Player Discussion Replacing Jacob Markstrom

[bandwagonesque]

Continue? Eddie Lack .930’d them into the post season.

His save percentage was .921. That creeping exaggeration aside, he never achieved success again, washed out of the NHL within three years, and played far less and far worse than Miller during those three years. You can dispute the methodology of the poster's beliefs, but you can't dispute that they replaced Lack with a steadier and better goaltender, although I expect you to do something that superficially has the appearance of trying.

 

[4Twenty]

His save percentage was .921. That creeping exaggeration aside, he never achieved success again, washed out of the NHL within three years, and played far less and far worse than Miller during those three years. You can dispute the methodology of the poster's beliefs, but you can't dispute that they replaced Lack with a steadier and better goaltender, although I expect you to do something that superficially has the appearance of trying.

He .930’d them as a starter in the heaviest work load in the NHL when Miller went down.

I would’ve been fine with your last response had you said unproven goaltending but you called it poor. And in this post you’re using Lack flaming out as your support for this, which is using the benefit of hindsight. When I use hindsight I see a team finishing about as low as it gets with this “steadier better goaltender”. So what was the benefit? I’d say very little on the ice and we don’t really know what Lack could’ve done here where he was comfortable and successful. Nor do we know how much greater the return for Miller would’ve been. But even you should be able to admit the difference should’ve been significant being the steadier better goalie and all.

Why bother with your last sentence?
Blatant attempt to troll. A real common theme among your posts.

 

[bandwagonesque]

He .930’d them as a starter in the heaviest work load in the NHL when Miller went down.

I would’ve been fine with your last response had you said unproven goaltending but you called it poor. And in this post you’re using Lack flaming out as your support for this, which is using the benefit of hindsight. When I use hindsight I see a team finishing about as low as it gets with this “steadier better goaltender”.

Again, this has nothing to do with what the poster you responded to was talking about, which was the effect of having proven, reliable goaltending on the long-term development of a team and the individual players on it.

So what was the benefit? I’d say very little on the ice and we don’t really know what Lack could’ve done here where he was comfortable and successful. Nor do we know how much greater the return for Miller would’ve been. But even you should be able to admit the difference should’ve been significant being the steadier better goalie and all.

Apart from the suggestion that Lack was significantly more likely to be successful if he hadn't been traded, much of this is probably correct. The person you were addressing didn't dispute any of this, nor did you take the initiative to discuss it with them. You skipped it and moved right on to pretending they'd expressed an opinion they hadn't and criticizing them for it.

Why bother with your last sentence?

Because in my opinion it's a measured, accurate, and probably understated description of your typical behaviour.

 

[Hit the post]

He .930’d them as a starter in the heaviest work load in the NHL when Miller went down.

The hilarious thing was, it was the unproven backup goalie sheltering the veteran mentor starting goalie. Miller got all the starts against a godawful Oiler team (not that they’re much better today) that one season for example.

 

[4Twenty]

The hilarious thing was, it was the unproven backup goalie sheltering the veteran mentor starting goalie. Miller got all the starts against a godawful Oiler team (not that they’re much better today) that one season for example.

Oh I remember he got most of the tough starts and the first night of the back to backs.

 

[4Twenty]

Again, this has nothing to do with what the poster you responded to was talking about, which was the effect of having proven, reliable goaltending on the long-term development of a team and the individual players on it.


Apart from the suggestion that Lack was significantly more likely to be successful if he hadn't been traded, much of this is probably correct. The person you were addressing didn't dispute any of this, nor did you take the initiative to discuss it with them. You skipped it and moved right on to pretending they'd expressed an opinion they hadn't and criticizing them for it.

Because in my opinion it's a measured, accurate, and probably understated description of your typical behaviour.

It had something to do with it for me. If the alternative to the potential disaster was finishing 28th and 29th then we’re just arguing about different disasters. Katrina vs Andrew if you will.

well I think without hindsight benefiting the thinking, I don’t think it was fair to think Lack would’ve flamed out of the league. But that’s just going by his body of work as a Canuck prospect/player.

You didn’t give the poster a chance to respond by the way, you moved right in and started preaching from the pulpit.

plenty of folks were excited the moment Benning took the job thinking they might finally skimp on spending on a goalie and thought going with that young tandem was the way to go. I certainly did.

 

[y2kcanucks]

1) I would argue that these contracts are only "franchise crippling" if it prevents us from successfully re-signing our core players (Boeser, Markstrom, Pettersson, Hughes, or any other young player on our team that promises to be an integral part of our core).

2) If you want to talk about "franchise crippling contracts," see Maple Leafs Toronto. Unlike what will likely be the case in Vancouver, the Leafs' contracts and cap structure serve as hindrances AFTER their core had been signed, post ELC's. Their core players didn't accept cap friendly bridge deals because Dubas paid a premium to Tavares beforehand.

The Canucks on the other hand, already have two extremely cap friendly deals to Miller and Boeser. They'll likely get a bridge of some kind from Hughes as well. Contracts such as Pearson, Schaller, and Sutter will all come off the books by the time we need to re-up Petey and Hughes. Baertschi, Beagle, Roussel, and Ferland will be off the books by the time we need to re-sign guys like Horvat, Boeser, and future RFA's such as Podkolzin and Hoglander.

Our only contract hindrance right now, is Eriksson, but that will likely be addressed as well.

When you don’t realize how awful contracts to Eriksson, Myers, and other 4th liners hurts the Canucks, and instead think Toronto was stupid for giving out big contracts to legitimate stars, there’s no discussion to be had. One team is a Cup contender while the other isn’t likely to make the playoffs. This is common sense, yet your blind faith in Benning has clouded your judgment. Not sure if that’s intentional, or you really think that way, either way, you’re wrong.

 

[Horse McHindu]

When you don’t realize how awful contracts to Eriksson, Myers, and other 4th liners hurts the Canucks, and instead think Toronto was stupid for giving out big contracts to legitimate stars, there’s no discussion to be had. One team is a Cup contender while the other isn’t likely to make the playoffs. This is common sense, yet your blind faith in Benning has clouded your judgment. Not sure if that’s intentional, or you really think that way, either way, you’re wrong.

Yeah, we will have to agree on one thing:

There really is no discussion to be had.

You think the Leafs are a cup contender(this year and beyond), while not taking into account what the Canucks' cap structure will look like after the Summer of 2021.

There is no discussion to be had if one of the parties cannot see the forest for the trees.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Yeah, we will have to agree on one thing:

There really is no discussion to be had.

You think the Leafs are a cup contender(this year and beyond), while not taking into account what the Canucks' cap structure will look like after the Summer of 2021.

There is no discussion to be had if one of the parties cannot see the forest for the trees.

Absolutely. I mean, it’s not like Toronto has been in the Stanley Cup discussion. It’s not like Toronto has been one of the best teams in the league. Yet you think the worst team since 2015 is actually good. Try getting in touch with reality, then maybe we can have a discussion.

 

[Hit the post]

Absolutely. I mean, it’s not like Toronto has been in the Stanley Cup discussion. It’s not like Toronto has been one of the best teams in the league. Yet you think the worst team since 2015 is actually good. Try getting in touch with reality, then maybe we can have a discussion.

Biggest mistake the Laffs made was not sending Babcock to the EI office sooner. Far less passive team now imho.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Absolutely. I mean, it’s not like Toronto has been in the Stanley Cup discussion. It’s not like Toronto has been one of the best teams in the league.

That's the key word right there. Has been. Toronto were setting themselves up nicely before they over-allocated their cap towards Tavares, Marner, Matthews, and Nylander. Because they are so heavily invested and committed into their top end talent, they likely won't have enough cap space to invest in........

1) Depth
2) An elite defense

Toronto is pretty much the Pittsburgh Penguins of 2010-2015 now (i.e. a bridesmaid team that will make some 2nd and possibly 3rd round appearances, but will likely fall against a team that has cost controlled elite talent plus depth).

I'll happily eat crow and admit being wrong if Toronto wins the cup, but if the last 10 years have proven anything, it's that Toronto doesn't have the correct cap structure to win a cup.

Cost controlled elite talent + depth = championships.

Even after this season, one of Barrie or Muzzin will likely be gone due to the cap (making their already average defense even weaker).

 

[y2kcanucks]

That's the key word right there. Has been. Toronto were setting themselves up nicely before they over-allocated their cap towards Tavares, Marner, Matthews, and Nylander. Because they are so heavily invested and committed into their top end talent, they likely won't have enough cap space to invest in........

1) Depth
2) An elite defense

Toronto is pretty much the Pittsburgh Penguins of 2010-2015 now (i.e. a bridesmaid team that will make some 2nd and possibly 3rd round appearances, but will likely fall against a team that has cost controlled elite talent plus depth).

I'll happily eat crow and admit being wrong if Toronto wins the cup, but if the last 10 years have proven anything, it's that Toronto doesn't have the correct cap structure to win a cup.

Cost controlled elite talent + depth = championships.

Even after this season, one of Barrie or Muzzin will likely be gone due to the cap (making their already average defense even weaker).

You’re criticizing a team for paying legit NHL superstars, while defending a team for grossly overpaying 4th liners/bottom pair defensemen. That’s all that needs to be said.

 

[Horse McHindu]

You’re criticizing a team for paying legit NHL superstars, while defending a team for grossly overpaying 4th liners/bottom pair defensemen. That’s all that needs to be said.

And you're criticizing a team (Canucks) that isn't in its cup window yet.

A team truly hasn't entered its window until their core players have been re-upped beyond their ELC contracts.

So yeah - Why don't we actually wait to see what the Canucks' cap looks like AFTER they have re-signed Pettersson, Hughes, and Markstrom?.........when the Canucks real window will have started.

Meanwhile, enjoy your Leafs. They'd better hope that Sandin and Liljegren are the real deals:

 

[vanuck]

It had something to do with it for me. If the alternative to the potential disaster was finishing 28th and 29th then we’re just arguing about different disasters. Katrina vs Andrew if you will.

well I think without hindsight benefiting the thinking, I don’t think it was fair to think Lack would’ve flamed out of the league. But that’s just going by his body of work as a Canuck prospect/player.

You didn’t give the poster a chance to respond by the way, you moved right in and started preaching from the pulpit.

plenty of folks were excited the moment Benning took the job thinking they might finally skimp on spending on a goalie and thought going with that young tandem was the way to go. I certainly did.

Lack's hip problems had a huge part in his career going downhill. To the point where the guy already had to retire from playing at the age of 31. Not taking that into account is oversimplifying things.

The truth is he was a promising young goalie who outplayed Miller in 2014-15 while generally being given tougher starts and carried us to the playoffs when our supposed No. 1 goalie went down.

Calling that poor goaltending is just straight up false.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Lack's hip problems had a huge part in his career going downhill. To the point where the guy already had to retire from playing at the age of 31. Not taking that into account is oversimplifying things.

The truth is he was a promising young goalie who outplayed Miller in 2014-15 while generally being given tougher starts and carried us to the playoffs when our supposed No. 1 goalie went down.

Calling that poor goaltending is just straight up false.

Lack's performance during that playoffs was sub-par.......which then prompted the Canucks to play a not-fully-recovered Miller from Game 5 onwards.

 

[vanuck]

Lack's performance during that playoffs was sub-par.......which then prompted the Canucks to play a not-fully-recovered Miller from Game 5 onwards.

Some posters here thought Bonino looked poor in that series for instance, hence justifying his being traded for Sutter. And yet he's still the superior player 4 years later on and would be an excellent middle 6 forward even today.

Just goes to show that it's hard to read anything into a 4-game sample. Especially one where Willie Desjardins 1-2-3-4'ed himself out of the playoffs.

 

[4Twenty]

Some posters here thought Bonino looked poor in that series for instance, hence justifying his being traded for Sutter. And yet he's still the superior player 4 years later on and would be an excellent middle 6 forward even today.

Just goes to show that it's hard to read anything into a 4-game sample. Especially one where Willie Desjardins 1-2-3-4'ed himself out of the playoffs.

Bonino lost a matchup that Calgary exploited and Willie had no counter. The Sedin line and even the Horvat led 4th line was handling Monahan/Gaudreau when our against them but Willie kept rolling the 1-2-3-4 and made it easy for Hartley to get his preferred matchup.

That was just bad coaching.

 

[42]

The title should be changed to re-signing Jacob Markstrom.

 

[Cupless44]

Benning has really put this team in a world of cap hurt with bad signings on marginal bottom 6 players.

To resign Markstrom is a problem now...where is the cap space for the 6 mil a year he is going to want or try to get as a UFA going to come from?

 

[StreetHawk]

Benning has really put this team in a world of cap hurt with bad signings on marginal bottom 6 players.

To resign Markstrom is a problem now...where is the cap space for the 6 mil a year he is going to want or try to get as a UFA going to come from?

That $6 mill is dependent on the market. Varly and Lehner landed at $5 mill last summer.

as well, I thought Columbus would be in the market until I checked the stats and Korpisalo through 29 starts has a 2.54 GAA and .911 sv%. Those are good numbers. Lehner for Chicago is at 2.86 GAA but .924 SV%.

so Columbus could stand pat on their guy and Chicago could extend the guy they know. Taking 2 teams off the list.

SJ, in a tight cap situation. Jones is untradeable because of his cap hit and remaining 4 year term. Buyout for next year is like $2.8 in dead cap.

NJ, will move off Schneider so depends how they feel about Blackwood. Detroit, Howard is ufa and 1 year left on Bernier. But are either team looking like a playoff team anytime soon? Does Markstrom want to still be playing for a bottom team?

buffalo, not a horrible dead cap hit to buyout Hutton. Around $1 mill per to do so. An option there.

Carolina and Colorado depends how their goaltending holds up this playoffs.

Holtby is the big ufa goalie with playoff experience. He might be the target for a playoff team over Markstrom.

so, it’s very much dependent on the market And whether that drives the price up.

 

[Cupless44]

That $6 mill is dependent on the market. Varly and Lehner landed at $5 mill last summer.

as well, I thought Columbus would be in the market until I checked the stats and Korpisalo through 29 starts has a 2.54 GAA and .911 sv%. Those are good numbers. Lehner for Chicago is at 2.86 GAA but .924 SV%.

so Columbus could stand pat on their guy and Chicago could extend the guy they know. Taking 2 teams off the list.

SJ, in a tight cap situation. Jones is untradeable because of his cap hit and remaining 4 year term. Buyout for next year is like $2.8 in dead cap.

NJ, will move off Schneider so depends how they feel about Blackwood. Detroit, Howard is ufa and 1 year left on Bernier. But are either team looking like a playoff team anytime soon? Does Markstrom want to still be playing for a bottom team?

buffalo, not a horrible dead cap hit to buyout Hutton. Around $1 mill per to do so. An option there.

Carolina and Colorado depends how their goaltending holds up this playoffs.

Holtby is the big ufa goalie with playoff experience. He might be the target for a playoff team over Markstrom.

so, it’s very much dependent on the market And whether that drives the price up.

Either way he won’t be asking for less than 5 million...and that is a problem over the next few years with the mess Benning has put this team in

 

[4Twenty]

Price is going up

 

[Green Blank Stare]

They can't replace him. Trade Demko, re-sign Marky and get a stop gap backup.

 

[Michael Dal Swolle]

You’re criticizing a team for paying legit NHL superstars, while defending a team for grossly overpaying 4th liners/bottom pair defensemen. That’s all that needs to be said.

Pretty much. You're talking to a poster who thinks paying all star centre Tavares his asking price in free agency was a horrible move, but giving Eriksson one of the consensus worst contracts in the league was fine because Benning is just going to make him disappear this offseason... somehow.

 

[Cancuks]

Markstrom seems like the kind of player you give the big contract to and then he chokes on it and ends up becoming a cap crippling backup. I just don't have faith in him, he's way too inconsistent. Demko might fetch a 2nd round pick at this point if we're lucky. I'd rather take the gamble that Demko will breakout as a starter next season and trade Markstrom at the deadline to the highest bidder. Then sign a cheap UFA or claim a backup on waivers. Plenty of Darcy Kuempers and Thomas Greiss types available every season. Just need an actual good coach with a sound two-way system in place and that will fix a lot of the problems.