First off...why the hell was the Markstrom thread closed?!?!?
Here's what I was about to post...
My initial reaction to the trade was that I felt we gave up more than I would've liked...though when the news of the retention level eventually trickled out I thought it was more of a fair trade. I'm also looking at it from the viewpoint of a Devils homer though that wanted to see Fitz outright "win" the trade...which is how much of the hockey world seems to view it. I've listened to a number of podcast that all rated in it NJ's favor and just using this one article as an example:
The Devils got the goalie they've wanted all along and didn't give up top picks or prospects to do it.
www.nytimes.com
The writers had it as:
Sean Gentile
Devils: A
Flames: D+
Shayna Goldman
Devils: A
Flames: C-
Eric Duhatschek:
Devils: A
Flames: C-
So...straight A's across the board for the Devils from 3 writers that I don't know why they'd be slanted towards NJ versus a C- or lower across the board for the Flames.
Gentile's write-up is especially scathing and worth the read.
Sean Gentille: When the initial reports on this one started trickling out, the dots seemed easy enough to connect. The Devils, submarined in part by poor goaltending in what was supposed to be a breakout season, had identified Jacob Markstrom as the solution to their problems, and they’d been chasing him for months. His no-movement clause had been an issue — but those sorts of issues are often resolved, especially when the acquiring team is, y’know, good. Most of all, a solid prospect pool and a lottery pick in 2024 meant that Tom Fitzgerald had options available to meet any ask.
“Markstrom to the Devils for the No. 10 pick next week? Fair enough on both sides. Everyone gets a B-plus” is where I landed before we knew the details.
Then, we learned the details — and then, the grades changed. This is nothing less than a heist for New Jersey, who acquired the goaltender of their dreams for … what exactly? The No. 10 pick is staying put. The Devils’ prospect pool is intact. Their best NHL-ready young players are still in the fold. And, maybe most shockingly, they’re saving nearly $2 million on Markstrom’s cap hit for the remaining two years of his deal.
None of this is to say Markstrom is perfect; he’s not quite a franchise guy, mainly because he’s prone to the performance swings that seem baked into 95 percent of NHL goaltenders. He is, though, a firmly above-average starter with the potential to, at times, look like something more. Thanks to Calgary’s salary retention, that’s exactly what the Devils are paying him to be.
Maybe most importantly, last season, only Connor Hellebuyck and Jordan Binnington had him beat league-wide in Goals Saved Above Expected. That’s great for anyone, let alone someone who’s about to replace the Vitek Vaneceks, Nico Dawses and Akira Schmids of the world. The Devils didn’t miss the playoffs solely because of their goaltending — an injury-decimated defense was another huge factor — but they came pretty close. Now, they’ve turned that weakness into a strength for a protected pick and a third-pair defenseman.
That brings us to Calgary’s end of the deal, which starts with the obligatory disclaimer: GM Craig Conroy was in a tough spot because of the no-movement clause. The market was what it was. They’re not entirely incorrect — but they’re still excuses, and they’re similar to what we heard at the trade deadline. Conroy, tough as his situation may be, has yet to win a trade, and he’s running low on tradable pieces. It helps to have Dustin Wolf in the fold as the heir apparent, and it certainly seems like a large chunk of the Flames fan base was ready to move on from Markstrom. That doesn’t make this one any less underwhelming, especially given the very real possibility that Markstrom drives that 2025 first-round pick somewhere into the 20s.
When you lose a deal in this many ways — no prime pick, no prospect, no impact lineup player, money sent the other way — the grade can’t be anything but harsh.
And yet...your view of the trade is that we "got bent over".
Best case scenario was always that Markstrom refuses to play for Calgary again and will only accept a trade to NJ. That didn't happen though. I have no doubt that Calgary and Markstrom were both resigned to a split this offseason, but it was also made clear by both Friedman as well as Markstrom himself in his post-trade interview that he was willing to waive his NMC for other teams as well, which certainly put some pressure on Fitz to get a deal done or move on. At the very least it seems Ottawa and Toronto were in on him.
Was he the ideal solution? No, though I don't think there was an ideal solution out there for me. Markstrom was probably always the best solution though as the acquisition cost would be much less than Saros or Ullmark and I had reservations about handing over long-term, high AAV contracts to either of them before they even got in the crease.
Maybe we could've run it back with Kahkonen - would've at least saved some assets, though I don't think an Allen/Kahkonen duo has any shot of doing much damage in the playoffs. A somewhat rested Markstrom after having much less travel and a 1A/1B tandem with Allen? Yeah, there's at least the potential there for a long run in the playoffs. And even if they don't win it all these next two seasons, whatever playoff experience you can get in for a young core is really valuable.
The hope is that one of the young 4 goalie prospects we have in the pipeline can step up after Markstrom - at a much lower cap hit and without the risk of a long-term, high AAV contract that would've come with Saros or Ullmark.
Would be curious to hear what your ideal solution would've been though.
