[Signing] Canucks re-sign Thatcher Demko

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

16 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Not without seeing what he does with EP and QH plus how he handles the UFA. Sounds like Pearson is going to be re-signed so lets see how deals like that look first.

Maybe he said that so other teams think he's valuable instead of not valuable....

[mll]

Just now, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

Maybe he said that so other teams think he's valuable instead of not valuable....

Dreger on Insider Trading says there’s still some work to be done but both sides are optimistic.

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

2 minutes ago, mll said:

Dreger on Insider Trading says there’s still some work to be done but both sides are optimistic.

Yeah, but if JB came out and said no we don't want to resign him then all teams would think he's not valuable to the Canucks and offer them nothing knowing he isn't resigning him. He had to say what he said to hopefully get the most out of a trade if one happens.

[mll]

12 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

Interesting I always assumed multi-year Contracts are usually frontloaded 

Escrow rates were set in the CBA negotiated last summer.  It’s a decreasing scale from 20% to 6%.  Players bring more home if they have the lower rates on their higher paid years. That’s why deals have been more backloaded.  For older players it’s more in a bell shape to avoid the buyout risk.

 

It also helps owners with many having liquidity issues with the lack of revenue.

[mll]

5 minutes ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

Yeah, but if JB came out and said no we don't want to resign him then all teams would think he's not valuable to the Canucks and offer them nothing knowing he isn't resigning him. He had to say what he said to hopefully get the most out of a trade if one happens.

Still, they are looking to get a deal done.

[wallstreetamigo]

3 hours ago, KoreanHockeyFan said:

Not sure why you're looking at the Holtby signing as expensive insurance/reactionary to losing Markstrom? I thought it was clear that he was being signed to meet the minimum exposure requirements for the upcoming expansion draft (i.e. every team must expose 1 goalie at minimum). 

Acquiring a backup goalie to expose would probably have been pretty easy/inexpensive and far less cap restrictive. Given how he has played there is pretty much zero chance Seattle takes him. So that 2 year deal not only cost the team Toffoli this year, it will hinder the team again this offseason.

[wallstreetamigo]

1 hour ago, Gawdzukes said:

This is a pretty silly take. It wasn't reactionary at all. He had a goalie with almost zero NHL experience and he backed him up with a proven goalie on a short term contract for decent money. Absolute rubbish here. The rest is foolish too except I also hope we don't give Pearson anything. 

A veteran backup at 4 plus million per year is a good deal? Holtby was not needed at all. A veteran backup at a quarter of that hit would have been fine. With all the good players they lost due to having a bunch of bad contracts and players they could not move, it was pretty obvious the team would regress this season.

 

Benning and Green clearly thought Holtby would be the starter or at the very least the 1A/1B guy with Demko. You dont sign that contract if you have confidence in Demko to get the job done.

[SilentSam]

I think Demko will prove this to be an exceptional contract.

This young man is guaranteed a great living in a beautiful part of the world,  in the profession he loves.

Giving young men this peace of mind in their early careers and going into their prime should pay better dividends than this type of money going to vets playing safe into their sunsets.

In comparison to this,  I would use the Sutter and Eriksson contracts ..  one would think that men in their 30’s would give you more.. but ultimately retiring is on the horizon.

Perhaps players in their mid 30’s should have contracts that are written more production based or of that orientation.

Challenging type contracts can bring out better performance.

Im not proposing the “puck hog” mentality,.

but perhaps some type of formula based on all stats and rythyms would work better for players and franchises .

just my 2 bits,. I’ve been watching this game evolve for 50 years ,  yes the contracts increase in pay,.  But they haven’t really evolved to the type of game it is.. including the danger it has.

 

[aGENT]

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

Demko looks like he's the very first home grown goalie to do anything in franchise history too.   Wow. 

 

Another in a long and growing list of positive firsts under Benning... And people want him fired 

 

1 hour ago, iinatcc said:

Interesting I always assumed multi-year Contracts are usually frontloaded 

 

With Covid revenues in the red, owners are not than happy to differ real cash in to the future where revenues are hopefully recovered.

 

Escrow on players is also quite high for the next couple years, so it benefits them as well to differ their larger salaries to the future as escrow decreases (they get to keep more of their money).

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, KoreanHockeyFan said:

Assuming Benning has learned his lesson from some of his bad signings, I think the Canucks are in pretty good shape in a few years once contracts like Roussel, Sutter, etc are off the books. I honestly believe we'll be in the same realm of the Leafs and the OIlers in the near future - just need some defencemen like Juolevi and/or Rathbone to pan out. 

 

That being said, I'm still expecting another couple of years of 1 step forward, 2 steps back - not out of the woods yet. 

I don't think we will be like EDM or TO, we simply won't be that top heavy.   Like it or not our path is closer to St. Louis then anything.   Our cap should be pretty balanced.    We don't have a Tavares/Mathews or McDavid/Drasaitl ... we do have a Miller, Horvat, EP though... 

 

Really think that the hockey gods have given the Canucks a gift.   Hope JB navigates it well. 

[hammertime]

5 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

A veteran backup at 4 plus million per year is a good deal? Holtby was not needed at all. A veteran backup at a quarter of that hit would have been fine. With all the good players they lost due to having a bunch of bad contracts and players they could not move, it was pretty obvious the team would regress this season.

 

Benning and Green clearly thought Holtby would be the starter or at the very least the 1A/1B guy with Demko. You dont sign that contract if you have confidence in Demko to get the job done.

You sign that contract to have a vezna/cup winning veteran backup to make sure demko has the best opportunity to succeed in his transition to starter.

[alt kilgore]

13 hours ago, Dazzle said:

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.

I don't get the "hilariously ironic" angle but whatever. A GM can trust and agree with his amateur scouting department, and at the same time realize he does not have time himself to travel to watch junior games and so will lean to agree with a recommendation from them.  That's not irony, that's reality.  Of course a GM would have his own knowledge on the player, but would still have to rely and trust the amateur scouting department for a more detailed report on the player, no? 

 

As well he should be confident in his amateur scouting department's work to the point of giving them the benefit of the doubt, you'd think. (To the point of not antagonizing your new brilliant head director who helped garner a host of good prospects, including gems from lower rounds, by firing two of his staff and demanding he be able to keep doing that, and also hire who he wants for that department anytime he wants to, no matter what the ASD head wants)

 

There may come along a player that a GM would have a unique, more detailed knowledge than his ASD, but mostly, he should be relying on their work and recommendations. It only makes sense.  A GM has a host of other duties to concentrate on. One of which is pro-scouting, the arena where most of his deal making would take place.

 

I have no problem crediting Benning when he does good. Such as this signing of Demko. The Miller deal was bold, costly, but worked out great. Not saddling the team with older expensive vets like Markstrom and Tanev, painful but necessary. A little Wally Buono thinking that should have happened earlier.....oops I did it again. 

 

It is more of a straw breaking the orca's back for me.  I had my blue and green glassed strapped on when Jim arrived. I swallowed many of his first moves as learning on the job and surmountable. Some good decisions for sure, but over all a pattern of failure and excuses.   The one shining light, the prospect pool was mostly Bracketts influence, but I give Jim credit for agreeing with him mostly.  JB can be specifically credited more with Jake who was picked before Brackett's reign,  and Joulevi who he swooped in to insist on.

 

I love my team too much to want to continue to put its life in his hands.  But what I want, and a few others, means nothing I know. I still cheer for his success while he's here because I want the team to succeed. Now that could be defined as ironic I guess.  It was easier to excuse him when we had not much of a team to work with, but now with these young gems in the line up, its a crucial time, and my faith in him is strained to believe he can be creative and smart enough to manage our next phase and juggle our cap and find a good cheap support roster, just based on his history here.  Things like saying re-signing Pearson was his next big priority, doesn't make me regain any of that faith.

 

 

[JM_]

5 hours ago, KoreanHockeyFan said:

Assuming Benning has learned his lesson from some of his bad signings, I think the Canucks are in pretty good shape in a few years once contracts like Roussel, Sutter, etc are off the books. I honestly believe we'll be in the same realm of the Leafs and the OIlers in the near future - just need some defencemen like Juolevi and/or Rathbone to pan out. 

 

That being said, I'm still expecting another couple of years of 1 step forward, 2 steps back - not out of the woods yet. 

pretty good chances both OJ and Rathbone work out. We're actually in decent shape for next season cap-wise, in part because there should be some covid/flat cap deals still around. 

 

As far as the previous deals go, I don't really see a correlation to Demko's. They were made under very different plans and circumstances. 

[JM_]

3 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

A veteran backup at 4 plus million per year is a good deal? Holtby was not needed at all. A veteran backup at a quarter of that hit would have been fine. With all the good players they lost due to having a bunch of bad contracts and players they could not move, it was pretty obvious the team would regress this season.

Actually there wasn't much on the market available. You're calling him a backup but thats pure hindsight, the thinking was they might split the year evenly. 

 

From the list of UFA goalies, I don't really see who else fit the bill, be significantly cheaper, and be someone that could tandem with Demko and keep us competitive: https://www.spotrac.com/nhl/free-agents/goaltender/ufa/

 

3 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

 

Benning and Green clearly thought Holtby would be the starter or at the very least the 1A/1B guy with Demko.

yup

3 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

 

You dont sign that contract if you have confidence in Demko to get the job done.

Now we know.

[Gurn]

Can you imagine the hair pulling and teeth nashing that would have gone on had J.B. signed  Keith Kincaid to a $900,00 deal.

Then early in the season Demko breaks a finger.?

OMG J.B. too stupid to sign a quality back up.

[JM_]

4 minutes ago, gurn said:

Can you imagine the hair pulling and teeth nashing that would have gone on had J.B. signed  Keith Kincaid to a $900,00 deal.

Then early in the season Demko breaks a finger.?

OMG J.B. too stupid to sign a quality back up.

maybe worse, maybe Demko cracks under the early pressure being handed the #1 spot too early. He did struggle early but at least he had a veteran partner to lean on. 

[Whorvat]

I'm convinced Benning could cure cancer and you'd have these same people complaining about why it wasn't diabetes or some other ailment

[The Lock]

4 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

A veteran backup at 4 plus million per year is a good deal? Holtby was not needed at all. A veteran backup at a quarter of that hit would have been fine. With all the good players they lost due to having a bunch of bad contracts and players they could not move, it was pretty obvious the team would regress this season.

 

Benning and Green clearly thought Holtby would be the starter or at the very least the 1A/1B guy with Demko. You dont sign that contract if you have confidence in Demko to get the job done.

 

Curious. What's your opinion of Allen backing up Price for almost 4.5 million? What's your opinion of Lehner and Fleury making 5 and 7mil respectively? In those situations are both of those goales clearly there to be the starter as well? While our scenario isn't common, it's not exactly breaking the bank compared with a couple of others teams either. Imagine paying Brobovsky 10mil a year. lol

 

The thing is, all we had to really go on last season with Demko was his 3 games in the playoffs. While it's nice to think all roses with him because of those 3 games, it's kind of good to have that extra help and it's only a 2 year contract. It doesn't really hurt us that much. I'd argue that he was brought in to be a potential starter in case if Demko needed a little more time given we didn't know how he'd be this season.

 

So it makes sense in my opinion to bring in a proven goalie as a backup just in case if you have that scenario where you actually do need him as a starter since the unknowns with Demko were there. I was all for the signing and I still am honestly. In fact, if we can just signed someone cheap who wasn't a proven starter, I would have questioned that more.

[Jayinblack]

20 minutes ago, The Lock said:

 

Curious. What's your opinion of Allen backing up Price for almost 4.5 million? What's your opinion of Lehner and Fleury making 5 and 7mil respectively? In those situations are both of those goales clearly there to be the starter as well? While our scenario isn't common, it's not exactly breaking the bank compared with a couple of others teams either. Imagine paying Brobovsky 10mil a year. lol

 

The thing is, all we had to really go on last season with Demko was his 3 games in the playoffs. While it's nice to think all roses with him because of those 3 games, it's kind of good to have that extra help and it's only a 2 year contract. It doesn't really hurt us that much. I'd argue that he was brought in to be a potential starter in case if Demko needed a little more time given we didn't know how he'd be this season.

 

So it makes sense in my opinion to bring in a proven goalie as a backup just in case if you have that scenario where you actually do need him as a starter since the unknowns with Demko were there. I was all for the signing and I still am honestly. In fact, if we can just signed someone cheap who wasn't a proven starter, I would have questioned that more.

Plus Holtby is our goalie to expose for the ED and if he gets taken (or we sweeten things so he does) then JB can go with a cheaper backup for next year and there's no issue.

[The Lock]

Just now, Jayinblack said:

Plus Holtby is our goalie to expose for the ED and if he gets taken (or we sweeten things so he does) then JB can go with a cheaper backup for next year and there's no issue.

Exactly. The exposure is definitely a plus.

 

Benning's done a few things I've disapproved of but Holtby isn't one of them.