[Rumour] Friedman: Devils and Flames have had legit discussions about Markstrom

[MegaErtz]

Even with as good as he's played lately, Markstrom still have negative trade value with two years left at six million per year. This is a Monahan type situation where we'd have to include draft picks to get his contract off the books.

Now, at 50% retained, that's a whole different story.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

Even with as good as he's played lately, Markstrom still have negative trade value with two years left at six million per year. This is a Monahan type situation where we'd have to include draft picks to get his contract off the books.

Now, at 50% retained, that's a whole different story.

Most teams would gladly shell out a measly $6M in 2024 for any goalie playing at the level Markstrom is.

It's not even close to a Monahan situation. But the Flames still need to retain some money to help a contending team fit him under their cap.

[butterfly]

Except they turn into pumpkins at the drop of a hat.

-1.6 goals saved above expected in 165 games that we paid $18 million for during the three seasons prior to this.

Now he's on a roll and if we can finally get out of this deal for zero return or retention it's a win, for me. David Rittich has been on a better roll this year.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by HighLifeMan

Are we really suggesting that a 34 year old Markstrom holds the value of Mercer and a 1st?

Conroy would be an absolute trading savant if he pulled that off, but let’s atleast be somewhat realistic here..

I am not suggesting, I am telling you it would take that value to get Jacob Markstrom to NJ this season. It doesn't matter what you think his market value is or what it even is, it is an asset we have that isn't being shopped and that the team would like to keep, if you want to overpay then we can talk about availability. People don't seem to get the fact the team doesn't want to trade Markstrom and he doesn't want to really go anywhere right now. Think of it this way, I have a classic car that is worth $30,000, I really like the car and it isn't for sale. Now if you offered me $50,000-$60,000 for it maybe my mind can be changed.

[midniteowl]

Comparing Markstrom's age with Mercer's is irrelevance. Devils isn't trading for Markstrom for the future per se, they are trying to get a top goalie to push them over the top. Since they have so many young top prospect, losing one doesn't really hurt them. But getting a top goalie helps them go deep in the playoff. Back in the days, when Flames traded their top prospect in Brett Hull, for well, junks, but those junks added depth and the Flames won a Cup. So, it's all worth it.

[Naitix]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

Even with as good as he's played lately, Markstrom still have negative trade value with two years left at six million per year. This is a Monahan type situation where we'd have to include draft picks to get his contract off the books.

Now, at 50% retained, that's a whole different story.

You must know you're completely wrong right

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

Even with as good as he's played lately, Markstrom still have negative trade value with two years left at six million per year. This is a Monahan type situation where we'd have to include draft picks to get his contract off the books.

Now, at 50% retained, that's a whole different story.

This might just be the stupidest thing I have read on here in a while. You are 100% clueless.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

This might just be the stupidest thing I have read on here in a while. You are 100% clueless.

Why is that stupid? 14.1 goals saved above expected in around 3 2/3 seasons.

Saving 3.85 goals above expected per season is worth more than $6 million? Because recency bias?

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Now that they've come down off the post-trade bump, the Flames look like they won't score enough goals to support the great goaltending they're getting. They look a bit anemic again. And their defense is guaranteed to get worse in the coming weeks.

They can still try their luck at a wildcard spot, but they're way better off getting the kind of talent a now markstrom trade can bring into their system.

Begin the wolf era, fetch a young center like Mercer and another couple picks and start working with your new long term group/core.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

Even with as good as he's played lately, Markstrom still have negative trade value with two years left at six million per year. This is a Monahan type situation where we'd have to include draft picks to get his contract off the books.

Now, at 50% retained, that's a whole different story.

Wat?

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Why is that stupid? 14.1 goals saved above expected in around 3 2/3 seasons.

Saving 3.85 goals above expected per season is worth more than $6 million? Because recency bias?

Goalies have up and down seasons like any player, everybody on the team had a down season last year during that turmoil. How is that stupid? It would be like saying the Penguins should move on Sydney Crosby because he is 36 and he makes 8.7M a year and the team needs to rebuild, of course it would cost a first to move him because at that age and salary he has negative value. Markstrom is 34 and playing at a Vezina calibre level and goalies tend to stay good a lot longer than other positions. Saying Jacob Markstrom has negative value and would cost a 1st round pick to dump is not just stupid, it's beyond stupid!

[dissentowner]

Hey, maybe we can trade that Vancouver 1st we got for Lindholm to get someone to take Tanev at the deadline too!

[Kovaz]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Why is that stupid? 14.1 goals saved above expected in around 3 2/3 seasons.

Saving 3.85 goals above expected per season is worth more than $6 million? Because recency bias?

There are 18 goalies making 6+ million this year, and 0 goals above expected is league average goaltending. So yeah $6 million is the market rate for a starting goaltender in the NHL.


And if you're committed to the premise that trade values are based on the last 3 2/3 seasons rather than the last 1 or 2, I'm curious what you think point-per-game all-star winger Jonathan Huberdeau is worth in a trade.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Goalies have up and down seasons like any player, everybody on the team had a down season last year during that turmoil. How is that stupid? It would be like saying the Penguins should move on Sydney Crosby because he is 36 and he makes 8.7M a year and the team needs to rebuild, of course it would cost a first to move him because at that age and salary he has negative value. Markstrom is 34 and playing at a Vezina calibre level and goalies tend to stay good a lot longer than other positions. Saying Jacob Markstrom has negative value and would cost a 1st round pick to dump is not just stupid, it's beyond stupid!

Crosby is worth $8.7M.

Markstrom isn't. Calgary paid $18 million for -1.6 goals saved above expected in the 165 games he played during the prior 3 years. Which Markstrom do you think they are going to get for the next 2 1/3 years for $14 million? Is he going into his prime too?

[Harry Lime]

People are getting hung up on mercer. What if the target is nemec? Jersey is much deeper in that position if Hamilton were healthy.

If it was markstrom 2M retained, and tanev, for nemec and a pick, I'd almost be more into that trade than mercer.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Crosby is worth $8.7M.

Markstrom isn't. Calgary paid $18 million for -1.6 goals saved above expected in the 165 games he played during the prior 3 years. Which Markstrom do you think they are going to get for the next 2 1/3 years for $14 million? Is he going into his prime too?

So how many 1sts would it take for Washington to move on from Ovechkin this year? 3?

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

So how many 1sts would it take for Washington to move on from Ovechkin this year? 3?

Why don't you argue with me? I'm talking about Markstrom, not Ovechkin.

I've asked this question about four times and no one ever answers. How much would Markstrom's contract need to be in your opinion for him to have zero value?

[bax]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

People are getting hung up on mercer. What if the target is nemec? Jersey is much deeper in that position if Hamilton were healthy.

If it was markstrom 2M retained, and tanev, for nemec and a pick, I'd almost be more into that trade than mercer.

Nemec isn’t available. He’s a future superstar and pillar of that team. There is no chance.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Why don't you argue with me? I'm talking about Markstrom, not Ovechkin.

I've asked this question about four times and no one ever answers. How much would Markstrom's contract need to be in your opinion for him to have zero value?

No one answers because it’s a dumb question.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Why don't you argue with me? I'm talking about Markstrom, not Ovechkin.

I've asked this question about four times and no one ever answers. How much would Markstrom's contract need to be in your opinion for him to have zero value?

*Facepalm* If Markstrom was Jack Campbell he would have zero value or even negative value. Right now most GM's consider him one of the best starting goalies in the NHL, he has term and salary that is good value for a workhorse number one goaltender. He is not being shopped and is coveted by multiple teams. He has very good value. You can choose not to believe that but you can believe whatever you like.