Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Thatcher Demko

Status
Not open for further replies.
hoglanderisbeast said:
its not a bad thing, or at least shouldnt be. all of us on team tank are because we think if we play bad enough and miss the playoffs then finially aqua will get new management. he thinks with results of the final score board instead of what actually goes on play for 60 mins a night. having a goalie carry your team isnt a recipe for success
Click to expand...

I would rather the team plays so well that someone offers Aquaman an offer he can't refuse and has to sell the team.

Change of ownership is what the team needs the most.
 
JAK said:
Not going to happen when there is a 6x6 on the table. Markstrom would only have signed in Vancouver had we matched.
Click to expand...
Yes - which is why I didn't blame them for not signing him. I wouldn't have matched Calgary's deal unless we had an obvious short term contention window which we didn't because of our cap issues.

I'm just saying that's the offer I would have been comfortable with.
 
JAK said:
Not going to happen when there is a 6x6 on the table. Markstrom would only have signed in Vancouver had we matched.
Click to expand...
Disagree..He would have signed here for less term and cash...imo....He would have taken the Canucks offer of $5.5 x 5 years with a NMC.

He really wanted to be on the Canucks....The sticking point was the NMC...(which essentially boils down to 'its me or Demko').
 
  • Like
Reactions: Breakers
VanJack said:
Is this post 'tongue in cheek'? What happens if you sign a flock of veterans for too much money and term and still have ' losing culture'?
Click to expand...

That would never happen, the Canucks properly evaluate veteran talent and sign them to cost effective deals.
 
Pastor Of Muppetz said:
Disagree..He would have signed here for less term and cash...imo....He would have taken the Canucks offer of $5.5 x 5 years with a NMC.

He really wanted to be on the Canucks....The sticking point was the NMC...(which essentially boils down to 'its me or Demko').
Click to expand...

It wasn't a me or Demko, it was a Markstrom wanted stability.
 
Pastor Of Muppetz said:
Stability through a NMC...
That essentially means..Me or Demko..?
Click to expand...

No, telling the GM it's either me or Demko means me or Demko.

Markstrom has earned his right to ask for whatever he wants through free agency.

It is just business.
 
JAK said:
No, telling the GM it's either me or Demko means me or Demko.

Markstrom has earned his right to ask for whatever he wants through free agency.

It is just business.
Click to expand...
I think we’re at cross threads to what we’re talking about..Absolutely,Marky deserves to go to free agency..Same with Tanev..
 
Its not really a discussion on if he has been better than Markstrom this year. That's a given at this point

In wins above replacement
Vasi in Tampa is pretty comfortable in the lead.
Demko and Fluery are tied for 2nd

not really anyone close in 3rd
 
Pastor Of Muppetz said:
Disagree..He would have signed here for less term and cash...imo....He would have taken the Canucks offer of $5.5 x 5 years with a NMC.

He really wanted to be on the Canucks....The sticking point was the NMC...(which essentially boils down to 'its me or Demko').
Click to expand...

Got a source for any of this? Thought not...
 
Zippgunn said:
Got a source for any of this? Thought not...
Click to expand...
It’s pretty well known. The sticking point was probably a combination of the initial term they offered (4 years) and the lack of NMC.

It’s been suggested by Dhaliwal and others as well.

They upped the offer to five years the day before he signed in Calgary like they upped their offer to Tanev to three years because they got desperate last second.

They’d already lost them both at that point.
 
Pastor Of Muppetz said:
Unfortunately, Team 1040's archive has been removed from the internet..this 'was' the link..The title is self explanatory.
http://markstrom-it-was-huge-to-get-a-nmc-have-a-home-for-the-next-6-years-1.1538772

and just to prove the link existed..
Grading the off season moves

post #61
Click to expand...

So you folks are suggesting that Markstrom was SO enamored with the city and the franchise that if his demand for a NMC was granted he would sign here for 8.5 million dollars less? Give me a break!
 
Peen said:
It’s pretty well known. The sticking point was probably a combination of the initial term they offered (4 years) and the lack of NMC.

It’s been suggested by Dhaliwal and others as well.

They upped the offer to five years the day before he signed in Calgary like they upped their offer to Tanev to three years because they got desperate last second.

They’d already lost them both at that point.
Click to expand...

Those last minutes offers did reportedly force Calgary to up their offers as well. Not a bad deal for the Canucks.
 
F A N said:
Those last minutes offers did reportedly force Calgary to up their offers as well. Not a bad deal for the Canucks.
Click to expand...
Wait where was this stated? I don’t remember hearing/reading that from VAN media
 
Pastor Of Muppetz said:
Yes..thats what we're saying...
Click to expand...

You are out of your minds...

Marky's agent: "oh wait, the Canucks have sent a counter offer! They'll give you the NMC and a half million less per year for only 5 years instead of 6".

Marky: "sounds, erm, OK to me"

Marky's agent: (slaps him hard) "so you think after 5 more years of Benning your stock will have risen so much that you can make 8.5 mil a year after this contract runs out? Don't be a schmuck! 8.5 million is a hella lot of money."

Marky: (sheepishly) "yeah, never thought of that. You're right, call the Flames back..."
 
Pastor Of Muppetz said:
Are we?...Marky claimed that the NMC (security from the ED) was the sticking point..not the money.

Didnt you claim that Vancouver was the last place NHL players want to play yesterday...?
Click to expand...

I know at least half a dozen ex-NHLers from this area. Not a one ever considered once signing with the Canucks for a variety of reasons the foremost being travel, taxes and legacy. It is NOT a destination of choice for any high end players which is why we end up with the Pearsons and Roussels of the league (and have to overpay them to entice them here). Other than the 37 year old Messier name me a superstar who has signed here as a FA.
 
Zippgunn said:
I know at least half a dozen ex-NHLers from this area. Not a one ever considered once signing with the Canucks for a variety of reasons the foremost being travel, taxes and legacy. It is NOT a destination of choice for any high end players which is why we end up with the Pearsons and Roussels of the league (and have to overpay them to entice them here). Other than the 37 year old Messier name me a superstar who has signed here as a FA.
Click to expand...
I could see some players not liking the travel, or its in Canada...You claimed that it was one of last places, good NHL players would play, which is completely false.
When you're a bottom feeder, or a rebuilding team..you generally don't attract good UFA's...does not matter what city you're in (unless its NYC)..
All the players that left..Toffoli, Stecher,Tanev,Markstrom wanted to stay...All the players that came to the squad ..Schmidt, Holtby and Hamonic are happy to be here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom