Player Discussion Replacing Jacob Markstrom

[n00bxQb]

With the emergence of DiPietro things get really interesting.

It is plausible that Demko is the best trading chip of the 3 just as Schneider was.

We're not even 2 months into his 1st pro season. Impressive as he's apparently been, it's not enough to go all-in on him yet.

 

[M2Beezy]

Just terminate Erikssons contract
Trade Sutter for a late pick
Trade Baertchi for a 3rd round pick

Opens up the money then sign him for 2 years at $6 million per

 

[vanarchy]

Just terminate Erikssons contract
Trade Sutter for a late pick
Trade Baertchi for a 3rd round pick

Opens up the money then sign him for 2 years at $6 million per

Just like that, eh?

 

[sting101]

We're not even 2 months into his 1st pro season. Impressive as he's apparently been, it's not enough to go all-in on him yet.

Agree but it could change things if some of the flaws Mossey chronicles are concerns of the coaching staff and they become extremely high on MDP

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

No team in a position to make the playoffs has ever traded a star incumbent starter without a highly drafted future star 1B already outperforming them and taking their starts. If Demko does that, then it would make sense. Otherwise there's no precedent for this happening, which would seem to undermine your description of it as common sense.

for context, three different situations in the early '90s with some level of comparability (i'll let you all decide how much in each case)—



1993 rangers. vanbiesbrouck is the former vezina winner, richter is the young hotshot. that was the year messier got roger neilson fired. going into the deadline there was a lot of talk of new york trading one of them because the expansion draft was coming that summer and teams could only protect one goalie. trade deadline was march 22, 1993. going into it the rangers were 33-28-11... not great but still in playoff position.

decision: they kept both goalies.

result: they went 1-11-0 the rest of the way and finished last in the wales conference. beezer played the first two games after the deadline, losing both. richter plays the next one, loses. then back to beezer, who gets a shutout. then he loses again, and corey hirsch(!) gets a game, which he loses. hirsch gets a second game, where he gets pulled, richter finishes that game and plays out the last five, losing them all. keenan was hired as their coach in the summer. before the expansion draft they traded beezer to us for doug lidster because we knew one of the expansion teams would pick him first, allowing us to keep our own backup, kay whitmore.



1993 leafs. fuhr is the former vezina winner/hall of famer, potvin is the young guy. up to february, fuhr has 29 games, potvin has 23 games. they both have good records but potvin's stats are way better.

decision: they trade fuhr to buffalo at the beginning of february for dave andreychuk and the first round pick that became kenny jonsson.

result: after potvin takes over, the leafs get really hot and go 20-9-4 to close out the year before making it to the third round, where they lose to LA.



1994 devils. chris terreri was the legit starter, he played between 48 and 53 games the previous three seasons and received stray vezina votes in two of those years. brodeur was a rookie.

decision: they kept both goalies but handed the team over to brodeur toward the end of the season. up to march, it was a fairly even split, with terreri getting a few more games most of the time.

result: brodeur started the playoffs, beating buffalo in the first round, but lost the first two games of the second round against boston so they went back to terreri, who won three in a row. brodeur got back in for game six, pitching a shutout. he started the rest of the way, losing in the wales finals to the rangers in game 7 double OT. terreri backed up brodeur full time the year after and the devils won their first cup. the rest is history.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Trading Markstrom for the highest return possible is common sense, especially with Demko looking good in his starts. Only problem is common sense isn’t a strength for this team.

Watch Benning trade Demko for a near bust prospect like Puljujarvi or Ho Sang.

And before the Benning Bros storm in to defend his honour, this guy traded 33rd overall (similar value as Demko) for Erik freakin' Gudbranson.

 

[bandwagonesque]

for context, three different situations in the early '90s with some level of comparability (i'll let you all decide how much in each case)—



1993 rangers. vanbiesbrouck is the former vezina winner, richter is the young hotshot. that was the year messier got roger neilson fired. going into the deadline there was a lot of talk of new york trading one of them because the expansion draft was coming that summer and teams could only protect one goalie. trade deadline was march 22, 1993. going into it the rangers were 33-28-11... not great but still in playoff position.

decision: they kept both goalies.

result: they went 1-11-0 the rest of the way and finished last in the wales conference. beezer played the first two games after the deadline, losing both. richter plays the next one, loses. then back to beezer, who gets a shutout. then he loses again, and corey hirsch(!) gets a game, which he loses. hirsch gets a second game, where he gets pulled, richter finishes that game and plays out the last five, losing them all. keenan was hired as their coach in the summer. before the expansion draft they traded beezer to us for doug lidster because we knew one of the expansion teams would pick him first, allowing us to keep our own backup, kay whitmore.



1993 leafs. fuhr is the former vezina winner/hall of famer, potvin is the young guy. up to february, fuhr has 29 games, potvin has 23 games. they both have good records but potvin's stats are way better.

decision: they trade fuhr to buffalo at the beginning of february for dave andreychuk and the first round pick that became kenny jonsson.

result: after potvin takes over, the leafs get really hot and go 20-9-4 to close out the year before making it to the third round, where they lose to LA.



1994 devils. chris terreri was the legit starter, he played between 48 and 53 games the previous three seasons and received stray vezina votes in two of those years. brodeur was a rookie.

decision: they kept both goalies but handed the team over to brodeur toward the end of the season. up to march, it was a fairly even split, with terreri getting a few more games most of the time.

result: brodeur started the playoffs, beating buffalo in the first round, but lost the first two games of the second round against boston so they went back to terreri, who won three in a row. brodeur got back in for game six, pitching a shutout. he started the rest of the way, losing in the wales finals to the rangers in game 7 double OT. terreri backed up brodeur full time the year after and the devils won their first cup. the rest is history.

Thanks for putting in the effort to research all this. It all seems to be in accord with the fact that teams in a position to make the playoffs never trade good, incumbent starters unless they also have an excellent young goaltender taking a significant proportion of their starts away and putting up better numbers. Two other examples have been mentioned -- Christobal Huet in 2008, who was losing his starting job to 5th overall pick Carey Price, and Ben Bishop in 2017, who had already lost his job to 19th overall pick Andrei Vasilievsky. I can't isolate the stats at the time of the trades of the goaltenders who remained with the team, but their full season stats were superior in each case.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Watch Benning trade Demko for a near bust prospect like Puljujarvi or Ho Sang.

And before the Benning Bros storm in to defend his honour, this guy traded 33rd overall (similar value as Demko) for Erik freakin' Gudbranson.

Yes please for Puljujarvi....because it'll mean Edmonton gets a good goalie which should keep them ahead of the Canucks while Benning is here.

 

[Regal]

Again -- no team in the history of the NHL has made the decision you're implying the Canucks should make. No team has ever traded a clear no. 1 goaltender when in range of a playoff spot without a young star goaltender taking about half the starts and outperforming them. You're construing this to be evidence of incompetence while disregarding the objective reality that every other GM who has ever been in the same position has made an identical decision, regardless of how they came to be in a position to have to make it. Criticizing Benning for mortgaging the future is defensible. Criticizing him for not trading Markstrom now, regardless of whether or not his career hangs in the balance, isn't. Unless Demko dominates and takes the bulk of the starts, no GM in this position would trade Markstrom regardless of any other circumstances. Therefore it makes no sense to say that Benning's position is the cause of his not trading Markstrom. This isn't a defence of Benning, it's frustration with people criticizing him in ways they know are disingenuous.

The Habs did this exact move in the 07-08 season. Despite sitting tied for 5th in the league in points at the trade deadline, they traded a 32 year old pending UFA in Christobal Huet who had started 38 of their 62 games at that point putting up a respectable .916 SV%, in order to roll with a 20 year old rookie Carey Price in net, who had only started 24 games by that point and was actually putting up worse numbers than Huet with a .910 SV% at the time.

NHL.com - Stats

Yes, Price was more highly touted than Demko, and Huet was a little older than Markstrom, but the premise was the same. The fact is there isn't a lot of situations like this because of Markstrom's contract and the upcoming expansion draft. Ideally Markstrom would be here another year or two, but the fact is that it's unlikely he's going to want to sign a palatable contract and if Demko is the future going forward, getting something for Markstrom is certainly worth considering. And anyone realistic knows this team isn't going anywhere this season, so keeping Markstrom for the year only to let him go is a waste.

I think the two major factors that would greatly affect the decision that we don't know are what kind of contract Markstrom is looking for and what kind of price would teams be willing to pay for him. Goalie markets are fickle so if he's not getting much value then idea goes out the window anyway

 

[bandwagonesque]

The Habs did this exact move in the 07-08 season. Despite sitting tied for 5th in the league in points at the trade deadline, they traded a 32 year old pending UFA in Christobal Huet who had started 38 of their 62 games at that point putting up a respectable .916 SV%, in order to roll with a 20 year old rookie Carey Price in net, who had only started 24 games by that point and was actually putting up worse numbers than Huet with a .910 SV% at the time.

The is technically true but misleading. By the time the trade actually happened Huet had a 2-4 record and a 4.31 GAA in the previous 6 games and the players were splitting starts. Also Bob Gainey specifically said he made the trade in order to give the starting job to Price and said nothing about recouping assets --

"... there’s only one net and only so much time to play. We made the same decision last season when we put Price in the net in Hamilton."

"... It was a clear decision to make our goal available to two premier, young goalies."

Huet returned nearly nothing -- 2nd rounder two years out -- and trade was obviously made because Price was taking his job. The same day Gainey made an enormous offer for Marian Hossa. Did you not see all this when you were researching the trades?

 

[RobertKron]

The is technically true but misleading. By the time the trade actually happened Huet had a 2-4 record and a 4.31 GAA in the previous 6 games and the players were splitting starts. Also Bob Gainey specifically said he made the trade in order to give the starting job to Price and said nothing about recouping assets --

"... there’s only one net and only so much time to play. We made the same decision last season when we put Price in the net in Hamilton."

"... It was a clear decision to make our goal available to two premier, young goalies."

Huet returned nearly nothing -- 2nd rounder two years out -- and trade was obviously made because Price was taking his job. The same day Gainey made an enormous offer for Marian Hossa. Did you not see all this when you were researching the trades?

If they weren't interested in recouping assets, they'd have just kept Huet and played Price more.

 

[bandwagonesque]

If they weren't interested in recouping assets, they'd have just kept Huet and played Price more.

Bob Gainey categorically, specifically said he made the trade primarily to provide playing time for Price and Halak. Halak immediately became one of the best backups in the league and went on to become an excellent starter.

 

[VanJack]

Just terminate Erikssons contract
Trade Sutter for a late pick
Trade Baertchi for a 3rd round pick

Opens up the money then sign him for 2 years at $6 million per

I think the problem is that the Canucks can only protect one goalie in the Seattle expansion draft.....so regardless of Markstrom's contract number, he probably gets claimed anyway.

 

[StreetHawk]

I think the problem is that the Canucks can only protect one goalie in the Seattle expansion draft.....so regardless of Markstrom's contract number, he probably gets claimed anyway.

Factors for a Markstrom extension:
1) Cap hit and term. He'll start the new deal at age 30. So, likely looking for his big payday. Minimum term would likely be 5 years. Cap hit around $6 million for a proven starter. So, the Canucks would have to find around $2.3 million in cap space. And again, with them seemingly pushing the ELC bonuses for Petey and Quinn to next season, that $2.5 million give or take will eat up any salary cap increase. So, they need to find the money by clearing out someone or two off the roster and replacing them with a cheaper option.

2) ED protection. I was surprised to hear that Faulk didn't get ED protection. So, anything is possible.

3) Holtby is the other big name UFA goalie. Also have Howard, but he's more a vet to split time with a younger guy at this point.
And you have the likes of Chicago, Columbus in clear need. Detroit should be in the market. Ottawa, could be but might not want to spend that kind of money right now. And then there's teams like Carolina/Colorado/Calgary who will wait and see how their guy performs in the playoffs.
So, there would be some competition for his services.

 

[82Ninety42011]

I'd dangle Markstrom at the deadline for sure if we could get a 2nd I'd do it. Were not winning the Cup so why not use him as best we can instead of losing for nothing? Who knows a team thinking they are a goalie away might even pay more gotta see whats out there.

 

[F A N]

Benning has not been one to rush his goaltenders and he does place a great importance on goaltending. After Demko's first year he signed Nilsson to a 2 year contract (and paying top dollar for backup goaltending) and Demko was older than Dipietro. Outside of Demko clearly grabbing the #1 goalie spot away from Markstrom, I think Benning will try to re-sign Markstrom. It really comes down to money and term.

 

[biturbo19]

Markstrom isn't the goaltender to break the bank for. If he's not gonna sign to a realistic mid-term sort of deal to tandem and probably slowly lose his job to Demko...so be it. There's probably going to be options to shop for on that "starter-tandem" tier market. Plenty of things slated as of now, and those mid-tier options don't tend to be the ones who get locked up early to keep them from hitting FA.

I'd like to keep this Markstrom-Demko tandem and ride it for a few more years...but if not...i couldn't shrug harder to emphasize my apathy toward Markstrom over a good handful of other comparable options who may well be available that summer.

 

[DL44]

Haven't really read the thread.. Disclaimer.

Marky's sample size of great play is not good enough.

We absolutely know he's capable of great play.
We've seen it.
It's awesome and makes watching games the highlight of the day...

We've also seen the the not great play.
I was sooooo locked into getting rid of him prior to his second half of last season... He was leaky thru his arms, crushing early Weak goals before focusing and slamming the door... But the gut punch goals were too much to overcome... Etc..

So now, this season.. he started well.. fell back to how he used to be (extenuating circumstances).. and then 2 great starts...

Ok.

Need much more great play to make the decision.

Demko.. steady progression. He hasn't shown consistency of high level play yet.. nor has stole a game to the level of Marky.. mbut you hope it's coming.

Gut feel at this time.... Resign Marky for less than $5.5 for 3.... If he continues his good play this season.... (Still needs to be established)..

Otherwise let him walk and we sign a veteran 1B. 1A if Demko isn't ready.

 

[StreetHawk]

Gut feel at this time.... Resign Marky for less than $5.5 for 3.... If he continues his good play this season.... (Still needs to be established)..

Otherwise let him walk and we sign a veteran 1B. 1A if Demko isn't ready.

This is Markstrom's chance at a big payday with term. Kind of like Scott Darling getting $16.6 million over 4 years after leaving Chicago as a backup.

It comes down to what his options are going to be after the season.

chicago - both Crawford and Lehner are UFA. Hawks seem like they will move off the injury riddled Crawford. Retaining Lehner is a strong possibility for them if he plays well this season.
Columbus - no big money has been committed to goaltending. So, they top the list of suitors.
Detroit - Howard is UFA. Bernier 1 more year in the $3's. They can manage having both guys on the roster next season.
Ottawa - Anderson is UFA. Could opt to go a cheaper route. Depends how much money they plan on spending.
New Jersey - seems like they will move on from Schneider. Will Blackwood show them enough to convince them to stick with him long term or will they go for a veteran. Probably depends on Hall. If Hall leaves, then most of the roster is fairly young, so can ride out the development time for Blackwood.
Again, consider that Holtby will also be on the market. He'll eat up 1 of the spots.
Plus, I'm not too familiar what other team's prospect goalies are like or at right now. Do they have their own Demko who is ready to step into the NHL?

As for trading Markstrom, you pretty much need an injury to occur to a team's starter.

 

[VanJack]

The 'gap' if there is one between Markstrom and Demko has narrowed considerably since the start of the season. And before the season is done, Demko might actually be the better goaltender. Then what?

You can't sign Markstrom to long deal with money and term, if he's basically the backup goaltender. Of course at the rate Jimbo hands out dumb contracts, I suppose anything is possible.

 

[Vancouver_2010]

Cant afford him. We will be cap strapped.

Even if we can afford him, Seattle will probably take one away anyways.

 

[4Twenty]

"no team has done....."

Rebuttal shows teams did it

"while technically true...."

HILARIOUS!!!!!

I cannot imagine being the guy always accusing other posters of lying or speaking half truths but doing the same thing in every damn thread.

Also, didn't Benning already tell us they may be able to recoup some picks after sending the 1st and 3rd for JT Miller? I seem to recall that.

 

[Canadian Canuck]

With the emergence of DiPietro things get really interesting.

It is plausible that Demko is the best trading chip of the 3 just as Schneider was.

I've been thinking about this as well. Demko has insane value for a goaltender, arguably almost as much as Schneider when he was traded. I'm really confident in Dipietro, so if we can trade Demko for a top 10 pick or package him for a star player (Hall?) I'd be all for it.

 

[xtra]

Demko has a much smaller sample size for teams to rely on as opposed to Schneider though.

I actually think demko is the best of the 3 by far and fully expect him to be in a 1a/1b situation by the deadline.

at that point it becomes a question if trading markstrom is the right move and if they are a 1a/1b then markstrom needs to go for the best as it’s what’s best for the franchise

 

[ratbid]

I feel we should re-sign Markstrom, unless an overpay comes along, even if it means we lose him to Seattle.
At best we're likely to get a 2nd rounder for him this year. Signing him means we have another year to see exactly what we have in both him and Demko and make moves next year accordingly. I think that's worth a 2nd round pick personally, and we should have the capspace unless we go after Hall.