smelly Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 (edited) Cryptic tweet at 11:37 am -- no specific team mentioned. IF it is anything involving Devils (and at this point that's still a big if), I think that given Calgary's pending FAs any deal would have to start with Casey. Edited January 12 by smelly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincois Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Markstrom is having an OK year so far. But 6 mil for next 3 years? a NMC. He was MIA last year. No? A change of scenery might help, but doesn't look like a Fitz kinda move. A couple salaries will have to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunninWithTheDevil Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Personally, if we're in on him I'm not excited. Signed until he's 37? Am I correct in seeing that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smelly Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 (edited) 39 minutes ago, vincois said: Markstrom is having an OK year so far. But 6 mil for next 3 years? a NMC. He was MIA last year. No? A change of scenery might help, but doesn't look like a Fitz kinda move. A couple salaries will have to go. As I posted earlier this season, I was told that Fitz was in on Markstrom. Nothing has happened yet, so clearly some combination of ask, remaining term, and potential retention has prevented any deal to date. I also think that he could be moving to CAR - I’d be surprised if he went to TOR given their cap situation we will see Edited January 12 by smelly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njbuff Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 42 minutes ago, smelly said: Cryptic tweet at 11:37 am -- no specific team mentioned. IF it is anything involving Devils (and at this point that's still a big if), I think that given Calgary's pending FAs any deal would have to start with Casey. The Devils are going to give up a top prospect for a soon to be 34 year old average goalie. Fitz would be ALL TIME dumb to do that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smelly Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 (edited) 5 minutes ago, njbuff said: The Devils are going to give up a top prospect for a soon to be 34 year old average goalie. Fitz would be ALL TIME dumb to do that. In this market, the going rate is an overpayment. i don’t want to give up Casey. But I’m thinking that an established starter is going to cost something comparable if Fitz makes a deal. I would love to be wrong. Edited January 12 by smelly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 16 minutes ago, njbuff said: The Devils are going to give up a top prospect for a soon to be 34 year old average goalie. Fitz would be ALL TIME dumb to do that. One with three years and $18 million left too. fvck. That. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 12 minutes ago, smelly said: In this market, the going rate is an overpayment. i don’t want to give up Casey. But I’m thinking that an established starter is going to cost something comparable if Fitz makes a deal. I would love to be wrong. I’m not trading Casey for Markstrom. I’ll punt on this season before I’d do that. Markstrom has too much term. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henriqued Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 Markstrom has been red-hot as of late, but that's a small sample...currently he's an improvement over what VV's provided in 2023-24, but I'm VEEEEEERY leery of overpaying wildly for him. Calgary has to take back VV in any deal, to even attempt to make the money work. If Fitz feels this desperate, crazy as it many sound, I'd rather see him give up a first-rounder, than Casey. But we'll see if this actually happens. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 11 minutes ago, Henriqued said: I don’t really appreciate this cryptic sh!t from Weekes. If you have something to report, report it. And who is that? Merzlikens? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagknife Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 6 minutes ago, MadDog2020 said: I don’t really appreciate this cryptic sh!t from Weekes. If you have something to report, report it. And who is that? Merzlikens? Yeah it’s Elvis. My logic brain said a they just swap, the money is comparable, both need changes in scenery 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smelly Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said: Markstrom has been red-hot as of late, but that's a small sample...currently he's an improvement over what VV's provided in 2023-24, but I'm VEEEEEERY leery of overpaying wildly for him. Calgary has to take back VV in any deal, to even attempt to make the money work. If Fitz feels this desperate, crazy as it many sound, I'd rather see him give up a first-rounder, than Casey. But we'll see if this actually happens. I'm fine with that. And I'd love it if CAL would accept that (in a world where Fitz has decided Markstrom is the guy). I am skeptical though that Conroy is taking a deal (with anyone, not just NJ) that is built around futures (especially if that first rounder is in 2025, which is all that the Devs could move now due to the Timo deal). So many obstacles to getting even a semi-permanent fix. Regardless, AS should be en route to FLA already, and it's a sin that he apparently isn't. EDIT -- I guess the deal could be structured so that 2024 first goes to CAL if it doesn't go to SJ, CAL gets 2025 first if it does. No idea if that would matter. Also, maybe NMC works in favor of any acquiring team by depressing return. Who knows. Edited January 12 by smelly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nessus Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 2 minutes ago, smelly said: I'm fine with that. And I'd love it if CAL would accept that (in a world where Fitz has decided Markstrom is the guy). I am skeptical though that Conroy is taking a deal (with anyone, not just NJ) that is built around futures (especially if that first rounder is in 2025, which is all that the Devs could move now due to the Timo deal). So many obstacles to getting even a semi-permanent fix. Regardless, AS should be en route to FLA already, and it's a sin that he apparently isn't. For what it’s worth, the Devils would need to make it to the ECF for them to give up their first. I don’t think that’s happening this year, Markstrom or not. But you’re right if they want to trade this year’s first, it will have to be conditional, and include 2025’s pick if they make it to the ECF. It would be insane to give up Casey for Markstrom though. We better hope that isn’t the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devlman Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 hour ago, vincois said: Markstrom is having an OK year so far. But 6 mil for next 3 years? a NMC. He was MIA last year. No? A change of scenery might help, but doesn't look like a Fitz kinda move. A couple salaries will have to go. He has been red hot of late., as has Calgary. This would be Calgary selling high. So I don’t imagine the asking price being anything but hefty. Would love him here though, especially if he came with Tanev or Hanifin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RizzMB30 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 I think I would rather take my shot with Elvis than Markstrom. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 4 minutes ago, RizzMB30 said: I think I would rather take my shot with Elvis than Markstrom. Elvis has a multi-year deal too, but I think it’s cheaper than Markstrom’s in dollars (not sure on years). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Ottawa Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 Elvis at 5.4 each year to 2027 I really don't like the length of that deal. The money is acceptable though 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDfan1711 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 Markstrom is 12-11-0-2 this year with a .910 Sv %. About to turn 34 and signed for a couple more years? Yeah, no thanks. This doesn't help us really in any way. Not long term, and not even short term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devlman Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 (edited) Here’s the biggest stat for Markstrom: he has exactly 666 saves this season. Make of that what you will…for me, he’s already a Devil. Edited January 13 by devlman 2 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicomo Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 (edited) 1 hour ago, NJDfan1711 said: Markstrom is 12-11-0-2 this year with a .910 Sv %. About to turn 34 and signed for a couple more years? Yeah, no thanks. This doesn't help us really in any way. Not long term, and not even short term. I don’t see how it wouldn’t. It might not be ideal contract-wise, and we might not like what we have to give up to get him, but it would certainly help the team in a big way. They’d have a true #1 goalie for the next 2.5 seasons. Edited January 13 by Nicomo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicomo Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 The problem with just punting on the season and doing nothing is the options aren’t going to be any better this summer. It’s pretty brutal outside of maybe Kahkonen https://www.spotrac.com/nhl/free-agents/goaltender/ufa/ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 7 hours ago, Nicomo said: I don’t see how it wouldn’t. It might not be ideal contract-wise, and we might not like what we have to give up to get him, but it would certainly help the team in a big way. They’d have a true #1 goalie for the next 2.5 seasons. I just cringe at the contract. And Markstrom hasn’t been very good. I know he’s played better recently, but I’m not really psyched about paying this dude $18 million over the next three years, and giving up Seamus Casey for the privilege to do so. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDfan1711 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 7 hours ago, Nicomo said: I don’t see how it wouldn’t. It might not be ideal contract-wise, and we might not like what we have to give up to get him, but it would certainly help the team in a big way. They’d have a true #1 goalie for the next 2.5 seasons. I don't see him as a true #1. I don't think he's been a true #1 at any point in his career. The first four years of his career he was a backup in Florida, then when he was traded to Vancouver he was a backup for 2 years before becoming the starter, but the only reason he was the starter was because they really didn't have anything else. It's been the same thing in Calgary. He's their "starter", but consider who he's up against..... Dustin Wolf, Daniel Vladar, Louis Domingue (😂). And on the Canucks it was no better... an aging Ryan Miller and Anderss Nillson. Then Demko came along and it was clear he was their future, so they shipped Markstrom out. To me, he's really no different than what we've had for the last 10 years. A bunch of average goalies who, at times are serviceable and can be considered a "starter", but it's not really because of their play, it's because there's just no better option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted January 13 Share Posted January 13 2 hours ago, MadDog2020 said: I just cringe at the contract. And Markstrom hasn’t been very good. I know he’s played better recently, but I’m not really psyched about paying this dude $18 million over the next three years, and giving up Seamus Casey for the privilege to do so. Calgary would have to eat some money AND they are not getting Casey. But given how rough of a time VV is having (and not showing any signs of snapping out of this), I’m open to the idea of Markstrom. Not overjoyed about it but open to it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.