Jacob Markstrom | #25 | G

[The Lock]

Just now, lmm said:

How can you not blame your starting goalie when he lets in deflating goals in the first 30 seconds of the game?

I think the first goal creates the second goal. Maybe, (its a big maybe) if Edler trusts his goalie he doesn't make that lame save attempt on goal two.

Because I know it's going to happen anyway. It's expected. The problem isn't going to fix overnight so there's no point in complaining about it. If we had a good team, then I'd be all over it, but we don't.

 

Not only that, as I mentioned earlier, there's no fix at the moment. Let me repeat that. There's NO FIX at the moment. I know some people want us to claim a random goalie off waivers or sign whatever name to the team, but it's not a fix if we don't know it will fix the problem in the first place.

 

So let me ask you a question: what does complaining solve? I'm curious as to what exactly you want to happen that "fixes" the problem.

[captainhorvat]

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

What exactly were you expecting of him? This team wasn't going to be good to begin with. The defense in front of him is extremely lackluster.

 

I don't think he's a good goalie but, right now, almost any goalie would look like trash back there. Don't blame him.

 

The things that some people on this board complain about just baffles me at times. Yeah, let's just magically throw in a good goalie! Problem solved! 

Just make a save once in awhile when we need one. When was the last time u see Markstrom robbing someone? Just be decent hes to inconsistent. The guy cries and complains how badly he hates to lose but cant backup his own game.

[The Lock]

6 minutes ago, captainhorvat said:

Just make a save once in awhile when we need one. When was the last time u see Markstrom robbing someone? Just be decent hes to inconsistent. The guy cries and complains how badly he hates to lose but cant backup his own game.

Okay. Let's throw you in net with no defense in front of you and see how well you do? lol

 

And then afterwards you can talk to the media about how you love losing because why would you say the arbitrary thing that you hear all the time in interview about wanting to win? Pshaw! Winning! Who needs that?

 

It would be kind of weird if Markstrom didn't say he wanted to win don't you think?

Edited October 11, 2018 by The Lock

[lmm]

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

Because I know it's going to happen anyway. It's expected. The problem isn't going to fix overnight so there's no point in complaining about it. If we had a good team, then I'd be all over it, but we don't.

 

Not only that, as I mentioned earlier, there's no fix at the moment. Let me repeat that. There's NO FIX at the moment. I know some people want us to claim a random goalie off waivers or sign whatever name to the team, but it's not a fix if we don't know it will fix the problem in the first place.

 

So let me ask you a question: what does complaining solve? I'm curious as to what exactly you want to happen that "fixes" the problem.

Well this is where the GM does that GM thing and goes out and finds a better goalie.

As I was one hoping a goalie would be claimed, (a D too) and the goalie we lost to was one of those goalies, I have to wonder would the result have been better if we had claimed Curtis McElhinny? I am not one to say that he IS the answer because he is now 35 and may have lost what he once had, but I think he is better than Nilsson and would put preasure on Markstrom to be #1. Miller was better and probably still is.

 

That was a very uninspiring camp, no goalie competition, no D competition and not very much F competition.

The problem that this creates is next year Demko could come in, be better than Markstrom and still be a bad goalie.

Just like beating Gagner for a job, a player is not beating NHL talent.

At least if Jim picked up McElhinny he would have made a statement that his goaltending did not prove enough to keep their job.

He did not do that.

So with Nilsson on a lame duck contract, Demko can see his name on next years roster whether he earns it or not.

 

I am not buying your arguement that " we suck anyway, may as well keep the worst starter ( or goalie tandem) in the league"

My question to you is, " doesn't this situation contribute to complacency?" 

Edited October 11, 2018 by lmm

[CaptKirk888]

6 hours ago, captainhorvat said:

Waive this trash or trade him. Go get miller back.

Or how about this? We get Luongo back

[CaptKirk888]

3 hours ago, Tre Mac said:

I think it's more rust.  I seem to recall these crazy scores at the beginning of last year yet only one player topped 100points.  When players start scoring 50/60 goals and 120+ points then I'll be more incline to believe that scoring is up.

Or it could be the equipment, remember the crazy 80s when goalie pads were as thin as Paterson’s dik and everyone thought less than 30-40 goals was a fail?

 

Edited October 11, 2018 by CaptKirk888
Spelling

[CaptKirk888]

21 minutes ago, lmm said:

Well this is where the GM does that GM thing and goes out and finds a better goalie.

As I was one hoping a goalie would be claimed, (a D too) and the goalie we lost to was one of those goalies, I have to wonder would the result have been better if we had claimed Curtis McElhinny? I am not one to say that he IS the answer because he is now 35 and may have lost what he once had, but I think he is better than Nilsson and would put preasure on Markstrom to be #1. Miller was better and probably still is.

 

That was a very uninspiring camp, no goalie competition, no D competition and not very much F competition.

The problem that this creates is next year Demko could come in, be better than Markstrom and still be a bad goalie.

Just like beating Gagner for a job, a player is not beating NHL talent.

At least if Jim picked up McElhinny he would have made a statement that his goaltending did not prove enough to keep their job.

He did not do that.

So with Nilsson on a lame duck contract, Demko can see his name on next years roster whether he earns it or not.

 

I am not buying your arguement that " we suck anyway, may as well keep the worst starter ( or goalie tandem) in the league"

My question to you is, " doesn't this situation contribute to complacency?" 

So the solution is to claim a goalie off waivers, who could’nt make the cut for the team that has him, because he will be much better than Markstrom? How about we trade Bo for, I don’ know, um, Schneider?

Edited October 11, 2018 by CaptKirk888
Spelling

[The Lock]

22 minutes ago, lmm said:

Well this is where the GM does that GM thing and goes out and finds a better goalie.

As I was one hoping a goalie would be claimed, 9a D too) and the goalie we lost to was one of those goalies, I have to wonder would the result have been better if we had claimed Curtis McElhinny? I am not one to say that he IS the answer because he is now 35 and may have lost what he once had, but I think he is better than Nilsson and would put preasure on Markstrom to be #1. Miller was better and probably still is.

 

That was a very uninspiring camp, no goalie competition, no D competition and not very much F competition.

The problem that this creates is next year Demko could come in, be better than Markstrom and still be a bad goalie.

Just like beating Gagner for a job, a player is not beating NHL talent.

At least if Jim picked up McElhinny he would have made a statement that his goaltending did not prove enough to keep their job.

He did not do that.

So with Nilsson on a lame duck contract, Demko can see his name on next years roster whether he earns it or not.

 

I am not buying your arguement that " we suck anyway, may as well keep the worst starter ( or goalie tandem) in the league"

My question to you is, " doesn't this situation contribute to complacency?" 

The problem I have with this is this pretty much supports my previous posts.

 

1) "Find a better goalie" = "magically fix the problem". It's not that simple. If it was, don't you think that would have happened already?

 

2) It's easy to ponder if x goalie would be better than our situation now; however, the problem is we don't know and, like I said earlier, with the defense we have, do you really think McElhinney is going to be any better seeing 35 shots per game average? And this is only after 3 games without injuries on defense. What's that shot total going to look like when we get injuries?

 

3) What competition were you expecting? Like I've said over and over, we have no defense. We don't have a good team. Why would there be competition at the moment? (aside from merely holding onto a roster spot)

 

4) This doesn't create any problem for Demko. If he's not ready next year, he can still spend another year in the AHL next year. It's not hard to sign another backup goalie at that point or (the horror) sign Nilsson to one more year. If he is ready, I would be more concerned about our defense than Markstrom. That would be the real issue, so I don't even see how complaining about Markstrom has anything to do with Demko. Demko's not being rushed clearly, otherwise he would be up here now with the same crappy defense.

 

5) Gagner was beat out of a job so I don't know if I'm reading that sentence.... correctly?....

 

6) Picking up McElhinney, a backup goalie, doesn't really make much of a statement in my opinion. A backup goalie to replace a backup goalie....um... yay? I guess I just see it as an unnecessary sideways movement. We have just as much of a chance of Markstrom getting better as we do McElhinney being any better.

 

7) To answer your question: Right now, we are at the bottom of the league in terms of expectations; therefore, why should we be critical? Solving our goalie situation doesn't help us at the moment; let alone unlikely to even be possible as I mentioned earlier. We have Demko in the prospect pool. We even have Dipietro in the pool.  Our solution is down the road. Not now. So, again, why complain?

 

You say you're not "buying" my argument, but I haven't really seen anything here that really any better than what we have. I'm not convinced on McElhinney or other waived goalies, especially when the likelihood of this getting fixed in a year or 2 is pretty good.

Edited October 11, 2018 by The Lock

[The Lock]

15 minutes ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Or how about this? We get Luongo back

Wow... this actually made me do a spittake.

 

Thanks for making me laugh at least. 

[BlastPast]

Personally, while he hasn't looked sharp the last 2 games I'm going to hold off calling for his head until he's faced 500 shots. This represents ~15 games which given Nilsson gets a few starts I would think comes sometime in mid November . If he's still sub .900 then I think eyebrows can get raised.

[Dannydog]

1 hour ago, lmm said:

How can you not blame your starting goalie when he lets in deflating goals in the first 30 seconds of the game?

I think the first goal creates the second goal. Maybe, (its a big maybe) if Edler trusts his goalie he doesn't make that lame save attempt on goal two.

Absolutely. Even add in the opposition not having to put anyone screening Marky because Eddy has that covered to. Marky can really make that 6' 6" frame look small when he balls up in that butterfly.

[canuckledraggin]

I think the way Marky is playing is improved since the goalie coaching change. He is far more active in net and many of his goals against of the deflection variety, would have gone in against any goalie in the world. It's easy to criticize after 3 games, but I think he is playing an improved game in spite of the results.

[The Lock]

26 minutes ago, canuckledraggin said:

I think the way Marky is playing is improved since the goalie coaching change. He is far more active in net and many of his goals against of the deflection variety, would have gone in against any goalie in the world. It's easy to criticize after 3 games, but I think he is playing an improved game in spite of the results.

Not to mention a lot of the goals have been from the defense pretty much handing over scoring lanes on a silver platter. All we need to do now is get the defense to score on our own net and being at the bottom will be complete!

 

EDIT: Do they allow lawnchairs on the ice? If so, we could give them front row seats. 

Edited October 11, 2018 by The Lock

[canuckledraggin]

20 minutes ago, The Lock said:

Not to mention a lot of the goals have been from the defense pretty much handing over scoring lanes on a silver platter. All we need to do now is get the defense to score on our own net and being at the bottom will be complete!

 

EDIT: Do they allow lawnchairs on the ice? If so, we could give them front row seats. 

It's a team game and the team needs to tighten up. Marky can and will play better. .500 hockey is where this team should end up and Marky will end up a casualty of this team.

[JeremyCuddles]

Obviously, the super aggressive style defense is being asked to play is costing us in a big way defensively. Although, I think this team has just been bad at taking care of the puck. Marky has let in a good many softies, but the team gives up a lot of 2 on 1s, 2 on 0s etc. Forwards need to cover for the defense better when they inevitably make an aggressive pinch. And the defense needs to do a better job of actually succeeding in their pinches. Marky will hopefully start to clean up those softies as the year goes on. Seems like a good few goalies are known for slow starts.

[The Lock]

4 minutes ago, canuckledraggin said:

It's a team game and the team needs to tighten up. Marky can and will play better. .500 hockey is where this team should end up and Marky will end up a casualty of this team.

I don't doubt he will given his last 3 seasons were better than the 3 games he's played. We can even do some math with this...

 

So the last 3 seasons = 117 games played at a 0.912 save percentage average.

So then the last 3 games we are complaining about of 120 games total is 2.5%

 

Sure, he had some bad games of those 117, but the point is that 3 games into the season and Markstrom being less of a goalie than usual and we're ALREADY complaining. lol

[CaptKirk888]

13 minutes ago, The Lock said:

I don't doubt he will given his last 3 seasons were better than the 3 games he's played. We can even do some math with this...

 

So the last 3 seasons = 117 games played at a 0.912 save percentage average.

So then the last 3 games we are complaining about of 120 games total is 2.5%

 

Sure, he had some bad games of those 117, but the point is that 3 games into the season and Markstrom being less of a goalie than usual and we're ALREADY complaining. lol

Regardless of Marky Marks performance so far, I have enjoyed every game! Win or lose, when is the last time we have seen the Nucks score at a 4 goal average per game. I’m Loving it (thank you McDonalds).

Edited October 11, 2018 by CaptKirk888

[captainhorvat]

2 hours ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Or how about this? We get Luongo back

Yea im down...give them markstrom back. I do that deal in a heartbeat.

[CaptKirk888]

1 minute ago, captainhorvat said:

Yea im down...give them markstrom back. I do that deal in a heartbeat.

Sykwalker, joking I was. But even an injured Lou might be better!

[The Lock]

4 minutes ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Sykwalker, joking I was. But even an injured Lou might be better!

Maybe Lou wants a lawnchair....