Benchsplinters Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 This by far makes the most sense, goalies in the pipeline make Lack expendable. Trade Lack while his value is high, it's not like he's all weve got for a backup, however, we trade miller and Lack has a poor season, we have literally no one ready to stop the puck full time yet. Lack/Markstrom tandem = lottery pick next year, good luck convincing the season ticket holders on that one. The flip side of that is - what if Miller has a poor season or gets injured. Same result. Tough decision but I would go with youth and as proposed earlier by another poster, trade Miller in a package for a first round draft pick. Eddie will only get better IMVHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl's Jn Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 maybe the canucks feel that Demko is ready to make a jump then again they thought marstrom could... clearly they where wrong. look it.. if the canucks wanna make the playoffs it was clear that both goalies miller and lack produced those results for them. It would be wrong to trade lack because you need a solid back up. Oh one other thing... its always been our bad and lazy defense that lets our goaltenders down.. just ask luongo about that one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 I'd rather trade Miller for whatever we can get. A 7th round pick would be fine by me to drop that contract. Re-sign Markstrom and give him the permanent back-up spot. We can spend the extra 5 mil that will save us on a quality defenceman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 We could obtain a young top 6 forward with Miller as the centerpiece. Or possibly another top 15 first round pick. Given his $6m cap, NTC, age and the current goalie market... I doubt we get much better than a 2nd for him. But personally I take that and the cap space and run if we can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Bye Bye Eddie, that 3rd round pick we get is going to get us more meat n taters. 3rd rounder is awful. He may or may not pan out. Meanwhile, Lack is a serviceable goalie who can start games. You don't trade Lack if a 3rd rounder is all you can get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 The problem is you are not going to get the return Scneids got with Eddie, too much of a glut in the goalie market right now. Miller is almost untradable with the nice little NTC he supposedly has. San Jose most likely will want Miller. They may change from Niemi and Miller will want to go there as it's California (where his wife lives/works) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuckin Kingsly Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Given his $6m cap, NTC, age and the current goalie market... I doubt we get much better than a 2nd for him. But personally I take that and the cap space and run if we can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 3rd rounder is awful. He may or may not pan out. Meanwhile, Lack is a serviceable goalie who can start games. You don't trade Lack if a 3rd rounder is all you can get. Well i doubt he gets a 1st unless someone goes with him, so lets splt the difference a 2nd or 2nd and a 3rd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanaholic Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 The mistake we made in the FIRST place was signing Miller. Getting into the playoffs this year we all knew would be a complete bust and indeed it was. I would far preferred to have been close to tanking and getting a top 5 pick. That would have made more sense then who we should trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firestorm238 Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 I wonder if we could retain a significant amount of Cap on a Miller trade for a solid asset. Say Miller + 2 Million retained (which we won't need if we're getting younger, and which will be for 2 more years at the most anyways) for a 1st or 2nd and prospect... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 3rd rounder is awful. He may or may not pan out. Meanwhile, Lack is a serviceable goalie who can start games. You don't trade Lack if a 3rd rounder is all you can get. And that's why if we're trading Eddie he should be used in a package for an asset that we need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-SN- Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 The problem is you are not going to get the return Scneids got with Eddie, too much of a glut in the goalie market right now. Miller is almost untradable with the nice little NTC he supposedly has. Ah, I didn't know Miller has an NTC (unconfirmed?). Another unfortunate goalie contract. Too long, too much, ntc. Why Canucks, why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tystick Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Given his $6m cap, NTC, age and the current goalie market... I doubt we get much better than a 2nd for him. But personally I take that and the cap space and run if we can I see what you're saying but I disagree with that being his max value. Many here have mentioned SJ as a destination that makes sense. Miller would still be able to compete and be closer to his family. Or a more outside the box destination in Edmonton. They're in the process of designing their team with the plethora of assets they now have. They would have to overpay being a division rival. And why not Toronto as well. Their team is in the process of being re-engineered. ^ These are just ideas off the top of my head. My point being is that there would be teams interested IMO. But like you said, his NTC would be the deciding factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Miller would look great in a San Jose jersey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Ah, I didn't know Miller has an NTC (unconfirmed?). Another unfortunate goalie contract. Too long, too much, ntc. Why Canucks, why. It's a limited NTC. He can choose 5 or 10 teams to go to. Miller would look great in a San Jose jersey. Any of our goalies would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 The mistake we made in the FIRST place was signing Miller. Getting into the playoffs this year we all knew would be a complete bust and indeed it was. I would far preferred to have been close to tanking and getting a top 5 pick. That would have made more sense then who we should trade. Miller wasn't a mistake; it was an insurance policy for a team that showed promise of doing more. The Sedins would have a legitimate chance of doing their role, without the new-incoming GM openly giving up on them. That would reflect poorly on the franchise. We saw that Miller wasn't the weakest link and that the team itself has revealed its weaknesses - the defence and possibly the lack of physicality. The first year was never meant to be the year to bring it all, but it was an assessment for everyone. Benning would see the good things that everyone else brings to the table, but the team wasn't good enough. How do we know that Miller wouldn't sign with Vancouver if it was less than 3 years? Benning probably saw it as a good thing too because what if Lack turned into a fringe starter? Most people would've blamed Benning for not constructing the team properly. This would give less pressure for the backup position to adapt to the rigors of NHL games. Miller has an NTC but he ONLY wants to be on the Western side. Any one of the western teams might be interested in his services. Miller started most of the games, so his veteran presence may or may not have an impact on moulding Lack's development as a goaltender. The signing is good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 And that's why if we're trading Eddie he should be used in a package for an asset that we need. What do you propose? Lack + 1st for decent/slightly overpaid defenceman? Does one personnel really fix the problems of the team? Hint: A team doesn't rise and fall because of one player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaner Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 What do you propose? Lack + 1st for decent/slightly overpaid defenceman? Does one personnel really fix the problems of the team? Hint: A team doesn't rise and fall because of one player. I disagree. One could totally argue that without Pittsburgh getting Crobsy, they wouldn't be where they are today. And in 15 years, we will be satin the exacts ame thing about McDavid and the Oilers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Trade him for 9th overall and draft Bo Horvat I think we already drafted Horvat once. But I guess we could do it again. Inb4 goaltending controversy. EDIT: I'd rather keep Lack than Miller, honestly. Not surprising. We kind of have to trade a goalie. If the return for Lack helps this team more than having him play back up to Miller then do it. I would rather trade Miller though, but just don't see that happening. Agree with the above comments. I would rather keep Lack than Miller. Lack was better last year. (I know Miller loyalists will disagree but the numbers are clear.) And the relative ages mean Lack will probably get better and Miller will probably get worse over the next few years. But it sounds as though money is an issue. When Benning says he knows what it will take to keep Lack it sounds like it will take a lot. And if Sbisa is worth 3.6 million, what is Lack worth? (Not to mention Miller's 6 million and the contracts that Tanev and Dorsett got.) Sooner or later Benning has to stop overpaying. Given the salary issues and Benning's determination to get something for Lack instead of just letting him go as UFA it seems that one of Lack or Miller will go and I don't see how Miller's contract is tradeable. A cap hit of 6 million is way too much for an aging below average NHL goalie (which is what Miller was last year). I don't think the Canucks could even give Miller away. And there is his (not very limited) NTC to consider. Let's hope Markstrom can translate his excellent AHL performance to the NHL, because I think he will be with the Canucks next year one way or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 Trade Miller Higgins and Sbisa to the Sharks for a 2015 1st. Run with Lack and Marky next year and try to win the Cup. Trade Lack, Jensen, Higgins, Hansen to Buffalo for the 2nd overall pick. Draft Eichel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.