"We could've moved Ryan Miller. There were teams calling on Ryan Miller." - Jim Benning

[elvis15]

I'm not disagreeing that's apparently what they've set their sights on, and I've never said Lack was some special rarity. What I have been saying (over and over again) is that not only is Lack comparable to Miller on ice but he also is well liked and could have a longer future here than two more seasons at a cheaper rate than Miller even after a new deal. He's good enough for this team as is, and the only argument for Miller is the experience and mentoring aspect. Even then mentoring is only so useful when a goalie coach should be more than effective enough so long as a young goalie can be sheltered somewhat in their starts.

Sure, there are lots of free agent signings, but there are lots that don't work out. That's my point as well, that you don't just get rid of a goalie that has shown he can play when they aren't so easy to come by. Markstrom is no guarantee to get there either, and banking on Miller to be good enough and last long enough to bring Marky in is a gamble when this team is already at a low point.

[alfstonker]

You're right there is no argument that Lack is nowhere near Miller in capability. There is however an argument that Lack is very much close to Miller in capability. That was shown when he took over from Miller during his injury and he put up similar numbers.

Do you want to try and say only Miller can handle a majority workload? Probable in a higher percentage than Lack, but by no means significantly more to the point that Lack can't be a starter. Maybe it's a 65/35 split that's better for Lack where Miller could maybe do 75/25, but then again with Miller's age perhaps he can't handle that much workload for extended periods as well.

But then we should also look at what we expect this team to be. We certainly want the team to be positive and have a winning atmosphere, but how much of that can we reasonably expect? What is keep them in the running? For a Stanley Cup? Or just for a one and done playoff spot? Perhaps you're worried we'll be in the running for a 1st overall pick?

He doesn't have to be Schneider to be able to start a reasonable percentage of games. Markstrom will need starts sometime, and if he's not ready to back up a starter this year then we'll be in trouble anyway. Imagine if Miller gets injured again, is that more or less plausible than Lack not being able to carry the team?

Easy, eh? Then why didn't Eriksson become that player? Why doesn't every team just go out and find that player before us?

And considering the cost of players like Lehner, Talbot and even Jones - Lack's peers - I'd hardly say a replacement can be had for nothing.

Elvis I plussed you for a decent rebuttal but I suspect if Lack had been going to be the player you suspect, then he would already have been that player 3 years ago.

Let's face it, we stood to lose Markstrom if we had kept Lack OR we stood to sacrifice the whole season and direction if we had traded Miller and the Lack/Markstrom tandem had let us down.

I notice you have ignored that if we are to believe what Benning said, more teams wanted Miller for a No1 than wanted Eddie for a back up.

I also strongly disagree with DeNiro that Miller is over the hill. I think he is in fact more likely to be even better for us this coming season now that he has settled in. Don't forget it was Miller who played us into a playoff spot in the first place, despite having all the D injuries in front of him. All Eddie did was keep us there which is what a good back up does.

I think that many of the Vancouver fans have been downright classless in their treatment of Miller.

Many made it obvious from the start they didn't like him or want him in the team, without even giving him a chance. Why is it we have so many jerks in this fanbase, most people know goalies thrive on appreciation and support. (which probably makes Miller's figures more remarkable) yet many went out of their way to show him neither.

[alfstonker]

I'm not disagreeing that's apparently what they've set their sights on, and I've never said Lack was some special rarity. What I have been saying (over and over again) is that not only is Lack comparable to Miller on ice but he also is well liked and could have a longer future here than two more seasons at a cheaper rate than Miller even after a new deal. He's good enough for this team as is, and the only argument for Miller is the experience and mentoring aspect. Even then mentoring is only so useful when a goalie coach should be more than effective enough so long as a young goalie can be sheltered somewhat in their starts.

Sure, there are lots of free agent signings, but there are lots that don't work out. That's my point as well, that you don't just get rid of a goalie that has shown he can play when they aren't so easy to come by. Markstrom is no guarantee to get there either, and banking on Miller to be good enough and last long enough to bring Marky in is a gamble when this team is already at a low point.

I agree, and for what it is worth I suspect he won't but this is more about fulfilling a plan. That plan is NOT for us to fall back as many on here seem so sure about but to exceed last year and Miller was integral to that plan, certainly as far as Management was concerned.

I would actually have been happier to trade Markstrom (despite his Utica form) because personally I doubt his NHL temperament but due to the contract situation that would have been more difficult if not impossible. I hope I'm wrong.

By the way, again I dispute Lack being comparable to Miller. There is not enough data to make that argument. Apparently he has gone to Canes to be a back up.

[Caknuckle Puck]

Ryan Miller is a veteran goalie, I'm glad he will stay to mentor Markstrom and teach him the ways of the NHL the future is bright

[Roadrunner12]

Guys we got bigger issues, our logo is a whale.

[Gurn]

If the Canucks saw Eddie as a back up goalie why were they worried about trading him in the division?

Botch says.......... oh wait , I need to have a coffee, I almost used Botch as a reference. Out of here till I've perked up.

[Ghostsof1915]

Guys we got bigger issues, our logo is a whale.

Yeah, like that effects drafting, trades, and players performance.

We also used to have a downhill skate as our logo. Real good psychological motivator.

[Jack Fig]

Guys we got bigger issues, our logo is a whale.

A constipated whale.

[Cupless44]

I think some people aren't realizing how easy it is to get a player of Lack's caliber.

Yes we all loved his personality, but what he brought on the ice can be replaced. There's more talented goalies now than ever that can be had for nothing.

All we need to do is scout the European leagues for another goalie and we can develop our next Lack.

This really is the truth.

Lack was an average NHL goalie almost 28 years old. Cant help but think if he wasn't such a quirky, likeable guy and twitter star if there would be far less uproar.

[oldnews]

I find Botchford entertaining but he's going overboard on this move.

I agree with the bolded part. That's the cheap m.o. of the Province.

They could give any publication a run for their money where volume and consistency of stupid things published are concerned.

Gallagher and Botchford are prolific dimwits.

[alt kilgore]

If we could just trade Jacobs personality for Eddie's we'd be set.

[Kran]

A constipated whale.

Still? Even after how hard we $&!# the bed in 2011? Hehe :D

[theminister]

I believe that we had negotiations of interest for a higher pick than 66th for Lack but the decision was to not move him in the West.

I support that decision as the board at the time had many good players left.

If Edm did, in fact, offer the 57th straight up then I don't see there being a major difference in position. I believe this is why a 7th was included, to make up albeit a small bit of ground in value. I do believe JB when he says they would have taken Brisebois at that spot.

[Boudrias]

Saw this at NHL.com. Seriously depressing and even more concerning. They're definitely doubling down on the hope that Markstrom will eventually become the goalie people have been saying since he was drafted he could be. Being that he's already more expensive than Lack but hasn't shown he can perform at the same level in the NHL as Lack, though, that's a tough sell for me.

If we could have moved Miller, it made way more sense to go with Lack and Markstrom and let them battle it out, especially since Benning and Linden seem to be content with just rebuilding for the future rather than trying to be competitive now. (We seem to be betting way too much on finding incoming players to take spots...)

Really not happy with this decision.

Saw this at NHL.com. Seriously depressing and even more concerning. They're definitely doubling down on the hope that Markstrom will eventually become the goalie people have been saying since he was drafted he could be. Being that he's already more expensive than Lack but hasn't shown he can perform at the same level in the NHL as Lack, though, that's a tough sell for me.

If we could have moved Miller, it made way more sense to go with Lack and Markstrom and let them battle it out, especially since Benning and Linden seem to be content with just rebuilding for the future rather than trying to be competitive now. (We seem to be betting way too much on finding incoming players to take spots...)

Really not happy with this decision.

One can disagree with Benning's decision to stick with an experienced Miller. I wanted Miller traded last spring but then he went down with injury. Benning argues that experience in goal can keep a young

team in games and there by build confidence. If his intent is to bring more youth into the lineup moving Lack might turn out well.

As much as I wanted Lack to stay what really bothers me about the deal were rumors that Benning could have got more if he dealt in the Western Conference. If true that hurts. It is a indicator that Benning

felt Lack was better than suggested.

It is summer and second guessing Canuck management is the only game in town. With the Lions pulling one out we can transfer attention there. I still like the TL/JB combo and will trust their judgment.

[elvis15]

Here's a different take I don't know that I've seen yet. I think we can mostly agree the Canucks recognize they'll lose season ticket holders (or sales of tickets in general) if they don't aim for the playoffs at least. But, being as we're on the bubble as is, how does keeping Miller over a fan favourite in Lack (who's cheaper and younger and developed by the Canucks) and getting what's regarded as a less than optimal return affect fan's perception of the team and willingness to spend money?

I believe that we had negotiations of interest for a higher pick than 66th for Lack but the decision was to not move him in the West.

I support that decision as the board at the time had many good players left.

If Edm did, in fact, offer the 57th straight up then I don't see there being a major difference in position. I believe this is why a 7th was included, to make up albeit a small bit of ground in value. I do believe JB when he says they would have taken Brisebois at that spot.

I agree with that in a pick 9 spots higher wasn't a huge selling point (much the same as Edmonton's 7th overall and MPS wasn't a huge selling point when moving Schneider). If we had an option of a little higher pick, particularly for someone like Dallas (who had the 49th overall) we don't see quite as often, then I'd have to consider that more seriously than what we got.

...
It is summer and second guessing Canuck management is the only game in town. With the Lions pulling one out we can transfer attention there. I still like the TL/JB combo and will trust their judgment.

The Whitecaps (and Canadians) are already an alternative and haven't distracted people from Canucks Talk yet. The Lions fan base isn't so rabid and overwhelming they'll have much impact.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

If we could just trade Jacobs personality for Eddie's we'd be set.

Jacob is even funnier. We just haven't gave him the chance to show it yet

[elvis15]

I agree, and for what it is worth I suspect he won't but this is more about fulfilling a plan. That plan is NOT for us to fall back as many on here seem so sure about but to exceed last year and Miller was integral to that plan, certainly as far as Management was concerned.

I would actually have been happier to trade Markstrom (despite his Utica form) because personally I doubt his NHL temperament but due to the contract situation that would have been more difficult if not impossible. I hope I'm wrong.

By the way, again I dispute Lack being comparable to Miller. There is not enough data to make that argument. Apparently he has gone to Canes to be a back up.

Yeah, but considering what we have going into next season compared to the moves other teams made, do you really think that's plausible?

It may be smaller sample sizes in the Lack/Miller comparison, but teams overpaid for other goalies who haven't done anything significantly more. I think we know what we have in Lack as well, and if that's not enough for us during a retool where we aren't really expected to compete, then there's nothing I can do about that anyway.

And I'd be pretty sure Lack would start as a backup behind Ward and his $6.3M cap hit, but then we saw how that worked out with Luongo as well. He'll be given a chance to play, and there's opportunity for him to steal the starting role, but they can't just gift it to him while Ward's still in town.

Next season though, when Ward's contract has expired, that's a different story. Who will challenge Lack, Altshuller or MacIntyre? Nedeljkovic isn't ready yet. Do they make another move/re-sign Ward, or do they think Lack could handle the role?

EDIT: for the record, I already think Lack is basically the player we should expect, and I think Miller is not who he once was. It's based on that (and of course their performance last season) I think they're comparable.

...

Let's face it, we stood to lose Markstrom if we had kept Lack OR we stood to sacrifice the whole season and direction if we had traded Miller and the Lack/Markstrom tandem had let us down.

I notice you have ignored that if we are to believe what Benning said, more teams wanted Miller for a No1 than wanted Eddie for a back up.

I also strongly disagree with DeNiro that Miller is over the hill. I think he is in fact more likely to be even better for us this coming season now that he has settled in. Don't forget it was Miller who played us into a playoff spot in the first place, despite having all the D injuries in front of him. All Eddie did was keep us there which is what a good back up does.

...

Why would we lose Markstrom? Because he'd throw a temper tantrum if he isn't made the starter? If he's not ready to take over from Lack then he doesn't. If he is then we move Lack (or keep him to share the role/play as backup since he loves it here) and be happy Marky turned out so great. There's still the option we drop Markstrom if he can't play well at all as an alternative to him just deciding he doesn't want to be behind Lack.

And why is it of any consequence that teams valued Miller for a #1 (we assume) and Lack as a backup? We know Lack's value so if other teams don't then that's their issue - and more reason not to be undersold on him. If teams want Miller as an older goalie at $6M you give him that trade.

Lack kept us in that spot after Miller got injured but a back up only does that in spot duty, not extended periods. That's why Talbot was in demand this year after he stepped up in Lundqvist's absence. Lack did the same (one less save in the same amount of games as Talbot, but that includes Lack playing in the higher pressure of playoffs) so if he has any support from Markstrom at all then we can help spread the load for him. If Marky can't do that, then how would Miller hold up to playing 19 straight games down the stretch? 25 like Lack did this year? Most of the season?

I'm a fan of Miller as well, and agree he was the best goalie in 2010. I just don't think he (and his $6M cap hit) are what this team needs right now.

[RUPERTKBD]

I find it interesting that so many here are calling Miller the better goaltender and saying that Lack is nothing but a backup, as if those two statements are somehow proven facts.

The only factual comparison between Eddie and Miller is statistics and outside of wins (a team stat) Eddie's were better...

The idea that "the whole league sees Lack as a backup" is garbage as well. His numbers are also better than Ward's.

[Barry_Wilkins]

I find it interesting that so many here are calling Miller the better goaltender and saying that Lack is nothing but a backup, as if those two statements are somehow proven facts.

The only factual comparison between Eddie and Miller is statistics and outside of wins (a team stat) Eddie's were better...

The idea that "the whole league sees Lack as a backup" is garbage as well. His numbers are also better than Ward's.

Agreed.

The pro-Miller narrative is all about intangibles (mentorship, experience, proven ability, long-term transitioning) and nothing about results.

Take the only thing, the only stat, worth comparing -- save % -- and the conclusion is obvious. Lack is the better goaltender now. And considering their respective ages and Miller's past performance lately (not just with Van), it's not a stretch to think that won't be the case in the future, too.

[Winter Soldier]

I find it interesting that so many here are calling Miller the better goaltender and saying that Lack is nothing but a backup, as if those two statements are somehow proven facts.

The only factual comparison between Eddie and Miller is statistics and outside of wins (a team stat) Eddie's were better...

The idea that "the whole league sees Lack as a backup" is garbage as well. His numbers are also better than Ward's.

Sample size analysis, champ.