[Signing] Tyler Myers to Vancouver

[kanucks25]

5 hours ago, hammertime said:

I dont think savvy has anything to do with it. Their going to the highest bidder. Savvy would be to let that be someone else.  

 

Double edged sword. If JB goes into next season with the D corps of last year Fans will call for his head. If he signs an over priced Myers fans will call for his head. 

 

If he trades for a D its gonna cost him youth or picks and fans will call for his head. 

 

What do people really think his options are? Short of tanking some more in which case FA will have his head.

And he has nobody to blame but himself. 5 years into the "rebuild" and the D is in shambles with all his best D-men being ones he inherited. His list of D-men acquisitions is simply grotesque.

 

This team is nowhere close to competing and him trying to "buy" his way into the playoffs will be an obvious panic move that will only lead to bad things in the future, exactly like the Eriksson contract.

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Care to explain how he's a 1st line player? Legit 2nd liner, for sure, but 1st?

Depends on how you define, or what your expectations are, for a first line player, no?

Petey is clearly an elite play making center, who is a first line player.

Bess is clearly a top young sniper, who is a first line talent.

They need a Clark Gillies type of winger to be at their best.  Miller is a top line winger, because of the role he will play.

[kanucks25]

On 6/29/2019 at 5:09 PM, ilduce39 said:

Loui drastically underperformed his contract.  You can’t assume everyone will do the same. That’s just fear mongering. 

It's not fear-mongering, it's just not being woefully ignorant. Just as Eriksson's signing was, this Myers signing will be an anchor from day 1. Every single shred of evidence suggests that it's simply not a good idea to give an average D-man (average based on like every type of analysis we have available) #2 D-man money. 

 

It's honestly baffling that I even have to spell that out for anyone who follows hockey.

 

If we signed a 4th liner to a 12mil contract and I said it would be bad is that fear mongering too? Or is that just being freaking realistic.

 

On 6/29/2019 at 5:16 PM, ilduce39 said:

He’s not replacing Stecher, though... he’s bumping Biega, Schenn and expected to be a lot more durable than Tanev who is also showing signs of regression in his play on top of his body.  Our RD situation is so gross I think he’ll be a huge impact, especially over the course of 82 games.

There is no doubt he makes us better. But when we're nowhere close the Cup over the next couple years (probably the remainder of his prime) is there really any point? What's the logic behind having him on the books during his downfall when the rest of the team is ready to compete? It makes zero sense timeline wise.

Edited July 1, 2019 by kanucks25

[hammertime]

2 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Care to explain how he's a 1st line player? Legit 2nd liner, for sure, but 1st?

Was Brendan Morrison a 1st liner? Burrows?

 

He doesn't have to drive the line he just needs to do what he does best create turnovers and distribute the puck add some jam and create some havok infront of the net. 

[The Lock]

9 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Care to explain how he's a 1st line player? Legit 2nd liner, for sure, but 1st?

Personally, I think the whole mauling over who's 1st line and 2nd line is silly; however, I will say that one thing that's worked well for 1st lines around the league in the past is having that player who can get into the corners and get the puck for his linemates. Patrick Eaves was a good example of this when he was in Anaheim playing with Getzlaf and Perry and it was pretty evident how effective having that guy who can do a lot of the dirty work for your top scorers can be.

 

I picture Miller as that guy. If you just look at points and stats then I would agree with you in that he would be classed as a 2nd liner; however, the makeup of a team can be just as important and I wouldn't be surprised if it he that 1st line player that we need to do the dirty work for Pettersson and Boeser that we kind of lacked last year.

[hammertime]

11 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

And he has nobody to blame but himself. 5 years into the "rebuild" and the D is in shambles with all his best D-men being ones he inherited. His list of D-men acquisitions is simply grotesque.

 

This team is nowhere close to competing and him trying to "buy" his way into the playoffs will be an obvious panic move that will only lead to bad things in the future, exactly like the Eriksson contract.

bet you're fun at parties.

[kanucks25]

11 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Depends on how you define, or what your expectations are, for a first line player, no?

Petey is clearly an elite play making center, who is a first line player.

Bess is clearly a top young sniper, who is a first line talent.

They need a Clark Gillies type of winger to be at their best.  Miller is a top line winger, because of the role he will play.

Players aren't valued by what role they might play on your team, they are valued by their production overall, league-wide (when it comes to trades and signings).

 

He's pretty much a 55 point player, not many people would consider that legit 1st line production.

 

Just because we're going to play him on our 1st line, it doesn't mean he is a 1st liner.

 

If we were going to play a 20 point player on the 1st line, should we give up a 1st and a 3rd for him, too? It makes zero sense.

 

Same goes for the Myers situation. You could argue he might be our 2nd best D-man going into next season. Does that mean we should pay him like a #2 D-man? Not even close.

Edited July 1, 2019 by kanucks25

[Alflives]

Just now, The Lock said:

Personally, I think the whole mauling over who's 1st line and 2nd line is silly; however, I will say that one thing that's worked well for 1st lines around the league in the past is having that player who can get into the corners and get the puck for his linemates. Patrick Eaves was a good example of this when he was in Anaheim playing with Getzlaf and Perry and it was pretty evident how effective having that guy who can do a lot of the dirty work for your top scorers can be.

 

I picture Miller as that guy. If you just look at points and stats then I would agree with you in that he would be classed as a 2nd liner; however, the makeup of a team can be just as important and I wouldn't be surprised if it he that 1st line player that we need to do the dirty work for Pettersson and Boeser that we kind of lacked last year.

Was Morrison a first line centre?  Was Burrows a first line winger?  Like you say, not all guys on a line will push the play.  Each needs to compliment the other.  Miller is the perfect compliment to Petey and Bess.  

[kanucks25]

1 minute ago, hammertime said:

bet you're fun at parties.

A discussion board might not be the best place for you if you prefer to make personal comments over discussing the topic at hand.

[kanucks25]

On 6/29/2019 at 5:11 PM, ilduce39 said:

He’s not Loui and he’s also not Gudbranson.  

In two years, when the next dumb signing is being rumored:

 

"He's not Loui, he's not Gudbranson and he's not Myers."

 

Let's learn from history, please.

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Players aren't valued by what role they might play on your team, they are valued by their production overall, league-wide.

 

He's pretty much a 55 point player, not many people would consider that legit 1st line production.

 

Just because we're going to play him on our 1st line, it doesn't mean he is a 1st liner.

 

If we were going to play a 20 point player on the 1st line, should we give up a 1st and a 3rd for him, too? It makes zero sense.

 

Same goes for the Myers situation. You could argue he might be our 2nd best D-man going into next season. Does that mean we should pay him like a #2 D-man? Not even close.

IMO a great line requires players who compliment each other.  Miller will compliment Petey and Bess.  I don’t think a player can be solely defined by point production.  

Myers is a player we need.  He will get paid.  He’s a UFA.  

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, kanucks25 said:

In two years, when the next dumb signing is being rumored:

 

"He's not Loui, he's not Gudbranson and he's not Myers."

 

Let's learn from history, please.

He’s not Zuccarello; he’s not ... fill in the blank.  Lots of mistakes are made July 1st.  I don’t think Myers will be one.  

[KKnight]

Myers for 6 million over 5 is something i would be comfortable with. If it's 6 over 6, I guess that the price of doing business. We need a RD badly. 

 

We are going to be paying Edler 6 million until hes 36. I dont see the issue of paying Myers 6 million until he is 35 or 36. Especially when you know the cap will be going up at some point, when expansion is done. 

[hammertime]

1 minute ago, kanucks25 said:

In two years, when the next dumb signing is being rumored:

 

"He's not Loui, he's not Gudbranson and he's not Myers."

 

Let's learn from history, please.

So instead of pure Cynicism enlighten us Is there a FA D he should sign (how much)? Maybe a D he should target in trade, what do you give up. 

 

Its easy to point to someones mistakes and act as though they can do no right. You talk about this being a discussion board but your not really offering discussion. Anyone can point out faults lets hear something constructive........

[48MPHSlapShot]

Welp, it's happening. Best to get over it or bail out now. 

[-Moose]

So rumour is we are signing Myers to a "long term deal" worth over 6 million per. We offered more term and more money than all others interested. Not sure what "long term deal" equals, but hopefully it's only 5 years and probably between 6-7 million per. 

[The Lock]

8 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Players aren't valued by what role they might play on your team, they are valued by their production overall, league-wide (when it comes to trades and signings).

 

He's pretty much a 55 point player, not many people would consider that legit 1st line production.

 

Just because we're going to play him on our 1st line, it doesn't mean he is a 1st liner.

 

If we were going to play a 20 point player on the 1st line, should we give up a 1st and a 3rd for him, too? It makes zero sense.

 

Same goes for the Myers situation. You could argue he might be our 2nd best D-man going into next season. Does that mean we should pay him like a #2 D-man? Not even close.

I disagree completely with the bolded above and hear me out on this....

 

Let me ask you this: why do you buy things? Is it because you are lacking that object and want it or because it has a value? Everything has a value but I doubt you want to go out and buy bras for yourself if you're a guy (unless if you're into that thing, I won't judge) even though those bras have value.

 

Similar idea with players: there is their production overall, which could be thought of as the features of the product. There is the intangibles which could be thought of as how well is the product build and what role that product's going to play. Therefore, if you just base it off of productivity alone, you are ignoring the entire point of why you are getting the player in the first place.

 

So the entire point of getting players is to make your team better. If you just base it on production, then you are looking at a team with little to no intangibles. They have productivity but no one to protect them or do other things stats are likely to forget entirely about. Therefore, it's better to have a few players for productivity but also value players based on what roles they can play.

[Sedintwinpowersactivate]

4 minutes ago, KKnight said:

Myers for 6 million over 5 is something i would be comfortable with. If it's 6 over 6, I guess that the price of doing business. We need a RD badly. 

 

We are going to be paying Edler 6 million until hes 36. I dont see the issue of paying Myers 6 million until he is 35 or 36. Especially when you know the cap will be going up at some point, when expansion is done. 

Exactly this.  6x6 is doable.  6x5 preferred.  Myers will help this team.  Playing until 35-36 is not to old.  But his best seasons will be behind him.

[kanucks25]

3 minutes ago, hammertime said:

So instead of pure Cynicism enlighten us Is there a FA D he should sign (how much)? Maybe a D he should target in trade, what do you give up. 

 

Its easy to point to someones mistakes and act as though they can do no right. You talk about this being a discussion board but your not really offering discussion. Anyone can point out faults lets hear something constructive........

I've said many times that no move is better than a bad move. We're still nowhere close to contending, it makes no sense to overpay for older players right now.

 

Yes the D is in shambles, yes it will be a complete disaster next year if it's not significantly improved. But if there's no better option out there than paying an average D-man like he's a #2D, then the best option is to just take it on the chin for another year.

 

If Benning is as good at drafting as some say he is, then guys like Juolevi, Woo and Brisebois will come through in time. Young, cheap and effective is the name of the game in the cap world.

[Gaudette Celly]

5 minutes ago, KeslerWho? said:

So rumour is we are signing Myers to a "long term deal" worth over 6 million per. We offered more term and more money than all others interested. Not sure what "long term deal" equals, but hopefully it's only 5 years and probably between 6-7 million per. 

Well some (the ones who hate them) call the 4-year Beagle and Roussel signings "long term".