Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Demko is more than 2 years away from the NHL. UFA Back Up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finnish Aho Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Trading Markstrom is a bad move, keeping Lack and Miller and hemming in that much cap in goalies and then not being able to resign Lack and losing him for nothing is a bad idea imho. Especially as apposed to keeping Miller and Markstrom who can eventually when Millers contract expires can be a starter which is realistic based off this past AHL season, and trading lack... Actual asset management not picking who you like more. but I'm sure Benning already knows this so I don't see Markstrom being traded its illogical at its core Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCNeil Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 CKNW a Vancouver station? I live in victoria curious where that station is located What I find confusing, is why would someone be randomly listening to them?? My grandma finds it a boring station Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shazzam Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Demko is more than 2 years away from the NHL. that is where Miller fits in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nergish Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 A markstrom demko combo could be leathal if they reach their potential. But I'm curious about this San Jose rumour. Barzal prob be on the board or werenski perhaps at 9. I don't know if we wil see it happen tho I really like Markstrom and am looking forward to seeing what he can do this season, but if they want him over Eddie in the proposed exchange for a top 10 pick, it's done. Makes the whole Luongo situation worthwhile if we can land a franchise defenseman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Do they want Markstrom to give their snipers confidence at practice?Be ironic if he made a positive impression with them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bingo Chili Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Barzal at #9 Barzal Horvat McCann Cassels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Trading Markstrom is a bad move, keeping Lack and Miller and hemming in that much cap in goalies and then not being able to resign Lack and losing him for nothing is a bad idea imho. Especially as apposed to keeping Miller and Markstrom who can eventually when Millers contract expires can be a starter which is realistic based off this past AHL season.... Benning has already said ownership has no problem paying big money for two goalies after next season if that's what it comes to, We'll have cap space anyways because management won't be spending big until we're ready to go for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Benning has already said ownership has no problem paying big money for two goalies after next season if that's what it comes to, We'll have cap space anyways because management won't be spending big until we're ready to go for it. There are good arguments for keeping Lack over Markstrom.... and ya, a year of paying both salaries or eating a chunk of Miller's salary for his last year and trading him is no biggie really. It is wildly different than the Schneider/Luongo situation because Miller isn't signed until eternity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkoshack Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 that is where Miller fits in So resign a 38 year old miller after his contract is up in 2 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BanTSN Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Barzal at #9 Barzal Horvat McCann Cassels Only thing worse than trading Bieksa would be getting Barzal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karlsson`s Flo Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Benning has already said ownership has no problem paying big money for two goalies after next season if that's what it comes to, We'll have cap space anyways because management won't be spending big until we're ready to go for it. I feel déjà vu hitting me all of a sudden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbriggs Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Farhan Lalji @FarhanLaljiTSN #Canucks have asked Kevin Bieksa to waive his no-trade clause. Potential list of teams TBD Matthew Sekeres @mattsekeres Kevin Bieksa's agent tells me that the #Canucks have not asked him to waive his no-trade clause. Wouldn't comment when asked if Bieksa would Dan Murphy @sportsnetmurph If the #canucks have told Bieksa they want him to move on does it matter if they formally ask him to waive his NTC? #semantics Blake Price @BlakePriceTSN After hearing Bieksa's agent, I think he's open to a trade, but the Canucks don't have a deal yet so no official "ask" just yet So you mean No one has asked Kevin to wave, No deal is on the table that anyone knows of so maybe we should just wait and people like the one who started this topic should shut up. Patience people Patience. Dont start something you dont know anything about fool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 If San Jose needs a starter, why Markstrom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirensong87 Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Only thing worse than trading Bieksa would be getting Barzal. What is wrong with you? Don't like 1st line C's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BanTSN Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 What is wrong with you? Don't like 1st line C's? Where? Barzal is more of a 2nd line C. Better picks available at 9th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sirensong87 Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Where? Barzal is more of a 2nd line C. Better picks available at 9th. Barzal is a 70-80pts playmaking C. He's a #1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 I personally prefer Rantanen or Connor at that spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Barzal is a 70-80pts playmaking C. He's a #1. Based off of?.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyguy1234 Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 It's all politics. When people are asked if they "asked" Bieksa to waive his NTC they say no. But what they likely did was ask Kevin a what/if scenario...................e.g. what if you could go to LA would you consider that? Given there's no trade on the table they haven't "asked" him to waive his NTC, e.g. Kevin we have an offer for you to go to LA, we're going to do it if you waive your NTC. You see the difference. If management hasn't talked to all of their players with NTC's about "possibilities", they should all be fired as they're not doing their jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.