[Rumour] Flames are keeping Markstrom for the rest of the season

[The Yen Man]

I'm ok with this. If the team is going to be in the mushy middle anyways, we may as well continue to cheer on wins for the rest of the season and hope they sneak into the playoffs.

It will at least make the remaining games fun to watch.

[Jason14h]

Flames need to aim to be bad next year . We need top picks to augment the depth prospects we are acquiring with some stars

Markstrum is playing too good to allow this to happen

Think long term . We are no where close to being a contender - Yet

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

The market will be filled be a lot of cheaper options that wont cost any assets.

If a 1st and Holtz was on the table, what do you think a slight decrease is? They couldn't even agree to compensation on retaining.

Really? Who?

If they’re cheaper and don’t cost assets, why would you assume they’re better?

[Bonded]

Hopefully it’s a head fake. Moving Markstrom would be the best asset management they have ever done. Better pick is also great

[Jetfire]

Pay up, Fitz. You know you need a goalie, your players know you need a goalie.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Do we really think that the GM that has moved Toffoli, Zadorov, Lindholm and Tanev for futures this year is now cratering his asset value to send a message?

I think we can assume this is either posturing, or they honestly believe they will get more value in the summer, no?

Or there never was an overpay offer from the Devils to begin with. I trust Conroy's done his process, and if he believes he's not getting great value for Markstrom, then so be it.

[Jore]

If true it would be a huge mistake not only because of the volatility of goalie performance year to year and because of lost draft positioning. Very little upside

[Fighting Banana Slug]

May or may not be true, but is still consistent with what Diss has been saying: the Flames aren't shopping Marky. Need an overpay.

[btimbit]

Reading between the lines here it seems the message is "There haven't been any good enough offers"

Which tracks with everything else we've heard, that they're not actively selling him so you're going to have to pay up

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Really? Who?

If they’re cheaper and don’t cost assets, why would you assume they’re better?

Guys like Talbot will be available for free, and save similar save % and a lot of team play tandems anyways.

You think New Jersey is going to increase their offer in the offseason for a 34 year old goalie?

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Really? Who?

If they’re cheaper and don’t cost assets, why would you assume they’re better?

Ullmark is the goalie that isn’t available now but probably will be in the summer. Nashville might also toss in the towel on Saros if he refuses to sign.

[devo22]

I don't even know what the "right message" is supposed to be. We're 19th in the league and 5 points out of a playoff spot, and that's with a top goaltender and Tanev/Hanifin. We've just traded one of them for futures and will probably trade the other one shortly. You can't trade away two of your top defenseman and expect Markstrom to still carry them to the sacred land.

Might just be a ruse anyway, but sending messages instead of sticking to sensible asset management is dumb. Especially when said message makes little sense to begin with.

[Hackey]

Goalies never bring back big returns. Getting anything of value is a win. Especially for a guy who played horrible last season and is at the end of his career. I'm okay with them holding on to him this year but I hope they try hard to deal him in the offseason, even though there will be so many more goalie options available at that time.

If the Flames 1st is higher than 10 next year doesn't it go to Montreal? Those conditions are confusing. If there was ever a season to tank that would be the one.

[FlamesAddiction]

It really depends on what that message is. If the message is that if you choose to sign in Calgary as a UFA, receive an NMC, and give it your all, we will not pressure you to uproot your family mid-contract; then I don't think it's a bad message. Trying to put myself into the mind of such a player, and such a scenario might feel similar to being fired from a job and the rest of the team might rally against management in solidarity. Conroy has to be careful to keep a positive culture on the team.

[blankall]

Where are people getting this information that the Flames have the opportunity to "sell high" right now. From what's coming out of NJ, they seem hesitant and unsure if it's the right move. What "sell high" offers have been confirmed?

If Markstrom finishes out the year strong, why is his value all of a sudden much lower in the off season? If anything, you could have more suiters, as you'll have teams planning for the upcoming season and more overall cap space.

[Enoch Root]

Sounds like the team took the Tanev trade pretty hard, which isn't surprising, as he is no doubt very popular. So this comment turns the heat down a little bit.

But as for sending the wrong message, they have/are traded/ing 3 of their top 5 defensemen, and 2/3 of last year's top line. Suggesting that trading Markstrom too, is 'sending the wrong message' just doesn't carry any weight.

I think it's an easy position for them to take, as they probably don't get a deal done anyway, and it also serves very well as posturing to potential buyers: "change our minds!"

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by devo22

I don't even know what the "right message" is supposed to be. We're 19th in the league and 5 points out of a playoff spot, and that's with a top goaltender and Tanev/Hanifin. We've just traded one of them for futures and will probably trade the other one shortly. You can't trade away two of your top defenseman and expect Markstrom to still carry them to the sacred land.

Might just be a ruse anyway, but sending messages instead of sticking to sensible asset management is dumb. Especially when said message makes little sense to begin with.

What is the message in it anyways? The players aren't dumb they can see what his happening, we are trading away all our UFA players for picks and prospects not roster players.

"Hey guys we know you can do it even with our depleted depth on defence, and no immediate help coming in we kept Marky and believe in you."

[blankall]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It really depends on what that message is. If the message is that if you choose to sign in Calgary as a UFA, receive an NMC, and give it your all, we will not pressure you to uproot your family mid-contract; then I don't think it's a bad message. Trying to put myself into the mind of such a player, and such a scenario might feel similar to being fired from a job and the rest of the team might rally against management.

The message is about the performance of the team. The Flames, as stated, are not tanking.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Quoting myself from an other thread here...but I don't know how any team could look at the potential goalie market in the offseason and go "Yeah there will be a bigger market for him in the offseason"

The goalie market is generally soft in the offseason because there are lots of options for teams to go the cheap route available for short term looks.

It's not like Markstrom is 28 like Saros either...he's 34.

Sell now while you have a motivated buyer that if rumors are true made a very aggressive offer.

I also think the market is soft in the off-season because teams aren't playing any games. Everyone thinks their goaltender has the capability of being a good starter. Nobody is posting an .870 SV%.

I'm hoping this is just a negotiation tactic. I don't think anybody would be surprised, if the Flames keep Markstrom, if he has another bad season next year. In fact, I'm kind of expecting it given how our defence will look and because Markstrom himself seems to just swing wildly between seasons.

This is an opportunity to add extreme value to an organization for an asset you believed to have negative value less than a year ago. It's potentially franchise changing.

I don't understand how the Flames would refuse to act simply to "send a message". Who cares. A message has already been sent by trading Lindholm, Tanev, and soon Hanifin for futures. It's the right message.

[dammage79]

I bet the only way the Flames would move Markstrom is for a Center. And no one is willing to do so.

I get it. Flames need one, sorely, of the top two line variety at that.

If they can't land one why do a trade?

My answer is, help yourself and let the team figure out what they are without a vezina caliber goalie.