Rumor: Rick Dhaliwal on Tsn1040: Markstrom Progress Made

[TomasHertlsRooster]

This is why you don't stat watch.
He was good in the regular season, he had a bad stretch after Markstrom went down, Lots of those goals came in the last few minutes, Canucks defense was completely crippled and brutal, he stood on his head.

Did the NHL make an amendment saying that goals in the last few minutes don’t count?

 

[deckercky]

Interesting take, but I don't see it happening. I think Toronto and Edmonton have completely set the bar with superstar players now and these young RFA's are going to just want to lock in their security as soon as possible. All it takes is one bad injury and you have lost your big pay day. Also, who knows how long this cap will stay flat for, one would hope not too long but the uncertainty of when Covid will end would make these players want the safety of their big contract now.

There's a big difference between getting paid with respect to the current depressed cap, and getting paid once the cap starts increasing again in a few years (particularly when you factor in escrow).

Unless they were mainly concerned with stability and security, Pettersson and Hughes would make way much more money by signing a reasonable bridge deal.

 

[613Leafer]

If this happens you just absolutely know it's gonna be a situation where
Demko = Tuukka Rask
DiPietro = Justin Pogge

It would definitely be a risk, though unlike that trade, the Canucks would still have Markstrom and would hopefully get back a better piece than Raycroft by trading Demko.

This all boils down to the expansion draft. Markstrom wants a NMC which makes him inelligible for the expansion draft next year, and the Canucks don't want to lose Demko for nothing.

So they either:
1) Don't sign Markstrom and just go with one of the many other goalies available on the market (but one which won't need a NMC). This would very likely be a downgrade from Markstrom though (upside is they'd likely save on the cap);
2) Somehow convince Markstrom to sign without that NMC protection and thus risk being exposed to Seattle (that'd be great but unlikely); or
3) Trade Demko now and commit to Markstrom (risky but could pay off).

 

[4Twenty]

Who do Canucks fans feel the need to come here and exaggerate. Demko is far from a proven thing and wasn’t great during the season.

People trying to overvalue a few bubble games like it was the norm are off it.

you want an informed opinion on the issues with Demko’s goaltending. Go to Canucks board and read posts by @mossey3535 in the game day threads of his starts.

the concerns are real. He’s still has lots going for him but acting like he’s proven and not either risky to keep as number 1 or acquire as a number one is just wishful.

The phenomenon with creating a false narrative to dupe some other fans on a message board is wack.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Who do Canucks fans feel the need to come here and exaggerate. Demko is far from a proven thing

No one has said otherwise.

and wasn’t great during the season

No one said he was. One person said he was "good."

People trying to overvalue a few bubble games like it was the norm are off it

One person in this thread did this.

He’s still has lots going for him but acting like he’s proven and not either risky to keep as number 1 or acquire as a number one is just wishful

Almost nobody is doing this.

The phenomenon with creating a false narrative to dupe some other fans on a message board is wack.

This isn't happening. For the most part, Canucks fans in this thread are expressing the view that Demko is likely enough to succeed that it's worthwhile to let Markstrom go.

 

[Drake1588]

Interest in Demko is no doubt significant. Interest in Eriksson is zero. Interest in a Demko+Eriksson package is probably also zero.

Moving exceedingly bad contracts right now is just not going to be feasible, whatever the owners are telling their GMs. Too many teams are either adopting cap neutral or cap retrenchment postures. There just aren't buyers for that kind of deal, not even with futures in the deals to sweeten the pot.

If owners are going to insist on significant payroll cuts, their GMs are going to have to go back after due diligence and tell them that the only way to do that is by dealing some of their very good players - not the guys with negative value. The really interesting question is how many owners will tell their GMs to cut payroll anyway.

 

[canadianmagpie]

It would definitely be a risk, though unlike that trade, the Canucks would still have Markstrom and would hopefully get back a better piece than Raycroft by trading Demko.

This all boils down to the expansion draft. Markstrom wants a NMC which makes him inelligible for the expansion draft next year, and the Canucks don't want to lose Demko for nothing.

So they either:
1) Don't sign Markstrom and just go with one of the many other goalies available on the market (but one which won't need a NMC). This would very likely be a downgrade from Markstrom though (upside is they'd likely save on the cap);
2) Somehow convince Markstrom to sign without that NMC protection and thus risk being exposed to Seattle (that'd be great but unlikely); or
3) Trade Demko now and commit to Markstrom (risky but could pay off).

I think the large number of capable goalies (adding Lundqvist into the mix now), I'd rather see letting Markstrom go and pairing Demko with a guy like Holtby or Greiss who would come cheaper and shorter term than Markstrom. Use that money elsewhere (Tanev and Toffoli if possible).

 

[Fatass]

Looks like some Progress is being made.
My guess is that the deal is probably done, but don't want to tell anybody since it would lower Demko's Value.
What does everybody think?

Don’t done contracts have to be sent to the league for approval? Once approved they become public, no? Unless the news of a pending deal is leaked first. So I don’t think a done deal can be hidden.

 

[BCNate]

Was Demko not an absolute monster for you guys in the playoffs?

I don't know the full story but I am surprised that he's not a priority.

Markstrom did have an amazing season though so....I have no idea what I am talking about.

Demko was lights out in the playoffs, but was not good when Markstrom got hurt this year.

 

[BCNate]

I think Canucks are planning to have both Marky and Demko.

The big hitch on Marky is that he doesnt get a NMC so that the Canucks can expose him to seattle and protect Demko.

I still think Demko is the goalie of the future for the Canucks

Yup, keeping both next year is the best case.

 

[gstommylee]

I think Canucks are planning to have both Marky and Demko.

The big hitch on Marky is that he doesnt get a NMC so that the Canucks can expose him to seattle and protect Demko.

I still think Demko is the goalie of the future for the Canucks

No way Vancouver keeps both and exposes Marky to Seattle. They'll trade either Demko or Marky and get something of value in return and have seattle take a lesser value player.

 

[Fatass]

Eriksson + Demko to Detroit for future considerations.

On my jog today (just got back) I felt a breeze brush by me, and in it there was a message:
Demko + Baertchi for Carlo + Halak.

 

[ManwithNoIdentity]

Demko and Loui for a 2nd rounder seems fair to me.

Done

 

[Slurpeelover27]

Interest in Demko is no doubt significant. Interest in Eriksson is zero. Interest in a Demko+Eriksson package is probably also zero.

Moving exceedingly bad contracts right now is just not going to be feasible, whatever the owners are telling their GMs. Too many teams are either adopting cap neutral or cap retrenchment postures. There just aren't buyers for that kind of deal, not even with futures in the deals to sweeten the pot.

If owners are going to insist on significant payroll cuts, their GMs are going to have to go back after due diligence and tell them that the only way to do that is by dealing some of their very good players - not the guys with negative value. The really interesting question is how many owners will tell their GMs to cut payroll anyway.

On a team that has lots of cap space and wants to save money taking on Loui's contract is not that bad. He is owed significantly less than his cap hit so that makes it much more palatable. If a team really likes Demko then this is a good deal for them.
If I am Jim Benning I want to win now and the next few years. Markstrom most likely gives them the best chance to do that. Trading Demko and clearing cap space to sign Markstrom and maybe Toffoli and others is extremely valuable. Could be losing a top young player, but you have to give in order to get. Also as everyone knows the Seattle expansion draft is a huge factor that must be considered. Flat cap also limits options if you really want to win in the next few years. As much as it would be great to have Markstrom and Demko, I just don't think that is the wisest strategy overall.

 

[tsujimoto74]

Vancouver's situation isn't really much different from Toronto's last year. Loui obviously doesn't have the full NTC, but presumably his 15 team list is going to include the teams that actually have cap space, which are few and far between.

The cost to move him is going to be absurd.

Eriksson also has an extra year and is a worse player compared to Marleau last off-season. Plus the whole Covid cap crunch thing. If Vancouver can move him at all, it's going to be very, very expensive.

 

[Peter Griffin]

Yup, keeping both next year is the best case.

Benning has said this is their goal as they expect a rough schedule with a compressed format and two capable goalies is a must. Also said they would then address the goaltending situation at the trade deadline/before expansion draft.

 

[TheDoldrums]

Eriksson also has an extra year and is a worse player compared to Marleau last off-season. Plus the whole Covid cap crunch thing. If Vancouver can move him at all, it's going to be very, very expensive.

Marleaus play had no impact on things though, he was only willing to waive his NMC if the team acquiring him was going to buy him out. At least LE could still be a warm body.

 

[Troygambletheforgot]

The Canucks need to walk from Markstrom and Tanev and do a Bill Belichick and get out a few years too early then too many years too late. Giving Tanev and Markstrom 5 year deals with $5 million plus with NTC or NMC is not smart and will set the Canucks cap structure back. They need to go after OEL and include either LE or Sutter or Roussel for money in and money out and that way they get a number 2 or 3 d for next year and a replacement for Edler after he becomes a ufa and dumping a bad contract.

 

[avsfan9]

They still have Di Pietro coming up as well, so I could see trading Demko, signing Markstrom, and looking to Di Pietro as the goalie of the future as an option.

I’d have more faith in Demko than Di pietro.

 

[Coach Parker]

Yup, keeping both next year is the best case.

Yeah, sign Markstrom and keep holding out for him to not insist on a NTC and then trade one at the deadline before the Seattle expansion draft.

Only reason you wouldn't do that is if Markstrom signs and you get a great offer for Demko now.

 

[deckercky]

Who do Canucks fans feel the need to come here and exaggerate. Demko is far from a proven thing and wasn’t great during the season.

People trying to overvalue a few bubble games like it was the norm are off it.

you want an informed opinion on the issues with Demko’s goaltending. Go to Canucks board and read posts by @mossey3535 in the game day threads of his starts.

the concerns are real. He’s still has lots going for him but acting like he’s proven and not either risky to keep as number 1 or acquire as a number one is just wishful.

The phenomenon with creating a false narrative to dupe some other fans on a message board is wack.

Demko is a risk for sure, but he has a good pedigree and has shown some very good signs.

Worth noting that given the expansion draft, a gm acquiring demko believes that he will be a starter within a season. The value they pay likely reflects that.

 

[Peter Griffin]

Yeah, sign Markstrom and keep holding out for him to not insist on a NTC and then trade one at the deadline before the Seattle expansion draft.

I don’t think NTC is the issue, just NMC. In the end Markstrom may look at the situation and say I want to stay in Vancouver so if I re-sign without a NMC I’ve got a good chance to remain here for the next few seasons or worst case scenario I go to the closest city possible in Seattle. But if I turn down Vancouver I may have to settle for somewhere I have no desire to be. I think if Vancouver is offering a fair contract minus NMC he’ll strongly consider it.

There’s also no guarantee Seattle would take a 31 year old Markstrom if exposed.

 

[gstommylee]

I don’t think NTC is the issue, just NMC. In the end Markstrom may look at the situation and say I want to stay in Vancouver so if I re-sign without a NMC I’ve got a good chance to remain here for the next few seasons or worst case scenario I go to the closest city possible in Seattle. But if I turn down Vancouver I may have to settle for somewhere I have no desire to be. I think if Vancouver is offering a fair contract minus NMC he’ll strongly consider it.

There’s also no guarantee Seattle would take a 31 year old Markstrom if exposed.

That depends on what the available goalie list includes. Its within the possibility Seattle may take Markstrom if he's remains with Vancouver and is exposed to Seattle.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

 

[FreeMcdavid]

I still think the Canucks end up with Markstrom and OEL.

There are rumors saying they are trying to get Markstrom to sign for cheaper so theres more room to get OEL under the cap