Confirmed Signing with Link: [VAN] Thatcher Demko signs extension with the Canucks (5 years, $5M AAV)

[Ted Hoffman]

I'm really curious whether the team could convince an arbiter that a player is worth less when there's a flat cap.

The flat cap is irrelevant. It's the fact that the player would have ~80 games under his belt, no major awards, perhaps a scattering of votes for one this season, no real playoff experience other than 3 games which is statistically meaningless, and is only 25 years old.

I'm pretty convinced a player in that situation isn't going to convince an arbitrator that they're worth $5 million per given no other RFA contract out there valued a goalie in a similar situation that richly.

 

[Luck 6]

The flat cap is irrelevant. It's the fact that the player would have ~80 games under his belt, no major awards, perhaps a scattering of votes for one this season, no real playoff experience other than 3 games which is statistically meaningless, and is only 25 years old.

I'm pretty convinced a player in that situation isn't going to convince an arbitrator that they're worth $5 million per given no other RFA contract out there valued a goalie in a similar situation that richly.

I think it would matter... Percentage of the cap each year, if the cap doesn’t grow, the dollar value represented by the percentage can’t grow either. I would be shocked if this wasn’t considered. There must be a precedent of this within arbitration hearings to refer to.

I fully agree that he wouldn’t have got 5mil in arbitration, I could actually see him getting close to 3.75mil this year, then let’s say 4.5mil next year as his last year of UFA. After that, if he plays close to where he’s at now, he would easily get a 3 year deal at 6mil per year (see Binnington), heck he’d probably even get a bit more.

3.75, 4, 6, 6, 6 = 5.15mil cap hit. That’s kind of what I was thinking. Canucks do it to avoid risk of losing him, and to get him under a lower hit when we’re ready to compete. Demko takes a slight discount for the security. If Demko falls off a cliff this will look bad, sure, and you could make an argument that we could have signed him for one more year before doing this. But if he played well that 1 more year you’re left with this:

5, 6.5, 6.5, 6.5, 6.5 = 6.2mil. Demko takes a discount down to 6mil cap hit. I’d rather gamble and save a million.

 

[kovacro]

Heard the Canucks goalie coach has his contract expiring at the end of the season and no lock he’s back. Obviously, has been influential in working with Markstrom and now Demko.

I’m sure they would want to retain him to continue that relationship that looks to be working well.

 

[M2Beezy]

Never heard of him

Canucks goalie. From United States

 

[BCNate]

(sigh) If you're going to buy 3 years of UFA [not 4; he's 25 now and would be RFA; 21-22 would be one year and he'd be 26 and still RFA; 22-23 would be the second year and then he would be UFA], then yes - that has a cost. For the 117th time: did the Canucks really need to do that right now? Could Benning really not wait a year and see if Demko is as outstanding as everyone thinks and then commit money - even if it cost a little more to do so? That question is really kind of important if, as you mention, it ends up costing them Sutter or Pearson.

I don't know how many times I have to keep saying this: I don't care if the Canucks want to lob 5/25 at their goalie of the future because of all his alleged talent, potential, hype, pedigree, ancestry, whatever else. Their decision, great - they're happy about it, I'm happy for them. I wouldn't have done it, I think it's premature, I would have asked for more results before lobbing $5 million at anyone, but if someone else wants to do it on more than a feeling I say if it feels good, just do it.


1. Whoa, let's see that top-5 finish in Vezina voting first. Right now, he's got a career 0 total votes for anything.
2. He's been hot enough to "single handedly keep us in a playoff series" once. A whopping total of 3 games, for 0 playoff series wins. Jordan Binnington has been hot enough to win 4 playoff series as part of winning a Stanley Cup once. One of those two is getting lauded for a 25-game sample this season for single-handedly keeping his team from getting buried in the basement of the Scotia North as reason for why he should get 5/25, the other is getting trashed for a 25-game sample this season for struggling on a team that's been wildly inconsistent, injury-plagued and defensively poor as reason for why he shouldn't have gotten 6/36.

HFBoards, 200X - present: where unknown, untapped potential is always more important than actual results.


There were comparables for Demko. Benning ignored every last one of them when he doled out this contract. Hughes is already quite arguably a top-15 defender in the league with (considerable?) upside yet to realize. Pettersson has been a nearly point-per-game player and already had Hart votes last season. Both of them are going to ask why they should get indexed to "much clearer comparables" seeing as how they've got as much or more potential and have done significantly more in their time in the league.

-So in your eyes, Hughes, who is arguably top 15 in the league in his position with considerable upside to realize can be paid for potential, but Demko, who is is arguably top 15 in his position with considerable upside cannot?
-Are you really throwing EP's 3 Hart votes from last year into the mix as leverage for him?
-Yes, Svechnikov, Tkachuk, Heiskanen, Makar ect, are very good comparables for both EP and Hughes deals. Better comparables than the 3 Russian RFA goalies who combined have played less than Demko. I would be willing to bet that they all end up worth similar deals though.
-Yes, locking up any young player long term is a risk, everyone here recognizes that. Waiting to lock him up once he is Arb. eligible and the cap (likely) starts going up also carries considerable risk. Building cost certainty around your young core is a very good thing, despite the gamble.
-a 6x6 deal is not comparable in any way to a 5x5, not sure why you'd choose to throw that out there.

 

[BlueOil]

3 starts does not make one of the best playoff performances in playoff history and not even close to that.

you just don't understand canucks' playoffs man, it's not about winning

 

[SurferBroChad]

you just don't understand canucks' playoffs man, it's not about winning

Lol

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

Are we going back to college? Probably 3 dozen. [Thanks, past employers for letting me go to conferences back in the Northeast.] Post-college? Probably a dozen.


You want cost certainty, and for that you wrote a $5 million per check for a goalie on top of what you'll have to write for Hughes and Pettersson, which is probably going to price out a few supplemental pieces on that roster. OK.


He could. Might. Maybe. Perhaps. But, you don't know. You didn't try to find out. You panicked over maybe he'll ____ and forked over a wad of dough to guard against it.


In my scenario, you wait a couple of extra months and see how he does, then decide what you want to do. He's RFA for 2 more years. You couldn't say "hey, let's do a 1-year deal at $2.5 million, show us you're worth more and we'll cut the check?" You don't see a pretty girl who's supposedly really nice, she kisses you on the lips, and you run to Jared's and drop $7500 on a ring for her and rush to the altar without knowing if she's really as nice as you've been told or if she's really a psychotic bitch. At least date her longer than it was love at first sight at the hors d'oeuvres bar, and she ate an olive I had in my drink.


Bobrovsky got $10 million per on the backs of a pair of Vezina wins + 3 other top-10 finishes. Yes, it was an asinine contract, but one can at least connect some dots and see how a track record of high-level performance on a mid-level might be valued by some team around the league. It's not like he was 28-13-8, 2.59, .915 and 7th in Calder Trophy voting and someone decided that looks fantastic - let's drop 7/45 on him in case he thinks about ever walking away.


This is kind of funny given the situation you're arguing about.


You think it's a good gamble. Great! I'm happy for you! Hope it works out too! I don't get why you're so agitated that I'm disagreeing with you, to the point you've fired off I don't know how many responses complaining about my disagreeing.

I have only replied to your own responses. Is it that you just want the last word?

Let's agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

-So in your eyes, Hughes, who is arguably top 15 in the league in his position with considerable upside to realize can be paid for potential, but Demko, who is is arguably top 15 in his position with considerable upside cannot?

I love how 25 starts over one season and 59 for a career suddenly makes a goalie "arguably top-15 in his position" because the 25 this season were in aggregate pretty good, where the 34 prior to that were ... not as good. If he's more Jonathan Quick than Andrei Vasilevskiy next season, I look forward to seeing recency bias in action and hearing about how he's barely a top-30 goalie.

-Are you really throwing EP's 3 Hart votes from last year into the mix as leverage for him?

His 3 5th-place votes, his 16 votes for Lady Byng (including 3 1st's), his 3 3rd-place votes for NHL All-Star ... all in his 2nd year in the league. Oh, and his Calder Trophy win the year prior which he built on last season.

-Yes, Svechnikov, Tkachuk, Heiskanen, Makar ect, are very good comparables for both EP and Hughes deals. Better comparables than the 3 Russian RFA goalies who combined have played less than Demko. I would be willing to bet that they all end up worth similar deals though.

Tkachuk has one (1) season where he's been close to point-per game, and has never picked up votes for anything other than the Calder.

Svechnikov is still on his ELC, his best season still isn't as good as Pettersson's worst, and he's also never picked up votes for anything other than the Calder.

Heiskanen is still on his ELC, his best season is still 18 points shy of Hughes on arguably a better team with a better defense, the difference between him and Hughes in Norris Trophy voting is a 4th instead of a 5th, and Hughes is outproducing him this season.

Makar is also on his ELC; he's the only guy on the list who's better and no one knows what his next contract will be.

The 3 Russian RFA goalies, ... going to guess we're talking about Samsonov, Shesterkin and Sorokin since you didn't name any of them and these are the 3 closest that fit. Not the 3 young goalies I'd have picked on, but OK - let's roll with it.
-- Samsonov is on his ELC and was tabbed as the #1 guy in Washington; he's got 6 fewer wins in 26 fewer career starts, a better career GAA and SV% and was a 1st-round pick in 2015 which suggests "he's got a really high pedigree" - like, higher than Demko. Courtesy of the Demko contract, Samsonov is going to lick his chops this offseason.
-- Shesterkin is also on his ELC, seized the #1 spot when Lundqvist faltered last season, has been flat outstanding for the Rangers and by most accounts better than Demko this season, and again courtesy of Demko is going to make more this offseason should he elect for arbitration. He's sure as hell going to make more than Georgiev, the clear #2 who's making $2.4 million this year.
-- Why Sorokin would be here, I have no f***ing clue. He isn't supposed to be the #1 for the Islanders now, and he's certainly not going to have any kind of track record to log a big contract even in arbitration this summer unless something happens to Varlamov.

You're not very good at this.

-Yes, locking up any young player long term is a risk, everyone here recognizes that.

Most people also realize after 2-3 years and 150+ games, you've got a pretty good read on what a guy is going to do and so lobbing a contract at that point at least gives you some kind of a decent track record to work with. Apparently highly-touted goalies are different.

Waiting to lock him up once he is Arb. eligible and the cap (likely) starts going up also carries considerable risk. Building cost certainty around your young core is a very good thing, despite the gamble.

You keep talking about the upside risk, like there's no downside risk or the downside risk is so remote it's negligible and the upside risk is practically certain.

The cap isn't going up for a couple years. By then, we'll all have an idea of what to expect ... and, in the meantime, you could try him out for another year and make sure he's a better shot to realize that upside, instead of just constantly he's got upside, he might really hit it, we gotta protect ourselves just in case.

-a 6x6 deal is not comparable in any way to a 5x5, not sure why you'd choose to throw that out there.

There are no words to express how little sense this makes.

 

[BCNate]

I love how 25 starts over one season and 59 for a career suddenly makes a goalie "arguably top-15 in his position" because the 25 this season were in aggregate pretty good, where the 34 prior to that were ... not as good. If he's more Jonathan Quick than Andrei Vasilevskiy next season, I look forward to seeing recency bias in action and hearing about how he's barely a top-30 goalie.


His 3 5th-place votes, his 16 votes for Lady Byng (including 3 1st's), his 3 3rd-place votes for NHL All-Star ... all in his 2nd year in the league. Oh, and his Calder Trophy win the year prior which he built on last season.


Tkachuk has one (1) season where he's been close to point-per game, and has never picked up votes for anything other than the Calder.

Svechnikov is still on his ELC, his best season still isn't as good as Pettersson's worst, and he's also never picked up votes for anything other than the Calder.

Heiskanen is still on his ELC, his best season is still 18 points shy of Hughes on arguably a better team with a better defense, the difference between him and Hughes in Norris Trophy voting is a 4th instead of a 5th, and Hughes is outproducing him this season.

Makar is also on his ELC; he's the only guy on the list who's better and no one knows what his next contract will be.

The 3 Russian RFA goalies, ... going to guess we're talking about Samsonov, Shesterkin and Sorokin since you didn't name any of them and these are the 3 closest that fit. Not the 3 young goalies I'd have picked on, but OK - let's roll with it.
-- Samsonov is on his ELC and was tabbed as the #1 guy in Washington; he's got 6 fewer wins in 26 fewer career starts, a better career GAA and SV% and was a 1st-round pick in 2015 which suggests "he's got a really high pedigree" - like, higher than Demko. Courtesy of the Demko contract, Samsonov is going to lick his chops this offseason.
-- Shesterkin is also on his ELC, seized the #1 spot when Lundqvist faltered last season, has been flat outstanding for the Rangers and by most accounts better than Demko this season, and again courtesy of Demko is going to make more this offseason should he elect for arbitration. He's sure as hell going to make more than Georgiev, the clear #2 who's making $2.4 million this year.
-- Why Sorokin would be here, I have no f***ing clue. He isn't supposed to be the #1 for the Islanders now, and he's certainly not going to have any kind of track record to log a big contract even in arbitration this summer unless something happens to Varlamov.

You're not very good at this.


Most people also realize after 2-3 years and 150+ games, you've got a pretty good read on what a guy is going to do and so lobbing a contract at that point at least gives you some kind of a decent track record to work with. Apparently highly-touted goalies are different.



You keep talking about the upside risk, like there's no downside risk or the downside risk is so remote it's negligible and the upside risk is practically certain.

The cap isn't going up for a couple years. By then, we'll all have an idea of what to expect ... and, in the meantime, you could try him out for another year and make sure he's a better shot to realize that upside, instead of just constantly he's got upside, he might really hit it, we gotta protect ourselves just in case.


There are no words to express how little sense this makes.

-name 15 goalies you would rather have in your goal right now.
-I could not care less about a sportsmanship award and an all star game vote. You quoted his 3 Hart votes, not me. Bringing in all the other award votes is really just grasping at straws.
- (hint) both Ep and Hughes are also on their ELCs as well as all the others I compared them to. Again, what’s your point? Why are Calder votes relevant??
-re read my post, which clearly states that those 3 goalies are not good comparables. Nice to see you agree.
-again, I clearly stated that there is risk involved, not sure what your point is here.
- the cap freeze is over aftrr next season. Until they say otherwise, I’m going with the info from the league, not you.
-if you can’t see the difference between a 25 and 36 million dollar commitment, not sure what to tell you.

you’ve spent a lot of time on this and really only shown that you are near generational at formatting, but not much else.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

-name 15 goalies you would rather have in your goal right now.

Red Herring.

-I could not care less about a sportsmanship award and an all star game vote. You quoted his 3 Hart votes, not me. Bringing in all the other award votes is really just grasping at straws.

The players don't think so, because they're all mentionable in arbitration.

- (hint) both Ep and Hughes are also on their ELCs as well as all the others I compared them to. Again, what’s your point? Why are Calder votes relevant??

You're talking about comparables to lesser players who don't have their next contracts themselves but presuming whatever they get, our guys will get that too. You're bad at this.

-re read my post, which clearly states that those 3 goalies are not good comparables. Nice to see you agree.

Actually, I didn't. I stated 2 of the 3 are as inexperienced and have better stats and, because Demko got dropped $5 million for alleged potential, they've got a comparable to reference in arbitration which they'll readily point to when they ask for at least that much if not more, and the 3rd was totally irrelevant so I have no idea why you even mentioned them.

You're really bad at this.

-again, I clearly stated that there is risk involved, not sure what your point is here.

I typed it out pretty clearly. I can't help you comprehend.

- the cap freeze is over aftrr next season. Until they say otherwise, I’m going with the info from the league, not you.

Red Herring

-if you can’t see the difference between a 25 and 36 million dollar commitment, not sure what to tell you.

If you can't understand the difference between $36 million for proven performance to an impending and $25 million to a guy with 2 RFA years remaining and who's got scant performance but lots of potential I don't know what to tell you.

you’ve spent a lot of time on this and really only shown that you are near generational at formatting, but not much else.

You've shown you hate the idea that someone isn't offering a full-throated profession of love for this contract while ignoring my comments that if Canucks fans are happy with it, I'm happy for them. Please read everything I wrote, not just the parts you hate reading.

 

[BCNate]

Red Herring.


The players don't think so, because they're all mentionable in arbitration.


You're talking about comparables to lesser players who don't have their next contracts themselves but presuming whatever they get, our guys will get that too. You're bad at this.


Actually, I didn't. I stated 2 of the 3 are as inexperienced and have better stats and, because Demko got dropped $5 million for alleged potential, they've got a comparable to reference in arbitration which they'll readily point to when they ask for at least that much if not more, and the 3rd was totally irrelevant so I have no idea why you even mentioned them.

You're really bad at this.


I typed it out pretty clearly. I can't help you comprehend.


Red Herring


If you can't understand the difference between $36 million for proven performance to an impending and $25 million to a guy with 2 RFA years remaining and who's got scant performance but lots of potential I don't know what to tell you.


You've shown you hate the idea that someone isn't offering a full-throated profession of love for this contract while ignoring my comments that if Canucks fans are happy with it, I'm happy for them. Please read everything I wrote, not just the parts you hate reading.

-"Red Herring" for any comments you you make but can't defend. Well played, I'll give you credit for that.
-Makar and Heiskanen are lesser players that Hughes, very interesting take.
-I stated right from the get go that those three goalies were not good comparables, again, unsure of your point.
-You brought Binnington into this, trying to compare a cup winner with a 36 million dollar deal to Demko, who has no ring, and a 25 million dollar deal. Their expererience, and their deals, are in no way comparable.
-I've said multiple time that their is risk in this deal. As someone who has seen all of his starts in the NHL, and many prior to that, I recognize the risk, and am happy with this deal.

Anyway, I'm out, enjoy your weekend.

 

[BCNate]

100% this is a risky deal. All goalies have risk associated with a long term deals. so I’m fine with taking it now, as opposed to bridging him and the taking a potentially bigger risk down the road.

 

[elitepete]

The flat cap is irrelevant. It's the fact that the player would have ~80 games under his belt, no major awards, perhaps a scattering of votes for one this season, no real playoff experience other than 3 games which is statistically meaningless, and is only 25 years old.

I'm pretty convinced a player in that situation isn't going to convince an arbitrator that they're worth $5 million per given no other RFA contract out there valued a goalie in a similar situation that richly.

Why would we f*** around with and penny pinch when it comes to our stud goalie? He's going to be one the best players in the game at his position. Canucks organization has an outstanding skill - developing and quantifying the ability of goalies. We know what we have in him and it is a ridiculously gifted player. Both parties (Canucks and Demko+his agent) know how good he is. On top of that he has an unbelievable character, competitive nature, outstanding work ethic, and burning desire to win.

I wish the deal was 8 years 6mill a year.

 

[elitepete]

100% this is a risky deal. All goalies have risk associated with a long term deals. so I’m fine with taking it now, as opposed to bridging him and the taking a potentially bigger risk down the road.

What do you mean by risky? It is somewhat risky, but not that risky based on how good he already is, his track record at lower levels, etc.

Also, Canucks know what they are doing when it comes to goalies. TBH the Binnington and Murray deals were bigger risks. Demko has never struggled in his entire life like how Binnington struggled last year and how Murray has for the past 2 years.

 

[BlueOil]

What do you mean by risky?

the kid has 30 career wins. the risk is that the sample size is too short. pretty easy to argue that point actually. 30 wins is nothing in the nhl.

 

[elitepete]

the kid has 30 career wins. the risk is that the sample size is too short. pretty easy to argue that point actually. 30 wins is nothing in the nhl.

read the rest of my post

 

[BlueOil]

read the rest of my post

i didn't find the rest of you pumping demko worth it, it's a risky contract for a kid with a small track record. hope he pans out cuz if not there's a lot of things hindsight should have caught

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Why would we f*** around with and penny pinch when it comes to our stud goalie?

I don't have the energy to explain this a 388th time.

He's going to be one the best players in the game at his position.

Pavel Brendl says hello. So does Jason Bonsignore. So does Alexandre Volchkov. So does Alexandre Daigle. So do a slew of other "going to be one of the best players in the game at his position" busts. Let's see him get there first before giving him that title.

Canucks organization has an outstanding skill - developing and quantifying the ability of goalies.

The last goalie the Canucks identified who played an NHL game before taking Demko was Cory Schneider. That was 2004. The last one before that was Rob McVicar, who got picked in 2002 and played one NHL game. The ones before that were Dieter Kochan (1993), Mike Fountain (1992), Corrie D'Alessio (1988) and Troy Gamble (1985) who played 21, 11, 1 and 72 games respectively. You have to go back to Wendell Young in 1981 to find the last goalie before Schneider who played at least 100 games. That's 28 goalies across 30 years who were taken between Young in '81 and Demko in '14, of which 6 made the NHL for even a game, and Schneider accounts for 409 of their total 515 games played.

The Blues over the same time frame put out Bishop, Allen and Binnington along with Guy Hebert and Pat Jablonski, all who have at least 110 NHL games to their credit - and we were shitty at developing and quantifying the ability of anything over at least 20 years of that 30-year period.

If 515 games played from 6 guys, 409 of them from one of them, and 22 misses counts as "outstanding skill - developing and quantifying the ability of goalies," ... f***ing yikes.

We know what we have in him and it is a ridiculously gifted player.

Gifted players are not sure-fire "one of the best players in the game at his position" locks.

Both parties (Canucks and Demko+his agent) know how good he is. On top of that he has an unbelievable character, competitive nature, outstanding work ethic, and burning desire to win.

Hope they know how good he is. Unrealized potential. the history of the NHL is replete with guys who have "unbelievable character, competitive nature, outstanding work ethic, and burning desire to win" who still didn't cut it despite their oft-claimed talent.

Good lord, this is like explaining what a square looks like to someone who keeps wanting to compare it to an alpaca.

I wish the deal was 8 years 6mill a year.

Can't believe with all the hype I've heard, it's not. You should bitch endlessly that it wasn't and you might have to pay him even more 5 years from now when that contract expires. Maybe you'll get to do it for fear that he'll walk somewhere else.

 

[MBH]

Big commitment to a guy with 60 wins to his name.

 

[elitepete]

Pavel Brendl says hello. So does Jason Bonsignore. So does Alexandre Volchkov. So does Alexandre Daigle. So do a slew of other "going to be one of the best players in the game at his position" busts. Let's see him get there first before giving him that title.

This is completely irrelevant, none of these guys are goalies that were developed by a team that is elite at developing goalies.

The last goalie the Canucks identified who played an NHL game before taking Demko was Cory Schneider. That was 2004. The last one before that was Rob McVicar, who got picked in 2002 and played one NHL game. The ones before that were Dieter Kochan (1993), Mike Fountain (1992), Corrie D'Alessio (1988) and Troy Gamble (1985) who played 21, 11, 1 and 72 games respectively. You have to go back to Wendell Young in 1981 to find the last goalie before Schneider who played at least 100 games. That's 28 goalies across 30 years who were taken between Young in '81 and Demko in '14, of which 6 made the NHL for even a game, and Schneider accounts for 409 of their total 515 games played.

You forgot Jacob Markstrom, who was on the verge of busting when he was traded to the Canucks at age 24. Canucks saw something in him and developed him by first sending him to the AHL for the year, then bring him up and developing him as the backup in the NHL for another 2 years. They resurrected his career and now he is one of the best goalies in the game.

Canucks also signed Eddie Lack as a undrafted prospect from Europe, and developed him to the point where he was a borderline starter, before injuries ruined his career.

What the Canucks did with goalies 30 years ago is irrelevant. The position has completely changed.

The Blues over the same time frame put out Bishop, Allen and Binnington along with Guy Hebert and Pat Jablonski, all who have at least 110 NHL games to their credit - and we were shitty at developing and quantifying the ability of anything over at least 20 years of that 30-year period.

Bishop was a good find, but his career really only took off when he went to Tampa. If he stayed on the Blues, I doubt he would have been this good. Allen is a good backup who was seen as having starter potential when he was a prospect, but didn't make it. Binnington had an excellent rookie season and was crucial to the Blues cup win. Last year he was decent in the regular season, but just terrible in the playoffs. Haven't really payed attention to what he's been doing this year, but I wonder if his dominant rookie season had a lot to do with other teams not having much scouting info on him. It seems like his tendencies are much well known in the league now. Remember, he really just came out of nowhere in his rookie season. He was a 25 year old AHLer prior to that, and wasn't seen by very many people as a future starter anymore.

Bishop, Allen, Binnington, Husso vs Schneider, Markstrom, Lack, Demko. Lmao. I know which group I would go with.

Good lord, this is like explaining what a square looks like to someone who keeps wanting to compare it to an alpaca.

This is funny, coming from you. You have shown that you don't have very much knowledge when it comes to what the Canucks have done with goalies over the last 10-15 years, when they identified that they had a huge problem with the position, and decided to put much more resources into developing young goalies. They completely changed the way they went about it, and now it is a huge organization strength.

 

[elitepete]

i didn't find the rest of you pumping demko worth it, it's a risky contract for a kid with a small track record. hope he pans out cuz if not there's a lot of things hindsight should have caught

Not as risky as you think. Every long term contract in sports has risk attached to it.

Again, Canucks know what they are doing when it comes to goalies.

A lot of uninformed people thought the Markstrom contract in 2016 was too risky too. Only criticism you can make of that now is that it was too short of a contract

 

[Oddbob]

Did he have a 48-save shutout?

I don't know did he? If he did, what is your point?

 

[BruinsBtn]

I don't know did he? If he did, what is your point?

1. Scroll up.
2. Read what I wrote.
3. Get back to me

 

[sting101]

Is it riskier to let him continue on his trajectory and cost you 6-7 million or maybe walk in free agency or lock him up through his prime at 5 x 5.

You are clueless to Demko's talents and career to date if you think that his contract has a lot of risk to it. He's easily a huge core piece to the team. Ian Clark and coaches knew this and it's why they refused to negotiate a contract with a top5 31yr old goalie that would have forced them to flush Demko out of the organization or watched him become Seattle's top dawg as a rivalry team just down the I5.

No brainer move that will have added value in a couple years if not sooner.