Proposal: Carolina - Vancouver

[GIN ANTONIC]

Huge incentive for Vancouver.

If we resign Markstrom we'll lose one of Markstrom/Demko to Seattle in the expansion draft for nothing, or have to pay assets to keep them. Given our current roster the Canucks don't have a lot of quality defenseman to protect as Hughes isn't eligble and Edler's contract is up. That means we really don't have a lot of prime assets on defense we NEED to protect (Myers?, Stecher?, Juolevi) which gives us space to trade for one. If the value is there, it could be a win-win for Carolina as they have a too many decent defenseman so they'll need to expose one or two.

So what if we simply to something around Demko for Bean +

Gives Van a young NHL ready D with tons of skill and team control who they can protect.

Carolina gets their young goaltender.

 

[GoldiFox]

So what if we simply to something around Demko for Bean +

Gives Van a young NHL ready D with tons of skill and team control who they can protect.

Carolina gets their young goaltender.

High price to pay given Bean was a #13 Overall and has developed well. But, as mentioned, the Canes run into the same expansion issue that Vancouver has with goalies. In an ideal world Carolina would keep and develop Bean while Vancouver would keep and develop Demko. Seattle throws a wrench in that.

It would be a greater gamble but it seems to me like Vancouver's best bet is to keep Demko and let Markstrom walk. Use Demko's cheap salary to pay Hughes/Pettersson while improving the rest of the roster.

 

[Peter Griffin]

Huge incentive for Vancouver.

I understand the premise just don’t like the value/return. I don’t think LD is a long term weakness. I guess we’ll have a better idea if Juolevi makes the team and how Rathbone looks in the majors.

 

[Boondock]

Huge incentive for Vancouver.

If we resign Markstrom we'll lose one of Markstrom/Demko to Seattle in the expansion draft for nothing, or have to pay assets to keep them. Given our current roster the Canucks don't have a lot of quality defenseman to protect as Hughes isn't eligble and Edler's contract is up. That means we really don't have a lot of prime assets on defense we NEED to protect (Myers?, Stecher?, Juolevi) which gives us space to trade for one. If the value is there, it could be a win-win for Carolina as they have a too many decent defenseman so they'll need to expose one or two.

In this scenario the Canuck lose 2 inexpensive roster pieces. I like Bean, but to lose Gaudette and Demko and only get Bean back makes us a much worse team going forward. How many we need a bottom pairing LHD threads are there vs we need a #3C? The 2nd would be years away if the player becomes an NHL player, odds are they wouldn't. And the Canucks need to replace both Gaudette and Demko for more than their cap hit is now. That deal works for a team going into a re-build not a team looking to emerge from a re-build.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

no teams are good trade partners once their fans get going on HF, dont let that discourage you.

I don't agree with that, at least not all of it. When discussing "value" or if a poster doesn't understand the make-up and needs of the opposing team, then sure. But there are many cases where fans agree that the two teams make good trade partners. For example, a couple years ago when the Canes had 4 NHL RHD as well as Adam Fox in the system, Brett Pesce was displeased with his role as he wasn't getting top 4 minutes early in the season (after recovering from an injury). The Leafs desperately needed a top 4 RHD and had Nylander holding out and had good depth at forward (Matthews, Tavares, Marner, Hyman, Kadri, Nylander, Kapanen, Johnsson, Marleau, etc..). Most of both fan bases agreed that the two teams made good trade partners, and in fact the two teams had discussed a trade.

In this case, my response to Peter Griffin was because of his statement: "I don't see the incentive here for Vancouver. If they're going to move young pieces for a defenseman it better be a RH'ed d-man."

The Canes only have two RHD under contract, Hamilton, who is signed for 1 year and Pesce, who is signed for multiple years and no internal replacement within the system. I'm not saying a trade for a RHD won't happen between the two teams, but on the surface, they don't make good trade partners because of the lack of depth on Carolina in a position that a Vancouver poster said was the desired position to acquire. Now, if Peter Griffin had said "LH'ed d-man", I would say Carolina and Vancouver make good trade partners because at LHD, Canes have Slavin, Skjei, Fleury, Gardiner and Bean.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

I think the reason why Vancouver and Carolina make sense as trading partners is the expansion draft. As currently constructed, Vancouver is primed to lose one of Demko/Markstrom (if Markstrom is re-signed) and Carolina is primed to lose one of their defensemen (Hamilton, Slavin, Pesce, Fleury, Sjkei). Vancouver doesn't have enough good defenseman worth protecting and Carolina doesn't really care as much about protecting Reimer/Mrazek as much as other pieces of their roster.

Honest question for Carolina fans: What are the thoughts around expansion protection currently (i.e. who to protect vs who to expose) and what are some of the preferred solutions out there right now amongst the fan base for what to do? One of the earlier posters on here suggested trading a 1st to Seattle to not take a defenseman. Is that preferred over trading them for a forward or goalie or draft pick?

I think others have made the position clear already. The other wildcard (sorry, couldn't resist) is that I'm not sure Francis is going to be very accommodating to Carolina as the divorce was not an amicable one. It will also depend on if Hamilton is re-signed or not. In the end, we are likely going to lose one good player, likely a LHD and so be it.

 

[spockBokk]

In the end, we are likely going to lose one good player, likely a LHD and so be it.

Very much this.

CAR has built up admirable depth. They can afford to lose a good player. It sucks, but I think teams have learned from the fleecing some of them took from Vegas, that it’s probably best to just accept the loss of a good player and move on.

The exception to this would be cap-strapped teams who may be willing to pay a hefty price to get out from under crappy contracts.

 

[LakeLivin]

Reality check?

Demko has played 37 regular season NHL games with a .906 save % and a 3.02 GAA. Granted, he was brilliant in his 4 playoff games this season (4g, 0.64 GAA, .985 S%), but in placing a value on him it seems like many are ignoring the entirety of the rest of his career. Now maybe Demko flipped a switch of some kind and he'll perform the same way going forward. But I've seen too many temporary hot streaks to bet my house on it.

At this point I still see Demko as a raffle ticket. Don't get me wrong, Demko is young, the ticket might have good odds, and I'd love to have it. But I'm sure not going to buy it for anything close to the payout amount of the ticket IF it wins. I see it making more sense for Vancouver to keep Demko than taking what I see as a realistic return in a trade.

 

[Johnsie19]

I don't agree with that, at least not all of it. When discussing "value" or if a poster doesn't understand the make-up and needs of the opposing team, then sure. But there are many cases where fans agree that the two teams make good trade partners. For example, a couple years ago when the Canes had 4 NHL RHD as well as Adam Fox in the system, Brett Pesce was displeased with his role as he wasn't getting top 4 minutes early in the season (after recovering from an injury). The Leafs desperately needed a top 4 RHD and had Nylander holding out and had good depth at forward (Matthews, Tavares, Marner, Hyman, Kadri, Nylander, Kapanen, Johnsson, Marleau, etc..). Most of both fan bases agreed that the two teams made good trade partners, and in fact the two teams had discussed a trade.

In this case, my response to Peter Griffin was because of his statement: "I don't see the incentive here for Vancouver. If they're going to move young pieces for a defenseman it better be a RH'ed d-man."

The Canes only have two RHD under contract, Hamilton, who is signed for 1 year and Pesce, who is signed for multiple years and no internal replacement within the system. I'm not saying a trade for a RHD won't happen between the two teams, but on the surface, they don't make good trade partners because of the lack of depth on Carolina in a position that a Vancouver poster said was the desired position to acquire. Now, if Peter Griffin had said "LH'ed d-man", I would say Carolina and Vancouver make good trade partners because at LHD, Canes have Slavin, Skjei, Fleury, Gardiner and Bean.

Either way one team has goalie depth and winger depth and weakness in defense. The other doesn't have a starting goalie and good depth at defense. They are in different conferences. They're as good a trading partners as you'll find. Doesn't mean they should or will make a trade but I could come up with about 5 reasonable trades between these two teams.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Either way one team has goalie depth and winger depth and weakness in defense. The other doesn't have a starting goalie and good depth at defense. They are in different conferences. They're as good a trading partners as you'll find. Doesn't mean they should or will make a trade but I could come up with about 5 reasonable trades between these two teams.

If Van is ok with a LHD, I agree. again, the poster said Only a RHD where the canes have no depth which is what I responded to. wouldn’t you agree the Canes have no depth there?

 

[Johnsie19]

If Van is ok with a LHD, I agree. again, the poster said Only a RHD where the canes have no depth which is what I responded to. wouldn’t you agree the Canes have no depth there?

we have pretty decent 4-5 RHD in Troy Stecher to send back as well so again, lots of options.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

we have pretty decent 4-5 RHD in Troy Stecher to send back as well so again, lots of options.

Except Stecher hasn’t played as a 4. Based on TOI and quality of competition. So his value is bottom pairing until proven otherwise. Are you saying Canes can move Pesce, with Hamilton as a Ufa in 1 year and Stecher is the answer? Would you make that trade if the roles were reversed? Likely not.

At some point you need to account for other teams situations.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

As Canucks fan, id rather keep Demko, Boeser and Stecher than trade them for Pesce/Bean.

nothing wrong with that trio of Canucks, keep them all.

CRL should trade for Markstroms rights.

 

[Chan790]

As Canucks fan, id rather keep Demko, Boeser and Stecher than trade them for Pesce/Bean.

nothing wrong with that trio of Canucks, keep them all.

CRL should trade for Markstroms rights.

I don't see Markstrom's cap hit working in Carolina. For the same reasons you'd prefer to move Markstrom and keep Demko, I can see the Canes only interested in Demko.

Unlike other Canes fans, I absolutely give up Bean if it gets us Demko one-for-one...I don't see any future in Raleigh for Jake Bean.

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

As Canucks fan, id rather keep Demko, Boeser and Stecher than trade them for Pesce/Bean.

nothing wrong with that trio of Canucks, keep them all.

CRL should trade for Markstroms rights.

Well I suppose it would be a pretty minimal asset to give up for exclusive negotiation rights so that would be fine.

 

[bleedgreen]

While I don’t think the canes would or should do this I will say it’s nice to see an offer that has Pesce in it that has players I would in general trade for. Having said that the 13oa makes the op offer way too much for the Canes to be paying. Pesce for Boeser would be an interesting thought if we had the depth to trade Pesce, but we don’t.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

I wouldn’t do Boeser for Pesce, I think Pesce is a nice piece but not someone to pay a premium for.

like Boom Boom said, not a great trading partner if the Canes don’t want to pay the contract Markstrom will demand.

that said, I’m not Jim Benning so the rest of you can keep discussing it, I’m not saying I will be right.

 

[Johnsie19]

Except Stecher hasn’t played as a 4. Based on TOI and quality of competition. So his value is bottom pairing until proven otherwise. Are you saying Canes can move Pesce, with Hamilton as a Ufa in 1 year and Stecher is the answer? Would you make that trade if the roles were reversed? Likely not.

At some point you need to account for other teams situations.

He played the last 10 games of the playoffs as a 4 and filled in for injuries throughout the season there. That's why I said he's a 4-5.

Would I make what trade if the rolls were reversed?