Jake Kielly | G

[aGENT]

13 minutes ago, Ray_Cathode said:

 

I’m not saying we should choose to lose a goalie, but we very likely could based on how well both Markstrom and Demko are playing. So, do we choose to risk losing one in the expansion draft, or trade one for an asset?  Or do we make a deal exposing a winger and surrender a draft pick to ensure we keep them both?  That is all I am saying.

One is gaining you a valuable asset back one costs you multiple assets.

 

That's pretty easy math IMO.

[RetroCanuck]

7 minutes ago, Ray_Cathode said:

 

I’m not saying we should choose to lose a goalie, but we very likely could based on how well both Markstrom and Demko are playing. So, do we choose to risk losing one in the expansion draft, or trade one for an asset?  Or do we make a deal exposing a winger and surrender a draft pick to ensure we keep them both?  That is all I am saying.

In my mind we have one more year of transitional hockey so keeping both Demko and Marky for the beginning of the season makes sense. If Demko looks like he can handle a #1 or 50/50 work load then Id trade Marky when his value is highest.

 

As for expansion draft if we trade Marky and Tanev then I think we are good to go. Not many high impact D or forward that absolutely need protection.

 

Goalie: Demko___Defensemen: Stecher, Juolevi...?Brisebois?_____Forwards: Horvat, Pettersson, Boeser, Gaudette, Virtanen, Leivo, ?Lind?

 

Id be trying to package a Vet with a decent prospect. Eriksson+Brisebois?

[aGENT]

11 hours ago, RetroCanuck said:

In my mind we have one more year of transitional hockey so keeping both Demko and Marky for the beginning of the season makes sense. If Demko looks like he can handle a #1 or 50/50 work load then Id trade Marky when his value is highest.

Problem being, if you wait until mid season to move one, who are you signing to backup/tandem with the other?

 

There's a large pool of solid veteran, UFA goalies to choose from this summer. By December (or later), you're picking through scraps.

[RetroCanuck]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Problem being, if you wait until mid season to move one, who are you signing to backup/tandem with the other?

 

There's a large pool of solid veteran, UFA goalies to choose from this summer. By December (or later), you're picking through scraps.

Well usually if a team is trading for a #1 goalie they are needing to move out a lesser one. So a goalie would have to come back in the deal or a backup would need to be traded for. Or waivers is another option.

 

Side note Im expecting Benning to be much more active with waivers next year. Both waiving underperforming players like Eriksson and Schaller as well as picking up waived players.

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, RetroCanuck said:

Well usually if a team is trading for a #1 goalie they are needing to move out a lesser one. So a goalie would have to come back in the deal or a backup would need to be traded for. Or waivers is another option.

 

Side note Im expecting Benning to be much more active with waivers next year. Both waiving underperforming players like Eriksson and Schaller as well as picking up waived players.

Do we want a guy they'd likely be willing to waive or do we want a legit backup/1B?

[RetroCanuck]

8 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Do we want a guy they'd likely be willing to waive or do we want a legit backup/1B?

If Demko looks ready to take majority of the starts, and considering its another transitional year of hockey, Im fine with any goalie we can plug in for 20ish games.

[aGENT]

4 minutes ago, RetroCanuck said:

If Demko looks ready to take majority of the starts, and considering its another transitional year of hockey, Im fine with any goalie we can plug in for 20ish games.

I doubt every one else would be.

[Borvat]

Finally they are addressing goalie depth and people suggest we part with some - Markstrom.  What's wrong with signing Markstrom to a decent extension and trading him once/if they know what they have in the younger ones like Demko, Kielly and Dipietro.  Utica needs to stabilize the goalie position as well.  No more of the goalie merry go round please in Vancouver or Utica. 

 

Plus Markstrom provides some veteran leadership to all these young goalies and players alike.  He's a gamer who HATES to lose and he is only 29. 

 

 

Edited April 4, 2019 by Borvat

[Ray_Cathode]

19 hours ago, aGENT said:

One is gaining you a valuable asset back one costs you multiple assets.

 

That's pretty easy math IMO.

Not really.  The greater asset might be two fine goaltenders.  Not all assets are equal.

[aGENT]

19 minutes ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Not really.  The greater asset might be two fine goaltenders.  Not all assets are equal.

Not if you lose one in the ED...

Edited April 5, 2019 by aGENT

[Kanukfanatic]

On 4/2/2019 at 10:17 AM, aGENT said:

IMO, even if they think he will be a #1 (and all the more trade value).

 

If they think Markstrom has truly turned the corner and can be their #1 for the next 4-6'ish years... along with DiPietro coming up and now signing Kielly, and Thiessen already in the pipeline plus we can always draft another goalie this/next year and sign a short term vet to expose in the ED and backup Markstrom the next couple years...

 

It makes a LOT of sense IMO to translate that value to somewhere else in the lineup, where needed (1LW or right D).

[SingleThorn]

7 minutes ago, Kanukfanatic said:

So.......how would you deal with the ED ? The main point in the 'think about trading a goalie' conversation is that losing either Markstrom or Demko at the ED is too expensive. You keep rolling your eyes at the stupidity of this thought. So.......a) you think it's okay to lose a goalie at the ED or b) you have a cunning plan to 'not lose' a goalie at the ED. If the answer is 'a', we disagree. If the answer is 'b', please elaborate ! In normal times, this never becomes a conversation ! the ED changes everything !

[Kanukfanatic]

1 hour ago, SingleThorn said:

So.......how would you deal with the ED ? The main point in the 'think about trading a goalie' conversation is that losing either Markstrom or Demko at the ED is too expensive. You keep rolling your eyes at the stupidity of this thought. So.......a) you think it's okay to lose a goalie at the ED or b) you have a cunning plan to 'not lose' a goalie at the ED. If the answer is 'a', we disagree. If the answer is 'b', please elaborate ! In normal times, this never becomes a conversation ! the ED changes everything !

I think it is stupid to say the Canucks should trade Demko when Markstrom has shown, at 29 years old, that he may be able to be a starter in the NHL. I have been pretty clear on that.

 

This team needs two good goalies going forward if they want to compete. Demko still needs some time before, and if, he can become a starter. The team certainly should not trade Demko because they are afraid of what might happen in 2021. It is pretty clear to me.

 

Benning knows more about this than you, and more than I, so why don't we let Benning decide what to do. 

 

So to sum up, I think it is stupid for anyone to say trade the 23 year old highly touted and possibly future starting goalie of this team to keep a 29 year old possible starter because of something happening more than 2 years from now. Does this seem unclear to you? 

 

Good god...settle down and don't panic about 2021. Did you pay attention to what happened in the Vegas expansion draft? Some teams paid Vegas to not take certain players. If Marky actually shows over the next couple of years he is head and shoulders better than demko then make a decision then. Doing it now is stupid and reeks of panic for something that could happen in 2021. Making some demko trade now also reeks of ineptitude, UNLESS Benning is the one that thinks demko will amount to nothing. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

I can see it now...some stupid trade for demko is made and marky goes down with injury and we have some plug goalie to fill in and lose lotsa games. Brilliant idea. It is not like there are tons of very capable back ups around that you can just go out and get anytime you want.

 

And the rest of our young goalie prospects ARE NO WHERE near being able to even back up in the NHL.

 

There you go. That is my elaboration.

Edited April 5, 2019 by Kanukfanatic

[Boudrias]

1 hour ago, Kanukfanatic said:

I think it is stupid to say the Canucks should trade Demko when Markstrom has shown, at 29 years old, that he may be able to be a starter in the NHL. I have been pretty clear on that.

 

This team needs two good goalies going forward if they want to compete. Demko still needs some time before, and if, he can become a starter. The team certainly should not trade Demko because they are afraid of what might happen in 2021. It is pretty clear to me.

 

Benning knows more about this than you, and more than I, so why don't we let Benning decide what to do. 

 

So to sum up, I think it is stupid for anyone to say trade the 23 year old highly touted and possibly future starting goalie of this team to keep a 29 year old possible starter because of something happening more than 2 years from now. Does this seem unclear to you? 

 

Good god...settle down and don't panic about 2021. Did you pay attention to what happened in the Vegas expansion draft? Some teams paid Vegas to not take certain players. If Marky actually shows over the next couple of years he is head and shoulders better than demko then make a decision then. Doing it now is stupid and reeks of panic for something that could happen in 2021. Making some demko trade now also reeks of ineptitude, UNLESS Benning is the one that thinks demko will amount to nothing. But that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

I can see it now...some stupid trade for demko is made and marky goes down with injury and we have some plug goalie to fill in and lose lotsa games. Brilliant idea. It is not like there are tons of very capable back ups around that you can just go out and get anytime you want.

 

And the rest of our young goalie prospects ARE NO WHERE near being able to even back up in the NHL.

 

There you go. That is my elaboration.

Markstrom will get another contract and if Demko is good enough he will force himself into the #1 slot. JB has time. As you rightfully said this team needs 2 good tenders.  

[Fred65]

I like this signing. He's older than DiPietro and has played in an older league. Despite his nomination for two major NCAA  awards he has had little coaching and yet has a good SV% I'm thinking this kid chose Vcr because Vcr has Ian Clark and the kid has a good chance to make some major improvement, all supposition I suppose. 

[stawns]

On 4/5/2019 at 4:31 PM, Boudrias said:

Markstrom will get another contract and if Demko is good enough he will force himself into the #1 slot. JB has time. As you rightfully said this team needs 2 good tenders.  

exactly, why the rush?

[Darkstar]

Kielly is probably the most underrated prospect in the system. I can see him being an NHL starter one day.

[Fred65]

12 hours ago, Darkstar said:

Kielly is probably the most underrated prospect in the system. I can see him being an NHL starter one day.

Maybe along with maybe Rafferty

[GoldenAlien]

 

[Guest]

My prediction is that he'll be the starter in Utica by game 20. 

 

Great couple of years in college and good reviews from prospect camp.