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

[RUPERTKBD]

Rupert:

I'm aware of that and I'm not talking down to you. I've been following along. The thing is is whether or not you agree or disagree with the tandem moving forward, this is it. Personally I understand the philosophy behind it, and in Boston at least, it worked very well. An up and coming Rask played behind an old vet like Thomas. It may not be a fool-proof strategy but at the very least, at least we HAVE a strategy. I could live with a few years of no goaltending controversies for awhile.

Agreed. It's a strategy that has worked in the past. However, I'm of the opinion that we traded away the Tuuka Rask in your example and kept Tim Thomas.

While I understand that Eddie is certainly not as far along in his development as Rask was, the fact is, they are close to the same age and there are similarities between the two. Like Rask, Lack was able to outplay his so-called mentor (Luongo) and for a time at least, supplant him as the starter. He did so with Miller as well.

All I've been saying all along is that there is another school of thought in this situation. One that doesn't follow the company line that the team absolutely needs a veteran goaltender to make sure that a "culture of losing" isn't engendered, thereby ruining the development of not only the young goaltenders, but the rest of the young players as well. I think by the time players are NHL ready, they are made of much stronger stuff and are able to handle not being on a playoff roster year in and year out.

I also am unconvinced that the Canucks will do better in the standings with Miller as the de facto starter, than they would have with Lack as the #1. The numbers from last year definitely support that theory.

In any event, the decision has been made, for better or worse. Time will tell which one it is and I honestly hope that I'm wrong in thinking it's the latter.

[GreyHatnDart]

Agreed. It's a strategy that has worked in the past. However, I'm of the opinion that we traded away the Tuuka Rask in your example and kept Tim Thomas.

While I understand that Eddie is certainly not as far along in his development as Rask was, the fact is, they are close to the same age and there are similarities between the two. Like Rask, Lack was able to outplay his so-called mentor (Luongo) and for a time at least, supplant him as the starter. He did so with Miller as well.

All I've been saying all along is that there is another school of thought in this situation. One that doesn't follow the company line that the team absolutely needs a veteran goaltender to make sure that a "culture of losing" isn't engendered, thereby ruining the development of not only the young goaltenders, but the rest of the young players as well. I think by the time players are NHL ready, they are made of much stronger stuff and are able to handle not being on a playoff roster year in and year out.

I also am unconvinced that the Canucks will do better in the standings with Miller as the de facto starter, than they would have with Lack as the #1. The numbers from last year definitely support that theory.

In any event, the decision has been made, for better or worse. Time will tell which one it is and I honestly hope that I'm wrong in thinking it's the latter.

I respectively disagree that Lack is on the same page as Rask is. Perhaps he'll prove me wrong in Carolina. Even if he does however, I actually don't care much.

It's not a matter of toeing the company line, at least for me. I'm not a blind sheep lost in the "stay competitive, get younger" BS. I'm a Canucks fan, pure a simple. I want us to win a cup. I don't see that happening this year. What I DO see happening this year is a team that'll work hard, stand up for each other, and pull some games out that they have no business of winning. I'm okay with that. The changing of the guard is finally upon us and for that I am extremely grateful.

[RUPERTKBD]

I respectively disagree that Lack is on the same page as Rask is. Perhaps he'll prove me wrong in Carolina. Even if he does however, I actually don't care much.

It's not a matter of toeing the company line, at least for me. I'm not a blind sheep lost in the "stay competitive, get younger" BS. I'm a Canucks fan, pure a simple. I want us to win a cup. I don't see that happening this year. What I DO see happening this year is a team that'll work hard, stand up for each other, and pull some games out that they have no business of winning. I'm okay with that. The changing of the guard is finally upon us and for that I am extremely grateful.

I don't think I said that Lack is on the same page as Rask. In fact, I admitted that he's behind Tuuka in his development to this point. However, I believe they're similar in the respect that both are guys who took over from (or should have in Miller's case and will in Ward's case) a veteran guy.

As to your last paragraph, I believe that you and I are on the same page. I just think that we could be a little further along in the changing of the guard and we'd have a better goaltending future if that were the case

[VanGnome]

I don't think I said that Lack is on the same page as Rask. In fact, I admitted that he's behind Tuuka in his development to this point. However, I believe they're similar in the respect that both are guys who took over from (or should have in Miller's case and will in Ward's case) a veteran guy.

As to your last paragraph, I believe that you and I are on the same page. I just think that we could be a little further along in the changing of the guard and we'd have a better goaltending future if that were the case

I think the fact that you even mentioned Rask and Lack in the same breath is all there is to say about that. Now, if you're talking about Markstrom and Rask, then you might have some basis for comparison. The key distinction between the two is that Markstrom's development was severely hampered by Florida's need to get the next "Luongo" in place; ironic that he was indeed traded for Luongo.

Point is, Markstrom is now back on track developmentally, and is where Rask was after two years in the AHL. Markstrom is also 3 years younger than Rask, so having Miller as the cagey veteran to bring him along slowly at the NHL level is just about as ideal. I fail to see how Lack would have been able to do that when Lack himself was only just beginning to establish himself in the NHL and did not have the benefit of years and years of experience.

Imo, the right move was made to move Lack off, if only because of their respective contract situations after this coming season (Markstrom RFA, Lack UFA).

[chrisbanks]

My prediction is that lack splits games with ward and then Carolina moves on from ward and signs eddie at a nice 3 year 12m deal...miller gets hurt bad , markstrom continues his act of playing Dodgeball in the NHL. Benning freaks, signs ward for way too much next off season. cdcers applaud him for signing a "proven vet" way passed his glory days who hasn't been anything more than average for half a decade, but he will be a great "mentor" (sound familiar?) markstrom demands a trade, becomes a star for the islanders (benning gets a 5th for him). We go into next season with miller on the LTIR, Ward as our #1 and demko as #2 until ward goes down with yet another injury and demko steals the #1 job. Meanwhile lack, Schneider, markstrom and luongo battle it out for the vezina. . . The end

[VanGnome]

Meanwhile lack, Schneider, markstrom and luongo battle it out for the vezina. . . The end

[elvis15]

Rupert:

I'm aware of that and I'm not talking down to you. I've been following along. The thing is is whether or not you agree or disagree with the tandem moving forward, this is it. Personally I understand the philosophy behind it, and in Boston at least, it worked very well. An up and coming Rask played behind an old vet like Thomas. It may not be a fool-proof strategy but at the very least, at least we HAVE a strategy. I could live with a few years of no goaltending controversies for awhile.

Yeah, but in that case Rask likely could have been a starting goalie for them (and probably should have been) except that Thomas had the best season of his career. Miller is no Thomas at this point in his career and we're no 2011 Bruins. Lack is no Rask either, but he and Markstrom would probably be just fine for where this team is now and then we wouldn't even be talking about cap issues with Baertschi still to sign.

[mpt]

Yeah, but in that case Rask likely could have been a starting goalie for them (and probably should have been) except that Thomas had the best season of his career. Miller is no Thomas at this point in his career and we're no 2011 Bruins. Lack is no Rask either, but he and Markstrom would probably be just fine for where this team is now and then we wouldn't even be talking about cap issues with Baertschi still to sign.

Except that I have much more confidence in Miller being able to mentor Markstrom into the league than Lack, who is still trying to figure out his game too.

[SaintPatrick33]

Bottom line is that Miller wins games. He can also play the puck which helps out our d-men, something that Lack didnt really adjust to and almost seemed tentative (remember that Buffalo game with 2 min left?)

The guys also know that Miller is a vet, and provides a calming experience which is important with a lot of youngsters. Just ask the oilers how not having a veteran guy affects their mindset.

[nuck luck]

 

Nuck Luck’s Negotiation Tactics 101

Benning: “Hey Edmonton you want Lack?”

Chiarelli: “Sure, I’ll give you my third”

Benning: Carolina already offered us a 3^rd and 7^th you’ll have to beat that”

Chiarelli: “Our 57^th?”

Benning: “No, we think he’s worth more, we’re thinking the same price flames just paid for Hamilton”

Chiarelli:“Ok you convinced me, here, take McDavid”

I don’t think you understand negotiating. Your whole thesis is that JB needed to sell Lack harder. Well This isn’t an open market. This is 29 team league where all the teams have just as much insight on your players as you do. GM’s don’t need selling, Edmonton’s scouts likely saw Lack play half his games live and the other half recorded on TV. He’s not some player coming in from across the world that no one has never heard of.

There were only a certain amount of teams interested in goalies this year. There were other “better” goalie options on the market this year as well. Canucks wanted a pick in the 2015 draft. Other teams have all summer to figure out their goalie situation. They were in no rush to make a decision. Carolina could have waited until after the draft to give us a better offer.

Francis: “We offer you the 3^rd and 7^th”

Benning: “We want at least a 2^nd this year”

Francis: “Well we are not in a rush, we still have Ward for another year” “If you don’t like it, we can talk later in the summer if he’s still around”

You seem to think that Lack was this sought after Commodity where teams felt that if they didn’t get him they were losing out on the next big thing. They know what Lack is, they’ve all seen him play. Just because I tell you my worn out Ball cap is worth $1,000 doesn’t mean some sucker will fall for it. All teams interested in goalies would have done their homework on Lack. The would already know the value that he’s worth and they would know the market value with the current goalie market.

NYR had said repeatedly that they wanted more than just a first round pick for Talbot. They settled for a late 2^nd and 3^rd.

Would you have been satisfied with a return of the 57^th & 76^th, because that’s essentially what Talbot (the more sought after commodity) got, so it’s going to be less than that, so let’s say, 76^th and the 86^th? Does that make you happier? Are you really going to whine and complain about a 4^th round pick.

Here’s what you don’t know. You might think that Lack had similar value to Talbot, but that doesn’t mean Edmonton thought the same. Just because they’re willing to pay premium for the guy you want the most doesn’t mean they’re willing to pay nearly as much for their second choice.

 

Wow...Only a simpleton would deduce what I've said and come up with a scenario like you presented. In your world I'm sure things are simply "black & white" and very easy to get through...most important decision made in your life is the purchase of a house? That's great and it's clearly what you know. Your example of my theory is the exact same "negotiations" that people would go through purchasing a home...or car.

Home buyer: Hey is the house still available?...no, guess there's no interest in it? I'll offer you xxxx

Home seller: No...we have interested parties already so were just waiting on the best offer. Another buyer just offered us xxxx more than your offer. Can you beat their offer?

Home buyer: How about I give you xxxx than? Good enough?

Home seller: No...were gonna need at least xxxx

Home buyer: Done.

YOU HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT NEGOTIATIONS AT HIGHER LEVELS ARE SIMPLY THAT EASY? THAT'S ALL IT TAKES TO GET DEALS DONE? You sir, have no clue. Not only that, you have comprehension issues that are substandard as well. My child could have understood what I've written in numerous posts, and yet you fail to, by a mile.

My point..

Yes, benning needs to do a MUCH better job marketing his players. This is done in all levels when the options are available. 29 teams are good enough to have an open market in a sports league and I guarantee you that not every team keeps track of others as much as you believe. I've heard numerous GM's talk about teams and other players in their own division/conference while admitting that they were not too familiar with some teams and players in other divisions/conferences.

They may know the players and their names...even have some info from stats that they keep or search up, but you are naive if you think that they follow each and every player in the league that close and know each and every intricate detail that would be useful in trades. For example, MG and company and some Canuck fans may have been aware that Cody was being sheltered and given favorable minutes and zone starts...the other GM's in the league had no idea. That's why there was a little uproar when we ended up trading Cody...other GM's were upset that they didn't have an opportunity to make a bid. If they all knew Cody was being sheltered than why were they upset? Why the hell would Buffalo have made the trade?

Because MG had a plan and he executed to get the best deal possible for a player that he felt was not going to fit in this organization. DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THIS? Oh....this may require a little thought from your side.

DO YOU SEE HOW MG PROMOTED HIS PRODUCT TO ENHANCE HIS TRADE VALUE?

And YES, Lack was a sought after commodity....actually a lot of goalies were this year. If you have multiple buyers than the product is sought after. And the difference between the goalies that were available....two were considered higher-end, and Lack was one of the two high-end goalies available. Where you have problems is that you think that the other NHL teams do their "homework" and can find out every single detail that is relevant to a player... BIG NO here as well. They can ask around, they can google, they can watch films....but there's not much else they can do. They might know how many games Lack played and his stats from these games, but they won't know that Lack played the tougher match ups and every other detail that could be relevant. Teams do this all the time....did they know that Cody was getting favorable lines? zone starts? NO....because no team is able to do that much "homework". Do you understand how many extra employees you would need to hire and how much work would be involved to keep serious records on each and every player in the NHL and every detail that is relevant to each player? Not to mention their AHL teams and other prospects... You talk like you know it all and like to toss out childish scenarios without putting any real thought into them. Please.

Think before you write something. It's laughable that you actually believe that every team knows about all the intricate details of each player and any factors that effect their performance. A lot of GM's and their management teams will also get their information from the media...local papers, magazines, websites, blogs, etc.....a good GM will promote their products utilizing all these venues.

You used NYR as an example...saying they wanted a 1st round pick. Well...they did better than us didn't they? Not only that, but do you remember what you were reading in the papers about their goalie? Do you remember things that their GM was saying about their goalie? Everything was about their goalie and their goalie being the best options, how their goalie came in and proved himself, etc. Yes...promoting their product!

What did you hear from benning when he was asked about Lack? "Yes, Miller will be back. We don't feel comfortable going through a season with two young goalies that don't have the experience." Man...jimmy-boy sure can sell it! Basically, both Lack and Markstrom are too young and inexperienced now to handle the role of a #1....WTF? this statement was just before trade talks were taking place FFS. Look what the lessor goalies got....what did we get?

What you don't understand is...YES, I'm pissed we traded Lack. I'm also super FU@KING PISSED with the return we got for Lack. The final nail is that I am awestruck that we actually had offers for Miller and we didn't take it!!!!! WTF!??? We could make our team younger (something benning likes to say, but Prust and Miller are proving otherwise)...we could save a 3-6 million on our cap depending on the type of deal we made, we could show our younger prospects that we cherish them and want them all to succeed with this team (not tell them that they're trade bait so don't bother getting attached to this organization), we could fill the seats and keep the fans happy....you know the customers, etc.

Edit: I also people talking about the return...whatever the offer was, at worst it would have been what we got for Lack. Absolutely worth trading Miller.

What this GM is showing us, even when he makes a colossal mistake, he is not willing to own up to it and he will not do anything to rectify it. He is too stubborn and wants to prove himself right. That's why he's handing out these unimaginable contracts to Sbisa, Dorsett and Prust (brace yourselves for his)....and why he told us he had an option to trade Miller.

He thinks that we, obviously some members do, believe that if our fearless GM is willing to offer these players these contracts than they must be better than we all think. If this GM didn't take an offer for Miller than he must be one of the best goalies in the league and much better than Lack. And if this wasn't his intention and it was just his own stupidity.... either way, were all up sh!t creek.

[Honky Cat]

I dont think that JB is all that concerned about what he says about his 'potential 'trade chips,you can only manufacture so much hype about a player....Acting immediately,JB obviously wanted to unload Lack,Kassian and Bieksa..(a really big contradiction from previous GM Gillis who held out for ages on the Luongo deal),..

Maybe its just me,..but Im not all that uptight about the returns on the the players that Benning extracted from the lineup...When the Cassels and McCanns get in the lineup,it will be a different story.

[nuck luck]

 

The point that some of us have been making is that if Lack was not "sought after", why trade him?

According to JB himself, there was interest in Miller, so why not trade him instead, get an actual return and go with the youth movement in goal as well as everywhere else? It's not like this team has any chance of contending for the Cup with Miller as the goaltender anyway...

If we're going to do this thing, lets do it and skip the "We need mentors for the young players" routine, which IMHO is JB's way of defending a signing that he never should have made in the first place.

 

Exactly! Nicely said... if your not going to get a legitimate offer for Lack than why not trade Miller instead. I'll add something to support your argument cause you seem to have a lot of people opposing you on here.

There's only 8 teams in the league who have a goalie tandem averaging 30 years of age or more....Calgary, Carolina, Edmonton, Florida, Nashville, NYR, Ottawa and Vancouver. Not the elites of the league and I would definitely prefer to be grouped with the others.

http://ingoalmag.com/news/canucks-gm-miller-will-for-sure-be-back/

It looks like this "mentoring" thing is overrated....and like a lot of people on CDC like to say, I think the majority of GM's in the league have a better clue than CDC. benning talks about this mentoring crap because it's a good excuse to support his signing of Miller. Nothing else.

[Baggins]

There's only 8 teams in the league who have a goalie tandem averaging 30 years of age or more....Calgary, Carolina, Edmonton, Florida, Nashville, NYR, Ottawa and Vancouver. Not the elites of the league and I would definitely prefer to be grouped with the others.

http://ingoalmag.com/news/canucks-gm-miller-will-for-sure-be-back/

It looks like this "mentoring" thing is overrated....and like a lot of people on CDC like to say, I think the majority of GM's in the league have a better clue than CDC. benning talks about this mentoring crap because it's a good excuse to support his signing of Miller. Nothing else.

I have to ask: What does the average age of a goalie tandem being over 30 have to do with mentoring? It's experience more than age that qualifies somebody as a mentor. For example, by 27 Patrick Roy had been a starter for 7 years while Tim Thomas didn't make the NHL as starter until he was 31. Who would you rather have as a mentor Roy at 27 or Thomas at 31?

Finally, if the starting goalie is 36 and the backup 22 the average age combined is under 30. So what point is there in using combined average age of 30 to determine whether or not there is mentor?

[nuck luck]

 

I'll give you credit for finally supplying a link. But really all he said was Markstrom or Lack would be traded not that either was "just a backup".

No amount of lauding Lack as a starter is going to convince other GM's it's true. They know what they are trading for. It's not like selling a car and saying the brakes are fine when they actually need replacing. Unlike selling your used car you can't bs your way into a better return.

You've obviously chosen to believe your own fantasy world. The bottom line is if any GM out there in the market for a goalie thought Lack was worth more than what Carolina offered they would have offered it. Didn't happen. What does that mean? Nobody in a decision making position valued Lack as highly as you did.

Seriously, tell them our D sucked? How will that work out should we try to trade any of them? Didn't you just lower the value of them by telling all the other GM's they suck? Don't worry, I understand negotiations. Trying to BS and make excuses gets you nowhere good.

 

Did you not read the link? I have no idea of what other thought could go through your head from what he said?

Here's another question for you....did lack not end up playing like the #1 role in the last two years? He took the helm for long stretches both years...did fine the 1st year, but not having a single day to recoup will effect his game. Last year, he got us to the finals...and played a majority of the tougher competition. There's a sh!tload of stuff benning could have said to tell everyone that he's been playing like a #1...but not a single word from benning. He did nothing to help the narrative. Your having a laugh, and I'm laughing right at you, if you think Lack didn't play as the #1 since Miller's been hurt...benning didn't have to "sell" anything! All he needed to do was point this fact out to the media.

You obviously have no idea about negotiating, promoting, selling or marketing a product... sure you can sell something without putting an effort into it, but if another person puts the effort into a product and build interest, he's gonna get more out of it. I'll break it down for you, try selling a house on your own without using an agent....odds are you won't find much interest from buyers and you won't get top dollar. Use an agent who will market the product and get some sort of buzz going on about your house....possibly start a bidding war with multiple buyers after using all the tools at his disposal. Vancouver's got so many buyers from China now...agents are targeting this market and buyers are paying top dollar. Try getting top dollar on your own without any marketing. What you don't seem to understand that there's a lot a seller can do to increase sales or purchasing price.... My point is that benning doesn't do anything...instead, he says sh!t like this to worsen his position:

"A tandem of Markstrom and Eddie Lack has been quickly ruled out of the question, as Benning stated that he wants to keep at least one goaltender with experience around:

I want to keep an older, experienced goalie and Ryan is that guy. And then were going to decide on either Lack or Markstrom. I dont feel comfortable going into the season with two younger goalies that havent had the experience of being the No. 1 guy, especially in this marketplace. So Ryan will for sure be back and then were going to decide on one of the other two guys.

http://ingoalmag.com/news/canucks-gm-miller-will-for-sure-be-back/

When he says that Lack and Markstrom don't have the experience of being No. 1....he's saying that they are currently considered backup goalies. He doesn't outright say it....but again, you need to learn to read between the lines. Do you think saying something like this helps him get top dollar for his players???

Forget that....you wouldn't understand anyways.

[nuck luck]

dp

[nuck luck]

 

I have to ask: What does the average age of a goalie tandem being over 30 have to do with mentoring? It's experience more than age that qualifies somebody as a mentor. For example, by 27 Patrick Roy had been a starter for 7 years while Tim Thomas didn't make the NHL as starter until he was 31. Who would you rather have as a mentor Roy at 27 or Thomas at 31?

Finally, if the starting goalie is 36 and the backup 22 the average age combined is under 30. So what point is there in using combined average age of 30 to determine whether or not there is mentor?

 

Read the link.....

I'm done with this. You keep asking for links for verification cause you can't comprehend anything and I show you them and you only take a couple words out of it to argue something ridiculous.

Anybody can make ridiculous arguments like your suggesting...take one hypothetical situation and make crap out of it.

This time you should provide evidence to suggest a majority of these teams have one keeper who's 36 and the backup is 22. Or some sort of combination like you suggested....

And another point to argue yours.... experience means squat when it comes to mentoring! Experience DOES NOT qualify someone as a mentor! And Miller doesn't have a history and/or is not known to be a mentor to any keeper.... If anything, he has a reputation of being selfish and throwing his teammates under the bus. So your argument is completely false.

The point is that there's a movement in the NHL to move with a younger tandem of goalies.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

It’s actually comical how clueless you are, but yet you keep rambling on with nonsense.

It really seems hard for you to grasp the concept that the NHL is NOT an open market. Sure there 29 other teams in the league but home many of them are interesting in your asset. How many teams were looking for a 27 year old goalie that has played less than 100 games. Now look and see how many similar goalies there were on the market. The supply out numbers the demand, therefor the value you are going to receive is going to be low. If Lack was the only goalie on the market sure we would have got more, but he wasn’t. and he wasn’t the best option on the market either. If Canucks were willing to wait out and not get any picks in 2015, they likely could have got a better pick in 2016 draft, but we wanted a player in this draft.

Do the math? Teams desperate for a goalie to be on their roster starting in OCT. Edmonton, Buffalo, San Jose…..3 teams. Goalies on the market, Niemi, Jones, Talbot, Lehner, Lack/Markstrom….5 Goalies…. Supply outnumbers demand…….

Buffalo had different needs and a younger goalie to grow with their core makes more sense. And San Jose already has a 27 year old goalie that has identical numbers to Lack, so they wouldn’t be too interest in Lack unless the price was extremely low. That leaves Vancouver negotiating with only Edmonton. Good for Vancouver since oilers saw Lack consistently over the last two years. They likely seem 60+ games of his 82 NHL starts. Problem is there’s still a better goalie on the market, a goalie that Edmonton values more. Lack isn’t the only option, so playing hard ball doesn’t work.

Benning: You interested in Lack?

Chairelli:: Yes, we offer you our 57^th”

Benning: No, we got better offer’s we need you to add more, we’d like your 33rd.

Chairelli: Sorry, we got other options, Talbot is better and can be had for less.

Negotiating over…. If Lack was way better than Talbot then canucks would have had more bargaining power but he isn’t.

Again if the most sought after goalie (because he was the best goalie on the market)only gets a 2^nd and 3^rd . How much more do you believe Lack should have got? Rangers marked the crap out of Talbot, but the return wasn’t substantially more.

Teams interested in a goalie, heading into the draft would have been doing their research on goalies. Would Montreal but that much time into young goalies, not but teams such as Carolina, They knew they needed an option for a goalie since Ward is UFA next year, they knew they needed someone with potential to take over number one. GM’s do have pro scouts that watch other teams play. Carolina likely watched over a quarter of Lacks games this year. If they didn’t end up getting Lack, oh well, they have a year to watch the market and figure other options out. It’s not like Lack is the second coming of Hasek (although in your messed up world you might think so). He’s a 27 year old backup goalie that has proven to be able to fill in as a starter. He’s not a top 5 goalie, he’s not even a top 20 goalie (“some” day he could) and he doesn’t have the sample size to be considered a proven trusted fulltime starter, he’s been in the league for 2 years.

You also keep throwing out how JB should have done a better job at marketing Lack throughout the year, similar to what MG did for Cody. How’s he supposed to do that when his number one goalie is injured? Lack was the only option we had left. Hard to showcase a goalie when your #1 guy is injured. If you’re talking about the start about the start of the year, maybe your forgetting something. Canucks had no intention of trading Lack at the start of the year. Taking a huge risk of losing Markstrom to waivers shows that they were comfortable keeping Lack as a backup. It wasn’t until Markstrom took his game to another level and showed JB how confident he is in playoffs that they decided to keep him. It wasn’t until Lack dropped the ball in games 3 and 4 that JB thought it was best to go with the younger.

The other thing you seem to not understand. Showcasing a young center vs showcasing a goalie are completely different. Every team in the league could use a young potential top 6 center. Not every team in the league is looking for a 27 year old goalie who’s only been a backup.

I’m was a big fan of MG, but he sure didn’t a homerun with Kassian. You don’t think there was any outcry. Maybe you missed the 20 threads full of 100’s of pages where people complained. He may have been targeting a certain type of player but he could have gotten more. You also make it seem that Cody was a terrible player and MG was the only one that knew it. Cody was still putting up numbers, if only it was that simple to inflate a person’s stats. We could have made Ebbet a star. He could have had a bidding over him where a team like buffalo would have had to pay Kassian plus to get him Aren’t you the master negotiator? Aren’t you supposed to know that more teams interested, equals higher bidding, equals higher return. He still could have targets a certain player, he just would have been able to get more. And I’m a huge Kassian fan.

Seriously open your eyes. Maybe if you tried that you’d realizing you’ve been living in a dream world. Don’t even waste your time replying to this if you’re just going ramble on with the same garbage on how you GM’s should negotiate because your clearly out to lunch. It’s not worth my time continuing on a conversation with someone who can’t tell the difference between negotiation in an in closed environment, with educated professionals vs bartering with the kid on the street corner selling lemonade. Good day…

[elvis15]

Except that I have much more confidence in Miller being able to mentor Markstrom into the league than Lack, who is still trying to figure out his game too.

But then I have even more confidence that working full time with Melanson will do more for his game than mentoring under Miller. Miller has a lot of experience to bring in, but Markstrom has seen a lot at the AHL level (plenty of starts, multiple playoffs, etc.) and it's really about finding confidence at the NHL level against NHL quality speed and shots.

I dont think that JB is all that concerned about what he says about his 'potential 'trade chips,you can only manufacture so much hype about a player....Acting immediately,JB obviously wanted to unload Lack,Kassian and Bieksa..(a really big contradiction from previous GM Gillis who held out for ages on the Luongo deal),..

Maybe its just me,..but Im not all that uptight about the returns on the the players that Benning extracted from the lineup...When the Cassels and McCanns get in the lineup,it will be a different story.

People keep saying that about Gillis but he had a rumoured offer with the Leafs but Luongo vetoed it thinking he could still be moved to the Panthers. Of course, the Panthers weren't given any kind of OK from the owners for a Luongo deal until the year it happened, but Gillis' hands were tied.

And when our highly touted prospects don't all turn out and we have holes - particularly in the top end skill department - how will you feel about not maximizing returns?

Maybe we can say Benning gambled and lost (could have moved Matthias at the deadline, probably Kassian too, could have gotten San Jose's 2nd instead of Anaheim's for Bieksa) and he's taking a risk that Miller and/or Markstrom will be enough until Demko's ready. I'd like to see a little more certainty in some of his moves though and even some of the more defendable ones might not hold up.

But hey, he's made good moves obtaining players in their early 20's and has some good draft picks to really help our prospect pool, so that should be enough to offset the loss of elite/top level players from the 2011 team and allows us another run at it...

[Junkyard Dog]

[cuporbust]

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

http://youtu.be/jc10aIXBQnk

Ya cause Jacob looks like a real jerk in this vid hey?