apollo Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Don't know who I am more worried about, Miller or Markstrom. Both have pretty big question marks next to their names. One is 35 coming off back to back sub par seasons and a knee injury. The other has proven nothing at the NHL level. The first time in a long time I've been worried about our goalies. The top 5 things that worry be about Miller are 1. Winning too much 2. Playing amazing 3. Being a leader 4. Way too Clutch 5. oh and absolutely not a damn thing. He's a great goalie and had he not been hurt it would have been us playing Anaheim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 I expect another solid season from Miller. Hopefully Markstrom is good enough to go this year that he can learn as much as he can from the veteran goalie. You are out to lunch; Lack was traded at the draft, not during or before last years playoffs. Yeah you're right. 1st class goalie playing in front on unproven, much younger, backups, and we got him for nothing. Read: no assets spent on acquiring him. By the time he moves on if Marky isn't ready there will be another "terrible" signing that puts a goalie between the pipes before Demko shows up. Umnnnn....the question was "Did management really have that little confidence in Lack?" Yes! Hence why they traded Lack - in the off season in case you didn't understand. Did you even have lunch today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Lack allowing 3 goals on 7 shots in Game 4 ring a bell? That game led to the Canucks being down 3-1... of course there was some panicking by management. Miller comes into game 4 and shuts the door, and does well in the next. If the team didn't crap the bed in game 6, trying to coast after chasing Hiller, the series could have ended differently, and people would be singing Miller's praises for coming in at less than 100% and saving the day Lack was cool to have around, but he did not have a calming effect on me. Too often he looked awkwardly out of position. He's young, and could well grow out of it, but he is not yet ready to lead a team, IMO. I wish him the best. I have no issue near-term with management keeping Miller, as long as Markstrom wakes up and starts playing NHL-caliber hockey. I just hope they have a plan for when Miller's contract is up. Markstrom would have to make huge strides to be #1 after the next 2 seasonsIf Miller wasn't healthy, that means you go with Lack. If he was healthy, then why are hearing he wasn't and it took 5 months to get healthy? Did he go in and make his injury worse? Well let's hope he's truly recovered now then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sedin Brothers Posted September 16, 2015 Author Share Posted September 16, 2015 If Miller wasn't healthy, that means you go with Lack. If he was healthy, then why are hearing he wasn't and it took 5 months to get healthy? Did he go in and make his injury worse? Well let's hope he's truly recovered now then. Read the article and it answers your question right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Why the F did he play in the playoffs? Did management really have that little confidence in Lack? We were losing the series with shoddy defense, an injured Burrows and only a few remaining guys going all in to win (Sedins, Horvat, Hansen and Edler). It was very much a "Hail Mary' move IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeslerPlaysLikeACanadian Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Why the F did he play in the playoffs? Did management really have that little confidence in Lack? You answered your own question. You think Lack was good? Well, the coach didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 You answered your own question. You think Lack was good? Well, the coach didn't. IMO Lack was overcompensating for the gong show taking place in front of him most of the time. We saw Lu do the same thing many times. Putting Miller in had far more to do with how nearly the entire team was playing than how Lack was IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 Read the article and it answers your question right there.We shouldn't have started Miller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeslerPlaysLikeACanadian Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 The top 5 things that worry be about Miller are 1. Winning too much 2. Playing amazing 3. Being a leader 4. Way too Clutch 5. oh and absolutely not a damn thing. He's a great goalie and had he not been hurt it would have been us playing Anaheim. You forgot mentoring and keeping the room chill. If this team can figure out how to stop giving up a goal in the first 5 minutes of every game, stop letting every 3-2 game become a 6-2 game, and stop failing to play when facing a bottom-feeder, Miller should be just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 If Miller wasn't healthy, that means you go with Lack. If he was healthy, then why are hearing he wasn't and it took 5 months to get healthy? Did he go in and make his injury worse? Well let's hope he's truly recovered now then. Players play hurt, especially in the playoffs. Miller was better in the playoffs than Salo was after taking a shot to the crotch, but Salo is revered for being a warrior. To your point, I wouldn't have minded if Miller sat, and helped ensure he was healed. It was a risky move (how much... ask his doctor), but Lack was struggling in Game 4, and Miller was the backup and did his job when called. And did it well enough to warrant a start. Sure, he didn't look 100%, but he and management felt he was good enough to suit up. I don't think anyone claimed Miller was fully recovered, and it was clear watching him in those playoff games that his knee was not giving him the full support he was used to. By your logic, would you have sat Linden in game 7 in '94? Players answer the bell if at all possible in the playoffs, even when they are not 100%. I'm sure all Canuck fans hope he is better. Knee injuries can be nasty, and he may never be truly 100%, but it sounds like is as ready as he will get to try to continue his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeslerPlaysLikeACanadian Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 We were losing the series with shoddy defense, an injured Burrows and only a few remaining guys going all in to win (Sedins, Horvat, Hansen and Edler). It was very much a "Hail Mary' move IMO. You're totally right. The fact that Lack is an average goalie on his best day didn't help - and it wasn't even close to his best day. It says an awful lot that they threw an injured Miller in there. No disagreement on how poor and disorganized the team was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Pulling Lack in game 4 after letting in 3 goals early was the right thing to do and Miller filled in well, closing the door for the rest of the game. Lack had a history of bouncing back with a good effort after a poor effort. I would have started him in game 5. Especially since Miller was sore. I understand why Miller got the start. It was because Miller was the starter, was cleared to play and Lack's hot streak was over. In the eyes of management, Lack was never viewed as starter material. Personally, I think that Lack will make a middle of the road NHL starter. Rated 10th to 20th in the league and command a middling salary (4-5M). Some teams are happy with this sort of a goalie because they may be a budget team or would rather spend the money elsewhere. Benning is the sort of a GM who wants a top 10 or better goalie as his number 1. He thinks that Miller is this goalie and that Markstrom can become this goalie. Incidentally, I don't think that Benning measures success by stats. I think he wants a player to perform when the game is on the line and in close games; to be a difference maker in other words. I think this translates more into wins than any other stat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monteeun Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Markstrom was busy? Answer to 2nd question: Lack was traded Nvm...read the one below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monteeun Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Umnnnn....the question was "Did management really have that little confidence in Lack?" Yes! Hence why they traded Lack - in the off season in case you didn't understand. Did you even have lunch today? I think you misunderstood what that guy meant. It may have been during the season. Or it could've been interpreted differently from you. Oh and I have to say, my lunch was decent...yours? Thought I jump in on the fun. Three cheers for msg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monteeun Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Pulling Lack in game 4 after letting in 3 goals early was the right thing to do and Miller filled in well, closing the door for the rest of the game. Lack had a history of bouncing back with a good effort after a poor effort. I would have started him in game 5. Especially since Miller was sore. I understand why Miller got the start. It was because Miller was the starter, was cleared to play and Lack's hot streak was over. In the eyes of management, Lack was never viewed as starter material. Personally, I think that Lack will make a middle of the road NHL starter. Rated 10th to 20th in the league and command a middling salary (4-5M). Some teams are happy with this sort of a goalie because they may be a budget team or would rather spend the money elsewhere. Benning is the sort of a GM who wants a top 10 or better goalie as his number 1. He thinks that Miller is this goalie and that Markstrom can become this goalie. Incidentally, I don't think that Benning measures success by stats. I think he wants a player to perform when the game is on the line and in close games; to be a difference maker in other words. I think this translates more into wins than any other stat. I wonder if we should be worried once Miller's contract is up. Can Markstrom take the next step? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I think you misunderstood what that guy meant. It may have been during the season. Or it could've been interpreted differently from you. Oh and I have to say, my lunch was decent...yours? Thought I jump in on the fun. Three cheers for msg. I didn't misunderstand anything. I think you misunderstood what I meant. The only people out to lunch are those that thought Eddie Lack was as good as Schneider. The GM's in the rest of the league agree with me - else why didn't Eddie fetch us a 1st round draft pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I wonder if we should be worried once Miller's contract is up. Can Markstrom take the next step? If he can't, at least we'll have the cap space to get a decent defense man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sedintwinpowersactivate Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 The Lack bashing is interesting as he had better stats all season. We would not have even made the playoffs without him. Getting ventilated in a game happens to all goalies. Lui and Miller are not immune! Some of you have short memories. During the season when Lack had a poor game he always took responsibility and rebounded the following game with a gem (shutout or 1 goal allowed). I thought he had earned the right to start game 5... and nobody can predict the result, but I as a fan I had way more confidence in Eddie than Miller. Even if Miller was healthy I liked Eddie's game better. But what do I know... I'm just a fan. The coaches saw it differently. I will be very interested to see how this season plays out. I'm glad Eddie will get a chance to be a number one goalie even if it is elsewhere. I have less confidence in the current tandem. Interesting season ahead! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killagram Posted September 17, 2015 Share Posted September 17, 2015 sometimes you just need a change in net to spark the boys light a fire under they're asses you know lack is good but miller is proven change of tactics for the other team like lou in boston sometimes a team just has your number Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sedin Brothers Posted September 17, 2015 Author Share Posted September 17, 2015 The Lack bashing is interesting as he had better stats all season. We would not have even made the playoffs without him. Getting ventilated in a game happens to all goalies. Lui and Miller are not immune! Some of you have short memories. During the season when Lack had a poor game he always took responsibility and rebounded the following game with a gem (shutout or 1 goal allowed). I thought he had earned the right to start game 5... and nobody can predict the result, but I as a fan I had way more confidence in Eddie than Miller. Even if Miller was healthy I liked Eddie's game better. But what do I know... I'm just a fan. The coaches saw it differently. I will be very interested to see how this season plays out. I'm glad Eddie will get a chance to be a number one goalie even if it is elsewhere. I have less confidence in the current tandem. Interesting season ahead! I give you credit for having faith in Lack, because I had absolutely none. He was nervous from the first interview, and you could see it during ice with his body language. Enough with this "stats were better". Miller was a starter, played way more games, and unlike Lack, was not able to finish games he played poorly in. Miller's stats were reduced to the game against the Oilers and his injury game. That brought his save % from .918 to .913 and .911 respectively. Miller makes BIG saves. I have yet to see consistency from Lack. People like to trash Miller "he played weak teams" - well at least he beat them. I distinctly remember Lack losing two straight to Arizona and Toronto (maybe) - he was very hot and cold. Not to mention the team played better (unquestionably) with the leader in net. I get people love Lack.. I sincerely just don't understand the logic. Did so many people really prefer Lack? Off of skill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.