Sign in to follow this  
StealthNuck

Jacob Markstrom | #25 | G

Recommended Posts

Any update on the knee? Espn fantasy switched his status to Day to Day this morning which forced me to take him off IR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rypien=hero said:

Any update on the knee? Espn fantasy switched his status to Day to Day this morning which forced me to take him off IR.

Guy at work was saying that. I haven't seen anything. Makes me think it's just typical espn suck

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else see this:

 

https://blackhawkup.com/2020/03/26/blackhawks-free-agent-goalie-options-offseason/

 

I'm sure it's just some amateur blogger in his momma's basement but if he's thinking of poaching our guy (everyone calm down, I know signing ufa's is perfectly legal) then surely people with actual hockey credibility and real NHL jobs are thinking it too.  Yeah, I laughed too at the part where he suggests......well, I'll let you read the funny parts on you're own.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/28/2020 at 11:33 AM, PlanB said:

  Yeah, I laughed too at the part where he suggests......well, I'll let you read the funny parts on you're own.

Lol......he thinks they'll low-ball a contract and sign Marky to backup Craw...... that literally made me lol.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/28/2020 at 11:33 AM, PlanB said:

Anyone else see this:

 

https://blackhawkup.com/2020/03/26/blackhawks-free-agent-goalie-options-offseason/

 

I'm sure it's just some amateur blogger in his momma's basement but if he's thinking of poaching our guy (everyone calm down, I know signing ufa's is perfectly legal) then surely people with actual hockey credibility and real NHL jobs are thinking it too.  Yeah, I laughed too at the part where he suggests......well, I'll let you read the funny parts on you're own.

Hahahahahahaha!!!!!!

This guy's got to be joking. If he's not, he needs to be fired, as clearly he's got no credibility..

He thinks Marky's going to sign anywhere to be a backup?

Personally, I believe he gets more like 6 to be a starter, anywhere else but Chicago apparently.

I'm hoping we get a bit of a discount but, at his age he's going to be looking to cash in, and; Who can blame him?

I can totally see a team (maybe even us) sign him to a max 7 yr deal at 6 mil.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve suggested previously that the Canucks should try to sign Marky to a one year deal, making him a UFA heading into expansion, allowing them to protect Demko and then re-sign Markstorm after the expansion draft. There’d still be a risk of Seattle being allowed to negotiate with Markstrom during the expansion draft free agency window, but I doubt Marky actually chooses to sign with an expansion club, especially if he knows the Canucks have a deal waiting for him.

 

The only problem with this plan, in the past, was: what was in it for Markstrom? The Canucks have lots to gain, but for Marky, this is his chance to cash in on a long term deal with a high AAV. Why would he accept a one year deal?

 

And then along came COVID-19 and all the financial uncertainty and it’s effect on the cap, and salaries, both next season, and moving forward.

 

I suspect that teams will be rethinking the offers they planned to be extending to this year’s crop of free agents. Certainly, in terms of percentage of cap, contracts will be lower than anyone was predicting a few months ago. Probably not the market for players to be locking in long term. It might actually be beneficial to take a one year deal, and then negotiate the big contract once we’re (hopefully) back to business as usual in a year.

 

So what seemed unlikely before (signing Marky for a one year deal), now seems like good business, and for both sides. Canucks get to keep both Markstrom and Demko (and without having to pay Seattle assets so they don’t pick one of them). Marky delays his big contract a year, but likely makes significantly more money doing so than he would if he locked in long term at today’s prices.

 

Winner winner chicken dinner?

 

Anyway, just couldn’t sleep and wanted to jot down my thoughts. Hopefully this will help quiet my brain so I can get to sleep.


Hope I’m making sense. I’m very tired. :bored:

  • Huggy Bear 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

I’ve suggested previously that the Canucks should try to sign Marky to a one year deal, making him a UFA heading into expansion, allowing them to protect Demko and then re-sign Markstorm after the expansion draft. There’d still be a risk of Seattle being allowed to negotiate with Markstrom during the expansion draft free agency window, but I doubt Marky actually chooses to sign with an expansion club, especially if he knows the Canucks have a deal waiting for him.

 

The only problem with this plan, in the past, was: what was in it for Markstrom? The Canucks have lots to gain, but for Marky, this is his chance to cash in on a long term deal with a high AAV. Why would he accept a one year deal?

 

And then along came COVID-19 and all the financial uncertainty and it’s effect on the cap, and salaries, both next season, and moving forward.

 

I suspect that teams will be rethinking the offers they planned to be extending to this year’s crop of free agents. Certainly, in terms of percentage of cap, contracts will be lower than anyone was predicting a few months ago. Probably not the market for players to be locking in long term. It might actually be beneficial to take a one year deal, and then negotiate the big contract once we’re (hopefully) back to business as usual in a year.

 

So what seemed unlikely before (signing Marky for a one year deal), now seems like good business, and for both sides. Canucks get to keep both Markstrom and Demko (and without having to pay Seattle assets so they don’t pick one of them). Marky delays his big contract a year, but likely makes significantly more money doing so than he would if he locked in long term at today’s prices.

 

Winner winner chicken dinner?

 

Anyway, just couldn’t sleep and wanted to jot down my thoughts. Hopefully this will help quiet my brain so I can get to sleep.


Hope I’m making sense. I’m very tired. :bored:

Still unlikely IMO but you're right, there's at least potential for it anyway.

 

Canucks can also rightly point to the knee injury as another reason to test waters with a shorter term. They'll want to make sure he and it are tested before committing longer term. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Still unlikely IMO but you're right, there's at least potential for it anyway.

 

Canucks can also rightly point to the knee injury as another reason to test waters with a shorter term. They'll want to make sure he and it are tested before committing longer term. 

Well if I am Markstrom the potetntial of injury - especially career ending or altering - is the reason I want term at this stage of my career.  He has earned a sizeable payday and will potetntially risk much by taking a one year deal. I don't see why he would if he can get term and dollars.  He will be 31 next year his opportunity is now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Borvat said:

Well if I am Markstrom the potetntial of injury - especially career ending or altering - is the reason I want term at this stage of my career.  He has earned a sizeable payday and will potetntially risk much by taking a one year deal. I don't see why he would if he can get term and dollars.  He will be 31 next year his opportunity is now.

Oh, I agree that's what he'll want (and as I noted, it is still unlikely he'll only sign one year). But similar to what we saw with Ferland last year, teams weren't interested in offering him the $5x5 he was reportedly looking for. In his case, Ferland got close to his desired term but took a sizeable hit on the $$.

 

What Markstrom wants isn't the entire picture.

 

All I'm suggesting is that his knee is some actual ammo in the Canucks favour on keeping term lower. Whether that's one year or two or three or four or...? we'll just have to wait and see. And again, I'm doubtful it's one. But the cap/Covid and his knee DO both help the Canuck's/hurt Markstrom' case in that direction.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Sure hope the Canucks do leverage the injury to give him a "show me you can stay healthy" deal and whittle down both cost and term.  The one-year deal with big cap hit and promise to re-sign after the expansion would be optimal.  However, the crease is still Marky's to lose and the team knows how important he is to their success so I hope no one freaks out if he gets like $8 million for one year as he's giving up aav for a bigger payout (Rask and Rinne each have $7 - $7.5 million cap and that's because they signed longer term deals) 

 

Also TD better step up his game in the long term since, once the big contract is handed out, it'll be years before Jacob would likely be dethroned and Thatcher's chances of getting moved would become higher if he starts to price himself out.    

Edited by Phil_314

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

I’ve suggested previously that the Canucks should try to sign Marky to a one year deal, making him a UFA heading into expansion, allowing them to protect Demko and then re-sign Markstorm after the expansion draft. There’d still be a risk of Seattle being allowed to negotiate with Markstrom during the expansion draft free agency window, but I doubt Marky actually chooses to sign with an expansion club, especially if he knows the Canucks have a deal waiting for him.

 

The only problem with this plan, in the past, was: what was in it for Markstrom? The Canucks have lots to gain, but for Marky, this is his chance to cash in on a long term deal with a high AAV. Why would he accept a one year deal?

 

And then along came COVID-19 and all the financial uncertainty and it’s effect on the cap, and salaries, both next season, and moving forward.

 

I suspect that teams will be rethinking the offers they planned to be extending to this year’s crop of free agents. Certainly, in terms of percentage of cap, contracts will be lower than anyone was predicting a few months ago. Probably not the market for players to be locking in long term. It might actually be beneficial to take a one year deal, and then negotiate the big contract once we’re (hopefully) back to business as usual in a year.

 

So what seemed unlikely before (signing Marky for a one year deal), now seems like good business, and for both sides. Canucks get to keep both Markstrom and Demko (and without having to pay Seattle assets so they don’t pick one of them). Marky delays his big contract a year, but likely makes significantly more money doing so than he would if he locked in long term at today’s prices.

 

Winner winner chicken dinner?

 

Anyway, just couldn’t sleep and wanted to jot down my thoughts. Hopefully this will help quiet my brain so I can get to sleep.


Hope I’m making sense. I’m very tired. :bored:

This plan might be possible now as with the drop of the cap due to this pandemic, FA might want to sign a shorter deal to wait until the economy gets back up before committing to any long term deals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, aGENT said:

Oh, I agree that's what he'll want (and as I noted, it is still unlikely he'll only sign one year). But similar to what we saw with Ferland last year, teams weren't interested in offering him the $5x5 he was reportedly looking for. In his case, Ferland got close to his desired term but took a sizeable hit on the $$.

 

What Markstrom wants isn't the entire picture.

 

All I'm suggesting is that his knee is some actual ammo in the Canucks favour on keeping term lower. Whether that's one year or two or three or four or...? we'll just have to wait and see. And again, I'm doubtful it's one. But the cap/Covid and his knee DO both help the Canuck's/hurt Markstrom' case in that direction.

The Canucks in all likelihood won't be his only - and in your scenario - best option.  As I said he will be wanting to get the best deal for him and his family's future especially turning 31, being a UFA and coming off of his best year ever.  I think your scenario is wishful thinking and if I am his agent I recommend against it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Borvat said:

The Canucks in all likelihood won't be his only - and in your scenario - best option.  As I said he will be wanting to get the best deal for him and his family's future especially turning 31, being a UFA and coming off of his best year ever.  I think your scenario is wishful thinking and if I am his agent I recommend against it.

It's not my scenario :lol:

 

For the third time now, I think it's highly unlikely we get him for one year. It's seems your arguing a point in not trying to make lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Hope I’m making sense. I’m very tired. :bored:

Doesn't seem likely Marky takes a 1 yr deal.

 

If anything, this covid pandemic showed people they need more stability not less.  I doubt it can happen.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.