Markstrom requests a trade (or not)

[ayoshi]

The Canucks aren't a goalie graveyard.

They just have poor asset management.

Agree 100%. I didn't like the Miller signing, and I like it even less now. I would have given Lack/Markstrom a chance, especially on a "re-tooling" (or whatever) team. Now it looks like we will lose Markstrom for potentially very little.

Benning must have seen this coming and thought it was better to sign 33 year old Miller to an $18M deal than keep and try to develop Markstrom.

 

[Finnish Your Czechs]

Anyone remember when we traded for goalie Mikka Noranen and Canucks fans were so excited?

Then 3 months later we traded for Roberto Luongo.

Noranen booked to the SEL I believe

This is very reminiscent of those times

 

[Wilch]

Anyone remember when we traded for goalie Mikka Noranen and Canucks fans were so excited?

Then 3 months later we traded for Roberto Luongo.

Noranen booked to the SEL I believe

This is very reminiscent of those times

Except Luongo in 2006>>>>>>>>>>Miller in 2014

It's very different.

 

[Finnish Your Czechs]

Except Luongo in 2006>>>>>>>>>>Miller in 2014

It's very different.

From the perspective of the lesser goalie, there's really no difference

 

[Wilch]

From the perspective of the lesser goalie, there's really no difference

I'm hoping it doesn't play out this way.

Letting Lack go would be a huge mistake.

I think if properly developed, he can be at least on par with Schneider. Really talented and great work ethic.

 

[thekernel]

Wheeeeeeeee this carousel is fantastic I never want to get off

 

[Luongos Knob]

Wheeeeeeeee this carousel is fantastic I never want to get off

 

[dc]

Strange. He won't be a backup on any NHL team, no matter where he's traded. You'd think he wouldn't have minded having a starting job in the AHL next year considering how terrible his NHL numbers have been.

 

[Addison Rae]

He has no value.

 

[biturbo19]

[/b]

Agree 100%. I didn't like the Miller signing, and I like it even less now. I would have given Lack/Markstrom a chance, especially on a "re-tooling" (or whatever) team. Now it looks like we will lose Markstrom for potentially very little.

Benning must have seen this coming and thought it was better to sign 33 year old Miller to an $18M deal than keep and try to develop Markstrom.

And that 2 NHL organizations in the very recent past have apparently thought this little of Markstrom, should probably be an indication as to where his value is as an NHL netminder right now.

He still has the same physical tools that people drooled over...but if he's going to make anything of them, he's going to have to figure out the mental side of his game, which is a huge, and very difficult to sort out. His focus is poor, his attention to detail is poor, his over-aggressiveness gets him in trouble regularly, his composure is poor, his confidence is extremely fragile, he doesn't read the play particularly well. He's an impressive athlete with nice tools. But it's looking more and more likely that he's something like the "David Booth of Goaltending". Yes, he's young and he could still "get it" in the right scenario...but that scenario is most likely in the AHL, where only the Canucks really have a chance of stashing Markstrom in the minors shy of a team trading for him and taking on the risk of waiving him.

Quite frankly...when a team loses an asset for "very little return", it typically means that asset has "very little value". That's where Markstrom is right now.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

Jacob Noronen.

 

[Shareefruck]

<---- #1 Cloutier fan



Honestly the Dan Cloutier bashing gets overblown. Fans tend to have this bipolar tendency to love a guy one season but the moment he slips up completely turn on them. See: Jannik Hansen, aka the loveable Honey Badger who you would have to overpay to get a year ago, and today you trade his ass for whatever draft pick and let a kid take his spot. Alex Burrows works just as well for an example.

Following a number of bad years post-Kirk McLean, Cloutier was the first guy we had that brought some stability to the position. A guy that was a decent through the regular season but struggled in the playoffs. Though for the latter it was looking like he may have turned that around early in the '04 playoffs, but a fluke injury tripping on a bad bit of ice in Calgary and injuring his angle put Auld in net who was sub par. Only reason Auld was the starter post-lockout is because Cloutier was injured all year, Auld was basically our Devan Dubynk.

I always saw Dan Cloutier as a Chris Osgood caliber goalie, except didn't play for Detroit and injuries ruined any chance for longevity. Not the best, but he was okay holding the fort until between McLean and Luongo. One of the reasons who got ripped on so hard around the league because at the time the 'model' to winning the cup was to have a top 5 goalie. Ironically the moment we got Luongo the mindset changed and it was all about having a good cheap goalie so you can spend more cap space on the skaters

It was Hedberg. And he was totally fine in the playoffs, IMO.

I don't think the Cloutier bashing is unwarranted. His play was bipolar as hell, and you rarely see hockey players choke so visibly.

 

[Bad Goalie]

Strange. He won't be a backup on any NHL team, no matter where he's traded. You'd think he wouldn't have minded having a starting job in the AHL next year considering how terrible his NHL numbers have been.

Simple question. Why would he automatically have a starting job in the AHL if the 'Nucks could manage to get him sent down?

He played half of the AHL San Antonio Rampage games last season and had a below .500 record as did Houser and Clemmensen. He couldn't get it done as a starter or backup in Florida when he was given that shot.

Now Vancouver management is showing they don't have the confidence to take that risk here. He was a throwaway by Florida in gaining Luongo because Vancouver would need a goalie coming back.

Eriksson and Cannata had very good records in their non playoff team's second half season when they were the AHL's best record team from January to season's end. This in spite of the fact that the team was horrible in putting up goals, usually not more than 2/game.

Coach Green was very loyal to his original players when new guys arrived in town. They most often sat on the bench or didn't even dress until the guy they were sent here for returned to the lineup. The backup goalie to Cannata when Jokie went up to Vancouver got one start and that was in a 3 games in 3 nights deal or something like that if I remember correctly. He would be most likely go with Jokie until he failed to hold down the spot.

Face it. These two guys both need to get the bulk of play and not alternate or "battle" for #1. Why would they put Jokie's climbing development on backhold in favor of a guy in whom they made no historical investment?

Another issue is cost. Markstrom's salary playing in the AHL against Vancouver's cap would be ridiculous.

My guess is Vancouver will get Markstrom his out and go with the less expensive, improving, promising, yet to be NHL busts currently assigned to Utica.

 

[Barney Gumble]

Another issue is cost. Markstrom's salary playing in the AHL against Vancouver's cap would be ridiculous.

Up to 900K of it won't count towards Vancouver's cap (at least somewhere in the 900K range) if Markstrom's manages to slip thru waivers. That's the amount you can still "hide" a contract's cap consequences by shoving him in the minors.

 

[Royal Canuck]

Feel bad for the guy, never really got a chance here.

 

[Virtanen2Horvat]

Well just trade him for a 7th rounder I guess.

 

[Raincouver]

Trade him and a pick for Yakupov!

 

[bo2shink*]

Anyone remember when we traded for goalie Mikka Noranen and Canucks fans were so excited?

Then 3 months later we traded for Roberto Luongo.

Noranen booked to the SEL I believe

This is very reminiscent of those times

Ah yes, Crawford's whipping boy. What a colossal waste of a pick.

 

[bo2shink*]

I don't think the Cloutier bashing is unwarranted. His play was bipolar as hell, and you rarely see hockey players choke so visibly.

Bertuzzi and Naslund in the playoffs were on par with Cloutier's failures.


Back to Markstrom, I surprised anyone is broken up by this news. My assumption is it's the same people that complain about everything hoping they can type "told you so" in 3 years.

 

[SweedishKeepers]

Sportsnet Pacific ‏@SNETPacific 32s

Benning - "Markstrom never asked for a trade." #Canucks

 

[arsmaster*]

I think the people all broke up about this were thinking markstrom was a high end prospect that half validated dumping and retaining salady on Lu for Shawn Matthias.

Now whatever we get for Markstrom will be linked to the Lu deal.

Be nice to move him for Brett Connolly or another similarly stuttering prospect in a different position.

 

[bo2shink*]

Sportsnet Pacific ‏@SNETPacific 32s

Benning - "Markstrom never asked for a trade." #Canucks

You are ruining the thread!!

 

[Win One Before I Die]

Oh my god I love a good goalie controversy. Signing Miller was the best thing they could have done for team 1040.

 

[Raincouver]

Oh my god I love a good goalie controversy. Signing Miller was the best thing they could have done for team 1040.

Only if they signed him to take over that awful morning show.

 

[BROCK HUGHES]

[/b]

Agree 100%. I didn't like the Miller signing, and I like it even less now. I would have given Lack/Markstrom a chance, especially on a "re-tooling" (or whatever) team. Now it looks like we will lose Markstrom for potentially very little.

Benning must have seen this coming and thought it was better to sign 33 year old Miller to an $18M deal than keep and try to develop Markstrom.

you would have played Markstrom and Lack with the almost same defense we had last year?
Wow.Im more concerned with our defense then anything right now.Moving Garrison was a great thing but he was not the only problem back there. Beiska and Edler had better step it up this year,or they will be on the outs.