[Proposal] Vancouver TO goalie swap

[JM_]

So to begin, my preference is for Jim to sign Marky. But if thats just not possible given the larger wallets of other teams I suggest this:

 

To Toronto: Stecher, rights to Marky, Lind 

 

To Vancouver: Andersson 

 

Toronto gets to have sole negotiating rights to Marky until free agency opens  so about 1 month to get a long term extension done. If they can't, they get a legit bottom pair RHD for their trouble who would likely take a nice lowball deal to stay in the league. Add to that TO gets a close to ready prospect, which matters a lot in the cap era. 

 

TO won't get a shot at a better goalie with a few years left in the tank. We get a great cost controlled tandem in Demko and Andersson and we expose Anderson to Seattle, and we can extend hm for 1 year to make him eligible. 

 

In order to make this happen we let Markys agent speak with TO to let them establish the terms of his extension. 

Edited September 6, 2020 by Robert Long

[BPA]

No thanks.

 

TO is in a bind if they want a different starting goalie.  Don't see the need to offer Stecher and Lind.  

 

We lose a valuable prospect in Lind for a year of Anderson?  

 

There could be a basis for a trade but not sure of the pieces.

[kingofsurrey]

13 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

So to begin, my preference is for Jim to sign Marky. But if thats just not possible given the larger wallets of other teams I suggest this:

 

To Toronto: Stecher, rights to Marky, Lind 

 

To Vancouver: Andersson 

 

Toronto gets to have sole negotiating rights to Marky until free agency opens  so about 1 month to get a long term extension done. If they can't, they get a legit bottom pair RHD for their trouble who would likely take a nice lowball deal to stay in the league. Add to that TO gets a close to ready prospect, which matters a lot in the cap era. 

 

TO won't get a shot at a better goalie with a few years left in the tank. We get a great cost controlled tandem in Demko and Andersson and we expose Anderson to Seattle, and we can extend hm for 1 year to make him eligible. 

 

In order to make this happen we let Markys agent speak with TO to let them establish the terms of his extension. 

No thanks.

Edited September 6, 2020 by kingofsurrey

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, BPA said:

No thanks.

 

TO is in a bind if they want a different starting goalie.  Don't see the need to offer Stecher and Lind.  

 

We lose a valuable prospect in Lind for a year of Anderson?  

 

There could be a basis for a trade but not sure of the pieces.

TO needs both cost controlled d, particularly on the right side, and also some winger prospects. We need a good goalie tandem. But maybe other prospect pieces work better, I see Lind as expendable tho with Hogs and Podz on the way. 

[BPA]

But here's the thing.  Why do we need 1 yr service of Anderson?  We are giving up 2 pieces for a non starter goalie since this path is for Demko to be the starter?

 

If anything, I would get a UFA goalie to help out Demko and use the other pieces to shed cap or upgrade elsewhere. 

[JM_]

1 minute ago, BPA said:

But here's the thing.  Why do we need 1 yr service of Anderson?  We are giving up 2 pieces for a non starter goalie since this path is for Demko to be the starter?

 

If anything, I would get a UFA goalie to help out Demko and use the other pieces to shed cap or upgrade elsewhere. 

thats an option, but you don't know the cost. Having cost control in the deal helps us know who else we can retain like Toffoli and Tanev. We have to have a goalie under contract for at least one year to expose to Seattle as well, so by extending Andersson by 1 year we solve that too, without being into a long term deal. 

 

with a UFA goalie we're likely into a multi year scenario. 

[mll]

Toronto probably does not have the cap space for a goalie like Markstrom.  Carolina has shown interest in Andersen per Friedman.

 

[JM_]

1 minute ago, mll said:

Toronto probably does not have the cap space for a goalie like Markstrom.  Carolina has shown interest in Andersen per Friedman.

 

they can afford to move someone like Nylander tho for not much back in return. They'll have to do this at some point anyway. If TO trades Andersson with no assurance of a starter coming back.... yikes. 

[mll]

2 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

they can afford to move someone like Nylander tho for not much back in return. They'll have to do this at some point anyway. If TO trades Andersson with no assurance of a starter coming back.... yikes. 

 

Friedman in his 31 thoughts:  

19. The Carolina Hurricanes have interest in Frederik Andersen, but Toronto’s made it clear it has no desire to make a move just for the sake of change. If it happens, it’s for an upgrade, which means the Maple Leafs could wait to see how a loaded group of goaltending free agents shakes out.

[JM_]

3 minutes ago, mll said:

 

Friedman in his 31 thoughts:  

19. The Carolina Hurricanes have interest in Frederik Andersen, but Toronto’s made it clear it has no desire to make a move just for the sake of change. If it happens, it’s for an upgrade, which means the Maple Leafs could wait to see how a loaded group of goaltending free agents shakes out.

but thats my point, TO would get early access to the best UFA on the market in Marky. 

 

For us, we could fit all of Andersson, Tanev and Toffoli on our current cap situation. With Marky we have to chose one of TT or Tanev. I hank we'd be a stronger team over all with the 3 players vs 2. 

 

[Bissurnette]

If Toronto have talks with Markstrom and they see a deal being done, I could see something along those lines happening. Anderson is a capable starting goalie who has just been ridden into the ground in Toronto from what I can tell. A change of scenery might allow him a bounce back year, and it gives Toronto what they're looking for - an upgrade in in net and a work horse. I don't know if those are the exact pieces going back and forth but I can see there being a fit for both teams.

[BPA]

33 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

thats an option, but you don't know the cost. Having cost control in the deal helps us know who else we can retain like Toffoli and Tanev. We have to have a goalie under contract for at least one year to expose to Seattle as well, so by extending Andersson by 1 year we solve that too, without being into a long term deal. 

 

with a UFA goalie we're likely into a multi year scenario. 

Then that's the same problem with Anderson.   He'd be UFA after next year.  So why would he sign just a 1yr extension?

[JM_]

5 minutes ago, BPA said:

Then that's the same problem with Anderson.   He'd be UFA after next year.  So why would he sign just a 1yr extension?

why wouldn't he? 5 million reasons. He won't be getting an extension for TO. 

[JM_]

14 minutes ago, Vanuckles said:

If Toronto have talks with Markstrom and they see a deal being done, I could see something along those lines happening. Anderson is a capable starting goalie who has just been ridden into the ground in Toronto from what I can tell. A change of scenery might allow him a bounce back year, and it gives Toronto what they're looking for - an upgrade in in net and a work horse. I don't know if those are the exact pieces going back and forth but I can see there being a fit for both teams.

thats what I was thinking. A split season with Demko-Andersson sounds pretty good to me. 

[BPA]

1 minute ago, Robert Long said:

why wouldn't he? 5 million reasons. He won't be getting an extension for TO. 

UFA.  

 

Perhaps he can get a multi-year deal elsewhere and be the starter instead of being the backup.

[JM_]

1 minute ago, BPA said:

UFA.  

 

Perhaps he can get a multi-year deal elsewhere and be the starter instead of being the backup.

then thats fine, we're not on the hook for a long term deal with a guy over 30. We can always sign a plug goalie like Domingue if need be for expansion. But Andersson would be foolish not to take the 5 mil extension in covid times imo. 

[mll]

18 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

but thats my point, TO would get early access to the best UFA on the market in Marky. 

 

For us, we could fit all of Andersson, Tanev and Toffoli on our current cap situation. With Marky we have to chose one of TT or Tanev. I hank we'd be a stronger team over all with the 3 players vs 2. 

 

According to Sportloqiq's tracking technology,  Andersen was pretty much break even where he made the stops he was supposed to make.  Markstrom on the other hand saved the Canucks 1 goal every 2 games.  That's not negligible as difference and can impact the standings.

 

[JM_]

Just now, mll said:

According to Sportloqiq's tracking technology,  Andersen was pretty much break even where he made the stops he was supposed to make.  Markstrom on the other hand saved the Canucks 1 goal every 2 games.  That's not negligible as difference and can impact the standings.

 

for sure, which is why I stated my preference is to keep him. But if he's priced out of our range and/or wants too much term, this is a deal i'd be happy with. 

[BPA]

So we end up trading Stecher + Lind for 1yr of Anderson, only to go back to Domingue??

 

If your reasoning that Anderson would accept 5M x 1yr cuz Covid-19, then why not use that reasoning for Marky?

 

Sign Marky for $5M x 2yr???  He should be happy to get that as well shouldn't he?

 

Sorry.  Can't see how the deal favors Canucks at all.

[mll]

.

Edited September 6, 2020 by mll