SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Markstrom

Created by: Devsfan25
Team: 2023-24 New Jersey Devils
Initial Creation Date: Feb. 11, 2024
Published: Feb. 11, 2024
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Trades
CGY
  1. Bahl, Kevin
  2. Vanecek, Vitek
  3. 2024 1st round pick (NJD)
  4. 2025 3rd round pick (NJD)
Buyouts
Recapture Fees
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2024
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the COL
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NSH
2025
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
2026
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the NJD
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
23$83,500,000$73,269,166$422,500$5,540,000$10,230,834
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$894,167$894,167 (Performance Bonus$850,000$850K)
RW, LW
RFA - 2
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$8,000,000$8,000,000
C
UFA - 7
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$7,875,000$7,875,000
RW, LW
UFA - 8
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$6,000,000$6,000,000
LW, RW
NMC
UFA - 4
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$7,250,000$7,250,000
C
UFA - 4
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$8,800,000$8,800,000
LW, RW
UFA - 8
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$2,125,000$2,125,000
RW, LW
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$3,150,000$3,150,000
C, LW
NTC
UFA - 3
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$894,167$894,167 (Performance Bonus$400,000$400K)
RW, C
RFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$1,000,000$1,000,000
RW, C
UFA - 2
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$1,000,000$1,000,000
LW, C
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$1,350,000$1,350,000
RW
UFA - 2
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$3,400,000$3,400,000
LD
UFA - 5
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$918,333$918,333 (Performance Bonus$3,250,000$3M)
RD
RFA - 3
Logo of the Calgary Flames
$6,000,000$6,000,000
G
NMC
UFA - 3
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$925,000$925,000 (Performance Bonus$925,000$925K)
LD/RD
RFA - 2
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$4,400,000$4,400,000
RD
UFA - 4
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$850,833$850,833 (Performance Bonus$57,500$58K)
G
RFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$1,100,000$1,100,000
LD/RD, LW
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$1,850,000$1,850,000
RD
UFA - 1
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$863,333$863,333
LW
RFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$9,000,000$9,000,000
RD
NMC
UFA - 5
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$850,833$850,833 (Performance Bonus$57,500$58K)
LD
RFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$1,400,000$1,400,000
C
RFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$775,000$775,000
C
UFA - 1
Logo of the New Jersey Devils
$800,000$800,000
RD
RFA - 1

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight
Feb. 11 at 10:29 a.m.
#1
MisstheWhalers
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2019
Posts: 23,685
Likes: 12,381
Calgary should retain like a million or so.
SomeonesOffended liked this.
Feb. 11 at 10:54 a.m.
#2
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2023
Posts: 203
Likes: 69
Markstrom (retained 50%) + 2nd for Mercer.
Feb. 11 at 11:17 a.m.
#3
LBS
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 1,518
Likes: 559
100% disagree with the other two commentors, I think if Calgary moves Markstrom they won't retain. It makes no sense to retain on a goalie that won a Vezina 2yrs ago, has bounced back well after a down year and is already at a reasonable price for a goalie that averages 60ish games as a starter

I think the offer is fair, I'd hope for a better prospect but if this was the return I wouldn't complain. Markstrom's full no move is the only thing to worry about
MoxNix liked this.
Feb. 11 at 11:20 a.m.
#4
I Love J Boqvist
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2023
Posts: 11,966
Likes: 3,161
I’d want retention at that price.

1st+Vitek for Markstrom is the highest I’d go unretained.
Feb. 11 at 11:21 a.m.
#5
MisstheWhalers
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2019
Posts: 23,685
Likes: 12,381
Quoting: lowblocksniper
100% disagree with the other two commentors, I think if Calgary moves Markstrom they won't retain. It makes no sense to retain on a goalie that won a Vezina 2yrs ago, has bounced back well after a down year and is already at a reasonable price for a goalie that averages 60ish games as a starter

I think the offer is fair, I'd hope for a better prospect but if this was the return I wouldn't complain. Markstrom's full no move is the only thing to worry about


You're really that hung up on $1M retention?
Feb. 11 at 11:23 a.m.
#6
LBS
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 1,518
Likes: 559
Quoting: MisstheWhalers
You're really that hung up on $1M retention?


Less about the money and more about the occupation of a rentention slot for 3yrs and it's not like he makes Bobrovsky money
MoxNix liked this.
Feb. 11 at 11:30 a.m.
#7
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2022
Posts: 7,452
Likes: 3,190
Calgary already told NJ the price for Markstrom starts with Mercer.
Feb. 11 at 11:31 a.m.
#8
I Love J Boqvist
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2023
Posts: 11,966
Likes: 3,161
Quoting: lowblocksniper
Less about the money and more about the occupation of a rentention slot for 3yrs and it's not like he makes Bobrovsky money


You’re almost certainly gonna have to retain if you want real bidders.

Otherwise your choices come down to
Vitek+whatever from NJD, and again that’s only if NJD is in a position to buy
Or
Anderson+whatever from Carolina, and that’s if Carolina even buys a goalie

Completely saying no to retention cuts down your trade market significantly.
MisstheWhalers liked this.
Feb. 11 at 11:36 a.m.
#9
MisstheWhalers
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2019
Posts: 23,685
Likes: 12,381
Quoting: lowblocksniper
Less about the money and more about the occupation of a rentention slot for 3yrs and it's not like he makes Bobrovsky money


So besides Tanev and Hanifin is there anyone else the Flames might retain on this year?

They'd still have two retention spots the next two trade deadlines which should be fine for selling off their UFAs.
Feb. 11 at 11:37 a.m.
#10
MisstheWhalers
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2019
Posts: 23,685
Likes: 12,381
Quoting: MoxNix
Calgary already told NJ the price for Markstrom starts with Mercer.


I'm sure Fitzgerald already told Conroy to **** off then.
Smitty426, Tintin and Devil liked this.
Feb. 11 at 11:40 a.m.
#11
LBS
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 1,518
Likes: 559
Quoting: dgibb10
You’re almost certainly gonna have to retain if you want real bidders.

Otherwise your choices come down to
Vitek+whatever from NJD, and again that’s only if NJD is in a position to buy
Or
Anderson+whatever from Carolina, and that’s if Carolina even buys a goalie

Completely saying no to retention cuts down your trade market significantly.


That's fine, personally I don't want to trade Markstrom so if retention is mandatory I hope they hold onto him. I want Wolf to learn for Markstrom and back him up before taking the reigns in 2-3yrs time. Also all Calgary needs is two teams like Carolina and NJ that can afford him not being retained to have a bidding war
Feb. 11 at 11:44 a.m.
#12
LBS
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 1,518
Likes: 559
Quoting: MisstheWhalers
So besides Tanev and Hanifin is there anyone else the Flames might retain on this year?

They'd still have two retention spots the next two trade deadlines which should be fine for selling off their UFAs.


Your (Calgary) limiting the amount of transactions that you can make for a 3yr period by occupying that spot. You keep it free and you can enter 3way trades this year and the next 2

It's not the worst thing in the world but, since again Markstrom's contract is very affordable, retaining should only be if the return is crazy like Mercer but if I was NJ I wouldn't move Mercer.
MisstheWhalers and MoxNix liked this.
Feb. 11 at 11:50 a.m.
#13
I Love J Boqvist
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2023
Posts: 11,966
Likes: 3,161
Quoting: lowblocksniper
That's fine, personally I don't want to trade Markstrom so if retention is mandatory I hope they hold onto him. I want Wolf to learn for Markstrom and back him up before taking the reigns in 2-3yrs time.Also Also all Calgary needs is two teams like Carolina and NJ that can afford him not being retained to have a bidding war


Carolina is the stingiest front office in the league, NJD openly states they prefer to make their goalie moves in the offseason.

And while both teams can technically afford it, Markstrom at full cap creates significant issues for both teams.

It forces NJD to eat bonus overages. Meaning Markstrom would be closer to 8.5 mill next year if acquired unretained.

And Carolina is in a tight spot next year with a bunch of key guys expiring. Bringing Markstrom in significantly impairs their ability to bring back important pieces on their team
Feb. 11 at 11:57 a.m.
#14
LBS
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2023
Posts: 1,518
Likes: 559
Quoting: dgibb10
Carolina is the stingiest front office in the league, NJD openly states they prefer to make their goalie moves in the offseason.

And while both teams can technically afford it, Markstrom at full cap creates significant issues for both teams.

It forces NJD to eat bonus overages. Meaning Markstrom would be closer to 8.5 mill next year if acquired unretained.

And Carolina is in a tight spot next year with a bunch of key guys expiring. Bringing Markstrom in significantly impairs their ability to bring back important pieces on their team


I'd have to check Markstrom's bonuses but, I'll trust you're right. I think a trade like this would definitely be better in the off-season.

Carolina IMO should just right out Kochetkov he's the future for them, him and a hopefully healthy Andersen should be good next year

NJD would be best served IMO trading for a retained Jake Allen or Kahkonen or Lankinen for the season and re-evaluate in the off-season by getting Ullmark or Markstrom, etc when they have a better understanding of the cap they'll be working with
Feb. 11 at 12:05 p.m.
#15
Thread Starter
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2017
Posts: 4,331
Likes: 1,340
Quoting: MoxNix
Calgary already told NJ the price for Markstrom starts with Mercer.


That’s not true lol. That was probably off some BS website run by Flames fans. You can’t actually believe the Devils would trade a 22 year old forward for a 34 year old goalie
Smitty426 and MisstheWhalers liked this.
Feb. 11 at 12:06 p.m.
#16
I Love J Boqvist
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2023
Posts: 11,966
Likes: 3,161
Quoting: lowblocksniper
I'd have to check Markstrom's bonuses but, I'll trust you're right. I think a trade like this would definitely be better in the off-season.

Carolina IMO should just right out Kochetkov he's the future for them, him and a hopefully healthy Andersen should be good next year

NJD would be best served IMO trading for a retained Jake Allen or Kahkonen or Lankinen for the season and re-evaluate in the off-season by getting Ullmark or Markstrom, etc when they have a better understanding of the cap they'll be working with


Not markstroms bonuses. NJDs rookies. If we move out toffoli+Vitek we can avoid them entirely, as we stand pat we avoid a portion. If we move vitek more, toffoli more, etc etc.

If we get markstrom it guarantees we use LTIR money and that bonus carry’s ever
Feb. 11 at 12:28 p.m.
#17
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2022
Posts: 7,452
Likes: 3,190
Edited Feb. 11 at 12:36 p.m.
Quoting: Devsfan25
That’s not true lol. That was probably off some BS website run by Flames fans. You can’t actually believe the Devils would trade a 22 year old forward for a 34 year old goalie


Actually it came from NJ fan websites. It'd didn't say NJ would do it, it said the Flames told NJ Markstrom would cost them Mercer. Calgary is no rush to move Markstrom, Conroy has stated he won't even ask Markstrom if he'd waive unless they get an offer they really like.
Feb. 11 at 12:32 p.m.
#18
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 6,849
Likes: 1,982
Quoting: MoxNix
Actually it came from NJ fan websites.


Not a reliable fan site for sure. Clickbait obviously
Feb. 11 at 12:33 p.m.
#19
I Love J Boqvist
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2023
Posts: 11,966
Likes: 3,161
Quoting: Smitty426
Not a reliable fan site for sure. Clickbait obviously


Probably Nichols lol
Smitty426 liked this.
Feb. 11 at 12:40 p.m.
#20
Shaners79
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 641
Likes: 187
Quoting: MoxNix
Actually it came from NJ fan websites. It'd didn't say NJ would do it, it said the Flames told NJ Markstrom would cost them Mercer.


If you go back to Mercer's draft year. We had 3 first round picks,the second was Mercer at 18 and I truly believe that the coveted him and when we pick him they immediately traded down to the Rangers who picked Schneider. Was there discussion between them when BT was Gm to Fitzgerald that they wanted Dawson. Who knows. I still believe they want Mercer
Feb. 11 at 12:55 p.m.
#21
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2022
Posts: 7,452
Likes: 3,190
Quoting: Shaners79
If you go back to Mercer's draft year. We had 3 first round picks,the second was Mercer at 18 and I truly believe that the coveted him and when we pick him they immediately traded down to the Rangers who picked Schneider. Was there discussion between them when BT was Gm to Fitzgerald that they wanted Dawson. Who knows. I still believe they want Mercer


You might be right. Calgary's pick was at 19 and they did trade down after NJ took Mercer at 18.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll