Value of: Demko + Virtanen to Toronto

[The Podium]

With all the smoke around Andersen and Johnsson I fully expect Dubas to move on from them both.

With that said, the Leafs need replacements for these players and with Vancouver's upcoming cap crunch, and these two long speculated by fans to be expendable pieces, they can be adequate replacements at a fraction of the cost.

With that said what would the cost be?

Click to read more...

 

[604]

Demko is available if you take Beagle/Roussel/Eriksson.

Virtanen is available if you take Eriksson.

None are available without taking a real cap dump because losing two young players who are underpaid for their roles is not helpful to Vancouver's cap.

 

[TheImpatientPanther]

With all the smoke around Andersen and Johnsson I fully expect Dubas to move on from them both.

With that said, the Leafs need replacements for these players and with Vancouver's upcoming cap crunch, and these two long speculated by fans to be expendable pieces, they can be adequate replacements at a fraction of the cost.

With that said what would the cost be?

Do you think Demko can reach Andersens level though?
Or just more of a gamble to go with two 1b/2a options in Campbell and Demko while saving cap?

 

[The Podium]

Do you think Demko can reach Andersens level though?
Or just more of a gamble to go with two 1b/2a options in Campbell and Demko while saving cap?

The idea is to gamble on a tandem and take the 5 mill in savings

 

[TheImpatientPanther]

The idea is to gamble on a tandem and take the 5 mill in savings

Which would give you how much cap space to spend on another LD?
Which RD would you target whether in trade or free agency sans the obvious one in AP?

 

[Cogburn]

Demko is available if you take Beagle/Roussel/Eriksson.

Virtanen is available if you take Eriksson.

None are available without taking a real cap dump because losing two young players who are underpaid for their roles is not helpful to Vancouver's cap.

I agree, and would throw Baertschi in on Demko+Beagle/Roussel. Not Eriksson though, he's enough of a cap dump.

If we were offered young players, making the same kind of cap hit, that could impact the team better in different ways (immediately and assuredly)....I'd consider it.

How ever, I don't know that Toronto has players that fit that description.

 

[The Podium]

Which would give you how much cap space to spend on another LD?
Which RD would you target whether in trade or free agency sans the obvious one in AP?

If Tanev walks I can see him as a solid option. Depending on contract negotiations I'd check in on Hamilton as well.

Other than that I bet its a name we havent thought of yet.

 

[Boondock]

With all the smoke around Andersen and Johnsson I fully expect Dubas to move on from them both.

With that said, the Leafs need replacements for these players and with Vancouver's upcoming cap crunch, and these two long speculated by fans to be expendable pieces, they can be adequate replacements at a fraction of the cost.

With that said what would the cost be?

Both these players are available, but with the Canucks having a little success there is no way the GM will be looking to off load assets that will make the team less competitive next season, so if the Leafs want Demko and Virtanen any deal will require 1 or both of the following
1. Cap Space - Canucks need space because our fearless leader has committed over 1/4 of our total salary cap to 4th line players and dead cap space. This does not mean we'll take Virtanen for a 3rd to free up cap, this means taking on a Baertschi/Sutter/Rousell/Beagel/Eriksson. Without losing bad contracts the Canucks can't be moving out cost controlled assets such as Virtanen and Demko.
2. RHD - Tanev is a free agent and should be the Canucks #2 priority behind Markstrom but he may be a cap casualty, Stetcher is a RFA but with Arbitration rights his cost could potentially be prohibitive. Our prospect depth is very weak on the right side with UDFA Brogan Rafferty and Jett Woo as our only potential RHD in the system right now. The Canucks would trade assets if they are getting young cost controlled RHD that can replace Tanev, either this season or in a year or two.

Seeing as Toronto needs cap space and RHD, I don't see how a deal works between the two teams.

 

[Rowlet]

I'd rather try and package Demko to CGY for one of their defensemen, there isn't much within reason that I'd expect from Toronto

Edit: unless the Leafs want to move Liljegren

 

[Diamonddog01]

Both these players are available, but with the Canucks having a little success there is no way the GM will be looking to off load assets that will make the team less competitive next season, so if the Leafs want Demko and Virtanen any deal will require 1 or both of the following
1. Cap Space - Canucks need space because our fearless leader has committed over 1/4 of our total salary cap to 4th line players and dead cap space. This does not mean we'll take Virtanen for a 3rd to free up cap, this means taking on a Baertschi/Sutter/Rousell/Beagel/Eriksson. Without losing bad contracts the Canucks can't be moving out cost controlled assets such as Virtanen and Demko.
2. RHD - Tanev is a free agent and should be the Canucks #2 priority behind Markstrom but he may be a cap casualty, Stetcher is a RFA but with Arbitration rights his cost could potentially be prohibitive. Our prospect depth is very weak on the right side with UDFA Brogan Rafferty and Jett Woo as our only potential RHD in the system right now. The Canucks would trade assets if they are getting young cost controlled RHD that can replace Tanev, either this season or in a year or two.

Seeing as Toronto needs cap space and RHD, I don't see how a deal works between the two teams.

Yup. Don't really see Van and Toronto as good trading partners. One player that I could see moving to Toronto however is Stecher (if they don't sign AP or Tanev). Apparently Toronto was interested previously, probably wouldn't cost too much given his contract status. Really not sure what the return would be but we have wingers up to the gills so most likely would be a pick going back to Vancouver.

 

[Techcoockie]

Demko is available if you take Beagle/Roussel/Eriksson.

Virtanen is available if you take Eriksson.

None are available without taking a real cap dump because losing two young players who are underpaid for their roles is not helpful to Vancouver's cap.

You don't want Roussel ? isn't he a Playoff player ?

 

[LuLover96]

You don't want Roussel ? isn't he a Playoff player ?

Not sure what this guy is talking about with Rooster or Beagle. Only reason Reaves hasn’t been playing dirty on our stars is because Rooster is living rent free in his head right now, hence the clucking. Beagle is our PK specialist, and a former winner.

However, I’d look at it if Liljegrin became available. We need another guy that can defend, and if you really want Jake’s physicality then you have to pay for it. He’s played well the past few games, so maybe he keeps it up.

 

[Cogburn]

You don't want Roussel ? isn't he a Playoff player ?

He's overpaid, but effective. He is behind a long list of other players that are cap dumps to me. Baertschi, Eriksson, Sutter, Benn, Beagle, Ferland and Roussel (in that order) are who need to go. He is also one of the few listed that has a positive, or not straight up negative, value inspite of the high cap hit. If we explore all other avenues and nothing comes about though, Roussel is a movable piece if necessary.

 

[Boondock]

You don't want Roussel ? isn't he a Playoff player ?

He can play himself off the team. I understand the role of the agitator but Rousell has done a better job getting the other team engaged in the game than he has getting them off their game. For the $3million cap space I'd rather use it to keep Markstrom and Tanev.

 

[Sam Pollock]

I don't see how Toronto and Vancouver are good trading partners. Both teams are tight to the cap and need to dump salary to fill out their respective rosters. I can't see either team taking a cap dump without giving one in return much like the Neal for Lucic trade. I also can't see either team giving up cost controlled players for anything but the same in return.

 

[BCNate]

If the Canucks are dealing Demko, Baerschi has to go along with him for a minimal return. If we are giving up one of our young pieces, it has to allow us to keep our 3 big UFA's. I do think that Stecher is going to be available as well, not sure what TO's interest in him would be.

 

[StickShift]

To echo what has already been said—I can only see Vancouver trading the likes of Demko, Virtanen, or Gaudette if it is part of a package to shed a cap hit like of Eriksson, Beagle, Baertschi or Sutter.

 

[Canuck86]

Tanev and Markstrom with contract extensions in place for TO for Anderson, Johnsson and?

 

[Mick Jagr]

Demko is available if you take Beagle/Roussel/Eriksson.

Virtanen is available if you take Eriksson.

None are available without taking a real cap dump because losing two young players who are underpaid for their roles is not helpful to Vancouver's cap.

Unless you're Seattle in which case you can take him during the 2021 expansion draft.

 

[Cogburn]

Unless you're Seattle in which case you can take him during the 2021 expansion draft.

Yup. So we better trade him to Toronto along with next years first for a fifth, and that's the response you expect?

 

[Mick Jagr]

Yup. So we better trade him to Toronto along with next years first for a fifth, and that's the response you expect?

No, of course not. But it doesn't take a genius to tell you that with an expansion draft on the horizon... if you wait too long your hand will be forced and his return will be much smaller than it is right now. Obviously Vancouver can't make a move with Demko without signing Markstrom first though.

Not to mention... whoever traded for him now would have to believe in him enough to be their starter (something Vancouver hasn't done yet) and make him their protected goalie come the expansion draft.

With the goalie market currently flooded... Demko and 38 games played in the NHL doesn't have value nearly as high as you might imagine.

 

[Cogburn]

Tanev and Markstrom with contract extensions in place for TO for Anderson, Johnsson and?

What kind of plus are you looking for here? Toronto doesn't have a piece in the middle of the value spectrum.

Both are integral parts of our team, Andersen's stats are in decline (GP, S%, GAA, Wins, everything but shutouts) where as Markstrom is our MVP night in, night out. His stats are steady or improving, too. Tanev brings a lot more to the table then another 3rd line winger will. If we can resign these two, why trade them for less unless it's we get a game breaking asset back? Because that's what we're giving up.

We might save 1 million off of the difference in goalies, but we still have 2 goalies...and we let Andersen walk after his contract? We resign him (likely the same kind of cap hit we're hoping to get Markstorm for), and still have to expose or trade a goalie? If we feel compelled to trade Tanev and Markstrom with extensions in place, we shouldn't be getting lesser pieces+ back.

 

[Cogburn]

No, of course not. But it doesn't take a genius to tell you that with an expansion draft on the horizon... if you wait too long your hand will be forced and his return will be much smaller than it is right now. Obviously Vancouver can't make a move with Demko without signing Markstrom first though.

Not to mention... whoever traded for him now would have to believe in him enough to be their starter (something Vancouver hasn't done yet) and make him their protected goalie come the expansion draft.

With the goalie market currently flooded... Demko and 38 games played in the NHL doesn't have value nearly as high as you might imagine.

Detroit would be the team I'd be talking to. We can send a cap dump their way, given their open cap situation, and their need for a young goalie capable of being a starter would raise his value higher than...Johnsson or Kerfoot.

 

[Mick Jagr]

Detroit would be the team I'd be talking to. We can send a cap dump their way, given their open cap situation, and their need for a young goalie capable of being a starter would raise his value higher than...Johnsson or Kerfoot.

I do not like Kerfoot and I wouldn't trade much for Johnsson after his injury. I'd want to see how he returns first.

 

[Fedz]

For those mentioning Baertschi or Sutter in these deals...

There is literally ZERO chance we give up years of control on Virtanen and Demko to save us on a deal with one year remaining.

If you see the Canucks make a cap dump type of move the only three names that make sense are Roussel, Beagle and Eriksson as they have multiple years left. Benn won't be traded, he is a great third pair D at minimal costs. Especially now that he's on the right side.

Besides Sutter with salary retained will absolutely be worth something at some point next season, if that is an avenue Benning wants to explore. (I personally think there is zero chance they trade Sutter. I could even see him being re-signed.)

Toronto doesn't want to take any of these contracts back anyways, they're in a similar position to us, just a year or two ahead in terms of cap crunch. (Already signed their big boys to deals, that's next summer for us)