Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Report] Ryan Miller won't be moved & looking for a 2nd rounder or hockey trade for Lack/Markstrom


Recommended Posts

Who's going to mentor Markstrom better? Lack is that much cheaper for one season. If we want Markstrom to develop learning from a veteran is a much better idea

Markstrom is 25. He doesn't need much more mentoring imo. Plus he's got Cloutier and Melanson to rely upon.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lack's statistics in games started are almost the exact same as Miller's.

in 35 games started(I've counted the NYI game as one when Lack replaced an injured Miller and won) Lack has let in 89 goals on 1023 shots.

Which means in games started Lack has a .913 save percentage and a 2.54 GAA.

In comparison Miller had a .911 save percentage and a 2.53 GGA.

Lack's statistics were padded by coming in relief for Miller(and 1 game for Markstrom) when Miller has faltered. When Lack was having an off night for whatever reason Miller never came in relief probably due to WD wanting to rest Miller. Vise Versa Miller's stats were worsened significantly when he was pulled early in games.

I'll use the playoffs as an example.

Lack had a .886 save percentage and 3.03 GGA. His stats were worsened when he got pulled in game 4. Millers had a .910 save percentage and a 2.31 GGA in the playoffs, his stats were padded because of the 2 periods of play he got when he relieved Lack in game 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lack was good in the playoffs and made a number of big saves. Even Ken Dryden would have had an GAA over 3 with the number of breakaways and odd man chances a weak Canucks defence was surrendering.

I think the best trade is Miller, but it doesn't sound like that will happen. So Markstrom is the guy to move.

Lack and Miller split the starts. Benning has already said that you need 2 good goalies in the NHL to have success. If he believes in Markstrom then I guess Lack could be moved at under his value. I personally see Lack having a 9.25 SV% on any team he lands with. While Miller will be 9.10 SV%. Markstrom will be at 9.01 SV% and will force Benning to bring in another goalie.

That's the way I see it shaking out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This begs the question would Miller's stats be better than Lack's if Miller was not pulled in those games?

It would make sense considering Lack wouldn't of gotten a chance to come in relief which would improve his numbers and Miller's numbers would of been better from finishing out the games.

Take it how you see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom you seen to forget that Miller was the reason we started off so well. Sure he had some bad games that brought down his stats, but he also stole at lot of games for us and was consisently bailing out the defence in the first 40 games

Edit: I WASN"T AN ERROR SIGNING MILLER, if we didn't everyone would be screaming fire Benning because we would have missed the playoffs. You can't say that the Markstroe who lead Utica to the finals would have been the same Markstrom we would have seen with the Canucks, infact I believe that the Markstrom at the beginning of the year would have failed miserably. He has made great strides this year, some of which is mental and some of which came from getting a lot of work in Utica.

Lack would have not handled a full 82 game schedule as well as he did in the last 2 months, being able to learn from a Vezina winner goalie has helped him greater.

I hate how everyone thinks the goalie you have at the end of the year is the same as the goalie you had at the beginning of the year

The Miller signing was a bad one for the money aspect alone. Also you are absolutely wrong that everyone would be screaming fire Benning if he didn't sign him. Benning was just hired shortly before the Miller signing and after the MG/Torts fiasco, he was lauded as the franchise savior. He clearly over paid for an aging goalie who really had few options as good as the one Van could offer. So in reality 2 years at 10 mill per, is what he should have paid for Miller, tops.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Miller signing was a bad one for the money aspect alone. Also you are absolutely wrong that everyone would be screaming fire Benning if he didn't sign him. Benning was just hired shortly before the Miller signing and after the MG/Torts fiasco, he was lauded as the franchise savior. He clearly over paid for an aging goalie who really had few options as good as the one Van could offer. So in reality 2 years at 10 mill per, is what he should have paid for Miller, tops.

then we won't have gotten him. I can almost guarentee Edmonton and Calgary made him similar offers but the extra year was the deal breaker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately Miller won't be moved; he has practically no trade value and Benning seems to think he is better than Lack for whatever reason.

Odds are Lack won't move either. He's proven at the NHL level over Markstrom, has a similar cap hit and is liked and marketable in the Vancouver fanbase. With Lack were looking at a early to mid 2nd rounder with Markstrom we are looking at the very best a late 2nd round to a 3rd round pick.

I think Benning will work the phones and talk up Markstrom to the media and find a pick around 50-60 for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has had the last 2 years when Lu left and when Miller was injured plus last years playoffs. How much more of a chance does he need? And........He is not even close to Scneids so that is not a real comparison. Just cause he is a likeable guy does not make him a great goalie.

Lack is very good goalie with a porous defence playing in front of him. If Eddie had Nashvilles, Chicago's or the Rangers D in front of him he would be well regarded as a top end goalie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

then we won't have gotten him. I can almost guarentee Edmonton and Calgary made him similar offers but the extra year was the deal breaker

If we hadn't gotten him I would say good for us. I don't believe he was worth 6 mill over 3 years any how so what would be the benefit. We probably would've still competed for a playoff spot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we hadn't gotten him I would say good for us. I don't believe he was worth 6 mill over 3 years any how so what would be the benefit. We probably would've still competed for a playoff spot.

Nope there is no way Lack would have handled a 60+ game season as well as he did for 40. Markstrom would have cost us a couple of game that Miller/Lack got us a W in.

There is no way you can convince me that a Lack/Markstrom duo would have gotten us anywhere near a playoff spot. We would most likely be picking in the top 10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if Miller plays the way he did last season, the Canucks will lose a lot of fans. That has nothing to do with Lack.

A lot of it banks on Miller playing to expectations on par with the chunk of cap space he takes up. That means stealing games like other goalies in his price range do. There were not many games last season where Miller was better than the opposing goalie. Blame it on injury, new team, new baby, IDK and I don't care, he just needs to quite a bit better.

It's pointless to argue who's better Miller or Lack. It should be Miller, no question. It's like arguing who's better Lundqvist or Talbot. But obviously the Miller we saw last season is nowhere near as dominant.

I'm glad Benning has faith in Miller. I'm not sure I do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those of you saying "we wouldn't have made the playoffs without MIller". Would that really have been so awful? Would that have been worse than getting dumped in 6 games by Calgary? 6 extra games is all we got thanks to Miller and his immovable contract. This is just one guy's opinion but I could have lived without losing to Calgary in the playoffs. I'd have been happier to see the Canucks either sink or swim with Lack and Markstrom, get the better draft pick if that didn't work out, and seen Miller's 6 million spent a bit more wisely, on a PMD perhaps.

I 100% agree however this is a fare weather fan base atm who wouldn't accept that and the Aqua boys know that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having Miller is great. It lets us move assets at a position we are deep in. Cap room is irrelevant for us at this stage of the game... We aren't contenders for the remainder of his contract so no need to overspend on high priced Vets.

What UFAs are we missing out on this summer? Franson, Green, Ribiero, Soderberg? Who are we losing because we can't afford to resign them? Matthias? Richardson? These guys would be nice, but we actually have pieces in the organization to replace them from within while getting younger.

As for trades, we don't have the assets to move pieces and take on big salary. That's fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a little side note. Making the playoffs makes the Aquilini's about 2-3 million per home game, that money is not subjected to the revenue sharing (i believe).

Forget where i heard this from but it makes sense

50x18000= 900,000 (assuming $50 per ticket which isn't the case in Vancouver)

Plus Concessions and "others"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since there are so many different opinions on Miller and Lack, I decided to check the

facts and share them with you.

GP W L OT Sv% GAA SO Min

Ryan Miller 45 29 15 1 .911 2.53 6 2542

Eddie Lack 41 18 13 4 .921 2.45 2 2324

These are the regular season stats. Some people argue now that Miller has more wins,

others say Eddie has the better Sv%.

Stats vs. East

Ryan Miller 22 GP 16 Wins (8 vs. PO teams) 6 Losses (4 vs PO teams)

Sv% .924 GAA 2.02

Eddie Lack 12 GP 5 Wins (2 vs PO teams) 4 Losses (1 vs PO team)

Sv% .921 GAA 2.37

Stats vs. West

Ryan Miller 23 GP 13 Wins (4 vs PO teams, 5 vs EDM) 9 Losses (4 vs PO teams)

Sv% .899 GAA 3.02

Eddie Lack 29 GP 13 Wins (9 vs PO teams) 9 Losses (5 vs PO teams)

Sv% .921 GAA 2.48

Note: Eddie vs. Pacific 12 GP 6 Wins 2 Losses 2 OTs Sv% .949 GAA 1.48 !!!

Conclusion

I don't want to say that Eddie is the better goalie but he's definetly the better fit

for our team because we play in the western conference.

Miller puts up elite numbers vs. the east but has proven that he can't handle the

western conference (this year with the Canucks and last year with the Blues).

Also keep in mind that Eddie had no breaks at the end of the season similar

to last year while Miller got the starts he wanted and some rest if needed.

If Lack is in a starting/tandem role next year he will put up a .930 Sv%. I just hope

it's on the Canucks because I don't trust a Miller/Markstrom combo... and to move

Lack for a 2nd round pick is just not worth it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we trade Miller now, in 2 years we will have another goaltending situation where we are forced to either trade another goalie, or lose one for nothing to free agency.

Trading Lack, or Markstrom makes way for one to stay as backup until Miller's contract expires and then take over as the teams number 1 goalie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if Miller plays the way he did last season, the Canucks will lose a lot of fans. That has nothing to do with Lack.

A lot of it banks on Miller playing to expectations on par with the chunk of cap space he takes up. That means stealing games like other goalies in his price range do. There were not many games last season where Miller was better than the opposing goalie. Blame it on injury, new team, new baby, IDK and I don't care, he just needs to quite a bit better.

It's pointless to argue who's better Miller or Lack. It should be Miller, no question. It's like arguing who's better Lundqvist or Talbot. But obviously the Miller we saw last season is nowhere near as dominant.

I'm glad Benning has faith in Miller. I'm not sure I do.

You pretty much laid out the situation. If Benning thinks the real deal is Markstrom then Lack gets

dealt. My fear has always been that with a better d-core Lack would be lights out. Miller is a

depreciating asset. Lack is still rising.

Since I do not think the Canucks will be serious competitors for a few years it comes down to what

Benning can get for a trade comeback. To an extent I think all 3 tenders are tradable. It is all about

what comes back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just like last season its important to note that it wouldn't be Miller/Lack vs Lack/Markstrom, but rather Miller/Lack vs Lack/Markstrom plus 4.8 mil player:

Last year here were some free agents that signed for under that 4.8 mil Miller would have freed up.

Dan Boyle

Ehrhoff

Hemsky

Legwand

Perreault

Ribeiro

Richards

Some guys were 5 mil we could have likely signed:

Cammalleri

Moulson

For everyone claiming that either Miller or Lack played against easier/harder competition there is an easier way to control for this. Adj. save percentage that weights higher quality shots more than low quality shots based on distance to the net. No need to truncate against certain teams or divisions. If the team in front of the goalie plays good or bad this should mitigate the difference.

This year:

Lack 93.21% (45 games)

Miller 92.40% (48 games)

Last year:

Lack 92.84% (41 games)

Miller 92.70% (65 games)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Higgins + Lack for grigs and buffs 2nd is more than fair. Lack is more proven than grigs and the 2nd and Higgins balance the difference b/c higgy is prob worth a 3rd. This would be fantastic b/c we could potential have our #1 C that we've been coveting. Of course it comes with some risk but the reward would be worth it. If higgy is gone it frees up some cap space and a roster spot(Baertschi). Buff gets lack a young, solid starting G, and higgy to mentor the kids. Higgins is from NY also so maybe he'd waive. Works out for both teams.

Buffalo doesn't want or need Lack or Higgins...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...