[Rumour] Jacob Markstrom...rumour? <Kevin Weekes does dumb eyeball thing on X>

[saillias]

Curious, to approach your goalie who chose to sign in Calgary as a UFA, and has a NMC, and still has term, and ask him to move it when he's having a strong season and keeping you in the playoff race. It would suggest to me either they are being dishonest about their intent to stay competitive, and really are just trying to tank, which seems kind of odd and out of character for this franchise. Or two, they have a potential deal cooking up so good it's worth it.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I have heard nothing different than Markstrom is happy here and the Flames don't want to move him. Maybe something happened to change that, maybe an offer came and Markstrom changed his mind. I still would be completely shocked if the Flames trade Markstrom, I am having a hard time buying this one.

This, I reached out and asked about this and all I heard back was Conny went to Markstrom and said that there was likely going to be changes and if he was ok with a re-tool or would he rather move on to a contender if one was interested and Markstrom just said he's happy here. I would be shocked if he's moved.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by saillias

. Or two, they have a potential deal cooking up so good it's worth it.

It'd have to be that one and Wolf needs to play while Vladar has no value.

[Jiri Hrdina]

I think it's more giving him the option.
"Even though we are playing better, the numbers show that statistically it is highly unlikely we make the playoffs. And you know where we are with some of our pending free agents. While we don't intend to enter a full re-build, we are going to look more to the future for the remainder of this season. We have inbound interest from teams in playoff positions. If we can make a strong deal, would you be interested in moving to a contending team".

If handled well I don't see any issue.

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

In that same playoff against Dallas he was fantastic.
It's confirmation bias. Putting more weight to things that support an already held view.

I don’t see it as confirmation bias in this case. It’s just a differing view. When you lose spectacularly as an athlete the question arises. For the record I loved the acquisition of Markstrom originally. I only started truly questioning him after some tough playoff games. The Edmonton series being the worst. Doesn’t mean it’s a confirmation bias - just that in a big second round he fell face down and into the next year it lingered.

[CaptainYooh]

Even if there is any meat to this rumour, I just don't see how could NJ, Edmonton or Toronto swing a trade for Markstrom with their respective cap spaces. Only Carolina can.

[Jiggy_12]

Originally Posted by bluejays

He did very well. Yes.

I would imagine there was a mountain of pressure in that game.

Flames hadn't been past the 1st round in quite some time. Oettinger was a brick wall, and the Flames were vastly outplaying the Stars yet could easily have lost the series.

The (blood) pressure I felt as just a fan was off the charts but Markstrom was cool and calm. That game was arguably the best I'd ever seen him.

I can't imagine that just a week later he all of a sudden couldn't handle pressure anymore.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by bluejays

I don’t see it as confirmation bias in this case. It’s just a differing view. When you lose spectacularly as an athlete the question arises. For the record I loved the acquisition of Markstrom originally. I only started truly questioning him after some tough playoff games. The Edmonton series being the worst. Doesn’t mean it’s a confirmation bias - just that in a big second round he fell face down and into the next year it lingered.

Well I was referring more to the original poster who was critical of the acquisition of Markstrom from Day 1, and seems to ignore when he's been good and only pay attention to when he's played badly.

And to be clear. He was awful during that Oiler series. No question. And bad last year. So that should absolutely be factored in.

My overall assessment is that he's a legitimate #1 goalie, but probably a middle of the pack one. Which means he's probably slightly overpaid, but to the tune of 1M max, or less.

I also think the number of #1 goalies in the league that are very consistent is very small. So the argument could be that's why you don't allocate that much cap to a legit goalie. But then I go back to the fact that the Flames thought they had a team that could contend, and needed a legit starter. Previous attempts with guys like Elliott just weren't sufficient, so they went out and got a legit #1. I think that's sound logic even though things didn't work out with that core.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by Jiggy_12

I can't imagine that just a week later he all of a sudden couldn't handle pressure anymore.

Along with the rest of the team. There weren't too many players that didn't play like ass. They let themselves get sucked into playing pond hockey.

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Well I was referring more to the original poster who was critical of the acquisition of Markstrom from Day 1, and seems to ignore when he's been good and only pay attention to when he's played badly.

And to be clear. He was awful during that Oiler series. No question. And bad last year. So that should absolutely be factored in.

My overall assessment is that he's a legitimate #1 goalie, but probably a middle of the pack one. Which means he's probably slightly overpaid, but to the tune of 1M max, or less.

I also think the number of #1 goalies in the league that are very consistent is very small. So the argument could be that's why you don't allocate that much cap to a legit goalie. But then I go back to the fact that the Flames thought they had a team that could contend, and needed a legit starter. Previous attempts with guys like Elliott just weren't sufficient, so they went out and got a legit #1. I think that's sound logic even though things didn't work out with that core.

Agree completely. At the time I believed they overpaid a bit as well but with the cap being what it is it’s not a terrible contract given the remaining years, his salary and his recent play.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by bluejays

It’s a valid point he made though. Not everyone has to have nefarious reason for pointing something out. If every game had the same weight then it’s fair to point to the entire body. But the playoffs is what matters most and more recently is faltered badly. It’s a valid point to question if he can handle the pressure of the playoffs as it was among the worst goaltending performances with the goals he let in. Is it behind him? Who knows.

The Edmonton series may be more recent than him playing lights out in eliminating the Stars, but only by a week.

[MegaErtz]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

This, I reached out and asked about this and all I heard back was Conny went to Markstrom and said that there was likely going to be changes and if he was ok with a re-tool or would he rather move on to a contender if one was interested and Markstrom just said he's happy here. I would be shocked if he's moved.

As much as I love the loyalty, you have to question his ambition.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by saillias

Curious, to approach your goalie who chose to sign in Calgary as a UFA, and has a NMC, and still has term, and ask him to move it when he's having a strong season and keeping you in the playoff race. It would suggest to me either they are being dishonest about their intent to stay competitive, and really are just trying to tank, which seems kind of odd and out of character for this franchise. Or two, they have a potential deal cooking up so good it's worth it.

I would guess the conversation has been ongoing.

"if we move some UFAs do you want to stay?"
"has anything changed?"
"getting some calls from Jersey, should we just tell them no go?"

I don't see it as a complete shock of a conversation where they sit him down and tell him out of the blue that they would like him to waive.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by saillias

Curious, to approach your goalie who chose to sign in Calgary as a UFA, and has a NMC, and still has term, and ask him to move it when he's having a strong season and keeping you in the playoff race. It would suggest to me either they are being dishonest about their intent to stay competitive, and really are just trying to tank, which seems kind of odd and out of character for this franchise. Or two, they have a potential deal cooking up so good it's worth it.

It’s neither of those options. It’s the reality option. They are a team with a ton of key UFA’s who either didn’t want to extend, or are too expensive to extend. And losing any handful of them will cripple the team. So extending half of them is poor asset management.

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

Even if there is any meat to this rumour, I just don't see how could NJ, Edmonton or Toronto swing a trade fro Markstrom with their respective cap spaces. Only Carolina can.

Read earlier in the thread.

VITEK VANECEK #41
New Jersey Devils
Goaltender
Cap Hit: $3,400,000

JACOB MARKSTRÖM #25
Calgary Flames
Goaltender
Cap Hit: $6,000,000

Difference is $2.6 M

Add in

The illustrious Curtis Lazar @ $1M
Or Nathan Bastien @ $1.35M

&

MICHAEL McLEOD #20
New Jersey Devils
Centre
Cap Hit: $1,400,000


It becomes $0.2M to -$0.15M

The Devils have $0.275 in cap place & would need to pay for roster spots, but Dougie Hamilton is on $LTIR indefinitely & Timo Meier so they are accruing cap space daily.

The only question is if the Flames retain or not because they can only retain 2 out of 4 of (Tanev, Hanifin, Markstrom, Lindholm)

[NewFan]

I think there are so many teams that they think they have a legit chance to win this year. So I hope Conroy receives a great offers for our 3 UFAs plus for Kadri, Weegar, Markstrom/Vladar, Coleman. I'm sure all of these players will be Okay to be traded to a good team which has a chance to win.

[CaptainYooh]

VITEK VANECEK #41
New Jersey Devils
Goaltender
Cap Hit: $3,400,000

JACOB MARKSTRÖM #25
Calgary Flames
Goaltender
Cap Hit: $6,000,000

Difference is $2.6 M

Add in

The illustrious Curtis Lazar @ $1M
Or Nathan Bastien @ $1.35M

This is just playing with numbers. Nothing in that scenario would make any sense for Calgary.

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

It’s neither of those options. It’s the reality option. They are a team with a ton of key UFA’s who either didn’t want to extend, or are too expensive to extend. And losing any handful of them will cripple the team. So extending half of them is poor asset management.

Markstrom is not one of those UFAs so I'm not following what you're saying. please elaborate on what reality means to you

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

As much as I love the loyalty, you have to question his ambition.

You don’t, actually.

[bluejays]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

As much as I love the loyalty, you have to question his ambition.

Haha. Sometimes when you have a family winning isn’t the most important thing as stability comes into play. In the corporate environment if your boss asks you to move to Boston and you say no, is it a reflection of your work ethic or you having other priorities outside the four walls of work?