- May 23, 2004
- 11,609
- 3,598
I can't see why Calgary would do that.Markstrom to NJ. Wonder if something around Jarry to Calgary for Mangi is possible.
I can't see why Calgary would do that.Markstrom to NJ. Wonder if something around Jarry to Calgary for Mangi is possible.
I'm guessing Ullmark is next to be moved, then hopefully a few teams are desperate enough to give us a call for Jarry..If Markstrom is bringing back a decent depth defenseman and a 1st, you can absolutely move Jarry for positive value without taking back any money. Jarry isn't Markstrom but he's not going to be that much less valuable than Markstrom.
If Markstrom is bringing back a decent depth defenseman and a 1st, you can absolutely move Jarry for positive value without taking back any money. Jarry isn't Markstrom but he's not going to be that much less valuable than Markstrom.
1st+Bahl for Markstrom at 69% though. That would be us retaining Jarry down to roughly $4mil. Not the end of the world but we'd need to be getting back a player that justifies it. As is, not sure it's a 1st round pick or Bahl. Holtz, maybe. Mercer, yes.
Numbers are similar, Jarry is younger and has a lower cap hit. Markstrom has Jarry on playoff series wins and not as many years left on his deal. But it’s not crazy that we could get a similar return.
I imagine Columbus would want a younger player so that if Smith leaves in FA at the end of the year or they trade him, they aren't left with nothing. I could see something like Smith+Poulin for Laine+3rd.
Question I would have is, does that take us out of the running for Mangipane and/or Wahlstrom. Wahlstrom is a whatever. That's a Puljujarvi level attempt to see if you can bring a guy back to life. But I would prefer Mangipane over Laine. Unless the Mangipane involves Rakell.
Mangipane-Crosby-Rust
Bunting-Malkin-Laine
DOC-Pono-Wahlmstrom
Puljujarvi-Eller-Acciari
I could come to terms with that.
I believe he approved last year and a deal was done but Calgary owners blocked the trade because of the retention.Markstrom had a full NMC so he had to be ok with this trade.
Pretty good value for Calgary honestly. I assume NJD will run Markstrom-Allen as their duo which is pretty solid. Reminds me of the MAF-Vokoun level pairing.
Just say that Calgary retained 31% of Markstroms contract, so NJ certainly paid a premium. We can't retain on Jarry so I imagine that bumps value down quite a bit. Likely a 2nd or just a Bahl level player.
That’s how to start a rebuild. NJ’s first is top 10 protected but NJ went from almost league worst goaltending to decent so I don’t see it being a top 10 pick anyway.
Utah looks even better with 20. Only 3 firsts but they have 10 2nds. Gotta think they use some of that capital to upgrade their current roster after relocating.That’s how to start a rebuild. NJ’s first is top 10 protected but NJ went from almost league worst goaltending to decent so I don’t see it being a top 10 pick anyway.
Do I?1st+Bahl for Markstrom at 69% though. That would be us retaining Jarry down to roughly $4mil. Not the end of the world but we'd need to be getting back a player that justifies it. As is, not sure it's a 1st round pick or Bahl. Holtz, maybe. Mercer, yes.
Still think LA is the destination for Jarry should something happen.
Which, honestly, is a case both FOR and AGAINST trading Jarry.Markstrom is marginally better, and that's 1 outlier regular season.
Edit: This just proves how desperate teams are for even moderately good goaltending, and at a premium.
And they missed the playoffs, you say?Given how bad our PP was I was surprised to see we had the 4th highest high danger chances for.
BUT were 28th in PP goals (30th in PP%). Tied for 1st in short handed goals against.
Watch that organization become an absolute powerhouse out west after being trash for most of their tenure in AZ.Utah looks even better with 20. Only 3 firsts but they have 10 2nds. Gotta think they use some of that capital to upgrade their current roster after relocating.