Should the Canucks walk away from Toffoli and Markstrom at the end of this season?

[JeremyCuddles]

If Marky and Toff agree to team friendly 5mil deals we can maybe keep em both. Likely would require dumping both Rooster and Sutter. Given the cap troubles nearly everyone will be in not sure how likely that is though.
 

Only walk away from Marky if his ask goes above 6mil per. Love Demko but at least one more season of backup duty isn't the end of the world for him.

[24K PureCool]

4 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

tbh i walk away from markstrom and try to keep toffoli and tanev.. Markstrom is great for us the last couple of years there's no denying. but if he's looking for something like 6 years contract.. plus sounds like there will be teams bidding for his service and his agents knows it.. is it something we want to take the gamble on? history says most goalie hit their decline when they hit 30 or enter 30. the decline might not be as big as some but it's gonna be a gamble if markstrom is looking for 6 years and around 6mil.. if he does hit a decline even say in 3 years.. that'll be a unmovable contract.. at this point i rather keep tanev and keep toffoli or sign another top 6.. can't imagine our defense next year with just hughes edler and myer. and say we let Toffoli walk.. our top 6 once again is questionable.. it'll be EP Miller Boeser Horvat and ??? ???.. Virtanen in these playoff shown nothing he belongs in the top 6.. Pearson seems more suited for a 3rd line role.. and the vegas series showed us we have problems playing with big and fast team and once again scoring is an issue outside the top line.. 

Problem is it is also a huge gamble on Demko able to be a starter or 1A starting next year. Not saying Demko will but he can definitely pull a Bennington or Hamburgerlar. Than we are left searching for another number 1. I would try to sign Markstrom but with the red line being protection in expansion draft. JB need to make it clear to Markstrom that there is a good chance he is either getting traded or exposed in the expansion draft. Losing Marky to Seattle isn't gonna be the end of the world for the reason you stated and it would give us at least one more year to see if Demko can be that elite number 1 goalie.

[wai_lai416]

20 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

Problem is it is also a huge gamble on Demko able to be a starter or 1A starting next year. Not saying Demko will but he can definitely pull a Bennington or Hamburgerlar. Than we are left searching for another number 1. I would try to sign Markstrom but with the red line being protection in expansion draft. JB need to make it clear to Markstrom that there is a good chance he is either getting traded or exposed in the expansion draft. Losing Marky to Seattle isn't gonna be the end of the world for the reason you stated and it would give us at least one more year to see if Demko can be that elite number 1 goalie.

i honestly don't see markstrom re-signing with the canucks if there's going to be a bidding war.. hell if Toronto Edmonton and whomever will enter a bidding war for Markstrom.. i'll take Anderson off toronto + a sweetener lol not much of a downgrade more of a sidegrade if anything anderson is overplayed i really don't see markstrom giving vancouver any kind of discount for what possibly his final big contract in his career.. especially not without a NTC NMC i don't think he's opened to finishing his career in an expansion team

[Kevin Biestra]

25 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

i honestly don't see markstrom re-signing with the canucks if there's going to be a bidding war.. hell if Toronto Edmonton and whomever will enter a bidding war for Markstrom.. i'll take Anderson off toronto + a sweetener lol not much of a downgrade more of a sidegrade if anything anderson is overplayed i really don't see markstrom giving vancouver any kind of discount for what possibly his final big contract in his career.. especially not without a NTC NMC i don't think he's opened to finishing his career in an expansion team

 

Perhaps, but expansion teams aren't what they used to be (Ottawa, San Jose).  With the way the draft is set up for Vegas and Seattle, I think many goalies would jump at the chance to be the starter for Seattle.

[wai_lai416]

9 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Perhaps, but expansion teams aren't what they used to be (Ottawa, San Jose).  With the way the draft is set up for Vegas and Seattle, I think many goalies would jump at the chance to be the starter for Seattle.

possibly but i think goalies will only jump at that chance when they were getting phased out by their team a la fleury. Markstrom is a legit starter so he doesn't need to jump at seattle. i think stability is a big thing for players. i doubt any of them would like to sign a long deal without any say in where they go.. imagine signed to a 6 or 7 years contract and then the team trades u from 1 to another to another

[IBatch]

19 hours ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

Its always frustrating to hear when the team develops and obtains depth, quality depth at that then the argument of " well who should we let walk ?, who has to go ? " comes up. Why ?

 

You CAN have a top six that is NHL caliber, you CAN have two very good goaltenders moving forward and that's ok. Demko has played amazing in his two games thus far, Kirk McLean played an entire Playoff year in calm, poised and reliable fashion and came up big on multiple occasions. Luongo was touted as a top netminder for years in the League and played as such when called upon. Demko has a really bright future but it is in the team's best interests to move ahead with Markstrom at this time and if need be and play dictates then you look at exploring options. You can always look at trade options and obtain assets rather then let him walk anyways.

 

Toffoli, I get it there is an argument there just isn't room for say he and other players we have who are being relied upon to score goals. But what?  I feel there is maybe some shorter term memories here as the team's fanbase screams for the Canucks to have reliable players who can produce, can't be a one line team. The GM brings in depth and arguably quality players who have Playoff experience as well as a history of being able to produce and we are wondering if we should let one of these players walk ? maybe the team can't afford him or as an Unrestricted Free Agent Toffoli has other plans fair enough. But there is room for him here. You tinker with and make moves in the bottom part of the lineup where need be or if push comes to shove on a player like Eriksson to make it work. Toffoli in his brief stint has been revitalized and is producing.

 

What some may view as bad contracts were the price to bring specific players to our market when we were a lost franchise ( Beagle, Roussel ). Eriksson like it or not is a serviceable NHLer and was paid less then others at a time when the team wanted to add to their top 6 group with a very slim Free Agent crop.

 

Myers, higher than some may like but again, supply and demand right.

 

There is room on the Canucks for Toffoli, Markstrom, and Demko without a doubt. It can be done and let's enjoy that the team has been developing and adding quality talent. 

Sure it’s nice to say these things.  However the math doesn’t work.  And we can only save one of our goalies in the ED and with our cap don’t be surprised if Markstrom gets a NMC to keep it down.   That means we will most definitely without a shadow of a doubt now, be playing against us in Seattle.   He’s by far the best player Seattle will get exposed from us, and most likely the best young goalie they will have to choose from.  And you know they will pick four after Vegas needed all four of theirs within a couple months the first year (have to pick at least 3).

 

Pie in the sky is fun and makes you happy but the reality each decision JB makes has cap ramifications next off season and beyond too.   It’s easy to find wingers in this league and cheap effective back-ups.   It’s not easy to find top ten goalies (Markstrom) or young very promising future number ones (Demko).   If we sign Markstrom we also have another goalie thing like Luongo and Schneider - hard hard pass.  That played into our dressing room issues. 
 

Asset management is important- we need to either plan to trade or trade Demko now and double down on Markstrom - or let him walk, save 3 million in cap space after finding a capable back-up.   Demko is either going to give us a nice pick or D prospect or he’s going to give us cap space.  
 

TT is not a priority.  Our RHD is.   So Tanev stays for sure.    Nothing available worth going after UFA wise - Hamonic is just as injury prone as Tanev can’t have two like that - Ceci might be an upgrade on Stetcher but will come with a bigger price tag (4-4.5). 
 

For me we only sign Markstrom and keep Demko if he signs without a NMC, which allows JB to decide whether or not to expose Markstrom instead.  Either way Vancouver will be playing against one of these guys in Seattle, and giving them way too much talent to start with. 

[DownUndaCanuck]

I think we have to sign Marky but it can't have an NMC because we simply have to keep Demko - he might be in his prime the year Seattle pick. Have 2 solid goalies for an intense season next year with lots of back to backs to try and cram games in.

 

Marky and Toff will want and deserve 5M, Tanev will hopefully take a cut and take 3.5M as he gets older and less minutes, then we need to keep Virtanen and Motte for a combined 3.5M. That just about keeps our main secondary players together, leaving guys like Stecher and Gaudette etc. to sort out.

 

Realistically if we want to fit everyone in, someone's going to have to take a cut (eg. Toff or Marky) or we need to get rid of one of the many wasted veterans (Roussel, Sutter, Eriksson). I worry that Motte's going to ask for 2-3M and to be fair he deserves it.

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, wai_lai416 said:

possibly but i think goalies will only jump at that chance when they were getting phased out by their team a la fleury. Markstrom is a legit starter so he doesn't need to jump at seattle. i think stability is a big thing for players. i doubt any of them would like to sign a long deal without any say in where they go.. imagine signed to a 6 or 7 years contract and then the team trades u from 1 to another to another

If he doesn’t get a NMC then he won’t have a choice if we expose him in the ED.   And for sure Seattle would jump at the chance - we’d be gifting them a great goalie just like Vegas was with MAF (no choice for PIT they needed the cap space).   Not a terrible thing for us because that would mean Demko is better and that means Demko is a top 1-6 goalie next year.    We either walk away from Markstrom now, which means Seattle won’t get him and we’d get 3 million extra in cap space after a capable 1b guy is signed to play with Demko, or we trade Demko and find a capable 1b back-up.    Demko is either going to get us a nice pick or d prospect or he’s going to give us some cap space and start his journey as a number one guy.    At least thats how I see it, personally I don’t want Seattle to get either of these guys. 

[IBatch]

14 minutes ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

I think we have to sign Marky but it can't have an NMC because we simply have to keep Demko - he might be in his prime the year Seattle pick. Have 2 solid goalies for an intense season next year with lots of back to backs to try and cram games in.

 

Marky and Toff will want and deserve 5M, Tanev will hopefully take a cut and take 3.5M as he gets older and less minutes, then we need to keep Virtanen and Motte for a combined 3.5M. That just about keeps our main secondary players together, leaving guys like Stecher and Gaudette etc. to sort out.

 

Realistically if we want to fit everyone in, someone's going to have to take a cut (eg. Toff or Marky) or we need to get rid of one of the many wasted veterans (Roussel, Sutter, Eriksson). I worry that Motte's going to ask for 2-3M and to be fair he deserves it.

My bro made a spread sheet and no matter how you do it someone has to go if we don’t sign TT.   With the cap overages owed, and the amount of guys that need a new contract the arithmetic just doesn’t work.   Need to trade either Roussel or Pearson.  After this year either won’t be too hard to trade.   Especially Pearson - we’d actually get something decent back for him.   If Ferland is on LTIR then it help a little bit towards signing TT too but still not enough.  Both Pearson and Roussel would have to go, we’d have to promote Motte (which I think he deserves).  This model also includes letting Leivo walk, and giving Stetcher the Hutton treatment whether we sign TT or not.  
 

Anyway we shake it we are going to lose some depth and at least two roster spots (Pearson/Roussel and Stecher).  OJ is going to get his chance - Benn moves to the right side, and McEwen or Lind is getting their chance - and that’s just signing Markstrom and Tanev.   Going with Demko instead would for sure alleviate  some of this (either keep Pearson or Stecher) 

Edited September 5, 2020 by IBatch

[canuckster19]

If I had to pick between Markström and Tanev+Toffoli, I pick Tanev+Toffoli.

[erkayloomeh]

Demko just went from sweetener in a trade to getting rid of Lou to big trade chip who could also get rid of Lou. 

Trade Demko if someone will take one of our contracts with him and sign Marky.  He's still got 5 yrs left. 

While Demko was awesome it doesn't mean he will continue that kind of play 

[EddieVedder]

4 hours ago, wai_lai416 said:

i honestly don't see markstrom re-signing with the canucks if there's going to be a bidding war.. hell if Toronto Edmonton and whomever will enter a bidding war for Markstrom.. i'll take Anderson off toronto + a sweetener lol not much of a downgrade more of a sidegrade if anything anderson is overplayed i really don't see markstrom giving vancouver any kind of discount for what possibly his final big contract in his career.. especially not without a NTC NMC i don't think he's opened to finishing his career in an expansion team

How is toronto going to afford him? They are in deep sh1t with cap.  Marky in Carolina is the biggest possibility.   I love Marky and want him to stay but its only happening if we find a way to unload Sutter, LE and get Lou off the books.

[EddieVedder]

2 hours ago, IBatch said:

My bro made a spread sheet and no matter how you do it someone has to go if we don’t sign TT.   With the cap overages owed, and the amount of guys that need a new contract the arithmetic just doesn’t work.   Need to trade either Roussel or Pearson.  After this year either won’t be too hard to trade.   Especially Pearson - we’d actually get something decent back for him.   If Ferland is on LTIR then it help a little bit towards signing TT too but still not enough.  Both Pearson and Roussel would have to go, we’d have to promote Motte (which I think he deserves).  This model also includes letting Leivo walk, and giving Stetcher the Hutton treatment whether we sign TT or not.  
 

Anyway we shake it we are going to lose some depth and at least two roster spots (Pearson/Roussel and Stecher).  OJ is going to get his chance - Benn moves to the right side, and McEwen or Lind is getting their chance - and that’s just signing Markstrom and Tanev.   Going with Demko instead would for sure alleviate  some of this (either keep Pearson or Stecher) 

I think we are forgetting Leivo is actually a good player.  Hes got the pure skill this team needs and is one of the best guys with the puck on this team.  There were games he played with miller and petey where he looked really good.  We need the depth. 

[bertuzzi44fan]

I think we can dump Markstrom now,he's gonna be too expensive. Need to eject Erikson though for sure and get some younger replacements for Edler and Tanev. Toffoli seems useful so I would try to keep him.

[Rush17]

Keep toff imo

[N4ZZY]

7 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I am more concerned about our D. The D we have isn't built well for playoff hockey vs faster teams. We lack size/physicality and speed/skill on our D-core. Rath/OJ may be able to help address some of the skill eventually but we might need to trade for some size/physicality. Tryamkin is a darkhorse but we are gonna need 2-3 defenseman in our top 6 that have a solid physical presence.

 

Not expecting any huge changes on D anytime soon though unless there's a trade. 

I think Tryamkin would have helped in a series like this. He may not be as physical as some would like for a guy his size. But he's huge, and he's long. He takes up ice and space. 

 

It's unfortunate, but the reality is that Tanev and Edler are both getting older, and they can't be relied upon too heavily to play big minutes. They're getting tired. We need new, young defensemen coming in, and we don't have much of those guys in the pipeline. 

 

Hughes and Stetcher are the only guys in their 20's. And Stetcher is in his mid to late twenties if I'm not mistaken. 

[Mike Vanderhoek]

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

Sure it’s nice to say these things.  However the math doesn’t work.  And we can only save one of our goalies in the ED and with our cap don’t be surprised if Markstrom gets a NMC to keep it down.   That means we will most definitely without a shadow of a doubt now, be playing against us in Seattle.   He’s by far the best player Seattle will get exposed from us, and most likely the best young goalie they will have to choose from.  And you know they will pick four after Vegas needed all four of theirs within a couple months the first year (have to pick at least 3).

 

Pie in the sky is fun and makes you happy but the reality each decision JB makes has cap ramifications next off season and beyond too.   It’s easy to find wingers in this league and cheap effective back-ups.   It’s not easy to find top ten goalies (Markstrom) or young very promising future number ones (Demko).   If we sign Markstrom we also have another goalie thing like Luongo and Schneider - hard hard pass.  That played into our dressing room issues. 
 

Asset management is important- we need to either plan to trade or trade Demko now and double down on Markstrom - or let him walk, save 3 million in cap space after finding a capable back-up.   Demko is either going to give us a nice pick or D prospect or he’s going to give us cap space.  
 

TT is not a priority.  Our RHD is.   So Tanev stays for sure.    Nothing available worth going after UFA wise - Hamonic is just as injury prone as Tanev can’t have two like that - Ceci might be an upgrade on Stetcher but will come with a bigger price tag (4-4.5). 
 

For me we only sign Markstrom and keep Demko if he signs without a NMC, which allows JB to decide whether or not to expose Markstrom instead.  Either way Vancouver will be playing against one of these guys in Seattle, and giving them way too much talent to start with. 

Simply put, in a realistic manner you can make the math work. Yes the cap and expansion ramifications of each decision must be weighed, no different an approach i'd assume on any other day. But to reply frankly to the initial post no the Canucks should not walk from both Markstrom and Toffoli, whether either wants to stay is another story. But you can make the math work.

 

There is also a lot to be said for working out deals with expansion clubs to take or not take specific players so while to fans and some media it may seem intimidating or scary that a team like the Canucks could and may very well lose a very good player there are resources and scenarios that can be utilized to ensure thats not the case. Like you said the use of a NMC for example could play largely into things too.

 

But back to my point, the team has two very good goaltenders, keep'em. It is not an impossible suggestion and teams are pushing more and more to have a reliable tandem vs the $ 10 million Bobrovsky or King Henrik scenarios.

 

Toffoli, well he may simply decide family in California is paramount and go back to a western US team. But if he wants to come back to Vancouver he is the exact type of player the team needs. We cry over needing more scoring or depth, we get it and we debate just walking away, its kind of ridiculous.

 

Yes the team needs to upgrade on defense, not sure Tanev is the answer with his already noticeable decline in mobility and foot speed but he is a warrior and is likely better than the other options available in the offseason. Will he come back at less then Edler type numbers ? can't blame him for moving on but perhaps the team can figure that number out. I think the team has a bit of a pleasant surprise coming with Juolevi who gets forgotten and maybe justfiably so.

 

Either way yes there are ways to make it work, wouldn't be surprised if the team dealt Demko to upgrade defense but right now it can go either way and work.

[Lazurus]

Final game cap hit for all guaranteed contracts with the Canucks = 86.4 plus bonuses of 4 mil spread over two years 1.75 /yr = 88.1 mil,

That is 7 mil OVER the cap limit

Letting Markstrom and Tofolli go gets the team to the cap limit of 81 mil or so.

 

Now they have 13 other contracts to sign and give raises with 0 cap space if the players don't get raises.

 

 

Trading a guaranteed trade asset in Boeser opens up possible enough cap space to retain most of the rest of the team with raises, if that is the desire. Moving Boeser also removes a negotiation impediment in the future and will most likely get a fantastic return.

 

Let both go, besides there was only one that even hinted that he wanted to stay here, I don't know where some fans figured Tofolli wanted to separate from his wife

 

 

[Canucks-12]

On 9/4/2020 at 6:42 AM, BoKnows said:

Why's everyone ready to give up on Marky after 2 solid games from our backup.  

 

Sign Markstrom and trade the worse of the two goalies before the expansion draft  

Yes or expose Markstrom to save salary cap. 
 

Keep Demko for long term.

[EddieVedder]

2 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

I think Tryamkin would have helped in a series like this. He may not be as physical as some would like for a guy his size. But he's huge, and he's long. He takes up ice and space. 

 

It's unfortunate, but the reality is that Tanev and Edler are both getting older, and they can't be relied upon too heavily to play big minutes. They're getting tired. We need new, young defensemen coming in, and we don't have much of those guys in the pipeline. 

 

Hughes and Stetcher are the only guys in their 20's. And Stetcher is in his mid to late twenties if I'm not mistaken. 

I agree.  I love Edler and Tanev but they need to be relied on less.  If they can be used as our 3rd or 4th and 5th guys next season we are good.   I think Juolevi can step in and i think we are underestimating what Jett Woo might become one day.  I can see him as a solid 3 behind Huggy and OJ