Would You Extend Markstrom?

[Skinnyjimmy08]

100% yes.. Hes breaking out now and Nucks know what they have... Sure they have some good goalie youth but its still up in the air how they will be

Id be just a little nervous if JM is demanding a 7 or 8 year deal... Cause he is 29 already

 

[vancityluongo]

Of the goalies in his age group, Markstrom is closer to Raanta (or Holtby...) than Darling or Talbot. He was a top pedigree prospect who is finally getting enough of a consistent schedule to develop a rhythm and he's running with it.

You don't wait and see on a 29 year old goalie. Either he is what he's shown this year for the next three years or he's a one-off and you trade him now. Again, Markstrom repeating his performance next season just gives him all of the leverage. But track record means so little for goalies IMO. I wouldn't be more or less comfortable with Markstrom as the starter in 2020-21 if he has a good season next year vs a bad one. Things change too much year to year.

As of right now, I think a 3 year 16-18M extension is a slightly risky, but perfectly reasonable bet based on what he has shown. If he proves himself on that, he's in the same situation Ryan Miller was before coming here. With cap inflation, that means a 8x3 at age 32 is not out of the question.

 

[drax0s]

I think the expansion draft kind of forces our hand here. If both goalies play well next year, we lose one in the expansion draft (likely Demko). I think I'm in the trade Markstrom in this scenario - there are a load of teams on the cusp who need a solid starter and Markstrom has proven he can hold down that role.

 

[StreetHawk]

Of the goalies in his age group, Markstrom is closer to Raanta (or Holtby...) than Darling or Talbot. He was a top pedigree prospect who is finally getting enough of a consistent schedule to develop a rhythm and he's running with it.

You don't wait and see on a 29 year old goalie. Either he is what he's shown this year for the next three years or he's a one-off and you trade him now. Again, Markstrom repeating his performance next season just gives him all of the leverage. But track record means so little for goalies IMO. I wouldn't be more or less comfortable with Markstrom as the starter in 2020-21 if he has a good season next year vs a bad one. Things change too much year to year.

As of right now, I think a 3 year 16-18M extension is a slightly risky, but perfectly reasonable bet based on what he has shown. If he proves himself on that, he's in the same situation Ryan Miller was before coming here. With cap inflation, that means a 8x3 at age 32 is not out of the question.

I’m not opposed to signing Markstrom.

My main point is that the Canucks have to be right on his performance matching his contract. If they are right then his contract is movable in the future should they instead opt to go with Demko cause he’s stepped up his game or they move Demko instead.

If this is just a career year and we’ve seen some goalies have good years then off years you’re then locked into that goalie and can’t move him.

Trading goalies is always a small market.

Blues now have Bennington. Flyers now have Hart. Oilers locked into Koskinen. Detroit extended Howard for a year.

Calgary to be determined. Colorado unknown what they do once Varly hits the open market in the summer. Is buffalo going to look for an upgrade?

Small market. Which adds to the reason that you can’t be wrong.

 

[Pure West]

Absolutely, he's been phenomenal this season in a year where scoring has increased, goalie stats are declining, and the defense has given him little help. I don't expect any discounts with this management group, but I would be very comfortable giving him 5-5.5 million AAV on a 4-5 year deal. I could not disagree more with the thought that signing Markstrom automatically means we have to (or should) immediately trade Demko. This is nonsense. Is he ready to play in the NHL? Yes, but he's going to need some time to play some games before he's ready to start. For one, goalies get injured and have their ups and downs, and this isn't 1999 where goalies played 75 games in a season. Demko will get his chance to play and develop even if Markstrom is here, at least getting 20 starts next year. Even if he plays terrific, and outplays Markstrom and is ready to start at some point, great. This supposed team-destroying goalie controversy in the Luongo-Schneider era netted us Horvat and Markstrom, so think about how bad this team would be if we dumped Schneider for a pittance in 2009 before he developed into a starter. Its a better problem to have too many good players than not enough.

 

[StreetHawk]

Absolutely, he's been phenomenal this season in a year where scoring has increased, goalie stats are declining, and the defense has given him little help. I don't expect any discounts with this management group, but I would be very comfortable giving him 5-5.5 million AAV on a 4-5 year deal. I could not disagree more with the thought that signing Markstrom automatically means we have to (or should) immediately trade Demko. This is nonsense. Is he ready to play in the NHL? Yes, but he's going to need some time to play some games before he's ready to start. For one, goalies get injured and have their ups and downs, and this isn't 1999 where goalies played 75 games in a season. Demko will get his chance to play and develop even if Markstrom is here, at least getting 20 starts next year. Even if he plays terrific, and outplays Markstrom and is ready to start at some point, great. This supposed team-destroying goalie controversy in the Luongo-Schneider era netted us Horvat and Markstrom, so think about how bad this team would be if we dumped Schneider for a pittance in 2009 before he developed into a starter. Its a better problem to have too many good players than not enough.

Agreed with this. The timeline to move a goalie would be 2020 should the Canucks extend Markstrom. You get to see how Markstrom follows up this season and how Demko looks in the nhl full time. Not much bargaining power should they wait until 2021 to decide.

And no reason to decide in 2019. But you don’t want Makrstroms extension to be the deciding factor of who you move because it’s a bad contract which we’ve seen other goalies unable to perform up to.

 

[Fatass]

Agreed with this. The timeline to move a goalie would be 2020 should the Canucks extend Markstrom. You get to see how Markstrom follows up this season and how Demko looks in the nhl full time. Not much bargaining power should they wait until 2021 to decide.

And no reason to decide in 2019. But you don’t want Makrstroms extension to be the deciding factor of who you move because it’s a bad contract which we’ve seen other goalies unable to perform up to.

Marky will be UFA after next season. He’s the one with all the leverage. He’s likely going to insist on protection against Seattle expansion. If the negotiations are not going well, I think we have to maximize the asset and trade him.

 

[Szechwan]

Tough question. Demko needs a year or two of backup/splitting time, but I can see Markstrom wanting to sign a longer term deal at this point in his career.

I'd say pay him more on a short term deal if possible. 6x3 wouldn't be the end of the world, but ideally that wouldn't come until halfway through next season.

 

[StreetHawk]

Marky will be UFA after next season. He’s the one with all the leverage. He’s likely going to insist on protection against Seattle expansion. If the negotiations are not going well, I think we have to maximize the asset and trade him.

Yep. It’s another tough decision for this management group to make. They need to know the player.

But I’ve come to accept that Benning likes to push that decision off until the end and it blows up in his face.

Benning has a year with Hamhuis and didn’t figure out what his preference was and held him until the tdl was upon them and rushed a decision. Same with Edler. Had 4 seasons with Edler to understand his personality. Time to move him was summer 2018 where he could sign an extension. But again no, play it out and rush at the end with a concussion to boot.

Markstrom, it takes two sides to come to a deal. What does he want and what do the Canucks want to give? Market for goalies is up and down and very limited.

I would not hand Markstrom a nmc. He can either take the guaranteed contract or play it out.

 

[StreetHawk]

Tough question. Demko needs a year or two of backup/splitting time, but I can see Markstrom wanting to sign a longer term deal at this point in his career.

I'd say pay him more on a short term deal if possible. 6x3 wouldn't be the end of the world, but ideally that wouldn't come until halfway through next season.

You are likely not keeping both guys past the ED. If you have both of them one will Ben selected given the dearth of talent the Canucks will have available.

I’m all for extending Markstrom to provide Demko the right environment to develop. If Markstrom at age 31 gets taken by Seattle in the ED you live with it.

Given the status of the contracts of management I don’t see them moving their number one goalie in the offseason where their fate lies in how next season goes do you?

 

[Pure West]

Marky will be UFA after next season. He’s the one with all the leverage. He’s likely going to insist on protection against Seattle expansion. If the negotiations are not going well, I think we have to maximize the asset and trade him.

When it comes to the expansion draft, unless this management group has failed miserably at acquiring talent by the end of the 2020/21 season we are going to lose a player of value. As a terrible team, we lost Sbisa (did us a favour), but one would hope that we are nearing our contending window by then and will have a little bit of depth by then. If losing a 26 year old Demko, even if he looks ready to be a starter is the worst thing that could happen, so be it. Is that worse than Minnesota having to give up Tuch? Or Anaheim losing Theodore? Or Washington losing Schmidt? I hope we will have to lose a player of value at least.

 

[rypper]

I said no, but in reality I expect the team to move Demko this off season and re-sign Markstrom to term.

 

[StreetHawk]

I said no, but in reality I expect the team to move Demko this off season and re-sign Markstrom to term.

What do you expect them to get for Demko who currently has started 4 nhl games and relieved Markstrom for 40 minutes.

Maybe he gets 3-4 more starts to being his career numbers to 7-8 starts and 8-9 appearances?

There is no rush to move Demko. They have the full season next year to develop him to see what they have. Why would you rush the decision so soon?

 

[rypper]

What do you expect them to get for Demko who currently has started 4 nhl games and relieved Markstrom for 40 minutes.

Maybe he gets 3-4 more starts to being his career numbers to 7-8 starts and 8-9 appearances?

There is no rush to move Demko. They have the full season next year to develop him to see what they have. Why would you rush the decision so soon?

I'm not rushing anything. I would have liked to see him get more games down the stretch to give him something to build on for the summer, to come back next season to be ready to be a full time back up.

Demko's camp allegedly pressured Benning into moving Nilsson and getting him into the NHL. How are they going to react if Markstrom gets a 4-5 year deal? Plus I think it's evident from Benning's history that he prefers a veteran goalie. I just see him moving Demko as part of a bigger deal. Demko on his own doesn't hold much value but as a piece in a multi part trade, yeah I can see that.

 

[ChilliBilly]

Sign Marky to a 3 yr $18 M deal. Structured 5 - 5 - 8. If Seattle claims him, they have to pay him $8 M.

Marky gets his payday but on a shortened term. If claimed, they can re-sign the next year if he wants to come back.

 

[BeardyCanuck03]

Extend Markstrom to a 2-3 year deal. 2 would be ideal, but 3 with the right structure makes sense as well.

Also just as important is signing Demko to a 2-3 yr deal this summer.

 

[StreetHawk]

I'm not rushing anything. I would have liked to see him get more games down the stretch to give him something to build on for the summer, to come back next season to be ready to be a full time back up.

Demko's camp allegedly pressured Benning into moving Nilsson and getting him into the NHL. How are they going to react if Markstrom gets a 4-5 year deal? Plus I think it's evident from Benning's history that he prefers a veteran goalie. I just see him moving Demko as part of a bigger deal. Demko on his own doesn't hold much value but as a piece in a multi part trade, yeah I can see that.

Depends on whether Canucks hand Markstrom a nmc which they should not.

Demko is a RFA. Minimal rights. One thing to press to make the nhl, now it’s up to Demko to outplay Markstrom. Demko needs to showcase himself at the nhl level. Worst case he gets claimed by Seattle.

To Calgarycanuck3, Seattle has money, I doubt that they will be scared off paying $13 million cash to pick up Markstrom for 2 seasons. That’s only $500k per year above his cap hit. Remember he is still under contract through next season. New dea would not begin until 20-21.

 

[m9]

Usually I have a pretty definite opinion on things like this, but this is a tough one.

Demko doesn't factor in much to me. He's the backup next year and should get 25+ starts.

My first choice would be a one-year extension this summer, and although that isn't a realistic option I would try to make it worth Markstrom's time and offer 6 million or 7 million on a 1 year extension. That contract is easily affordable for 20-21 and doesn't lock the team into anything long-term.

If that doesn't work, I would try something short-term. 2 years, 11 million. Something like that.

If he insists on 3+ years, I let things play out through December and see where the team and the player are at.

 

[timw33]

Markstrom is going to be a 30 year UFA looking for his first and last lifetime security contracts, especially if he plays up to the same level of this year.

Table stakes will be at least 5-6 years IMO.

 

[F A N]

I'm not rushing anything. I would have liked to see him get more games down the stretch to give him something to build on for the summer, to come back next season to be ready to be a full time back up.

Demko's camp allegedly pressured Benning into moving Nilsson and getting him into the NHL. How are they going to react if Markstrom gets a 4-5 year deal? Plus I think it's evident from Benning's history that he prefers a veteran goalie. I just see him moving Demko as part of a bigger deal. Demko on his own doesn't hold much value but as a piece in a multi part trade, yeah I can see that.

Benning also believe in having a succession plan though. Plus they need a backup goalie who can play at least 20+ games. It's not so much that Demko is untouchable but keeping Demko while DiPietro develops in Utica is the path of least resisitance.

 

[BeardyCanuck03]

To Calgarycanuck3, Seattle has money, I doubt that they will be scared off paying $13 million cash to pick up Markstrom for 2 seasons. That’s only $500k per year above his cap hit. Remember he is still under contract through next season. New dea would not begin until 20-21.

I know Markstrom's new deal won't start till 20-21. This is why a 2-3 year deal makes more sense. If Demko plays his way into the starting role, the Canucks don't want to be saddled with an expensive backup when Pettersson will be out of his ELC. If Markstrom is still the starter by then, they can extend him again.

Making sure the team has cap and roster flexibility going into those years is very important. There is no guarantee that the Seattle team will take Markstrom in that situation either (unless the Canucks make a dumb move and offer assets).

 

[I in the Eye]

Benning is not going to tolerate a goalie scenario a la Luongo and Schneider. The entire decision will be based on his imagination telling him what the future team is to look like. If he sees Demko as the future goaltender of the Canucks, he'll ignore markstrom's play this year, and he'll ignore demko's injury history to date. He'll ignore anything that doesn't support his imagination.

My bet is Markstrom took Benning by surprise, and his play will be ignored. Benning won't deal with a potential goalie controversy, and won't have two #1's on the team. He'll tell himself that demko is a #1 and is ready, where Markstrom is traded this offseason.

 

[y2kcanucks]

I think the expansion draft kind of forces our hand here. If both goalies play well next year, we lose one in the expansion draft (likely Demko). I think I'm in the trade Markstrom in this scenario - there are a load of teams on the cusp who need a solid starter and Markstrom has proven he can hold down that role.

This. This is the only thing that makes sense.

This is also why the Canucks should have been giving Demko more starts this season, but once again a lack of foresight hurts them in the long run.

Markstrom will be 30 by the time his next contract kicks in (and 31 midway through the first year of a new contract). He probably has a few more good years left, so he should have value. Demko is supposedly the goalie of the future and should have even more good years left. With the upcoming expansion draft we can only keep one.

IF this is a rebuild, there's no question we trade the older goalie and we keep Demko. But it's not a rebuild so this is in question.

I would look to extract value for Markstrom at the draft, and then look for a veteran backup to split time with Demko. Cam Talbot or Brian Elliot wouldn't be bad options. Or even Mike Smith if he leaves Calgary.

 

[sting101]

The problem with trading Markstrom is 2 fold.

1 - he has just started to break out at 27/28 and his service years as a #1 are limited and questionable. effecting his return value.
2 -We have literally no idea yet how Demko will be at shouldering a starting role or any role for that matter. I mean sure he looks the part but its a really risky proposition.

It's really too bad we haven't seen more Demko this year as it would have been nice to flirt with the idea of Markstrom for draft picks

 

[sting101]

This. This is the only thing that makes sense.

This is also why the Canucks should have been giving Demko more starts this season, but once again a lack of foresight hurts them in the long run.

Markstrom will be 30 by the time his next contract kicks in (and 31 midway through the first year of a new contract). He probably has a few more good years left, so he should have value. Demko is supposedly the goalie of the future and should have even more good years left. With the upcoming expansion draft we can only keep one.

IF this is a rebuild, there's no question we trade the older goalie and we keep Demko. But it's not a rebuild so this is in question.

I would look to extract value for Markstrom at the draft, and then look for a veteran backup to split time with Demko. Cam Talbot or Brian Elliot wouldn't be bad options. Or even Mike Smith if he leaves Calgary.

Hmmmn Good point. I didn't think Demko was available