Jacob Markstrom | #25 | G

[aliboy]

If they sign Marky to a 2 year deal, would he get claimed? Why would they claim him when they only get 1 year? If it's a longer term deal he likely ends up in Seattle and might prefer to be in control of his own destiny, pick another team that can win. So, if he wants a longer term deal they would have to know they can pay a price to protect him, otherwise it will be tough to make this work.

[aGENT]

26 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

Edler was coming off a big money contract though. Different in Marky's case as this is likely his last chance to sign a big money contract.  Don't see him offering much (if any) of a discount (even in light of today's cap environment).

 

Probably end up unfortunately being a cap casualty.  And Demko's post-season performance I think pretty much sealed that.

Marky is going to need to decide whether he wants to make really good money for the young, talent loaded team he is close with, that was patient with him, and hired arguably the best goalie coach in the world etc... Or make great money elsewhere.

 

I don't think it's as cut and dry as your post indicates. (And not to say it can't or won't end up that way).

 

Either way, the 'they're not close' media reports are the same 'agent using the media to negotiate' as any other time we have a big free agent due an extension. And most of the time, the player ends up signed. It's really very little indication of what will actually happen.

Edited September 7, 2020 by aGENT

[Rush17]

5 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Marky is going to need to decide whether he wants to make really good money for the young, talent loaded team he is close with, that was patient with him, and hired arguably the best goalie coach in the world etc... Or make great money elsewhere.

 

I don't think it's as cut and dry as your post indicates. (And not to say it can't or won't end up that way).

 

Either way, the 'they're not close' media reports are the same 'agent using the media to negotiate' as any other time we have a big free agent due an extension. And most of the time, the player ends up signed. It's really very little indication of what will actually happen.

I would be worried his game might fall off without our goalie coach. He has credited his goalie coach for saving his game. Can he stay the same tender with another voice trying to change his game? Can he stay on his game without his go to coach that saved his career?

[Squamfan]

Seems Like he was fine.

 

 

[JM_]

34 minutes ago, Squamfan said:

Seems Like he was fine.

 

 

 

the only thing that bothers me about that is some portion of my season ticket money went to Sam Gagner's boat house. 

 

[-DLC-]

1 hour ago, Squamfan said:

Seems Like he was fine.

 

 

Groin injuries only really impact ad/abductors and this would be doable even if the groin was tweaked.  But good to see him in fine form!  He deserves some fun...he's busted his tail for us all season.

[-DLC-]

 

[JM_]

46 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

 

interesting. So Marky 1st, then I'd guess Tanev and then Toffoli if they can clear some cap. 

Edited September 8, 2020 by Robert Long

[Nucker 67]

Hmm, makes me wonder what the plan is for Demko then. Markstrom will be 31 in January, how many great years does he have left? 

 

I hope that when they re-sign Marky, there isn't a NTC or NMC included, but, if a player does have a NMC in their contract, does that make them exempt from the SEA expansion draft?

 

E.g.

Re-sign Markstrom for 3 years at $5.5 and give him a NMC

Protect Demko

 

Not sure they would, but can they do this?

[mll]

5 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Hmm, makes me wonder what the plan is for Demko then. Markstrom will be 31 in January, how many great years does he have left? 

 

I hope that when they re-sign Marky, there isn't a NTC or NMC included, but, if a player does have a NMC in their contract, does that make them exempt from the SEA expansion draft?

 

E.g.

Re-sign Markstrom for 3 years at $5.5 and give him a NMC

Protect Demko

 

Not sure they would, but can they do this?

A NMC requires that the player is protected and uses up a protection spot.  There is no additional spot available.  IE a NMC to Markstrom guarantees that he is the only goalie protected and that Demko gets exposed.

[JM_]

15 minutes ago, mll said:

A NMC requires that the player is protected and uses up a protection spot.  There is no additional spot available.  IE a NMC to Markstrom guarantees that he is the only goalie protected and that Demko gets exposed.

I can see Marky getting a full NTC but not expansion protection. No one on the team has it. 

[Provost]

I would be amazed if we can swing a deal that doesn’t include a NMC for expansion.  It would mean that there would be no discount in terms of AAV or term because he wouldn’t give that up just to risk being exposed.

 

If Benning managed a deal that pays less than $6 million per year and has 4 or fewer years term AND doesn’t include a NMC for expansion, I would certainly tip my hat to him.  I just don’t see it happening, at least not before Markstrom gets to check out the offers in free agency.

 

This is also a funny UFA year when agents will likely try to backload salaries rather than front load them.  Money paid 4 years from now is going to be subject to far less escrow than money paid this year.

Edited September 8, 2020 by Provost

[JeremyCuddles]

Keeping Marky almost feels like it'll cost us Demko. Is Marky gonna sign a good deal for us if we aren't gonna protect him? I guess he can find solace in the fact even if he gets drafted by Seattle he's still on the west coast. But still. Something tells me he's gonna want draft protection. This is the most interesting contract to watch for this season.

 

We need a expansion eligible goalie, so we can't really let Marky go or trade Demko. Since I don't think DiPietro is eligible. And I don't see Domingue staying to backup DiPietro in the AHL. Do we still have Bachman?

[aGENT]

40 minutes ago, N7Nucks said:

Keeping Marky almost feels like it'll cost us Demko. Is Marky gonna sign a good deal for us if we aren't gonna protect him? I guess he can find solace in the fact even if he gets drafted by Seattle he's still on the west coast. But still. Something tells me he's gonna want draft protection. This is the most interesting contract to watch for this season.

 

We need a expansion eligible goalie, so we can't really let Marky go or trade Demko. Since I don't think DiPietro is eligible. And I don't see Domingue staying to backup DiPietro in the AHL. Do we still have Bachman?

Hence why I think either Marky walks, or we trade Demko this offseason. Either way, we sign a vet to backup for whoever is left and expose that guy (who won't likely be a risk).

Edited September 8, 2020 by aGENT

[Provost]

Rumour is Lehner is going to sign a contract with Vegas at about $5 million per year for 5 years.
 

If that is the case, that reduces the market price for Markstrom’s contract I would think.  Lehner wants stability and term so may sign for a discount,  but similarly If Markstrom wants to stay he needs to leave a little on the table compared with the absolute max he could get on the open market.

 

I would sign Markstrom at a $5x5 and give him the NMC for expansion, but no trade protection afterwards.  That cements him as our starter but also gives us an out later on if DiPietro is ready before the end of that contract.

[mll]

Per Woodley Canucks were a bottom-5 defensive team this season - they were better in the playoffs.  He doesn't think it's easy to replace Markstrom.  He thinks it's insane to be thinking that Greiss or Khudobin could replace him because Dallas/NYI were top-5 defensive teams and operating in a far easier environment. 

 

Woodley uses CSA Hockey which is probably the most elaborate tracking out there.  They capture context of every play sequence that leads to a shot on goal.  It's not just shot location but the whole play that gets analysed such as number of screens, passing plays.

 

[JM_]

1 hour ago, mll said:

Per Woodley Canucks were a bottom-5 defensive team this season - they were better in the playoffs.  He doesn't think it's easy to replace Markstrom.  He thinks it's insane to be thinking that Greiss or Khudobin could replace him because Dallas/NYI were top-5 defensive teams and operating in a far easier environment. 

 

its funny, over on HF boards there's a poll where 85% of them want this option 

 

But it may be out of our hands if Marky wants to go for as much $ as he can, and its hard to blame these guys given how short their careers are, we might be forced into a new goalie tandem. 

[aGENT]

7 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

its funny, over on HF boards there's a poll where 85% of them want this option 

 

But it may be out of our hands if Marky wants to go for as much $ as he can, and its hard to blame these guys given how short their careers are, we might be forced into a new goalie tandem. 

Plus I'd imagine the predominate thinking is that a 1 year older, more experienced Demko would be 'replacing' him. Greiss, or whoever, would be replacing this past year's green Demko.

 

And as the quote and you both note, we don't exist in a perfect world. Between Marky possibly (and understandably) wanting to cash in, flat covid cap, the Seattle ED, etc, etc, we may simply have no choice in the matter.

[mll]

30 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

its funny, over on HF boards there's a poll where 85% of them want this option 

 

But it may be out of our hands if Marky wants to go for as much $ as he can, and its hard to blame these guys given how short their careers are, we might be forced into a new goalie tandem. 

In the Andersen thread I was arguing that the Leafs might be better off improving in goal than trying to fix their defence in one off-season.  

 

The Canucks D needs a fair bit of work.  Is it really worth to walk away when whatever they will save is probably not going to be sufficient to fix the D.  They might be able to bring up prospects (which cost less) because Markstrom is such a wall.  If they have a less reliable goalie, the D needs to be better which could make it harder to give bigger roles to inexperienced players.  

 

[JM_]

16 minutes ago, mll said:

In the Andersen thread I was arguing that the Leafs might be better off improving in goal than trying to fix their defence in one off-season.  

 

The Canucks D needs a fair bit of work.  Is it really worth to walk away when whatever they will save is probably not going to be sufficient to fix the D.  They might be able to bring up prospects (which cost less) because Markstrom is such a wall.  If they have a less reliable goalie, the D needs to be better which could make it harder to give bigger roles to inexperienced players.  

 

I don't think its that far away tbh. If we can extend Tanev on something reasonable and bring in a guy like Hamonic on a bargain, Rathbone works out then its actually pretty good.