JeremyCuddles Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Eddie still needs a couple years. Give Miller 2-3 year deal tops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grandmaster Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Lack and Markstrom are not number one goalies. We desperately need one. How we went from Luongo and Schneider to this is beyond me. Gillis was such an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkpoet Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Schneider is entering the last year of his deal in NJ, and becomes a UFA thereafter. (unless he's re-signed/extended) With it looking like Brodeur is leaving, it opens the door for Cory to be the starter there, which is what he wants... but who knows what happens? Not much this organization has done in the 30+ years I've been following the Canucks, has bothered me more than trading away Schneider. The way this team is shaping up now, he would fit in beautifully here. If at all possible I would be ringing that bell as well.... Miller? not thanks. I'd rather have Tokarski, who could potentially be another Schneider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Here we ago... Another year of goalie controversies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laoag Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 sign him and flip him at the deadline. excellent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure to Mogilny Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 sign him and flip him at the deadline. excellent. After stlouis disaster who would take him going in to the playoffs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkstar Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Re-build you morons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundernuts Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Miller joins this team I will hang up my jersey until he is gone. this better be a a rumor and nothing more. Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 I hope not,but this year we are goint to change and this could be a part of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
From.The.Point Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Its Miller/Hiller time! Would rather go with Hiller myself, he seemed to be the whole reason Ducks got to where they were but unfortunately Gibson proved that hes ready for NHL duty. No more than a 3yr deal if possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks35 Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Hiller would be better honestly. But for some crazy reason I just don't think he'll sign here for some reason or thrive in this market. Miller though well he's just Miller... Good goalie but not a playoff kinda guy and honestly even Lu was much better than Miller when it came to playoffs, and even he was known for not getting it done in the playoffs... Sorry Lu fans just my honest opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Guys....if we have any hope of winning we need a guy who has experience...not just skill....Lacks losses were not from absence of skill....only nerves and lack of experience. For gods sake do him a favor and find someone to take the heat off of him for a couple years. This is the most vicious market in the NHL. Think about. Lack and Markstrom are not number one goalies. We desperately need one. How we went from Luongo and Schneider to this is beyond me. Gillis was such an idiot. That's what people said about Crawford too... until he won a Stanley Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 That's what people said about Crawford too... until he won a Stanley Cup. Yeah he definitely carried the Hawks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 That's what people said about Crawford too... until he won a Stanley Cup. Exactly, goalies got to earn there starter reputation sometime. It's up to the canucks to take that risk and find out if one of our young guys can step up and earn that role Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Yeah he definitely carried the Hawks... He was being considered for the conn smyth, If it wasn't kane he was next in line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Does Markstrom become a UFA or RFA next season? If we ship him down to AHL and if he is UFA we will probably lose him if we dont offer him the backup gig. Anyone know he is like 23 so prob a RFA right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Re-build you morons. see, we can agree on things! But that shirt is still not your color Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 I thought players don't have to clear waivers in the off-season? Also his 1-way doesn't kick in till after the draft. 1-way has nothing to do with it of course, but people keep saying that waivers don't exist in the offseason. That's not correct in that we can't send players to the AHL until playing season waiver period is in effect: The “Playing Season Waiver Period” (which I will call “waiver period”) begins 12 days before the start of the regular season and ends the day after a team’s season ends. http://www.mcsorleys-stick.com/nhl-waiver-rules-explained/ So we can't slip Markstrom to the AHL without waivers in August, because the waiver period isn't open yet. Once that period is open to assign players to the AHL, then the waivers rules apply and Markstrom has to pass through waivers starting this year. Yeah, I believe the waiver period starts on September 26th this year (12 days before the opening of the regular season on October 8th). And it ended the day after the Canucks finished their season. So basically, the Canucks could potentially sign Miller and they could still bring Markstrom to training camp and even play him for the first couple games of the preseason (split-squad versus Sharks on Sept. 23 and versus Flames Sept. 25) As long as he was assigned to Utica before September 26th, he shouldn't need to clear waivers. But don't forget, they had to move up the waiver period prior to the lockout so teams could actually assign younger players to the AHL. From the same link: In September, 2012, the league and the NHLPA moved up the start of this period in order to allow teams to assign players to the AHL before the 9/15 lock-out date. If anyone has a link that explains they can send players to the AHL prior to this waiver period, I'd like to see it. But, as far as Miller, this is just a phone call. He'll likely want too much and won't have us as a top destination. I don't see the interest going very far, much like the earlier call for Bolland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nergish Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Fun Fact: 2014 Eddie Lack is exactly as good as 2014 Ryan Miller. This would be the biggest waste of money... Lack is our starter. If we bring in anyone, it will be a veteran back up. But I say screw it, run with Eddie/Markstrom for a few months and see how they develop. Tons of potential there. Goaltending is the least of our many concerns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 That's what people said about Crawford too... until he won a Stanley Cup. And Quick, Niemi, Rask and a young Lundquist Goalies and players all start as rookies not vets... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.