two drink minimum Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 This is why I hate the Miller signingI don't hate the Miller signing, I wonder if they didn't think ahead to how this situation could back fire on them the way it possibly can. New MGMT but the same old poor asset MGMT again for the Canucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jinx_RK17 Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Trading Lack will be a Schneider 2.0. Am I the only person who believes in 2 years he could become an all star? He was hands down the only reason our lost games were such low scoring games last season. This guy's got all the makings to be a franchise goalie. Markstrom has done absolutely nothing to impress me to eve consider keeping him. Who better to mentor Demko once Lack takes over the helm 2 years from now? Demko wouldnt be ready for another 3-5 years easy. Markstrom still has a reputation of potential that a dry goalie farm team would be interested in. Trading away our future starter AGAIN will be one of the biggest mistakes we'll make in this new Era. Quote me on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.DirtyDangles Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Realistically if any goalie trade were to happen Lack maybe the one to go. His value is much higher than Markstrom's and Miller is prob gonna play 65 games. I am sure Lack packaged with some one will yield a much higher return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jigsaw99 Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 lets trade them both because it's the Canucks way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 What is the debate about? Lack has shown he can play in the NHL, well! Markstrom has not. Lack would not bring back enough in a trade. .910 SV % on a team in chaos. What do fans want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KassianBeastMode Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 I think if Benning is smart Miller should be traded after this season. Give Lack and Markstrom an opportunity to take the next steps this year, trade one of them when Eriksson is ready to be a backup. If anyone of them gets traded hopefully it'll be for a top prospect that's a little more proven then Horvat. For everyone excited about Demko, calm down a little. The kid's still got a long way to go and is unproven. It's premature and annoying to talk about him as our #1 right now. I think it depends on how we play as a group and if we are going to make the playoffs. My guess is it has already been discussed as Miller would likely want to go to a contender (given his age) and as well he will be a valuable trade chip at the deadline (and particularly in a deep draft). Given the way our young players played last night (and only one game but very positive regardless), many are showing they can at least compete at the NHL level. In my view it would be actually better for this team to miss the playoffs this year (not saying tank) but a miss in this draft and with our many highly valuable gritty veterans, we might have alot of trades available to us. Many teams would be interested in Higgy/Hansen/Miller/and dare I say Burr (who I love as a player but his value would be huge at the deadline)... Hansen / Miller / prospect would get us a first (maybe not even have to give up that much) Burr and a 3rd would get us a first... Three firsts in 2015...could be a huge win... We'd still have a very very good team in 2015/2016 Sedin Sedin Vrbata Shinkaruk Vey Kassian Matthias Horvat Jensen Higgins Richardson Dorsett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Honestly, I know Miller was a signing to give us a fighting chance in the West this year, but I wish we could go back and not sign him. I'd so much rather see Lack get 50 games and Markstrom get 30 than have to trade or waive one of them. I really like both of them, and Miller hasn't been elite in 3-4 years. This was the only offseason move I was truly against from the start. I didn't love the Garrison trade, but I understood it. Signing Miller just made no sense when you already have two potential future stud goalies on 1 way contracts. If we trade Lack, were going to regret it in 2 years when Miller is useless to our team. If we trade Markstrom, we could be shipping off yet another potential future top 10 NHL goalie (Schneids), and that would be awful too. If were forced to trade one, I trade Lack, only because of Markstroms long term potential. If Miller can be dealt at the deadline or next offseason, I trust Lack and think he can be a really awesome starter, and I probably move Markstrom now. But I prefer to move neither. Good thing you're not in charge of the team. Letting this team gain an identity after struggling for two years with two completely unproven goalies would be dumber than dumb. Some people seem to think we can just wait for 2 years until our players all develop and we'll be awesome. The problem with that is time continues to exist and there are 2 seasons in the meantime. You need a goalie to play the game of hockey, and certainly a combo of Lack and Markstrom doesn't cut it. That would lead to horrible development for not just the goalies but the entire team. What is the debate about? Lack has shown he can play in the NHL, well! Markstrom has not. Lack would not bring back enough in a trade. .910 SV % on a team in chaos. What do fans want? Finally someone with a brain. This isn't the stock market. Trying to maximize dollar value on penny items is useless. Pick the best players for our team moving forward and stop trying to squeeze blood from a stone like MG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 By the end of training camp, every team should have 2 goalies ready to go. So if we waive Markstrom, another team would have to be really thin on goalies to pick him up. Like, they have to waive their backup goalie (one that's more unproven than Markstrom) before they can pick up Markstrom off waiver. Since nobody is going to waive a skater so they can have 3 goalies on their roster, there is a good chance that Markstrom won't get picked up. Am I correct in my assessment of the situation? ...except by teams who have an entry level contract as their current backup. They can send that goalie to the minors and get Markstrom for free. Here are the teams that have a two-way backup. Boston - but they have cap issues Chicago - but they also have cap issues Ottawa - but Lehner is very good In the case of Anaheim, their 2 way goalie is their starter. In the case of Winnipeg, they might just waive their current 1 way back up and pick up Markstrom. So Winnipeg I think might be the team to go for Markstrom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 ...except by teams who have an entry level contract as their current backup. They can send that goalie to the minors and get Markstrom for free. Here are the teams that have a two-way backup. Boston - but they have cap issues Chicago - but they also have cap issues Ottawa - but Lehner is very good In the case of Anaheim, their 2 way goalie is their starter. In the case of Winnipeg, they might just waive their current 1 way back up and pick up Markstrom. So Winnipeg I think might be the team to go for Markstrom. I would definitely roll the die on that one. I can't see Markstrom finding much success on a mid building Winnipeg team and I'm not sure they have the desire to focus goaltending at this point in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2SKATES1STICK Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Bench Miller, play Lack and Markstrom. Best of 7 games, ta Hard to showcase Markstrom when mgmt. is out to win now. Could be right but Markstrom will not bring a superior PMD this team needs to seriously contend. neither will lack, so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2SKATES1STICK Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 ...except by teams who have an entry level contract as their current backup. They can send that goalie to the minors and get Markstrom for free. Here are the teams that have a two-way backup. Boston - but they have cap issues Chicago - but they also have cap issues Ottawa - but Lehner is very good In the case of Anaheim, their 2 way goalie is their starter. In the case of Winnipeg, they might just waive their current 1 way back up and pick up Markstrom. So Winnipeg I think might be the team to go for Markstrom. 100% its Winnipeg who'd pick him up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missioncanucksfan Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Question is....who wants/needs Lack or Markstrom this far into camp and this close to season opener? Most teams Are set and will have the same new problems that we now do. Not only that, most GM's exploring trade options already recognize that we arent in a position of strength. Having that, IMO, I cant see us getting much for either and that would be a damn shame not to get sure value for Lack Would "the package deal" be the way to go? Who NEEDS a netminder? WHAT do they have that we need? Philly could use Lack or Markstrom WPG could use help... Car could use someone reliable that Ward and his injuries. Car just so happened to lose Staal to a broken leg. Lack/Markstrom+Matthias should get something from Car. Thoughts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missioncanucksfan Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 ...except by teams who have an entry level contract as their current backup. They can send that goalie to the minors and get Markstrom for free. Here are the teams that have a two-way backup. Boston - but they have cap issues Chicago - but they also have cap issues Ottawa - but Lehner is very good In the case of Anaheim, their 2 way goalie is their starter. In the case of Winnipeg, they might just waive their current 1 way back up and pick up Markstrom. So Winnipeg I think might be the team to go for Markstrom.Markstrom to Chicago for Oduya would be great. Surely Oduya is an upgrade on our bottom 4 defense all while expending an asset we are/were about to lose anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 I would definitely roll the die on that one. I can't see Markstrom finding much success on a mid building Winnipeg team and I'm not sure they have the desire to focus goaltending at this point in time. It would be an upgrade for them from one Michael Hutchinson who has 3 games of NHL experience, unless they feel that their guy is better than Markstrom and thus not worth losing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayubassist Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 The "New" Vancouver Canucks would never put themselves in a position where they need to rely on an unproven goaltender like Markstrom in case Miller gets injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Question is....who wants/needs Lack or Markstrom this far into camp and this close to season opener? Most teams Are set and will have the same new problems that we now do. Not only that, most GM's exploring trade options already recognize that we arent in a position of strength. Having that, IMO, I cant see us getting much for either and that would be a damn shame not to get sure value for Lack Would "the package deal" be the way to go? Who NEEDS a netminder? WHAT do they have that we need? Philly could use Lack or Markstrom WPG could use help... Car could use someone reliable that Ward and his injuries. Car just so happened to lose Staal to a broken leg. Lack/Markstrom+Matthias should get something from Car. Thoughts Yes. Also been pushing his idea since yesterday. Carolina could be a good partner-the teams did biz to start last season too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevo882 Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Send Markstrom down to Utica. That way he can get a good number of starts and we can see if he can live up to his potential or flop. I doubt any team claims him. He's been terrible the last couple of years. Give him the #1 job in Utica for now and if he plays well, that means we can actually get something for him in a trade. It'll be crowded down there with Ericsson and Cannata already there but that can be dealt with later. I think Lack is the real deal. He'll take over as Canucks #1 goalie after Miller. There's no room for 3 goalies in Vancouver because we have too many forwards to keep around. And I'm much higher on Lack than Markstrom right now so I send him to Utica for now and see what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Markstrom to Chicago for Oduya would be great. Surely Oduya is an upgrade on our bottom 4 defense all while expending an asset we are/were about to lose anyway Oduya is old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 I believe the organization will wait til a team or two is hit with the injury bug. Then flip one of our 2 younger tenders with some of the contracts who don't fit into our mold for the future. Some of these players imo could be: Higgins, a current 2nd liner I wont mention his name starts with a k. I think some of our expiring contracts such as Matthias, Richardson, Sestito may also be included or traded later on if the season isnt looking to promising. We could ride someone like Richardson into the post season but if by the deadline the option of a 5th round pick is more enticing its something JB can consider doing. As it stands now Richardson has 1 year left and will have a hard time keeping his spot at C if Sedin, Bonino, and Vey are all setup and youngsters like Horvat and Gaunce are knocking on the door. Gaunce could play wing but Horvat will likely be nhl ready by next season at the latest. We could resign Richardson if Horvat went to the AHL for more seasoning but I think its unlikely. (Better to get your prospects nhl xp if they are ready). The player on the 2nd line as I mentioned above. Still has to prove hes capable of fitting into this system. I'm not sure if hes the type of player JB has in mind for our squad. Not saying he isn't capable but he might be considered trade bait if he doesn't fit into Willies system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 Im hopefully said player does fit into the system. But I am personally not a big fan of his. Id hate to see everyone sad though if he didnt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.