riffraff Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 On 1/25/2020 at 2:16 AM, JC2 said: Demko would be a downgrade in the short run but I believe he will develop to be at least just as good as Markstrom is now and would be cheaper for longer. The only problem is, with all the progress the team has made, do they really want to potentially take another step back and waste a couple of years that they can retain the core? Such a good debate. For me I see Marky trumping Demko based on the size advantage. no doubt Demko is athletic and is JQuick-esque but Markstrom is very athletic for a big man and his size allows him to battle for his position in the crease when it gets heavy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 27, 2020 Author Share Posted January 27, 2020 3 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said: So Seattle takes him even though they will have better goalie options? 'Better' ignores context of age, contract term/$, side deals made by those other teams, who else may be available on those teams, who else will be available on our team etc, etc, etc... Far too many variables to declare with any certainty of will/won't they take one of our goalies. If we still have both and we expose one, they'll be on a very short list of who to target from Vancouver. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceman64 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 On 1/25/2020 at 2:16 AM, JC2 said: Can we even afford to keep him is the real question here, Petey is not going to be cheap and if Marky wants 7-8 mil a season, not sure we can afford that.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC2 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 32 minutes ago, iceman64 said: Can we even afford to keep him is the real question here, Petey is not going to be cheap and if Marky wants 7-8 mil a season, not sure we can afford that.. I agree that it's going to come down to what Markstrom is willing to accept. Hopefully he doesn't just chase the money and sticks with a team that's on the upswing. The advantage for Benning is that he's not desperate to sign him. Demko might not be as good as Markstrom yet but he's not too much of a downgrade that you handcuff the team by overpaying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 hopefully he's at a point where we can start bringing up our own developed from our own system rather then via trade of free agency. He wants to get this cycle started now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Fingers Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 10 hours ago, riffraff said: Such a good debate. For me I see Marky trumping Demko based on the size advantage. no doubt Demko is athletic and is JQuick-esque but Markstrom is very athletic for a big man and his size allows him to battle for his position in the crease when it gets heavy. Demko has a solid career ahead of him.... but Marky is in the zone and has been for 1 year. The team is om the rise and having both is a luxury worth keeping. With Mikey on the farm, we have a stocked pipeline. In the next 2 years, expansion pending, one will beat out the other. Honestly can make a great case for either. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 9 hours ago, aGENT said: 'Better' ignores context of age, contract term/$, side deals made by those other teams, who else may be available on those teams, who else will be available on our team etc, etc, etc... Far too many variables to declare with any certainty of will/won't they take one of our goalies. If we still have both and we expose one, they'll be on a very short list of who to target from Vancouver. I agree on this. Not sure why Robb is arguing the point so strongly. As of now they easily appear to be at or near the top. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Fingers Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 5 hours ago, iceman64 said: Can we even afford to keep him is the real question here, Petey is not going to be cheap and if Marky wants 7-8 mil a season, not sure we can afford that.. Anything north of 6 is out of the question. 6 year term and he lives a life of wealth and so does his kids. If he wants more... see ya later. Bring in a solid vet to stabilize the crease and let Demko evolve. The salary structure has to be maintained to exit this mess in one piece. Teams that over commit to goalies almost always suffer. Look at Montreal, look at the Loui debacle under MG. We just cannot commit beyond 6m for any player not named Pettersson or Hughes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 11 hours ago, aGENT said: If we still have both and we expose one, they'll be on a very short list of who to target from Vancouver. Says you. I could not agree with you on this at all. That doesn't fit at all with what I believe Seattle will do. We will both find out soon enough but in my opinion, you are reading this all wrong. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 27, 2020 Author Share Posted January 27, 2020 10 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: Says you. I could not agree with you on this at all. That doesn't fit at all with what I believe Seattle will do. We will both find out soon enough but in my opinion, you are reading this all wrong. Cheers! You'll note I didn't say they'd for sure select them, I said they'd be on the short list of players to target out of VAN. You don't agree that SEA would have whichever goalie we expose on that short list...ok... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithers joe Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 14 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: Says you. I could not agree with you on this at all. That doesn't fit at all with what I believe Seattle will do. We will both find out soon enough but in my opinion, you are reading this all wrong. Cheers! what are you thinking seattle will do? how many better goalies will be available? do you think they take a veteran or a young mcewen type? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 48 minutes ago, aGENT said: You'll note I didn't say they'd for sure select them, I said they'd be on the short list of players to target out of VAN. You don't agree that SEA would have whichever goalie we expose on that short list...ok... I don't agree at all. They (SEA) will have better options for that position than the Canucks will be exposing. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 43 minutes ago, smithers joe said: what are you thinking seattle will do? how many better goalies will be available? do you think they take a veteran or a young mcewen type? Joe - it isn't about "better" per se, it is about contract status, leverage, the CAP etc. etc. I think from Vancouver they will take two players - one formally through the draft process and one that Benning will give them in a trade to protect another Canuck that they (Canucks) cannot protect. Of the various scenarios I see playing out, that one has the highest likelihood of occurring. Of course, I am also guessing at draft order and Canuck roster at that point - two parameters that could change considerably between now and then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 27, 2020 Author Share Posted January 27, 2020 3 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: I don't agree at all. They (SEA) will have better options for that position than the Canucks will be exposing. Cheers Sure, arguable if you ignore all those other factors I posted Again, you're oversimplifying and ignoring a LOT of context that could easily affect how 'better' their other options are. It's nothing you can declare as absolute, as your attempting to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 2 minutes ago, aGENT said: It's nothing you can declare as absolute, as your attempting to. Uh, you talking to yourself? There are no absolutes in professional sports but odds are incredibly high that the angst some Canuck fans have over losing a goalie in the expansion draft are far overdone due to the very low likelihood that is how it plays out. Canucks will likely protect Demko and expose a contracted Markstrom that will be too rich for the expansion team in that other options will present themselves with equal/better statistics, shorter term and more flexibility. Added to that the very probable situation that Benning will use his now considerable and enviable depth in the organization, particularly at forward, to strike a deal with Seattle (and why I see Vancouver more than likely losing two players - one by draft, one through the process) that the likelihood is driven even lower. However, you seem to want to continue to have angst over this. Knock yourself out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 27, 2020 Author Share Posted January 27, 2020 1 minute ago, Rob_Zepp said: Uh, you talking to yourself? There are no absolutes in professional sports but odds are incredibly high that the angst some Canuck fans have over losing a goalie in the expansion draft are far overdone due to the very low likelihood that is how it plays out. Canucks will likely protect Demko and expose a contracted Markstrom that will be too rich for the expansion team in that other options will present themselves with equal/better statistics, shorter term and more flexibility. Added to that the very probable situation that Benning will use his now considerable and enviable depth in the organization, particularly at forward, to strike a deal with Seattle (and why I see Vancouver more than likely losing two players - one by draft, one through the process) that the likelihood is driven even lower. However, you seem to want to continue to have angst over this. Knock yourself out! What angst? I'm simply stating a fact that SEA will have whichever goalie we expose, likely a forward or two and a D or two, on the short list of players they will target from VAN and make a choice from there. That's it. That's my point. There's zero 'angst'. There's zero guarantee that the 'better' goalie options you feel are out there will remain 'better'. That will depend heavily on their contract, term, injuries, other players those teams might expose, side deals those teams may make etc, etc, etc. You're laughingly choosing to ignore ALL of that context and rant on about absolutes and nonexistent 'angst'. Fill your boots Rob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 21 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: Uh, you talking to yourself? There are no absolutes in professional sports but odds are incredibly high that the angst some Canuck fans have over losing a goalie in the expansion draft are far overdone due to the very low likelihood that is how it plays out. Canucks will likely protect Demko and expose a contracted Markstrom that will be too rich for the expansion team in that other options will present themselves with equal/better statistics, shorter term and more flexibility. Added to that the very probable situation that Benning will use his now considerable and enviable depth in the organization, particularly at forward, to strike a deal with Seattle (and why I see Vancouver more than likely losing two players - one by draft, one through the process) that the likelihood is driven even lower. However, you seem to want to continue to have angst over this. Knock yourself out! Neither Marky nor Demko will be exposed to Seattle. Demko will be traded at this coming draft to recoup the first we are giving to TBay in the Miller deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 19 minutes ago, aGENT said: Fill your boots Rob I have....with your angst....and that is a FACT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 27, 2020 Author Share Posted January 27, 2020 6 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: I have....with your angst....and that is a FACT! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 57 minutes ago, aGENT said: Sure, arguable if you ignore all those other factors I posted Again, you're oversimplifying and ignoring a LOT of context that could easily affect how 'better' their other options are. It's nothing you can declare as absolute, as your attempting to. I think we can all agree there may be better goalies available. The thing he is missing is that we don't know who else will be available. Say Holtby is available, but they also leave Wilson, Oshie, Ellers, or a young upstart unprotected, they may decide to take Oshie and Markstrom as compared to Lind and Holtby ... there are so many unknowns. For me it would be something like Markstrom Demko Lind Myers Ferland Rousell (1 yr) Beagle (1 yr) Motte (1-2 yr) Dipietro Rafferty Brisebois Gadjovich How he unequivocally dismisses Marky and Demko from that list is beyond me ... I guess based on what he thinks Seattle will do. Because that's pretty easy to figure out ... considering Seattle hasn't even figured it out yet. Anyways if I'm Seattle the only player I seriously consider other than the goalies is Lind, unless they are seriously seeking a 4th line role player in Rousell, Beagle, Motte. 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