Dragonfruits Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 People stop obsessing with cap space just because a team has it doesn't mean there's a quality player to sign Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniwaki Canuck Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 He's 27 right now. In a year's time he'll be 28. Miller's contract will be up, and Lack will be our starting goaltender at 28 years old, with (hopefully) another 40ish game season and maybe some playoff action under his belt. That IMO is enough experience to let him get thrown in to a full time starting goaltender role. Want to compare that age to some of the current starting goalies, particularly the ones doing well in the playoffs? Craig Anderson, sure he lost the series but was outstanding. 33 years old. Lundquist, probably going to win a Cup this season. 33 years old. Price may be the best goalie in the world right now and isn't particularly young, he's 27. Bishop is the same, he's 28 right now. Age has nothing to do with how well Lack will perform, but experience and how he eases into the starting role will. If he's 28 by the time he becomes a true starter, give him a couple more seasons before he's got around 20ish playoff games under his belt and he's 30 years old. That may seem old, but look around the league - half of the goalies succeeding in the playoffs (and winning Cups) have been around 30+. Goalies take longer to develop and unless we hit it lucky and get one of these kid goaltenders who go on a fantastic, sparkling Cup run, we're not going to win a Cup. Face it, Lack's our best shot at having a Cup winning goaltender. I'm not waiting around for Markstrom to develop, who hasn't shown he can translate AHL to NHL success yet, and I'm definately not waiting on O'Connor to do it when he hasn't even signed with the Canucks yet. You're pretty desperate if you think a kid is going to be this team's starting goaltender when he's fielding about 14 other offers and has no professional experience... Miller's contract will be up in 2 years' time, not one. I don't mind having both him and Lack splitting time for another year, but Miller's cap hit would be better spent on something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniwaki Canuck Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 People stop obsessing with cap space just because a team has it doesn't mean there's a quality player to sign True, and I think that is particularly true this summer, but next summer we clear a lot more cap and could take a more serious run at a top player, particularly if we manage to work some more inexpensibe youth into the lineup this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
250Integra Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Miller is here to stay because there is no team out there that will take him for the remaining 2 years at 6 million. The question is whether you trade Lack (get a higher return) and bring Markstrom up, or you trade Markstrom (lower return) and keep Lack as your 1B. I see either Markstrom or Lack in a package for us to move up in the draft this year. The Canucks dearly need a highly-touted, puck-moving defensive prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Miller is here to stay because there is no team out there that will take him for the remaining 2 years at 6 million. The question is whether you trade Lack (get a higher return) and bring Markstrom up, or you trade Markstrom (lower return) and keep Lack as your 1B. I see either Markstrom or Lack in a package for us to move up in the draft this year. The Canucks dearly need a highly-touted, puck-moving defensive prospect. That’s exactly what JB will have to test the waters with. If Lack gets you an offer for a decent pick you jump on it. A lot of teams have multiple picks within the first 35 selections. Buffalo has (2nd overall, 21st overall and 31st overall) Edmonton has (1st overall, 16th overall, 33rd overall) Philly has (7th overall, 26th overall) Arizona has (3rd overall and 24th overall) Carolina has (5th and 35th overall) People keep mentioning Sharks wanting Miller but if Sharks wanted a short term Veteran Niemi is exactly that guy, he cost nothing to resign and has a way cheaper cap hit. If Sharks want to upgrade their goaltending it would be for long term, so wouldn’t Lack make more sense for them. Lack doesn’t affect there cap situation so they can still go out and pick up a D, something they needed after Boyle left. He’s not just a short term solution and can be in his prime along with Hertl, Couture, Pavelski and Vlasic. Lacks’ play is almost on par with Miller’s. I could see a package involving Lack + allowing canucks to move up in the draft and acquire that 9th overall. Lack, Juice, Clendening Lack + 23rd overall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Still consider Scotty Bowman's opinion tops. He is very high on Lack. A Miller trade might not be as difficult as many think. He is a top tender and his contract is only 2 years. There are many NHL clubs who come no where near spending their CAP. Van fans think Lack will bring more back than might be reality. I suspect Miller is still a higher market value. To bad he wasn't dealt before the trade deadline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcon45ca Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 A -He was thrown into the NHL at a young age and expected to be a start B- He played with the Panthers C- What had Lack shown you at the NHL level before he turned 26 D -What had Bishop, Howard, Crawford, or Smith showed the NHL before they were 26 E- Markstrom is 25 years old. Most goalies don’t get a shot in the NHL until they are 25. Well he’s done everything to prove he deserves his shot and that shot is as a backup to the canucks next year. Schneider, Luongo, Halak, Miller, Elliott, Anderson, Hiller, Nabokov, Bobrovsky, Price & LOTS more showed by 25 & younger that they could be NHL goalies. Markstrom has emphatically shown he is not ready, & IMHO will never be. Like I said, it's up to him to prove me wrong. I'd rather 1 more year of Miller/Lack tandem & then decide what to do, cuz' there is no way Markstrom is ready for an NHL backup position. I mean, look at his two games he played for us this year after CRUUUUSHING in the AHL. Nowhere near ready. Not even close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canadiangunner Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 He's 27 right now. In a year's time he'll be 28. Your forgot to mention in two years time he will be 29... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 You need 2 capable goalies. We have that. JB, TL, and WD all said that today. If anything, sounded like Markstrom was the odd man out. Benning did say he would use him as an asset. My guess is if O'Connor signs, Markstrom is traded. Miller/Lack in the big club and O'Connor downstairs. When Miller's contract is up in 2 years, so will O'Connors ELC. Then it'll be Lack/O'Connor and etc. At this point, highly doubt Miller/Lack tandem is touched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Schneider, Luongo, Halak, Miller, Elliott, Anderson, Hiller, Nabokov, Bobrovsky, Price & LOTS more showed by 25 & younger that they could be NHL goalies. Markstrom has emphatically shown he is not ready, & IMHO will never be. Like I said, it's up to him to prove me wrong. I'd rather 1 more year of Miller/Lack tandem & then decide what to do, cuz' there is no way Markstrom is ready for an NHL backup position. I mean, look at his two games he played for us this year after CRUUUUSHING in the AHL. Nowhere near ready. Not even close. You mean the 77 minutes of NHL time he got this year. Real good sample size. The only game he played a full game this year was against Arizona where he played fine stopping 26 of 27 shots. Yes he got shelled against the Sharks but all goalies in the league have been shelled before. WD should have started him again BUF the game before. It’s a good thing he could care less about proving it to you and the people that matter such as Rollie Melanson canucks own goalie coach seem to believe he’s an important asset to the canucks. Bring him up with the canucks as the backup this year, get him in the groove, gain him some confidence at the NHL level, start him off against the weaker teams, and he will be fine. Being the with the team and the full time back up is a lot different than getting thrown into a game here or there. It would be plain dumb to let a high potential goalie let Markstrom walk for nothing. Imagine if canucks would have done that with Lack, gave up on him and let him walk since again he didn’t get his first start in the NHL until he was 3 months away from turn 26, same age Markstrom will be in October. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefCon1 Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 honestly, goaltending was not a problem and was never the problem with this team ever since Luongo came in. It doesn't matter who is our goalie if our defense is still the same. What kind of a playoff team has Sbisa and Weber logging top 4 minutes? The decline of Hamhuis and Bieksa is another problem. The only good defenseman we have that can play actual defense is Tanev while Edler has improved, he is still prone to making mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcon45ca Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 You mean the 77 minutes of NHL time he got this year. Real good sample size. The only game he played a full game this year was against Arizona where he played fine stopping 26 of 27 shots. Yes he got shelled against the Sharks but all goalies in the league have been shelled before. WD should have started him again BUF the game before. It’s a good thing he could care less about proving it to you and the people that matter such as Rollie Melanson canucks own goalie coach seem to believe he’s an important asset to the canucks. Bring him up with the canucks as the backup this year, get him in the groove, gain him some confidence at the NHL level, start him off against the weaker teams, and he will be fine. Being the with the team and the full time back up is a lot different than getting thrown into a game here or there. It would be plain dumb to let a high potential goalie let Markstrom walk for nothing. Imagine if canucks would have done that with Lack, gave up on him and let him walk since again he didn’t get his first start in the NHL until he was 3 months away from turn 26, same age Markstrom will be in October. Haha, the fact that Markstrom only got 77 minutes while dressed as a backup for what, 20 games? shows a lot more about how confident the Canucks coaching staff are about him than anything Rollie has said. At that rate Lack will play 72 games next season. Yeah, sounds like a winner. Tell ya what, let's put a pin in this and see where Markstrom is next year at this same time. I'm betting AHL and/or a different club. Hey, if I'm wrong I'll be the first to admit it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THERETOOL Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 gotta see if someone will bite on miller . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Haha, the fact that Markstrom only got 77 minutes while dressed as a backup for what, 20 games? shows a lot more about how confident the Canucks coaching staff are about him than anything Rollie has said. At that rate Lack will play 72 games next season. Yeah, sounds like a winner. Tell ya what, let's put a pin in this and see where Markstrom is next year at this same time. I'm betting AHL and/or a different club. I think it says a lot more about the team battling for a playoff spot than it does about Markstrom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Cudo's to the OP for a well laid out post. One thing seems obvious; we have to trade one of Miller, Lack or Markstrom. We will lose or trade at least one, the only issue is who and for what return? My own preference is to trade Miller. Logic being Lack is at least close to comparable. And the cap space could allow an investment in a better defence which would see the remaining tandem post better numbers. And improve the team as a whole. Plus Lack is still an improving goalie, and very marketable, neither of which I believe remains true with Miller. My instincts tell me Benning will also value the relationships involved in acquiring Miller. Unless he discussed a potential move as a possibility with Miller, Ryan also obviously getting some input (he does have an NTC of sorts), when signed; I think Miller will stay. I also believe Lack would be smart to even ask for a trade. Considering that he appears ready to be a starter, the right situation next year could make a world of difference in his contract. Which is due (UFA I believe?) at the end of next season. All of this also leaves a good situation for Lack's friend of some years; Markstrom. So I add it up as the smart money being on Lack getting traded regardless of what I prefer. And there could be worse problems to have... Lack for Matt Tennyson and a 3rd... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcon45ca Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 I think it says a lot more about the team battling for a playoff spot than it does about Markstrom. The team's always battling for a playoff spot, they don't just give em' away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 The team's always battling for a playoff spot, they don't just give em' away. We weren't running away with the President's trophy. We were fighting to remain in the top 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Another possibility is Miller for Justin Braun. A fair trade and one needed by each player and all teams involved imo. Then we try and parlay Sbisa into a 2knd or a prospect elsewhere... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 Can I ask why you are so key on getting rid of Markstrom? Are you sure Lack is Canucks goalie of the future. We have three goalies, letting Markstrom walk and then trading Miller as an upcoming UFA is just bad asset management. Especially if you think Demko or O'Conner will take over in 3-5 years. Why not trade the goalie that gives canucks the best return, be that Miller or Lack (I fully expect it to be lack). and then role with a tandem of Lack or Miller and Markstrom as the back up. How confident were you in Lack as a backup when Schneider got dealt? Giving up on Markstrom now does not seem like a smart move. Again I'll point out Lack got his first start in the NHL Oct 06, 2013. He was 25 years of age and 10 months. Markstrom right now is only 25 years of age and 4 months old. Yes he's currently younger than when Lack got his first start. He's got just as good as AHL numbers, and has been unreal this year in the AHL. Even our own goalie coach thinks he's got a bright future ahead of him and huge asset to the canucks. Also you need to stop worrying about injuries. 70% of NHL teams are screwed if their #1 goalie gets injuried so you really can't worry about that and play the what if games. Having a 1a and 1b tandem is a luxury, not a necessity. It will be much more easier to move Miller during his final year considering Hammer, Vrbata and Bieksa will all be UFAs meaning we would have the cap to eat some of Miller's contract which in return would get us a bit more of a return while making it easier to move him. Even though these facts are probably not valid I see the point of them and will go with it. We weren't that 70% that would be screwed if our goalie got injured. We were that 30% who's starter(Miller) got injured at the most crucial time of the season and our backup(Lack) was able to get us into the playoffs. It that were Markstrom instead of Lack who stepped in when Miller got hurt then we would most likely not of made the playoffs. Last season having a 1a/1b was key to making the playoffs. The route I want to take is a safer route. Going with Lack/Miller and Markstrom next season is more of a risk/reward move and I don't think we should take risks with our goaltending, not next season at the least. Those are just my opinions though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westcoasting Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 I can't imagine anything other than moving Miller will be the scenario this summer. Lack has shown he can take the number 1 spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.