All or None of the big three UFAs?

Cherry Picker · Post by **Cherry Picker** » Sat Sep 19, 2020 4:54 am

Tanev and Marky are 30, Toffoli is 27, based on what you think Benning will be able to sign them for, and what you think will be given up to keep them, if it were an all or none scenario, do you think the Canucks would be better off signing all these three UFAs or none them?

theman · Post by **theman** » Sat Sep 19, 2020 6:54 am

I think Tanev and Taffoli will be back.

Have my doubts regarding Markstrom.

Just call it a hunch.

Madcombinepilot · Post by **Madcombinepilot** » Sat Sep 19, 2020 6:57 am

Lol. Oops. I hit the wrong response.

Sign them all — to the correct contracts.

Cousin Strawberry · Post by **Cousin Strawberry** » Sat Sep 19, 2020 7:53 am

None....just Petro

Mickey107 · Post by **Mickey107** » Sat Sep 19, 2020 8:36 am

Tanev for sure / Marky if the price is right / Toffoli--no big need.

Hockey Widow · Post by **Hockey Widow** » Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:09 am

Ya I don't see it as an all or nothing scenario. I think for sure you bring Tanev back on a 2-3 year deal if you can.

Markstrom same thing but 3-4 years if you can. You limit his trade protection. Demko isn't going to wait 3-4 years to become a starter. I think his performance in the SCP has given us a glimpse of what he can do, but on a regular full season basis? That has not been tested yet and may take a year or two. But I think he is the future of the team. If Markstrom will do a 3-4 year at no more than 6 with limited trade protection then you bring him back. Otherwise trade his rights to a team that covets him for a conditional pick. The pick will be relatively inconsequential.

Toffoli, I'd like a 2 year deal for him if we keep Virtanen. But if we trade Virtanen I'd go up to 4 years for Toffoli. We still need that veteran playoff, cup experienced player. We see how valuable it is in the playoffs.

Obviously all of this depends upon what they all want. It would be pretty easy to sign all three if they would all sign for chump change and since that isn't happening, well it may be cap restrictive to get them all. Maybe not. We just don't know at this point.

Meds · Post by **Meds** » Sat Sep 19, 2020 1:24 pm

The Brown Wizard wrote: ↑Sat Sep 19, 2020 7:53 am None....just Petro

I will say that I don't disagree with you Brownie.

Everyone knows that you need to have some top players on cheap contracts to really do damage in the cap era. It really limits the window, and while it creates parity it really punishes the savvy GM's and owners who want to win and know how to do it through smart scouting and team building.

Regardless. I'm inclined to say let Markstrom walk. Especially if you can somehow offload Eriksson and one other dead contract.

Sign AP.

Go for broke, gamble that Petey, Hughes, and Thatcher, can be top players in their positions while still on very team-friendly contracts.

If it fails, it fails. But you gotta try.

Do this especially if Tanev comes back on a one-year, dirt cheap, I love being a Canuck and want to avoid the expansion draft, contract.

Cousin Strawberry · Post by **Cousin Strawberry** » Sat Sep 19, 2020 1:41 pm

The far more realistic scenario is that we take the unwanted right shot dman from wherever Petro lands instead.

Adam Larsson could be a decent addition IMO. Brodie? Zadorov? Brandon Carlo even?

Or theres ARI wanting to move on from OEL (Virtanen, Lind and Eriksson...?)

It might be a buyers market for a change and Vancouver needs a serious makeover to their defense to graduate from pretender to contender

Strangelove · Post by **Strangelove** » Sat Sep 19, 2020 2:47 pm

Hockey Widow wrote: ↑Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:09 am Otherwise trade his rights to a team that covets him for a conditional pick.

I hate to be that guy, but that kind of conditional pick no longer exists.

https://www.nhl.com/devils/news/feature ... -317420014

Okay I lied, I love being that guy...

Hockey Widow · Post by **Hockey Widow** » Sat Sep 19, 2020 11:09 pm

Strangelove wrote: ↑Sat Sep 19, 2020 2:47 pm
Hockey Widow wrote: ↑Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:09 am Otherwise trade his rights to a team that covets him for a conditional pick.
I hate to be that guy, but that kind of conditional pick no longer exists.

https://www.nhl.com/devils/news/feature ... -317420014

Okay I lied, I love being that guy...

Thats fine. It wouldn't be worth shit anyway. I like the player Markstrom has become but moving forward....This maybe the time to move on from him.

Meds · Post by **Meds** » Sun Sep 20, 2020 7:40 am

Strangelove wrote: ↑Sat Sep 19, 2020 2:47 pm
Hockey Widow wrote: ↑Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:09 am Otherwise trade his rights to a team that covets him for a conditional pick.
I hate to be that guy, but that kind of conditional pick no longer exists.

https://www.nhl.com/devils/news/feature ... -317420014

Okay I lied, I love being that guy...

Makes me wonder what the reasoning behind that is.....

Cousin Strawberry · Post by **Cousin Strawberry** » Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:16 am

Hockey Widow wrote: ↑Sat Sep 19, 2020 11:09 pm
Strangelove wrote: ↑Sat Sep 19, 2020 2:47 pm
Hockey Widow wrote: ↑Sat Sep 19, 2020 9:09 am Otherwise trade his rights to a team that covets him for a conditional pick.
I hate to be that guy, but that kind of conditional pick no longer exists.

https://www.nhl.com/devils/news/feature ... -317420014

Okay I lied, I love being that guy...
Thats fine. It wouldn't be worth shit anyway. I like the player Markstrom has become but moving forward....This maybe the time to move on from him.

Hes definitely the one that had the best season so his value is sky high. As good as he has been for Van they have to make some sacrifices so if you look at it objectively he should be the one that gets away

Vancouver Canucks Messageboard

All or None of the big three UFAs?

Which would be worse for the Canucks long term, signing all or none of the big three UFAs?

All or None of the big three UFAs?

Re: All or None of the big three UFAs?

Re: All or None of the big three UFAs?

Re: All or None of the big three UFAs?

Re: All or None of the big three UFAs?

Re: All or None of the big three UFAs?

Re: All or None of the big three UFAs?

Re: All or None of the big three UFAs?

Re: All or None of the big three UFAs?

Re: All or None of the big three UFAs?

Re: All or None of the big three UFAs?

Re: All or None of the big three UFAs?