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

The logic behind letting Tanev, Markstrom, and Toffoli walk

Rate this topic


Patel Bure
 Share

Recommended Posts

Jb did what he’s aways does he got fixated on trying over spend on another big name ufa OEL and be neglected the players he had.

when it became clear he wasn’t getting OEL ( thank god) it was to late and the likes of toffoli and  tanev wanted nothing to do with him. 
the writing was on the wall for markstrom.

but we could should have retained toffoli. 
it happens every year with Jim and his terrible cap management and gaging the players leaving.

jims traded more picks away than any other GM in Nucks history, 

he also let the most pending UFAs leave for nothing to.

He right there with nonis and Keenan for being flat out awful at his job. 
the sooner he’s gone the better of this club will be. 
 

 


 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BoKnows said:

Markstroms contract will be ass in a couple years.  Whens the last time 6x6 worked in favour of the Canucks?

well, you didn't specify that the player had to be signed with the canucks. So the answer is probably "plenty of times"

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marky made sense to let walk. Demko has shown great promise at his age and fits Bette with the core. 
 

Marky is also the only guy who would have made a difference. Even if when we had all of them last year we were still bad defensively. Only difference is that we had Marky to bail us out. 
 

In hindsight you could have kept one or Tanev/Toffoli but we’d still be the same. Need to be better in front of our goalies, it has been an issue for a while. 
 

The teams offence and goaltending improved over time but the team D hasn’t changed at all. Vegas series pretty much told the story of how we are and the fact that relying on your goalie as much as we did isn’t winning hockey. 
 

Since we were bad defensively with everyone we had last year that alone should tell you that it isn’t as much of a roster issue as it probably is a coaching one. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can’t blame JB for losing Markstrom and Tanev. Calgary overpaid for both. Toffoli is a different story. He signed in Montreal for the same amount we’re paying Braden Holtby. Who of those two would you rather have right now?

 

For those of you saying that we needed Holtby to avoid losing Demko in the expansion draft this is false. Craig Anderson or any number of competent veteran goalies could have been signed as Demko’s backup for low salary and been exposed in the draft.

 

Keeping Toffoli would have enabled us to have two legitimate scoring lines and would have made us immeasurably better. It would also have kept EP happy.

 

A competent GM could have made this work.

 

 

 

 

  • Hydration 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Schmautzie said:

Can’t blame JB for losing Markstrom and Tanev. Calgary overpaid for both. Toffoli is a different story. He signed in Montreal for the same amount we’re paying Braden Holtby. Who of those two would you rather have right now?

 

For those of you saying that we needed Holtby to avoid losing Demko in the expansion draft this is false. Craig Anderson or any number of competent veteran goalies could have been signed as Demko’s backup for low salary and been exposed in the draft.

 

Keeping Toffoli would have enabled us to have two legitimate scoring lines and would have made us immeasurably better. It would also have kept EP happy.

 

A competent GM could have made this work.

 

 

 

 

The choice is not Holtby or Toffoli. We need a somewhat competent veteran goaltender to mentor Demko.

The choice was between Jake and Toffoli. Clearly a wrong call there.

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing wrong with having Holtby instead of Markstrom. 

Not only is his contract shorter at only 2 years, it's only only $4.3 million per season.  


Lets not forget, he has been to the last 5 All-star game, won the Vezina back in 2016, Jennings in 2017, Stanley Cup at 2018, a Second Team All-star and also a First team All-star.  

 

He's also the same age as Markstrom too.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Colorado and Tampa Bay model:  

 

Thank you everyone for their wonderful responses and I'll try and address as many of these as I can when I have enough time.    

 

There's one thing that I'd like to touch upon:   Colorado and Tampa Bay.       

 

I cite both of these teams because in my mind, these two teams exemplify what a true rebuild TRULY entails.    Tampa Bay started to rebuild in 2004 while Colorado started to rebuild after 2007 (if memory serves me correctly).    While many people will argue that both of these teams started their rebuilds at much later dates, I would counter-back that those arguing otherwise don't TRULY understand the nature of a rebuild.   

 

Anyways, here is my point:   In the cases of both of these teams, progression wasn't always a linear process even though the "moving average" tended to trend upward for the most part.   Before both of these teams truly became elite, there were rebuilds and multiple re-tools that were involved.   The ultimate point that I'm trying to make is this:   We can romantize all we want about how successful rebuilds only take 3-4 years but this often very rarely the case.   What often appears to be a "3-4 rebuild into greatness," was usually preceded by years of struggle and rebuilding the organization in the most realistic way possible.    

 

Think about the Calgary Flames for instance.   When they defeated us in 2015, they were supposed to be only "1-2 years away from elite hood," but it didn't exactly pan out that way did it?  Have they won a playoff series since then?   How many times have they qualified for the playoffs since then?    For all this talk about "Shanaplan" in Toronto, they haven't won a single playoff series since "Shanaplan" took over (although that will change this year.......even though Toronto is basically 2010-2015 Pittsburgh given their overallocation of cap to their top players).    Trevor Linden has often talked about the "Winnipeg" model but has Winnipeg really enjoyed much playoff success since they re-entered the league?   

 

The Canucks, in my opinion, are exactly where they were in 2007-2008, and they might be like this for this season AND next season.........and you know what?   There's nothing wrong with that.  

 

2022-2023 = the Canucks truly joining the big boys (If the Canucks don't make the same mistake as Toronto, Edmonton, and Buffalo did in terms of giving their top young players monstrous 8-year deals at high cap hits).   If Petey and Quinn receive 'bridge' deals or 5 year cap friendly deals, the Canucks will be in TREMENDOUS position to join the elites in 2022-2023.    Tyler Myers being claimed in the expansion draft will also go a long way.  

Edited by DarkIndianRises
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Well I made that argument on people saying Markstrom 6 x 6 wasn't worth it. So my argument it was. 

Defense is also a problem but let's say even if Markstrom still walks maybe Vancouver has more flexibility improving their defense or solidifying it. Perhaps after acquiring Nate Schmidt, they can also find a way to resign Tanev or maybe sign Tyson Barrie. Or keep Tanev and sign Joel Edmundson. All of a sudden Vancouver has more flexibility in their defense instead of being limited due to cap constraints.

Edmundson is a guy I wanted badly.  At $3.5 million for 4 years that is s steal.  He's only 27 years old, plays a physical game and can fight like a heavyweight.  If he was a right shot he would have been perfect with Hughes.  I would have still signed him and played him with Myers.

  • Hydration 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

The reason for the moves we made this past off-season, it's pretty clear. You've outlined them well here but all Canucks fans should understand this by now.

 

There isn't really much to discuss on this front.

 

The real question is: at this point of the rebuild, is it acceptable that we pause the ride for 2 seasons due to cap mismanagement? I see a lot of people saying that rebuilds aren't linear and many teams can take steps back before they push forward, which is fine. But is there something to be said about a natural step-back (due to young player slumps, injuries, veterans unpredictably falling off a cliff, etc.) vs. one caused by blunders, and should the person responsible for said blunders be held, well, responsible?

While some fans may understand these reasons, there are a lot more who just see how good Toffoli/Markstrom were against  us and don't think about the expansion draft this summer or the team 3 years  down the road.

 

 

 

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, higgyfan said:

Wait And See by Tim Finn

Patience is a virtue,

Possess it if you can,

You gotta wait and see,

Seldom in a woman,

Never in a man,

You gotta wait and see.

 

On that note, let's talk about the Colorado Avalanche.  I see a lot of similarities between the Avs and Nucks.

Officially started their rebuild when the picked up Duchene in the '09 draft.  '10 was a bust.  '11 brought Landeskog.  '12 a 2nd round bust.

'13 Mckinnon.    '14 another bust.   '15 Rantanen.   '16 Jost.    '17 Makar.   '18  another bust.   19  Bowen

 

As you can see, the Avs have very lucky in the draft considering the lotto draft and/or strong draft years. In fact, they had 5 top 3 picks over 10 years!  They also busted on 3 picks of the 10 yrs.:o  But Stevie Y....

 

Now look at their SC playoff record

In the 10 years of their rebuild, these are their playoff results.  (6) did not qualify,  (2) lost in 1st round and (2) lost in 2nd round (those were the last 2 playoff seasons).

 

***Finally, this year the Avs look like they are ready to be contenders.***

 

That's a lot of bad and disappointing hockey for at least 8 years.

 

Wait and see Canuck fans.  Like the Avs, we just might have to go back to the draft this year and maybe like the Avs, win the lotto.

 

Interesting view... so their rebuild started in 2009. That's 12 years in the making.

 

I guess by the same logic, Tampa's rebuild began in 08 with drafting of Stamkos.

 

I guess our rebuild began in 2013:

2013: Horvat.

2014: Virtanen, Demko.

2015: Boeser, Gaud.

2016: OJ.

2017: EP.

2018: Hughes.

2019: Pod and Hog.

 

I guess the future is bright indeed. But note that JB drafted a lot better than the Avs did. And hence, we have enough talent to be making the playoffs year in and year out with good veteran support unlike the Avs.

 

When JB said he wanted to improve our defence during the offseason, I was happy.  I don't want to lay all the blame on him but the end result was disappointing. I think he could have done better. We took a huge hit on defensive end of the puck to improve offence from the back end and became worse as a result.

 

With the benefit of the hindsight, I would have liked JB to have done the following:

 

Before UFA market opens:

 

0. Decide on Markstrom. If we decide to keep him, re-sign Marky and trade Demko.

 

1. Clear cap space. Trade rights to Virtanen and/or Gaudette to dump Roussel's salary. In particular, it was a good chance to sell Gaudette high. This clears up about 4-7 mil in cap space. 

 

2. Re-sign Tanev. If you want to improve your defence, you can't let go of the guy that handled all the hard minutes for you. Edler-Tanev is a rock solid pairing when defending a lead. Hughes-Tanev is a great puck moving pairing.

 

After UFA market opens:

3. Sign 1B goalie since we let Marky walk. Check. 

 

4. Make cap room if step 1 wasn't carried out; wait for Pietrangelo to sign with Vegas; rob Schmidt from Vegas.

 

I'm not too hung up on letting Toffoli walk. We have Hog and Pod in the pipeline and I'm sure that internally they decided that Hoglander is ready and they were right.

 

But "ran out of time" excuse does piss me off. He had a lot of time to clear cap and sign Tanev (or Toffoli if that's who they valued more).

 

Other issue I have is that apparently, they valued Toffoli more than Tanev? That baffles me a bit. Considering the importance of Hughes to have a stable partner and how well Edler and Tanev have worked together when needed, I just don't understand how they thought about re-signing Toffoli over Tanev. Besides, Tanev put in 10 years of service for the team. I know loyalty may mean very little in pro sports but Tanev deserved some from the Canucks.

 

Up till now, I held JB in high regard. But now, I'm starting to doubt whether he has what it takes to oversee this rebuild.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, khay said:

Interesting view... so their rebuild started in 2009. That's 12 years in the making.

 

I guess by the same logic, Tampa's rebuild began in 08 with drafting of Stamkos.

 

I guess our rebuild began in 2013:

2013: Horvat.

2014: Virtanen, Demko.

2015: Boeser, Gaud.

2016: OJ.

2017: EP.

2018: Hughes.

2019: Pod and Hog.

 

I guess the future is bright indeed. But note that JB drafted a lot better than the Avs did. And hence, we have enough talent to be making the playoffs year in and year out with good veteran support unlike the Avs.

 

When JB said he wanted to improve our defence during the offseason, I was happy.  I don't want to lay all the blame on him but the end result was disappointing. I think he could have done better. We took a huge hit on defensive end of the puck to improve offence from the back end and became worse as a result.

 

With the benefit of the hindsight, I would have liked JB to have done the following:

 

Before UFA market opens:

 

0. Decide on Markstrom. If we decide to keep him, re-sign Marky and trade Demko.

 

1. Clear cap space. Trade rights to Virtanen and/or Gaudette to dump Roussel's salary. In particular, it was a good chance to sell Gaudette high. This clears up about 4-7 mil in cap space. 

 

2. Re-sign Tanev. If you want to improve your defence, you can't let go of the guy that handled all the hard minutes for you. Edler-Tanev is a rock solid pairing when defending a lead. Hughes-Tanev is a great puck moving pairing.

 

After UFA market opens:

3. Sign 1B goalie since we let Marky walk. Check. 

 

4. Make cap room if step 1 wasn't carried out; wait for Pietrangelo to sign with Vegas; rob Schmidt from Vegas.

 

I'm not too hung up on letting Toffoli walk. We have Hog and Pod in the pipeline and I'm sure that internally they decided that Hoglander is ready and they were right.

 

But "ran out of time" excuse does piss me off. He had a lot of time to clear cap and sign Tanev (or Toffoli if that's who they valued more).

 

Other issue I have is that apparently, they valued Toffoli more than Tanev? That baffles me a bit. Considering the importance of Hughes to have a stable partner and how well Edler and Tanev have worked together when needed, I just don't understand how they thought about re-signing Toffoli over Tanev. Besides, Tanev put in 10 years of service for the team. I know loyalty may mean very little in pro sports but Tanev deserved some from the Canucks.

 

Up till now, I held JB in high regard. But now, I'm starting to doubt whether he has what it takes to oversee this rebuild.

 

Doubt is normal, I think. What doesn't make sense is for people to continually defend Green, saying stuff like "Oh it's Benning's fault. Green's just doing the best he can."

 

No, it doesn't cut it that the team is playing the EXACT same style/brand of hockey as previous years. And it doesn't cut it that the coach isn't making adaptations. Why the hell is Juolevi sitting the press box, but not Chatfield? I'm not saying all these losses are on Chatfield. It's the decision making that is very questionable with Green.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The OP is rationalizing and conflating a bunch of things.

1.  Virtually no one has argued that we should have kept Markstrom or Tanev at the price and term they got elsewhere.
2.  We don't know what price and term Tanev would have accepted here because the team didn't bother negotiating with him.  The only negotiations that happened were with Markstrom and Arizona.

3.  Toffoli and Stecher would have been on more team friendly contracts than the guys we did sign going forward so would not have handcuffed us in the least.
4.  There is no evidence at all that Benning tried to trade Virtanen and/or Boeser.  If his ask for Virtanen was a 1st round pick, then shame on him for badly evaluating his own player.  Qualifying Virtanen was a mistake that cost dollars which could have been used for a valuable player who wasn't going to be stapled to the bench.
5.  He could have exited a bad contract by using a pick or player like Virtanen.... if he had jumped on it early like half this board was begging him to the moment we got eliminated from the playoffs.  Other teams were able to move money... even Gudbranson was able to be traded.  Benning couldn't get it done, and the opportunity cost of those tied up dollars cost us cap efficient players.
6. Nothing said we had to sign Holtby, there were many free agent goalies out there that we could have had for cheaper.  Between not qualifying Jake and signing a cheaper guy like Griess there would have been Toffoli money
7.  From his own words he said he "ran out of time".  Make all the guesses or listen to whatever speculation or rumours you want... or believe he isn't lying.  He just spent all his time on Markstrom and OEL and didn't address any of the other players who were waiting for a phone call until after well into free agency.  This is pretty clearly corroborated by those players after they left saying they didn’t hear from the Canucks side at all.  I can't even imagine after all Tanev had bled for the team, finally calling him for the first time 3 days into free agency after he had been waiting for months for an offer and then telling him that they would call him back later in the day "if" another deal couldn't be worked out with another player... that is what Tanev said happened and why he decided to sign with the offer that was actually on the table from Calgary.

Edited by Provost
  • Haha 1
  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nathancanuck said:

6 full seasons so far. Made the Playoffs twice, lost to Calgary because we got out-coached badly and last years run was pretty fun!

 

Doing that with the team and contracts/clauses and empty prospect pool he took over in 2014 this is pretty amazing. We also dropped every year in the lottery

and still came up with this team while making the Playoffs in 2 out of 6 years. Sure he's not perfect but I appreciate where he got us.

 

How would you have done the rebuild in 2015? Henrik and Daniel for a first each? Mathias for a first? Hamhuis for a 2nd? And everyone was throwing first rounders around to acquire Tanev and Edler right?

 

Agree on Gagner and LE though, horrible contracts.

I would have traded the twins to a bubble team for highest draft picks in 2014-15. Probably two seconds. Saving a lot of contract money, and collect draft picks. This would have made LE unnecessary.:towel:

Probably get Beagle, kept Sutter, but not Rooster or Lievo. Grab a couple interim UFA forwards and developed from within. Grab a great UFA dman along the way.

  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Benning gave Green two superstars, a top sniper, a top 6 power forward, a very good young goalie with a bright future and some very good young prospects.  It's up to Green to put the puzzle together and make things work.  Markstrom bailed us out of alot of games last year.  It's not like Toffoli was here all last year scoring at a 60 goal pace.  He played only 10 games for us, all while Boeser was injured.  Markstrom still had to stand on his head virtually every game even with Tanev in the lineup.  So Tanev not being around right now is not the main reason we suck.

 

Benning inherited a team with almost no prospects and veterans who were at their past due date and on the decline.  It's taken 6 years to rebuild our prospect pool and to replace the retired veterans with new players.  Has Benning made some mistakes?  Sure he has.  Has he made some great moves?  Sure he has.  At the end of the day with the talent we have we should be doing better than we are.  I'm not saying that Benning should be without criticism or even that he should still be around after this year.  All I'm saying is that it looks like Green has lost the room and this team which means he should be the first one out the door.  Bring in Gerard Gallant.  See what he can do to turn things around.  If Gallant can't do it then by all means you can fire Benning.  But I have a feeling if you brought in a guy like Gallant this team would be doing much better than it is right now and he would buy us some time until all of our young prospects are on the big club and contributing.  

 

I think we are realistically 2 years from having a very good competitive team that can challenge in the playoffs.  There is no need to make a complete overhaul and fire every person in sight.  Let's start with the guy behind the bench first along with all of his assistants.  I'm willing to give Benning a little more time to see the fruits of his labour.  I wanna see Podkolzin, Tryamkin, Lind, Juolevi, Rathbone and Woo in this lineup with a guy like Gallant and see what they can do before I go firing Benning.  We have alot of talented players.  We need someone behind the bench who can maximize on that talent and motivate them to play at their very best.

Edited by Elias Pettersson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 24K PureCool said:

Lol you are more delusional than anyone if you expect this team to be a contender with or without all of JB's blunders. 

How can you even quantify all of JB's blunders?

 

What if we had 7 years of good /great coaching, would the team be better at defense?

What if he kept Sullivan? 

what if we had Tanev... Calgary would not have Tanev., their best +/- guy. That is a plus for us and a minus for them

What if we had Toffoli and Edmunson ? Then Montreal would not have either of them.

2 cracks at Pasternak???

What if he sold rather than bought for the last 5 -7 years, We could have 5-7 more young guys ready to play

What if he did not spend 2 picks per year on guys that weigh 138-169 #s and threw some pick and NHL sized players

What if he realized that the Sedins did not have another cup run in them?

 

So many blunders, it hard to know how different this team would be wothout them all compounding upon each other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Provost said:

The OP is rationalizing and conflating a bunch of things.

1.  Virtually no one has argued that we should have kept Markstrom or Tanev at the price and term they got elsewhere.
2.  We don't know what price and term Tanev would have accepted here because the team didn't bother negotiating with him.  The only negotiations that happened were with Markstrom and Arizona.

3.  Toffoli and Stecher would have been on more team friendly contracts than the guys we did sign going forward so would not have handcuffed us in the least.
4.  There is no evidence at all that Benning tried to trade Virtanen and/or Boeser.  If his ask for Virtanen was a 1st round pick, then shame on him for badly evaluating his own player.  Qualifying Virtanen was a mistake that cost dollars which could have been used for a valuable player who wasn't going to be stapled to the bench.
5.  He could have exited a bad contract by using a pick or player like Virtanen.... if he had jumped on it early like half this board was begging him to the moment we got eliminated from the playoffs.  Other teams were able to move money... even Gudbranson was able to be traded.  Benning couldn't get it done, and the opportunity cost of those tied up dollars cost us cap efficient players.
6. Nothing said we had to sign Holtby, there were many free agent goalies out there that we could have had for cheaper.  Between not qualifying Jake and signing a cheaper guy like Griess there would have been Toffoli money
7.  From his own words he said he "ran out of time".  Make all the guesses or listen to whatever speculation or rumours you want... or believe he isn't lying.  He just spent all his time on Markstrom and OEL and didn't address any of the other players who were waiting for a phone call until after well into free agency.  This is pretty clearly corroborated by those players after they left saying they hear from the Canucks side at all.  I can't even imagine finally calling Tanev 3 days into free agency after he had been waiting for months for an offer and then telling him that they would call him back later in the day "if" another deal couldn't be worked out with another player... that is what Tanev said happened and why he decided to sign with the offer that was actually on the table from Calgary.

I thought you were a Benning supporter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, khay said:

Interesting view... so their rebuild started in 2009. That's 12 years in the making.

 

I guess by the same logic, Tampa's rebuild began in 08 with drafting of Stamkos.

After Tampa won the cup in '04 they crashed mightily.  Any team that starts drafting top 10 picks for 5 years is rebuilding.  Fortunately for TB, they had very good scouting and managed to pick up great players in the later rounds as well.

 

7 minutes ago, khay said:

I guess our rebuild began in 2013:

2013: Horvat.

2014: Virtanen, Demko.

2015: Boeser, Gaud.

2016: OJ.

2017: EP.

2018: Hughes.

2019: Pod and Hog.

 

I guess the future is bright indeed. But note that JB drafted a lot better than the Avs did. And hence, we have enough talent to be making the playoffs year in and year out with good veteran support unlike the Avs.

I don't agree with that.  Duchene, Landeskog, McKinnon (better than any player on Nucks), Rantanen, Jost, Maker, Bowen, Newhook is a pretty nice collection of players.  I certainly don't see Virt, Gaud, or possibly OJ in that group.

 

7 minutes ago, khay said:

When JB said he wanted to improve our defence during the offseason, I was happy.  I don't want to lay all the blame on him but the end result was disappointing. I think he could have done better. We took a huge hit on defensive end of the puck to improve offence from the back end and became worse as a result.

 

With the benefit of the hindsight, I would have liked JB to have done the following:

 

Before UFA market opens:

 

0. Decide on Markstrom. If we decide to keep him, re-sign Marky and trade Demko.

 

1. Clear cap space. Trade rights to Virtanen and/or Gaudette to dump Roussel's salary. In particular, it was a good chance to sell Gaudette high. This clears up about 4-7 mil in cap space. 

 

2. Re-sign Tanev. If you want to improve your defence, you can't let go of the guy that handled all the hard minutes for you. Edler-Tanev is a rock solid pairing when defending a lead. Hughes-Tanev is a great puck moving pairing.

 

After UFA market opens:

3. Sign 1B goalie since we let Marky walk. Check. 

 

4. Make cap room if step 1 wasn't carried out; wait for Pietrangelo to sign with Vegas; rob Schmidt from Vegas.

 

I'm not too hung up on letting Toffoli walk. We have Hog and Pod in the pipeline and I'm sure that internally they decided that Hoglander is ready and they were right.

 

But "ran out of time" excuse does piss me off. He had a lot of time to clear cap and sign Tanev (or Toffoli if that's who they valued more).

 

Other issue I have is that apparently, they valued Toffoli more than Tanev? That baffles me a bit. Considering the importance of Hughes to have a stable partner and how well Edler and Tanev have worked together when needed, I just don't understand how they thought about re-signing Toffoli over Tanev. Besides, Tanev put in 10 years of service for the team. I know loyalty may mean very little in pro sports but Tanev deserved some from the Canucks.

 

Up till now, I held JB in high regard. But now, I'm starting to doubt whether he has what it takes to oversee this rebuild.

I didn't address the recent UFAs and signings, so I won't say much about that.  The Marky and Tanev signing to Cal appears to be a loss for our team at this point.  It's hard to say how these contracts will play out over time, or where Demko will be in his development.  I'm not sure about TT, as he only scores against the Canucks.  I doubt he will maintain his point a game production over the whole season.

 

Regardless, I still think that the Nucks will continue to improve over the next couple of years (this year may be a wash) and the team will finally be in a good situation with many ELCs, RFA bridgings and plenty of cap space.  I don't know if JB will be around though, as usually, the GM that builds a contender, rarely gets to reap the rewards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

The logic behind letting Tanev, Markstrom, and Toffoli walk:

 

By choosing to move forward with guys like Holtby, Schmidt, and Virtanen over Markstrom, Tanev, and Toffoli, Benning is thinking long term and not short term.  Yes, we only saved 1.8 million in overall cap but those terms that Markstrom and Tanev got would have hurt us long term.   

 
As far as Toffoli goes, the Canucks were reportedly trying to move one of Boeser and Virtanen to clear space so that they could accommodate Toffoli’s salary but received low ball offers.  Had Benning accepted those low ball offers for either of Boeser or Virtanen, he would have been ridiculed around the league.  In fielding offers for Virtanen, the Canucks were looking to recoup the low first that was lost in the Miller deal, while looking to recoup both the first and good prospect lost in the Miller and Toffoli deals as it related to Boeser  (NOTE - Canucks were looking to move ONE of Boeser or Virtanen in the summer, not both).
 
At the start of the 2022/2023 season, we will have the following:
 
1) All of our bad “rebuild/transitional” contracts will be off the books.
2) Horvat, Schmidt, and Miller will still be on cap friendly deals while Boeser will still be a cost controlled asset as an RFA.
3) Guys like Pettersson, Hughes, Demko, Hoglander, Podkolzin, etc., will be closer to their peak.
 
The next two seasons could be our version of the 2007-2008 season (I.e a regression after having made an unexpected 2nd round appearance a year prior, which is then followed by a window of elite hood), but our cap structure fully indicates that we will likely enter a window of elitehood starting in 2022-2023.
 
My suggestion for my fellow Canucks fans is as follows:
 
1) The future is still bright.   2022/2023 is when our real "window" will start.    This season and maybe even next season is our 2007/2008.    
2) Be patient and enjoy the ride.   
 
 
 
 
 
 

TL,DR 

They ran out of time.

 

On a serious note.  Whatever you think about the moves, I think it's junk how they treated Tanev.  

 

 

Edited by CanadianRugby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...