Does Demko Fit our Timeline?

[CanucksJay]

I am a proponent that if they get a good offer for Demko, they should pull the trigger 

He's 27,coming off an injury after another injury where he came back and didn't look sharp. 

There's a good chance he regains form but there is also a chance he may never be the same. He however still has the allure of Bubble Demko and teams saw us take vegas to the brink solely on the back of Demko. 

But more importantly, I wonder if he fits the timeline of our competitive window. 

With Horvat gone and getting Raty and a first along with our own high first rounder, it looks like our competitive window will actually open in 3-4 years. 

Moreover, we will probably be pretty bad next year as well. Demko's stats will continue to suffer and its hard for goalies to pull themselves out of a rut once they start averaging below. 900 save percentage... His trade value would deminish as well... 

That makes Demko 31 when we start playing good hockey. That makes Petterson 28 which is great. But does Demko Fit at that point or is it better now to trade him and get some assets and draft or trade for a goalie like Kochetkov and groom him to be a starter in 1-2 years? In fact I'd just ask Ian Clarke who he wants and trade for him. 

In the interim, we can sign a vet goalie on a 2 year deal? 

What is Demko worth on the market today? 

If it's a first rounder and a good prospect, I would take it. 

[rychicken]

No, but if we pick up the pace, Demko Jr might....

[Phil_314]

Goalies are rarely worth a 1st and a good prospect.  If we are sold on moving Demko then sure, but understand that goaltender volatility season to season is a real thing (just look at Carter Hart, Sergei Bobrovsky and Martin Jones as examples of wildly fluctuating W-L totals) and at this point we're selling low and will be getting pennies on the dollar for his potential value.  Goalies also age differently, when guys like Fleury and Tim Thomas back in the day were starting well into their 30s, so I don't think we should worry too much about a 27 year old not fitting the timeline.  IMO if he wants to stay and the value in the trade market isn't there, then he stays.  If we do sell him, we could always trade to take a guy like Cal Petersen off LA's hands at a hefty price (top prospect RD and 1st pick) to have a similar reclamation project.

[Coconuts]

Of course, JR said we'd be contending within two years and we've got one more year to get to that point, buckle up! Trading Bo is for a middle six tweener, a B-B+ prospect, and a 1st is a move towards contention innit? 

 

[Junkyard Dog]

Probably gonna need to draft a goalie and/or get one in the trade for Demko if he goes. 
 

Need more insurances than just Silovs. 

[rychicken]

6 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Of course, JR said we'd be contending within two years and we've got one more year to get to that point, buckle up! Trading Bo is for a middle six tweener, a B-B+ prospect, and a 1st is a move towards contention innit? 

 

we're moving on up!!
 

 

[Rabbit]

Selling him is not a big problem, depends on what the return, and the replacement.

[You Mad Bro?]

I probably feel the same as management 

 

[DarthMelvin]

Good goalies never diminish unless they are injury prone. Cloutier, great goalie but once the injuries started, he declined fast.

 

Look at old ass Ed Belfour lol

 

I would look at trading him. Delia is doing his best. but we could another up and comer to replace the other guy. what's his name...

[250Integra]

We're probably back in the playoff picture in about 2 years time so at age 29, Demko should be in the middle of his prime. It's not like we have any promising goalies coming up (Sorry Silovs, not yet) so hang on to him while he's on a great contract and see what happens.

[Fanuck]

43 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

 What is Demko worth on the market today? 

If it's a first rounder and a good prospect, I would take it. 

As Brian Burke often said, you're worth whatever anyone is willing to pay for you.

 

When you look at clubs like TO/EDM one has to think in hindsight, they should've invested in an elite goalie - maybe they'd have more PO success if they had invested in the position instead of the other areas. 

 

Clubs like TB/Dal/Wpg/NYR have invested in elite goaltending and it shows.  I think a club like LA could take that next step to the upper echelon of the NHL if they had an elite goalie locked up in their franchise - I mean, do they really expect Copley, a 31yo career journeyman to be the long-term answer there? 

 

The issue with trading Demko for me isn't who are you getting in return (cuz you're certainly not getting another Demko -level goalie) - but rather how do you replace him on the roster both short and long-term? 

[CanucksJay]

6 minutes ago, 250Integra said:

We're probably back in the playoff picture in about 2 years time so at age 29, Demko should be in the middle of his prime. It's not like we have any promising goalies coming up (Sorry Silovs, not yet) so hang on to him while he's on a great contract and see what happens.

2 years is ambitious. 

Next year will be growing pains... Learning Tocchet's system while losing lots. 

Pearson, Myers contracts are done at that point. 

We would need some nhl ready defensemen to step right in and do a better job than Myers and the current crew the following year. We would not only just have to be better than current defense but there needs to be a clear upward progression / development if we want to be a contender in the future. 

I can see a stopgap defensemen that might help get us into the playoffs in 2 years but that's more of the same as we've seen... Watered down mediocre defense. 

If we truly want to contend, we need to develop our defense, not just plug an existing nhler in place of Myers and hoping for the best. 

 

[CanucksJay]

8 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

As Brian Burke often said, you're worth whatever anyone is willing to pay for you.

 

When you look at clubs like TO/EDM one has to think in hindsight, they should've invested in an elite goalie - maybe they'd have more PO success if they had invested in the position instead of the other areas. 

 

Clubs like TB/Dal/Wpg/NYR have invested in elite goaltending and it shows.  I think a club like LA could take that next step to the upper echelon of the NHL if they had an elite goalie locked up in their franchise - I mean, do they really expect Copley, a 31yo career journeyman to be the long-term answer there? 

 

The issue with trading Demko for me isn't who are you getting in return (cuz you're certainly not getting another Demko -level goalie) - but rather how do you replace him on the roster both short and long-term? 

Demko was a high 2nd rounder.. 

We've been pretty lucky in the goaltending department so maybe I don't realize how tough it is to get a good goalie. 

We've had Lu, Schneider and Demko with the latter 2 being developed internally. 

I feel like we could probably acquire one in a trade or draft one and develop him for the next 3 years under Clarke. 

 

But yeah i may be oversimplifying 

 

Also you raise a good point. If we draft another Demko with a 2nd rounder we Recieved in the Demko trade... What's the point besides having taken an unnecessary risk? 

I believe we would either need a bluechip goaltending prospect AND  a draft pick or a prospect and a late first to make it worthwhile. 

 

 

Edited February 1, 2023 by CanucksJay

[nuckin_futz]

We're the Canucks, a kid born 2 years ago might fit our timeline.

[Fanuck]

4 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

Demko was a high 2nd rounder.. 

We've been pretty lucky in the goaltending department so maybe I don't realize how tough it is to get a good goalie. 

We've had Lu, Schneider and Demko with the latter 2 being developed internally. 

I feel like we could probably acquire one in a trade or draft one and develop him for the next 3 years under Clarke. 

 

But yeah i may be oversimplifying 

 

Obviously every prospect is different, but if you look at Demko (and yes, he has had some injury history and was playing behind Marky and what not), but it took a LOT longer than 3 years from his draft season to when he became an impact player for the Canucks.  Even looking at other young up and coming goalies in the league like Oettinger and Knight, their development took a lot longer than 3 years.  And yes, I understand you're probably using '3 years' as a ballpark figure - but I think it should be closer to 5 or 6 years to fully expect the complete development of a truly elite goalie.

 

Either way, it would be nice if the club had a clear succession plan in place for not only the goaltending position, but defence as well. 

[CanucksJay]

22 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

Obviously every prospect is different, but if you look at Demko (and yes, he has had some injury history and was playing behind Marky and what not), but it took a LOT longer than 3 years from his draft season to when he became an impact player for the Canucks.  Even looking at other young up and coming goalies in the league like Oettinger and Knight, their development took a lot longer than 3 years.  And yes, I understand you're probably using '3 years' as a ballpark figure - but I think it should be closer to 5 or 6 years to fully expect the complete development of a truly elite goalie.

 

Either way, it would be nice if the club had a clear succession plan in place for not only the goaltending position, but defence as well. 

We'll said. 

If we keep Demko. We probably need to draft another one this year if Silovs not it. 

[24K PureCool]

Who knows. If we win the lottery either this year or the next then probably yes. If not, probably not. 

 

Either way if we are trading Demko it has to be a situation where the acquiring team have to make the Canucks say yes. 

[BC_Hawk]

2 hours ago, CanucksJay said:

I am a proponent that if they get a good offer for Demko, they should pull the trigger 

He's 27,coming off an injury after another injury where he came back and didn't look sharp. 

There's a good chance he regains form but there is also a chance he may never be the same. He however still has the allure of Bubble Demko and teams saw us take vegas to the brink solely on the back of Demko. 

But more importantly, I wonder if he fits the timeline of our competitive window. 

With Horvat gone and getting Raty and a first along with our own high first rounder, it looks like our competitive window will actually open in 3-4 years. 

Moreover, we will probably be pretty bad next year as well. Demko's stats will continue to suffer and its hard for goalies to pull themselves out of a rut once they start averaging below. 900 save percentage... His trade value would deminish as well... 

That makes Demko 31 when we start playing good hockey. That makes Petterson 28 which is great. But does Demko Fit at that point or is it better now to trade him and get some assets and draft or trade for a goalie like Kochetkov and groom him to be a starter in 1-2 years? In fact I'd just ask Ian Clarke who he wants and trade for him. 

In the interim, we can sign a vet goalie on a 2 year deal? 

What is Demko worth on the market today? 

If it's a first rounder and a good prospect, I would take it. 

He fits our timeline. If a 27yo goalie doesn't, then we better get ready for Pettersson walking out the door in a couple years

[RU SERIOUS]

Only even consider trading Demko once/if our defence is bolstered and they can find a hhalf descent replacement for him, otherwise it will be a turkey shoot out there and our better players will be clawing at the door to get out of Vancouver.  

 

The other thing is that he has a very reasonable contract with $ stability for a few years which mgmt will appreciate, given the mess Benning left the franchise stuck with so many bad contracts.

Edited February 1, 2023 by RU SERIOUS

[RU SERIOUS]

1 hour ago, CanucksJay said:

2 years is ambitious. 

Next year will be growing pains... Learning Tocchet's system while losing lots. 

Pearson, Myers contracts are done at that point. 

We would need some nhl ready defensemen to step right in and do a better job than Myers and the current crew the following year. We would not only just have to be better than current defense but there needs to be a clear upward progression / development if we want to be a contender in the future. 

I can see a stopgap defensemen that might help get us into the playoffs in 2 years but that's more of the same as we've seen... Watered down mediocre defense. 

If we truly want to contend, we need to develop our defense, not just plug an existing nhler in place of Myers and hoping for the best. 

 

Don't worry about Pearson, he'll never be back and Myers will also be gone soon - either by trade or bought out after July 1st as will other deadwood on the team.