Hammertime Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 1 minute ago, SilentSam said: I think if Demko can not play 50 games next season he will be traded. Or do we trade him now for a shit load of good ?! Huh. no Silovs playing 30+ games is a good thing. Rested Demko also a good thing. We could have a Jennings caliber goaltending duo under 7m. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devron Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Just now, Hammertime said: Huh. no Silovs playing 30+ games is a good thing. Rested Demko also a good thing. We could have a Jennings caliber goaltending duo under 7m. Yeah Silovs needs a couple years of playing 30ish games. Giving him the reins would be a developmental mistake. 2 years of Demko and Silovs then a decision is made 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Hammertime said: Huh. no Silovs playing 30+ games is a good thing. Rested Demko also a good thing. We could have a Jennings caliber goaltending duo under 7m. Lets not get ahead of ourselves. Silovs held us in there but his stats haven’t exactly been sparkling so far. If he can match what DeSmith did this season and continue to grow I’ll be happy. Edited June 9 by DeNiro 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 6 minutes ago, SilentSam said: I think if Demko can not play 50 games next season he will be traded. Or do we trade him now for a shit load of good ?! Considering we were a healthy Demko from winning the Cup this year, I’m thinking JR/PA will keep him. We would get a grotesque amount if we did trade him though!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanfor42 Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 I'd like to see almost a 50/50 split next year for Demko and Silovs. Especially late in the season. 45/37 type of split. Critical to keep Demko healthy for the playoffs and I think if he goes over 50 games his injury risk increases. He has been injuring himself going side to side in the net without any contact with anyone. That's wear and tear IMO. Also, playing Silovs up to half the games gives him a ton of work and development. He shouldn't be sitting for 2 to 3 weeks at a time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 1 minute ago, Hammertime said: Huh. no Silovs playing 30+ games is a good thing. Rested Demko also a good thing. We could have a Jennings caliber goaltending duo under 7m. I agree , but I also believe in attrition of players to make the TEAM stronger .. An example was not trade Markstrom when we should have. Horvat was great timing. Demko is UFA after 2 more seasons, at a 5m cap hit per. The questions will be asked towards the end of next season. that’s not far away. He has groin issues,. And he is a goalie . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 9 minutes ago, Devron said: Yeah Silovs needs a couple years of playing 30ish games. Giving him the reins would be a developmental mistake. 2 years of Demko and Silovs then a decision is made I think 1 more year . 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devron Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 3 minutes ago, SilentSam said: I think 1 more year . Yeah gotta give it that at least 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Realistically Silovs still has a lot to prove, one run of high end play does not make a guy an NHL level starting goaltender. Demko is the guy until he's not, questions of health and ideal load are warranted but he's still the guy. Other tenders have had hot runs too, even come playoff time, it's alright to be excited about Silovs but let's not get ahead of ourselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammertime Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 2 hours ago, SilentSam said: I agree , but I also believe in attrition of players to make the TEAM stronger .. An example was not trade Markstrom when we should have. Horvat was great timing. Demko is UFA after 2 more seasons, at a 5m cap hit per. The questions will be asked towards the end of next season. that’s not far away. He has groin issues,. And he is a goalie . Sure I'm with you. there's a right way and a wrong way to develop a starting goalie though. Silovs starting 50-60 games next year would be the wrong way. get him in there for 30-35 starts next year and maybe were looking at a Swayman Ullmark situation where we are in a position of strength. with a bigger picure of if we have a Halak Price situation on our hands. Or Demko Martin situation. Teams are feverishly writing a book on silovs right now. He's not a secret weapon anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 1 hour ago, Coconuts said: Realistically Silovs still has a lot to prove, one run of high end play does not make a guy an NHL level starting goaltender. Demko is the guy until he's not, questions of health and ideal load are warranted but he's still the guy. Other tenders have had hot runs too, even come playoff time, it's alright to be excited about Silovs but let's not get ahead of ourselves. it’s up to Demko to keep or lose it this year, or Silvos to take it .. I don’t think TD has any Trade Clauses to hand cuff us to his UFA , which is better than Markstroms contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 6 minutes ago, Hammertime said: Sure I'm with you. there's a right way and a wrong way to develop a starting goalie though. Silovs starting 50-60 games next year would be the wrong way. get him in there for 30-35 starts next year and maybe were looking at a Swayman Ullmark situation where we are in a position of strength. with a bigger picure of if we have a Halak Price situation on our hands. Or Demko Martin situation. Teams are feverishly writing a book on silovs right now. He's not a secret weapon anymore. oh I agree .. all I’m saying is if Demko does not have a “next” healthy season . more questions will be asked and more speculation will be aired. Christmas break is a fair time line, and then up to Trade Deadline. The groin / ? injuries will dictate that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks curse Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Not a goaltending thread 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain insano Posted June 9 Share Posted June 9 Just now, canucks curse said: Not a goaltending thread I keep seeing this thread looking busy just to keep coming back to off topic discussions that are going on in 4 other places, almost ready to cave and go back to Twitter 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 7 hours ago, spook007 said: Firstly (and no disrespect meant) please split up your post amigo.. Its like a wall of text, and really hard to get through... I think Tocchet left Petey with Mika and Hogs in the hope the line could reconnect... in the end he gave up on that as well during the play offs, and shifted players in and out of Peteys line. Again, as you say yourself as well, why would they spend so much money on a 3C, when they are looking at less money going forward. If they want Petey to play C, which he did, while playing with Lindholm, They would be just as well of signing a bonafide winger for Petey... Lindholm on Peteys wing didn't work (for a game and a half... small sample size), but I think they played Lindy as a C later with Petey moving to the wing and he looked better there (I might be wrong, but seem to recall this)... Its exactly as you say, they are paying premium for a C in Lindholm, so playing him as a 3C doesn't make sense (or at least not to me)... Now thinking outside the box, it could be to ensure that even in the event of injuries we have 2 bonafide top 6 Centers... But paying $7M for a 3C to play next to a $5M winger sound extreme to me? Especially with Petey having to play with black holes and worse... too hard on a phone lol.. which is why i'm against signing lindholm.. yes he makes the team better defensively.. but defence honestly wasn't an issue all season.. and if they are spending 8mil on a player.. (there's no way Lindholm would sign for 7mil let alone only 7 unless he's taken multiple shots to the head when he can wait free agency to see what team will offer with the same length) it make sense to spend money on a player in the right role/position.. rather than spend money in case of an injury that may or may not even happen.. when was the last time Miller was injured? or EP outside his 3rd season? depth shouldn't cost 7-8mil... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Screw Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 On 6/7/2024 at 9:37 PM, Déjà Vu said: he turned down the 7yr 7mill anyway, so this thread is mute now Lindholm Reportedly Turning Down Long-Term Offer from Canucks (msn.com) I didn’t see anything of substance to that article. Not even a quote from an unnamed source. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 5 hours ago, wai_lai416 said: too hard on a phone lol.. which is why i'm against signing lindholm.. yes he makes the team better defensively.. but defence honestly wasn't an issue all season.. and if they are spending 8mil on a player.. (there's no way Lindholm would sign for 7mil let alone only 7 unless he's taken multiple shots to the head when he can wait free agency to see what team will offer with the same length) it make sense to spend money on a player in the right role/position.. rather than spend money in case of an injury that may or may not even happen.. when was the last time Miller was injured? or EP outside his 3rd season? depth shouldn't cost 7-8mil... Lol... I know the feeling True, but I still believe Petey and Lindholm could be dynamite together... or maybe even a Lindholm with Miller and then Lekkerimaki on the RW being well protected by the other two... We'll see... I guess, you are right though, we won't be getting Lindholm at 7M... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 11 hours ago, Coconuts said: Realistically Silovs still has a lot to prove, one run of high end play does not make a guy an NHL level starting goaltender. Demko is the guy until he's not, questions of health and ideal load are warranted but he's still the guy. Other tenders have had hot runs too, even come playoff time, it's alright to be excited about Silovs but let's not get ahead of ourselves. Silovs had a sub .900 save percentage in both regular season and post season. He was a great story, but that is because he managed to give average goaltending over that short span and no one expected him too. DeSmith had better numbers in the playoffs, albeit in an even shorter sample size. Folks have gotten seriously carried away with suggesting he is any competition for Veniza finalist Demko. It is still far likelier that this is the high water mark for Silovs and he never becomes an NHL starter. I think folks have forgotten to have all your hopes sunk by poor goaltending. We have had a long run now with that not being a problem. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 28 minutes ago, Provost said: Silovs had a sub .900 save percentage in both regular season and post season. He was a great story, but that is because he managed to give average goaltending over that short span and no one expected him too. DeSmith had better numbers in the playoffs, albeit in an even shorter sample size. Folks have gotten seriously carried away with suggesting he is any competition for Veniza finalist Demko. It is still far likelier that this is the high water mark for Silovs and he never becomes an NHL starter. I think folks have forgotten to have all your hopes sunk by poor goaltending. We have had a long run now with that not being a problem. It was fun to see him just keep winning and the blind optimism that he just might have been offering a Cam Ward 2.0 story, but yeah I've seen waaaaay too much trade Demko run with Silovs takes lately. Silovs needs at least two years behind Demko to really see what we have in him. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 18 hours ago, fanfor42 said: Keep in mind that Demko has only played 55+ games in his career once. That's at NHL, AHL and college levels. Only once. This past year he made it to 51 and missed a month. The prior year he only played 32 games and missed several months. Unfortunately there is a big question whether he can play 55 or if he has to play less than that to stay healthy. I would be surprised if moving Demko has not been discussed in the org. For the very reasons you outlined. If not now then after a season of Silovs backing him up. Outside the box is resigning DeCasey, playing Silovs as #1 and trading Demko for pieces that solidify the forward group. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 1 minute ago, Boudrias said: I would be surprised if moving Demko has not been discussed in the org. For the very reasons you outlined. If not now then after a season of Silovs backing him up. Outside the box is resigning DeCasey, playing Silovs as #1 and trading Demko for pieces that solidify the forward group. Yup. Demko would have crazy high trade value. But he’s our most important player. Can we win the Cup without him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 2 minutes ago, Alflives said: Yup. Demko would have crazy high trade value. But he’s our most important player. Can we win the Cup without him? No doubt I am outside the box. Obviously management evaluation of both Demko and Silovs. What does the goalie coach think? Silovs nearly had the Canucks in the final 4. The team was not knocked out because of his play. He is 24. Demko has a nice CAP hit for a #1 and a market if moved. Would he bring enough back to help anchor Petey's line and a piece on the d-core if Hronek is moved. What a novel idea Alf that the Canucks actually have quality pieces they can move to achieve long term competitiveness. A far cry from Goldobin era. Although the d-core played well during playoffs the thing that stays with me is the physical pounding Hughes took. IMHO the Canuck forward group still needs size, Mik has to go, Lindholm resigned if reasonable cost, and another bonafide top 6 winger. Not to much to ask? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DexM94 Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Alflives said: Yup. Demko would have crazy high trade value. But he’s our most important player. Can we win the Cup without him? A real top 6 would have make us to the SC final with the goaltending we have. i’m for trading Demko, 50% because of Silovs’ play, and mostly 50% because he can’t stay healthy and it will be noticed, ruining the trade’s return. Edited June 10 by DexM94 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 6 minutes ago, Boudrias said: No doubt I am outside the box. Obviously management evaluation of both Demko and Silovs. What does the goalie coach think? Silovs nearly had the Canucks in the final 4. The team was not knocked out because of his play. He is 24. Demko has a nice CAP hit for a #1 and a market if moved. Would he bring enough back to help anchor Petey's line and a piece on the d-core if Hronek is moved. What a novel idea Alf that the Canucks actually have quality pieces they can move to achieve long term competitiveness. A far cry from Goldobin era. Although the d-core played well during playoffs the thing that stays with me is the physical pounding Hughes took. IMHO the Canuck forward group still needs size, Mik has to go, Lindholm resigned if reasonable cost, and another bonafide top 6 winger. Not to much to ask? Yup. Make moves from a position of strength. We moved out Horfat because we had Petey and Miller. We could move Demko and the number clubs bidding on him would drive the return way up. LA, Jersey, Toronto for sure. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted June 10 Share Posted June 10 3 minutes ago, DexM94 said: A real top 6 would have make us to the SC final with the goaltending we have. i’m for trading Demko, 50% because of Silovs’ play, and mostly 50% because he can’t stay healthy and it will be noticed, ruining the trade’s return. Demko is already on a fantastic contract. No need to retain. Actually it would be a moran move to retain on him. He’s got two years left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.