Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

(Discussion) Goalie situation


Recommended Posts

Might get bashed again... but hear me out...

We obviously have to move a goalie. We all know it will happen, it's just a matter of whom (Lack or Markstrom) personally I think neither should be. My opinion is we should move Miller. I know JB made a commitment to him signing him for 3 years.. but he is 34 years old and having a pretty average season.

Yeah Lack isnt all that proven yet amd yes Markstrom also has a lot to prove at the NHL level. But why give up either. Both are monsters at 6'4" and 6'5". They are also both young. 26 & 24. Then can split the starts 41/41. They can develop together and push one another. Most good teams have a good 1A and 1B. So why give up 2 goalies with all that potential for someone who will be gone in 2 years or less??

Keep Lack amd Markstrom. Trade Miller for a pick or 2 or bundle him come draft time

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miller is here to provide veteran depth for a franchise until the youth movement is complete and will start ahead of, one of Lack or Markstrom moving forward. Until either becomes a legit starter. That was the plan, that's what the plan will continue to be, the only question remaining is who will play under Miller for 2-3 seasons. We'll likely find out soon.

Edit: I'd speculate that it's likely that Lack will be moved because he will have spent an over-due amount of time as a back-up by the time Miller's contract ends. He is worth more than Markstrom currently. So move him, and go with the equally as likely to succeed: Markstrom (who potentially has a higher ceiling) Pretty sure JB said Markstrom was taken off the market, so there's that too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets sign a Free Agent and trade him 2/3 into his first season they said, it would be fun they said....... VANCOUVER WILL NEVER sign another Free Agent because they will all be worried about being traded right after they signed

First, I agree with your thoughts in general.

But when Miller was signed here I was shocked it was for so much and for so long, especially given his performance with the Blues. It's hard to believe there would have been a lineup of teams wanting to sign him under those terms. So even IF Miller is traded by Vancouver, he still wins to the tune of about $18 million. Just say'en.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One will be moved before deadline. If we are planning on Markstrom + Miller next year, they will move Lack this year. I don't see why they would keep him until the offseason.. It only makes sense to give Marky some games this year, more next year, move Miller, and start the year after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, I agree with your thoughts in general.

But when Miller was signed here I was shocked it was for so much and for so long, especially given his performance with the Blues. It's hard to believe there would have been a lineup of teams wanting to sign him under those terms. So even IF Miller is traded by Vancouver, he still wins to the tune of about $18 million. Just say'en.

Let him win. If all we get is average seasons.. what was the point. 2 young up and comers who can split a season over a guy who is old and going ro play 60-70 games anyway and not give either a chance to really play. I dont think Canucks brass though Markstrom was going ro have the stellar year he has had

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lack gets traded, Markstrom develops behind Miller for a few years then takes over the starting job

Exactly. If Lack was truly the face of the future, he'd be that face by now. His starts are okay, but he has yet to prove himself capable of being a #1 and I guess I'm just not patient enough to be like "he'll hit his stride at 30".

I love Eddie's character, he really seems like an awesome guy, but in no way is he ready to share starting duties. Remember last year after Luo got dealt? Lack stunk, Markstrom was a little worse.

So to the OP's point - pfffft and no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly makes you think Lack's value is high.

It's not that he's extremely valuable, he's just more proven than Marky, and is worth more than him because of it. Lack will likely never be an elite goaltender, but by next year he'll likely be a serviceable starter on a non playoff/middle of the pack team.

More so what he was saying is that we've to a cross-roads where we must make a choice between them, and that we should sell Lack while he's as valuable an asset as he's ever been, and move forward developing Markstrom behind Miller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder which 5 teams Miller would be willing to wave for? If its Buffalo, then I can see us not becoming a pariah for future free agents.

Anyways, JB brought Miller in because he believed the core could deserved another shot at winning and that maybe Miller could have another Vezina season. But JB totally overvalued Miller by giving him a 3 year 18M contract. That's absolutely ridiculous and his worst move as a GM. I mean he had to have known that our depth on D was weak, we could have used more cap space to sign another Dman and that we have multiple free agents coming up.

I know our D has been bad all season, but Miller isn't the same goalie that stole games that his team had no business winning. If Buffalo offered even just a 2nd round pick (a midlevel prospect would be nice too, or a third rounder) I'd pull the trigger.

We got Miller for free, now we risk losing 2 excellent goalie prospects. Trade him at the draft if possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder which 5 teams Miller would be willing to wave for? If its Buffalo, then I can see us not becoming a pariah for future free agents.

Anyways, JB brought Miller in because he believed the core could deserved another shot at winning and that maybe Miller could have another Vezina season. But JB totally overvalued Miller by giving him a 3 year 18M contract. That's absolutely ridiculous and his worst move as a GM. I mean he had to have known that our depth on D was weak, we could have used more cap space to sign another Dman and that we have multiple free agents coming up.

I know our D has been bad all season, but Miller isn't the same goalie that stole games that his team had no business winning. If Buffalo offered even just a 2nd round pick (a midlevel prospect would be nice too, or a third rounder) I'd pull the trigger.

We got Miller for free, now we risk losing 2 excellent goalie prospects. Trade him at the draft if possible.

YES! That last paragraph especially. If Buffalo offered us anything, id take it and run for sure as well! But then again... its Buffalo we are talking about. He probably wouldn't wanna go back?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, I agree with your thoughts in general.

But when Miller was signed here I was shocked it was for so much and for so long, especially given his performance with the Blues. It's hard to believe there would have been a lineup of teams wanting to sign him under those terms. So even IF Miller is traded by Vancouver, he still wins to the tune of about $18 million. Just say'en.

Patronage!

Just like MG signing first Pavel Demitra, then Sundin who were both his clients when he was an agent!

Payback might be better said? Miller was drafted and developed under Bennings watch.

Benning brought in something he knew and trusted. But its almost like he was doing Miller the favour after he tanked in St Louis!

Now that he has his game mostly back in order. And he has his $18 mill contract! I doubt he minds letting Benning do him another favour? Finding him a job in San Jose...

And we'll take young D Matt Tennyson back plus a pick for that courtesy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Patronage!

Just like MG signing first Pavel Demitra, then Sundin who were both his clients when he was an agent!

Payback might be better said? Miller was drafted and developed under Bennings watch.

Benning brought in something he knew and trusted. But its almost like he was doing Miller the favour after he tanked in St Louis!

Now that he has his game mostly back in order. And he has his $18 mill contract! I doubt he minds letting Benning do him another favour? Finding him a job in San Jose...

And we'll take young D Matt Tennyson back plus a pick for that courtesy!

If you think Miller has his game back in order then he's definitely untradeable. His game is way too erratic right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was said earlier; Miller doesn't go due to appearances. You rarely trade out someone you just signed to a very nice contract, unless they totally suck. Miller hasn't been horrible...yes he has had more "stankin" games than you would expect out of a goalie of his caliber but he has stolen a couple of games. Not a great signing, but the market kinda dictated his worth.

That leaves Lack & Markstrom. Lack likely has been value at this time, he's more of a proven player. While I doubt that he could ever be a true #1, playing ~60 games yearly, I do think he could be a great #2 for the majority of teams. Markstrom, I think, is capable of about the same. What makes me leery of Markstrom is that he hasn't grabbed the #1 spot in Utica completely. In fact, Eriksson has played more games than him, though admittedly there has been some minor injuries causing a few games to be missed. Still, when Lack was in the AHL, there was no doubt he was the #1, no discussion otherwise.

I would rather trade Markstrom than Lack. Eddie reportedly has a great locker room presence; Markstrom, it has been said, is complaining about not being in the NHL...not a good sign. I think we could get a low 2nd-high 3rd for Markstrom.

And lest we forget, Eriksson may be capable of being a #2 for some

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...