Benning: Markstrom has not asked for trade, expected to be at camp

[Gollumpus]

Unless some kind of trade situation opens up where one of Lack or Markstrom gets moved in a package deal this summer, then I see the Canucks starting the season with three goalies.

Miller will play 50+ games, with Lack and Markstrom sharing the rest for the entire season (and into the playoffs).

Whether one of these other two will play a lot more than the other depends upon whether Markstrom has managed to pick his game up. If Lack is the obvious better choice then he will get most of the other games. If Markstrom gives a good showing, then he will play possibly as many as half of the remaining games.

regards,

G.

[Red Light Racicot]

Im really annoyed about this.

I cant understand why the media just goes ahead and conjures pointless garbage.

Its not helping anyone you disingenuous clowns.

[oldnews]

No he won't.

He would have to clear waivers and he would get claimed.

No, that's not correct.

http://www.litterboxcats.com/2013/10/7/4792782/nhl-waiver-waivers-cba-florida-panthers

"Starting twelve days before the start of the season and ending on the day of each team's final game, teams wishing to loan players on their active rosters to any other league must first place the player on waivers."

So up to 12 days before the season starts, the Canucks can assign Markstrom to the AHL without him being subject to waivers.

Also:

"Players on loan to an affiliated league may be recalled without waivers under emergency conditions, established when injury, illness or suspensions result in the availability of fewer than two goalkeepers, six defensemen and twelve forwards. Players recalled under emergency conditions must be returned as soon as the emergency is over."

So Markstrom will be available to be recalled, exempt from waivers, if one of the Canucks goaltenders is injured, and they return him to Utica once that goaltender is back on the active roster.

The Canucks can both send Markstrom to Utica and have him available for emergency recall - without subjecting him to waivers. He can also be recalled and not subject to recall (there are no longer recall waivers) at any point, but if not under emergency recall, would be subject if they wanted to send him back to Utica.

I like it - and I like the fact he'll have time to work with Rollie Melanson, tweak his game, get lots of starts in Utica, and be available.

Miller's term also allows the Canucks to revisit their top 2 in the future if they should decide that Eddie and Jacob force the issue with their play.

Nice depth as far as I'm concerned, and really gives Utica a solid trio of goaltenders as well.

[oldnews]

Im really annoyed about this.

I cant understand why the media just goes ahead and conjures pointless garbage.

Its not helping anyone you disingenuous clowns.

It's just what Botchford does. The guy desperately needs attention - any attention he can get.

Nothing he says is worth taking as credible.

[King Heffy]

I honestly had a hard time believing that THIS happy-go-lucky kid could be such trouble.

Well it's also THIS kid:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrH0ukdOG-c

[oldnews]

^ why you Hef to be so med at da Swedes?

[King Heffy]

^ why you Hef to hate da Swedes so much?

I love me some Sedinery in all fairness. Lack's a beauty too.

[elvis15]

Markstrom will be sent down to Utica during the 10 day or however many days thing it is before the season starts.

Again, people keep saying that but that doesn't mean it's true. Just because there's a waiver period that starts 12 days before the season doesn't mean waiver eligible players can be sent down to the AHL prior to that to avoid having to clear.

I don't think Markstrom has to pass through waivers, maybe a capologist could weigh in on it, but I think hew signed his ELC when he was 20, meaning he is waiver exempt for 4 years. I think he can go down anytime next season. The season after that, it changes for him.

As has been mentioned before and after your post, he is waiver eligible. If you ever have any doubt, check CapGeek. I'll tell you right now though, I've checked and he most definitely has to pass through waivers this coming season.

Google is useful for correcting such misperceptions.

Actually, I'd rephrase that as 'basic internet skills' since it's not that hard to go to a known website like theahl.com and get his stats without Googling them.

No, that's not correct.

http://www.litterboxcats.com/2013/10/7/4792782/nhl-waiver-waivers-cba-florida-panthers

...

That doesn't mean waiver eligible players can be sent down outside of the waiver period as a loop hole. The CBA is vague on it, but even if it were true, how would Markstrom feel about getting sent to the AHL prior to any preseason games and most of the training camp? I wouldn't want to stay with a team that didn't at least give me a chance in camp to compete for a spot.

I've quoted another site in the past that talks about the waiver period, and they actually noted specifically how they waiver period had to be moved up in the lockout season so players could be sent to the AHL before the lockout came into effect. That wouldn't have been necessary if players like Markstrom could have been sent from the NHL roster to the AHL teams outside of that waiver period.

[Red Light Racicot]

It's just what Botchford does. The guy desperately needs attention - any attention he can get.

Nothing he says is worth taking as credible.

Im definitely figuring out how he has earned the infamy for sure.

[hockeyfan87]

Where is the accountability for Botchford and other members of the hockey media in Vancouver?

This isn't the first time he's fabricated stuff regarding the Canucks and yet he's employed by TSN and The Province (and occasionally Team1040). He's a parasitic asshole who needs to be held accountable for making up lies outright. He deleted the tweets quietly without comment of course when the Benning quote came out contradicting what he reported.

This is definitely a black spot on this hockey market. It's the media playing the fans to create controversy that doesn't exist. Spiraling it out of control when it does. I hope the guy is fired sooner rather than later.

[Baggins]

To be fair Benning didn't deny Markstrom isn't being shopped or that other teams may have expressed interest in him. He only denied Markstrom has demanded a trade.

[oldnews]

To be fair Benning didn't deny Markstrom isn't being shopped or that other teams may have expressed interest in him. He only denied Markstrom has demanded a trade.

That would be fair to people who wonder about his future here, or are speculating that he may be moved....

but Botchford on the other hand, to be accurate, stated that Markstrom requested a trade, something Benning has flat out refuted.

http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/533580

"Vancouver Canucks goaltender Jacob Markstrom requested a trade in light of the signing of Ryan Miller to a 3-year, $18-million contract, according to Jason Botchford of The Province."

Botchford has a history of inaccurate claims of this nature - to be fair - he is a meddling clown with no credibility.

[oldnews]

That doesn't mean waiver eligible players can be sent down outside of the waiver period as a loop hole. The CBA is vague on it, but even if it were true, how would Markstrom feel about getting sent to the AHL prior to any preseason games and most of the training camp? I wouldn't want to stay with a team that didn't at least give me a chance in camp to compete for a spot.

I've quoted another site in the past that talks about the waiver period, and they actually noted specifically how they waiver period had to be moved up in the lockout season so players could be sent to the AHL before the lockout came into effect. That wouldn't have been necessary if players like Markstrom could have been sent from the NHL roster to the AHL teams outside of that waiver period.

It's not a loop hole - it's looks a lot more like a pretty clear definition of the waiver period, and the terms and dates by which a player must be loaned to their AHL club. The lockout was what preceded the new CBA - it appears the Litter Box Cats site I posted is more up to date on the new terms than you are, which makes me wonder why you are disputing it as opposed to finding actual information that might refute their research.

Training camp opens on Sept 11 - preseason games start on Sept 16th - leaving up until the 27th before Markstrom would need to be assigned to Utica, as the regular season starts for Vancouver on Oct 8.

How Markstrom would feel isn't really something I care to speculate about. I'll leave the baseless speculation to Botchford.

[bluesman60]

Even worse than a NTC is the No Trade Value that Markstrom has.

You have to love how CDC discounts every player that dons the jersey. When he was in Florida, many on CDC said Markstrom was the future for Florida....in Vancouver he suddenly has no trade value?

I hope he plays a lot in Utica and gets his confidence and game on track. The kid is still learning for petes sake.

[touchable]

You have to love how CDC discounts every player that dons the jersey. When he was in Florida, many on CDC said Markstrom was the future for Florida....in Vancouver he suddenly has no trade value?

I hope he plays a lot in Utica and gets his confidence and game on track. The kid is still learning for petes sake.

Sure, when he was first drafted, lots of people (not just CDC) thought that he was the future in Florida. No one is disputing that. But by the time we acquired him in the trade last year, he was already damaged goods. He has a career NHL record of 12-27-5 with a GAA of 3.19 and a save% of 0.896. That is just plain awful, and it's not like he's showing signs of improvement. His save% last year was 0.874 in 12 games with Florida and 0.868 in 4 games here.

The only hope he has of becoming a reliable NHL goalie is if Rollie Melanson can work a miracle with him. Therefore, as of right now, he has absolutely zero trade value.

[Brick Tamland]

Isn't this ANOTHER BOTCHED rumour? He has not made himself likable to new management at all. Exposed again Botched...

He should try this year where he only reports FACTS, see if he can then get that exclusive he has been asking for from the first day TL was hired...

[oldnews]

Isn't this ANOTHER BOTCHED rumour? He has not made himself likable to new management at all. Exposed again Botched...

He should try this year where he only reports FACTS, see if he can then get that exclusive he has been asking for from the first day TL was hired...

As usual, he's taken the obnoxious liberty of speaking for someone else. As unprofessional as they come.

I can see why though. Who cares what Jason Botchford himself has to say?

[elvis15]

It's not a loop hole - it's looks a lot more like a pretty clear definition of the waiver period, and the terms and dates by which a player must be loaned to their AHL club. The lockout was what preceded the new CBA - it appears the Litter Box Cats site I posted is more up to date on the new terms than you are, which makes me wonder why you are disputing it as opposed to finding actual information that might refute their research.

Training camp opens on Sept 11 - preseason games start on Sept 16th - leaving up until the 27th before Markstrom would need to be assigned to Utica, as the regular season starts for Vancouver on Oct 8.

How Markstrom would feel isn't really something I care to speculate about. I'll leave the baseless speculation to Botchford.

My source was also post lockout and the same information, but with that little tidbit added in. I could look it up again, but it's another blog site the same as yours and it won't make any difference to prove anything either way.

And a clear definition of the waiver period could just as easily be a clear definition of the only time a waiver eligible player can be sent down (much like the strict periods for buyout waivers).

My point is this, nowhere on that site or others (or the CBA) have I found specifically that waiver eligible players can be assigned to an AHL roster outside of the waiver period. In my recollection of past camps as well, it's all been junior/overseas/waiver exempt players that get sent down that early. Our pickups like Stanton and Dalpe are players I'm sure Chicago and Carolina would have liked to keep instead of losing on waivers or being forced to trade, but it still happened despite people saying there's been another option all along.

Absence of that information isn't confirmation and I'm asking for someone to show me something that proves that Markstrom can be sent down before as fact. You're right that there are a couple preseason games before the waiver eligible period starts Sept 27, so he would get some time, but he still gets sent down early and is at least a borderline NHL goalie.

If no one can find anything definitive and he's still here in late September, then I guess we'll find out.

[oldnews]

My source was also post lockout and the same information, but with that little tidbit added in. I could look it up again, but it's another blog site the same as yours and it won't make any difference to prove anything either way.

And a clear definition of the waiver period could just as easily be a clear definition of the only time a waiver eligible player can be sent down (much like the strict periods for buyout waivers).

My point is this, nowhere on that site or others (or the CBA) have I found specifically that waiver eligible players can be assigned to an AHL roster outside of the waiver period. In my recollection of past camps as well, it's all been junior/overseas/waiver exempt players that get sent down that early. Our pickups like Stanton and Dalpe are players I'm sure Chicago and Carolina would have liked to keep instead of losing on waivers or being forced to trade, but it still happened despite people saying there's been another option all along.

Absence of that information isn't confirmation and I'm asking for someone to show me something that proves that Markstrom can be sent down before as fact. You're right that there are a couple preseason games before the waiver eligible period starts Sept 27, so he would get some time, but he still gets sent down early and is at least a borderline NHL goalie.

If no one can find anything definitive and he's still here in late September, then I guess we'll find out.

The first bolded part would seem to be in agreement with the point regarding being able to assign Markstrom to Utica in the summer. It would appear to contradict the principle of being waiver eligible, but regarding players that are not waiver eligible, what would be the point of defining a waiver period if the dates outside that period don't in fact apply to players otherwise waiver eligible within that period?

Stanton and Dalpe were both picked up on Sept 29 - 9 days before opening night, once the waiver period applied.

[nd84]

I like Markstrom, after Lu got hurt and Eddie had to saddle up for a stretch, we couldn't play the backup for a while and I think that took a chunk out of Eddie's energy plus the final 19 games he played at the end of the season.

You may have a solid 1-2 punch, but the key is also having really solid depth at the number 3 and 4 situation.

Look at Montreal who had Price, Budaj and Tokarski.

Anaheim with Hiller, Fasth (until traded), Anderson, Gibson, Bobkov

LA kings with Quick, (Scrivens until traded), Jones

St Louis had Miller-Halak, Elliot, Allen.

Having a Miller-Lack-Markstrom trio will give us good depth if either the top two hurt themselves.

Even look at Minnesota when both Backstrom and Harding went down they had enormous depth with Kuemper and Bryzgalov to help out.

If Miller or Lack get hurt, I do not have faith in Eriksson to step in. Good teams will have depth flooding in the organization at all positions. canucks are building good depth especially if Miller figures out Vancouver may not work for him and we have to dish him out, we still have Markstrom to fall back on to backup Eddie.

If Miller or Lack get injured then Markstrom would have to clear waivers to get called up. Highly doubt he goes unclaimed