Too early to panic about Markstrom

[Jason14h]

Canucks let Markstrum walk because they had a younger , cheaper and arguably as good goalie waiting to take over

You don’t give a guy a 5 year deal when you have a young goalie ready to start

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Canucks let Markstrum walk because they had a younger , cheaper and arguably as good goalie waiting to take over

You don’t give a guy a 5 year deal when you have a young goalie ready to start

Well....yes you do if he is your "franchise" goalie and starter for the next number of years.

[Enoch Root]

The Canucks could only protect one goaltender in the expansion draft. Markstrom was a UFA and Demko looked ready to be a starter.

Suggesting they 'let him walk' is pretty ridiculous

[Yikes]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The Canucks could only protect one goaltender in the expansion draft. Markstrom was a UFA and Demko looked ready to be a starter.

Suggesting they 'let him walk' is pretty ridiculous

Ridiculous? So why did they not protect Markstrom? Anyways...I have zero interest in batting this around. I prefer Vladar over Markstrom as starter and that's it. If I am wrong then I will eat my words over and over and over but hey, I am also the guy that would have traded both Kiprusoff and Iginla after the 04 run.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Yikes

As you know, I am uncertain about Markstrom...nothing to do with his performance as a Flame but everything to do with his tenure with the Canucks. The way I see it is that for the most part, the "system" of goaltending in the NHL has to be pretty consistent from team to team. Within reason the coaching is probably similar, training programs similar...etc. The thing that I don't like is that the Canucks saw something (or numerous things) in Markstrom to let him go. Maybe low glove, maybe this., that, the other thing. Fact is they let him go. As I have mentioned before, I like Vladar, he is young, cheap and moves like a cat. He is my starter.

Canucks had two starting goalies (Marsktrom established, Demko emerging after a strong playoff performance). One was younger and cheaper, and the other was a UFA on an expiring contract. It was the year of the Seattle expansion draft, so even if they had signed Markstrom, they would have had to trade either him or Demko, because Seattle would have taken whoever they didn't protect.

So they may have tabled a lowball offer, knowing that they planned to keep Demko anyway, and they only had backup money available for Markstrom. The decision to not offer Markstrom starter's money to stay was strictly a business one.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Yikes

Ridiculous? So why did they not protect Markstrom? Anyways...I have zero interest in batting this around. I prefer Vladar over Markstrom as starter and that's it. If I am wrong then I will eat my words over and over and over but hey, I am also the guy that would have traded both Kiprusoff and Iginla after the 04 run.

It was an exercise in risk mitigation. The Canucks could have seen Markstrom walk as a UFA and lost Demko's rights in expansion draft. Now no goalie.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Yikes

Ridiculous? So why did they not protect Markstrom? Anyways...I have zero interest in batting this around. I prefer Vladar over Markstrom as starter and that's it. If I am wrong then I will eat my words over and over and over but hey, I am also the guy that would have traded both Kiprusoff and Iginla after the 04 run.

oh god, he has had some good games but being an NHL starter is a whole new ball game

Rittich was also awesome as a backup

[Captain Otto]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Canucks had two starting goalies (Marsktrom established, Demchuk emerging after a strong playoff performance). One was younger and cheaper, and the other was a UFA on an expiring contract. It was the year of the Seattle expansion draft, so even if they had signed Markstrom, they would have had to trade either him or Demchuk, because Seattle would have taken whoever they didn't protect.

So they may have tabled a lowball offer, knowing that they planned to keep Demchuk anyway, and they only had backup money available for Markstrom. The decision to not offer Markstrom starter's money to stay was strictly a business one.

Demko?

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Captain Otto

Demko?

Oops, how embarrassing, thanks for the correction!

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by Yikes

Ridiculous? So why did they not protect Markstrom?

Because Markstrom wanted a NMC which would have meant them having to protect him which would have exposed Demko. They weren't/aren't a contender so it made more sense to protect the younger Demko for when they reach that point.

[dino7c]

Yeah people forget Vancouver offered Markstrom a long term contact just wouldn't do the NMC because of the expansion draft. Not to mention they haven't made the playoffs since he left

"Letting him walk" is not an accurate description

[Burning Beard]

3 games in. Is it cellphones making everyone so impatient?

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Canucks had two starting goalies (Marsktrom established, Demko emerging after a strong playoff performance). One was younger and cheaper, and the other was a UFA on an expiring contract. It was the year of the Seattle expansion draft, so even if they had signed Markstrom, they would have had to trade either him or Demko, because Seattle would have taken whoever they didn't protect.

So they may have tabled a lowball offer, knowing that they planned to keep Demko anyway, and they only had backup money available for Markstrom. The decision to not offer Markstrom starter's money to stay was strictly a business one.

What revisionist history is this? By all accounts they offered him over 5M. Also Markstrom won the 2 playoff rounds that season, Demko came in when he got hurt. Markstrom had far better numbers than Demko in his final season in Vancouver

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Yikes

... I am also the guy that would have traded both Kiprusoff and Iginla after the 04 run.

Uh, what now?

Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by CSharp

Whatever, I keep saying that Markstrom only looks good when the team in front of him plays great. Otherwise, he's just an overpaid average goalie. Markstrom is OK but he's no Kipper. I wish Sutter would play Vladar more.

That likely is a good summary of Vladar also.

[CGY12]

I don't think some wanting Vladar over Markstrom is that wild of an idea as it sounds, I personally wouldn't lean that way but can understand those who do. I think Markstrom is a good goalie but something just doesn't seem right about him when you have visions of winning a cup. He has all the physical tools that Vasilevisky has, highly talented but doesn't exactly instil supreme confidence. Hopefully he can figure that out this year.

[FanIn80]

If I had to choose between Markstrom and Demko back then, I would have chosen Demko 100% of the time. I think a lot of us remember watching Demko play for BC (because we were watching Gaudreau, who was on the same team).

Vancouver did the right thing in the situation they were in (I mean it's not exactly a hot take to say that now lol).

[Burning Beard]

Demko hasn't started the season too hot either. The season has barely started. Let's see what happens in another 7-10 games.

[Firebot]

The fact that this thread exists 4 games in where the Flames are 3-1 and Markstrom just had an illness week ago is embarrassing.

The whole team had focus issues last game.

Last year Markstrom let in 7 goals in his first 2 games was sub 900 and lost both games. He finished 2nd for the Vezina.

[Firebot]

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showth...anic+markstrom

Exact same time last year, same panic level.

Originally Posted by AustinL_NHL

Not blaming Markstrom for the OT goal, but you're not going to win many games when your $6M goalie is the 2nd best goalie on the ice most nights.