[Discuss] Markstrom's Future

[VegasCanuck]

Resign Markstrom ASAP to 2 - 3 years, 5.5 - 6 million Cap Hit.

 

Demko needs at least this full season as backup. He's looking good, but he's had a handful of games in the NHL. Doesn't need to be rushed to be our #1. 25 - 30 games this season, 30 - 35 next season and let's see how he holds up.

[IBatch]

12 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

Resign Markstrom ASAP to 2 - 3 years, 5.5 - 6 million Cap Hit.

 

Demko needs at least this full season as backup. He's looking good, but he's had a handful of games in the NHL. Doesn't need to be rushed to be our #1. 25 - 30 games this season, 30 - 35 next season and let's see how he holds up.

This is my hope too.  Don’t know if Markstrom will take the deal or go test the market, he might feel he’s earned a legacy deal...and if he keeps it up facing tons of shots often a lot  more then we get on net... hard to say what he’ worth on the open market, most of that comes down to how he plays the rest of the season.   He’s getting noticed but still just barely cracking the top 20 fantasy wise ...  a Vezina finalist or Conn Smyth trophy (ha ha) would go a long way as far as bargaining goes.

[linden17]

It’s going to be interesting. If any teams number one goalie goes down for a significant period of time especially down the stretch I would think that they would be making a phone call to Vancouver. 

[DownUndaCanuck]

We've made plenty of goaltending mistakes in the past, let's not mess this one up unless the expansion draft plays a role.

 

I think we have to extend Marky at least 3 years, there should be the perfect overlap between him and Demko and we've got time to swap them over. Would like to see a Tim Thomas - Rask swap over. Thomas played 50-60 games comfortably while Rask got better and better, and neither was rushed in or out of playing time but it occurred smooth and naturally - unlike what we did with Schneider, Lack and Luongo.

 

Resign Marky and keep him as long as we can, even when his play starts do dip in a couple of seasons he'll still be a great backup and mentor for Demko. Tie those two guys up long term.

[Lancaster]

Extend Markstrom, but protect Demko.

 

It's understandable Markstrom may want to stay in Vancouver, but "worse case scenario", he just moves down along the I5.  

[Sbriggs]

15 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

This is an - 'under the radar' - massive decision. How do you just toss Markstrom aside? He's become so good, he's so important to this team.

 

Demko has looked good but its a limited role. Unless he looks like 2012-13 Cory Schneider next season, its not an easy decision to let Markstrom go. Long term Marky should be considered 100%. He's been playing at an (arguably) borderline elite level the last year or so. Its unfortunate the expansion draft kind of handcuffs us.

 

I think its still TBD. I'd use all the time we have to be sure about this.

Can't even use the words elite and Marky in the same sentence until he's at least gottin us into the play offs and won us a round or two

[J.I.A.H.N]

3 hours ago, Phat Fingers said:

You don't toss Markstrom.  He is finally living up to his billing all those years ago.  

 

Luckily we can play out the situation.  Marley continues his stellar play and becomes the goalie.  Depeirto develops well in Utica, Silvos as well.  

 

Demko becomes a tradeable asset.  We have RFA rights to Demko.  

 

The last time we have even remotely the same issue, Luongo had his anchor deal and Kesler slept with Schneiders girl and we ended up with Marky and Horvat.  

 

 

 

 

In which we traded both goaltenders...…...operative word being "trade"

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

In which we traded both goaltenders...…...operative word being "trade"

I could see a scenario where Marky is extended after this season's TDL, and we move Demko at the coming draft.  

[Sandro17]

2 hours ago, VegasCanuck said:

Resign Markstrom ASAP to 2 - 3 years, 5.5 - 6 million Cap Hit.

 

Demko needs at least this full season as backup. He's looking good, but he's had a handful of games in the NHL. Doesn't need to be rushed to be our #1. 25 - 30 games this season, 30 - 35 next season and let's see how he holds up.

With Demko eventually moving up, IMO we trade Markstrom while his stock is high and grab an Elite Defenseman to play with Hughes for an extreme top 2 D pairing. It'll be like Pronger + Niedermayer  all over again :D

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Sandro17 said:

With Demko eventually moving up, IMO we trade Markstrom while his stock is high and grab an Elite Defenseman to play with Hughes for an extreme top 2 D pairing. It'll be like Pronger + Niedermayer  all over again :D

Demko will have more value than Marky, who is on an expiring contract. 

[Sandro17]

Just now, Alflives said:

Demko will have more value than Marky, who is on an expiring contract. 

Which is why we trade Marky and not Demko :D
 

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Sandro17 said:

Which is why we trade Marky and not Demko :D
 

What do we get for an unsigned Marky, after the season is over?  I think we are a playoff contender, so it's highly doubtful we trade either goalie until the season is over.  Demko will have quite a lot of value.  Marky will be a coming UFA, so he will have zero value, no?

[Sandro17]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

What do we get for an unsigned Marky, after the season is over?  I think we are a playoff contender, so it's highly doubtful we trade either goalie until the season is over.  Demko will have quite a lot of value.  Marky will be a coming UFA, so he will have zero value, no?

I meant after we sign him and after the season. Sorry, I was thinking long term

[Alflives]

5 minutes ago, Sandro17 said:

I meant after we sign him and after the season. Sorry, I was thinking long term

I see.  That makes sense to have both goalies under contract before trading one away.  I see the Seattle expansion draft making a difference too.  If we are going to maximize our return for a goalie (I say trade Demko, because I think he's got a higher value) we better do that before the coming draft, or at the draft.  

[J.I.A.H.N]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

What do we get for an unsigned Marky, after the season is over?  I think we are a playoff contender, so it's highly doubtful we trade either goalie until the season is over.  Demko will have quite a lot of value.  Marky will be a coming UFA, so he will have zero value, no?

Alf

 

If your goal is just to reach the playoffs, then fine

But I am older than dirt, and I want to see us win the Cup

I think most the times on record, you need to take a few runs at it to win

and I do not see where Markstrom's time table and ours are in sync

 

It underlines one of our historically greatest problems

Which is afraid to make the big move to put things in sync

Here we got a goalie, who is in the now, and IMO a goalie

just coming into his own......

 

IMO, WE HAVE THE OPERTUNITY to trade Markstrom

and possibly another player, and solidify our young team for 10+ years

getting a younger RHD and possibly a prospect, that will truly

complete our team, and keep us cap compliant for years...….

 

Sure it would be good to have Marky and Demko long term

But long term, what is the cost? Marky at 6 Million+

Demko 4 Million?????? How does that work with filling in the team?

And is the cost of Seattle taking someone else.....

Well, we know from Vegas, the cost is a 1st, or equal asset

That too weakens the team

 

CDC can not have their cake and eat it too

[Sandro17]

9 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I see.  That makes sense to have both goalies under contract before trading one away.  I see the Seattle expansion draft making a difference too.  If we are going to maximize our return for a goalie (I say trade Demko, because I think he's got a higher value) we better do that before the coming draft, or at the draft.  

Yeah I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps make sure we reserve both goalies to make sure Seattle doesn't get them and then trade if we can't make a move? If anything, the last thing we want is another Luongo-Schnieder problem but we lose too much value if we don't reserve them both or don't trade one. We're better off allowing Seattle to take one of our defense-men considering were a little weak on that end so don't lose too much value when the expansion happens.  

Edited October 21, 2019 by Sandro17

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, janisahockeynut said:

Alf

 

If your goal is just to reach the playoffs, then fine

But I am older than dirt, and I want to see us win the Cup

I think most the times on record, you need to take a few runs at it to win

and I do not see where Markstrom's time table and ours are in sync

 

It underlines one of our historically greatest problems

Which is afraid to make the big move to put things in sync

Here we got a goalie, who is in the now, and IMO a goalie

just coming into his own......

 

IMO, WE HAVE THE OPERTUNITY to trade Markstrom

and possibly another player, and solidify our young team for 10+ years

getting a younger RHD and possibly a prospect, that will truly

complete our team, and keep us cap compliant for years...….

 

Sure it would be good to have Marky and Demko long term

But long term, what is the cost? Marky at 6 Million+

Demko 4 Million?????? How does that work with filling in the team?

And is the cost of Seattle taking someone else.....

Well, we know from Vegas, the cost is a 1st, or equal asset

That too weakens the team

 

CDC can not have their cake and eat it too

I like the concept, but really don't believe Marky has that kind of value, even if packaged with a younger player - like Gaudette.  Who is this D man we would target?  I'd say that our window for winning is 7 to 10 years.  Marky can take the first 5, and then Dipietro could take the next 5.  

Maybe JB is considering trading Demko at the coming draft anyway, and filling that top four RHD like you're suggesting?

[Sandro17]

2 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Alf

 

If your goal is just to reach the playoffs, then fine

But I am older than dirt, and I want to see us win the Cup

I think most the times on record, you need to take a few runs at it to win

and I do not see where Markstrom's time table and ours are in sync

 

It underlines one of our historically greatest problems

Which is afraid to make the big move to put things in sync

Here we got a goalie, who is in the now, and IMO a goalie

just coming into his own......

 

IMO, WE HAVE THE OPERTUNITY to trade Markstrom

and possibly another player, and solidify our young team for 10+ years

getting a younger RHD and possibly a prospect, that will truly

complete our team, and keep us cap compliant for years...….

 

Sure it would be good to have Marky and Demko long term

But long term, what is the cost? Marky at 6 Million+

Demko 4 Million?????? How does that work with filling in the team?

And is the cost of Seattle taking someone else.....

Well, we know from Vegas, the cost is a 1st, or equal asset

That too weakens the team

 

CDC can not have their cake and eat it too

Sorry, there was confusion between me and Alf during the discussion, he's not saying that we shouldn't trade either one. 

[J.I.A.H.N]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I like the concept, but really don't believe Marky has that kind of value, even if packaged with a younger player - like Gaudette.  Who is this D man we would target?  I'd say that our window for winning is 7 to 10 years.  Marky can take the first 5, and then Dipietro could take the next 5.  

Maybe JB is considering trading Demko at the coming draft anyway, and filling that top four RHD like you're suggesting?

That is absolutely nuts Alf

Players historically start sliding at 31/32....maybe 33/34

Why would you risk keeping a guy that may last 2 to 4 years

That is way too short of a coverage period

 

And exactly what do we have in DiPietro

He is untested, and undersized

Yes, he could turn out fine, but it is his 1st pro-season

and I am not banking on a maybe

 

I would far rather had Demko who if by your opinion

could last 8 to 10 years (because goalies last long???)

Than Marky who has a 2 to 4 window

 

I do not see the logic in that......

 

Now, in saying that, I am all for playing both to the TDL

to make sure my line of thinking works.....

Maybe by then, the answer is clearer...….

I am not in a rush, I just want you to see the merits of identifying

who is the best for the organization to keep

[Alflives]

8 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

That is absolutely nuts Alf

Players historically start sliding at 31/32....maybe 33/34

Why would you risk keeping a guy that may last 2 to 4 years

That is way too short of a coverage period

 

And exactly what do we have in DiPietro

He is untested, and undersized

Yes, he could turn out fine, but it is his 1st pro-season

and I am not banking on a maybe

 

I would far rather had Demko who if by your opinion

could last 8 to 10 years (because goalies last long???)

Than Marky who has a 2 to 4 window

 

I do not see the logic in that......

 

Now, in saying that, I am all for playing both to the TDL

to make sure my line of thinking works.....

Maybe by then, the answer is clearer...….

I am not in a rush, I just want you to see the merits of identifying

who is the best for the organization to keep

Demko is the best to keep over Marky.  I have no doubt about that.  However, that makes Demko way more valuable in trade too.  Goalies can perform at a high level until their mid 30s.  I'd say Marky looks like he has the competitive spirit to do that.  As for Dipietro, we don't know what we have, but I would think Ian Clarke would have a good idea if we do.