Vancouver Canucks

[bondon]

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

This is kind of what I mean. While I do agree that Demko showed flashes of promise that he could potentially step up and take the reigns, it really was just flashes. Goalies are a fickle thing.

Markstrom has actually been all-world calibre goalie for this team for two straight years and legitimately STOLE goals and games for this team and gotten little to no fanfare for it. Any downgrade from him, even if it's not huge, still makes a difference for this team in terms of competitiveness, and I feel like that's the Catch 22 of letting him walk because you want to allocate the resources elsewhere. You're basically taking from one person to pay another and you might be actually losing value in the process.

I also think Marky has a pretty strong leadership presence in the locker room. He's very well spoken, very level-headed, and you can tell his teammates love him.

[tweetdrivr]

Yeah the problem is, particularly with where Markstrom is in his career and with his performance this year, he isn't going to take a "reasonable" contract in either term or AAV. No way. Certainly can't blame him for it. He's going to be looking to cash in and get some security - he's 30 years old. That's exactly what Vancouver does not need to do. Unless Markstrom is really looking to do the team a huge favor in order to stay they need to let him go elsewhere.

[tweetdrivr]

This is kind of what I mean. While I do agree that Demko showed flashes of promise that he could potentially step up and take the reigns, it really was just flashes. Goalies are a fickle thing.

Markstrom has actually been all-world calibre goalie for this team for two straight years and legitimately STOLE goals and games for this team and gotten little to no fanfare for it. Any downgrade from him, even if it's not huge, still makes a difference for this team in terms of competitiveness, and I feel like that's the Catch 22 of letting him walk because you want to allocate the resources elsewhere. You're basically taking from one person to pay another and you might be actually losing value in the process.

I also think Marky has a pretty strong leadership presence in the locker room. He's very well spoken, very level-headed, and you can tell his teammates love him.

Here's the problem - within a couple of years you are indeed taking from one person to pay another - and that person who is sapping your resources becomes Markstrom because you had to commit too much AAV and/or too much term. He is a great guy and a very good goalie but unless he's willing to take a significant hair cut from what he can command on the FA market he's not the right guy to sign. He just isn't. If the pipeline were devoid of young G talent it'd be a different conversation. But it isn't.

[Axeman33]

Here's the problem - within a couple of years you are indeed taking from one person to pay another - and that person who is sapping your resources becomes Markstrom because you had to commit too much AAV and/or too much term. He is a great guy and a very good goalie but unless he's willing to take a significant hair cut from what he can command on the FA market he's not the right guy to sign. He just isn't. If the pipeline were devoid of young G talent it'd be a different conversation. But it isn't.

He's earned his payday so I don't see him taking less than fair market value.

[tweetdrivr]

He's earned his payday so I don't see him taking less than fair market value.

Completely agree.

[VanDan]

Markstrom was absolutely superb this season and deserves his money. But it shouldn't be in Vancouver. If you resign Markstrom, you're paying for him to cover the mistakes the D will be making, and hope that he can replicate his work from this year. I'd rather he walks, we sign a capable backup or 1B to Demko and use the extra cap space to improve the D. Tanev and Edler need to be moved down the lineup, they can't be workhorses forever.

I totally get people saying resign Markstrom, especially since a new goalie won't necessarily get the team system as well. But the D is a time bomb.

[Canucks_fan18]

This is kind of what I mean. While I do agree that Demko showed flashes of promise that he could potentially step up and take the reigns, it really was just flashes. Goalies are a fickle thing.

Markstrom has actually been all-world calibre goalie for this team for two straight years and legitimately STOLE goals and games for this team and gotten little to no fanfare for it. Any downgrade from him, even if it's not huge, still makes a difference for this team in terms of competitiveness, and I feel like that's the Catch 22 of letting him walk because you want to allocate the resources elsewhere. You're basically taking from one person to pay another and you might be actually losing value in the process.

I also think Marky has a pretty strong leadership presence in the locker room. He's very well spoken, very level-headed, and you can tell his teammates love him.

This. We could take the money from Markstrom sign another capable lets say 4/5th D and top 6 winger and they still won't have the same net effect as a stud goalie. Also two years down the road if it's a bad contract, who cares that's two years down the road. Who knows what the league/cap etc... looks like.

[tweetdrivr]

This. We could take the money from Markstrom sign another capable lets say 4/5th D and top 6 winger and they still won't have the same net effect as a stud goalie. Also two years down the road if it's a bad contract, who cares that's two years down the road. Who knows what the league/cap etc... looks like.

Is this Jim Benning?

[audiopile]

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

This is the kind of sentiment that gets a team into cap trouble.

[Axeman33]

This is the kind of sentiment that gets a team into cap trouble.

How so? Reward others before your best players or you don't think teams should reward their best players at all and let them walk for nothing when their contracts up?

[audiopile]

How so? Reward others before your best players or you don't think teams should reward their best players at all and let them walk for nothing when their contracts up?

They’ll be paying someone at 35 for how they played at 28. It happens all the time, I get it but look how it worked out for Chicago and LA. Quicks contract is terrible now, has been for two years and will be for 3 more. Do you justify it because he won a cup in 2014?

[stevegamer]

They’ll be paying someone at 35 for how they played at 28. It happens all the time, I get it but look how it worked out for Chicago and LA. Quicks contract is terrible now, has been for two years and will be for 3 more. Do you justify it because he won a cup in 2014?

You can reward them them with money, but not crazy long term. For example, a 4 year deal at a what is a good salary now would give him a chance for another contract later in a market that isn't facing a Covid-cap crunch.

At some point you have to deal with the fact that you got to underpay them for a (possibly long) time, and if your plan is to always move on from players at market value or higher, you get to be the Senators.

[Daydream Nation]

This is the kind of sentiment that gets a team into cap trouble.

I agree. With a hard-cap salary league you only pay for future performance. You don’t “reward” players for their past seasons. Obviously, you use a player’s past performance to help predict their future value but you only give the contract if you think the player can perform up to his cap hit. WWBBD

[Axeman33]

They’ll be paying someone at 35 for how they played at 28. It happens all the time, I get it but look how it worked out for Chicago and LA. Quicks contract is terrible now, has been for two years and will be for 3 more. Do you justify it because he won a cup in 2014?

Well first, these teams aren't playing fantasy hockey. That means their values doesn't evaporate once they hit 30, especially goalies, who still can play at a very high level for years.

And yes, I'm well aware of overpaying for past production isn't smart, if you don't think they'll keep up the rate of production. I don't think that's the case here for Markstrom. I think he's still got years of high level production in front of him.

I'm not saying they should give him an eight year deal, but a similar contact to what Lehner us getting is an excellent investment for Vancouver.

Markstrom is in his prime years now and has a few more ahead of him. Goalies prime years are further to the right compared to skaters. You can definitely find examples of goalies not living up to their contracts but the two examples you gave really aren't great ones. Both those teams are currently rebuilding and if you've got a mediocre team in front of a goalie, if course their numbers are going to suffer. Vancouver is on the way up for what will be the main years of Markstroms new deal, not on the way down.

[DocMcPuffin]

Eddie Lack made a great point. "He paid all the 3rd and 4th liners money but don’t want to pay your MVP starting goalie? Makes sense..."