Benning needs to deal miller, lack or markstrom before July 1st

[Nuxfanabroad]

Here's a relevant question: Does Miller WANT to stay?

Imagine we trade Eddie to Buff/CBJ/wherever..& the guy's lights out on his new squad. The media will be trolling Van hard. Fanbase boos & protest will rain down on RM, if he doesn't hold up his end of the bargain. Does he really want the added pressure of replacing what is probably our team's most magnetic personality(not to mention his gting)?

Even JM will face added pressure whenever he starts.

When you start to analyze, this could be a pretty slippery, precarious slope.

[LYKMAN]

Trade Miller! This is a no brainer for 2 reasons:

1. He had not demonstrated that he is much superior than Lack. Therefore, without him, the Canucks will not be any worse off.

2. Free up his 6M contract will enable the Canucks to have more ammunition in the Free Agency market.

[Jiggs50]

People got no chill on these boards lulz

[Quoted]

People got no chill on these boards lulz

I tried Google Translate and still have no response to this.

[DownUndaCanuck]

Personally I think they all have pretty well-defined roles so far. Goaltending is the least of our problems.

Miller - current top-10ish NHL goaltender, maybe top-15. Still a starter on the Canucks and most teams in the league. His contract is good for 2 more years, but he'll be our starter for another season and then will probably get closer to a 41-41 split in his contract year. The team floundered for a bit without him, but this defence was MUCH stronger with Miller in net, and as far as I'm concerned Lack is not ready to play 70 games. Keep Miller, he'll be good to play another 50 games next season as our #1 guy unless there's injuries...

Lack - showed flashes of absolute brilliance in the last two seasons, but then signs of real mental weakness. He may be getting old, but I believe he's a late bloomer and will really become a starting goaltender (if we continue to groom him well) when he turns 30ish. Physically and skill-wise, Eddie Lack is a starting goaltender, but mentally he's still a kid. He's got a few holes to his confidence and mental game but hopefully, once Miller's contract expires, those holes will be filled in and Eddie will be ready to take the reins and play 60-70 games as a starting goaltender. He got some great playoff experience, but needs another post-season's worth more before he can think about a deep Cup run.

Markstrom - never really got a chance to show his stuff, he blew one opportunity he got, played well in another in the NHL but had a monster AHL year and is still going strong, so I believe his stock and potential increased this season, despite getting a year older. He should be getting the Eddie Lack treatment right now - playing as a sheltered backup with 20-30 starts behind a veteran goalie who can groom him into a starter, mainly mentally.

Instead he's bunkered down in the AHL where he's clearly too good to be playing, but until he gets a bit of good luck or steals Lack's job (which is unlikely), he'll never get a decent chance. We should trade him for a pick or package him up, because his value is still climbing this playoffs in Utica.

Demko - ways to go, but he'll hopefully replace Eddie Lack once he's getting older, and their ages/experiences coincide nicely.

[Benchsplinters]

This. With trading Lack we get the best asset possible to help the team in the future. Miller's cap hit is irrelevant imo,since we're not likely to be contenders for the cup for at least 2-3 years when his contract expires anyway. Plus the Canucks the last few years seem pretty good at developing goaltenders in the farm system, so I don't think we really lose a lot in the long run if we deal Lack.

You just argued with yourself their Bud. You stated the Nucks were good at developing goaltenders in the farm system. Is that not what we did with Lack? Why spend all that money to develop a goaltender like Lack only to trade him and then have to pay through the nose for a number one starter.

You indicate we have nothing to lose by trading Lack. Well as I see it, we lose an expensive, seasoned young goaltender who has shown wonderful promise as a starter. What other goalie in our system Uis at Lack's present level. In an actual trade how much more would you get for Lack than for Miller or vise versa. And, Lack comes cheaper and with youth so giving him up, i say yes we would lose a lot. A heck of a lot more than if we traded Miller.

We want our team to be younger. We want to utilize the least amount of salary possible. Lack can only get better and right now he is on the cusp of being a starting goalie. Somewhere, this team has to make a decision about trusting youth. They took a chance with Tanev and Horvat and we all know what happened with them so how about taking a chance with Lack in the same manner. We know possibly three prospects may crack the line up next year, so that is taking a chance with them as well.

IMHO, A lot of very serious thought will go into what future Lack will have with the team. I am hoping they give Eddie the nod and trade Miller. Miller has good value especially to a team who is looking for a good starting goalie but as one poster mentioned, it should be done sooner not later. The draft would be a good time and who knows, Miller in a packaged deal just might get a first round draft pick.

One thing I know for certain, we can count on Benning to be all over it when the right time comes.

[mj vic]

it really doesn't matter as we now have Lucas Sbisa locked up!

[Sweathog]

You just argued with yourself their Bud. You stated the Nucks were good at developing goaltenders in the farm system. Is that not what we did with Lack? Why spend all that money to develop a goaltender like Lack only to trade him and then have to pay through the nose for a number one starter.

You indicate we have nothing to lose by trading Lack. Well as I see it, we lose an expensive, seasoned young goaltender who has shown wonderful promise as a starter. What other goalie in our system Uis at Lack's present level. In an actual trade how much more would you get for Lack than for Miller or vise versa. And, Lack comes cheaper and with youth so giving him up, i say yes we would lose a lot. A heck of a lot more than if we traded Miller.

We want our team to be younger. We want to utilize the least amount of salary possible. Lack can only get better and right now he is on the cusp of being a starting goalie. Somewhere, this team has to make a decision about trusting youth. They took a chance with Tanev and Horvat and we all know what happened with them so how about taking a chance with Lack in the same manner. We know possibly three prospects may crack the line up next year, so that is taking a chance with them as well.

IMHO, A lot of very serious thought will go into what future Lack will have with the team. I am hoping they give Eddie the nod and trade Miller. Miller has good value especially to a team who is looking for a good starting goalie but as one poster mentioned, it should be done sooner not later. The draft would be a good time and who knows, Miller in a packaged deal just might get a first round draft pick.

One thing I know for certain, we can count on Benning to be all over it when the right time comes.

I don't see how I'm arguing with myself. Yes I stated that the Canucks seem to be pretty good at developing goalies recently, I don't see why they wouldn't have the same kind of success developing someone like Markstrom for example, as they had with Lack and Schneider. If they did it before why can't they do it again, if not with Markstrom,then with someone else? Mabye another goalie prospect Benning has his eye on and could possibly trade for. If worst comes to worst, and we don't have a viable #1 when Miller's contact runs out,we can always sign a UFA or aquire one by trade.

Lack at this moment has a higher trade value than Miller for a variety of reasons, and Lack could bring us a solid asset or two,whereas Miller would fetch us significantly less because of his contract situation. This team desperately need solid young assets (especially on defense) to help us become a contender in the future. Why not strike when the iron is hot, and deal Lack when his value is at its highest?

I do agree we need to get younger,but I think we would be better served trading players like Bieksa,Burrows,Higgins etc to help bring that about. This is a team in transition, and a veteran presence in net would make that transition easier for the team as a whole.

Miller's caphit is quite bad,I agree, but I don't see it as that big of a deal considering where this team is at right now. This team is not a contender right now, so I don't see the Canucks being too active in the FA market anyways. By the time the Canucks are contenders again,Miller will be long gone anyway.

[RUPERTKBD]

I'd trade Miller if such a thing were possible. He wants to be on the west coast, close to where his wife works, so the Canucks' options are limited.

Do the Kings need a goalie? Nope. The Ducks? Doesn't look like it.

That leaves the Sharks. Good luck with that, JB.

[Boudrias]

Miller isnt worth a first. Trading Markstrom now would be terrible asset management, and he isnt worth a 2nd. Neither Erik or Demko are ready to be backup. Benning shouldnt be fired cause he can't trade assets for much more than they are worth, and can't magically make prospects ready to do something they arent ready for.

I think you are bang on.

Benning might have got a 1st if he had been able to trade Miller back in February. Injury botched that.

Fans are conveniently forgetting that Lack was out playing Miller before his injury. Who knows what options Benning is exploring.

Miller: Probably has the greatest trade value of all the Canuck tenders. He is still capable of being a #1. Fans should be asking why he might want to stay in Van if he has to share duties with a maturing

Lack. Miller has a career timeline which is short. I suggest he will be open to a move. His $6 mil per

season for another 2 years would be very attractive to some teams. The CAP relief could be better spent

on the d-core.

Lack: He is obviously the tender of the future. He was outplaying Miller before the injury. Suggestions

Lack cannot handle 60 games is a head scratcher. Fans should rethink that assumption. He compliments

the new Canuck development timeline. He is a developed Canuck prospect. His trade value is not recog-

nized by the rest of the NHL yet.

Markstrom: 2 years younger than Lack. Has failed a number of NHL opportunities. Still young enough and

he compliments the timeline. A strong Calder Cup run crys for a Canuck backup role. Since the time line does not have Van a serious contender for 3 or 4 years it guarantees he has a NHL opportunity with Van.

It might be a bit of a leap and tough for management to do but again the best asset management convinces

me that Miller gets traded. Lack is #1 and Markstrom gets 20 - 25 games as backup. Whatever the deal I

expect a multi player deal. I will be surprised if Lack goes.

[Hugor Hill]

How about if we dress 3 goalies and 11 forwards? Each goalie gets one period every game.

[coastal1]

Who's got that beat the dead horse gif?

Great trading position! Miller- overpaid for 2 more years. Lack-- clearly overwhelmed in the playoffs, exposed as no more than a solid back-up. mrakstrom-- well the story has not changed there this year one bit: grreat AHL goalie, period. Proven year after year. So, the onky tradeable is clearly lack, and what is the price for a back-up? Maybe a reclamation project prospect? Another Baertshi type player. Maybe.

[RUPERTKBD]

Miller has a career timeline which is short. I suggest he will be open to a move. His $6 mil per

season for another 2 years would be very attractive to some teams. The CAP relief could be better spent

on the d-core.

You think 6 million per would be attractive?

I'd look at that in the same way as I would someone who finds Sandra Bernhard "attractive"....

[ForsbergTheGreat]

I think you are bang on.

Benning might have got a 1st if he had been able to trade Miller back in February. Injury botched that.

Fans are conveniently forgetting that Lack was out playing Miller before his injury. Who knows what options Benning is exploring.

Miller: Probably has the greatest trade value of all the Canuck tenders. He is still capable of being a #1. Fans should be asking why he might want to stay in Van if he has to share duties with a maturing

Lack. Miller has a career timeline which is short. I suggest he will be open to a move. His $6 mil per

season for another 2 years would be very attractive to some teams. The CAP relief could be better spent

on the d-core.

Lack: He is obviously the tender of the future. He was outplaying Miller before the injury. Suggestions

Lack cannot handle 60 games is a head scratcher. Fans should rethink that assumption. He compliments

the new Canuck development timeline. He is a developed Canuck prospect. His trade value is not recog-

nized by the rest of the NHL yet.

Markstrom: 2 years younger than Lack. Has failed a number of NHL opportunities. Still young enough and

he compliments the timeline. A strong Calder Cup run crys for a Canuck backup role. Since the time line does not have Van a serious contender for 3 or 4 years it guarantees he has a NHL opportunity with Van.

It might be a bit of a leap and tough for management to do but again the best asset management convinces

me that Miller gets traded. Lack is #1 and Markstrom gets 20 - 25 games as backup. Whatever the deal I

expect a multi player deal. I will be surprised if Lack goes.

You say Miller has the highest value but then you go on to say.

You say Lack can and has already outplayed Miller

Miller had a 6 million cap hit vs Lack’s 1.15

Miller has a NTC vs Lack who can be traded to any team.

Miller is aging, coming off an injury and play is slowly regressing vs Lack who is 27, getting better and better, and just about to enter his prime.

For every reason you want Lack to stay, is all the reasons why other teams will be willing to pay more for Lack, than they would for Miller.

Great trading position! Miller- overpaid for 2 more years. Lack-- clearly overwhelmed in the playoffs, exposed as no more than a solid back-up. mrakstrom-- well the story has not changed there this year one bit: grreat AHL goalie, period. Proven year after year. So, the onky tradeable is clearly lack, and what is the price for a back-up? Maybe a reclamation project prospect? Another Baertshi type player. Maybe.

I don’t know, what was the price the 27 year Schneider who played 98 games as a canucks spread over 5 seasons vs the 27 years Lack who’s played 82 games in two seasons.

Using Cory as a value assessment:

Schneider had better stats, but Canucks were also dealing from a position of weakness (not trading with divisional teams, and cap was going down so a goalie needed to be moved) and still landed a 9^th overall (Bo Horvat) in what was said to be the deepest draft since 2003. People still complained the canucks got less value than they should of.

So in comparison, Lack not quite being as strong as goalie as Schneider but still just as proven. Both young and on the upside, if Cory can get a 9^th (or even better) than I really don’t see why Lack couldn’t fetch a late first round pick early second, in the 22-35 range. There are also a few things that makes this a stronger case. There a few teams (BUF & EDM) that would have interest in a goalie such as Lack that have multiple (3 picks) within the 1-35 range.

[Realtor Rod]

I read this thread strictly for all the awesome meme and gifs that I knew were going to follow the OPs post. I was not disappointed.

[steviewonder20]

Benning can't run into the same problem gillis had with Schneider and luongo. You must take the best possible option at the 11th hour and not wait around for the deal you think you deserve for the asset because teams will find their needs elsewhere.

Ottawa has 3 nhl tenders so one must go, niemi is a ufa amongst other nhl goalies and is Howard or ward on their way out?

Maybe 4-5 teams on paper need a starter or a solid back up and with so many other options and possibly cheaper routes the Canucks can't wait and let this drag out

Honestly I'll shocked if benning doesn't deal one around draft day. He's well aware of what happened here and he can negotiate quite well (I.e Kesler trade, vrbata deal, garrison move) so I'm not worried that this will become a distraction

Really?

[Wilbur]

You say Miller has the highest value but then you go on to say.

You say Lack can and has already outplayed Miller

Miller had a 6 million cap hit vs Lack’s 1.15

Miller has a NTC vs Lack who can be traded to any team.

Miller is aging, coming off an injury and play is slowly regressing vs Lack who is 27, getting better and better, and just about to enter his prime.

For every reason you want Lack to stay, is all the reasons why other teams will be willing to pay more for Lack, than they would for Miller.

I don’t know, what was the price the 27 year Schneider who played 98 games as a canucks spread over 5 seasons vs the 27 years Lack who’s played 82 games in two seasons.

Using Cory as a value assessment:

Schneider had better stats, but Canucks were also dealing from a position of weakness (not trading with divisional teams, and cap was going down so a goalie needed to be moved) and still landed a 9^th overall (Bo Horvat) in what was said to be the deepest draft since 2003. People still complained the canucks got less value than they should of.

So in comparison, Lack not quite being as strong as goalie as Schneider but still just as proven. Both young and on the upside, if Cory can get a 9^th (or even better) than I really don’t see why Lack couldn’t fetch a late first round pick early second, in the 22-35 range. There are also a few things that makes this a stronger case. There a few teams (BUF & EDM) that would have interest in a goalie such as Lack that have multiple (3 picks) within the 1-35 range.

You make valid points, and I'm not saying you're wrong, but at some point pedigree comes into play. Schneider had that 1st round pick pedigree that had not yet deminished. Lack, going undrafted, doesn't have the pedigree that Schneider had which hurts his value.

[UFCanuck]

Millers has 2 years left and both young goaltenders aren't Schneider calibre.

I'm just hoping for a 2nd rounder out of any of them.

[The Colt 45s]

i say trade lack

you get your most value for him... keep miller only 2 more yrs left...we need a vet goalie in the pipes...

Vet goalie for two years. Just because someone is a veteran, does not mean they are better. The issue I have with Miller is that he did not steal any important games for us. I think Miller declaring himself ready was one of the reasons we lost in the first round.

Trading Eddie is wrong. Think about two years from now when Miller walks--which he will. He will go to a team he thinks can win the Cup--because he will not stay here. If Miller stays, we will not be able to afford to shore up our D.

If the plan is immediate, you keep him. If the plan is long-term, you trade Miller.

[TheCammer]

I imagine there is plenty of discussion going on. Benning might be smart to see if Markstrom delivers and AHL championship and ups his value.