[Value of] Thatcher Demko

[JM_]

5 minutes ago, Provost said:

That was an option… either way was a fine idea really.

 

If we rebuild, keeping him wouldn’t make sense.  He isn’t likely going to re-sign to a rebuilding team that he just got shellacked for years playing for.

 

As far as value, this is a deal where we could be patient and opportunistic.  If a contending team gets an injury to their starting goalie, we could make a (relative) killing.

 

A good return would be a really blue chip prospect plus a 1st which is likely to be late as it would be a good team.  Maybe ask for a 1st the following year and hope that team takes a bit of a dive. 

 

 

Leafs would maybe be the ideal. team for his. Demko for Murray, 1st and a prospect. 

 

If the team does go blow up mode, we also have the ability to retain salary. I wouldn't do that for Demko, but it would certainly make Myers worth a heck of a lot more. Myers at 3 mil per should net us something good as well. 

 

 

[Provost]

5 minutes ago, JM_ said:

Leafs would maybe be the ideal. team for his. Demko for Murray, 1st and a prospect. 

 

If the team does go blow up mode, we also have the ability to retain salary. I wouldn't do that for Demko, but it would certainly make Myers worth a heck of a lot more. Myers at 3 mil per should net us something good as well. 

 

 

Anyone with 3 years or less could have salary retained to add value.

 

Myers, Pearson, even Petterson if someone blew you away.  A contending team adding Petterson for well under $4 million for three years vaults themselves to the top of the heap 

[JM_]

1 hour ago, Provost said:

Anyone with 3 years or less could have salary retained to add value.

 

Myers, Pearson, even Petterson if someone blew you away.  A contending team adding Petterson for well under $4 million for three years vaults themselves to the top of the heap 

I think I'd rather risk Petey receiving an offer sheet or try to keep him. 

 

It might even be worth considering retained salary on OEL, not ideal but otoh we should have a lot of ELCs during the last two years of that deal. Depends on whether or not you want him around for mentorship. I suppose we could take on a bad contact with lesser term for him too. 

 

Edited October 24, 2022 by JM_

[Coconuts]

14 hours ago, Devron said:

A first and a prospect I bet. Not worth trading as of right now. Very good chance he’s a great goalie for the next 10 years. Hell. Andersen is in his 40’s and crushing it. Goalie don’t decline like players unless theirs injuries involved.

 

I also doubt we have a goalie developed by the time his contract is up. If we enter a rebuild and Demko is traded it better include a great goalie prospect coming back. A first just won’t cut it for us.

 

Im scared that this team is showing it’s true Colours. I honestly don’t think I can do another rebuild just to fail again 

 

Dunno, I don't think playing behind a team that's been historically bad thus far is going to hurt his value too much. He hasn't been his best but that's also a reflection of the team in front of him. 

 

Dunno, I like Demko, I'm a big fan of him and his play, but I question whether he'd want to stay for a rebuild/retool if it comes to that. He could walk as a UFA down the road if we haven't bounced back by then. 

 

I don't know, maybe? At the very least we've really hurt or playoff chances and there's a good chance we're already looking at another lost season. The longer this stretch continues and the longer it takes us to start stringing stretches of wins together the more likely that becomes.

 

13 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I'd rather keep Demko for our rebuild.  Goalies are hard to find and they tend to peak later in their careers.  They also can play for longer periods of time.  Demko looks like the type of goalie who can play at peak level into his mid to late 30's, we can have him for another decade.  

I agree, but will he want to stay? Sure, being the guy he is he'll be a professional and ride out his contract, but what about after? Sure, it's a bit early to be asking about that but it's worth considering. 

 

Also, Demko is singlehandedly capable of keeping us from drafting high. Is that best for a rebuild if it comes to that? I don't know, there's a lot of what ifs, but it's a factor certainly. 

 

12 hours ago, J-23 said:

I don’t know, but a desperate team like the Leafs, you could probably squeeze a lot out of them.

 

Might be worth it, but do you really want to help the Leafs.

No, I don't want to help the Leafs. I'd rather suffer.

 

12 hours ago, whysoserious said:

Disagree, if we're going to actually rebuild there is no point keeping Demko. By the time the team is ready to compete, he will no longer be cost controlled. I say we take our chances that one of our goalie prospects develops or we get goalie through UFA or trade. Demko's probably at close to his peak value right now and we should sell high if we can. He'll also likely hurt our draft spot. 

He could hurt our draft spot. I suppose the question is how long do folks think a rebuild will take? We've got him for three seasons after this one, can we turn it around in four seasons if we start shipping guys out this season?

 

11 hours ago, Tank4Bedard said:

Hes a UFA once his contract is up. We are just trying to do asset management. 

Precisely, I don't want to lose Demko but given where we're at six games in and how the rest of the season could go it's worth being pragmatic. 

 

11 hours ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

I think Demko's the one part of the puzzle you don't trade away, and everyone here will grant him a few bad games. Problem is we have no one else in the system who has Vezina-potential. Can Silvos be that guy one day? Maybe but he's still very young and unproven. 

 

I'd hang on to Demko even in the midst of a rebuild. He's 26 years old now and sure, getting older, but goalies can get good in their early 30s so I'd hang on to him and hitch my wagon to Demko. If we're retooling or rebuilding, we might be ready to contend in 5 years time and that may well be Demko's true prime.

Do you think he'd extend if we had another three losing seasons? Now, that's far from a guarantee, but if we enter a rebuild or retool it's hard to say how long it'd take to bounce back from the steps back. 

 

It's a tough thing because no, we don't have anyone to replace him at this point. But he's also singlehandedly good enough to keep us from drafting top 3 or 5. If we're going to be bad for a while I'd prefer management to just tear the bandage off and commit to a direction. 

 

It's hard to say what's right or wrong regarding Demko, there are good arguments both ways. We'll have to see how the rest of the season goes, I just think it's worth pondering.

 

11 hours ago, shiznak said:

Colorado would probably be our best trading partner. They are tight against the cap, and neither Gerogiev or Francouz have been playing that great to start the season. 
 

To Colorado: Demko and Hoglander

To Vancouver: Gerogiev, O’Connor, Kaut and a 1st

 

 

Colorado could be a great partner but I'm not overly familiar with what they've got in their system. Demko could allow them a chance to repeat. 

 

11 hours ago, Sylas said:

Could’ve sold high for a kings ransom at the draft, multiple firsts I bet. 

Maybe, but even those like myself who thought we'd be a fringe playoff team at best didn't think we'd look this bad to begin the season. Doubt the coaching staff or management did either. 

 

5 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

The scary thing is like it or not. It will probably be the only real way to get a winning club.

Could be, mediocrity is death.

 

5 hours ago, thrago said:

Personally I think that if we aren't in a playoff position come Christmas we trade anyone 25 or older that can get us a 1st or better in return and start over.  This team isn't built in a way that can be easily be fixed otherwise.

It's tough to fathom, but no, I don't see any quick fixes. 

 

4 hours ago, Heretic said:

Demko is supposed to be our future, and lead us to a Stanley Cup one day.

 

As far as value, right now it's pretty low...

 

So was Luongo, and Schneider, and Markstrom. Or so some of us thought. 

 

Luongo at least got us close, what could have been.. 

 

I dunno, like I said above I'm not sure playing behind a team that's started historically bad, with the defense we've got, has damaged his value as much as people think. One would think they've gotta pull out of it eventually, whether it's too late at that point or not. 

 

2 hours ago, Canucks Curse said:

keep assets this season like Demko, Hughes Petey, would be interested in resigning Horvat, he is actually giving it hard right now, move miller and boeser for right shot d partner for higher young gritty 3C and 1 gritty vet who knows how to win, then in summer at draft if we do not get 1st OA do something like Petey + Van 1st for first OA for beddard assuming we have a high first, this will also give us some cap space and looks like a retool with a younger core, essentially building around Hughes and beddard, possibly keeping Demko

Pettersson, Podz, Hughes, and Podz were my personal untouchables and I've only really wavered on Demko. I'm all for trading Miller and Boeser, but I question what such moves would actually bring back. Dunno if we'd get a good right shot D at all. Would likely have to take cap back to facilitate moves, it's possible. 

 

I don't see anyone trading the 1OA, top three picks almost never, ever move. Especially not in what's supposed to be a deep draft, I've heard people say there could be multiple franchise players in the top 5. Bedard is a dream, we'd have to be bad enough to get lucky and I dunno if that's possible with Demko in net. 

 

2 hours ago, Provost said:

That was an option… either way was a fine idea really.

 

If we rebuild, keeping him wouldn’t make sense.  He isn’t likely going to re-sign to a rebuilding team that he just got shellacked for years playing for.

 

As far as value, this is a deal where we could be patient and opportunistic.  If a contending team gets an injury to their starting goalie, we could make a (relative) killing.

 

A good return would be a really blue chip prospect plus a 1st which is likely to be late as it would be a good team.  Maybe ask for a 1st the following year and hope that team takes a bit of a dive. 

 

 

That's my concern, maybe it's a bit early to be pondering it but better too early than too late. If we end up staring into the abyss of a lengthy rebuild or retool I question whether he'd want to stay, I could already see Horvat telling management he wants to explore his options and end up being traded. Lot of guys are happy just to have NHL jobs, but those who'd legitimately have plenty of options via UFA and who don't have to stay with a losing team can walk. Horvat ain't a fringe or bottom tier guy, he doesn't have to stick around. Neither does Demko down the road. 

 

2 hours ago, JM_ said:

Leafs would maybe be the ideal. team for his. Demko for Murray, 1st and a prospect. 

 

If the team does go blow up mode, we also have the ability to retain salary. I wouldn't do that for Demko, but it would certainly make Myers worth a heck of a lot more. Myers at 3 mil per should net us something good as well. 

 

 

I'd rather deal with Colorado, I'd rather suffer than get Toronto past the first round. 

[cripplereh]

4 hours ago, Canucks Curse said:

keep assets this season like Demko, Hughes Petey, would be interested in resigning Horvat, he is actually giving it hard right now, move miller and boeser for right shot d partner for higher young gritty 3C and 1 gritty vet who knows how to win, then in summer at draft if we do not get 1st OA do something like Petey + Van 1st for first OA for beddard assuming we have a high first, this will also give us some cap space and looks like a retool with a younger core, essentially building around Hughes and beddard, possibly keeping Demko

If we are going to do anything it would be retool,but we need to stop the retool over and over and rebuild.EP,QH,Bo,Miller with a 2year bad contract coming back,Myers at TDL should get us 6 to 7 firsts and prospects .Rest like Garland and Pearson later picks.