Benning could look at trading Eddie Lack - Article

[Junkyard Dog]

That's an awful lot for 9th when we got Horvat (9th) for just Schneider. Even if the market's a bit less right now, you'd think Lack and Bieksa alone would get us 9th and we draft twice in the first, thanks.

Schneider>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Lack+Bieksa.

Bieksa is an upcoming UFA and at a 4.6M cap hit for a top 6 D.

Bieksa and Lack will not get you 9th, not in this world.

And as I said, Niemi is probably looking for 4-6 years at $5m. Miller could easily look more attractive there.

Lack, sure he'd be a better fit age and cap wise but would Miller for a measly two years and keeping their 9th overall pick be better...?

They get our 1st(22nd/23rd) and Lack for 9th.

[CroSen]

-I think the problem is that Benning overpaid for Miller. I really doubt that Miller could have got this much money anywhere else.

-As for Lack, I hope they keep him, I think he can be our number 1 going forward. I think he has PR on his side; attendance is down, the Canucks bowed out to Calgary in the playoffs, and in terms of "what have you done for me lately," the Canucks have the Sbisa and Dorsett signings. We can debate the merits of those signings, however they are two players that are NOT going to draw in the masses. Trading Lack will do nothing right now except create some bad will with fans.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

Again, I'm not disputing that but you seem to be claiming it's a landslide that SJ would go for Lack (and his higher price tag).

I'm saying that it's pretty darn equal. Yes, Lack would be preferable but Miller's not much of a downgrade and could be had for cheap. They'll have to pay to get the lower age and cap hit of Lack and they may not want to pay that price.

Miller as a practically free alternative with a short contract (that happens to expire the same time as Thorton/Marleau's FYI) starts to look more attractive.

I don’t know if I can agree. Two things need to happen.

One we have to be sure that Miller is willing to move again. He’s already in his 3^rd city in 3 years and just signed a 3 year deal and for all we know he’s already mentally accepted to living in Vancouver and planned to do so for the rest of his contract.

The other this is we have to be sure that Sharks actually want Miller. As mention the sharks need more than just a goalie to be a contending team again. They really have a need on the point. Acquiring Miller pretty much blows their cap to go out and sign that much needed UFA defencemen. Lack on the other hand, gives them relatively similar play in goaltending, and allows them to spend a ton of saved money on signing a D.

It may cost them more to acquire but Lack + 23^rd + a defencemen signed in UFA will be greater short term for the Sharks. If Lack re-signs and provides stable goaltending for the next 7 years, it’s also a long term win.

That's an awful lot for 9th when we got Horvat (9th) for just Schneider. Even if the market's a bit less right now, you'd think Lack and Bieksa alone would get us 9th and we draft twice in the first, thanks.

It is a bit of an overpayment but we address our needs and free up cap space.

With 3 goalies and the need to shed cap space, we have the availability to over pay a bit on an offer.

Preferable I would be sending Lack + Higgins to buffalo for the 21^st overall, but if there was a way to get into the top 10, I think we'd have to over pay

[JiffyPB]

Minnesota paid a 3^rd round, wow, they could have picked him up in the summer as a UFA for nothing before that. Until Devin landed in Minnesota he has accomplished nothing in the NHL, and he was one more team away from being out of the league. Nothing about him before the trade pointed at him becoming the wilds fulltime starter. Hence why he went for a 3^rd round pick. Lack situation vrs Dubnyk situation are at completely ends of the spectrum.

They needed a goalie ASAP and were not willing to pay up for a goalie who was worth more for him. The point was not that Dubnyk is why Eddie isn't worth as much, the point is the canucks over-valued him then, just like how you are over-valuing him now considering he has even less term than before.

How many games did Cory play as a the starter? Oh that’s right he never played more than 33 games in a single season in Vancouver.

Lack has already played way more as a starter, without a backup net in case he fails and he had a much worse team in front of him. Cory had a president trophy winning team, Lack had a team that finished 6^th worst. Yes your right Cory was thought to be elite, that’s why when he got traded for only a 9^th, the whole world thought canucks got under value. Lack may not hold the Elite card but he is still a number one goalie, who’s young, who’s got a cheap cap and has zero restrictions on what team he can go to. Most goalies drafted in the 20-35 range don’t amount to more than Lack currently is.

Cory IS elite, nothing suggests Lack will ever be. Cory back then is what John Gibson and Vasilevskiy are in terms of goaltending prospects today. Eddie sure as hell ain't. One of the big reasons the Canucks, a team built on goaltending and special teams, were good was because Schneider and Luongo were good. Luongo and Schneider play on significantly inferior teams TODAY than Eddie Lack is and still managed better numbers. Because he is an inferior player he will get inferior value. Worse player with worse potential = worse value = worse return.

If you’re a team like Buffalo or Edmonton and you have 3 picks within 1-33, and need a goalie. Do you:

A – Draft a goalie in that range and hopes in 4-6 years he becomes a fulltime starter?

B – Use that pick to trade for a goalie that can solve your issued in net for the next 7 years?

Or do you use that pick to acquire someone like a Craig Anderson who is under contract and is far more proven or do you use it to acquire an up and coming goalie like a Martin Jones or a Malcolm Subban, goalies who will solve issues for much longer than 7 years and are controlled assets. Lack is not the only goalie on the market and is squashed between not being proven enough but also not being a controlled asset. He also does not project to be like goaltenders like Varlomov and Schneider, which also lower his value. If Eddie was 25 and was 1 year away from RFA, I would agree on your assessment regarding his value, but he is a 27 year old who doesn't have as much room to grow and projects to be a Corey Crawford/Jimmy Howard type of goalie with a year left on his deal. That's why he won't fetch as much, especially in a strong draft where there isn't as much pressure to do as much as there is for a contender/team looking to make a push on the deadline.

[6YPE]

IMO Lack goes nowhere...I believe Miller was signed for the 3 years to help mentor Lack into a number 1 position. The 3 year deal gave Benning a year to see what he has in Lack, (this past season) and another transition year (the up coming season) where the games are split a little more evenly between the 2 tenders... and then if Lack proves he can handle the starter role, Miller is moved at the deadline or next off season for some kind of assets. If I remember correctly, there was talk of this when Miller was signed....

[soshified]

Am i the only one who wants to keep Miller and Lack and trade Markstrom?

Miller + Lack would provide both goalies being fresh and keep our team competitive.

When Miller's contract is done, Lack would be 28/29 and in his prime, while hopefully having Demko as a backup.

[Junkyard Dog]

Am i the only one who wants to keep Miller and Lack and trade Markstrom?

Miller + Lack would provide both goalies being fresh and keep our team competitive.

When Miller's contract is done, Lack would be 28/29 and in his prime, while hopefully having Demko as a backup.

I do but if we are able to trade Lack + our 1st for SJS's 9th I would be open to it.

[Guest]

Am i the only one who wants to keep Miller and Lack and trade Markstrom?

Miller + Lack would provide both goalies being fresh and keep our team competitive.

When Miller's contract is done, Lack would be 28/29 and in his prime, while hopefully having Demko as a backup.

That's the scenario I'd like to see play out

[Zedlee]

Am i the only one who wants to keep Miller and Lack and trade Markstrom?

Miller + Lack would provide both goalies being fresh and keep our team competitive.

When Miller's contract is done, Lack would be 28/29 and in his prime, while hopefully having Demko as a backup.

The problem is that Lack is a UFA in a year,,,so he'll get a large raise. Meaning in Millers last year we'll have two expensive goalies. You can't tie up that much cap in two goalies.

[thejazz97]

As much as I hate to say this, I think it's finally time to say goodbye to Eddie.

[Patchoball Cannons]

I think Eddie gets us the best return. Keep Miller as the #1 for 2 more years and we develop Markstrom into our future #1. Eddie is a fan favorite and popular with his teammates, but I don't ever see him being a guy that can handle a 65-70 game workload. If we caqn get a decent return I say we move him.

[Vdbg Nate]

Trading miller would ruin lack, lack needs a mentor, I'd say this situation with lack and miller isn't good, better off going Calgary style with goaltenders, 2 decent goalies

We also should try make some moves with San Jose as they rebuild

Also somehow trade with buffalo for eichal,

[Patchoball Cannons]

Add in Bieska to add in the D depth they need and it's getting real close..

Lack + 23rd + Bieska for 9th overall.

Canucks dump cap, and pick up a top ten pick.

Sharks get a goalie for long term (same age range as Courture, Hertl, Vlasic and Pavelski), D help that they've needed since Boyle left, and they still pick in the first round, plus they still got more cap than they would if they took on miller alone.

At this point I think you'd have to pay someone to take Bieksa off our hands, he's done!

[Nuxfanabroad]

Here we go again with this 'run of the Mill' - talk.

It's never just about the money, but rather the Lack of true quality...

[HC20.0]

I'd rather trade Miller. But the Schnieder trade is gonna bite us hard for years. As much as I love Bo, imagine if we had Cory this year on our team. He put up amazing stats on a TERRIBLE Devils team. The only reason why they weren't a bottom 3.

[Nuxfanabroad]

So would you trade Bo + Miller for Schneids today?(& I really like Cory as a top GT)

I wouldn't trade Bo.

[goblix]

Obviously have to trade 1 of our goalies..
Would rather keep Markstrom just because he steals games in the AHL and just his overall size and athleticism should translate into NHL success will just need some sheltered games to begin with to get a rhythm going.

As for Lack or Miller they are both great goalies. I'd want to keep Lack just because he's such a good guy but overall whoever gets us the better return is what I'd vote for.

Wouldn't mind trading Lack/Miller + Jensen/Corrado as the main framework for a pick in the 8-13 range

So would you trade Bo + Miller for Schneids today?(& I really like Cory as a top GT)

I wouldn't trade Bo.

tough to think like that... there are a ton of good 9th pick overall:

2013 -- Horvat

2012 -- Trouba

2011 -- Granlund

2010 -- Cowen

2009 -- Bailey

Other than Trouba and Horvat think I'd rather have a young goalie in Schneider easily.

Guess all I'm saying is that picks are always gambles.

[Mustapha]

The logic Canucks management has just baffles me.

Ryan Miller suffered a serious knee injury, and everything I have seen in the past 25 years with older goalies and knee injuries leads me to believe that if it happens once, it will happen again.

The Canucks should retain Eddie Lack for exactly the same reasons people are advocating that he be traded - his best hockey is ahead of him, he's already excelled in big games, and the fans and teammates love the guy.

I don't have anything against Miller, but the term was too high considering his cap hit. I doubt he will be a starter somewhere else, he's one of the oldest goalies left in the league, most teams have already handed the torch to younger guys.

The only way Lack will garner a high draft pick is if there's a team that desperate for him - and since 95% of the rest of the league are using young goalies of their own, I doubt that will happen.

Canucks are better off moving Miller to another team for whatever they can get and eat some salary in return. That way Markstrom(or whoever) can actually get some minutes in the NHL.

Jim Benning will instantly become vilified by many Canucks fans if he pulls the trigger on Eddie Lack. Despite the rebound season, the team did not play very well in the playoffs, trading one of the team's bright spots will not put more butts in the empty seats.

[shiznak]

Trading Lack would be too risky. We already know what we're getting in Lack if he stays, but we have no clue how Markstrom will turn out, when Miller's contract is up. Can he be a number one goalie or will be a career backup?

[Junkyard Dog]

Trading Lack would be too risky. We already know what we're getting in Lack if he stays, but we have no clue how Markstrom will turn out, when Miller's contract is up. Can he be a number on goalie or will be a career backup?

Hence why if we trade Lack we should be getting a solid return.

Otherwise keep em both and trade Markstrom.