[discussion] [poll] Do we really "need" to resign Miller? There are many other options.

[-Vintage Canuck-]

5 minutes ago, ajhockey said:

Would you be okay with it even if Miller asks for $6M again? That's the only concern in my mind.

Not really. But at the same time, I don't think we will be buyers in the off-season, so I think we should be fine.

[MeanSeanBean]

I think its time to move on and go ahead with Marky. IF Miller wants to take a pay cut knowing games are to be split 50/50 or 60/40 next year, sure, bring it on. If he wants to hold fort as a starter I think it's time to give Marky the reins and see what we have in him. With the way he has played this year, I wouldn't be surprised if a contending team picks him up for a cup push.

[Lancaster]

Sorry but.....

 

Resign = To quit

Re-sign = To sign again

[Down by the River]

I'd rather overpay Miller for one year (a year in which the team will not be going after big name UFAs/be tight to the cap) than enter into a three year contract with any goalie on that list (other than Bishop, who won't sign here anyway).

[Fanuck]

44 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

Bring him back for one year, but do a 50-50 split between him and Markstrom. Then go with Markstrom after that until Demko is ready.

That's a great scenario for us,  not necessarily for Miller however.   With his play this year I see Miller easily commanding a 5mil/2yr deal on the open market, or thereabouts, as a clear #1 guy somewhere.  Don't see him eagerly signing 1yr deal at his age.  I also don't see a Cali team in the mix but I do see several other teams as possible destinations,  albeit no closer to his wife's work.  

 

If he'd sign a 2 year 5mil/4mil deal to stay here I'd seriously consider that if I were JB. By then Markstrom would be in his true prime and Demko would have more than enough pro experience to be a legit backup/1B alternative. 

[hatedkid666]

Get Darling

[TheGuardian_]

have to sign Miller so there is no cap space left to do anything else.

[Pears]

Miller's the main reason we aren't right with Colorado right now. He's the perfect stop gap for Demko next year. I've said before re-sign him for next year and have him help Markstrom get used to the starting role, then have Demko start 60+ games in Utica next year. Win-win for everyone IMO. 

[-AJ-]

22 minutes ago, Pears said:

Miller's the main reason we aren't right with Colorado right now. He's the perfect stop gap for Demko next year. I've said before re-sign him for next year and have him help Markstrom get used to the starting role, then have Demko start 60+ games in Utica next year. Win-win for everyone IMO. 

With how he's played this year, how likely is it that Miller will be willing to sign with a team only willing to use him as a 1B goaltender? Is it worth paying $6M for a stopgap if that's what Miller desires? I think Miller asks for at least what he's currently getting paid and wants to be the starter on a team, so I don't see him wanting to stay in Vancouver.

[Mathew Barzal]

Those are precious points in the standings that we definitely don't need, so to OP I say good bye and au revoir Miller!

[Alflives]

5 minutes ago, Mathew Barzal said:

Those are precious points in the standings that we definitely don't need, so to OP I say good bye and au revoir Miller!

Exactly!  Until we get a couple elite game changers via the draft, it's counterproductive to have Miller.  

[coastal.view]

4 hours ago, S'all Good Man said:

Two years scares me tho... over 35 contracts suck. I actually hope Miller gets what he wants and gets a job in SoCal close to his family, he's definitely earned it. 

i am not really big on cheaping out on a goalie to avoid signing miller

the team is young and developing

miller has played very well for the team

we know exactly what we would be getting

he is a decent leader

all the other goalies (except bishop who will not sign for only 1 or 2 years) are a bigger risk then miller

so we save a milion or 2 on a different goalie who may turn out to be lesser than miller

and the team in front of the goalie falters, looses confidence.. and it's development slips a bit

remember this team used to be a bit of a goalie graveyard

we do not need another cloutier type player in our net

 

jb wants to build from the net out

he is doing a good job

he needs a solid keeper in the net for his rebuild to work well

 

as noted by others, the biggest problem is miller might wish to opt to play elsewhere

[JM_]

1 hour ago, coastal.view said:

i am not really big on cheaping out on a goalie to avoid signing miller

the team is young and developing

miller has played very well for the team

we know exactly what we would be getting

he is a decent leader

all the other goalies (except bishop who will not sign for only 1 or 2 years) are a bigger risk then miller

so we save a milion or 2 on a different goalie who may turn out to be lesser than miller

and the team in front of the goalie falters, looses confidence.. and it's development slips a bit

remember this team used to be a bit of a goalie graveyard

we do not need another cloutier type player in our net

 

jb wants to build from the net out

he is doing a good job

he needs a solid keeper in the net for his rebuild to work well

 

as noted by others, the biggest problem is miller might wish to opt to play elsewhere

True, you don't want to lead with "cheap" on goal, but over 35 contracts come with issues, and Marky is the future (assuming he can step up). So knowing that Willie will play him over Marky, I really think its time to move on for younger player development. 

 

 

[BigTramFan]

Two main things to consider:

- Cap space in 2017-18

- When is Demko ready

 

We have about $18m projected cap space for next season and from that we need to resign Horvat, Tryamkin, Gudbranson.

 

Im guessing that will cost us about $11-13m total next season.

 

As well as those major signings we will need to sign/resign a bunch of plugs for 4th line and depth. Even at low individual salaries this may cost us $4m total.

 

If nothing else changes then we don't really have the space for Miller at $6m.

 

It would also be good to not rush Demkos development. I would like to see him have at least 1-2 years in AHL.

 

I think we should be looking for a cheaper backup option for Marky on a maximum 2 year deal.

[coastal.view]

47 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

True, you don't want to lead with "cheap" on goal, but over 35 contracts come with issues, and Marky is the future (assuming he can step up). So knowing that Willie will play him over Marky, I really think its time to move on for younger player development. 

 

 

and i really think it is time to move marky on

get a place holder back up .. bachman ? or some other low cost veteran

and give demko another year or 2 to develop

and hope he can take over for miller

 

[billabong]

no we need to move on. 

 

this is a rebuild and resigning a 37 year old doesnt make sense. he is playing his best hockey in years in a contract year? coincidence i think not. he will come back down to earth next year

 

give it to markstrom and see what we have in him with a capable back up  

[Alflives]

5 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

and i really think it is time to move marky on

get a place holder back up .. bachman ? or some other low cost veteran

and give demko another year or 2 to develop

and hope he can take over for miller

 

Markstrom has three seasons at 3+ million/ per.  I was in favour of trading him too, but He might not be so easy to move.  

[coastal.view]

10 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Markstrom has three seasons at 3+ million/ per.  I was in favour of trading him too, but He might not be so easy to move.  

i agree alf

he is overpaid for his production and for what he has shown

but canucks could take on a poor contract with a draft pick in return

as long as that poor contract is for 1 year only

[JM_]

1 hour ago, coastal.view said:

and i really think it is time to move marky on

get a place holder back up .. bachman ? or some other low cost veteran

and give demko another year or 2 to develop

and hope he can take over for miller

 

Marky and Backstroke would be cost effective.

[coastal.view]

25 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

Marky and Backstroke would be cost effective.

and risky

and less reliable

and unproven