Mike Smith's... woes? He blows? Eating crows? Who knows! (Also David Rittich exists!)

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Thatcher Demko is their guy going forward. He's 23, he's been seasoned in the AHL for ages, and I think they're looking at next year as his big coming out party.

Markstrom's deal expires after 2019-20. He's turning 30 next season and I don't think they'll be looking to bring him back as a UFA. I think the Flames might do well to reach out.

Edit -- moneyhands, if that is indeed the case, well, interesting. But with Demko as the presumed heir apparent, I really wonder what Benning's plan is. I would think they'd try to avoid a Schneider/Luongo situation.

If Vancouver cuts bait on Markstrom now, they're right back to where they were when they traded for him in the first place.

2.73/.913 and 27 wins behind that team is really good. Markstrom has never had a save percentage below .910 in four seasons as a Canuck.

You can't walk away from that for a 2nd round pick from five years ago who has 5 starts and 2 wins. Build a better team in front of Markstrom, he's your guy.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Thatcher Demko is their guy going forward. He's 23, he's been seasoned in the AHL for ages, and I think they're looking at next year as his big coming out party.

Markstrom's deal expires after 2019-20. He's turning 30 next season and I don't think they'll be looking to bring him back as a UFA. I think the Flames might do well to reach out.

Edit -- moneyhands, if that is indeed the case, well, interesting. But with Demko as the presumed heir apparent, I really wonder what Benning's plan is. I would think they'd try to avoid a Schneider/Luongo situation.

Just handing an unproven guy the net when you've got a reasonable goalie right now would be a beyond terrible move. If Demko can't cut it they are screwed until the next saviour shows up in a few years.

Say what you will about Mike Smith, but its smart business have a guy like that and have the younger guys take the job from him. When the Flames got him both Rittich and Gillies were coming off very good (Rittich) and ok (Gillies) years in the AHL and looking like prospects.

If Demko pans out and steals the job, its not like Markstrom is an unmovable player and can land you an asset.

[TheScorpion]

I'm not saying the Canucks would run with Demko as the starter. They could trade Markstrom at high value and sign another goalie to platoon with Demko.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I'm not saying the Canucks would run with Demko as the starter. They could trade Markstrom at high value and sign another goalie to platoon with Demko.

Demko hasn't even shown he's worthy of a platoon role. He has six career starts. Were Vancouver to move Markstrom, it would have to be for a Bobrovsky level player they expected to play 60 games a year.

Markstrom has more value to the Canucks than they'd get back. Nobody's giving them a 1st for a soon to be 30 year old goalie with one year left to UFA who's never played a playoff game. That's not Markstrom's fault, but it does submarine his market.

Demko should factor into the Canucks plans about as much as Jon Gillies figures in ours. If he works out one day, great. But that hasn't come close to happening yet, and it's not fair to the team, the fans or the player to operate as though a breakout is imminent.

In the meantime, they have a guy who has four straight .910 seasons playing on some really bad Vancouver teams. Extend him.

[CMPunk]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I'm not saying the Canucks would run with Demko as the starter. They could trade Markstrom at high value and sign another goalie to platoon with Demko.

That makes no sense. Overpay for a free agent just so you can trade the cheaper version for a pick?

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by CMPunk

That makes no sense. Overpay for a free agent just so you can trade the cheaper version for a pick?

Markstrom is probably at his highest-ever value. They can get an asset for him before he leaves in the summer of 2020 and then sign someone like McElhinney to a one-or-two-year deal in free agency to platoon with Demko. They're rebuilding anyway.

It's like what St. Louis did with Elliott in 2016.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Markstrom is probably at his highest-ever value. They can get an asset for him before he leaves in the summer of 2020 and then sign someone like McElhinney to a one-or-two-year deal in free agency to platoon with Demko. They're rebuilding anyway.

Why would Markstrom leave right when the team is about to get good? The Canucks are going to be back in the playoffs before the Oilers - they have a good nucleus of Pettersson, Boeser and Horvat, Quinn Hughes is a stud, and they're well coached.

That's Markstrom's net. Hockey players generally need a pretty good reason to go to UFA, and the only way that'll happen here is if Vancouver doesn't want him back. We can laugh at Jim Benning all day, and I will, but he hasn't created an organization defined by dysfunction.

I simply don't understand why they would want to move on from Markstrom to go with an option that is guaranteed to be less effective. Demko and McElhinney? He'll be 36 and he's not that good.

[TheScorpion]

Well, we'll have to watch it all play out. I'm just not convinced that the Canucks are sold on Markstrom and I think it could be a good opportunity to capitalize. And I think the Canucks are still pretty far from contending -- that forward group needs two or three more good players and the defense is pretty thin after Hughes and Tanev.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Well, we'll have to watch it all play out. I'm just not convinced that the Canucks are sold on Markstrom and I think it could be a good opportunity to capitalize. And I think the Canucks are still pretty far from contending -- that forward group needs two or three more good players and the defense is pretty thin after Hughes and Tanev.

It's way easier to acquire two or three middle six forwards than a goalie who's been an automatic .910 on teams much worse than what they'll be in the next few years.

The Blues gave us Elliott for a 2nd when Jake Allen had played nearly 100 NHL games. Not 5. What good does that 2nd do Vancouver? A player that might be relevant in four or five years?

Keep your goalie.

[Split98]

It surprised me last night to hear Francis talking about the bad vibes Smith is still getting from the Dome. Albeit, Smith made a great save later in that period and was met with a great crowd reaction, so maybe he's recalling the past just to start a conversation more than anything... it is Francis afterall.

But it's worth asking - are we really giving Smith a rough ride at home still?

I still have my reservations, but this is a moot point now and it has been since the deadline. He's one the Calgary Flames goalies, and I cannot think of the last game (I can't think of what I was doing 2 weeks ago lately either - but that's besides the point) where Smith truly gaffed and cost the game.

Earlier in the season, they were on display very often. He was a sieve, it was looking very grim in net and games were outright lost or were far more effort than necessary when he was in net. The highlight pack of Smith gaffs was really bad, and things kept getting worse the more they insisted on playing him. It was concerning, and it looked quite often to be a huge concern if this team was going to be able to sustain success all season. But we got through that.

Now? Whether it's due to this team's obsession with playing the right way or Smith learning how to better use the body he has today, I don't even look at his stats post game. I seriously couldn't tell you right now whether Smith or Rittch have had a better last 10, how Smith was his last game, or any of that. He was fine, we won, we're in 1st and he's a part of that now. There's a rebound there, and all I can honestly gripe about is 'maybe another goalie could have had that'. But I can't think of that last time I thought Smith cost them a goal. I'm sure there are a few here or there, as any goalie... but the nightly handful of costly errors are behind him.

All of this is to say: to those of you lucky enough to be at the Dome... let's make sure this changes. He's grown, improved and the team is fantastic to watch because of it. Let's do the same. I want to watch games where the home crowd is the envy of the NHL - not shouting down a goalie for a (quite extended, albeit) rocky stretch.

I want Mike Smith to want to win here.

[Erick Estrada]

One thing I agree with Francis is that even if Rittich starts in the playoffs, Smith will probably play as well at some point. I don't think Peters will hesitate to pull the trigger on either goaltender in the playoffs if he's not pleased with their play. I think both Smith and Rittich of late had been good and that's probably a good thing because the team will need both of them to feel good about their play going into the playoffs. The big thing for both of these guys in the playoffs is to not give up the free goals to the opposition by wandering out of the net and I'm sure the coaching staff has reinforced that.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

One thing I agree with Francis is that even if Rittich starts in the playoffs, Smith will probably play as well at some point. I don't think Peters will hesitate to pull the trigger on either goaltender in the playoffs if he's not pleased with their play. I think both Smith and Rittich of late had been good and that's probably a good thing because the team will need both of them to feel good about their play going into the playoffs. The big thing for both of these guys in the playoffs is to not give up the free goals to the opposition by wandering out of the net and I'm sure the coaching staff has reinforced that.

This is where I disagree with Francis, because this is not what he was saying. Yes, in the playoffs Peters will not hesitate to switch out his goalies as soon as one of them has a bad game. This is the right thing to do, but that is not what Francis was arguing. He was actually talking about a platoon in the post season with both goalies getting starts on the basis of strategic game planning for the opponent, or home v. road situations. That’s not happening.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Markstrom is probably at his highest-ever value. They can get an asset for him before he leaves in the summer of 2020 and then sign someone like McElhinney to a one-or-two-year deal in free agency to platoon with Demko. They're rebuilding anyway.

It's like what St. Louis did with Elliott in 2016.

When you have a good goalie, you don't just move him. It is far too difficult and unpredictable to try and replace him.

Just think about Kipper. We didn't even move him, he simply retired, and we are still trying to replace him. Goalies are witches and you don't #### with witches.

[powderjunkie]

That whole Fleury and Matt Murray situation sure was a disaster for Pittsburgh. I'm sure they wish they got rid of Fleury sooner.

There was a time when everyone in the hockey world thought Murray was a sure thing and Fleury was past his best-before date, or at least overpaid.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

That whole Fleury and Matt Murray situation sure was a disaster for Pittsburgh. I'm sure they wish they got rid of Fleury sooner.

There was a time when everyone in the hockey world thought Murray was a sure thing and Fleury was past his best-before date, or at least overpaid.

At least Murray won two championships and is still a helluva goalie who isn't yet 25. His problem is durability, he still has yet to start 50 games in a season.

Not exactly the same as bailing on your starter for a guy with six career starts.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Split98

He's one the Calgary Flames goalies, and I cannot think of the last game (I can't think of what I was doing 2 weeks ago lately either - but that's besides the point) where Smith truly gaffed and cost the game.!

You forgot Iginla Retirement Night already?

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

At least Murray won two championships and is still a helluva goalie who isn't yet 25. His problem is durability, he still has yet to start 50 games in a season.

Not exactly the same as bailing on your starter for a guy with six career starts.

Agree - not trying to crap on Murray, just saying it's silly to release the bird in your hand because you see a younger, more exciting bird in the bush. (though the way Pittsburgh played it made sense - they won two cups, freed up cap space and didn't have to lose anything else to expansion, and it's unlikely that Fleury would have rekindled himself to this level without a change of scenery, anyways)

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Agree - not trying to crap on Murray, just saying it's silly to release the bird in your hand because you see a younger, more exciting bird in the bush. (though the way Pittsburgh played it made sense - they won two cups, freed up cap space and didn't have to lose anything else to expansion, and it's unlikely that Fleury would have rekindled himself to this level without a change of scenery, anyways)

FWIW, I've gotten to watch Murray in person twice in the last four days, and he's every bit as good as Fleury.

Pittsburgh is not second guessing that decision.

[Classic_Sniper]

It looks more and more likely that both Rittich and Smith will be getting starts in the playoffs. Wouldn’t be surprised if that’s been Jordan Sigalet’s modus operandi since the All Star break. If Smith doesn’t slip up from here on out, it’s almost a certainty that we see a 1a-1b situation in the playoffs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

It looks more and more likely that both Rittich and Smith will be getting starts in the playoffs. Wouldn’t be surprised if that’s been Jordan Sigalet’s modus operandi since the All Star break. If Smith doesn’t slip up from here on out, it’s almost a certainty that we see a 1a-1b situation in the playoffs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I just don’t think we can make definitive assertions about near certainties at this point. I still think the coaches will pick a guy to run with, and will stick with him until he falters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk