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

[Signing] Canucks re-sign Thatcher Demko


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Chronic.Canucks.Fan said:

Unreal deal. We're set in the crease for years to come. Now hopefully Peter and Hughes will follow suit with similarly affordable deals! (I know, I know...)

Yes petey will sign for a home town discount because of all the missed games

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, aznmonk said:

Yes true we have 11 and Toronto has 10.

It's time to sign ian clark 2×5 

Someone on here said he currently makes around 800k... can't remember who .. it was cpl weeks ago.. if that's true Offer him long term 1 mill per yr and get him locked up. 

 

I have a feeling Florida might poach him to get Bobrovsky back to Vezina calibre. They have 5 more years at 10 mill per tied up in him. Re unite him with Clark and see if he can get Bobs back to the level during his CBJ days.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

It looks like almost zero cap hit next year, and 2 mil the next year? Moneywise we'd lose a million or so over the duration if we signed a minimum $$ backup? 

 

Am I reading this right? If so it's a no brainer if pressed for cap space, and a heck of a convenient solution.

I think you'd want to be careful and not sign anyone over 3aav, but its some nice extra cap for sure. Pays for Tryamkin e.g. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Patrik Laine said:

Yeah if only Benning could of lured guys at that time by saying come sign with a rebuilding team with zero prospect depth and some of the worst tax rates there is.... I mean if I played in the nhl I could think of alot better places to play at that time than the nucks unless I got more term and still would of probably played somewhere else but I guess Benning should of sold them on living in one of the most expensive cities in north America and not seeing the sun and constant rain over the winter. 

4th line players are literally one prospect away from not playing at all though. They (should) have little actual bargaining power even as UFA. And usually dont. Having no prospect depth is like their job security, which is probably why you see tons of them on waivers or signed for inexpensive 1 year contracts every year by other teams. 

 

If you really like a guy, maybe you give him an extra year to entice him to sign. Maybe a bit of a cap premium. Maybe some trade protection. You dont see a lot of GM's give him all 3 though like Benning does a lot.

 

Did Benning at the time say they were 4 years away from contending so who cares about the cap or term? No, he legitimately thought the team was a few depth players away from the playoffs. That alone should be cause to question his judgment. He was pretty clear about it actually. He signed them because he thought they would make the team competitive. Even at the time that was ridiculous reasoning hidden behind the supposed unicorn of veteran leadership so the actusl young impact players wouldnt crater into a bunch of losers.

 

Wasting cap though sure came back to bite the team. Losing Toffoli and Tanev simply because he wasted more cap on a goalie we didnt need and had too many untradeable bottom 6/press box/minor league stashes to have the space to keep them. 

 

Its easy to say those contracts dont matter but that doesnt make it true. They have already had a huge negative impact and will continue to.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Did Benning at the time say they were 4 years away from contending so who cares about the cap or term? No, he legitimately thought the team was a few depth players away from the playoffs.

Playoffs =\= contender. You seem to conflate/confuse a lot of simple things.

 

FYI, in case you missed it, we played in a play in and two rounds of playoffs last season. Looks like Benning was right again! :P

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

JB has actually done a good job keeping his RFAs to reasonable deals.  Bo, Brock and now Demko.
 

Bodes well for Petey/Hughes this summer.

I have a feeling they won’t be bridge deals either. I think he’s gonna lock them up. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, kilgore said:

No reason to take away Benning's credit where its due.  He agreed with Judd and others in that department about picking Demko.  And this re-signing is exactly the right move. In fact I was hoping Demko would be ahead of any signings for Hughes or Pettersson. The goaltending position is so crucial for any team's success. And this is a reasonable contract over 5 years.  Fantastic.

 

But most of the work scouting Thatcher was by the amateur scouting department, including Brackett.  No GM has time to travel all over NA, and the world, to watch junior hockey games, no matter how much they want to have their fingers in all the pots. The player assessment a GM should have more say in is pro-scouting, to make NHL player hockey deals, including FA acquisitions. I won't get into Jims history there. I applaud Jim for recognizing what he has now in the fold and has his priorities straight about shoring up the goaltending first and foremost.

 

Not sure what you are saying in your first paragraph though. Why wouldn't he re-sign here? He knows the team and has a good goaltending coach. I don't see what you are trying to imply there.

.

.

.

But that's hilariously ironic about how you pieced this post together. Though Benning agreed with Judd, your next paragraph states that a GM doesn't actually have time to do any of the work you said, which is probably true for most of the time. A GM does, in part, rely on the work of other scouts, but I'm certain Benning is at MINIMUM aware of the players that are available. In fact, prior to Benning being hired, he was rather proud of the wall of prospects that allowed him to know each team's farm.  So, yes, I do believe Benning's contributions do get washed out because people have a bone to pick with him. And that, in my opinion, is academically dishonest. I'm not directing this at you personally, but some posters here just have nothing good to say about Benning.

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

1 hour ago, Davathor said:

Right now this looks like a steal. Hopefully he doesn't regress, but he's only shown improvement.

 

Jam Banning strikes again

I don't think he will, he has taken a step in every league he's played in and even if he did, he doesn't have a NTC according to Dhaliwal. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Playoffs =\= contender. You seem to conflate/confuse a lot of simple things.

 

FYI, in case you missed it, we played in a play in and two rounds of playoffs last season. Looks like Benning was right again! :P

Come on bud. How many teams made it to the play in though? Without it the Canucks would not have made the playoffs iirc. They played pretty well against STL but only out of this world goaltending by Demko made that series remotely close against Vegas.

 

If Benning was so right, why does the team have about a 3% chance of making the playoffs this season? Just like most other years of Bennings tenure. Why should the outlier year that included a play in round be seen as some kind of validation of Bennings plan while you conveniently ignore the significant step back the team has taken this season? What would you attribute that to?

 

Signing a bunch of crappy and/or unnecessary contracts cost the Canucks a top line winger and a top 2 defensive dman last offseason. I would say both losses might have something to do with the regression. Coaching, injuries, declining play by some players, etc all contributed too of course. But the wasted cap is a significant factor.

 

The signing of Demko is a good one for the team. But it came only after Benning and Green had showed a lack of confidence in Demko as the starter by signing Holtby to an unnecessary contract then giving him the net to lose right off the hop. 

 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Trebreh said:

I wonder if Philly would take a flyer on Holtby? We need to trade him to give DiPietro some NHL experience. 

 

 

Holtby for Ghost? Philly retains 1 mill per season. This pipe dream could work and then we could expose him and seattle could take him if we chose not to protect him. Could be some insurance too if Edler doesn't come back plus I doubt we resign Benn.

  • Huggy Bear 1
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...