Vancouver Canucks

[Axeman33]

Yes - and every team would love to have 9 Connor McDavids. Or no salary cap and be able to spend like drunk sailors. I agree next year will be a very different season - but many teams just are not able to, don't need to, or don't see the need to have essentially two starting goalies.

The benefit that Vancouver has over those teams you mentioned is they don't have to go shopping for two quality goalies. They already have them.

[Canucks_fan18]

So Markstrom signs a 1 year deal?

No but if he wants 6 x 4 you do it. if he wants 5.5 for 6 you do it. If he wants anything over that you walk. You got nothing if you don't have goal tending and I don't trust Demko with the reigns yet. In a year from now see how things look. Might be hard to move Markeys contract then or trade Demko but that's a year from now's problem. Keep them and continue to grow the core.

[tweetdrivr]

Yes, but can they afford to keep them? If they do sign Markstrom to a deal like Canucks_fan suggests they are going into next year with the same or a slightly weaker roster than this year. If they can sign him to a deal like that I think it's a trade-able contract....as long as he doesn't turn into a pumpkin. I really do think the best way to proceed is let Markstrom go and give the reins to Demko. If he falters, sell at the trade deadline as best you can and get ready for the window to open with this young core in a year or two. If they do fine (which I think they will), go as far as you can (which was pretty damn good this year) and then make some moves to improve as the window really opens and these boat anchor contracts like Benn, Sutter, and Baertschi come off the books. Either way the window isn't going to be this next season because of Benning's gaffes. It's the season after where things get good.

[Axeman33]

It's not completely out of the question that they sign Markstrom, trade Demko and bring up DiPietro.

Who knows what they'll do.

[audiopile]

If next years schedule is going to force a team to play as if they have a 1A/1B scenario then why spend on Markstrom when there will be a plethora of 1B goalies out there.

Canucks are paying $3M this coming year and next for Luongo dont forget (thanks Bettman) so their goalie budget is not what it should be.

Marky my words, at 6Mx5 we will regret it after two.

[Axeman33]

If next years schedule is going to force a team to play as if they have a 1A/1B scenario then why spend on Markstrom when there will be a plethora of 1B goalies out there.

Canucks are paying $3M this coming year and next for Luongo dont forget (thanks Bettman) so their goalie budget is not what it should be.

Marky my words, at 6Mx5 we will regret it after two.

The guy was your MVP this year. I guess that means little to nothing to the fans.

[Daydream Nation]

If next years schedule is going to force a team to play as if they have a 1A/1B scenario then why spend on Markstrom when there will be a plethora of 1B goalies out there.

Canucks are paying $3M this coming year and next for Luongo dont forget (thanks Bettman) so their goalie budget is not what it should be.

Marky my words, at 6Mx5 we will regret it after two.

I agree. Vancouver needs to play out the next couple seasons and get out from under these bad contracts. In two years Eriksson, Beagle, Rousel, and Sutter will be gone which is 16 M in cap space. Unfortunately, they are not going to be able to capitalize on Hughes and Petersson's entry level deals. Vancouver really needs to prepare to win in 3 seasons when they get all that cap space, albeit much of it will go to Hughes and Petersson, and Podkolvin, Hoglander, and Rathborn are contributing. Sure, they can work around the edges and maybe move a contract and sign a minor free agent but the easiest way to improve their team is using Markstrom's cap saving on depth AND Demko being able to provide solid goaltending. Plus, there has been speculation that with the flat cap there will be quality players available in the 1-2 million range. Use Markstrom's saving on a couple of those players to shore up the bottom 6 and 2nd/3rd pairing is ideal. It's just really unfortunate that they have that much dead space and can't use it effectively. Vancouver has the top end talent to compete right now.

[bondon]

Losing Tanev would also be a pretty rough blow for the team too, as he provides that stabilizing presence that allows Hughes to dream big.

Though i'm scared af to give him a long-term deal.

[CMSpiced]

Losing Tanev would also be a pretty rough blow for the team too, as he provides that stabilizing presence that allows Hughes to dream big.

Though i'm scared af to give him a long-term deal.

I agree with both on Tanev, cant replace him in the near term, long term deal could be really rough, just based on him style of play.

I think fans are underestimating how much better Markstrom was then Demko this year. I like Demko a lot, he has a lot of promise, but he only got hot for three games, he has not shown what Marky has consistently. If you can get Markstrom at $6Mx5, I think it is really tough to say no. It is way to much of a gamble to give him up. He really should be a Vezina finalist (if not winner) this year and last year. It is crazy how good he has played for us in the last two years. The quality of chances our off the rush style gives up is very high.

[tweetdrivr]

So it's decided - Let Marstrom walk. Add a little but target the next 2-3 years as a real window and add as the crap contracts come off in the 2 years. And dont make Tanev one of those crap contracts. Im in.

[Axeman33]

So it's decided - Let Marstrom walk. Add a little but target the next 2-3 years as a real window and add as the crap contracts come off in the 2 years. And dont make Tanev one of those crap contracts. Im in.

Ken Holland would love to see Markstrom roll out as a FA. He'd be worth investing in for sure.

[Canucks_fan18]

Ken Holland would love to see Markstrom roll out as a FA. He'd be worth investing in for sure.

Exactly. There are teams that have been searching for years for goal tending. If we get rid of Markstrom, the Canucks are going to regret it. We will have next to zero chance of making the playoffs next year if he's gone and that will only hurt the young core's development.

[tweetdrivr]

Exactly. There are teams that have been searching for years for goal tending. If we get rid of Markstrom, the Canucks are going to regret it. We will have next to zero chance of making the playoffs next year if he's gone and that will only hurt the young core's development.

Don't know why you're so down on Demko. It would appear he's more than ready to give them what they need to finish top 3 in a pretty weak Pacific Div.

[STONE.]

I think signing him (assuming price isn't insane) is low-risk simply because Seattle is the backup plan. If a year from now, Demko is clearly in need of more of the net, then leave Markstrom exposed (at worst) or deal him to Vegas and hopefully use that as a way of keeping someone else (better) or having Vegas take a bad contract (best). Same could be done for Demko if Markstrom seems like the better guy to own (or if Demko is the better chip to deal).

The one thing I don't want to see is a NTC/NMC for Markstrom.

I was initially in the camp to let him walk, but I've kinda changed my tune.
And if they do let him walk, it better be because they are confident they can get a Khudobin/Greiss type backup for cheap. And ideally they deal Markstrom's rights prior to FA as well.

[Grapes]

No question the team has some top end talent plus some very good talent coming up. It also has too many albatross contracts. They need to get out from under those contracts without wasting too many seasons of their top talent.
Sign Markstrom as long as it’s a reasonable contract. With the expected condensed 2021 schedule they will need Markstrom and Demko.
At least give themselves until the Kraken expansion draft to see if they can get out from under any of the bad contracts. Then take stock and revise.