Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

The Hockey News Considers Markstrom And Demko 2 of the Best Goaltending Prospects In The World


SabreFan1

Recommended Posts

Doesn't really add to my confidence that they ranked 19 year-old Demko higher than 25-year-old and already-had-multiple-seasons- with-opportunities-to-make-it-in-the-NHL Markstrom.

Many believe Demko to be potentially an elite goaltender. His cieling is higher than Markstrom's, Markstrom is just older and about to reach his prime. Both good prospects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many believe Demko to be potentially an elite goaltender. His cieling is higher than Markstrom's, Markstrom is just older and about to reach his prime. Both good prospects.

That still doesn't help. Markstrom should be further along and therefor be rated higher. The fact that he's not only indicates that his ceiling may be far lower than many here hope.

Markstom cost us more last season than Lack did and will cost us more next season than Lack would have. In the very real sense that means to justify his cost, he needs to be better than what we gave up for him. We don't need him to be just a prospect. We need him to be a solid backup goalie who can make the transition to starter in the very near future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That still doesn't help. Markstrom should be further along and therefor be rated higher. The fact that he's not only indicates that his ceiling may be far lower than many here hope.

Markstom cost us more last season than Lack did and will cost us more next season than Lack would have. In the very real sense that means to justify his cost, he needs to be better than what we gave up for him. We don't need him to be just a prospect. We need him to be a solid backup goalie who can make the transition to starter in the very near future.

Translation = still not over trading backup Eddie Lack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's still a bad trade that will likely bite us in the arse.

Did you have anything to actually add to the conversation?

Just pointing out your critique of Markstrom obviously stems more from your opinion of the Lack trade.

It's just a list of what one guy thinks. Nothing to get too excited over. It's actually nice to see someone giving our prospects some credit for once. Yet even when 2 out of 5 are in our system, there is still griping about a trade of a backup goalie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because trading back-up goalies often comes back to bite people in the arse?

When the backup goalie was only in his second NHL season and already outplaying the aging starter? Yeah.

But hey, maybe you're right and keeping the more expensive backup's backup is a way smarter move. Time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just pointing out your critique of Markstrom obviously stems more from your opinion of the Lack trade.

It's just a list of what one guy thinks. Nothing to get too excited over. It's actually nice to see someone giving our prospects some credit for once. Yet even when 2 out of 5 are in our system, there is still griping about a trade of a backup goalie.

Of course it is. That's the context by which Markstrom will be judged in this market.

And it's just one opinion by one forum poster. Nothing to get too excited over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the backup goalie was only in his second NHL season and already outplaying the aging starter? Yeah.

But hey, maybe you're right and keeping the more expensive backup's backup is a way smarter move. Time will tell.

He was outplaying miller? I think you got lost in the dark horse frenzy, lack wasn't deemed to be starting quality on a rebuilding team.... Oh and the rest of the league agreed with the Canucks assessment on him. He was a great guy but the idea of him starting for us was just a pipe dream, I think he's a backup or a low end starter at his peak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was outplaying miller? I think you got lost in the dark horse frenzy, lack wasn't deemed to be starting quality on a rebuilding team.... Oh and the rest of the league agreed with the Canucks assessment on him. He was a great guy but the idea of him starting for us was just a pipe dream, I think he's a backup or a low end starter at his peak.

Unless you think stats are irrelevant, in which case, no. And Miller is the best goalie of all time and our scoring is right where it needs to be and we will surely win the SC next season.

But seriously, you think that because Lack wasn't ready after only 2 seasons in the NHL he's never going to be a quality starter? You do know Markstrom has played at least 1 game in 6 NHL seasons, right? And one season he even had a GAA below 3.

How do you figure the "rest of the league" agreed with your assessment that Lack isn't good enough to be a starter? The market for goalies was hardly hot and we don't know what other teams offered, though we've all heard the rumor that Benning turned down at least one offer from within our division. So, we might have been able to get more from a team that did want to make Lack a starter. And, of course, Carolina has already said they will allow him to battle for the net there. You're free to agree with Benning's assessment of our situation, just don't confuse it with absolute fact.

Markstrom might turn out to be as good as people here say he will be. I certainly hope he does. But we already know more of what Lack could do and he was only getting better, having improved this season over last. And he was cheaper to boot. So unless Markstrom ends up being significantly better than Lack in the near future this will be a bad trade. And that's a lot of unnecessary pressure to add to his shoulders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the backup goalie was only in his second NHL season and already outplaying the aging starter? Yeah.

But hey, maybe you're right and keeping the more expensive backup's backup is a way smarter move. Time will tell.

Can you name one? I very much liked Eddie, but losing him will have little to no impact on the organization, let alone biting them on the arse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Markstrom needs to make the full transition to the NHL and then all is good. Of course, he has to do it behind our defence.

Here is how Cory bounced back. I love BoHo but can't say I'd take him over Cory.

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Todd-Cordell/Cory-Schneider-Wasted-Several-Good-Seasons-Backing-Up-In-Vancouver/159/70412

Considering where we're at now, I would take Horvat.

We need center depth more than we need goalie depth right now. Having a great goalie with the team we have right now won't make much of a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you name one? I very much liked Eddie, but losing him will have little to no impact on the organization, let alone biting them on the arse

I'm sure I could look up some examples for you, but I'm assuming you also have access to Google. I'm also not sure why you would need irrelevant historical examples to illustrate how choosing one player over another is sometimes good and sometimes bad.

Trading Lack has already had an impact on the organization. We're already paying more for Markstrom than we ever did for Lack, meaning in a real way we are already worse off for having kept him and Miller rather than some combination of one of them and Lack because we have less cap space for the rest of the team. And if Markstrom ends up not being as good as Lack is now and/or Lack continues to improve and becomes a bona fide starter next season at a much lower cap hit, we will be even worse off than we could have been. That would be biting us in the arse. If we end up meeting Lack in the playoffs and he knocks us out because the goalie we kept instead of him gets outplayed by him, that would be biting us in the arse. There are lots of ways this trade could come back to bite us in the arse more than it already has. Only time will tell what will actually happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering where we're at now, I would take Horvat.

We need center depth more than we need goalie depth right now. Having a great goalie with the team we have right now won't make much of a difference.

Agreed. Horvat is at least a solid # 2, and I believe will become a good # 1. I don't think Schnieder has won a heck of a lot in Jersey. Plus, he seemed to have trouble with the stresses of playing in our market and the playoffs - cramping and sleeping issues. Did he himself not mention his issues with anxiety, and he was on medication? Please correct me if I am wrong on this note, but I believe I heard him talking about it, while he was here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure I could look up some examples for you, but I'm assuming you also have access to Google. I'm also not sure why you would need irrelevant historical examples to illustrate how choosing one player over another is sometimes good and sometimes bad.

Trading Lack has already had an impact on the organization. We're already paying more for Markstrom than we ever did for Lack, meaning in a real way we are already worse off for having kept him and Miller rather than some combination of one of them and Lack because we have less cap space for the rest of the team. And if Markstrom ends up not being as good as Lack is now and/or Lack continues to improve and becomes a bona fide starter next season at a much lower cap hit, we will be even worse off than we could have been. That would be biting us in the arse. If we end up meeting Lack in the playoffs and he knocks us out because the goalie we kept instead of him gets outplayed by him, that would be biting us in the arse. There are lots of ways this trade could come back to bite us in the arse more than it already has. Only time will tell what will actually happen.

There are loads of scenarios involving Lack,..but...Isnt he a UFA at the end of next season,..?...Obviously,the decision making in keeping Marksrtrom must have involved goalie coach Rollie Melanson (he's the expert)....Chances of facing Carolina in the the playoffs would be practically zero,unless the Canucks and Hurricanes make the SC final.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering where we're at now, I would take Horvat.

We need center depth more than we need goalie depth right now. Having a great goalie with the team we have right now won't make much of a difference.

The people in Jersey can't believe how good he is, what he did last year on a non-playoff team. Of course he would make a difference, #1 franchise goalies of his calibre don't come around very often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are loads of scenarios involving Lack,..but...Isnt he a UFA at the end of next season,..?...Obviously,the decision making in keeping Marksrtrom must have involved goalie coach Rollie Melanson (he's the expert)....Chances of facing Carolina in the the playoffs would be practically zero,unless the Canucks and Hurricanes make the SC final.

Yes he is a UFA. And? That doesn't negate that he's still cheaper next season. And that there's no reason to assume we couldn't have re-signed him for for a short-term reasonable contract after that.

I certainly hope Rollie was involved in the decision but I doubt his opinion was the only factor.

And no, as unlikely but not impossible as it may be, a Canucks/Carolina SCF isn't the only way we could meet Lack in the playoffs. As you said, he's a UFA next season and even signed players get traded all the time. We don't know what team he'll play for in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The people in Jersey can't believe how good he is, what he did last year on a non-playoff team. Of course he would make a difference, #1 franchise goalies of his calibre don't come around very often.

Oh so did they make the playoffs?

My point is, all he would do here is hurt our draft position. If we're not winning the cup in the next 4 or 5 years, Schneider would do nothing for us.

Horvat on the other hand is young enough to develop with the next core group of players. And considering we have two solid goalie prospects coming up, I'd say we're fine for the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...