CanucksCorner.com Forums

Mëds wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 4:25 pm

donlever wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 4:16 pm There is zero talent in our front office capable of that sales pitch.

We can only hope he comes back strong enough, and with play that is good enough, to make the sales pitch himself.

I bought a 649 today....

donlever wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 4:16 pm Multiple injuries over his career.
Hurt annually, often more than once.
Rumours of psychological issues in terms of his health.
3 years 8.5 million starting next year for what amounts to damaged goods.

When you put it like that, it's hard to figure out which of our goalies has the worst contract.

donlever wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 4:28 pm

Mëds wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 4:25 pm

donlever wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 4:16 pm There is zero talent in our front office capable of that sales pitch.

We can only hope he comes back strong enough, and with play that is good enough, to make the sales pitch himself.

I bought a 649 today....

Just trying to keeps some positive vibes ‘round this here hockey talk message board.

But Ok, fine.

Fuck it.

I’ll go back to keeping on with the negativity.

Sell the team. Move it to Houston.

Cornuck wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 4:29 pm

donlever wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 4:16 pm Multiple injuries over his career.
Hurt annually, often more than once.
Rumours of psychological issues in terms of his health.
3 years 8.5 million starting next year for what amounts to damaged goods.

When you put it like that, it's hard to figure out which of our goalies has the worst contract.

At least it should be easy to keep him on LTIR…..tho I’m sure this team will find a way to fuck that up too.

Well

Some here harp about the negative chat.

Honestly I personally do not regard it as such.

We all know each other and have for years.

We are all reasonably intelligent and educated overall as well as about the team.

I call it realism.

We went at each other for years, accusing the others for accepting "mediocrity" for consistently being outside of playoffs, but now that we're almost dead last... it's too negative?

Have the balls to tell it like it is. Freedom of speech and all that, exercise your right to call out this #1 bullshit.

Carl Yagro wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 5:02 pm Have the balls to tell it like it is. Freedom of speech and all that, exercise your right to call out this #1 bullshit.

No can do Carl. Bill C-9 and all that…..

Forum crossover Mëds...2 minutes.

Carl Yagro wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 5:02 pm We went at each other for years, accusing the others for accepting "mediocrity" for consistently being outside of the playoffs, but now that we're almost dead last... it's too negative?

Have the balls to tell it like it is. Freedom of speech and all that, exercise your right to call out this #1 bullshit.

Exactly - I've worn out my rose-coloured glasses over the past couple of years, but they are now sitting in a drawer in my desk, waiting to be pulled out when it's appropriate.

With that said, there are still good things to cheer about -and we're back to rooting for the kids to develop, the resurgant EP40, and this week - Ratatouille going on a bit of a tear.

I'm also at the point when I REALLY want Hughes to re-sign here soon, just so the media can shut the fuck up. #Morons

donlever wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 4:16 pm Multiple injuries over his career.

Hurt annually, often more than once.

Rumours of psychological issues in terms of his health.

3 years 8.5 million starting next year for what amounts to damaged goods.

Yes, damaged goods, and you'd have to think any other GM could see that, but like I said, "for this playoffs".

The buyers would have to be a team -- like Edmonton, but not necessarily Edmonton -- that believed:

1) they had a shot at a Cup this season

2) the thing holding them back was Playoff quality goaltending

and

3) Demko could still provide that, for an 8 week swan song (he might even play [what he believed to be] hurt, for games that actually meant something).

Historically, teams have been willing to give up lot of future assets when they believe that This Their Year, and they only need a few more current assets to put them over the top.

There are probably multiple ways to deal with Demko's contract after that, and if some of them are painful, well, they'll have their Stanley Cup rings to console them.

It's no sure thing, but it's better than lottery odds.

The first step, though, is an ownership/management group willing to bail on this season and look out to '27-'28.

Good response and I get your point RG.

Who are the favourites this year that need a goalie?

Adding Demko to the Oilers puts their cap for 7 players...LD CM EB DN ME ZH & Demko to 66.25 million.

Add RNH and its 70..

...can not see it.

A distressed "asset" who might not make it a week let alone 2 months and 20 plus games.

I don't see it my man.

Opposite sides on this one.

The bald dudes stuck us good with our goalies.

And then some.

A healthy Demko could be the difference in a team going to the Cup finals, I could see how a playoff contending team with suspect goaltending being interested in his services.

Name the team.

When is he healthy?

Hughes and Demko to Detroit then.

We will take John Gibson back for Thatcher.

No retention.

donlever wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 7:21 pm Name the team.

When is he healthy?

donlever wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 7:21 pm When is he healthy?

For brief intervals after extensive periods of re-hab and conditioning.

Maybe this Thursday?

With a carefully managed workload, he could make it through March and April to get his form back, so long as the Canucks don't overwork him first.

donlever wrote: ↑Wed Dec 10, 2025 7:21 pm
Name the team.

As previously mentioned, Edmonton (the Canucks could retain), Detroit, and I don't know whether Toronto and Florida still think they have open competitive windows, but they'd get boosts from better goaltending.

It would be a risky play, but there are no sure things in the NHL playoffs, and there have been few teams that could put themselves in a position to win without taking some chances. Was it Tortorella who said "Safety is Death" [or words to that effect] ?