So what's going to happen with our Goalies?

[btdvox]

Interested to know what everyone thinks about our Goalie Situation? Rather what is going to happen with Lack/Markstrom.

Since Cannata and Eriksson are signed for this year, it doesn't make sense to have 3 goalies in Utica. It also makes no sense to have 3 Goalies up here....

Does Lack or Markstrom get the boot?

If Markstrom is waived, does that mean Eriksson is on the way out, since Cannata just got re-signed?

Click to read more...

 

[stevecanuck16]

I voted for option 3, but I don't necessarily think Eriksson has to be moved. Why not stash Cannata in the ECHL? Or try to loan him to another AHL team?

 

[WinterEmpire]

At this point I want Lack to be traded. But I think Markstrom gets moved for like a 6th or 7th

 

[Nuclear Salo]

Markstrom will be traded for Cody Hodgson, and Todd Burtuzzi will be resigned

 

[TheWanderer]

Yea, can you remove the Eriksson part of option 3? That's not really necessary at all... then I'll vote 3.

 

[stevecanuck16]

Yea, can you remove the Eriksson part of option 3? That's not really necessary at all... then I'll vote 3.

I think Eriksson could be a decent mentor for Markstrom, despite their similarity in age.

Eriksson was a big success in the AHL last year. Obviously he has figured out the transition to North American hockey a little better than Markstrom. If we can sneak Markstrom through waivers, it would be nice if Eriksson can pass on some of that knowledge.

By the way, Utica fans would be so pissed if we traded Eriksson to make room for Markstrom.

 

[Hi-wayman]

I voted to trade Lack. Lack has good trade value and can either bring back a pick (2nd ?) or be packaged for more (Lack + Hansen + Higgins + pick= Ladd, Kane or Byfuglien ?

Markstrom has little trade value now, but if properly coached, in 2 or 3 years\ he has a far greater upside than Lack. In the meantime he should be able to handle back-up duties.

We do have enough cap space though to keep both on the roster and not trade either until teams start realizing they need a goalie (usually around Christmas)

 

[TheWanderer]

I think Eriksson could be a decent mentor for Markstrom, despite their similarity in age.

Eriksson was a big success in the AHL last year. Obviously he has figured out the transition to North American hockey a little better than Markstrom. If we can sneak Markstrom through waivers, it would be nice if Eriksson can pass on some of that knowledge.

By the way, Utica fans would be so pissed if we traded Eriksson to make room for Markstrom.

At this point in time, Eriksson > Markstrom, probably. Markstrom obviously has the higher ceiling, but Florida caused quite the ****-storm there.

 

[member 202355]

Just waive Markstrom.

 

[luongo321]

I voted to trade Lack. Lack has good trade value and can either bring back a pick (2nd ?) or be packaged for more (Lack + Hansen + Higgins + pick= Ladd, Kane or Byfuglien ?

Markstrom has little trade value now, but if properly coached, in 2 or 3 years\ he has a far greater upside than Lack. In the meantime he should be able to handle back-up duties.

We do have enough cap space though to keep both on the roster and not trade either until teams start realizing they need a goalie (usually around Christmas)

Yeah, I could see a trade with the Jets for sure. If Lack has a good start to the season, it may give other GM's even more confidence in him. It will also give us some time to see how Miller performs. I`d be pretty pumped with Ladd or Kane for Tanev + Lack.

 

[biturbo19]

I voted for option 3, but I don't necessarily think Eriksson has to be moved. Why not stash Cannata in the ECHL? Or try to loan him to another AHL team?

Yeah, i voted option 3 as well, but i don't think the trading Eriksson part is at all necessary.

 

[UticaHockey]

Markstrom clears waivers and shares the net in Utica with Eriksson and Cannata to the ECHL.

 

[crazychimp]

Keep Lack I want to see what type of player he turns out to be considering he came through our system and organization there's something about watching your guy playing in the minors and making it into the big league much like Schnieds and I would like to watch Lack continue his journey as a Canuck.

 

[skyo]

Markstrom clears waivers and shares the net in Utica with Eriksson and Cannata to the ECHL.

There's probably a few teams who'd easily snag him, forget what fans on the main board said their team could use him if he were waiver wire fodder.

Low value trade, but wonder what a 3rd liner Hansen and backup goalie Markstrom could fetch?

 

[Phrazer]

None of the above. Markstrom gets waived and claimed. Its not what I want to happen, but it is what I see as the most likely situation. For me ideally I would like to keep all 3 up, and to trade Lack at the deadline if he establishes some sort of value by that point.

 

[SighReally]

Whoever snags him has to keep him on their roster for a set amount of time. Thus opening up one of their goaltenders to waivers unless he fulfills the waiver-exempt rule. That means that that team has to be able to absorb the cap hit which a lot of teams aren't able to.

Personally I don't think he's going to be taken off waivers.

 

[canucks22]

At this moment I have to think that Markstrom gets waived/traded. It sucks but what are ya gonna do

 

[WestleySnipez]

Yeah, I could see a trade with the Jets for sure. If Lack has a good start to the season, it may give other GM's even more confidence in him. It will also give us some time to see how Miller performs. I`d be pretty pumped with Ladd or Kane for Tanev + Lack.

I doubt the Canucks would make a move for Kane without a forward going back. Tanev won't be moved either, unless he's having a very, very good season and Benning decides he can't afford him, but he'd be more likely to move someone to keep him, top defensemen are hard to come by.

Lack will probably be moved if Miller is doing well and they feel one of Eriksson/Markstrom is ready to be a backup (thus eliminating the need for Lack). I could see him going for a B level prospect+ a pick, or if it was any other draft, a 1st Rounder (possibly 2016).

They'd be more likely to move Lack than Markstrom due to the return they'd get. Markstrom still has a couple years to develop to Lack's level, but the chances of that happening are quite slim.

 

[Butcher]

I voted the third option, though I see no reason for it to include Eriksson being traded and voted based on him not being traded.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

I don't know what's going to happen. But to avoid the Schneider fiasco happening again I'd probably trade lack sooner rather than later. Depends on what his perceived value is though. Markstrom isn't going to get us anything and if the market for lack isn't there I'd just waive Markstrom.

 

[Canucks LB]

Lack has great value. Trade Lack to the peg.

 

[member 202355]

Lack has great value. Trade Lack to the peg.

He may have great value to us, but in terms of trade value around the league he has very little.

 

[Canucks LB]

He may have great value to us, but in terms of trade value around the league he has very little.

Winnipeg knows how good he can be, we could strip something decent from them.

 

[kurt]

Not sure Lack will get a useful return. I'm still very puzzled with the Miller deal, though Benning didn't overpay for him IMO. I think the best case scenario is that a contender has injury problems or an unproven guy in goal and Miller agrees to get traded at the deadline.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Winnipeg knows how good he can be, we could strip something decent from them.

If by decent you mean 3rd round pick...possibly.