Popular Post Blue Posted November 4 Popular Post Posted November 4 I don't think we have much choice. Even if that means spending 2-3 million+ on him to get him resigned as a 1B starter. If we didn't luck out with him, we would be blowing another year of Hughs's contract. And how can we risk doing this again next year ? Its November. And the same old story with Demko. Demko is looking like the type of goalie that will never finish a whole season without getting injured. And he's also going to cost around Swayman money to resign after next year. 2 3 Quote
Popular Post Bob Long Posted November 4 Popular Post Posted November 4 (edited) Was thinking this as well, maybe try to lock him up at around 2.5-3 on term. I wouldn't go more but I'd be happy if we inked him a year past Demko to have the position secured somewhat. Edited November 4 by Bob Long 2 1 1 1 Quote
DrJockitch Posted November 4 Posted November 4 Don’t know about co-starter but I have said many times, having Demko as a starter requires a solid proven backup AND good depth in net. It just is the truth of the matter that he will miss significant time every season and should have his workload managed carefully. Lankinen has been great, hopefully he doesn’t price himself out of town. 2 Quote
Canuck You Posted November 4 Posted November 4 He's probably going to want a longer contract for job security, Don't know how he feels backing up Demmer for awhile though...That's if Demmer ever comes back. 1 Quote
spook007 Posted November 4 Posted November 4 If Lankinen continues this stellar play, its doubtful we have the cap to sign him long term... However if feasible they should... he has been immense... nothing short of a revelation... 3 Quote
Blue Posted November 4 Author Posted November 4 7 minutes ago, spook007 said: If Lankinen continues this stellar play, its doubtful we have the cap to sign him long term... However if feasible they should... he has been immense... nothing short of a revelation... That is why if it is possible, we should be trying to resign him now. Before he continues with this audition to the rest of the league. He might take some guaranteed money now rather than wait for more down the road. 1 1 Quote
spook007 Posted November 4 Posted November 4 Just now, Blue said: That is why if it is possible, we should be trying to resign him now. Before he continues with this audition to the rest of the league. He might take some guaranteed money now rather than wait for more down the road. It works for me... but guess it depends on how the front office have allocated the money for the next couple of seasons... I have zero doubt that his play has given management reason to start to talk about the future of the goalie position... We are all Demko fans, but a pay rise to Demko + the question mark of his durability will force these discussions... (PS. This is NOT another "Petey, do we need him" like post ) 2 1 Quote
GrammaInTheTub Posted November 4 Posted November 4 True #1s are hard to come by. Be it durability or consistency, they just seem to be growing more elusive with each season. I’m not opposed to running a 1A/1B. There has been lots of discussion about limiting Demko to ~50 games, so it would seem we’re trending in that direction anyways. 1 1 Quote
erkayloomeh Posted November 4 Posted November 4 40 minutes ago, Bob Long said: Was thinking this as well, maybe try to lock him up at around 2.5-3 on term. I wouldn't go more but I'd be happy if we inked him a year past Demko to have the position secured somewhat. I'd be treating the goalie situation as though demko wasn't coming back. Remember when he was supposed to start the next round. He's been two weeks out for 5 months and we still don't seem to know what's going on. Silovs has been disappointing and lank has a way to go yet before we declare him a number one. Goalies can really taper off when given a heavy load. I had really high hopes for this year but the goalie situation along with whatever is going on with EP has got me worried. 2 1 Quote
Bob Long Posted November 4 Posted November 4 Just now, erkayloomeh said: I'd be treating the goalie situation as though demko wasn't coming back. Remember when he was supposed to start the next round. He's been two weeks out for 5 months and we still don't seem to know what's going on. Silovs has been disappointing and lank has a way to go yet before we declare him a number one. Goalies can really taper off when given a heavy load. I had really high hopes for this year but the goalie situation along with whatever is going on with EP has got me worried. Agreed. He certainly looks legit and a decent AAV should be possible. 1 Quote
Elias Pettersson Posted November 4 Posted November 4 23 minutes ago, spook007 said: It works for me... but guess it depends on how the front office have allocated the money for the next couple of seasons... I have zero doubt that his play has given management reason to start to talk about the future of the goalie position... We are all Demko fans, but a pay rise to Demko + the question mark of his durability will force these discussions... (PS. This is NOT another "Petey, do we need him" like post ) 1 1 Quote
Elias Pettersson Posted November 4 Posted November 4 I'd give Lankinen a 3x3 deal. He's an ideal backup for Demko as he can play as a 1B. And he's insurance in case Demko doesn't come back 100%. I wouldn't wait until he's a UFA to re-sign him. Demko might never be 100%, so he might get traded next summer for a draft pick. 1 1 Quote
Dr. Crossbar Posted November 4 Posted November 4 9 minutes ago, erkayloomeh said: I'd be treating the goalie situation as though demko wasn't coming back. Remember when he was supposed to start the next round. He's been two weeks out for 5 months and we still don't seem to know what's going on. Silovs has been disappointing and lank has a way to go yet before we declare him a number one. Goalies can really taper off when given a heavy load. I had really high hopes for this year but the goalie situation along with whatever is going on with EP has got me worried. Exactly this about treating it as if Demko isn't coming back. There's still too much unknown with him to be able to rely on him. And then that's also going to be a process when he returns. He's just not going to be able to step back in at the same capacity as what he was before the injury. So, with this in mind, we'll have to look at Lankinen beyond this year. It's still early but he needs to maintain this pace and keep us in the hunt. The bigger immediate issue right now is Silovs and getting him a couple of wins to build on and get back to a backup level of reliability. We need to be able to rely on our back up and we can't run from it. Have to face that head on earlier than later because we can't ride Lankinen to burn out or injury. But ultimately, yes, if Lankinen can keep us in the hunt as a starter, re-sign him. He'll be the clear and obvious, and much needed stability as back up when Demko returns. 1 Quote
RichterBelmont Posted November 4 Posted November 4 Lanks has been so good to start the season. The only reason we are doing as decently as we are until our stars get their legs under them. If we can sign him long term I say we do it. Quote
nzan Posted November 4 Posted November 4 8 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: I'd give Lankinen a 3x3 deal. He's an ideal backup for Demko as he can play as a 1B. And he's insurance in case Demko doesn't come back 100%. I wouldn't wait until he's a UFA to re-sign him. Demko might never be 100%, so he might get traded next summer for a draft pick. 3x3 might be a steal. If Demko literally never returns to form he remains a Canuck - if he becomes expendable, a bunch of teams would pay a pick when their goaltending looks shaky going into TDL 2 Quote
higgyfan Posted November 4 Posted November 4 51 minutes ago, Blue said: I don't think we have much choice. Even if that means spending 2-3 million+ on him to get him resigned as a 1B starter. If we didn't luck out with him, we would be blowing another year of Hughs's contract. And how can we risk doing this again next year ? Its November. And the same old story with Demko. Demko is looking like the type of goalie that will never finish a whole season without getting injured. And he's also going to cost around Swayman money to resign after next year. The 1st bolded sentence makes the second one, unlikely. I think it's too early for this discussion. Lanky's played 7 games so far this season and only played 24 and 19 previous 2 seasons with Nashville. I think management needs to see a lot more games to make a decision on his long term situation. Quote
JeremyCuddles Posted November 4 Posted November 4 I honestly see a bottom feeder or Toronto throwing 3.5mil+ at Lank to be their starter. Also, we flatly don't have the cap for a premium backup. Unless we part ways with Boeser in the offseason, in which case I honestly think we'll be back to being a pretty dog water team unless Lekkerimaki really just becomes a star over night. 1 Quote
Jess Posted November 4 Posted November 4 I wouldn't classify him as a co-starter, but he's capable of playing 30-35 games at a high level, so sort of a 1B situation. It would also help Demko stay healthy. I do wonder if he'll be affordable enough though. Quote
Grandmaster Posted November 4 Posted November 4 What is with people rushing signings? How about we wait till how he does for the FULL season? 1 1 Quote
spook007 Posted November 4 Posted November 4 8 minutes ago, Grandmaster said: What is with people rushing signings? How about we wait till how he does for the FULL season? Its because of the money he may want, should he continue in this vein of form... He is only signed for this season, and may get too expensive at the end... add that to Demkos injury record, and its not far fetched... Quote
DeltaSwede Posted November 4 Posted November 4 (edited) Let's not underestimate the bargaining power the Canucks would have considering Demkos injury history. Obviously don't know Demko personally and perhaps it's wishful thinking, but it feels like if anyone would understand that about themselves it would be Demko. Also feels like he is fully committed to the Canucks and the guys on the team. Given the injury history, Canucks should be able to push down the AAV and therefore theoretically have more room to spend a little more on a backup. Give Demko term which will likely by high on his and his agent priority list, given, again, the injury history. Way too early anyways. We will see how the dominos fall. Canucks are in a great position here with loads of time on their hands. Edit: It's possible that Lankinen falls in love with Vancouver and wants to stay but given the short stick he got this summer I think it would be very very surprising if he didn't go chase money this time around. Anything agreed with Vancouver will be market price and not team friendly. He can't afford to do make another decision like that at this point in his career. Just the way it is. Edited November 4 by DeltaSwede Quote
Ghostsof1915 Posted November 4 Posted November 4 Watch, the Canucks sign him for $3 Million for 3 years and his save percentage, and goals against tank. Quote
Heretic Posted November 4 Posted November 4 We don't need to do anything until the season is over - then we can evaluate what he did. Quote
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.