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

what did we gain by not re-signing any of Markstrom/Tanev/Toffoli?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

simple question,

 

would re-resigning one of the 3 have made it very tricky to give QH and EP the long-term contracts they deserve?

 

or did we not re-sign any of them to give us some flexibility to add a few much cheaper pieces over the next couple of years?

 

I think Toffoli was the obvious one to keep......... Markstrom would have been the no-brainer without Demko here.

 

I did go back 5 or 6 pages of the forum to try to find a Markstrom/Tanev/Toffoli thread to append this question.. no luck.

 

thanks in advance :) ... and it's not a rhetorical question. I actually don't know/remember the answer.... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

and no, I don't think Toffoli would have made a big difference for the Canucks this season. just another nice piece.... and you can make a strong argument that the Canucks need another top defenseman, not another forward. maybe should have kept TT and moved someone else

 

and of course, his goal count would be way down as he wouldn't be playing the Canucks :)

 

lastly, I do know the NHL has a hard or close to hard salary cap....... whereas in the NBA you can always re-sign your own players (subject to some conditions and possibly financial penalties)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot about picking up Nate Schmidt and Holtby......

 

while we already had glut of good forwards compared to defensemen.... I think we should have kept TT and traded another forward.

 

also, two young goalies would have been fine in my opinion....... such a volatile position anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Provost said:

This isn’t hindsight as it was my thoughts at the time.

 

Re-Sign Toffoli and Stecher

 

Let Markstrom and Tanev walk if their demands were too high.

 

That would have cost us Virtanen, Hamonic, and probably meant a cheaper back up than Holtby.  Maybe would have even needed to buy out a player if we wanted Schmidt... maybe not pretty close.


The downside would have been that maybe Hoglander doesn’t get as good a chance if Toffoli is there.  It would be hard to believe he wouldn’t have at least starter on the 3rd line even if Toffoli was there.

Benning never even talked to Tanev which pissed him off, he only tried to call him when he found out he was signing in Calgary

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Squamfan said:

Benning never even talked to Tanev which pissed him off, he only tried to call him when he found out he was signing in Calgary

That is true.

 

It isn’t impossible that we could have gotten him on a cheaper contract or less term.  We probably would have had to give him a NMC for expansion, but we have the extra protection slot for that anyways.

 

On the other hand, I probably would have only gone $4 million x 3 years for Tanev max at the time... and he probably earned more than that and deserved to cash in for his final contract.  No hard feelings at all, the timing of it expiring was just a year too soon.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Squamfan said:

Benning never even talked to Tanev which pissed him off, he only tried to call him when he found out he was signing in Calgary

The free agency was poorly handled.

 

Instead of retooling for the next two seasons, we could be making the playoffs and making some noise.

 

If right moves were made, we could be coming out of the North division -- although I don't give much of a chance to any team that comes out of the North division when it comes to winning the cup.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Squamfan said:

Benning never even talked to Tanev which pissed him off, he only tried to call him when he found out he was signing in Calgary

Is this true?

 

Just an absolute joke if that's actually how it went down.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, higgyfan said:

I don't think the season would have gone any better with the former players.  Of the 3, I would prefer Toffoli; especially his very friendly contract.

 

Going forward, I'd rather the team have Demko (not being taken by Seattle), Schmidt (ED protected) and Hoglander's 1st season success +(ED exempt). It's unfortunate the team may have to carry Holby for another year though.

 

I also look forward to the Entry Draft with a top 5-7 pick as well as, an improved team next season.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having Toffoli now certainly sucks, but it does mean there is ~4.25 in cap space that will be available in the next few years that otherwise would not be there. If this can be put to good use in time it's possible that there can be some positive externalities from not signing him.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was always on the re-sign Tanev train, and on the fence with Marky, but leaning towards re-sign. I felt Toffoli was unnecessary. No idea how it works out, but I do think re-signing Petey, Hughes, and to a lesser degree (though not that much lesser now) Demko, was a big reason. Additionally, with the raise that Marky was going to need, we would've been very tight or even over the cap already this year, never mind getting Petey or Hughes to big contracts for next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think Benning could have handled free agency more poorly if he tried.

 

Toffoli was a great fit and at the price Montreal got him it was a nobrainer to keep him. The chain reaction of him in the lineup instantly gives options that might have made for a better 3rd line too.

 

I was fine with letting Markstrom go but using Toffoli or Tanev money to sign Holtby was a bonehead move. Goaltending has not been a Canucks problem at all in what 20 years? That signing just showed no confidence in Demko imo. And its stunted Dipietro too as he could at least be getting some games as a backup if they dont want to send him down.

 

Tanev I think would have signed for cheaper and less term to stay. How Benning treated him was brutal if reports are true. 

 

Stecher at 1.75 mil? No brainer to keep imo.

  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Burr 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Squamfan said:

Benning never even talked to Tanev which pissed him off, he only tried to call him when he found out he was signing in Calgary

Tanev was given an offer and said he would sleep on it. A short while later his deal with Calgary was announced.

  • Upvote 1
  • Huggy Bear 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

Tanev was given an offer and said he would sleep on it. A short while later his deal with Calgary was announced.

Nope u have it wrong. No offer was made , no communication with Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • -SN- changed the title to what did we gain by not re-signing any of Markstrom/Tanev/Toffoli?

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...