SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Synergy

Member Since
Dec. 20, 2022
Favourite Team
Vancouver Canucks
Forum Posts
133
Posts per Day
0.3
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 6 at 12:14 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 29 at 2:06 p.m.
Thread: If you want Jack
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>dgibb10</b></div><div>I’m saying this season is Demkos most valuable. He’s at by far the highest level he’s played at in his career. There’s not really much further up to go, and i could argue with goalie volatility he’s likely to regress at least somewhat next year

Basically I don’t think Demko will be as good next year as he currently is.

And even at the same level, going from 3 years of term down to 2 is quite meaningful.

And in this I have 3 years of demko at 10 million valued at 22.5 million or about 4 1sts.

Overall for the package I would offer 10 1st round picks of value.</div></div>

Demko may not be as good next year, but between this season and 21-22, he has been elite 2 of his 3 seasons <em>since becoming a starter</em> (e.g. one of the top 5-7 goalies in the league), with injuries derailing the other. Even if he does regress a bit next year due to goalie volatility, he will still be a very efficient contract and will likely still be an elite goaltender for at least the next several years, particularly if paired with Ian Clark. The fact that you appear to think this is a one-off makes me think you don't really track the Canucks that well...Demko is legit, and often one of the core drivers of the Canucks results.

All that to say, Vancouver never considers this trade as constructed. Even without the retention on Demko. It would cripple the team in net in the short term. Doesn't matter how good Hughes' contract is.

Also, I think Hughes' injury tendency is being overlooked in his valuation. I love the guy. But he hasn't shown the consistent ability to be available for a full season. If we're talking about volatility of performance ;)
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 27 at 7:02 p.m.
Thread: EP Come Home
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>GMDannyB</b></div><div>Those deals are nearly impossible to pull off and someone always loses when they are pulled off (Hubby being useless for 1/2 the season on a horrible contract) which is why they rarely happen like that. Trading EP basically signals *Not Competing Right Now* no matter what the FO wants. You trade him and ur retooling regardless at least the picks allows you to then flip them for someone who wants to be there.</div></div>

There are actually a few analogous examples, to some extent. Obviously the Tkachuk trade. The Eichel trade - unique given his status - but it included a significant player in Tuch, who has been great for Buffalo. The PLD trade could also be considered similar, and netted three useful players (and was a win for Winnipeg so far).

I know it is a less likely route in terms of finding a partner, but I feel like people outside of Vancouver may not truly understand how much disdain this ownership group has for a rebuild, at least to the extent that this trade would suggest (e.g. the major value being in picks).

We wanted them to trade pieces for just picks and rebuild the right way for years, but they didn't. I doubt they do that with a player of Pettersson's calibre given their contract sheet/roster construction now (e.g. Hughes on an efficient contract, Demko on a great contract, Miller locked in and 31).

And even if I am wrong about that, three mid-to-late firsts aren't getting it done. ;)
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 5 at 6:01 p.m.
Thread: Vancouver with Lindholm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Tmclean64</b></div><div>Miller and Brock are a pair, Petey and Lindholm will be too. Cole is in the lineup when fully healthy.

Will look something like this:

Mikheyev-Petey-Lindholm
Suter-Miller-Boeser
Joshua-Blueger-Garland
Hoglander-Aman-Lafferty
Di Guiseppe - extra fwd

Hughes-Hronek
Soucy-Myers
Zadorov-Cole
Friedman-Juulsen - extras

Demko
Desmith</div></div>

I think you've nailed it. There is one change I would consider: Mikheyev playing with Miller and Boeser as an upgrade on PDG, who played a big role as F1 on the forecheck. But I also don't know if I love the lack of physicality on a Suter-Petey-Lindholm line...maybe Lafferty bumps up to play wing with Miller and Boeser, and the fourth line becomes Hoglander-Suter-PDG...
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 30 at 7:17 p.m.
Thread: Zadorov to Toronto idea
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>RipNasty</b></div><div>Canuck fans must be having buyers remorse eh? Trying to pawn off a guy they aren't happy with for more than they paid.</div></div>

It is more utter disbelief for how good this team is showing it can be, and therefore a will to go big game hunting at the TDL. They need cap space to do that, and Zadorov would be an easy move if it means you can get someone that really solidifies your top 4.

That said, Zadorov has been great and really elevated the Canucks bottom line on the back end.

As for this trade, I definitely wouldn't do it as the Canucks. Unless you're making a legit improvement on the right side (e.g. Tanev, Pesce, Hronek 2.0), I think having a big, gritty defenseman like Z is too valuable.