Rumor: Markstrom is asking for Connor Hellebuyck $$$$$

[Cupless44]

Markstrom has played great. I know the preference is to sign him and keep him but some common sense and good management (there is a concept) needs to come into play here, given the cap situation, and given how signing 30 year old goalies to big long term contracts usually works out.

 

[DS7]

Give markstrom term, but no NMC? provides flexibility on negotiations with Seattle.

I'm interested to see how much his preference to play in Vancouver translates in Cap $ savings

 

[Orr4Norris]

Give markstrom term, but no NMC? provides flexibility on negotiations with Seattle.

I'm interested to see how much his preference to play in Vancouver translates in Cap $ savings

I’d be shocked if Marky didn’t insist on protection from the expansion draft.

 

[Hit the post]

we can trade Sutter (or Eriksson) without taking cap back.

 

[Nucker101]

Hopefully Benning doesn't cave on term, I hate the idea of paying big bucks for a goalie when he's 33+.

 

[Luck 6]

it can happen. But say goodbye to someone like Gaudette, or a 1st round pick, going along with Eriksson.

 

[Hit the post]

it can happen. But say goodbye to someone like Gaudette, or a 1st round pick, going along with Eriksson.

Even the 1st round pick we deal will have less value given that we don't have control over which year that pick will be.

 

[mathonwy]

Hopefully Benning doesn't cave on term, I hate the idea of paying big bucks for a goalie when he's 33+.

I hate the idea of paying 36M over 6 years for complete garbage and here we are.

 

[EpochLink]

Ask after the season is over

 

[Jack Burton]

Markstrom has played great. I know the preference is to sign him and keep him but some common sense and good management (there is a concept) needs to come into play here, given the cap situation, and given how signing 30 year old goalies to big long term contracts usually works out.

C'mon Cupless, common sense and good management does not exist with our Vancouver Canucks.

Benning will reward Markstrom with a nice 30 something contract. He's been excellent for us the last few seasons and is a huge reason for our current success.

I dont think this organization wants to part with Markstrom and I dont think Markstrom wants to go anywhere else.

He'll get a decent contract, reasonable term with us unless someone elts blows Benning out of the water which I just don't see happening.

 

[mriswith]

Anyone keep up with Clear Sight Analytics?

They have the Canucks as the 6th worst defensive team in the NHL. 4th highest in the league at mid and high percentage shots against. Markstrom 2nd in the league in saves above expected save percentage. Long podcast on it here, coverage on his approach with some Markstrom bits starts roughly around 45 min but most is on his website: ‎InGoal Radio Podcast: Episode 44: Steve Valiquette on Apple Podcasts

And Markstrom leading the league in stolen wins with 8

 

[F A N]

Anyone keep up with Clear Sight Analytics?

They have the Canucks as the 6th worst defensive team in the NHL. 4th highest in the league at mid and high percentage shots against. Markstrom 2nd in the league in saves above expected save percentage. Long podcast on it here, coverage on his approach with some Markstrom bits starts roughly around 45 min but most is on his website: ‎InGoal Radio Podcast: Episode 44: Steve Valiquette on Apple Podcasts

And Markstrom leading the league in stolen wins with 8

No to your question but that sounds about right in terms off what I have read from other sources.

 

[mathonwy]

Anyone keep up with Clear Sight Analytics?

They have the Canucks as the 6th worst defensive team in the NHL. 4th highest in the league at mid and high percentage shots against. Markstrom 2nd in the league in saves above expected save percentage. Long podcast on it here, coverage on his approach with some Markstrom bits starts roughly around 45 min but most is on his website: ‎InGoal Radio Podcast: Episode 44: Steve Valiquette on Apple Podcasts

And Markstrom leading the league in stolen wins with 8

The eye test confirm this.

When the opposing team turns on the heat, this team has a tendency to fold like a cheap poker table but Markstrom stands tall and buys them time until they are able to score a flukey goal.

 

[biturbo19]

I don't think $6M x 6 years is even an unrealistic ask from Markstrom. That's where the market has kinda gone, for a goaltender performing as he has lately. It's just a real concern when it comes to term for this team, and Markstrom at his age. You don't want to sign a goaltender to a big money deal that takes them more than halfway through their 30s. It's just asking for a disaster.

The other problem is obviously the expansion draft. If you sign Markstrom to a deal like that, it's almost certainly coming with some sort of NMC protection that would leave Demko exposed, which isn't great. So you have to figure out how you're going to handle that situation, if you're even going to talk about a big extension for Markstrom. Who is going to be your guy...not just right now, but for the next half dozen years or so?


It'd be a huge blow to lose Markstrom like that, but i think you almost have to play hardball and try to call his bluff. There are only so many landing spots, and i think most of them are also going to have similar concerns when it comes to term and expansion protection. Carolina is the team that really worries me as a prospective suitor for someone like Markstrom, who would be able to accommodate his asking price. Outside of that though, how many teams would really be willing to lock themselves in to that $6M x 6 with a NMC type deal structure?

 

[Jack Burton]

No to your question but that sounds about right in terms off what I have read from other sources.

For a team to add a generational D talent and it only moves the needle 1 tick.

You probably have problems.

 

[Jack Burton]

I don't think $6M x 6 years is even an unrealistic ask from Markstrom. That's where the market has kinda gone, for a goaltender performing as he has lately. It's just a real concern when it comes to term for this team, and Markstrom at his age. You don't want to sign a goaltender to a big money deal that takes them more than halfway through their 30s. It's just asking for a disaster.

The other problem is obviously the expansion draft. If you sign Markstrom to a deal like that, it's almost certainly coming with some sort of NMC protection that would leave Demko exposed, which isn't great. So you have to figure out how you're going to handle that situation, if you're even going to talk about a big extension for Markstrom. Who is going to be your guy...not just right now, but for the next half dozen years or so?


It'd be a huge blow to lose Markstrom like that, but i think you almost have to play hardball and try to call his bluff. There are only so many landing spots, and i think most of them are also going to have similar concerns when it comes to term and expansion protection. Carolina is the team that really worries me as a prospective suitor for someone like Markstrom, who would be able to accommodate his asking price. Outside of that though, how many teams would really be willing to lock themselves in to that $6M x 6 with a NMC type deal structure?

6 x 5 is reasonable with a full NTC.

You wanna cut term then give him a condo in the downtown area. 7 x 4

 

[Hoghandler]

It'd be a huge blow to lose Markstrom like that, but i think you almost have to play hardball and try to call his bluff.

Yup, and that's what it appears they are doing, with the rumoured 2-3 year offer.

This is why you invest a high pick and all this time in developing Demko. If Markstrom wants 5+ years, you have to be willing to walk away and let Ian Clark work his magic with the younger goaltender.

Would be a big loss, but also open up cap flexibility to improve the team in front of it's goalies. If it affords you a Sami Vatanen or Torrey Krug for example, you take that big addition and move on.

 

[xtra]

Anyone keep up with Clear Sight Analytics?

They have the Canucks as the 6th worst defensive team in the NHL. 4th highest in the league at mid and high percentage shots against. Markstrom 2nd in the league in saves above expected save percentage. Long podcast on it here, coverage on his approach with some Markstrom bits starts roughly around 45 min but most is on his website: ‎InGoal Radio Podcast: Episode 44: Steve Valiquette on Apple Podcasts

And Markstrom leading the league in stolen wins with 8

I’ve finally started to see some markstrom for hart talk and honestly if this team makes the playoffs he deserves it.

if you watch the game there are so many five alarm saves he makes it’s stupid.

imagine if we had any other goalie in net where we would be.

 

[Nucker101]

I hate the idea of paying 36M over 6 years for complete garbage and here we are.

You know what they say




7 wrongs don’t make a right

 

[F A N]

For a team to add a generational D talent and it only moves the needle 1 tick.

You probably have problems.

What is the problem though? Not having Dmen who are good at preventing zone entries? Last season I made a post about how the Canucks were poor defensively with Edler, Tanev, Hutton, Stecher in the team's top 4. But the majority of us thought that Edler and Tanev were legitimate top 4 Dmen and Hutton and Stecher were too if not just below. So changes were made and we swapped out half of the D corps but currently 3 of those guys play in our top 4.

 

[RandV]

What is the problem though? Not having Dmen who are good at preventing zone entries? Last season I made a post about how the Canucks were poor defensively with Edler, Tanev, Hutton, Stecher in the team's top 4. But the majority of us thought that Edler and Tanev were legitimate top 4 Dmen and Hutton and Stecher were too if not just below. So changes were made and we swapped out half of the D corps but currently 3 of those guys play in our top 4.

I doubt anyone thought having those 4 alone would be good enough for a top 4, but if one of the stats brought up is "mid and high percentage shots against" then I don't think that has much specifically to do with zone entries and is probably more an overall team/coaching thing. Look at the Islanders for example, there blue line right now is:

LD	RD
Andy Greene	Ryan Pulock
Nick Leddy	Johnny Boychuk
Devon Toews	Scott Mayfield

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Man to man is that group really better than our guys this year or last?

 

[tantalum]

What is the problem though? Not having Dmen who are good at preventing zone entries? Last season I made a post about how the Canucks were poor defensively with Edler, Tanev, Hutton, Stecher in the team's top 4. But the majority of us thought that Edler and Tanev were legitimate top 4 Dmen and Hutton and Stecher were too if not just below. So changes were made and we swapped out half of the D corps but currently 3 of those guys play in our top 4.

There were some articles in the summer that discussed that while last year seemed to be a bounce back season, his underlying numbers suggested his play was degrading. That isn't to say he isn't a good D-man just that his effectiveness was being reduced. I wonder if that trend has continued to this year. The canucks are clearly better with him in the lineup but that and declining effectiveness can both be true. Against the rush Edler and Myers are disastrous when it comes to allowing zone entry (by the numbers). I wonder if a good chunk of that is a result of sharing the ice with forwards who are getting caught and allowing odd man attacks and attack with speed through the neutral zone. It's likely a bit of everything. As a group they also aren't very good at preventing those shots down low and clearing out rebounds.

But you are correct...the Top 4 is a concern and I think remains one. It's been stabilized a bit thanks to an unexpected year from Hughes but I still think there need to be further turnover in that top 4.

edit: I also think things are a bit topsy turvy at even strength. I don't feel Myers should be leading the team in icetime 5-on-5 (2 more minutes than Tanev). It should be Hughes-Tanev-Edler-Myers/Stecher NOT Myers-Edler-Hughes-Tanev.

 

[Hit the post]

I doubt anyone thought having those 4 alone would be good enough for a top 4, but if one of the stats brought up is "mid and high percentage shots against" then I don't think that has much specifically to do with zone entries and is probably more an overall team/coaching thing. Look at the Islanders for example, there blue line right now is:

LD	RD
Andy Greene	Ryan Pulock
Nick Leddy	Johnny Boychuk
Devon Toews	Scott Mayfield

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Man to man is that group really better than our guys this year or last?

Look at the quality of the German panzers vs French tanks in 1940. It's not what tools you have sometimes but how you use them.

 

[racerjoe]

I don't think $6M x 6 years is even an unrealistic ask from Markstrom. That's where the market has kinda gone, for a goaltender performing as he has lately. It's just a real concern when it comes to term for this team, and Markstrom at his age. You don't want to sign a goaltender to a big money deal that takes them more than halfway through their 30s. It's just asking for a disaster.

The other problem is obviously the expansion draft. If you sign Markstrom to a deal like that, it's almost certainly coming with some sort of NMC protection that would leave Demko exposed, which isn't great. So you have to figure out how you're going to handle that situation, if you're even going to talk about a big extension for Markstrom. Who is going to be your guy...not just right now, but for the next half dozen years or so?

It'd be a huge blow to lose Markstrom like that, but i think you almost have to play hardball and try to call his bluff. There are only so many landing spots, and i think most of them are also going to have similar concerns when it comes to term and expansion protection. Carolina is the team that really worries me as a prospective suitor for someone like Markstrom, who would be able to accommodate his asking price. Outside of that though, how many teams would really be willing to lock themselves in to that $6M x 6 with a NMC type deal structure?

As I mentioned in another thread, if I sign Markstrom to term, I am trading Demko.

I think you are making a choice on the two this offseason. If you sign Markstrom to term you believe in dipeitro as the next goalie.

 

[krutovsdonut]

this has been bugging me for a while as an opportunity wasted. can we change the title of this thread to:

"Markstrom is asking for Connor Hellebuycks"