TheNewGM Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 will demko be protected?? yes I think he will be.. so we keep both. Demko will be RFA still ?.. that means we dont have to protect him ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snapshot85 Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 2 hours ago, janisahockeynut said: There is 6 and a half years difference in age...…..that is a lot of games...…...55 X 6.5...……….approx. 250 games...that is a lot to give up, IMO Let's just wait it out until we see where we are...….at the TDL, which will be his greatest value Markstrom is sure playing well though, isn't he? He is going to want a lot, isn't he? I would think so. I agree with your statement.... however I dont agree with you 100% for me it becomes a case of asset management. My head works like this. Let's say we have 2 similar quality goalies in Marky and Demko one old and one young. If we dont sign and move Marky at the TDL maybe we get a 3rd? Or a 2nd? As a rental I'm thinking a third.... if we cant find a taker we get 0. So in that scenario we will have demko ( Similar quality Goalie younger) + 3rd round pick - 0 . If we sign Marky and trade Demko to a team like I dunno Detroit.... i think we could get a 1st and a blue chip prospect. That's my opinion. So in this scenario we will have Marky ( similar quality goalie older) + top 10 draft pick + blue chip (Joe veleno?). We have obtained significantly more for demko.... maybe even a top 3 pick.....and a blue chip... Marky is still young enough that if we did this there is time to develop another goalie. We can use 2nd round picks or even a late first to draft 1 or 2 sutible prospects... and with the low draft pick and guy like veleno we will have boosted our firepower significantly. Vs only getting a 3rd round pick for Marky as a rental. I think what your suggesting is essentially giving away a valuable asset because of contract situation and the fear of not being able to develop a solid goalie in time. But I believe the assets gained far outweigh the potential risk.. Just my opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 On 10/21/2019 at 9:03 PM, Alflives said: I could see a scenario where Marky is extended after this season's TDL, and we move Demko at the coming draft. If DiPietro lives up to the hopes, that could be the likely outcome... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hindustan Smyl Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 This decision could boil down to Michael Dipietro’s development, and how much confidence management has in him. If the Canucks see Dipietro as being legit, then I think they’ll be more likely to move Demko (to recoup the first that we lost in the Miller deal) as opposed to Markstrom. Dipietro would then be the heir apparent to Markstrom. I think the Canucks will proceed as follows: 1) Markstrom will be signed to a 5 year deal at the end of this year. 2) The Canucks will move one of Markstrom or Demko at the trade deadline next season. The more that Dipietro develops down in the A, the likelier it is that Demko will be the one to be moved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 22 hours ago, Nathancanuck said: If Markstrom keeps playing like this then I would sign him to a 6 years 5.5-6.0 AAV deal (NTC if necessary but no NMC so he could be left unprotected at the expansion Draft) at the end of this season. Next year we play with both Markstrom and Demko and might have the best goalie tandem in the league.. Markstrom in his absolute prime and a more experienced Demko. Then we sign Demko to a similar deal like Markstrom's current deal, something like 2-3 years with 2.5-3.5 AAV. I think as a RFA, and especially if he stays a backup the next 2 years, he can't really demand much more even if he plays stellar in the next 2 years. At the expansion draft we protect Demko and expose Markstrom. Why? Markstom will be almost 32 and he will most likely only have 1 or 2 seasons left at top level. He may still be the better goalie in the 21/22 season but after that it will be Demko for sure. It will also free up 6 million in cap which we need for Pettersson/Hughes. Another reason why I would expose Markstrom is to keep all of our forwards and defensemen, I'm pretty sure we would need to expose a player we would not want to lose. And we need to keep our depth. To find a backup goalie shouldn't be that hard or maybe Dipietro will be ready for NHL backup duties. If a team would offer us a good deal for Markstrom before the expansion draft but after the 20/21 season ended (I want Markstrom for the next 2 years as our starter).. something like a mid first round pick then I would do it and hope they take Myers and his 6 million. Why would you give any player a $6 mill for 5-6 years, if you expect him to be finished in 1-2 years???? Is Eriksson not enough pain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosmo Kramer Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Snapshot85 said: I agree with your statement.... however I dont agree with you 100% for me it becomes a case of asset management. My head works like this. Let's say we have 2 similar quality goalies in Marky and Demko one old and one young. If we dont sign and move Marky at the TDL maybe we get a 3rd? Or a 2nd? As a rental I'm thinking a third.... if we cant find a taker we get 0. So in that scenario we will have demko ( Similar quality Goalie younger) + 3rd round pick - 0 . If we sign Marky and trade Demko to a team like I dunno Detroit.... i think we could get a 1st and a blue chip prospect. That's my opinion. So in this scenario we will have Marky ( similar quality goalie older) + top 10 draft pick + blue chip (Joe veleno?). We have obtained significantly more for demko.... maybe even a top 3 pick.....and a blue chip... Marky is still young enough that if we did this there is time to develop another goalie. We can use 2nd round picks or even a late first to draft 1 or 2 sutible prospects... and with the low draft pick and guy like veleno we will have boosted our firepower significantly. Vs only getting a 3rd round pick for Marky as a rental. I think what your suggesting is essentially giving away a valuable asset because of contract situation and the fear of not being able to develop a solid goalie in time. But I believe the assets gained far outweigh the potential risk.. Just my opinion You have posted this hopeful return for Demko a couple times now. I have to disagree here, Our own Cory Schneider returned the highest ever draft pick for a goalie in a trade, and it was straight up. As others have mentioned. He was far more proven, more years in the league, bigger sample size. Demko is going to return as good of a pick, and a top prospect? It's just very unlikely, especially in a time where goalies are going for less and less it would seem. A mid to late first at best, if he performs as we all hope, with no extra prospects, is more realistic. I would rather sign and trade Markstrom if Demko performs that well I think. Haven't broken down the big picture of who we will have to expose yet beyond goalies, is exposing Markstrom and risking losing him, but saving another player of ours, more valuable than anyone we could bring in from trading him? Main point here, Neither goalie is getting Detroit first and a top prospect. Especially not with Stevie Y running the ship there. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 4 hours ago, TheNewGM said: will demko be protected?? yes I think he will be.. so we keep both. Demko will be RFA still ?.. that means we dont have to protect him ? Nope - he’s played enough pro games in the AHL and NHL to require protection ... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, spook007 said: Why would you give any player a $6 mill for 5-6 years, if you expect him to be finished in 1-2 years???? Is Eriksson not enough pain? Well Bobrovsky just got 10 x 8...no he’s no Bob but he is definitely earning a raise....don’t see any issue with signing him for four or five years - we could have a Bower/Thomas situation on our hands. Some of the best goaltending ever occurred in players 30’s I’m not worried, and so far he’s been pretty durable too. With Demko no need to play him 60 plus games either. Hoping we can sign him for 5-5.5 x 3-4 but that might not work. There will definitely be some interest in the open market if this really is he new and improved Markstrom - he’s played on some of the worst Canuck teams ever and managed decent stats - he’s better AND the teams getting better, could push him into another level entirely. At the end of the day we might trade him, we might sign and expose him, we might trade Demko and we might just protect both guys and leave another forward exposed. Edited October 23, 2019 by IBatch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hindustan Smyl Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 When the time comes, 1) The Canucks need to commit to Markstrom. 2) The Canucks need to take a calculated gamble that Dipietro will be able to successfully take the reigns from Markstrom in the future. 3) The Canucks need to trade Demko as to losing him to Seattle during the expansion draft. -Monitor Dipietro’s development -Continue to draft goalies between now and when Vancouver and Markstrom parts ways with one another 4-5 years from now. We absolutely CANNOT let superstar goalie Markstrom go. Yes, he’ll be on the wrong side of 30, but moving on from him presents far too many risks. Keep Markstrom, move Demko when the time comes, monitor Dipietro’s development, continue drafting goalies over these next 5 years. Final answer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snapshot85 Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 2 hours ago, Kosmo Kramer said: You have posted this hopeful return for Demko a couple times now. I have to disagree here, Our own Cory Schneider returned the highest ever draft pick for a goalie in a trade, and it was straight up. As others have mentioned. He was far more proven, more years in the league, bigger sample size. Demko is going to return as good of a pick, and a top prospect? It's just very unlikely, especially in a time where goalies are going for less and less it would seem. A mid to late first at best, if he performs as we all hope, with no extra prospects, is more realistic. I would rather sign and trade Markstrom if Demko performs that well I think. Haven't broken down the big picture of who we will have to expose yet beyond goalies, is exposing Markstrom and risking losing him, but saving another player of ours, more valuable than anyone we could bring in from trading him? Main point here, Neither goalie is getting Detroit first and a top prospect. Especially not with Stevie Y running the ship there. Yes.. you disagreed with me before on this.... like I said the situation under where snider's got traded was very unique.... both goalies like being here.... no ones demanding a trade... I think you valuation on return for demko is way to low. Ye schnider went for a top 10 pick... do you believe demko to be inferior I believe them to be same caliber...the diffrence is schnider demanded a trade and wanted out of VAN NOW because Kessler was banging his wife/girlfriend the rest of the league knew van was in a pinch. This is just not the case with Demko and Markstrom. Not to mention... if you look at the nhl right now there are a few teams really In need of a goalie to be competative. We traded schnider to New Jersey who still had brodeaur ( how is that a goalie problem ) in order for schnider to learn and take over for the legend. I wouldnt call this a goalie crisis and such was a opportunistic pickup on vancouver for minimum. Maybe we wouldnt get 1st plus Valeno.. but a 1st and a good prospect sure! We can always sign Marky and move Demko when the right deal comes along so we can get proper value... Just my opinion 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, IBatch said: Well Bobrovsky just got 10 x 8...no he’s no Bob but he is definitely earning a raise....don’t see any issue with signing him for four or five years - we could have a Bower/Thomas situation on our hands. Some of the best goaltending ever occurred in players 30’s I’m not worried, and so far he’s been pretty durable too. With Demko no need to play him 60 plus games either. Hoping we can sign him for 5-5.5 x 3-4 but that might not work. There will definitely be some interest in the open market if this really is he new and improved Markstrom - he’s played on some of the worst Canuck teams ever and managed decent stats - he’s better AND the teams getting better, could push him into another level entirely. At the end of the day we might trade him, we might sign and expose him, we might trade Demko and we might just protect both guys and leave another forward exposed. I totally agree and think you misunderstood what I was saying... The post I responded to said you'd give him a 5-6 year contract at 6 million each year, and further down the poster stated Markstrom would only be ok for another 1-2 years.... Hence my question, if you expect any player only to be ok for another 1-2 years, why would you sign him for 5-6 and 6mill each... Nobody would sign a player to a 5-6 year contract, especially at those numbers, if you don't expect them to be able to play more then a season or two at that level... I'm totally onboard with extending Markstrom for 4-6 years at 5-6 mill/year.... He has totally won me over. Last time we saw this stellar tending was Miller.. and Marky looks even better... And I totally believe he will be able to sustain this level the next 4 years at least depending on staying injury free... Edited October 23, 2019 by spook007 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathancanuck Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 9 hours ago, spook007 said: Why would you give any player a $6 mill for 5-6 years, if you expect him to be finished in 1-2 years???? Is Eriksson not enough pain? I don't expect him to be finished. Still a good goalie just not as good as now or Demko will be at that point. I would give him the term so that Seattle might not want him, then if we wouldn't need him anymore in 3-5 years we can still move him for a 4th.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosmo Kramer Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 6 hours ago, Snapshot85 said: Yes.. you disagreed with me before on this.... like I said the situation under where snider's got traded was very unique.... both goalies like being here.... no ones demanding a trade... I think you valuation on return for demko is way to low. Ye schnider went for a top 10 pick... do you believe demko to be inferior I believe them to be same caliber...the diffrence is schnider demanded a trade and wanted out of VAN NOW because Kessler was banging his wife/girlfriend the rest of the league knew van was in a pinch. This is just not the case with Demko and Markstrom. Not to mention... if you look at the nhl right now there are a few teams really In need of a goalie to be competative. We traded schnider to New Jersey who still had brodeaur ( how is that a goalie problem ) in order for schnider to learn and take over for the legend. I wouldnt call this a goalie crisis and such was a opportunistic pickup on vancouver for minimum. Maybe we wouldnt get 1st plus Valeno.. but a 1st and a good prospect sure! We can always sign Marky and move Demko when the right deal comes along so we can get proper value... Just my opinion While no one is demanding a trade, their is a deadline on making a deal with the expansion draft coming. Overly optimistic but Demko could be better than Schneids, minimum just as good, I agree he should have great value. They knew Brodeur was retiring and had nothing in the system behind him, some would say they saw the problem coming. We should sign Marky and wait for the right deal to come along, I just don't know which goalie should be moving out yet. Or if losing a goalie at the draft, will help us protect an even more important player within. I haven't broken down who needs protection yet. I don't disagree with your thought process, only the estimated return. I would be happy to be wrong here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timråfan Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 Give Marky a 7 to 8 million for 4 years and protect Demko. Seattle will think twice before taking that contract and if they do we have a lot of cap space. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oregon.Duck Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 55 minutes ago, Timråfan said: Give Marky a 7 to 8 million for 4 years and protect Demko. Seattle will think twice before taking that contract and if they do we have a lot of cap space. I'll be the first to say Marky is our MVP, but he's no $8M goaltender. Not many of them are 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 59 minutes ago, Timråfan said: Give Marky a 7 to 8 million for 4 years and protect Demko. Seattle will think twice before taking that contract and if they do we have a lot of cap space. 4 years bring him to 34. Doubt he wants to sign for that short term - would expect him to look for longer term. Teams are going to come calling the way he is playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hindustan Smyl Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 5 hours ago, Timråfan said: Give Marky a 7 to 8 million for 4 years and protect Demko. Seattle will think twice before taking that contract and if they do we have a lot of cap space. That’s not a bad idea (actually, I think that’s quite creative on your part). Unfortunately, the Canucks are going to be facing a cap crunch within the next few years and so I’m not sure if they’d be able to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted October 25, 2019 Author Share Posted October 25, 2019 I wouldn't move Demko in the HOPES that the smaller sized Dipietro can continue to develop and be an NHL regular G. It is too early to tell, I think Demko might get a new contract in the Murray/Binnington range or the older John Gibson deal with some inflation or our Cory Schneider deal we gave he. anyone know how many years Demko has after next season before he becomes a UFA? Singn Marky to a short term extension imo and leave him exposed for the picking to Seattle if/hopefully Demko shows he can be a #1 G. Not a chance JB trades Marky this TDL even if he ends up losing him for nothing JB is going all out for the Playoffs. Moving Marking as a soon to be UFA near the draft won't get too much, you would have to make it a sign and trade to get a bit more of a return. Interesting decision to be made leading up to UFA 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted November 16, 2019 Author Share Posted November 16, 2019 I know its an unpopular choice to discuss trading Markstrom, but would we do so if we could move LE with him and still get something decent back? NJD- might be in a win now mode to try keep Hall ( I think he walks as a UFA personally if not dealt at TDL) But maybe Shero goes all in to try keep him? To the Devils Markstrom- pending ufa 3.66m ( NJD lock him up to new deal) Eriksson- 6m x 3 years To Canucks Miles Wood- 2.75m x 3 years Schneider- 6m x 3 years Conditional 1st round pick- leave the details of that to the NHL GM's to come up with( My thoughts are pick is 2021 or 2022) We will like to have an extra pick like that in a 2-3 years time to dangle in a trade or to just make that extra selection when the time comes. In essence, we gain a youngish 24 year old LW who has a decent skill set, dump LE and gain a veteran back up with former ties here. LE and CS are both kind of a wash, but at least it gives us an NHL G back with experience. I know Schneids has fallen off quite a bit, but I have always liked him and feel he might be a good mentor for Demko and be able to provide 25-35 games a year still Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supermanbieksa Posted November 19, 2019 Share Posted November 19, 2019 (edited) It is a really tricky situation, but it semes like Markström is in the beginning of his prime, and I think he could keep playing at this level for another four years at least. So I think we should try to sign him to a 4-6 year deal @ circa 5,5-6 which I think is reasonable. Then Demko will be able to develop this year and next year as well and we could have a situation similiar to the Luongo and Schneider situiation, where we have two number one goalies.Then one of them can probably be dealt at the draft in 2021. At this time, both will probably have a high value, and they could be dealt to whoever needs a goalie at the time for potentially a 1st rounder or more depending on how they have performed. If Markström is able to maintain this level of play it would not scare away anyone from taking that contract for three years, and if Demko can get ca 80 games until then with good numbers there will be an interest for him as well. During this time we will see how DiPietro progress as well, and his numbers so far looks very promising and he could then step in as back-up to whoever is decided to be our number one. Even if it is a tricky situation, it really is a luxury few teams have. Should add that I haven't really considered the expansion draft and protection rules in this analysis Edited November 19, 2019 by supermanbieksa Forgot to add the last part 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now