[Rumor] Canucks shopping Eddie Lack for second round pick

[shazzam]

Where did the idea of trading Miller to ANA come from?

Andersen is a perfectly good goalie, I had him in my fantasy pool for most of the year. He's tied for if not the only holder of youngest goalie to 50 wins. He lead Anaheim to No. 1 in the Conference, No. 2 in the league.

Miller is not an upgrade on Andersen.

I think someone like Craig Anderson would interest ANA. He's a veteran, has great playoff numbers and friendly cap hit. By the time his contract his up, Gibson can take the reign.

OTT does need to deal a goalie and there is some history with the Ducks.

Andersen was great against weaker teams like WPG and CAL. The Hawks sure pounded on him the last several games.

[Brocklovich]

I bet Edmonton jumps all over this.

If Edmonton enters the picture I'd like to think JB & Pete can hammer out a good hockey deal that works for both sides.

I see Edmonton in the same way I see Buffalo in that Lack definitely helps make them better right away. They may not be good enough to make the playoffs but its all about starting to get competitive and start having the young players play in a winning / better environment than being so bad they are at the bottom of the standings year after year

[flickyoursedin]

Lack at a 2nd round pick isn't fair value but its market value. I think being on a cheaper contract might be the icing on the cake for teams to roll the dice on Lack as opposed to giving more and paying more for pretty much the same product.

[Oliewud]

You sound like a flames fan in 2010. It is rebuild time my friend, just accept it.

we will have had 5 1st round picks in 3 years come july...is that not a rebuild?

[Hoosierdaddy]

we will have had 5 1st round picks in 3 years come july...is that not a rebuild?

Almost I'd say. Need a top 2 or 3 pick to be a legit rebuild.

[canuck73_3]

Almost I'd say. Need a top 2 or 3 pick to be a legit rebuild.

Rebuild =\= tanking. You can rebuild without being a total bottom feeder...

[Ghostsof1915]

So, a year ago an uproven Vey fetches a 2nd, while this year one of the better 'backups' in the league gets a 2nd?

Value is skewed, Lack is worth at least a 1st.

Wrong, goalies aren't in demand. I hope we don't trade Lack. I'd rather see Miller moved even for a 3rd rounder.

[Hoosierdaddy]

Rebuild =\= tanking. You can rebuild without being a total bottom feeder...

semantics IMO.

[Nuxfanabroad]

Nice large package. Buff has a pending C-crunch...

Van: Lack, Tanev, McCann, Kenins, Car 3rd(trade Vey for it)

Buff: Grigorenko, Bogosian(size on D), 2015 2nd.

Grigs, Bo, Cassels would look good down the middle, in a coupla' yrs.

[canuck73_3]

semantics IMO.

Getzlaf 19th overall, Perry 28th backbone of the Ducks.

Detroit rebuilt/retooled all while not even missing the playoffs.

Boston: Bergeron 45th overall, Krejci 63, Lucic 50, Marchand 71, Hamilton 9. The only top 5 picks they had were Seguin and Kessel. And arguably Bergeron, Lucic, Krejci and Marchand had a bigger impact as Bruins than Kessel and Seguin.

[two drink minimum]

Wrong, goalies aren't in demand. I hope we don't trade Lack. I'd rather see Miller moved even for a 3rd rounder.

I'd take a 5th rounder if we could move Miller

[two drink minimum]

Nice large package. Buff has a pending C-crunch...

Van: Lack, Tanev, McCann, Kenins, Car 3rd(trade Vey for it)

Buff: Grigorenko, Bogosian(size on D), 2015 2nd.

Grigs, Bo, Cassels would look good down the middle, in a coupla' yrs.

Do you have mental problems?

[Me_]

No I don't think Benning does that. HUGE over payment by us. /S

?

[two drink minimum]

For a 2nd rounder I keep Lack as long as there's ANY hope of moving Miller. He's worth more to us than a 2nd rounder.

Best post of the thread. Unless the Canucks are offered a heck of a deal then they should keep Lack and Move Miller or Marks

[Me_]

I'd take a 5th rounder if we could move Miller

Go cheer for Edmonton. You're obviously not a hockey fan.

[BI3KSA-]

See the funny thing

Is that with only a few dozen more games played under a FAR FAR better team they were anointing Schneider the next Hasek, and by comparison Lack with a comparable amount of games under a lesser defense/offense isn't even close to being a starter.

I love this forum

The CDC logic tho

[YummyCakeFace]

So basically Lack for Baertschi? Benning isn't stupid.

[tyhee]

I'd take a 5th rounder if we could move Miller

Go cheer for Edmonton. You're obviously not a hockey fan.

Now there's a profound and logical argument. If you don't agree with me you're not a hockey fan!

If you think he isn't a hockey fan, wait until you see what I'd trade Miller for. I'd clear him just to clear cap room and get Miller out of the way of Lack and Markstrom.

I'd trade Miller even up for Raffi Torres, assuming Torres is no longer good enough to help the Canucks. If it would allow the Canucks to keep two promising goaltenders instead of someone in the midst of age related decline, while clearing up almost $4 million in cap space for 2015-16 and a full $6 million for 2016-17, then if nobody offered a more enticing goalie deal, I'd do it.

However, that's just me. I don't expect the Canucks' management, who are committed to Miller and don't apparently expect him to suffer with age for at least two more seasons, to even consider moving Miller. He's their man. Lack isn't.

Proviso: To some extent trading anyone depends on what the Canucks think Lack, Markstrom or both is going to do. If Lack would be so unhappy playing backup to Miller this coming season that he'd refuse to extend with the Canucks and leave as a free agent in a year, I think the Canucks should make all efforts to move him. (For those who think Lack takes on more of a burden this year and then at least half of it in 2016-17, imo WD won't do that. I'm assuming anyone behind Miller will be a little-used backup.)

Similarly, if there is an indication Markstrom is so peeved that he'd go to Europe next season if Canucks haven't moved his rights and even if room is made for him, then I think they should do their best to trade Markstrom.

Occasionally I wonder whether Canucks could end up losing Lack, Markstrom, Ericksson and Cannata because everyone is unhappy being pushed further down the lineup after Miller was signed last season. Thankfully, that is very unlikely. Maybe everything will be fine.

Also Note: Miller's agent has said he won't be 100% healthy until July. That makes it even tougher to move him for a draft pick because the draft will be held before Miller is 100%. It isn't impossible to trade someone who is injured if the other team agrees, but it doesn't exactly make it easier. How many teams are going to want to take on a $ 6 million per year still-injured 35 year old who has already declined with age and posted, as far as GAA and Save% is concerned, almost average numbers this past season while failing to be the answer for a good St Louis Blues team late in 2013-14?

Put that together with him being Benning's choice and Desjardins' choice, and the chances of seeing Miller in any uniform other than that of the Canucks this coming season are very, very slim.

[BI3KSA-]

I agree Tyhee, the cap space alone is return enough on Miller given the circumstances and the current goalie market. We'd be much better off keeping both Lack and Marky Mark, unless the package for Lack was stellar.

[iinatcc]

Lack at a 2nd round pick isn't fair value but its market value. I think being on a cheaper contract might be the icing on the cake for teams to roll the dice on Lack as opposed to giving more and paying more for pretty much the same product.

Lack for Oilers is a pretty good deal since there's so much the Oilers can give. Vancouver could either ask for their 2nd Round Pick or for their 16th Overall for Lack + Vancouver's 23rd.

I still wouldn't mind giving up Markstrom for a 3rd. His AHL season may be stellar but it's still a coin toss if that can even translate to an NHL Starter. I'd give Lack + Miller another year than perhaps trade Miller at his 3rd season while retaining $2 Million of his cap.