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

The logic behind letting Tanev, Markstrom, and Toffoli walk

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

8 of the 9 Goals toffoli got were against the Canucks. We are having a crap year so far. And got one against Calgary.

 

Against other teams he has not scored at all. I don't think he would be a concern if we were off to a better start.

 

Do not give him props for scoring a lot of goals. When even Spezza is getting hat tricks.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Quinn Skates said:

What will our D look like in 2 years to be elite? We have no potential stud defenseman in the farm.

Imo, the rebuild or retool will continue on for maybe another 5 years until our young core hits their prime. 

My hope is that it will look something like this:

 

Lindholm-Schmidt 

Hughes-Tryamkin 

[young guy + cheap vet]
 

The Canucks will have all of their bad contracts off the books by July 1st 2022 and Hampus Lindholm will become a UFA.   My hope is that we go HARD after Lindholm here as we will have the cap space to do so.

 

I’m also hoping that Myers is the ones that gets claimed in the Expansion draft. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2021 at 10:48 AM, 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.   
 
 
 
 
 
 

Great post, very insightful, just what I needed to read about the team today!!

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, VanIsleNuckFan said:

Great post, very insightful, just what I needed to read about the team today!!

Thanks man.  
Back in the summer, I was coming up with some crazy ideas on how the Canucks could keep their playoff core together and no matter which route I took, it always involved us using Podkolzin and our 1st as sweeteners to get rid of our “transitional”/rebuild contracts.  
 

Benning could have easily done this and could have easily signed Markstrom, Tanev, and Toffoli if he has truly wanted to, but it just goes back to the original question:

 

Do we want to be competitive NOW and have a very short window, or do we want to begin our REAL window in 2022-2023 and have a boatload of young talent in our system at cost controlled cap hits?  
 

Here is what I hope happens between now and July 1st 2022:

 

1) The Canucks accumulate draft picks for Edler, Pearson, and Sutter (50% retention) at the deadline if the Canucks are slated to miss the playoffs. (Edler waived his NTC as management makes it clear to him that we won’t be re-signing him)

2) The Jake Virtanen/Sam Bennett deal occurs

3) Podkolzin joins us in April in a similar way to how Boeser and Hughes joined us.

4) Tryamkin signs with the Canucks in the off-season

5) Pettersson and Hughes either sign bridge deals or 5 year deals to keep the cap hit relatively low and the Canucks do NOT make the same mistake that teams like the Oilers, Sabres, and Leafs did.

6) The Canucks sign Hampus Lindholm on July 1st 2022.

7) The Canucks sign two good two-way 3rd line players and/or someone emerges within the system.

 

October 2022 opening line-up:

 

Miller-Pettersson-Boeser

Hoglander-Horvat-Podkolzin

************ - Bennett - *********
Motte-Gaudette-MacEwen

 

Lindholm-Schmidt

Hughes-Myers

[Juolevi-Tryamkin / Rathbone-Tryamkin / Tryamkin-Chatfield]

 

Demko

[Dipietro or cheapVet]

 

With possible picks from this ugly 2021 draft possibly factoring into the above line up.

 

 


 

Edited by DarkIndianRises
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@DarkIndianRises
 

Do we want to be competitive NOW and have a very short window, or do we want to begin our REAL window in 2022-2023 and have a boatload of young talent in our system at cost controlled cap hits?  

 

That’s the premise I’m hoping you’re right about and it makes sense.

 

im also hopeful on Tryamkin, but that remains to be seen. I think if the cap went up as it should have non Covid we would have seen him here as a 7th man to work his way in...or not.

 

you’re forgetting Woo, who should be coming up in the next year, that will be exciting also!

 

im not one for speculation but I think you’ve got the most plausible reasoning for how the team is structured right now.

 

image.jpeg.40eea56a102511850c0e3f0a528a4ac0.jpeg

Edited by VanIsleNuckFan
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What you are saying though is not the logic behind this. We just beat the Stanley Cup Champions in the first round. We were at least favorites for a playoff spot. Everyone thought were were going to compete this year. Benning's logic was to hold off on Marky and Taanev and see if he can get hte big fish in OEL and ran out of time. I don't know what it is but it looks like Benning failed this off season. I agree with you 100% but what you are saying is just the silver lining.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, smokes said:

What you are saying though is not the logic behind this. We just beat the Stanley Cup Champions in the first round. We were at least favorites for a playoff spot. Everyone thought were were going to compete this year. Benning's logic was to hold off on Marky and Taanev and see if he can get hte big fish in OEL and ran out of time. I don't know what it is but it looks like Benning failed this off season. I agree with you 100% but what you are saying is just the silver lining.

So the question being is it 4d chess or horseshoes up his arse in the long run.. or maybe he was thinking both. Ie maximum upside, with a long term contingency plan?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, VanIsleNuckFan said:

So the question being is it 4d chess or horseshoes up his arse in the long run.. or maybe he was thinking both. Ie maximum upside, with a long term contingency plan?

When I look at the players he lost and the personnel he has lost, I am thinking that he gets an F right now on the report card. If this team was winning that would be different but right now he is looking like he won't be around for a long term contingency plan. With the way the team is playing, the only thing we can do right now is look to the future. Benning underestimated Marky and Tanev's worth in the locker room and on the ice. Sure everyone can think a few years down the lo=ine Marky's contract is going to look bad but as of right now in his prime and how he used to save 30-40 shots a night. As far as Tanev...I don't know, when you look at the locker room and you see all the youngsters call a teammate "Dad"...you keep him. Then there is Toffoli. For cap reasons and the 4d chess part, I'll let that go as Virtanen is still cheaper. But still I just want to say. AAARRRGGGGHHHH!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, smokes said:

When I look at the players he lost and the personnel he has lost, I am thinking that he gets an F right now on the report card. If this team was winning that would be different but right now he is looking like he won't be around for a long term contingency plan. With the way the team is playing, the only thing we can do right now is look to the future. Benning underestimated Marky and Tanev's worth in the locker room and on the ice. Sure everyone can think a few years down the lo=ine Marky's contract is going to look bad but as of right now in his prime and how he used to save 30-40 shots a night. As far as Tanev...I don't know, when you look at the locker room and you see all the youngsters call a teammate "Dad"...you keep him. Then there is Toffoli. For cap reasons and the 4d chess part, I'll let that go as Virtanen is still cheaper. But still I just want to say. AAARRRGGGGHHHH!!!!!

I agree with everything you said except Virtanen.  He isn’t cheap anymore plus he has shown to be just a plug, or a nicer term a depth player

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, smokes said:

What you are saying though is not the logic behind this. We just beat the Stanley Cup Champions in the first round. We were at least favorites for a playoff spot. Everyone thought were were going to compete this year. Benning's logic was to hold off on Marky and Taanev and see if he can get hte big fish in OEL and ran out of time. I don't know what it is but it looks like Benning failed this off season. I agree with you 100% but what you are saying is just the silver lining.

@VanIsleCanuckFan
 

(and @smokes

 

Here’s my take on it:   Benning didn’t really “run out of time,” on Marky/Tanev/Toffoli, but rather, hyper-focused on landing OEL.   The reason?

 

Benning is and was confident that they had long term replacements for all of Markstrom (Demko), Toffoli (Podkolzin), and Tanev (Tryamkin) but realized that their BIGGEST long term need was in finding a top pairing “all situations” dman that could log big minutes and help shut down......so in other words, an Edler replacement. 
 

Olli Juolevi was supposed to be that guy (which is why Benning and management drafted via positional need rather than BPA here), but it didn’t pan out unfortunately.   Still possible give OJ’s age, but looking unlikely at this point.   
 

I suspect that Benning wanted to sign Markstrom and Tanev, but only at terms and money that were far below what they could get on the open market.  Benning had that luxury because the Canucks had their replacements within the system.   Signing these two players at market value (term and money) would have screwed us in the long term.

 

Benning obviously can’t go on air and explain all of this and so that’s he’s going to say something like “ran out of time.”

 

As far as Toffoli goes, the Canucks wanted to keep him and were fielding offers for Boeser and Virtanen with the intention of moving one of these guys.   With Virtanen, they were trying to get a low 1st rounder using Kasperi Kapanen as a comparable and were trying to get a 1st and prospect (lost in the Toffoli and Miller deals) with Boeser which also would have allowed them to clear cap space to sign Toffoli.     The Canucks received low ball offers on both players instead and so Benning passed.  
 

Here is what a lot of people don’t understand, and this is why HF Canucks and many Canucks media members are very “toxic.”  
 

1) Getting young kids into the line-up isn’t always a good thing.

2) Signing cheap vets or PTO vets to good term and money is NOT akin to shooting fish in a barrell for a downtrending rebuilding team.  
 

I’m mentioning the above because Benning often receives a LOT of criticism for signing / trading for guys like Sutter, Eriksson, Ferland, Myers, Gudbranson, Beagle, Roussel, Schaller, etc.

 

What a lot of people don’t realize is that a lot of kids would have been pushed into the NHl too prematurely had it not been for these signings (And no, it’s NOT coincidence at all that ALL of these “transitional/extraneous” contracts will be off the books by July 1st 2022.)

 

As it relates to a PTO, the fit has to be good for both the team AND the player in order for it to make sense.  A PTO isn’t just going to agree to sign with a team and be thrown to the wolves playing against opposing top players while the kids get sheltered.  Why?  Because - that would likely spell the end of his NHL career once the year finished.   That is why we were able to sign Thomas Vanek.  
 

Guys like Bieksa, Hansen, Burrows, Lack, and Garrison were all moved for picks/prospects when management felt that there were kids within the system that could replace these guys.  
 

That’s why the Canucks didn’t move Tanev and Hamhuis when people were screaming for it.  Kids within the system would have been inappropriately placed into roles that they would have been too green for, and it would have had a negative rippling effect on the development of kids in various positions (including Markstrom who would have been over-exerted even more).
 

In a lot of ways, I think this management group is one of the most misunderstood management group’s in recent memory.  

Edited by DarkIndianRises
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, smokes said:

When I look at the players he lost and the personnel he has lost, I am thinking that he gets an F right now on the report card. If this team was winning that would be different but right now he is looking like he won't be around for a long term contingency plan. With the way the team is playing, the only thing we can do right now is look to the future. Benning underestimated Marky and Tanev's worth in the locker room and on the ice. Sure everyone can think a few years down the lo=ine Marky's contract is going to look bad but as of right now in his prime and how he used to save 30-40 shots a night. As far as Tanev...I don't know, when you look at the locker room and you see all the youngsters call a teammate "Dad"...you keep him. Then there is Toffoli. For cap reasons and the 4d chess part, I'll let that go as Virtanen is still cheaper. But still I just want to say. AAARRRGGGGHHHH!!!!!

I was thinking about Tanev yesterday during the game - what was our record with and without? What I was also noticing was that green used to lean on him constantly- we’ve always had holes in D but with Tanev in it didn’t look like it. I’ve been hating on Green in my mind honestly, but with this response it’s probably a combo of things. 
 

or maybe it’s just the leafs and Habs are that effing good right now and we need a 20 game summary before we can make any judgement.

 

I agree on Tanev though, 100% They’ve lost their papa! Papa!! Where did you go papa??

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You can paint this picture anyway you want. I see the picture a different way. Keeping Markstrom ,Tanev and Toffoli as the right move. But the cap you all cry and wring your hands . 

Markstrom is a top 5 goalie in the league  in his prime, 6 million cap, will be good for 3 to 4 years cheap cap compared to other élite goals. Would be right in our wheel house when the kids are ready . Better then Demko  . Canucks MVP. Leadership in the room all things that warranted keeping him. Demko could have been traded.

 

Tanev still a good Dman, glue for Hughes. Leadership calming influence in the room. was actually more healthy last year then years before comes with age and knowing how to play. 4 years of him helping Hughes become a better Dman. I would have taken that. 

 

Toffoli great two way forward well liked in the room and is good for 20 to 30 goals a year. Stanley Cup experience. Cost us a good prospect and a draft pick.

 

Benning pissed off his team and maybe the coach by going after OEL and shunning his out going vets stupid move. 

Now dont say that there was no cap room for Markstrom Tanev and Toffoli there was . the difference of 1.8 million Not signing Virtanen was a step in the right direction and or a trade to move him out. Benning cant think ahead on anything he does . Shinny new toy lets get! 

Schmidt was supposed to be a big upgrade on Tanev really not looking like it. 

So under my thinking we would have moved ahead under the same roster except Virtanen .

This years team.

Miller Pettersson Boeser

Pearson Horvat Toffoli 

Hoglander Sutter MacEwen 

Motte Beagle Hawryluk

 

Edler  Myers

Hughes Tanev

Juolevi Hamonic

 

Markstrom 

Demko

 

Extras       Gaudette, Brisebois, Chatfield

 

Utica,  Roussel, Eriksson , Bartschi and all the rest. Try to trade any of the three from the farm. Virtanen trade for a third or a prospect

Trade Demko at the trade deadline or make a deal with Seattle and keep him.

In the off season add Podkolzin  and Tryamkin 

We would have fit in the cap and could have had a better team.

Next year Edler, Bartschi, Sutter Pearson   Demko all off the books . 

Ferland could retire as well.

Eriksson bought out 

Enough cap to sign Hughes and Pettersson.

 

JB did a terrible job of cap management and asset management he should be fired ASAP

I definitely could do a better job

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2021 at 12:18 PM, 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.

 

Well said, I've often thought about the similarities between the Canucks and the Avs.  

 

Do you remember the year where the Avs were historically bad?  Canucks are making a strong case for just as bad of a year.  That was the year that both Avs and Canucks dropped in the draft order but it worked out for both teams (Makar and Elias). 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, vannuck59 said:

Markstrom is a top 5 goalie in the league  in his prime, 6 million cap, will be good for 3 to 4 years cheap cap compared to other élite goals. Would be right in our wheel house when the kids are ready . Better then Demko  . Canucks MVP. Leadership in the room all things that warranted keeping him. Demko could have been traded.

 

Tanev still a good Dman, glue for Hughes. Leadership calming influence in the room. was actually more healthy last year then years before comes with age and knowing how to play. 4 years of him helping Hughes become a better Dman. I would have taken that. 

 

Toffoli great two way forward well liked in the room and is good for 20 to 30 goals a year. Stanley Cup experience. Cost us a good prospect and a draft pick.

 

.....

 

Utica,  Roussel, Eriksson , Bartschi and all the rest. Try to trade any of the three from the farm. Virtanen trade for a third or a prospect

 

Agreed on Marky, he was our MVP.  Demko played those three lights out games to close out our season and really skewed everyone's perspective.  

 

Tanev would've been a good keep, but I really don't think he'll be staying healthy although I'm rooting for him.  

 

Toffoli has 8 goals against the Canucks and 1 against the rest of the division.  He was a luxury that we couldn't afford IMO  

 

Nobody will take other people's spare parts that cost money, zero chance of moving any of the three unless someone wants to give you their salary dump in return (kind of like Gagner for Spooner trade).  

 

I think that Marky could be looked at as the biggest mistake by Benning.  This whole argument that the team is bad because they lost a couple of teammates just doesn't hold water for me.  They're not preschoolers whose best friend moved away.  

 

We shouldn't overlook the fact that we went from playing the crappy California teams to being in the toughest division in hockey.  To top it all off, we have struggled mightly against the Canadian teams over the last couple of years and they all made significant upgrades.  Benning could've loaded up more but it would've cost us flexibility down the road.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Agreed on Marky, he was our MVP.  Demko played those three lights out games to close out our season and really skewed everyone's perspective.  

 

Tanev would've been a good keep, but I really don't think he'll be staying healthy although I'm rooting for him.  

 

Toffoli has 8 goals against the Canucks and 1 against the rest of the division.  He was a luxury that we couldn't afford IMO  

 

Nobody will take other people's spare parts that cost money, zero chance of moving any of the three unless someone wants to give you their salary dump in return (kind of like Gagner for Spooner trade).  

 

I think that Marky could be looked at as the biggest mistake by Benning.  This whole argument that the team is bad because they lost a couple of teammates just doesn't hold water for me.  They're not preschoolers whose best friend moved away.  

 

We shouldn't overlook the fact that we went from playing the crappy California teams to being in the toughest division in hockey.  To top it all off, we have struggled mightly against the Canadian teams over the last couple of years and they all made significant upgrades.  Benning could've loaded up more but it would've cost us flexibility down the road.  

The difference was 1.8 mil and a better team, better Goalie better D man and a better winger , I would take that any day as far as down the road cap would worry about that down the road . JB screwed this team.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, vannuck59 said:

You can paint this picture anyway you want. I see the picture a different way. Keeping Markstrom ,Tanev and Toffoli as the right move.

This really is the crux of it.

 

People can do as many mental gymnastics as they want but it's getting tougher and tougher to defend the moves with the results we're seeing on the ice. For how many more years are we going to be told to be patient?

 

We have veterans on this team at the bottom (and even out of) the lineup eating cap that were allegedly necessary for "age-gap" and veteran leadership purposes but these three guys that are actually impact players in the top half of our lineup and leaders?

 

"Well you gotta consider the cap structure and our future, right?"

 

Well where was this consideration for Benning's first 6 years here? The goalposts have moved. I'm going to paraphrase that awful Trudeau slander commercial and say that I heard a lot of "the cap will balance itself" type comments 2,3,4,5 years ago.

Edited by kanucks25
Link to post
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...