Player Discussion Jacob Markstrom

[tantalum]

Some players may not take long term deals in a flat cap because the cap will start to move up in a couple of years and a good chance it will be a significant move up. And you'll have the other mindset of I better get that long term security while I can.

It'll be an interesting summer to see where things shake out.

 

[Peter Griffin]

Benning said that Demko was the goalie of the future...Does this mean that Benning won’t offer Marky a NMC..?

That could be a game changer..

I would be very surprised if Markstrom gets expansion draft protection from Vancouver.

 

[BluesyShoes]

I think the best thing to do for both parties is to sign Markstrom to a good deal that he is happy with with no expansion draft protection and a limited no trade clause. Seattle isn't that bad of an option for a goalie, and if we are going to lose him we can try to trade him to a contender on his list at the deadline. He's a pro and understands the nature of the business. If he isn't happy with that, he can walk. We could also make a play with Seattle to protect Demko, maybe trade them a package of picks/prospects/players to protect Demko from the expansion draft. Who even knows what will happen; maybe with Covid Seattle is wary of entering the league, and the league doesn't want to expand just yet, and they will postpone the whole thing.

 

[Fatass]

I would be very surprised if Markstrom gets expansion draft protection from Vancouver.

If he does get expansion draft protection Benning had better trade Demko ASAP, because his value will drop.

 

[ChilliBilly]

The smart thing is to sign him to a 6 x $6 M (or something like that) contract and then trade him at the draft. that way we get a ton for him. Pretty sure one of the big teams would be interested if they have the cap space. And bring back a decent back up for $2.5 M in the deal, or get draft picks.

 

[Peter10]

I think the best thing to do for both parties is to sign Markstrom to a good deal that he is happy with with no expansion draft protection and a limited no trade clause. Seattle isn't that bad of an option for a goalie, and if we are going to lose him we can try to trade him to a contender on his list at the deadline. He's a pro and understands the nature of the business. If he isn't happy with that, he can walk. We could also make a play with Seattle to protect Demko, maybe trade them a package of picks/prospects/players to protect Demko from the expansion draft. Who even knows what will happen; maybe with Covid Seattle is wary of entering the league, and the league doesn't want to expand just yet, and they will postpone the whole thing.

There is absolutely ZERO chance of that happening

 

[Peter Griffin]

The smart thing is to sign him to a 6 x $6 M (or something like that) contract and then trade him at the draft. that way we get a ton for him. Pretty sure one of the big teams would be interested if they have the cap space. And bring back a decent back up for $2.5 M in the deal, or get draft picks.

Has this EVER happened in the NHL? Sign and trades involving impending UFA’s aren’t a thing in the NHL as the only party that benefits is the one trading the player away.

 

[Catamarca Livin]

If he does get expansion draft protection Benning had better trade Demko ASAP, because his value will drop.

Depends on Demko's value. If it is only a second round pick keep him for the year with his 1 million dollar contract. His contract is needed on this team so any trade would require a contract to be dumped. We will lose a player in expansion draft. If Demko is only worth a 2nd it would not be a huge lost value wise. When considering it saves a Gaudette level player. Demko's next contract will increase by 2 or 3 or even 4 times if he has good year. Demko is very valuable to the Canucks next year so team would require an overpayment to trade him.

 

[F A N]

Has this EVER happened in the NHL? Sign and trades involving impending UFA’s aren’t a thing in the NHL as the only party that benefits is the one trading the player away.

Hossa for Heatley was a sign and trade but I'm not sure if it's the type of sign and trade we're thinking of. Regardless, a player can benefit from a sign and trade. For example, a player's current team could offer an 8 year contract as opposed to 7.

 

[Hammer79]

I would be very surprised if Markstrom gets expansion draft protection from Vancouver.

"4x5 is probably the highest VAN goes (on Toffoli). As for Markstrom, believe they aren’t too far off reported Lehnar deal (5x5). Expansion protection is big."

"[Sportsnet 650] Elliotte Friedman: I think Canucks want to bring both the goalies back & make a decision in a year. I wouldn’t be surprised if Markstrom and Canucks are talking about is this: We’ll consider a NMC after expansion draft. We make our decision & if you’re our guy, then you get locked in"

 

[Peter Griffin]

"4x5 is probably the highest VAN goes (on Toffoli). As for Markstrom, believe they aren’t too far off reported Lehnar deal (5x5). Expansion protection is big."

"[Sportsnet 650] Elliotte Friedman: I think Canucks want to bring both the goalies back & make a decision in a year. I wouldn’t be surprised if Markstrom and Canucks are talking about is this: We’ll consider a NMC after expansion draft. We make our decision & if you’re our guy, then you get locked in"

Benning said just that actually, they want both goalies in the fold and look to make a move potentially at the trade deadline.

 

[Hammer79]

Benning said just that actually, they want both goalies in the fold and look to make a move potentially at the trade deadline.

Right, so Markstrom has to outplay Demko to get a NMC after the Seattle expansion draft is over? Why does Marky sign this, when there are 3 teams that can guarantee they need his services beyond this year? We're probably going after him because of the hurry-up schedule for the 2021 season, but I don't think we should be making 5 or 6 year deals (NMC or not) just to keep Markstrom for 1 season.

 

[Peter Griffin]

Right, so Markstrom has to outplay Demko to get a NMC after the Seattle expansion draft is over? Why does Marky sign this, when there are 3 teams that can guarantee they need his services beyond this year? We're probably going after him because of the hurry-up schedule for the 2021 season but I don't think we should be making 5 or 6 year deals (NMC or not) just to keep Markstrom for 1 season.

I think this is a big reason for them wanting to keep a Marky/Demko tandem through at least next season.

As for why Markstrom would sign here without expansion protection? Well for one there’s no guarantee that Seattle is even going to want an over 30 goalie signed to a long term deal. Secondly, maybe Markstrom would prefer to stay in Vancouver and take a chance that maybe he gets selected to go to the closest possible city to Vancouver, rather than pack his family and move elsewhere and have no chance at remaining in Vancouver. I dunno, all I know is that Benning specifically brought up the possibility of keeping both and reassessing the situation next year.

 

[Hammer79]

Heard this on XM NHL today. I, uh, wasn't happy when I heard it. Excuse the 'F off' please.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Heard this on XM NHL today. I, uh, wasn't happy when I heard it. Excuse the 'F off' please.

It just makes too much sense for Jimbo to trade Demko to relieve cap pressure while securing the net with Markstrom. This is the go to move.

There’s nothing progressive with what Jim Benning does.

 

[Hodgy]

It just makes too much sense for Jimbo to trade Demko to relieve cap pressure while securing the net with Markstrom. This is the go to move.

There’s nothing progressive with what Jim Benning does.

As I have said in the past, it’s hard not to see Benning using Demko to help get out of the cap crunch.

 

[VanJack]

Seems apparent now that Markstrom will test the UFA market in October. I suppose if he gets an offer he could still double back to the Canucks. But if it's $6m a season with a NTC in his contract, he's as good as gone imo. Too many teams out there desperate for goaltending.

 

[Hammer79]

It just makes too much sense for Jimbo to trade Demko to relieve cap pressure while securing the net with Markstrom. This is the go to move.

There’s nothing progressive with what Jim Benning does.

It's just so frustrating.

To sum up the video for those who can't watch: Trade talks around Demko, at least 2 teams have enquired. No contract extension talks. If they get closer to a deal with Markstom, Demko will be used to relieve cap pressure.

Also goes on to say that Toffoli is likely to sign in Vancouver.

The panelist after him was clearly east coast and said 'to be careful on Demko' and then goes on to quote his regular season stats as the only reason to be cautious, then sequed back to Griess and 'King Henrik' and basically changes the subject back to the overall league goaltending situation. I cut his response because he goes off topic quickly. I doubt he even watched those 3 games at all.

 

[Cupless44]

It just makes too much sense for Jimbo to trade Demko to relieve cap pressure while securing the net with Markstrom. This is the go to move.

There’s nothing progressive with what Jim Benning does.

Nothing progressive at all.

Let's lock up the 31 year old until he is 36 and move the cheaper 24 year old who is just about to come into his own as a stud goaltender.

 

[F A N]

There's not really a pure right and wrong answer here. It's sort of like the Luongo vs Schneider situation. Gillis had the option of simply letting Luongo go and keep Schneider. But he decided that there wasn't that much of a difference between Luongo and Schneider and felt getting Horvat was the better decision. In hindsight it certainly appears to have been a good decision in the long run but the Canucks did give up a goalie who was a top 5 caliber goalie for 3 seasons until injuries ruined his career.

Injuries affecting the outcome aside, Markstrom is the the proven goalie and he's only soon to be 31. He should be able to maintain his level of play for 3 or more years. Demko, however, is soon to be 25. He's unproven but it looks like he's ready to shoulder the load. Then again, some goalies never take the next step or can't maintain their play. Jake Allen is now considered a very good backup rather than a good #1 goalie.

The best option would be to bring Markstrom back (on a reasonable contract) with the understanding that long term Demko may be the team's #1 goalie going forward. But that's likely difficult to pull off. At the time of the Schneider trade I was upset because I highly value what an elite level goalie can bring to the team. I am of the same mindset. If the team believes in Demko, I would rather go with the younger goaltender and not worry about whether it is the better "asset management" decision.

 

[Hit the post]

Nothing progressive at all.

Let's lock up the 31 year old until he is 36 and move the cheaper 24 year old who is just about to come into his own as a stud goaltender.

Though in that case we didn't have a 24 year old D looking to come into his own as a stud D.

 

[MarkMM]

Nothing progressive at all.

Let's lock up the 31 year old until he is 36 and move the cheaper 24 year old who is just about to come into his own as a stud goaltender.

All because Benning overpaid for 30+ year-old under-performing winger based on his poor read of the team's competitive standing and made it a $6M/year long-term buy-out proof contract, then when that clearly blew up in his face he doubled down with more overpaid contracts for bottom six players.

 

[Fatass]

When Marky plays lots he gets worse, and injured. Is this a function of his age, and should that be a concern in resigning him?

 

[VanJack]

When Marky plays lots he gets worse, and injured. Is this a function of his age, and should that be a concern in resigning him?

Absolutely it should be a concern....particularly if takes between $5.5m and $6m to sign him with term on the contract.

When you look at the Canucks cap situation, Markstrom and Tanev are now officially off the books as UFA's. And next season they'll be joined by Edler and Sutter. That's a ton of money in cap savings, particularly with Hughes and Pettersson due monstrous deals going forward.

If Demko can even be 80=85 percent as good as Markstrom, the cap savings alone would make it worthwhile.

 

[Fatass]

Absolutely it should be a concern....particularly if takes between $5.5m and $6m to sign him with term on the contract.

When you look at the Canucks cap situation, Markstrom and Tanev are now officially off the books as UFA's. And next season they'll be joined by Edler and Sutter. That's a ton of money in cap savings, particularly with Hughes and Pettersson due monstrous deals going forward.

If Demko can even be 80=85 percent as good as Markstrom, the cap savings alone would make it worthwhile.

If we don’t sign Marky which UFA would be a good target?