Gstank29 Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 IDK probably a B prospect (maybe a Defenceman), some kind or pick, or a younger player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyhee Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 (edited) And he started to show signs of fatigure in the playoffs. which is still a reason to be cautious with the amount of games he plays. Next year I see it being a 50/30 split. With Miller geting 50 games he played like 30 straight. with a few nights off it'd be a non factor would it? Dubnyk and Holtby played something like 35 straight games with no drop off in profermance. I would be weary of letting Lack run with the number 1 job next year. No need to rush him when we have Miller still under contract You note that he suffered from fatigue. It was noted he'd played a ridiculous number of games in a row. You then question whether that would help with his fatigue because someone else had the endurance to play even more games in a row? That's logic (or lack thereof) is equivalent to saying an 800 metre runner showed signs of fatigue after a 10K run, and disputing that cutting the distance would help because marathon runners run even further than 10K. Working a ridiculous number of games is only a requirement for NHL goalies if the coach is silly enough to put the goalie in for a ridiculous number of games. Lack's endurance was fine-admittedly not as good as shown by Dubnyk, but fine. If a goalie is playing something like 30 straight games, his fatigue is the responsibility of the coach. If the coach has chosen to play someone that heavily after being aware that he showed signs of mental fatigue the season before after starting too many games, that is clearly the responsibility of the coach. If the coach isn't aware of what happened the year before, that is again the responsibility of the coach.) Edited May 10, 2015 by tyhee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gstank29 Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 You note that he suffered from fatigue. It was noted he'd played a ridiculous number of games in a row. You then question whether that would help with his fatigue because someone else had the endurance to play even more games in a row? That's logic (or lack thereof) is equivalent to saying an 800 metre runner showed signs of fatigue after a 10K run, and disputing that cutting the distance would help because marathon runners run even further than 10K. Working a ridiculous number of games is only a requirement for NHL goalies if the coach is silly enough to put the goalie in for a ridiculous number of games. Lack's endurance was fine-admittedly not as good as shown by Dubnyk, but fine. If a goalie is playing something like 30 straight games, his fatigue is the responsibility of the coach. If the coach has chosen to play someone that heavily after being aware that he showed signs of mental fatigue the season before after starting too many games, that is clearly the responsibility of the coach. If the coach isn't aware of what happened the year before, that is again the responsibility of the coach.) What? I questioned his ablility to be able to do this though the whole season because he was showing signs of fatigue during the playoffs. I'm also questioning his ability to be able to play a whole season as a number 1 because he would probably be playing 60+ games and the fact that he hasn't played more than half a season as a number #1 will mostly likely lead to him being fatigued. Playing the whole 6 month season as the number one guy is a lot different they only having to play the last 2 months as "the guy" there will be ups and downs during the season, and even though Lack showed well during the last 1.5 of the season, he didn't really have to face any extended slumps. Goaltending is as much a mental game as a skill game, if you don't have the right mind set (especially during slumps) the season is going to ugly and everyone will be asking for Eddie's head. I just don't think Lack will be able to play 60+ games a season while maintain a high level of performance. Also I have concerns about how he locks him self into position and doesn't anticipate back door plays, instead he butterfly's and locks his body. You can be as big as you wan't but if you have a glaring weakness, players will find a way to exploit it and this is one of Eddie's biggest weaknesses as a goalie. Back to Markstrom Markstom has the same weakness as Eddie, he didn't anticpate plays well during his time in Vancouver and was leaving sloppy rebounds. This is going to be exploit at the NHL level if it isn't corrected quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 I'd be pretty surprised if Markstrom is the one moved. He currently has little value and stands to increase that value immensely in the next few years. You don't sell low. It's either Miller and his $6m salary (hopefully!) or Lack coming off a good season and in his prime. We're either getting cap space or selling high IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 I'd be pretty surprised if Markstrom is the one moved. He currently has little value and stands to increase that value immensely in the next few years. You don't sell low. It's either Miller and his $6m salary (hopefully!) or Lack coming off a good season and in his prime. We're either getting cap space or selling high IMO. that's a good point. I'm hoping that Miller is the one being moved. keep markstrom and lack. develop markstrom to the point where he's starter material. and his value is better than it is today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuckin Kingsly Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 I'd be pretty surprised if Markstrom is the one moved. He currently has little value and stands to increase that value immensely in the next few years. You don't sell low. It's either Miller and his $6m salary (hopefully!) or Lack coming off a good season and in his prime. We're either getting cap space or selling high IMO.Ya, agree 100%. And heres to hoping its miller!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 that's a good point. I'm hoping that Miller is the one being moved. keep markstrom and lack. develop markstrom to the point where he's starter material. and his value is better than it is today. Ya, agree 100%. And heres to hoping its miller!!! Hard to make that sell to management who forked over that much money with the expectation that they will make the playoffs. Just because we might sell off some vets doesn't stop the prime idea that we are still trying to be a team to make playoffs and believe it or not Miller got us to that position although Eddie carried the rest of the load. I just don't see management moving Miller...to me ever since the start of the season I think Eddie Lack is the guy that will be moved. Markstrom like J.R said has too low a trade value and will definitely get better so no point getting little for something that will blossom sooner rather than later, and Miller is JB's + Management's go to man. Despite how Markstrom faired in his only 2 games with us this season, I still think he is the better technically sound goalie than Eddie Lack. Lack is too unorthodox in his style that it gets him into trouble a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gstank29 Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 Hard to make that sell to management who forked over that much money with the expectation that they will make the playoffs. Just because we might sell off some vets doesn't stop the prime idea that we are still trying to be a team to make playoffs and believe it or not Miller got us to that position although Eddie carried the rest of the load. I just don't see management moving Miller...to me ever since the start of the season I think Eddie Lack is the guy that will be moved. Markstrom like J.R said has too low a trade value and will definitely get better so no point getting little for something that will blossom sooner rather than later, and Miller is JB's + Management's go to man. Despite how Markstrom faired in his only 2 games with us this season, I still think he is the better technically sound goalie than Eddie Lack. Lack is too unorthodox in his style that it gets him into trouble a lot. He sure does flop a lot...... Luongo like. Also he locks himself into position which leaves the backdoor wide open. But Lack does have a great personality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 Ideally, we'd move Miller and his $6m, Markstrom would start the year as backup and quickly improve to the point he steals the starting job 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 Hard to make that sell to management who forked over that much money with the expectation that they will make the playoffs. Just because we might sell off some vets doesn't stop the prime idea that we are still trying to be a team to make playoffs and believe it or not Miller got us to that position although Eddie carried the rest of the load. I just don't see management moving Miller...to me ever since the start of the season I think Eddie Lack is the guy that will be moved. Markstrom like J.R said has too low a trade value and will definitely get better so no point getting little for something that will blossom sooner rather than later, and Miller is JB's + Management's go to man. Despite how Markstrom faired in his only 2 games with us this season, I still think he is the better technically sound goalie than Eddie Lack. Lack is too unorthodox in his style that it gets him into trouble a lot. Yeah the GM is kind of in a rough spot. You have 2 seats and 3 people. One you brought in for big money with experience. One that if you moved might make you look bad. Then you have Eddie the fan favorurite and trading him would be ill advised as Benning would have half the fan base calling for his head. Then you have Markstrom a super talented youngster who may be great or may simply be an ahler who wont get you much of anything. Kind of a pickle. Will see what happens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 Yeah the GM is kind of in a rough spot. You have 2 seats and 3 people. One you brought in for big money with experience. One that if you moved might make you look bad. Then you have Eddie the fan favorurite and trading him would be ill advised as Benning would have half the fan base calling for his head. Then you have Markstrom a super talented youngster who may be great or may simply be an ahler who wont get you much of anything. Kind of a pickle. Will see what happens Depends on the return I guess. If the price is right I'd be open to move anyone on this team. And he started to show signs of fatigure in the playoffs. which is still a reason to be cautious with the amount of games he plays. Next year I see it being a 50/30 split. With Miller geting 50 games I have to ask. What would giving Lack another 30 split games accomplish. We'd still be in the exact same position we are now with him. (We know he can play at the NHL level and that he's able to carry the team down the stretch) The only doubt we can have in Lack still, is if he can handle the mental pressure and fatigue of being a number one goalie. And honestly there's only one way to find that out. It's a risk that most teams make, sometimes it goes good, (Crawford in CHI, Anderson in ANA, Bishop in TB, Howard in DET, Schneider in NJ, and Holtby in WSH) and sometimes is doesn't turn out how you want it too, at least right off the bat.(Kuemper in MIN, Scrivens in EDM) Lack is 27, he's play 82 NHL games and in high pressure situations. Schneider was 27 when he got traded prior to that trade he'd played a total of 98 NHL games. Considering the teams each goalie had in front of them, Lacks stats are not bad at all. The guy deserves to be given the opportunity to be the full time starter now. Not in 2 years when Millers contract is up. Does the guy really want to be take a step back in his development and play the least amount of games in a season he's played to date. Especially in a contract year where he'd be looking to cash in on. What kind of contract does he get after next season if plays a split 30 games. Compare that to if he plays 60 and post decent numbers. JB needs to be, (and I'm sure he is) seeing the market value for ALL three goalies. If Miller gets a decent enough offer, we take it and role with Lack and Markstrom, If Lack gets us an offer that lands us another first round pick, we take that and role with Miller and Markstrom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gstank29 Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) Schnieder show all the signs of being an All-star goalie even if he had a good team infront of him. Lack looks like an average goalie IMO. He has some glaring holes what need to be adressed before he can be the number 1 guy. Also if lack gets you a first you should trade him. His value isn't going to be much higher than it is now. Edited May 11, 2015 by Gstank29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 Schnieder show all the signs of being an All-star goalie even if he had a good team infront of him. Lack looks like an average goalie IMO. He has some glaring holes what need to be adressed before he can be the number 1 guy. Also if lack gets you a first you should trade him. His value isn't going to be much higher than it is now. what kind of glaring holes are you talking about when it comes to lacks game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gstank29 Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 what kind of glaring holes are you talking about when it comes to lacks game? Rebound control, recovering when he flops, flopping, and locking himself into position when there is a threat on the backdoor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c00kies Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 what kind of glaring holes are you talking about when it comes to lacks game? Inconsistency, locks in position (leaves him vulnerable), lacks a superb glove hand (or anything for that matter), and seems to get rattled. I love Lack, but he definitely has his downfalls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuckin Kingsly Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Rebound control, recovering when he flops, flopping, and locking himself into position when there is a threat on the backdoor.My big concern is him following the puck behind the net, and his slow reactions post to post on wraparounds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Inconsistency, locks in position (leaves him vulnerable), lacks a superb glove hand (or anything for that matter), and seems to get rattled. I love Lack, but he definitely has his downfalls. every goalie has their deficiencies for sure. those things you listed I think are all things that be can work on to be more consistent. I love lack. and really don't want to see him go. but. if he nets us a first round pick in a deep draft. you have to consider JB goes for it. and then runs with Miller and Markstrom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Shirokov Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Schnieder show all the signs of being an All-star goalie even if he had a good team infront of him. Lack looks like an average goalie IMO. He has some glaring holes what need to be adressed before he can be the number 1 guy. Also if lack gets you a first you should trade him. His value isn't going to be much higher than it is now. I recall Lack being one of our best players this year on a lot of nights, even when our defense was banged up. I'm not saying he's going to win the Vezina, but he's been a pretty good goalie for us, especially considering how much of a train wreck our defense has been. The guy only has 85 NHL games of experience. Give the man sometime to develop his game. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gstank29 Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 I recall Lack being one of our best players this year on a lot of nights, even when our defense was banged up. I'm not saying he's going to win the Vezina, but he's been a pretty good goalie for us, especially considering how much of a train wreck our defense has been. The guy only has 85 NHL games of experience. Give the man sometime to develop his game. . 85 games is a lot of experince for a goalie. It's about the equilivant to 2/3 season as a player. He's 27 years old if you think he will develop and progress you are sadly mistaken. 27 years old is entering your "prime" as a goalie and big changes will be harder for him to make. Right now is when his trade value is going to be the highest. Next year he is a UFA and will probably be asking for around 3-4 million for 3-4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 85 games is a lot of experince for a goalie. It's about the equilivant to 2/3 season as a player. He's 27 years old if you think he will develop and progress you are sadly mistaken. 27 years old is entering your "prime" as a goalie and big changes will be harder for him to make. Right now is when his trade value is going to be the highest. Next year he is a UFA and will probably be asking for around 3-4 million for 3-4 years. yep. so if that's the case. then this summer is the time to trade him because he's of value for some team out there. and if he wants. he can sign back with van when he's a UFA. win win situation. haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now