Ryan Miller is "all in."

[spook007]

19 minutes ago, J.R. said:

First choice - take a cap dump goalie another team doesn't want + assets (Niemi).

 

Second choice -  MIller for 1-2 years +/-$4.5m

 

Third choice - Bachman.

 

Fourth choice -  UFA

Second choice... Sedins gone next year, Miller good for experience. Really pleased how he has performed.

[JM_]

5 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

I see where you're coming from. Not opposed to the 1-year. My gut tells me Benning will go with what he knows, sign him for two so he can focus on D and forwards over the next couple years and not worry about the net.

 

Not so worried about Miller retiring early. Don't think that's in his character given his relationship with Benning and his approach to the game. If he's not so motivated, well, all the better for Markstrom who'll get more starts.

just took a peek at the CBA rules, and Miller may want to sign a 1 year deal if it includes performance bonuses - over 35 1 year deals can have those in them. So say his base at 2 or 2.5 and if he has a knockout save % or number of wins maybe up to 4? Or if he's more interested in term then 2 years, 5 mil total? I'd be ok with that. 

[spook007]

57 minutes ago, kloubek said:

You're right - he's a damn expensive backup.  Should he excel and say we have Miller signed for 2 more years, that ended up being a big waste of money.

But what if he doesn't excel?  What if he buckles under the pressure of being a #1?  What if the contract Benning gave him was in retrospect a huge overpayment as some believe it was?  Well then we basically kill any confidence he has and end up with two backups splitting all the starts, and that certainly won't do anything for us in the W column which ownership has been wanting through this "soft rebuild".  By sharing the duties with Miller, that is alleviated.  Finally, as long as the pressure is contained and not overwhelming, I believe goalies tend to play better when they feel pushed.  I believe that Miller still wants to prove he has it, and Markstrom will feel pushed to earn his starts instead of having it handed to him.

As you can tell, I would be happy to see Miller back again.  But let's not kid ourselves - while he was generally very solid he isn't quite the goalie he used to be and the extra one or two years of age probably won't help.  I certainly hope he doesn't expect the same 6m he made in his last contract or he can absolutely walk.  But matching around what Markstrom is going to make in the 3.5-4m range I think is a solid investment against risk.  

Don't understand the worry about money? Sedins retire next season, and we are rebuilding, so we won't be have huge problems managing salaries. Like to give the youngsters a chance to win each game, and it starts with good goal keeping.

[spook007]

4 hours ago, 73 Percent said:

Boi you are about to get a free lesson here.

 

 

Miller went down on Feb 24th we were second in our division with 73 pts. 

 

Lack played 20 games during Miller's injury.

 

In those 20 games he only had 11 wins. 

 

9 of those games he let in 4 or more goals. 

 

Do your research before you make ridiculous claims from 2 years ago hoping people forgot. 

Bam... end off. +1

[Dr. Crossbar]

1 hour ago, S'all Good Man said:

just took a peek at the CBA rules, and Miller may want to sign a 1 year deal if it includes performance bonuses - over 35 1 year deals can have those in them. So say his base at 2 or 2.5 and if he has a knockout save % or number of wins maybe up to 4? Or if he's more interested in term then 2 years, 5 mil total? I'd be ok with that. 

I see what you're saying but Miller still has options. A performance contract like that likely wouldn't even get Miller to the negotiating table unless he was truly desperate to stay in the league.

 

His performance last season would prevent him from going from $6mill to a base of $2.5. That puts him below Markstrom's guaranteed value of $3.6mill. At this point, based on last year, Miller's value is at least equal to Markstrom. 

 

Also, his agent could easily make the case that even at Miller's age, he was the main reason why the team was anywhere close to being competitive. Benning already knows this.

 

So, Miller's performance last season is what they'll be negotiating around while also factoring in his age at 37. They'll be looking for a guaranteed/fixed dollar figure but will have to reduce that amount because of depreciation.

 

There's no way Miller can command a $6mill/year contract but his performance last season will keep him near $4mill. So even if he signs a one year deal, he'd be still be taking a $2mill hit but valued slightly higher than Markstrom. That makes sense.

 

In the realm of what you're saying above, if there were two years, it's more probable they'd negotiate a higher first year and lower second year - $4mill and $2.5 or $3 - than performance targets. 

[kloubek]

3 hours ago, spook007 said:

Don't understand the worry about money? Sedins retire next season, and we are rebuilding, so we won't be have huge problems managing salaries. Like to give the youngsters a chance to win each game, and it starts with good goal keeping.

Firstly, the Sedins may or may not retire.  They haven't talked much about it. 
 

Second, we do have some cap space even though we need to sign a few players like Horvat.  With that said, the more we have the more opportunities we might have to land a good UFA, etc.  Remember - next season what will be our 1st line is likely really likely to be a good 2nd line on any other team, and the Sedins really need to drop down to having 2nd line minutes at best.  We now have some good potential young talent but it certainly wouldn't hurt to have cap space for a player who can make an immediate impact.  Ie: Would you rather have two good goaltenders, or one good goaltender, one mediocre goaltender, and Kevin Shattenkirk who can put up 50 points from our back end - where we are seriously offensively weak?  Or perhaps a TJ Oshie to bolster our forward scoring?  (Although I know you mentioned you'd like to see the young guys play, and I can't deny that makes sense)

Finally, you speak of a few million like it means nothing to the owners.  While we've maxed out the cap since inception and I'm sure next season is no different, one would guess ownership wants to ensure the money is going to the place on our team where it will make the most impact.  If Markstrom truly was capable of holding with the #1 position then putting it in goal likely isn't the best use of the money.

[spook007]

10 hours ago, kloubek said:

Firstly, the Sedins may or may not retire.  They haven't talked much about it. 
 

Second, we do have some cap space even though we need to sign a few players like Horvat.  With that said, the more we have the more opportunities we might have to land a good UFA, etc.  Remember - next season what will be our 1st line is likely really likely to be a good 2nd line on any other team, and the Sedins really need to drop down to having 2nd line minutes at best.  We now have some good potential young talent but it certainly wouldn't hurt to have cap space for a player who can make an immediate impact.  Ie: Would you rather have two good goaltenders, or one good goaltender, one mediocre goaltender, and Kevin Shattenkirk who can put up 50 points from our back end - where we are seriously offensively weak?  Or perhaps a TJ Oshie to bolster our forward scoring?  (Although I know you mentioned you'd like to see the young guys play, and I can't deny that makes sense)

Finally, you speak of a few million like it means nothing to the owners.  While we've maxed out the cap since inception and I'm sure next season is no different, one would guess ownership wants to ensure the money is going to the place on our team where it will make the most impact.  If Markstrom truly was capable of holding with the #1 position then putting it in goal likely isn't the best use of the money.

Ok, Sedins retirement aside, I can not see them play here after next season.

 

I was in the happy camp, when we brough in Eriksson, as I though we would get a potentially deadly 1st line. We all know how that ended, so if I am honest, I'd rather we keep building from the back (with 88 gone fishing), and let Sedins mentor the youth one more season.

Unless JB come up with a masterplan that blows me away, I'd prefer one more season of seasoning for the young players, supported by some tougher team mates. We potentially have a lot of skill in our group of youngsters, so I'd like to have them protected from cheap shot artists. PS I would like to add a defender of Shattenkirks calibre to the back end.

 

I think my issue is, I don't see Markstrom as the future no. 1 for this franchise.... unless they aim to be in the no.1 sweepstakes... And I have a feeling management don't neither. Otherwise he would gotten far more starts already.

Also like the feistiness of Miller, and hope it rubs off on the rest...

 

Finally, on the owners issue you are absolutely right. Of course they'd rather pocket a couple of mill or make them go towards a place that makes the most impact.... but again my fear is it'll be a Eriksson/Vrabata clone, and that may stiffle the opportunities all the new talent should be given.

 

I do want us to be able to compete, but I would wait until after the Sedins are finished here, before I'd even consider the need for other mentoring players, or the type of mentoring players we need. I really hope Benning still want us to get bigger and meaner, as he stated, when he started.

[kloubek]

5 hours ago, spook007 said:

Ok, Sedins retirement aside, I can not see them play here after next season.

 

I was in the happy camp, when we brough in Eriksson, as I though we would get a potentially deadly 1st line. We all know how that ended, so if I am honest, I'd rather we keep building from the back (with 88 gone fishing), and let Sedins mentor the youth one more season.

Unless JB come up with a masterplan that blows me away, I'd prefer one more season of seasoning for the young players, supported by some tougher team mates. We potentially have a lot of skill in our group of youngsters, so I'd like to have them protected from cheap shot artists. PS I would like to add a defender of Shattenkirks calibre to the back end.

 

I think my issue is, I don't see Markstrom as the future no. 1 for this franchise.... unless they aim to be in the no.1 sweepstakes... And I have a feeling management don't neither. Otherwise he would gotten far more starts already.

Also like the feistiness of Miller, and hope it rubs off on the rest...

 

Finally, on the owners issue you are absolutely right. Of course they'd rather pocket a couple of mill or make them go towards a place that makes the most impact.... but again my fear is it'll be a Eriksson/Vrabata clone, and that may stiffle the opportunities all the new talent should be given.

 

I do want us to be able to compete, but I would wait until after the Sedins are finished here, before I'd even consider the need for other mentoring players, or the type of mentoring players we need. I really hope Benning still want us to get bigger and meaner, as he stated, when he started.

I think if any players would be willing to play for reduced money and try to help mentor the young guys, it would be the Sedins.  Not at all saying I feel they will stick around - I really don't know, but to bridge the transition a little longer I could see it happening.

 

As far as "tougher" teammates, I expect Dorsett will be back next season so that should help.  He don't win a lot of fights, but he does a good job of sticking up for his teammates.  I agree though - a big, strong player to compliment the smaller young talent we have coming up in the system wouldn't be a horrible idea.  If Virtanen manages to become a mainstay on the team that would go a long ways.  And yes, we obviously need a legit point getter on our blueline, and Shattenkirk should be a focus of management in my opinion.  It is always a risk bringing in a UFA as you pointed out with Eriksson, but I've always found UFA to be a great way to potentially acquire players because you give nothing up to do it.  The UFA market this season is pretty slim, and let's face it - not everyone wants to go to a rebuilding team.

I don't know how I feel about Markstrom.  I think he has pretty good talent, but is pretty inconsistent so I think the jury is still entirely out on him.  I do think that it is risky at this point to put him in a #1 role at the very least, as I previously mentioned.

[Hypocritical Cranium]

Bring Miller back (if he is willing to and doesn't get a better offer) and have him split or backup with Markstrom. 

[aGENT]

17 hours ago, kloubek said:

Firstly, the Sedins may or may not retire.  They haven't talked much about it. 
 

Second, we do have some cap space even though we need to sign a few players like Horvat.  With that said, the more we have the more opportunities we might have to land a good UFA, etc.  Remember - next season what will be our 1st line is likely really likely to be a good 2nd line on any other team, and the Sedins really need to drop down to having 2nd line minutes at best.  We now have some good potential young talent but it certainly wouldn't hurt to have cap space for a player who can make an immediate impact.  Ie: Would you rather have two good goaltenders, or one good goaltender, one mediocre goaltender, and Kevin Shattenkirk who can put up 50 points from our back end - where we are seriously offensively weak?  Or perhaps a TJ Oshie to bolster our forward scoring?  (Although I know you mentioned you'd like to see the young guys play, and I can't deny that makes sense)

Finally, you speak of a few million like it means nothing to the owners.  While we've maxed out the cap since inception and I'm sure next season is no different, one would guess ownership wants to ensure the money is going to the place on our team where it will make the most impact.  If Markstrom truly was capable of holding with the #1 position then putting it in goal likely isn't the best use of the money.

 

Neither of those things are happening regardless of what we do with the goalie situation.

[kloubek]

50 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

Neither of those things are happening regardless of what we do with the goalie situation.

Likely agreed.  I'm just using those as (unlikely) examples.  The crux of what I'm saying remains.

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, kloubek said:

Likely agreed.  I'm just using those as (unlikely) examples.  The crux of what I'm saying remains.

Does it though? Seems like your 'crux' is based on highly unlikely fantasy and a gross misunderstanding on where the organization is.

[spook007]

2 hours ago, kloubek said:

I think if any players would be willing to play for reduced money and try to help mentor the young guys, it would be the Sedins.  Not at all saying I feel they will stick around - I really don't know, but to bridge the transition a little longer I could see it happening.

 

As far as "tougher" teammates, I expect Dorsett will be back next season so that should help.  He don't win a lot of fights, but he does a good job of sticking up for his teammates.  I agree though - a big, strong player to compliment the smaller young talent we have coming up in the system wouldn't be a horrible idea.  If Virtanen manages to become a mainstay on the team that would go a long ways.  And yes, we obviously need a legit point getter on our blueline, and Shattenkirk should be a focus of management in my opinion.  It is always a risk bringing in a UFA as you pointed out with Eriksson, but I've always found UFA to be a great way to potentially acquire players because you give nothing up to do it.  The UFA market this season is pretty slim, and let's face it - not everyone wants to go to a rebuilding team.

I don't know how I feel about Markstrom.  I think he has pretty good talent, but is pretty inconsistent so I think the jury is still entirely out on him.  I do think that it is risky at this point to put him in a #1 role at the very least, as I previously mentioned.

Not sure about the Sedins. If they continue their downward trend, I hope not. I love the Sedins, and always stood up for them, but unless they recover, I think they are done. It remains to be seen. 

Virtanen will be interesting, hope they find roomful him, but if Green feels he needs more seasoning in the AHL, I hope they keep him there. However I actually believe he may surprise a lot. 

But Still could be done with a few more players, who can stand up to anyone. Its transition (or whatever its called  ) and I would actually like the team to play a tougher type of hockey. 

[kloubek]

59 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Does it though? Seems like your 'crux' is based on highly unlikely fantasy and a gross misunderstanding on where the organization is.

And where is that?  I believe ownership has always wanted this team to be competitive during the rebuild process.  Benning and Linden have said repeatedly.  Well, we aren't going to be that competitive team by most of our positions being manned by inexperienced kids.  While perhaps not a great decision in retrospect, the signing of Eriksson was a pretty good indication that indicated we were to remain competitive.

 

So the desire to bring in a high profile UFA to shore up either scoring and size on the front end or back end isn't "highly unlikely"... it is something this team needs now and going forward.  That's the crux.  As I said, Shattenkirk was just used as an example - albeit a "highly unlikely" one.

[kloubek]

23 minutes ago, spook007 said:

Not sure about the Sedins. If they continue their downward trend, I hope not. I love the Sedins, and always stood up for them, but unless they recover, I think they are done. It remains to be seen. Virtanen will be interesting, hope they find roomful him, but if Green feels he needs more seasoning in the AHL, I hope they keep him there. However I actually believe he may surprise a lot. But Still could be done with a few more players, who can stand up to anyone. Its transition (or whatever its called  ) and I would actually like the team to play a tougher type of hockey. 

I don't disagree that the Sedins are clearly a shell of their former selves.  And if they feel they cannot contribute, I'm sure they would sooner just retire.  But given second or perhaps even third line minutes in a secondary or tertiary scoring and pp role while they continue to mentor wouldn't really be the worst thing that could happen for us.  

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, kloubek said:

And where is that?  I believe ownership has always wanted this team to be competitive during the rebuild process.  Benning and Linden have said repeatedly.  Well, we aren't going to be that competitive team by most of our positions being manned by inexperienced kids.  While perhaps not a great decision in retrospect, the signing of Eriksson was a pretty good indication that indicated we were to remain competitive.

 

So the desire to bring in a high profile UFA to shore up either scoring and size on the front end or back end isn't "highly unlikely"... it is something this team needs now and going forward.  That's the crux.  As I said, Shattenkirk was just used as an example - albeit a "highly unlikely" one.

Would Miller be in the category of a highly paid UFA used to shore up an area of need?

[aGENT]

8 minutes ago, kloubek said:

And where is that?  I believe ownership has always wanted this team to be competitive during the rebuild process.  Benning and Linden have said repeatedly.  Well, we aren't going to be that competitive team by most of our positions being manned by inexperienced kids.  While perhaps not a great decision in retrospect, the signing of Eriksson was a pretty good indication that indicated we were to remain competitive.

 

So the desire to bring in a high profile UFA to shore up either scoring and size on the front end or back end isn't "highly unlikely"... it is something this team needs now and going forward.  That's the crux.  As I said, Shattenkirk was just used as an example - albeit a "highly unlikely" one.

Benning is on record that they will in no way, shape or form be fishing in the high end, free agent pool this summer.

 

Add to that the ED will put upward pressure on contract dollars for D men especially and you're going nowhere with your 'crux'.

[kloubek]

4 hours ago, Alflives said:

Would Miller be in the category of a highly paid UFA used to shore up an area of need?

Well that all depends on the views on Markstrom - which goes back to what was originally said.  If they believe Markstrom can carry the load and perform well, then no.  But otherwise, obviously.  Personally, I believe goaltending is like THE most important position on a team.  And if he can't hack it, then I'm more than happy to see Miller signed again for a short and reduced contract.
 

4 hours ago, J.R. said:

Benning is on record that they will in no way, shape or form be fishing in the high end, free agent pool this summer.

 

Add to that the ED will put upward pressure on contract dollars for D men especially and you're going nowhere with your 'crux'.

Yeah, I recall that being said as well.  They are kind of bouncing around a little so it is difficult to know their true position.  And if this is all true and I am indeed going nowhere, then we can only assume that it is highly likely we WILL sign another goalie.... be it Miller or otherwise.

 

 

[afan]

On 2017-05-17 at 6:53 AM, 73 Percent said:

Boi you are about to get a free lesson here.

 

 

Miller went down on Feb 24th we were second in our division with 73 pts. 

 

Lack played 20 games during Miller's injury.

 

In those 20 games he only had 11 wins. 

 

9 of those games he let in 4 or more goals. 

 

Do your research before you make ridiculous claims from 2 years ago hoping people forgot. 

My advice is you should do a research before opening your big mouth. Miller actually went down on Feb 22, 2015 playing 20:58 mins against the Islanders before being replaced by Lack when the Canucks won 4-0. Including the Islander game till the end of the season, Lack started in 22 games, got 13 wins, 7 regulation losses and 2 OT losses which means 6 games above .500 and 28 points for the Canucks The wins included games won against conference rivals, 2 against STL,1 each against SJS, ANA, LAK, ARI, WPG, NSH, most were fighting for a playoff spot with the Canucks. So each of those wins was basically a 4 point game which made it more significant.Eddie Lack was in fact the most popular Canuck at home games during that period and you could hear the frequent Eddie chant at most games.

 

For the season 2015-2016, Miller started in 51 games, got ONLY17 wins, 24 regulation losses and 9 OT losses that added up to 43 points while Markstrom started in 30 games, got 13 wins, 14 regulation losses and 4 OT losses which added up to 30 points. In the past 2016-2017 season, Miller started in 54 games, got ONLY 18 wins, 29 losses and 6 OT losses that added up to 40 points while Markstrom started in 23 games, got 10 wins, 11 losses and 3 OT losses that added up to 23 points. I do not know about you, but any elementary school student should immediately notice Markstrom has consistently way better  win percentage over Miller, even though Markstrom got most of the second half of back to backs which were games tougher to win for a tired Canucks team.

 

Only fools like you would care about how many goals Lack or Markstrom gave up in a particular game or how many spectacular saves Miller made. You call yourself Percent, somehow you do not even understand the only thing that counts is the win percentage a goalie gets.

 

Miller is a great goalie, there is no doubt about it. But it was before 2011, not any more after the Vancouver Olympics. It seemed the only success JB had in his career was the drafting of Miller in 1999 and he is still trying to feed on this by giving the ageing goalie another contract to take away the play time of the better goalie Markstrom. It is so sad this team has the worst GM in the league and there is this Percent fan with delusion of grandeur thinking that he can give a public lecture here.

[iceman64]

well I think it all boils down to money for a 1 yr extension and then year by year and see how it goes and see it Markstrom can start more, Markstrom is a LOT better then a lot of people realize but with our D the way it is? Reminds me of Lou and how he got us into the playoff's when we shouldn't have been, but even he will improve too as he plays more but we can't always be bad enough defensively to hang our goalies out to dry as we've done for far too long.

 

That gives Demko another year and see how he progresses too.. 

 

Sucks if we didn't re-sign him but then his salary could give Bo a healthy raise and another D as well since we will probably lose one to Vegas...