Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Signing] Canadiens sign Tyler Toffoli


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

It should be very apparent and seriously obvious that at tis point in time the one single mitigating factor in all these signings of Canuck UFAs has been term

 

Look at the current economic situation of the NHL under covid.  over 50% of league revenue is gate driven.  We're up for an expansion team and a new tv deal and there's actually talk about potential cap retraction.

 

There's a clear and concise reason that the organization has watched UFA's walk and been unable to sign some other UFAs in the first flurry of free agency.  Term being the most important.  Economy being the 2nd.  

 

The angst and endless meltdowns over the team essentially moving sideways at this stage and having the prospects and depth to cover the current losses has been amusing but it's getting old.  We've stockpiled prospects enough that they can in fact possibly cover the losses.  A lot of them are essentially completely unknown to most on here as evidenced by the hand wringing and angst filled posts.

 

There's a bigger picture here a lot of people are either unwilling or unable to see.  

Your last 2 paragraphs couldn’t sum things up any better.

 

The Canucks were either unwilling or unable to match the term being offered to the outgoing players.  Markstrom wanting 6 years and a NMC sped up the timeframe of Demko taking over.  Tanev wanting 4 years over the Canucks offer of 2 was simply too much due to the mileage he’s put on and his 1 dimensional play.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Barry_Wilkins said:

Hell yeah! A proven 25 goal scorer, and a key component on PP1 gone. But let's promote Lind, and sub him in automatically on the 2nd line. That should be great for the Canucks fortunes, plus for Lind's development! Or do you want Jake on line two, when Green didn't even trust him enough to start him in the playoffs, despite several injured forwards?

Ummm Toffoli played like 17 games for us. How exactly was he a key component for anything?  We literally took Vegas to 7 games and one goal away from beating them without Toffoli. 

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, fanofvan said:

Your last 2 paragraphs couldn’t sum things up any better.

 

The Canucks were either unwilling or unable to match the term being offered to the outgoing players.  Markstrom wanting 6 years and a NMC sped up the timeframe of Demko taking over.  Tanev wanting 4 years over the Canucks offer of 2 was simply too much due to the mileage he’s put on and his 1 dimensional play.  

We don't change the team without losing some key pieces.

 

Thats why we signed eriksson...to keep the Sedins moving.  We know how that turned out.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Barry_Wilkins said:

You realize that you can use that same bogus "deferral" non-argument for any move or non-move, right?

 

Even people who are angered by this trade still defer to Benning, as in, "there must be something up Benning's sleeve".

 

I can only go by the moves he's actually made. And it's not shaping up very well, is it? Or do you think losing your elite goalie, top line RW, top 4 Dman, and #5 Dman, only replacing that with an inferior tandem goalie, is countered by "we can still make moves".

 

Well, sure Benning can make moves, but, to be as objective as possible, do you really see any move he could make at this point recouping even a fraction of what he's given up?

Inferior Vezina And Cup winning goalie, sorry any credibility you might have had went out the window with that take. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

There's 4 teams in the east right now that are going to be forced to trade promising young players to maintain cap compliance.  3 in the west (4 now with the AP signing)

 

Maybe, patience?  Just because the first flurry of free agency is winding down doesn't mean that the moves have been made that matter

Also, you and canuck73 seem to be playing the "big picture" card here. This is a thread specific to Toffoli signing for $4.25X4 with another team -- a player at a position we need to fill, and will now have to hope to correct.

 

Do you or do you not think it unwise that we couldn't/wouldn't match that same offer for Toffoli?

 

And keep in mind that Toffoli, by all accounts, loved it here. And why wouldn't he, improving his stats on a dynamic PP with Petterson and Hughes. Plus, his wife liked the West Coast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At any level of debate the fact we gave up a prospect and a draft pick for a rental player, at a time when when essentially no gm in the league no longer does, is simply not acceptable 

 

I am ok with letting stetcher go and even Marky but letting Toffoli sign for what we could have paid along with losing Tanev without a concrete replacement plan is poor management 

 

Oilers and flames just got a lot stronger and we are significantly weaker 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Madden and a second for nothing.....
we aren’t in a position to be trading for rentals we are not a cup team and now we look more like a top 5 pick team. 


we lost yet another Ill  conceived Short sighted JB deal. Seems to be his specialty. 

Once again the easily confused canuck73-3 this member gotta he the most confused on here. 

 

Edited by Tracksuit
  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Barry_Wilkins said:

Inferior to Markstrom. I thought that point was rather obvious, but apparently you'll read into it what you want.

That is wrong and I knew you were referring to Markstrom hence me calling you out on it. Holtby>Markstrom period end of story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Ummm Toffoli played like 17 games for us. How exactly was he a key component for anything?  We literally took Vegas to 7 games and one goal away from beating them without Toffoli. 

He was on our 1st line, replacing Boeser. He was a key component on our PP1 with great down-low passing, lwading to many PP goals/per chance.

 

Did you follow the Canucks?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, canuck73_3 said:

That is wrong and I knew you were referring to Markstrom hence me calling you out on it. Holtby>Markstrom period end of story. 

Holtby better than Markstrom in the past 2 years?

 

I'll give you credit for trolling. Not even the most homer-obsessed fan could think this otherwise.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, canuck73_3 said:

That is wrong and I knew you were referring to Markstrom hence me calling you out on it. Holtby>Markstrom period end of story. 

No kidding.

 

Gotta love marky but he got paid for 18 months of good hockey. He may still keep getting better but with demko in the wings it wasnt worth it for us. Calgary took a high risk high reward signing and I love marky but I hope it fails for the flames lol

 

Not signing marky was a great move 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...