Goalies moving forward.

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Post Reply

What goalie situation is more palatable to you?

Poll ended at Sat Sep 12, 2020 3:33 pm

Signing Markstrom if it means losing Demko to a trade or expansion draft within a year.
5
22%
Not signing Markstrom if it means keeping Demko as the starter moving forward with a cheaper UFA backup.
18
78%
 
Total votes: 23

User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 7881
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by Meds »

Per wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:38 am
ukcanuck wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 7:34 pm Did anyone choose sign Markstrom to a reasonable deal considering the market for goalies soft (reportedly up to twelve established goalies available this year)

Even out the workload Between Markstrom and Demko until the trade deadline then make a decision on who to keep and who to trade or leave exposed for Seattle?
Yeah, that's what I think is the best option. Actually, ideal imho would be if we can sign a one year deal with Markström and protect Demko, then sign a longer contract with Marx after the Seamen have had their pick.

But if a one year option isn't on the table, we should still sign Marx so we can start the season with this tandem, and then decide who to protect, who to trade or lose as we get a better sample size of Demko. I think it's too early to start the season with him as our starter.
Getting a kick out of everyone hoping for a 1 year deal with Markstrom so we don't have to protect Demko and then hoping we can sign them both in 2021.

In that scenario Demko will be a year older. Next year he is going to get more games, so he will have more NHL experience. If he plays well enough that we want to keep him then there's no way he is interested in coming back to be Markstrom's backup if we also give Markstom a multi-year extension at a salary that everyone is expecting.

It makes no sense to bring Markstrom back on a multi-year deal 12 months from now unless the above scenario plays out and Demko turns out to have been a flash in the pan.
User avatar
The Brown Wizard
MVP
MVP
Posts: 12190
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by The Brown Wizard »

Our problems look like a dream to the alberian have-nots. Neither team has a goaltender worth fuck all yet here are the hated canucks....fretting over which all star to keep

:lol:
Witchcraft... Oh, but it IS. A dark and terrible magic...
User avatar
Chef Boi RD
CC Legend
Posts: 19019
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by Chef Boi RD »

Todd Bersnoozi wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:39 pm I would still like to try to keep Marky Marky, but if he wants too much $$$ and/or term, then let him walk. If he stays, we can't afford to give him trade and expansion protection neither. If Marky would do us a solid (like Edler) and sign for 1 year, so we don't have to protect him in the xpansion draft, that'd be great, but I'll be surprised if that happens. Can't blame him if he wants to cash in now, this might be his best and only chance. I think our priorities for our UFAs should be Marky > Tan-Man > Toffoli. Tan-Man & Toffoli can go too if the numbers don't work. We gotta save for Petey & Hughes.

I do like Demko, but durability is an issue for me. I'm not sure he can handle a heavy workload. If Marky walks, I wouldn't mind a guy like Hutchinson or Talbot on a 1-2 year deal. A 1-B kind of guy who can split the work load with Demko. Maybe even Lehner if it's short-term. A 3rd stringer with NHL experience who can play in Utica, be a mentor to Mikey D and come up here when one of our guy's is down would be ideal as well. Louis Dominque would be great if he's interested.

All our goalies aside, I think keeping the goalie guru Ian Clark is the top priority. Whoever is between the pipes is not as important.
Yes I do worry about Demko’s durability which is an unknown. The more this goes on the more I’m comforted by keeping both at least for 1 more season
DOYLE WOULD’VE RATHER HAD KEVIN HAYES AT 7 YEARS 7 MILLION PER INSTEAD OF J.T. MILLER FOR A LATE 1ST RD PICK
User avatar
Micky
MVP
MVP
Posts: 13625
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 5:27 am
Location: Richmond, B.C.

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by Micky »

I think that's exactly what Jim wants to do.
"evolution"
User avatar
The Brown Wizard
MVP
MVP
Posts: 12190
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by The Brown Wizard »

What terrible timing to have to lose a player to expansion ffs. I much preferred worrying about losing gonch or pizza
Witchcraft... Oh, but it IS. A dark and terrible magic...
Curmudgeon
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 408
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2020 11:23 am

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by Curmudgeon »

Benning saying at the media conference that he'd like to sign Markstrom then potentially make a decision if one goes at the trade deadline was downright stupid. Markstom's a UFA and number one goalie, he doesn't need to take a deal that would leave himself vulnerable to that. Jesus Benning.
User avatar
UWSaint
MVP
MVP
Posts: 573
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by UWSaint »

There's a lot of moaning about "losing Demko for nothing" or "losing Markstrom for nothing." That's what the expansion draft does. It means you lose a decent player for nothing. Unless your team is crap. Getting something for Demko means that we lost another player for nothing. (We also don't know yet whether Markstrom or Demko would be selected by the Kraken. They need one starting goalie to ride -- who they get for 25 games is as much a function of looking at the marginal return of that player vs. another from the same team).

I think moving Demko now would be a mistake. Markstrom is good -- finally better than an average starting goalie -- but we don't know how he will age and I don't think its a stretch to think he's not going to get better. He's in his peak, the uncertainty is for how long. Demko is a higher risk play -- the floor is lower, the ceiling is higher. But if he hits, his best years are going to be when this team has its best years.
Hono_rary Canadian
User avatar
The Brown Wizard
MVP
MVP
Posts: 12190
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by The Brown Wizard »

Curmudgeon wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:53 pm Benning saying at the media conference that he'd like to sign Markstrom then potentially make a decision if one goes at the trade deadline was downright stupid. Markstom's a UFA and number one goalie, he doesn't need to take a deal that would leave himself vulnerable to that. Jesus Benning.
I would guess the hypothetical trade he was referring to would be involving TD. Marky would surely be demandimg full trade protection in whatever contract he signs
Witchcraft... Oh, but it IS. A dark and terrible magic...
User avatar
Cherry Picker
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1485
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 5:56 am

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by Cherry Picker »

I can’t imagine the agent for Markstrom will want him to accept a deal without expansion draft protection. If he is signed Demko will be lost to expansion or traded. So Benning needs to make a choice of one or the other. The other options are fairy dust.
We are all Jim Benning.
User avatar
Madcombinepilot
MVP
MVP
Posts: 4125
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 9:54 am
Location: Saskatoon, Sk.

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by Madcombinepilot »

Bottom line, is you sign Markstrom. You have to. We NEED 2 goalies for the majority of next season. The league will compress the shit out of the season (shortened or not) to get as many games as possible in. 5 games in 4 nights is going to happen to every team. Probably a couple times. But the league probably doesn’t want playoffs ending in late September, so expect a shortened and compressed schedule.

Sign Markstrom. Play the shit put of him. See if Demko is for real, or at least how far he has developed. No decision is Needed on this until the next TDD at the earliest, but 2 capable goalies will be needed NOW.

So, Benning signs Markstrom, the schedule will demand they split games, and we re-evaluate at TDD, and again before the expansion draft. There will be a small window when all transactions have to go through Seattle, but that’s a long ways away.
The 'Chain of Command' is the chain I am going to beat you with until you understand I am in charge.
User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 11901
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by SKYO »

Could sign Marky 3 years at around $5.5M per, with a NTC. but he'd have to accept being exposed to Seattle, even then it'd be only for 2 years and making good cash, with no income taxes in Washington iirc IF the Kraken select him.

But it's a good roll of the dice move.

I'm still in the boat to offer 1yr $6M, if not, go sign a Greiss, Talbot or Elliott type for cheap to split duties with Demko.
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."
User avatar
Doyle Hargraves
MVP
MVP
Posts: 19983
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by Doyle Hargraves »

UWSaint wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:05 pm There's a lot of moaning about "losing Demko for nothing" or "losing Markstrom for nothing." That's what the expansion draft does. It means you lose a decent player for nothing. Unless your team is crap. Getting something for Demko means that we lost another player for nothing. (We also don't know yet whether Markstrom or Demko would be selected by the Kraken. They need one starting goalie to ride -- who they get for 25 games is as much a function of looking at the marginal return of that player vs. another from the same team).

I think moving Demko now would be a mistake. Markstrom is good -- finally better than an average starting goalie -- but we don't know how he will age and I don't think its a stretch to think he's not going to get better. He's in his peak, the uncertainty is for how long. Demko is a higher risk play -- the floor is lower, the ceiling is higher. But if he hits, his best years are going to be when this team has its best years.
You don’t remember the angst about losing Markus Granlund leading up to the Vegas E.D. There were a lot of piss soaked jeans on this board. The silver lining was that the jeans were used to put out the hair fires.
“Gohmert and Bumpty sitting in a tree”
User avatar
Tciso
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 2088
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:44 am

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by Tciso »

I like Markstrom, but, with the cap and Seattle, I say let him walk, unless he bends over backwards to stay here. What ever we do, we need to hold onto Demko. Demko is 6 years younger, but 3 or 4 years ahead of where Marky was at the same age. Yeah. we want both of them for next season, but Benning also has to look at where the team is in the 2-6 year range too. If we sign Marky to a long contract at market value, and NTC, we'll have a 36 year old starter that may help us waste the prime years of this re-build.

Demko will be reasonable for the next 4-6 years, and if he flames out ala Lack, then we dip into free agency, or ride the DiPietro train.

Just say NO to bad contracts at all levels.
The Cup is soooooo ours!!!!!!!
theman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1132
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 2:51 pm

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by theman »

I am okay with keeping Markstrom, not sold on Demko yet or Dipietro, only if he agrees to a modified NMC. (agrees to be exposed in the expansion draft) Yes, I am assuming the amount per year and term are reasonable here.
User avatar
The Brown Wizard
MVP
MVP
Posts: 12190
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Goalies moving forward.

Post by The Brown Wizard »

I was listening to a radio slot driving in this am and they were comparing the canucks situation to the Lightning when Bishop was up for a new contract. The TBL and Yzerman made the tough decision which ended up being the right one (handing off to Vasilevsky).

This is a watershed off season for the team. Jimmy better be on the ball
Witchcraft... Oh, but it IS. A dark and terrible magic...
Post Reply