What to do with our Goalie Situation (poll)

[Bertuzzzi44]

Why does he come crawling to JB for a contract when there are 3 NHL teams looking for a starter right now? This is his one chance to cash in, he's 30. He isn't coming back to do us a favor.

Irf Jaffar on NHL radio: 'Canucks went to Markstrom with a very low offer early in the season. Markstrom countered before the return to play. After that, they weren't meeting at all. They weren't seeing eye to eye'

Then it’ll be an easy choice to go with Demko and let Markstrom walk, but you do have to present an offer on the table, it’s up to him to sign it or not.

 

[Flik]

Honestly at this point I think it would be best for both Markstrom and our team if he went to a "win sooner than later" team like Colorado or Carolina. I'm grateful for what Markstrom has done for this team, and I'm elated at how he has emerged as a top tier goalie.

If our mgmt group had not completely f***ed up our cap situation I'd be stoked to reward Markstrom with a multi-year deal that paid him what he deserves. But that isn't reality, and Demko's age and potential lines up with our current core a little bit more.

Demko is still a dice roll so we'd be prudent to bring in a reasonable backup in the same vein as a Halak.

But since we're likely going to take a step backwards for the next few years due to our garbage roster configuration and terrible cap management, we may as well try and see what Demko is made of and let Marky walk.

 

[StreetHawk]

Honestly at this point I think it would be best for both Markstrom and our team if he went to a "win sooner than later" team like Colorado or Carolina. I'm grateful for what Markstrom has done for this team, and I'm elated at how he has emerged as a top tier goalie.

If our mgmt group had not completely f***ed up our cap situation I'd be stoked to reward Markstrom with a multi-year deal that paid him what he deserves. But that isn't reality, and Demko's age and potential lines up with our current core a little bit more.

Demko is still a dice roll so we'd be prudent to bring in a reasonable backup in the same vein as a Halak.

But since we're likely going to take a step backwards for the next few years due to our garbage roster configuration and terrible cap management, we may as well try and see what Demko is made of and let Marky walk.

ED would still dictate that one needed to be moved unfortunately. It’s like teams like Minny who were stacked on D in 2017 with Suter, Brodin, Dumba, Spurgeon, Scandella. Had to lose someone given their depth chart.

canucks are going to be caught in that scenario.

 

[Flik]

ED would still dictate that one needed to be moved unfortunately. It’s like teams like Minny who were stacked on D in 2017 with Suter, Brodin, Dumba, Spurgeon, Scandella. Had to lose someone given their depth chart.

canucks are going to be caught in that scenario.

That's a good point!

I think it makes an even stronger case to just roll the dice on Demko.

 

[Interior Cascadian]

This is all incorrect. The Canucks currently have no players they will be forced to protect for the expansion draft.

Is CapFriendly not a trusted source?

 

[Peter Griffin]

Is CapFriendly not a trusted source?

It is, that’s what I use.

 

[Hammer79]

Then it’ll be an easy choice to go with Demko and let Markstrom walk, but you do have to present an offer on the table, it’s up to him to sign it or not.

They already low-balled him. He said no. Then he countered and the Canucks broke off talks. It's done IMO.

One thing that will get better is post control. Remember that laugher he let in from the corner parallel to the post after making a huge save before that in the Blues series? Markstrom has issues with wrap arounds and hard angle shots. Demko is solid on the post and is not going too deep into his net like earlier in the season.

We have to run with Demko. We can't protect Markstrom from Seattle and let Demko go, we don't want to protect 8 with 2 goalies, that would be a disaster. One has to go. It's pretty simple, we just don't repeat the mistake we made with the Schneider-Luongo situation.

 

[StreetHawk]

Is CapFriendly not a trusted source?

It is but people are just not thinking clearly that a nmc in 20-21 season means ED protection . But if a player goes to a ntc/mntc for 21-22 season it is more likely that the nmc doesn’t include ED protection.

teams learned after 2017 Not to hand out nmc unless it is to a core player. Or if you do, like Edler or Ferland you make sure they expire before the ED.

like logically, what difference would it make to Ferland if he goes from a nmc in 20-21 to a mntc in 21-22 to be protected or not protected in an ED? He still needs to submit a list to the Canucks. In just over a week he’d get moved anyways right.

 

[RandV]

I always had a preference towards Markstrom and think the team does too, but even if Demko didn't get the starts I think that ship has sailed. The time to get Markstrom was with an extension during the season. Now with his strong playoff showing and the Canucks cap struggles, even if Benning wants to sign him I don't think we can be competitive on the UFA market.

Demko's final few games will make it much more palatable in the off season, but that was a mini-hot streak and we don't know if he can carry the team over the course of a full season like Markstrom was doing. Demko in the regular season with Markstrom injured didn't play as well as Demko in the post season did, and behind him will likely just be an ordinary career backup.

 

[Bankerguy]

This is all incorrect. The Canucks currently have no players they will be forced to protect for the expansion draft.

if someone with actual accurate knowledge could post how this ED works..that would be great. Like who NEEDS protection and how many spots do we have etc

 

[lawrence]

not signing Markstrom can give us more cap room, we will have enough room to sign both Tanev and Toffoli, Pearson and Stetcher is not coming back

 

[Bitz and Bites]

In a capped league,well managed teams let their older UFA's who are looking for retirement contracts walk and replace them with home grown cost controlled players on the upside of their career.So far in the Benning era we've often been on the wrong of that equation and now the stuff gets real.

By necessity,now we need to do the right thing but can Benning actually do it? Being that almost all of his moves have been win now and now with this playoff run,it's even harder to picture him letting the proven veteran player go and going with the younger and less proven option but it's what we need to do.

Markstrom is over 30 and a long term commitment is always risky at that age.Maybe he's like Luongo and continues to play at a high level deep into his 30's or (more likely) he gets more injury prone and his play drops off dramatically,especially when his 6M (or more) cap hit prevents us from improving the team in front of him and he continues to get shelled regularly.

Like others have said,Demko fits the age of the group much better plus his contract is downright cheap next year and he's still an RFA the year after when it runs out.We're going to have to save money every chance we get just to keep what we have now never mind going UFA shopping to try and plug the holes.

A few weeks ago on another thread I proposed trading Marky's rights for a pick,I'd definitely explore that or even try to package his rights along with Baertchi's or Spooner's contract to a team like Detroit or Carolina who have the cap space and badly need a #1 goalie.

 

[Diversification]

Marky is a victim of bad cap management. Go with Demko.

Play a more defensive system with the confidence that our offense will compensate. With that strategy, we can weather the worst of the cap squeeze and give ourselves a reasonable shot at a playoff spot.

 

[iFan]

I don’t think we will be as good next year, could definitely be wrong here! But Demko is still gaining experience and although I think running with him is the right move we can’t expect him to do what Markstrom did this past season.

We just can’t afford Markstrom thanks to Eriksson, Sutter, Baertschi, Luongo cap and other bad contracts. But not being able to sign Markstrom could be a blessing in disguise as it will likely have term and a big cap hit. Markstrom will be 31 next season and was a very late bloomer, not exactly the player I want to tie myself to long term. I think it has the potential to be a very bad deal, I’d hate to tie myself to that and lose Demko for nothing and see him become a solid #1 goalie for a long time.

 

[ChilliBilly]

I say this as a Canucks and Kraken fan: Benning’s gotta play this one carefully with a flat cap and critical ELCs approaching their expiration dates in the next few years. A lot of it comes down to what can be negotiated with Markstrom’s camp, but goaltending is also a position of strength that just got showcased on prime time tv. Demko in particular could go a long way in bringing back a quality defenseman in the offseason, and with the forwards and goalie who will be exposed, a top-4 defenseman (but not a star d-man) should avoid getting claimed by Seattle.

From the perspective of the expansion draft, we’re getting to that point where it’s useful to lay this out on the board now so we’re all familiar with who must be protected and who’s left for protection. Per CapFriendly:

Forwards
Eriksson, Sutter, Beagle, and Roussel all have NMCs/NTCs. Ferland does too, but he may be on LTIR and... someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think he needs to be protected then. This leaves protection for Pettersson, Horvat, and one of Miller, Boeser, or Toffoli (if he’s resigned).

Defense
Edler and Myers will have NMCs by the time the draft rolls around. Hughes gets the third sport for protection.

Goaltending
Very much in flux.

For this reason alone you use your buyouts now. We have 2 don't we? And I don't think NTC's are protected in the draft?

Yep, found this
For instance, a player with a no-movement clause in his contract must be included on a team's protected list unless he waives it. Players with no-trade clauses only do not qualify as no-movement clauses and must be protected or otherwise will be available to be selected.

so only have to protect Ferland (?) and Myers at this time. Pretty sure Seattle isn't taking any of the guys we would like to get rid of.

 

[StreetHawk]

For this reason alone you use your buyouts now. We have 2 don't we? And I don't think NTC's are protected in the draft?

Yep, found this
For instance, a player with a no-movement clause in his contract must be included on a team's protected list unless he waives it. Players with no-trade clauses only do not qualify as no-movement clauses and must be protected or otherwise will be available to be selected.

so only have to protect Ferland (?) and Myers at this time. Pretty sure Seattle isn't taking any of the guys we would like to get rid of.

No, because Myers only has a NMC for the 19-20 season. M-NTC for the remaining 4 seasons.
Ferland shows a NMC for the 20-21 season, but for 21-22 he drops to a M-NTC. Given the importance of giving yourself options, very likely that Ferland NMC in the 20-21 season contains language similar to Vermette when he was in Anaheim that it would expire 24 hours after the Cup is awarded, thus expiring before the ED. Ferland would be about 10 days between a NMC to dropping to a M-NTC only able to list 8 teams he can't be traded to. So, there would be 23 teams, including Seattle unless he puts them on his 8 team list that he could be moved to. So, very doubtful his NMC would cover the ED.

Teams learned after the LV ED not to hand out NMC like they were doing up to around 2016. Teams are very careful to not give up ED protection unless its to a Tavares type guy.

Buyouts, may not be the best option unless it's for players with term past next season, like Roussel, Eriksson, Beagle. Reason is that buying out Sutter would mean dead cap space in 21-22 when Hughes/Petey are on new contracts, in addition to the cost to replace Sutter's spot on the roster. So $900K replacement, plus another $1 million or so in dead cap hit, means, you have $2.4 mil to reallocate in 21-22 vs, $3.4 mill if you don't buy him out.

You are much better to retain on Sutter in the 20-21 season and hope that you can replace him production with a low cost player. Bottom line is that the Canucks need to get players off the roster after the 20-21 season in order to have around $18 million in total to pay Hughes/Petey.

So, this short term thinking of getting rid of the guys whose contracts are up in 2021 doesn't factor in the big picture. If you are spending the Sutter/Pearson/Edler or whomever cap on someone else with term, then that reduces the cap space that comes off the books in 2021. It's the guys with contracts past 2021, that hurt.

so, if you are extending Toffoli, you better make sure he can fit if you factor in the Hughes/Petey would count $18 mill in 21-22. So, Petey, Hughes at $18 mill Brock just under $6 mill. Horvat at $5.5 mill. Miller at $5.25 mill. Myers at $6 mill. 6 players combining for $40.6 million. That leaves just $41 million left for 17 skaters.

If TT is even at his same $4.6 mill cap hit, that leaves you at $36.4 mill for 16 skaters. If Tanev is at $5 mill, that leaves $31.4 mill for 15 skaters.

Demko will need another contract as well. If he performs solidly, something around $3 mill give or take, plus a backup goalie. $4 mill minimum. Drops you to $27.4 mill for 13 skaters.

So, 4 more Dmen, meaning Juolevi, Rathbone, Rafferty, Woo, etc. would have to come in around $5 mill, so $22 mill for 9 more skaters. There is $15 mill tied up in Eriksson, Beagle, Roussel, and Luongo and only 3 roster spots. That is $7 mill left for 6 skaters.

Gaudette, Podkolzin, Hoglander, Lind, Lockwood, Motte. Can these guys only combine for $7 million to round out the roster?

So even Demko at his $1.15 mill cap hit is just temporary for 1 year. If you swap out Demko for Markstrom, then your goalie costs will be $6.5 mill minimum, vs $4 million which is likely low. That is $2.5 million. But, then, you wouldn't have Toffoli at $4.6 mill, but only $2.1 mill to fill that roster spot.

You really have to post the cap impact of the 21-22 roster to fully appreciate what needs to be done this off-season.

 

[brent 44]

Keep Demko, let Markstrom walk. With the cap situation, you need space to sign Tanev and Toffoli, not to mention Petterson who will want crazy money after next year.

Then there's also a high percentage chance that one of them gets drafted by Seattle anyway.

Only thing I can see happening is Markstom signing a 1 year deal, with the idea being he'll get a better deal next year when the salary cap goes up.

 

[VanillaCoke]

For this reason alone you use your buyouts now. We have 2 don't we? And I don't think NTC's are protected in the draft?

What buyouts?

 

[geebaan]

not signing Markstrom can give us more cap room, we will have enough room to sign both Tanev and Toffoli, Pearson and Stetcher is not coming back

well you’d have to trade Pearson for that/who the f is gonna replace Stecher effectively?

 

[Phrazer]

Sign Markstrom. Hope to have another deep run with him in the mix next year. And then don't protect him.

 

[lawrence]

well you’d have to trade Pearson for that/who the f is gonna replace Stecher effectively?

This is kinda my bad I thought he was ufa this year.

 

[lawrence]

Keep Demko, let Markstrom walk. With the cap situation, you need space to sign Tanev and Toffoli, not to mention Petterson who will want crazy money after next year.

Then there's also a high percentage chance that one of them gets drafted by Seattle anyway.

Only thing I can see happening is Markstom signing a 1 year deal, with the idea being he'll get a better deal next year when the salary cap goes up.

a player his age knows it’s his last big possible pay check and he will and rightfully so ask for something if long term security so a 1 year deal is out question, 5 or more minimum is 5 million.

 

[brent 44]

a player his age knows it’s his last big possible pay check and he will and rightfully so ask for something if long term security so a 1 year deal is out question, 5 or more minimum is 5 million.

I know it would be unlikely, but I figure because of the COVID situation some players might sign a 1-year deal. Then next year when the cap possibly goes up, they would be in a better position to negotiate a multi-year big contract.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I think Demko will be a big part of how Benning deals with the cap. Benning can either trade him to get rid of a contract and sign Markstrom, or let Markstrom walk and go with Demko as a starter. Either way he gets cap relief.

With that said, you would have been crazy back in March to suggest going with Demko as the starter next year, and to let three games change your mind is extremely short sighted, especially given how important sample size is in evaluating goalies.

@vancityluongo suggestion is a good one if your team isn’t in cap hell. But i just don’t know if benning has the luxury of not using demko to get cap relief.

Its still insane.

We are talking about 3 games.

 

[Fatass]

I know it would be unlikely, but I figure because of the COVID situation some players might sign a 1-year deal. Then next year when the cap possibly goes up, they would be in a better position to negotiate a multi-year big contract.

Flat Covid cap is expected for the next three seasons. League is losing billions in gate revenues. Players, who are interested in their next contract being better than this coming one will sign fir 3 years. Marky, however, is coming to his last contract. He’s going to want maximin dollars now. Benning (who is terrible at contracts with these older players) had better not make another mistake if he resigns Marky. It’s either a good deal fir the team, or bye bye.