[Signing] Tyler Myers to Vancouver

[ilduce39]

7 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

In two years, when the next dumb signing is being rumored:

 

"He's not Loui, he's not Gudbranson and he's not Myers."

 

Let's learn from history, please.

Any successful person ever didn’t just quit because something didn’t go their way.  You can’t stop trying to upgrade the d, trading or signing free agents just because you got burned a few times. That’s too broad a brush.  

 

Myers is being signed to help out a decent young core and possibly be paired with Hughes... not as a last gasp to prop up the Twins during an inevitable downswing. He’s also a lot more proven commodity than Guddy was when picked up.  You need stronger parallels than “he’s big” or “the contract numbers are the same” which have zero bearing on whether he’ll be worth the commitment or not. That’s not learning from history.. that’s just doing nothing.  The minute a management team stops trying to get better because they’re afraid of their own decision making, they need to be let go. 

 

In any case, the Myers bashing has taken on a life of its own, like all the narratives pushed by bed wetting Canuck fans.  I guess I should commend the commitment.  All the whining the past 5 years has been completely and hilariously tuned out by the front office. 

 

I’d suggest, at the very least, to wait and see what (if) he signs for before self flagellating over it.  

[-Moose]

Kind of feel for Myers. Hasn't even signed a contract or laced up the skates for us, and the fans already despise him haha

[kanucks25]

10 minutes ago, The Lock said:

I disagree completely with the bolded above and hear me out on this....

 

Let me ask you this: why do you buy things? Is it because you are lacking that object and want it or because it has a value? Everything has a value but I doubt you want to go out and buy bras for yourself if you're a guy (unless if you're into that thing, I won't judge) even though those bras have value.

 

Similar idea with players: there is their production overall, which could be thought of as the features of the product. There is the intangibles which could be thought of as how well is the product build and what role that product's going to play. Therefore, if you just base it off of productivity alone, you are ignoring the entire point of why you are getting the player in the first place.

 

So the entire point of getting players is to make your team better. If you just base it on production, then you are looking at a team with little to no intangibles. They have productivity but no one to protect them or do other things stats are likely to forget entirely about. Therefore, it's better to have a few players for productivity but also value players based on what roles they can play.

This has nothing to with intangibles. Adding Miller's "intangibles" to his 55 points doesn't propel him into 1st line territory.

 

It's not like when Benning was on the phone with Tampa, Brisebois said: "Well you're going to have to pay a 1st line price for this player with 2nd line production because the way he fits on your team he could be a 1st liner." That makes absolutely no sense, and if Benning is valuing players that way then he's being grossly out-negotiated (although it does make the Brandon "Foundational" Sutter thing make more sense).

 

Pay what a player is worth, and target players that will excel in the way you deploy them so that they outproduce the value you gave up for them. Don't overpay for what you hope they might do.

 

Let me be clear that IMO, if that 1st rounder isn't a lottery pick, this was a fair price for Miller.

 

Edited July 1, 2019 by kanucks25

[hammertime]

Just now, kanucks25 said:

I've said many times that no move is better than a bad move. We're still nowhere close to contending, it makes no sense to overpay for older players right now.

 

Yes the D is in shambles, yes it will be a complete disaster next year if it's not significantly improved. But if there's no better option out there than paying an average D-man like he's a #2D, then the best option is to just take it on the chin for another year.

 

If Benning is as good at drafting as some say he is, then guys like Juolevi, Woo and Brisebois will come through in time. Young, cheap and effective is the name of the game in the cap world.

What was that part of your previous post where you maligned JB for not making more changes to the D and having inherited the best D we have? 

 

Right so you solution to that problem is to do nothing about it other than complain that someone else isnt doing enough about it and if he were to do something about it you would complain about that too. 

 

This is the heart of what sucks about canucks fans.

[Gaudette Celly]

3 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

All the whining the past 5 years has been completely and hilariously tuned out by the front office. 

They're not the only ones.  If not on ignore already, some of these non-stop repetitive complaining kids are on defacto scroll-by.

[ilduce39]

Just now, hammertime said:

What was that part of your previous post where you maligned JB for not making more changes to the D and having inherited the best D we have? 

 

Right so you solution to that problem is to do nothing about it other than complain that someone else isnt doing enough about it and if he were to do something about it you would complain about that too. 

 

This is the heart of what sucks about canucks fans.

Pretty much.  On one hand complain about how terrible the team is, on the other whine about how we over paid and jumped the gun by 3 years for any attempt to get better.  

[kanucks25]

1 minute ago, hammertime said:

What was that part of your previous post where you maligned JB for not making more changes to the D and having inherited the best D we have? 

 

Right so you solution to that problem is to do nothing about it other than complain that someone else isnt doing enough about it and if he were to do something about it you would complain about that too. 

 

This is the heart of what sucks about canucks fans.

Like I've said before. Benning has spent assets trying to fix this D in foolish ways and it hasn't improved at all. My problem with Benning is that he's spent assets trying to fast-forward the rebuild and all it's done is wasted time, money/cap, and assets.

 

IMO if we started to stockpile assets from year 1 of Benning's tenure we'd have a much better roster than we do now, including the D.

 

But we are where we are right now, and there's nothing changing that. We have to look at the past like a sunk cost and not panic.

 

We are simply not in a position to spend big money on older, average players right now. It's completely foolish. We're almost there, just need a little more patience.

[The Lock]

1 minute ago, kanucks25 said:

This has nothing to with intangibles. Adding Miller's "intangibles" to his 55 points doesn't propel him into 1st line territory.

 

It's not like when Benning was on the phone with Tampa, Brisebois said: "Well you're going to have to pay a 1st line price for this player with 2nd line production because the way he fits on your team he could be a 1st liner." That makes absolutely no sense, and if Benning is valuing players that way then he's being grossly out-negotiated (although it does make the Brandon "Foundational" Sutter thing make more sense).

 

Pay what a player is worth, and target players that will excel in the way you deploy them so that they outproduce the value you gave up for them. Don't overpay for what you hope they might do.

 

Let me be clear that IMO, if that 1st rounder isn't a lottery pick, this was a fair price for Miller.

 

It doesn't propel him to 1st line, but it can generate demand for the player in a trade or add to his value on the team.

 

I would argue that pay is actually about supply and demand. It's the entire reason why the top point scorers are paid more: they are in higher demand. In a similar sense, the players who don't score as much, but still are high end with their intangible (ie. Stone) are still paid a lot because of that demand. Pay is what a player is worth, but that worth is based on that player's role on the team. Perhaps we are sort of agreeing on things in terms of worth, but think about how that worth is actually generated. Points are obviously big, but so are those intangibles.

[Squamfan]

10 minutes ago, KeslerWho? said:

Kind of feel for Myers. Hasn't even signed a contract or laced up the skates for us, and the fans already despise him haha

becasue the fans know its going to be a horrible contract

[86Viking]

51 minutes ago, Pavel the Bure said:

Would you rather be young and poor or old and rich ?

Ristolianen would cost a fortune in trade, he is not a FA, Ristolianen may not want to play in Vancouver , other team may offer better pieces in trade 9if Buff trade him)...so many questions ….

Buffalo has gone out and trade for some RHD since the TDL. I know his plus minus is bad but that whole team is a wreck. He has put up solid offensive #s, he needs a steady 2 way D partner...could that be fellow countryman OJ?

 

I would not anti up a ton to acquire him, especially after we have committed a 1st in the JT Miller trade. I would have thought making a trade for say Risto with a conditional 1st would have been higher on our team needs than a winger but we went that route instead. The Canucks have many holes still before they can be considered a competitive team in the NHL. D is the hardest position to improve, I would have really wished we targeted that via trade rather then potentially overpay Myers. I think with Edler re upping that will squash any chance of Gardiner coming here.

[kanucks25]

3 minutes ago, The Lock said:

It doesn't propel him to 1st line, but it can generate demand for the player in a trade or add to his value on the team.

 

I would argue that pay is actually about supply and demand. It's the entire reason why the top point scorers are paid more: they are in higher demand. In a similar sense, the players who don't score as much, but still are high end with their intangible (ie. Stone) are still paid a lot because of that demand. Pay is what a player is worth, but that worth is based on that player's role on the team. Perhaps we are sort of agreeing on things in terms of worth, but think about how that worth is actually generated. Points are obviously big, but so are those intangibles.

I'm not saying that intangibles aren't considered when it comes to a player's worth, I just don't think that in this Miller case in particular, his "intangibles" or "fit" on our team was worth a 1st liner price (not that we really paid a 1st liner price). Just disagreed with the guy that claimed "we got a 1st liner at a cheap price" which IMO is completely false.

 

And Stone isn't really the best example for your point; he's one, if not THE best WAR and GAR players over the past few years.

[-Moose]

3 minutes ago, Squamfan said:

becasue the fans know its going to be a horrible contract

Not his fault

[kanucks25]

15 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

Any successful person ever didn’t just quit because something didn’t go their way.  You can’t stop trying to upgrade the d, trading or signing free agents just because you got burned a few times. That’s too broad a brush.  

Not saying they should stop trying to improve or sign players or anything. Just that some moves are so clearly wrong it's painfully obvious before they even happen (or on day 1) that it makes absolutely no sense to even go down that road. This is one of those moves.

[kanucks25]

1 minute ago, KeslerWho? said:

Not his fault

Of course it's not his fault. It wasn't Gudbranson's fault we paid a premium for a bottom-pairing at best D-man, either. They're both probably fantastic people.

 

That's sports, though.

[Me_]

43 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

I've said many times that no move is better than a bad move. We're still nowhere close to contending, it makes no sense to overpay for older players right now.

 

Yes the D is in shambles, yes it will be a complete disaster next year if it's not significantly improved. But if there's no better option out there than paying an average D-man like he's a #2D, then the best option is to just take it on the chin for another year.

 

If Benning is as good at drafting as some say he is, then guys like Juolevi, Woo and Brisebois will come through in time. Young, cheap and effective is the name of the game in the cap world.

At his best, Juolevi is 3-4 years away from being a T2D.

 

At his best, Woo is 4-5 years away from being a reincarnation of Bieksa.

 

At his best, Brisebois is 4-6 years away from being a T4D.

 

The Canucks need to revamp its backend and now. The playoffs is the goal because each game is a massive $2,000,000 deductible to the above the line personnel; the owners.

 

The Canucks have made a choice between being perpetual rebuilders or competing for the Stanley Cup within the next five to ten years.

 

While Horvat, Pettersson, Boeser, Virtanen, Demko, Goldobin, Gaudette and now Hughes continue to develop with the team, the Canucks still have Podkolzin, Juolevi, Woo, Tryamkin, Sautner, Lind, DiPietro, Höglander, MacEwen, Brisebois and Gadjovich waiting to make dents in the lineup. 

 

By the time most of these players are NHL regulars, the Canucks will be competing for the Cup.

 

Edited July 1, 2019 by Me_

[ilduce39]

3 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Not saying they should stop trying to improve or sign players or anything. Just that some moves are so clearly wrong it's painfully obvious before they even happen (or on day 1) that it makes absolutely no sense to even go down that road. This is one of those moves.

Well, we’ll agree to disagree here.  

 

I can appreciate the danger in signing any 29 year old long term and the inherent but the player: a big 30-point RHD with a decent shot makes sense to me at this juncture.

[kanucks25]

3 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

Well, we’ll agree to disagree here.  

 

I can appreciate the danger in signing any 29 year old long term and the inherent but the player: a big 30-point RHD with a decent shot makes sense to me at this juncture.

Fair enough. I guess time will tell.

[kanucks25]

5 minutes ago, Me_ said:

At his best, Juolevi is 3-4 years away from being a T2D.

 

At his best, Woo is 4-5 years away from being a reincarnation of Bieksa.

 

At his best, Brisebois is 4-6 years away from being a T4D.

 

The Canucks need to revamp its backend and now. The playoffs is the goal because each game is a massive $2,000,000 deductible to the above the line personnel; the owners.

 

The Canucks have made a choice between being perpetual rebuilders or competing for the Stanley Cup within the next five to ten years.

 

While Horvat, Pettersson, Boeser, Virtanen, Demko, Goldobin, Gaudette and now Hughes continue to develop with the team, the Canucks still have Podkolzin, Juolevi, Woo, Tryamkin, Sautner, Lind, DiPietro, Höglander, MacEwen, Brisebois and Gadjovich waiting to make dents in the lineup. 

 

Bu the time most of these players are regulars, the Canucks will be competing for the Cup.

I don't know what league you've been following but these days, in the NHL, most good players contribute in the top-half of the lineup well before the age of 25.

 

Not even going to get into the merits of squeaking into the playoffs for the revenue vs. building a true, consistent contender.

[hammertime]

Honestly if the number is 6.5 x6 im ok with that. 

 

Hughes Myers 

Edler Stetcher

Hutton?? Tanev

Juolevi Woo

Tryamkin? possibly the following year 

 

Is it an overpayment sure but I see the merit of putting a big shot next to Hughes. who eles is out there? how long do you wait? 

[Tinky-Winky]

Myers isnt a top 3 def , so people in vancouver better understand that, esp if he is signed by van ....like others have said, hes 4-5th ....but im sure van will want him to be something he isnt which will make the fans hate him more...:( so a no win situation for myers