Goalie Controversy in Vancouver once again?

[Elias Pettersson]

Here we go again.  Luongo/Schneider, Markstrom/Demko.  Now Demko/Silovs.  Do we have another Vancouver goalie controversy in the making?

 

Demko has two years left at $5 million.  He almost won the Vezina this year.  He will want an extension in the range of 8-8.5x8 on his next retirement deal.  Can we afford to pay him that given his injury history?  Especially considering we have a potential star goalie in the making in Arturs Silovs?

 

I mean Silovs is barely a rookie, but he literally got a shutout in an elimination playoff game.  How many previous Canucks goalies have ever done that?  To me, he is the real deal.  Has been since he was the MVP in the World Championships.  He has everything you need to be an elite #1 goalie in the NHL.  Size, flexibility, good instincts, and most importantly he is very calm and cool in the nets.  He doesn’t flop all over the place.  He might even be more calm and cool than Demko.

 

Also, Silovs is going to be a cheap #1 goalie for awhile.  Which will allow us to re-sign others players to long term deals and to try and keep most of this team together for several more years.  With a cheap #1 goalie, we can easily re-sign Zadorov, Lindholm, Joshua and even Hronek to long term deals.

 

Let’s see what happens in round 2 with Edmonton.  If Silovs steals that series then all bets are off.  He could be the next Ken Dryden…

[Provost]

Good grief, no need to start any drama.

 

We have a Vezina calibre starter and a young kid who looks like he might be the real deal…. Might.  Many goalies look good in stretches, few goalies can be consistent high end starters.  Demko has reached that level…. Silovs needs years under his belt before we could even dream of handing over the future of the team to him.

 

Demko is not being traded based on a few games and one playoff run by Silovs.  He just got nominated for the Vezina for God’s sake and you are talking about moving him because he isn’t good enough.

 

No controversy, just opportunity.  As it turns out, you can trade players in the NHL.  We can have what is probably  a really good back up next season and raise the value of those assets, or we could even trade Silovs if his value is high this offseason to help the team and/or move money out.

 

A Vezina nominated goalie is not where you look to save cap space…

Edited May 4 by Provost

[Toni Zamboni]

nope
nothing to see here tbh
 

[Elias Pettersson]

10 minutes ago, Provost said:

Good grief, no need to start any drama.

 

We have a Vezina calibre starter and a young kid who looks like he might be the real deal…. Might.  Many goalies look good in stretches, few goalies can be consistent high end starters.  Demko has reached that level…. Silovs needs years under his belt before we could even dream of handing over the future of the team to him.

 

Demko is not being traded based on a few games and one playoff run by Silovs.  He just got nominated for the Vezina for God’s sake and you are talking about moving him because he isn’t good enough.

 

No controversy, just opportunity.  As it turns out, you can trade players in the NHL.  We can have what is probably  a really good back up next season and raise the value of those assets, or we could even trade Silovs if his value is high this offseason to help the team and/or move money out.

 

A Vezina nominated goalie is not where you look to save cap space…

 

Umm, we literally let Markstrom walk for free after he placed 4th in Vezina voting and allowed a 24 year old Demko with 30 games experience to be our #1 goalie.  This was after Demko played 4 playoff games.  So, what exactly is the difference?

 

Why the heck would we trade a 23 year old star in the making goalie who will be on a cheap contact for years to come in order to keep a guy who will be 30 years old and will want an 8.5x8 contract extension who is also injury prone and can’t stay healthy?  

 

And I never said Demko wasn’t good enough.  So not sure why you made that comment up.  Demko can be traded for picks and prospects or we can upgrade our top 6 forwards. Allvin would be nuts to trade Silovs.  And he won’t.  He was drafted by Vancouver just like Demko and has been developed for years now until the guidance of Ian Clark…

[Provost]

40 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

Umm, we literally let Markstrom walk for free after he placed 4th in Vezina voting and allowed a 24 year old Demko with 30 games experience to be our #1 goalie.  This was after Demko played 4 playoff games.  So, what exactly is the difference?

 

Why the heck would we trade a 23 year old star in the making goalie who will be on a cheap contact for years to come in order to keep a guy who will be 30 years old and will want an 8.5x8 contract extension who is also injury prone and can’t stay healthy?  

 

And I never said Demko wasn’t good enough.  So not sure why you made that comment up.  Demko can be traded for picks and prospects or we can upgrade our top 6 forwards. Allvin would be nuts to trade Silovs.  And he won’t.  He was drafted by Vancouver just like Demko and has been developed for years now until the guidance of Ian Clark…

 

If you don’t know the difference, then you need to sit back for a while and take a break from posting.

 

1.  We were a crappy team not even close to being a possible contender like we are now.

2.  Markstrom was a UFA and not under contract. He walked even though the GM had spent the entire offseason trying to sign him… and because of that “ran out of time” to sign other players ( or even tender them offers) and saw them walk.  It wasn’t a choice, if Markstrom was under contract like Demko is,  he would have stayed.

3.  We didn’t save cap because there was so little trust in Demko they immediately signed another 1B starter with the money they saved and ended up spending more on the duo than Markstrom would have cost them.

4.  The expansion draft was looming so you couldn’t keep both Markstrom and Demko as only one could be protected.

5.  Benning was the worst GM in the league.  Never use any moves from that era as justification for what competent GMs should do.

 

Edited May 4 by Provost

[PureQuickness]

22 minutes ago, Provost said:

 

If you don’t know the difference, then you need to sit back for a while and take a break from posting.

 

1.  We were a crappy team not even close to being a possible contender like we are now.

2.  Markstrom was a UFA and not under contract. He walked even though the GM had spent the entire offseason trying to sign him… and because of that “ran out of time” to sign other players ( or even tender them offers) and saw them walk.  It wasn’t a choice, if Markstrom was under contract like Demko is,  he would have stayed.

3.  We didn’t save cap because there was so little trust in Demko they immediately signed another 1B starter with the money they saved and ended up spending more on the duo than Markstrom would have cost them.

4.  The expansion draft was looming so you couldn’t keep both Markstrom and Demko as only one could be protected.

5.  Benning was the worst GM in the league.

 

 

Not sure about that. Benning had made plenty of mistakes worthy of criticism, but the criticisms that he continues to bear is over-the-top compared to the things he should get credit for. Like it or not, Benning WAS responsible for this core: Pettersson, Hughes, Miller (1st round pick trade), Demko (drafted in the 2nd round), Hoglander (2nd rounder).

 

Surely he can't be the worst GM in the league by ANY measure. Then there's the non-core pieces: Garland, and now Silovs (6th round pick).

 

I get that people love bashing Benning, but objectivity should always be at the forefront at these discussions. You have to be fair in weighing arguments.

[Hairy Kneel]

I'm hoping this series is the exorcism that Elias Pettersson needed.

[Hairy Kneel]

I hope they take turns wearing that pink dress shirt.

The anti bullying shirt.

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, Provost said:

 

If you don’t know the difference, then you need to sit back for a while and take a break from posting.

 

1.  We were a crappy team not even close to being a possible contender like we are now.

2.  Markstrom was a UFA and not under contract. He walked even though the GM had spent the entire offseason trying to sign him… and because of that “ran out of time” to sign other players ( or even tender them offers) and saw them walk.  It wasn’t a choice, if Markstrom was under contract like Demko is,  he would have stayed.

3.  We didn’t save cap because there was so little trust in Demko they immediately signed another 1B starter with the money they saved and ended up spending more on the duo than Markstrom would have cost them.

4.  The expansion draft was looming so you couldn’t keep both Markstrom and Demko as only one could be protected.

5.  Benning was the worst GM in the league.  Never use any moves from that era as justification for what competent GMs should do.

 

 

Take a break from posting?  Why, because we have a difference of opinion?  You literally said we should consider trading Silovs.  I mean that is pretty messed up.  Yes, we are a contender now, so where is Demko?  Is he playing right now?  No, he’s injured.  Like he always is.  So you want to re-sign him to an 8.5x8 contract given the fact that he can barely play 50 games in a season without getting injured?  Why?

 

We have a 23 year old star in the making.  So re-signing a 30 year injury prone Demko to an 8.5x8 contract would seem like a Benning move to me, not an Allvin move.  Remember, Allvin already traded our captain for picks and prospects.  He might trade Hronek too.  He literally almost traded Pettersson as well.  So I don’t think he will have much hesitation in trading Demko.

[Provost]

35 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

Not sure about that. Benning had made plenty of mistakes worthy of criticism, but the criticisms that he continues to bear is over-the-top compared to the things he should get credit for. Like it or not, Benning WAS responsible for this core: Pettersson, Hughes, Miller (1st round pick trade), Demko (drafted in the 2nd round), Hoglander (2nd rounder).

 

Surely he can't be the worst GM in the league by ANY measure. Then there's the non-core pieces: Garland, and now Silovs (6th round pick).

 

I get that people love bashing Benning, but objectivity should always be at the forefront at these discussions. You have to be fair in weighing arguments.

Literally no GM in the league had fewer wins per cap dollar spent over his tenure… so that made him objectively the worst GM.

 

The only teams that fared worse in the standings were ones trying to lose and tank; or ones who were spending half the money on their rosters like Arizona who only made the cap floor by trading for millions in LTIR contracts.

 

The NHL is set up to reward failure so of course he is going to get some good players… it is impossible to avoid that when your team is so terrible for so long… even at that Benning fared badly.  He whiffed on half his top ten picks and got fewer NHL players from later rounds than average.  

 

 

[SuchaNuxtalgia]

Depth at the most important position. A competition for the crease, w/the bar being raised higher.

 

Not a controversy ..rather see it as healthy competition.

 

Bet there are a few rival GM's out there with 'tender-envy!

[DrJockitch]

Just stop.

Vezina candidate vs young Ian Clark project who didn’t put up great numbers in AHL.  Arty is big game goalie and ready for the backup role and hopefully Demko will be held to 50 ish games next year. 
When Demko is healthy there will be no questions about putting him in 

[tas]

nope

[Alflives]

4 hours ago, PureQuickness said:

 

Not sure about that. Benning had made plenty of mistakes worthy of criticism, but the criticisms that he continues to bear is over-the-top compared to the things he should get credit for. Like it or not, Benning WAS responsible for this core: Pettersson, Hughes, Miller (1st round pick trade), Demko (drafted in the 2nd round), Hoglander (2nd rounder).

 

Surely he can't be the worst GM in the league by ANY measure. Then there's the non-core pieces: Garland, and now Silovs (6th round pick).

 

I get that people love bashing Benning, but objectivity should always be at the forefront at these discussions. You have to be fair in weighing arguments.

Benning, the moran, was the worse GM there ever was, or will be. He spent more on cap for goalies after losing Marky by signing a guy who didn’t even want to be here as the new starter. 
Thankfully we have competent management again. They have a plan and will continue to make sure we have great goaltending. 

[Joe King]

We had no choice but to let Marky go. He wanted protection in the Seattle draft. If we did that we would have lost Demko. He wanted the security of a 6 year contract, can't blame him for that. I think our team was hoping he would sign a short term contract so he could come back to Vancouver as a free agent. He chose security with the lames of all teams, and I'm sure he convinced Tanev to switch over to the lames as well. 

But in the long run it's worked out fine for us. 

We have a competent management and coaching team to guide us through this.

To many good goalies what an awesome situation to have.

[gwarrior]

Having 2 rockstar goalies is a nice "problem" to have. If they're smart they could move one to shore up another area we come up short.

[Bob Long]

Depth = controversy 

[Alflives]

Just now, gwarrior said:

Having 2 rockstar goalies is a nice "problem" to have. If they're smart they could move one to shore up another area we come up short.

Exactly! New management aren’t like Benning (the moran). They have a plan. They say we need to improve on the wings. Could see a goalie moved for a high end, low cost, winger. A lot of clubs would love getting their hands on one of our superior super awesome goalies. And they’d pay dearly to do so. 

[DownUndaCanuck]

Perfect transition from star to kid over the next few years but we'll have to be careful with Demko's extension so it doesn't weigh us down too much. 5M for a Vezina calibre goalie is unreal value considering he should be getting double that.

[OldFaithfulcap]

[Gurn]

I think Silovs will be the back up next season; I'd like him to split games between the AHL and NHL.

When Vancouver is  at home, Silovs might be sent down to the minors to start a few games, then when the big team goes on the road, he would go with them and get a decent number of road starts.

While keeping Demko's starts at a reasonable. low limit, it would be good to see Silovs get just as many starts, but split between leagues.

Keeps him growing for the future.

Hey- maybe at the end of next year a decision is made to trade one, or the other.

It is good to have depth.

[Elias Pettersson]

2 hours ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

Perfect transition from star to kid over the next few years but we'll have to be careful with Demko's extension so it doesn't weigh us down too much. 5M for a Vezina calibre goalie is unreal value considering he should be getting double that.

We don’t have a few years. Demko will be up for an extension next summer as he’s in the last year of his deal. So you either re-sign him to an 8.5x8 contract or you trade him. He’ll want a NMC as well. So the decision will need to be made next summer. 
 

It’s great that Silovs will be the backup next season. Just like Schneider was the backup. But eventually a decision needs to be made in 2025. With Demko needing a new contract the decision will need to be made sooner rather than later. Also, Silovs is already 23. He’ll be 24 next summer. The same age that Demko became a full time starter. 

[AAA]

Hm it's pretty clear from the posts so far most fans don't think there is any credibility to the goalie controversy rumours you are trying to start

 

P.S. the Demko/Marstrom and the Demko/Silovs situation is COMPLETELY different

 

 

Edited May 4 by AAA

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

Yawn.

 

[Elias Pettersson]

13 minutes ago, AAA said:

Hm it's pretty clear from the posts so far most fans don't think there is any credibility to the goalie controversy rumours you are trying to start

 

P.S. the Demko/Marstrom and the Demko/Silovs situation is COMPLETELY different

 

 

 

It's only begun.  Usually there is pushback at the beginning.  That's what happened the other times as well.  Most posters are currently in the denial stage of the grief process:

 

1. Denial

2. Anger

3. Bargaining

4. Depression

5. Acceptance

 

I think some have moved on to being angry too as they always are.  By summertime they will be bargaining when Silovs leads up to the finals and maybe the cup.  Then depression will set in when the reality of trading Demko gets real.  Eventually, they will all accept the situation, and we will have a new young elite goaltender leading us to multiple cups.