Baby Pettersson
Moderator
Make the playoffs and Marky will be nicely rested and ready to roll.
Toxic is life bub, so of course palExcept for the toxic stuff, right?
Clean it up except for toxic stuff
If Demko goes on a rowMake the playoffs and Marky will be nicely rested and ready to roll.
Haven’t seen anyone say that.Who cares? Apparently after one game we don’t need Markstrom anymore.
No one has said anything like this.Who cares? Apparently after one game we don’t need Markstrom anymore.
Well in Miller's first year in Anaheim, the stats showed that the then 37 year old outplayed or was every bit as good as John Gibson. It's much easier to put up good stats as the backup goalie. Canucks fans have consistently held affection for backup goalies here for decades.
Haven’t seen anyone say that.
No one has said anything like this.
If Demko goes on a row
You can let Markstrom walk and use that cap space else where like Toffoli
Maybe not exactly the same but we have seen a lot of this.
Agreed. Ideally we trade one down the road to get a top 3 young D. Cash in on area of strength to plug a weakness. If Demko can show he’s a bona fide starter (still a ways to go) then you probably keep him as the younger and cheaper guy who gives you a longer window with the core group. And then there’s the other wild card with DiPietro. Having three good goalies would set us up for a long time. Still too early to say how this all shakes out but it’s a great ‘problem’ to have if both Demko and DiPietro pan out.We're going to have to pick between Markstrom and Demko at some point, and if Demko can play good hockey down the stretch than it's a thing to think about since he's younger/cheaper/team controlled - that's what people are talking about. Not the "We don't NEED Markstrom at all" angle some people are trying to push it as.
We all know how good Markstrom is and has been.
We're going to have to pick between Markstrom and Demko at some point, and if Demko can play good hockey down the stretch than it's a thing to think about since he's younger/cheaper/team controlled - that's what people are talking about. Not the "We don't NEED Markstrom at all" angle some people are trying to push it as.
We all know how good Markstrom is and has been. Why can't we ever just watch and see what happens, instead of freaking out?
Agreed. Ideally we trade one down the road to get a top 3 young D. Cash in on area of strength to plug a weakness. If Demko can show he’s a bona fide starter (still a ways to go) then you probably keep him as the younger and cheaper guy who gives you a longer window with the core group. And then there’s the other wild card with DiPietro. Having three good goalies would set us up for a long time.
We're going to have to pick between Markstrom and Demko at some point, and if Demko can play good hockey down the stretch than it's a thing to think about since he's younger/cheaper/team controlled - that's what people are talking about. Not the "We don't NEED Markstrom at all" angle some people are trying to push it as.
We all know how good Markstrom is and has been. Why can't we ever just watch and see what happens, instead of freaking out? Seems like there's always a freak out now thinking about the "what ifs" about everything.
What about signing Markstrom then waiting until the expansion draft to decide who to keep? I guess it depends on what kind of No Trade clause Marky gets.I think the Canucks are going to have to decide this offseason. Markstrom is a UFA, he either is re-signed or isn't. If he is, Demko is likely gone whether it be via trade or to Seattle. If not re-signed, then it's Demko's time.
There really isn't much time to make a decision that's going to decide who the face in the crease will be for the foreseeable future.
From a positive point of view, I agree with the bolded, given the underblown captastrophe that the team faces in the next couple seasons.
However, from a normative point of view, I believe the team should keep 2 goalies capable of playing at that level. Look at ARI who basically lost the season because they only had 1 goalie capable of playing at that level. Look to the Pens in their 2106 championship with Fleury and Murray.
Imagine getting into the SCF and then losing in 7 games because of injur . . . oh . . . oh, no . . . <sniff> . . . gotta go . . . sorry . . . <sniff> . . . <tears> . . . <uncontrollable shrieking> . . .
No the poster I quoted has been saying this since before the injury. He keeps trying to compare Markstrom to Bobrovsky. His angle has been there is hardly a difference between the two.
There is a entire chain of people saying Demko's win% is better.
Its happening.
Yes it is obviously something to think about, and something many here have been saying we needed to start way earlier so we know what we have in Demko, but don't deny people are talking about Demko being amazing since, well one game.
For the record this happens on both sides. People always push things from way to short of sample sizes.
I guess they could do that until it's time to sign Demko to a new deal and he is an RFA after all, but with the cap issues moving forward, I don't know if that will be possible..? Running two capable goalies seems to be the new wave of handling goalies instead of riding them for 90% of the season.
Rask/Halak
Holtby/Samsonov
Murray/Jarry
Greiss/Varlamov
Shesterkin/Georgiev
Grubauer/Francouz
Bishop/Khudobin
Rinne/Saros
Kuemper/Raanta
Fleury/Lehner
All of these teams are either locked into a playoff spot, or right in the thick of things - don't think it's really a coincidence all of them have a tandem in goal they can go to at any time.
I feel like the Canucks have under-utilized Demko a bit this year and could've started more games to let Markstrom rest a bit more.
Agreed - except I think a lot of those teams you listed had more . . . confidence? . . . of making playoffs and had the luxury of turning to their 1B more often.
The way our team defense was going and given how close the playoff race in the West/Pacific, I can understand Green going to Marky more often (even though I think Demko immediately demonstrated he actually could get the job done, was it the first game against STL in STL where he basically pulled a Marky?)
Oh I understand the reasoning of riding Markstrom too - hard to take him out of the crease when he's playing at this level, plus the added pressure of the Pacific teams constantly shuffling positioning and needing points.
Yeah, that's an absurd take IMO but there are those on both sides. I've personally been wanting Demko to split 50/50 with Markstrom for a long time because we NEED to see what he can do. I get Markstrom has been amazing, but Demko needs games. Doesn't even have to be a straight 50/50 split since Marky has been too good for that.
I am a bit scared of a Markstrom extension, which is why I'm hoping Demko can step in and provide not too big of a drop off from Marky's level of play.
It's really fascinating - the extra workload increases the risk of injury (which has occurred, correlation yes, causation who knows?) - but otoh if Marky can come back quickly rested and rehabbed with enough time to get into game shape (and Demko performs like I think he can and gets us solidly into a playoff spot) then it could be the best of all possible outcomes. Not something to aim for, just more fortuitous circumstances.