Gross-Misconduct Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Not really. No one knew Miller would get hurt and Eddie would have to come in and play this well. Not about Miller getting hurt, its about throwing Lack in once and for all and finding out if he can be the #1 guy. At 27, how much longer do they want to look at him? I think it was a mistake signing Miller. Lack was unproven but this was the yr to find out. If he faltered, we learn that he's not a #1 and we move on. If he plays well, like he is, we have our man. Now instead we have two #1s yet again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustapha Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 The problem with keeping Miller is that he won't put up with playing only 40 games. His cap hit is way too high for a tandem, and conversely I think Lack has played far too well the last two seasons to only get 20 starts per season. Until Miller was hurt, Lack could barely get in the crease. That's a huge problem. If this trend continues, the Miller signing could be a hindrance. Of course the Canucks are stronger with both, but as we have seen before, you can't have 2 starters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Not about Miller getting hurt, its about throwing Lack in once and for all and finding out if he can be the #1 guy. At 27, how much longer do they want to look at him? I think it was a mistake signing Miller. Lack was unproven but this was the yr to find out. If he faltered, we learn that he's not a #1 and we move on. If he plays well, like he is, we have our man. Now instead we have two #1s yet again. Goalies typically tend to start and finish at an older age compared with the other positions. 27 to 30 is actually a common age for goalies to enter the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Do you trust Markstrom as a back up? That means he'll be getting 20 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustapha Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Goalies typically tend to start and finish at an older age compared with the other positions. 27 to 30 is actually a common age for goalies to enter the NHL. Not really. there are exceptions (Hasek) but there are a ton of goalies who have packed it in in their mid-to late thirties. Those who stick around after 35 are either relegated to backup duty or falter in the starter's position, and yes I would lump Martin Brodeur in that category. There are exceptions, but for every Tim Thomas or Dwayne Roloson you will have a Miikka Kiprusoff or Martin Biron. Hell, even Patrick Roy retired before his 38th birthday. Assuming Eddie gets a shot to be the starter at age 30, that gives him ~7 seasons of high performance. (Assuming there are no major injuries) The real question is this: Does Eddie Lack give the Canucks enough quality goaltending to win most nights? I think you know the answer. If the Canucks are really about building for the future, then they will have to make it clear to Miller next offseason that he won't get more than 50 starts. I doubt he would like hearing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustapha Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Do you trust Markstrom as a back up? That means he'll be getting 20 games. I think Markstrom can improve, but the Canucks don't have to go with him. There are way more goalies than positions in the NHL right now, take your pick. Martin Jones is just sitting there in LA, I doubt he will ever get a shot to be a everyday goalie sitting behind Quick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoCanuck Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 I've been thinking about that. Eddie lack has to start in the playoffs. There's no way miller can show us that he will be like himself 100% right away. It makes sense to start eddie and everyone agrees. but if i think miller is back by then... Desjardins major downfall of the entire year will be starting miller over eddie. Lets hope that doesn't happen and ruin a good bounce back season.. He's smart but believe it or not coaches do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Eddie's been sensational in Miller's absence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggiesbrecht12 Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Trade Miller, prospect, and a pick for McDavid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Trade Miller, prospect, and a pick for McDavid Doubt we have what it takes... We'd need something along the lines of Miller, Raymond, Ballard and a first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksSayEh Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Im down for rollin with Lack next season, we would need a good new backup though. Markstrom.... not realgud.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmotamed Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Can we not do this again. As a fan base, just stop. We already drove the best goalie we've ever had out of town (Lu) and now you want to start this again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMorrison 7 Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 He's number 1 in my heart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G. Reaper Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Can we not do this again. As a fan base, just stop. We already drove the best goalie we've ever had out of town (Lu) and now you want to start this again! I think Schneider was a way bigger loss than Lu. Just look at every goalie stat this season. Schneids is beating Luongo in every category. That being said, look what we ended up getting for Schneider! Horvat is killing it at 19 years old and could be our future captain! I'm not complaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ms stanley Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 It's a question that's worth running up the flag pole OP. Do they still need Miller since Lack is looking so good? The answer is yes. Why?: Goalie is the most important position. I'm quoting JB. If Miller is traded, then Markstrom would be the back up. He looks nervous when he plays and he has not shown that he can win games at the NHL level. If the Canucks want to make the playoffs, should he be gifted 20 starts? Mentoring (see RK41 above) I really think that Benning is going to be conservative with the goaltending. Miller will remain #1 and Lack will gradually get increased responsibility. Lack is certainly earning that opportunity right now. By the time Miller's contract is up in 2 years, Lack will be getting the equivalent of 75% of the work. It's also a case of whom the players feel most confident in the net. Offense drops like a rock when the team is not too sure that the goalie can make the saves needed to be made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Not really. there are exceptions (Hasek) but there are a ton of goalies who have packed it in in their mid-to late thirties. Those who stick around after 35 are either relegated to backup duty or falter in the starter's position, and yes I would lump Martin Brodeur in that category. There are exceptions, but for every Tim Thomas or Dwayne Roloson you will have a Miikka Kiprusoff or Martin Biron. Hell, even Patrick Roy retired before his 38th birthday. Assuming Eddie gets a shot to be the starter at age 30, that gives him ~7 seasons of high performance. (Assuming there are no major injuries) The real question is this: Does Eddie Lack give the Canucks enough quality goaltending to win most nights? I think you know the answer. If the Canucks are really about building for the future, then they will have to make it clear to Miller next offseason that he won't get more than 50 starts. I doubt he would like hearing that. If you're lumping Brodeur in as being backup after 35 then I think you're horribly mistaken. Only in his last year in NJ was he backup. Even then that would be questionable. I'm pretty sure there are a lot more goalies that go past 35 than you think as a starter. Keep in mind I said it was a common category, yet not the most common. Overall the career age group of goalies in the NHL is older than in the other positions. There are statistics on it and everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackRedYellow Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Hmm... Since I don't care that much about individual stats like GAA and SV%, since these stats when comparing goalies within the same team, isn't always true, I actually care more for how the team performs when they are in net. Miller's win% is 64% and Lack's 50%. Lack had a bad start so if only counting his starts after the Miller injury he's been pacing 60%. (Really good, but not as good.) Facts: He's not yet as good for the team as Miller has been. And if we disregard Lack's first 15 games (don't really know why we should!?) then we could disregard Miller's worst games as well!? Miller´s percentage is 64 and Lack's 50. I'd rather win, period! Then see some good goalie stats (GAA/SV%) and lose... but hey, that's just me! I like em both but I think a lot of the members here should get their facts straight before trading Miller away. I think Lack will be our new no 1 keeper within a year, but during that year he would most greatly benefit from Miller as a mentor. Do not trade Miller away because Lack's been posting good win% in 15 games!! A reminder: Without Miller from the start of this season, we would have relied on Lack's win% before the injury, which were sub 40%. Without Miller we would not even be in this playoff race! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniwaki Canuck Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 I think this team undervalues what Lack can provide way too much. Lack is 10-4-1 since Miller went down with an injury, posting numbers SUPERIOR to what Miller has posted this season, and he has been doing it with a decimated line-up. I honestly don't see the reason to keep Miller around if we can get anything decent for him at the draft. Lack is getting older and he deserves a starting position. People keep saying "oh well he hasn't really played a full-time work load, I doubt he can handle it". How are you ever going to believe that Lack can handle a full work load until you let him do it? Lack has shown he is an excellent back-up that can not only hold down the fort when needed, but actually push this team to be better. So why not trade Miller for a 1st/2nd round pick at the draft to a team that needs a goaltender and proceed with Lack in the future. Miller was a stop-gap goalie. Miller was here to keep the Canucks winning until Lack was ready to take over. Lack is the goalie that has the Canucks winning and he has taken over. Lack is 27 years old. Stop using the song and dance that he needs time to develop and be mentored. This. Arguably Lack still needed mentoring this year, but he's had the benefit of it now, and is ready to be a #1. Just look at the difference between the end of last year when he took over and the end of this year. Admittedly the team is way better this year, but Lack has been as well, stealing us several games as a starter and rarely stinking it up. This is an idea whose time has come. Miller has been good for us this year so no disrespect there. I'm sure he'd be happy in San Jose and if it were up to me, I'd only demand a second in return just to get the cap space and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Enough with Lack needs Miller's mentoring. Canucks have Melanson to do that. I was calling for a Miller trade prior to the March deadline, since the All Star game. It is not whether Lack is necessarily a better tender than Miller. It is all about the new Canuck development time line. The only argument for keeping Miller is the need for a steady force in net which Lack might not be able to provide. I suggest the opposite. At 27 and with his existing experience I would play Lack and edge Markstrom into the NHL. Trading Miller is all about what comes back. What is his trade value? Is a high 2nd Rounder and a prospect enough? Could he bring a 1st Rounder? Can Miller's CAP hit be spent somewhere else with bigger impact. Two partners who might interest Miller to leave would be SJ and Buffalo. Last I checked Van did pretty well with the draft pick they got back for Schneids. Vancouver does not have the depth to keep Miller. Miller is not the tender who will take the Canucks back to the CUP finals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Dangled Out Of The Womb Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Assuming that Miller stays out, and Eddie Lack brings us into the playoffs. If Eddie were to start, and maybe even carry us into the 2nd round.. Wouldn't he have then proven that he can be our number 1 guy. We could then trade Miller (to the Ducks or SJ), and bolster up other areas of our team/creating cap space. I can really see this happening. Does that make me crazy? No. Stop now. No goalie controversy. Not again. BTW we have no proven backup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.