Canucks Draft goalie Thatcher Demko with 36 pick

[ukcanuck]

Canucks could be well represented at the WJCs. Cassels and Demko for USA. McCann, Virtanen for Canada. Is Horvat WJC eligible if he goes back to London? Would Tryamkin still be eligible for the russkies?

Horvat doesn't have to go back to jr to be WJC eligible, he can go from the NHL

If he's in the NHL not a chance in hell the Canucks loan him to Team Canada. NHL players are NHL players, they don't need to go to a children's tournament.

Children's tournament ... Seriously man, Coles they got a twofer on.

[Blob Mckenzie]

LOL Tony Gallagher sees this pick as a slap in the face to Eddie Lack.

[Hockey Widow]

No kidding. He won't even see Utica for three years then at least two there sees him five years away from a back up role, if everything goes well. By then, if Lack earns it, he should be our starter, ready to mentor a back up for a few years.

If Lack is smart I think he should welcome the addition of Miller, embrace it and better his game. Welcome the fact that he has this chance to be the starter in 2-3 years. If Miller plays lights out and earns an extension after three years then Lacks put himself in a position to be UFA and seek a decent contract at that time to start elsewhere.

[ClamRussel]

LOL Tony Gallagher sees this pick as a slap in the face to Eddie Lack.

So what were they supposed to do, not draft the best player available? A guy in the 2nd round who by all accounts should have gone in the 1st?!? Asinine.

[Aaronp18]

LOL Tony Gallagher sees this pick as a slap in the face to Eddie Lack.

Wouldn't that make every draft pick a slap in the face to someone?

What a fucking moron.

[Hockey Widow]

LOL Tony Gallagher sees this pick as a slap in the face to Eddie Lack.

Wouldn't that make every draft pick a slap in the face to someone?

What a fucking moron.

Good point Aaron!

I can't help but wonder what Benning would have done had he had the chance to deal with Luongo. Would they have bought him out or would they have been able to use him, straight up or in a package, to help nab the 1st overall pick. Or would they have kept him. I wonder if that would have been insulting to Lack?

[Boston Canucker]

LOL Tony Gallagher sees this pick as a slap in the face to Eddie Lack.

Yes, to follow TG's logic, the Canucks should not have acquired any goalies, vets or prospects, for fear of offending Lack. Of course, TG does not give a shit about Lack he's just looking for an angle. It's such a stupid claim though that drafting a prospect who want see NHL ice for at least 3 years offends a present guy on the team...what a reach.

[ClamRussel]

I really like this kid's personality & character.

[Hockey Widow]

I really like this kid's personality & character.

He shows a great sense of humour and a maturity beyond a teen. Love his competitiveness. Seems to embrace a chance to learn. I think we have a good one in him. If you caught him on the Summer Summit you can really see his humour.

[ClamRussel]

He has the knack of being able to talk smack w/ his teammates but still keeping it light & fun. Some guys just can't pull it off & come across as dicks. He'll be a great teammate, a solid pick!

[BingoTough]

LOL Tony Gallagher sees this pick as a slap in the face to Eddie Lack.

Wouldn't that make every draft pick a slap in the face to someone?

What a fucking moron.

In five years he might be ready to backup Lack, assuming he takes what goes for the regular amount of time before one of our picks gets a real sniff at playing in the bigs. Take that Eddie!

If not and he progresses faster, Eddie can hardly complain if he gets competition from below. It's exactly what happened in his situation.

Either way, Gollum is an idiot, or what you said.

[Todd Bersnoozi]

Just think out loud here and not really saying we should do this, but just as everyone thought Lou would be gone and we'd keep Schneids. MG did the unthinkable by trading Schneids. If the Canucks think Markstrom will be the better young goalie long-term, maybe we're better off trading Lack. We'd get a decent young player for Lack, whereas we'd get pretty much nothing for Markstrom. I do like Lack Attack Pack a lot, but just sayin.

[Strangelove]

Just think out loud here and not really saying we should do this, but just as everyone thought Lou would be gone and we'd keep Schneids. MG did the unthinkable by trading Schneids. If the Canucks think Markstrom will be the better young goalie long-term, maybe we're better off trading Lack. We'd get a decent young player for Lack, whereas we'd get pretty much nothing for Markstrom. I do like Lack Attack Pack a lot, but just sayin.

Well if Lack is indeed the better young goalie short-term, shouldn't he be the one we keep as backup

... seeing as how the goal is to make the playoffs this season?

We know that Lack could handle #1 duties if Miller were injured for a month or two.

Markstrom?

Very doubtful.

Also, Lack is signed (cheap) for 2 more seasons.

We should take whatever the market price is for Markstrom and turn the page.

[ClamRussel]

Crossed my mind as well, I'm sure JB will consider it esp w/ Demkko in the pipeline.

Doc, at this point no one knows who'll be better long term. It could very well be Markstrom. Are you saying we'd miss the playoffs w/ Jacob riding shotgun instead of Lack?!?

[Strangelove]

Doc, at this point no one knows who'll be better long term. It could very well be Markstrom. Are you saying we'd miss the playoffs w/ Jacob riding shotgun instead of Lack?!?

Yup.