smokes Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 The Canucks need a good veteran backup or number one like they need air right now. While Lack played pretty well for us at times, and Markstrom has good potential, the Canucks are not going to go for without veteran leadership in the goaltender position. Say what you will but I honestly believe the Canucks would have a better opportunity to get to the playoffs had we not traded Luongo. Both Lack and Markstrom are still prospects who can't just be thrown to the wolves like that. The defense is simply not good enough for that. A veteran presence will help either goalie grow while easing a lot of weight on their shoulders. I believe both have one way contracts and they can't possibly have 3 goalies, the question would be who stays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Really? Are you really doing the goalie controversy thing again? Lack is no longer a prospect, he's a starter now. He's been there, done that in being thrown to the wolves. He's our guy and is doing just fine. Lu was our veteran presence and has served well in leading the way for Lack...although abruptly cut off in that, Eddie'll be ok and the time to have posted this has past. I agree: keep both is my vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFBR392 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 poll option 3 should be "keep both" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks155 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 If Markstrom can go to the minors w/o having to go through waivers, send him there. If he can't, keep him as a backup. Keep them both. There's no reason to get rid of one of them. Hopefully they turn into Luongo and Schnieds in the sense that they both turn good. Also, what if we keep the wrong goalie? We'd just add to the list to bad trades in Canuck history.Put some tags in before the others come - HURRY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madness Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Keep both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJDDawg Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Keep both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Unless we're getting Jake Allen via trade, I'd say keep both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Keep both. And what's with the poll? It's the opposite of the thread title. I believe both have one way contracts and they can't possibly have 3 goalies, the question would be who stays. What does it matter whether they have one-way contracts or not? It is not a reflection of their waiver eligibility if that's what you were getting at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackcanuck Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Lack has a total of 16 NHLwins in 41 NHL games. The previous season he had 13 AHL starts, that is it! Zero NHL playoff games. Markstrom has 12 NHL wins in 47 NHL games. also zero playoff games I cannot believe that we would start next season with a tandem of Lack and Markstrom. Goaltending in the NHL is the toughest position in professional sports I do not see how we could finish in the top 8 in the west with this rookie tandem. I can see many NYI type games in our future if this is our goaltending for the season Don't get me wrong, I really like Lack, he is a great young Goalie I do not know enough about Markstrom to really comment I honestly think that Goaltending is the weakest position on this team right now Markstrom would have to clear waivers to be sent to Utica My vote is trade Markstrom Then sign a veteran Goalie for 2 years until Lack can take over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisbanks Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Lack has a total of 16 NHLwins in 41 NHL games.The previous season he had 13 AHL starts, that is it!Zero NHL playoff games. Markstrom has 12 NHL wins in 47 NHL games.also zero playoff games I cannot believe that we would start next season with a tandem of Lack and Markstrom. Goaltending in the NHL is the toughest position in professional sportsI do not see how we could finish in the top 8 in the west with this rookie tandem.I can see many NYI type games in our future if this is our goaltending for the season Don't get me wrong, I really like Lack, he is a great young GoalieI do not know enough about Markstrom to really comment I honestly think that Goaltending is the weakest position on this team right now Markstrom would have to clear waivers to be sent to UticaMy vote is trade MarkstromThen sign a veteran Goalie for 2 years until Lack can take overhow many games did jimmy howard play before he was named starter?? how about bishop?? niemi?? crawford?? quick??? mason?? miller?? ward?? lack is 26 these are his best years.. why waste it by making him back up and wasting cap space on a vet goalie who for the most part wont play any better than him?? and goaltending in the NHL isn't the hardest position in pro sports, there is a little position called QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilovewinona Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 In a perfect world we'd trade Markström to the Oilers for Fasth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 http://youtu.be/iqc7CEE0ekE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFleetwoodMack Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Let's give markstrom the starting job in the playoffs, trade him at the draft next June and then trade an unsuspecting Lack at the following trade deadline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Grimes Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Oh look, more goalie drama; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyLow_ Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 I would like to sign a free agent vet to mentor our young goalies and hopefully help with the ups and downs of a season. But I do want the kids to play, we have 3 probable starting goalies in our system. Play them, let our outstanding goalie coach develop them, and when we decide to trade them they will be worth way more than they are now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William_Clarkson Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Lack is no longer a prospect, he's a starter now. He's not an NHL starter (right now), he's an above average backup. Still, he should be should be the Canucks' starter next year, with Markstrom as the backup. See how they turn out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyLow_ Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 how many games did jimmy howard play before he was named starter?? how about bishop?? niemi?? crawford?? quick??? mason?? miller?? ward?? lack is 26 these are his best years.. why waste it by making him back up and wasting cap space on a vet goalie who for the most part wont play any better than him?? and goaltending in the NHL isn't the hardest position in pro sports, there is a little position called QB. I think people forget how competely dreadful Quick was for a looooong time. Same with Crawford. They don't get better if they don't play. Lack's numbers are right on par with those guys rookie year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl's Jn Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 keep both... put markstrom in the minors keep lack and aquire a veteran goaltender to mentor lack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbox Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Maybe if we've had a legit sample of Markstrom then we could comment. He barely played for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.