TOMapleLaughs Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Don't see a goaltender moving at deadline time. Maybe draft time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Why not just wait and do that at the draft then? 2nd round pick isn't going to score any goals for us down the stretch. Because teams like NSH may need a goalie now, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langdon Algur Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Which teams currently need goaltenders right now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 That is what he said. Vancouver Canucks GM Jim Benning was on Vancouver’s TSN 1040 on Wednesday evening. On if Jacob Markstrom has made it clear he wants to be in the NHL by next season, or be moved on: “No, he hasn’t – He’s gone down with a real good attitude. He’s worked hard. He’s played really well. Dan Cloutier has worked with him. Rollie has been down a couple of times and worked with him, and he’s had a real good season. “He’s being patient with us and he knows that he just needs to keep working hard, keep improving his game, and he’ll get an opportunity at some point.” On if Markstrom’s progess would make Benning less hesitant to move Eddie Lack: “Well, Eddie’s been real good for us too. So I don’t want to put that out there. Eddie, the game’s he’s got in, he’s been excellent for us. But having said that, if a team comes along and we can make our team better, we’ll look and we’ll definitely look at something. “I don’t know which guy it is yet, but if we can add a real good young prospect or something, we’ll look at it.” Saying he would look at something if it came along is not the same as saying: I will look at dealing one of them. Again its the language used in the title I think is disingenuous. Obviously contractually one of them will likely be gone next season. But implying he is actively looking to deal one which he probably is even though he says he isnt. lol I feel like we are debating apples and oranges here. Yes one of them has to go based on their contracts but Jim did not say he is actively shopping is my point. The title implies imo that he is actively shopping them by the way it is worded. I would of worded it something on the long the lines of: Benning open to offers on Lack or Markstrom. Not actively shopping. I feel the title implies a deal has to happen soon which then puts more pressure on the organization and gives other teams leverage. How this stuff is handled in the media and in CDC can create a situation where we potentially get less for an asset because of the fact he feels he needs to deal one. I wouldnt be surprised if he kept them both and dealt one at the draft to boost a draft position or package a goalie with a player for another 1st round pick. Will see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 And before anyone says we have no influence on the value of our players or our assets. I would refer you to past controversies and think in the contexts of the city itself. The writers/media personal in this city that have caused so much havoc in the past with controversies read these forums too to get ideas for articles. Could you imagine making a canucks article every few days when nothing is happening. Your going to explore other peoples opinion and if the popular consensus in these forums is negative or devalues a player often that is reflected in the media because the personal feel that view is widely enough accepted to promote for content. We have an impact. Dont think we dont. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Which teams currently need goaltenders right now? Well first of all we have to clarify that Lack is not a true #1. Right now he is an upgrade to teams that need a more solid back up. So right now we have: Nashville Dallas Arizona Edmonton Florida Detroit (howard out 2-4 weeks) Pits All these teams would be in the mix for Lack. What hurts Lack’s value is the fact that come July 1st there a big string of goalies that hit the market that cost nothing to get. Also something that hurts Lacks value which I’m sure other teams are going to be watching is what the flames do with Ramo. Ortio has been decent. If flames decide to keep him up that means Ramo will be on the move. He will either be shopped but being a UFA at the end of the year the likely hood is that he will be put on waivers and then picked up. Teams no this and if they are looking for a better back up they may wait for that to happen and then pick him up for free. I would be pushing Lack to NSH right now. I also wouldn’t be expecting a roster player in return but rather a prospect, NSH has a few that interest me. Dougherty, Salomaki. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 So we injure Nashville's starter and then sell them our backup?Eeeeenteresting. I think all teams may choose to run with the goaltenders they have. Nashville in particular has the points cushion to ride Rinne's knee sprain out anyway. Would be funny if we get a good pick for Lack in that scenario though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpennyCanuck Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Question, not sure if this has been asked. Would Markstrom need to clear waivers if he was sent up to Vancouver? I'm sure that would be a huge factor in trading either goalie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOL_dre Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Question, not sure if this has been asked. Would Markstrom need to clear waivers if he was sent up to Vancouver? I'm sure that would be a huge factor in trading either goalie. No they got rid of re-entry waivers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Question, not sure if this has been asked. Would Markstrom need to clear waivers if he was sent up to Vancouver? I'm sure that would be a huge factor in trading either goalie. Nope. Re-entry waivers don't exist anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Honestly I'm a huge fan of Eddie... Who isn't though right? I see marky as the future though after Miller is done his 3 years. If we can get a good return for Eddie, I'd deal him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Above list of seven possible gt destinations^ Nash Dall Ariz Edm Flor Det Pitt I'd suggest adding a few more: Philly Cbj(don't know if Bob's injury is days/wks? Perhaps upgrade their backups?.. Wash NYI Mtl If packaged with an asset like Kassian or Higgins, perhaps we could fetch a real key piece. It's all subjective, & somewhat depends upon a number of variables. As a GM cautionary-tale, look at what injuries did last spring to both TBay & Mtl. Or witness how Pitt's faith in ONE gt has possibly torpedoed 1 or 2 potential key runs. It's the under-analyzed, 'elephant in the room'..perhaps some GM's don't want to cough up for it, yet conversely, gting remains the most crucial position. Look what a brilliant SWEDISH gt did for a certain team's fortunes last spring. Don't tell me other GM's aren't jonesin' & dreaming about such an acquisition. Like D such as Weber. You don't GET such players after their star has risen. You must acquire them as they're emerging. Thus, an eye to PROJECTION is so essential for aspiring GM's. Yet so many posters here are quick to assert what other GM's are projecting. This ranges from presumptuous to disingenuous thinking. We won't know Lack & Markstrom's perceived value until said transaction is finalized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 i think right now we are going to get more for lack than at the draft. teams who are close to the playoffs or are in a spot but want a safety net behind their #1 would like an upgrade like lack. Washington doesnt play their backup cuz he has horrible numbers, but im sure they would like to rest holtby a bit down the stretch? Dallas might need a backup, same with philly. A trade can be made, strike while theres a decent amount of teams that may want to add a goalie, dont wait too long Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 ^Agreed Yotes. Perhaps they've lined something up, & are waiting until after the AHL ASG this wknd(Markstrom playing for home team, Utica fans)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 one could hope, id like to see some moves made, a shake up could do us well. If L.schenn can be had for a 2nd, which seems like all that flyer fans want id grab him to, throw him with hammer and let corrado play 3rd pair. we have assets like Lack, weber, sbisa, higgins, kassian, richardson to gain back a 2nd or grab a few picks if thats what benning chooses for a young prospect Its not dismantling the team, its giving us a fresh shake up and not depleting our team necessarily. You dont move all the players i mentions but you resolve this goalie debacle now, not drag it on like Gillis did then u move pending ufa's that may want too much or we may want to give richardsons role to horvat etc. Resign DOrsett and offer matthias a contract if he declines, hold on to him or get something for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Losing With Pride Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Lack to Philly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Lack to Philly for? 2015 3rd? or as part of a package? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeddingCrashers Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Package Lack and Higgins for a coupe draft picks. Edmontons 2nd this year and 3rd next year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Who to trade Marky or Lack? Are the Canucks rebuilding or not? If they are rebuilding I trade Miller at the deadline. Biggest bang for the buck. Someone said Marky has never had a chance in the NHL. He has played 8 fewer games than Lack. His NHL career is 12W 27L with no SO and a SV% .896. The bulk of his games (23) were as a 22 year old and his SV% during that stretch was .896. Consider his defense in Florida was brutal. Lack has played 47 games; 19W 23L 5SO with a career 0.912 SV%. Most of those games were last year after Lu was traded and the team had cratered. His team defense was pretty bad as well. 5 SO which should have been 9 IMHO but his defense let him down. Lack has shown a serious NHL capability and Marky has not. He has had a number of stellar AHL seasons and might be ready as well. Again, if a rebuild I deal Miller because his value would be exceptional and it is a better than normal draft year. If Benning moved some vets out front he might keep Miller's stability and move the younger guys. If that was the deal I would keep Lack as he could step in next year if needed. Marky's AHL season has probably raised his value again but his return probably not much better than a 3rd unless Utica won the Calder Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Hansen and a 7th to the peg for a 4th and glover. Flip Lack Kassian or Grenier and the 4th to the Yotes for a 2nd and Gormley A deal that works for basically everyone when you break it down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.