Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign G Braden Holtby to 2-Year Deal ($4.3M AAV)

[JenniferH]

You will get great enjoyment becoming acquainted with our team defense and Green's . . . system . . .

Holtby will be given every opportunity to shine.

Yeah, I'm picking up on that, but honestly, I can't imagine Holts (or anyone) honestly playing under anyone worse than Adam Oates or Todd Reirden.

 

[I am toxic]

Yeah, I'm picking up on that, but honestly, I can't imagine Holts (or anyone) honestly playing under anyone worse than Adam Oates or Todd Reirden.

Prepare to have your horizons expanded.

 

[mossey3535]

If Ian Clark is so good, why can't we sign a guy he likes for 2 million and he can turn him into someone worth much more? Why sign a reclamation project who has to hit such a high bar to be worth his contract?

Clark may not be good with young guys who have already been very heavily coached in their youth. Look at CBJ, their young goalies were killing it this playoffs. While he had a good influence on Bob (to an extent, Bob didn't retain a lot of those lessons when Clark left), he was also let go because of concerns he wasn't meshing with their two young starters.

 

[m9]

Clark may not be good with young guys who have already been very heavily coached in their youth. Look at CBJ, their young goalies were killing it this playoffs. While he had a good influence on Bob (to an extent, Bob didn't retain a lot of those lessons when Clark left), he was also let go because of concerns he wasn't meshing with their two young starters.

That's fair, I am open to him needing a specific type of player to work with. I would just hope that there were multiple options of this type of player and not one who required this much money.

I just think this management group thinks very simple. They allocated 5.5 million for a goalie in Markstrom, so when that didn't work out they just tried to get the next best goalie on their list and paid what they needed to in order to get him.

 

[Hit the post]

Clark may not be good with young guys who have already been very heavily coached in their youth. Look at CBJ, their young goalies were killing it this playoffs. While he had a good influence on Bob (to an extent, Bob didn't retain a lot of those lessons when Clark left), he was also let go because of concerns he wasn't meshing with their two young starters.

I *think* Luongo was several years under 30 when Clark worked with him right? I know jack about goalie coaching but exactly how much help (other than minor tweaks here and there) is he going to be for a NHL goalie who is already 30 years old?

 

[mossey3535]

That's fair, I am open to him needing a specific type of player to work with. I would just hope that there were multiple options of this type of player and not one who required this much money.

I just think this management group thinks very simple. They allocated 5.5 million for a goalie in Markstrom, so when that didn't work out they just tried to get the next best goalie on their list and paid what they needed to in order to get him.

Oh I'm not disagreeing with you, just adding on to what you said. Clark may well not mesh with Holtby at all.

Holtby's chances at bouncing back IMO are about 50/50. It would be easier if he had a glaring flaw or physical limitation. If he's lost confidence/tracking/focus in a lot of ways that's a lot harder to come back from. You can grind out your physical technique.

Having said that, always liked the guy as a goalie so I hope he bounces back. Especially at about $0.5-1M more than we should have paid.

 

[mossey3535]

I *think* Luongo was several years under 30 when Clark worked with him right? I know jack about goalie coaching but exactly how much help (other than minor tweaks here and there) is he going to be for a NHL goalie who is already 30 years old?

Clark did well with Luongo at the beginning of his career but by the time Melanson showed up Lu had fallen far behind in technique and skating. He was relying on almost pure talent. As their relationship went on it became a little too "yes man".

The fact that Clark didn't act on Lu's skating deficiencies for literally years is an example of how Clark isn't as infallable as, say, Korn.

 

[RobertKron]

Remember when it used to get brought up as like a really big terrible thing that Gillis drafted Ian Clark’s son?

 

[Hit the post]

Remember when it used to get brought up as like a really big terrible thing that Gillis drafted Ian Clark’s son?

It was imho. Though I wouldn't call it THAT terrible given how late that pick was. I don't believe he was ever offered a contract (but if it was, then I would call it a really terrible waste of a contract spot in the order of the same magnitude as Benning wasting a contract slot on M. Stewart).

 

[Hit the post]

Clark did well with Luongo at the beginning of his career but by the time Melanson showed up Lu had fallen far behind in technique and skating. He was relying on almost pure talent. As their relationship went on it became a little too "yes man".

The fact that Clark didn't act on Lu's skating deficiencies for literally years is an example of how Clark isn't as infallable as, say, Korn.

I said this before but didn't Melanson (when he was the Habs goalie coach) favor I think Halak over Price? They aren't infallible (like any other coach whether it be head coach or goalie coach) it seems.

HOWEVER, by & large, I think goalie coaches have been the LEAST of the this organization's problem through the past several decades.

 

[mossey3535]

I said this before but didn't Melanson (when he was the Habs goalie coach) favor I think Halak over Price? They aren't infallible (like any other coach whether it be head coach or goalie coach) it seems.

HOWEVER, by & large, I think goalie coaches have been the LEAST of the this organization's problem through the past several decades.

No. He and Price disagreed about positioning. Rollie is famous for "toes in blue" and at the time Price was a much more aggressive goalie. In interviews since, Price has admitted he still does Melanson movement drills and as time went on he basically adopted what Rollie was pushing for.

His disagreement with Price who rightfully was the one who was going to stay as a star goalie in Montreal is partly what led to Rollie leaving the Habs.

 

[F A N]

If Ian Clark is so good, why can't we sign a guy he likes for 2 million and he can turn him into someone worth much more? Why sign a reclamation project who has to hit such a high bar to be worth his contract?

Lol. It doesn't work that way. Holtby was for a long time one of the best goaltenders in the league. The talent is there. Recently he hasn't been good. If physically he is still capable it's easier to work with Holtby and get his game back closer to where it was than to try and make a backup goalie into a #1 goalie.

Head coaches want players with the talent to play their system. Goaltending coaches are no different.

Clark did well with Luongo at the beginning of his career but by the time Melanson showed up Lu had fallen far behind in technique and skating. He was relying on almost pure talent. As their relationship went on it became a little too "yes man".

The fact that Clark didn't act on Lu's skating deficiencies for literally years is an example of how Clark isn't as infallable as, say, Korn.

Well I think Clark only working part time was an issue. With Markstrom, his play fell off when he was overworked and you got to wonder how important it was to have some time off to work with Clark and reset. I think that "yes man" talk was BS to promote the change. Luongo was hard working and driven. I couldn't imagine that Luongo would fight against something Clark was trying to show him and Clark, reportedly, isn't a guy who is afraid to speak his mind.

I do think that sometimes a different coach can help a player. Clark's philosophy (from what I gather) is to work with a goaltender's strengths. Melanson seems more inclined to force a goalie to play a certain style (I don't mean this in a bad way) that he wants. Melanson might have came at the right time for Luongo - Luongo was not as athletic as before and Melanson had Luongo play further back. Perhaps Clark would have suggested changes to Luongo's game had he had the chance but we'll never know. The best coaches don't become stagnant. They evolve. Clark may not be the same coach as he was in his prior stint here.

I think Clark is one of the best goaltending coaches in the league if not the best. I have full trust in him. He's not going to be perfect but I think we're lucky to have him.

 

[Hit the post]

No. He and Price disagreed about positioning. Rollie is famous for "toes in blue" and at the time Price was a much more aggressive goalie. In interviews since, Price has admitted he still does Melanson movement drills and as time went on he basically adopted what Rollie was pushing for.

His disagreement with Price who rightfully was the one who was going to stay as a star goalie in Montreal is partly what led to Rollie leaving the Habs.

Thanks for the clarifying where I was wrong.

 

[m9]

Lol. It doesn't work that way. Holtby was for a long time one of the best goaltenders in the league. The talent is there. Recently he hasn't been good. If physically he is still capable it's easier to work with Holtby and get his game back closer to where it was than to try and make a backup goalie into a #1 goalie.

Head coaches want players with the talent to play their system. Goaltending coaches are no different.



Well I think Clark only working part time was an issue. With Markstrom, his play fell off when he was overworked and you got to wonder how important it was to have some time off to work with Clark and reset. I think that "yes man" talk was BS to promote the change. Luongo was hard working and driven. I couldn't imagine that Luongo would fight against something Clark was trying to show him and Clark, reportedly, isn't a guy who is afraid to speak his mind.

I do think that sometimes a different coach can help a player. Clark's philosophy (from what I gather) is to work with a goaltender's strengths. Melanson seems more inclined to force a goalie to play a certain style (I don't mean this in a bad way) that he wants. Melanson might have came at the right time for Luongo - Luongo was not as athletic as before and Melanson had Luongo play further back. Perhaps Clark would have suggested changes to Luongo's game had he had the chance but we'll never know. The best coaches don't become stagnant. They evolve. Clark may not be the same coach as he was in his prior stint here.

I think Clark is one of the best goaltending coaches in the league if not the best. I have full trust in him. He's not going to be perfect but I think we're lucky to have him.

I'm not saying make a backup goaltender into a #1, I'm saying find a guy who has been a good backup and kick him up a level to be a good 30-40 game starter or 1b guy. That guy should cost far less than 4.3 million and provide excellent value to the team. Even if Holtby plays great, if he's splitting time with Demko it's hard to gain value when he's making 4.3 million.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Come on, this is what I mean when I say so many posters love to exaggerate. Do you not remember the Canucks were 1 win away from the conference final. Maybe if there weren't 2 back to back games. Maybe Canucks win that series. Do you not remember that 1st round pick was traded for Miller. No Miller means no playoffs. Do you not remember the junk on the bottom 6, game 5 and game 6 vs Blues, 7 goals from the bottom 6 and 4 assists from Sutter. Sutter led the team in primary assist 5 on 5 in that series. Without that bottom 6, Canucks might not even beat the Blues. Hughes and Petey 1 and 2 years into their career. People already talking about Benning damaging Petey and Hughes rfa years. Wow

Nah.

 

[I am toxic]

Lol. It doesn't work that way. Holtby was for a long time one of the best goaltenders in the league. The talent is there. Recently he hasn't been good. If physically he is still capable it's easier to work with Holtby and get his game back closer to where it was than to try and make a backup goalie into a #1 goalie.

Head coaches want players with the talent to play their system. Goaltending coaches are no different.



Well I think Clark only working part time was an issue. With Markstrom, his play fell off when he was overworked and you got to wonder how important it was to have some time off to work with Clark and reset. I think that "yes man" talk was BS to promote the change. Luongo was hard working and driven. I couldn't imagine that Luongo would fight against something Clark was trying to show him and Clark, reportedly, isn't a guy who is afraid to speak his mind.

I do think that sometimes a different coach can help a player. Clark's philosophy (from what I gather) is to work with a goaltender's strengths. Melanson seems more inclined to force a goalie to play a certain style (I don't mean this in a bad way) that he wants. Melanson might have came at the right time for Luongo - Luongo was not as athletic as before and Melanson had Luongo play further back. Perhaps Clark would have suggested changes to Luongo's game had he had the chance but we'll never know. The best coaches don't become stagnant. They evolve. Clark may not be the same coach as he was in his prior stint here.

I think Clark is one of the best goaltending coaches in the league if not the best. I have full trust in him. He's not going to be perfect but I think we're lucky to have him.

Korn is the best goalie coach in the league. If he were to become available at the end of this season you snap him up - but you'd have to get Trotz as your head coach, can't see Korn ending that relationship.

 

[Balls Mahoney]

Don't even care anymore. Not going to register another emotional reaction about the Canucks until at the least Benning is gone which with our corrupt ownership will likely never happen until Jim dies.

 

[VanillaCoke]

No expansion protection is the key, i would've preferred a cheaper less name brand backup that shows clearly that demko is the #1.
So still dont love it, but it could've been worse. Sadly thats a plus for this management.


Now they just have to actually protect Demko for expansion draft....

 

[lousy]

No expansion protection is the key, i would've preferred a cheaper less name brand backup that shows clearly that demko is the #1.
So still dont love it, but it could've been worse. Sadly thats a plus for this management.


Now they just have to actually protect Demko for expansion draft....

Demko hasn't shown that he can preform at a high level for a whole season. He had the chance earlier last season and did not run with it. So why would the team clearly make him the #1? This is the best option to help him hopefully grow into that consistent starter.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Demko hasn't shown that he can preform at a high level for a whole season. He had the chance earlier last season and did not run with it. So why would the team clearly make him the #1? This is the best option to help him hopefully grow into that consistent starter.

Are you srs? What have they been developing him for?!?!

...Because he's 25 and has excelled at every level, and he showed in the playoffs he should be givin every opportunity to be the number 1, the clear #1.

All we needed was a cheap capable backup, not a 30yr old, 4+ million, statistically amd eye test declining 1b. And I like holtby, he would've been perfect for Edmonton.

 

[lousy]

Are you srs? What have they been developing him for?!?!

...Because he's 25 and has excelled at every level, and he showed in the playoffs he should be givin every opportunity to be the number 1, the clear #1.

All we needed was a cheap capable backup, not a 30yr old, 4+ million, statistically amd eye test declining 1b. And I like holtby, he would've been perfect for Edmonton.

He was given the opportunity to carry the team as the number 1 when markstrom went down to injury. And he showed he could not step into that role yet. Yes he has the potential to be a great starter, but he needs to be eased into that role. They are still not done developing him yet.

Holtby will be great by his side as he transitions to the consistent #1 we hope he can be.

 

[Catamarca Livin]

Are you srs? What have they been developing him for?!?!

...Because he's 25 and has excelled at every level, and he showed in the playoffs he should be givin every opportunity to be the number 1, the clear #1.

All we needed was a cheap capable backup, not a 30yr old, 4+ million, statistically amd eye test declining 1b. And I like holtby, he would've been perfect for Edmonton.

Hope you are right and we have too much goaltending. I think injuries happen and having both of them is needed. Which cheap backup would you prefer. Mike Smith? I do not see many goalies under 3 million.

 

[mossey3535]

Demko hasn't shown that he can preform at a high level for a whole season. He had the chance earlier last season and did not run with it. So why would the team clearly make him the #1? This is the best option to help him hopefully grow into that consistent starter.

Because of where this team is, the most rational move is to sacrifice this year to waiting out some of our bloated contracts, get QH/EP under long terms, and reset goaltending by running with Demko and eventually Dipietro. Those two will also save money that you will need to fill in our gaping roster holes.

The big issue is that Benning put this team into a position in which roster improvement was almost impossible due to cap considerations. Yet because of a fluke bubble playoffs the team management feels it has to try to live up to or exceed that performance.

In reality doing nothing is our best move. And by signing Holtby to that number you're again foregoing cap savings that are absolutely crucial for this team.

Honestly Demko could completely blow for the next two years and it wouldn't matter to me as long as we saw some development in his game. This team won't be in its window for at least that time. Any moves that take up valuable cap space that aren't for long term players that will surround and help QH/EP is a waste of money.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Are you srs? What have they been developing him for?!?!

...Because he's 25 and has excelled at every level, and he showed in the playoffs he should be givin every opportunity to be the number 1, the clear #1.

All we needed was a cheap capable backup, not a 30yr old, 4+ million, statistically amd eye test declining 1b. And I like holtby, he would've been perfect for Edmonton.

Next season, the league is planning on having a condensed schedule..Having 2 very capable goalies is imperative (Brad Treliving was making a point about that yesterday ..they have Marky and Rittich)..

Cheaping out on a backup would be foolish...

 

[F A N]

I'm not saying make a backup goaltender into a #1, I'm saying find a guy who has been a good backup and kick him up a level to be a good 30-40 game starter or 1b guy. That guy should cost far less than 4.3 million and provide excellent value to the team. Even if Holtby plays great, if he's splitting time with Demko it's hard to gain value when he's making 4.3 million.

You mean someone like Nilsson? Who exactly is a good backup who hasn't proven to be a good 30-40 game starter whom you think just needs a better goaltending coach? You got to start with something to work on. Maybe a Jack Campbell type. Regardless, Demko is an unproven #1. Previously I said that any GM with playoff aspirations would be stupid to start the season with Lack and Markstrom as the team's goaltending duo. Similar thinking applies. While that "good backup" would be more proven than Markstrom was, Demko is less proven than Lack was.

Before the start of free agency, I think most of us agreed that if we were to run with Demko it was important to insulate him with a veteran goaltender who could handle 30-40 games. That's the route that the Canuccks took.

I think Holtby brings value to the Canucks if he performs well. Unless Demko plays like a Vezina contender next season, the chances are that we can extend Demko for less than $5M AAV given that he still has an RFA year.

Korn is the best goalie coach in the league. If he were to become available at the end of this season you snap him up - but you'd have to get Trotz as your head coach, can't see Korn ending that relationship.

I agree that Korn is the best goalie coach but I would not pick Korn to replace Clark (I don't think Clark would be interested in working under Korn). Korn is 63 and clearly not interested in working with goalies on a daily basis. If we swap Clark for Korn, a guy like Curtis Sanford would be the team's goaltending coach.