Give me a second. You gonna make me work you female dog.

If miller wasn't signed and JB didn't sign an alternate UFA but instead held onto his cap space, it might have given him the ability to work a trade with a bit more ease during the season.

People can provide lots of examples of why the signing of miller was a positive but you can still argue that the miller signing was a poor decision. It ain't a moot point. It's only been one season and has he made that much of a difference?
- bloatedmosquito

Come on Bloated…the Canucks just came off one of the WORST 40 game stretches to close out the season two years ago with Eddie Lack at the helm due to the Luongo trade.

The core of veterans asked for a veteran goaltender because they felt like they could still compete for a Cup. Benning being new on the job did well to meet with the core and get their feelings on the team as a whole. He gave them their one year to prove themselves with Miller.

It's absolutely 100% hindsight to say we didn't need to acquire a goaltender who'd played more than 41 games in the league with a veteran core.

The only reason, IMO, that people are now so bent out of shape over the Lack situation is because he played well last year when Miller went down. They seem to have short memories from the season before though??

didn't Okposo have his retina detach last year?
- Mungo

I assume the Canucks would have him examined before a trade is finalized.

I think the only thing to consider was the "core" requesting an experienced goalie come in. If JB ignores them, he starts his management career with the bad rep that he doesnt listen to or care about what his best players want. From an outsiders perspective it seems stupid, but most athletes are headcases and this was to appease them
- WhiteLie

I can agree with that but yet the same GM is trying to trade (reportedly) the core a season later...

Once again, protecting a GMs position within the team and not making some hard choices about the future.

Both, I hate all equally.
- Nucker101

I'm certainly ok with trading a 2nd round pick for a player of Sven's caliber to close the gap of prospects we don't have within the organization.

Now that's trading from a position of power. To be able to trade like that must be awesome.

Dealing within the top three and still being a great team with an excellent future. Those years of 'tanking' sure hurt the Bolts. Tanking, winning the cup, tanking, competing for the cup (probably for a few years) seems so flawed. Thank god the canucks don't follow the Lightning model!
- bloatedmosquito

And Brett Connolly their 6th overall pick who turned out to be a bit of a bust was traded to Boston for two seconds. And they only gave up a 2nd to acquire Garrison to be a solid 2nd pairing d-man for them.

didn't Okposo have his retina detach last year?
- Mungo

ot

guy at work was home, yada yada, detached retina thing happened, his wife called in to work to let them know he wasn't coming in (not the sharpest knife in the drawer), left the voice mail message .... won't be in to work, has suffered a detached rectum...

wtf?

I'm certainly ok with trading a 2nd round pick for a player of Sven's caliber to close the gap of prospects we don't have within the organization.
- LeftCoaster

For sure. I believe a few people said it at the time of the trade: "getting a prospect with Sven's upside in the late 2nd would be great so this is a good deal".

We rarely see it the same way booner

One of my biggest canuck complaints I've had over the years is non-hockey pressures influencing hockey decisions. Does the GM want to come in and flop right away? Does he want to have his first strike against him in the eyes of his boss for not making the playoffs?

What does that have to do with smart hockey management or positioning your team for long term success? Poor reasoning to go out and get miller and give him a poor contract that handcuffs the team. Secondly, how could JB possibly flop when he took over from the abomination that was the gillis/torts era? He had a free pass and failed to capitalize on it.

In this particular case I'm not talking tanking I'm talking development. Lots of examples last season of surprise goalies. I'll use dubnyk as an example. Are we so sure the combination of lack/markstrom last season would be a purposeful tank? I don't know. So I don't think it's a moot point.

But I agree with you, the signing of miller was an attempt by JB to protect his position and image with the team owner more than a decision to progress an inevitable rebuild.
- bloatedmosquito

How is the team handcuffed? Because they are going to most likely turn Lack into a draft pick? They probably will get something for Miller when he leaves as well. Not having Lack in the system is not a big deal... specially with his raise and ability to walk if he doesn't get his money next year.

You think the money could be better spent? Who's this #1 C you wanted signed for Miller's money that would make the Sedin's over paid second liners? This team did fine without having to bring in talent that would demote the Sedin's. A UFA C would be a short term solution to a problem that is not short term and still has no end game. The draft is the solution to that... and there may be a gem available this draft for the Canucks if they can acquire picks.

You ask how could JB flop right away? What is this free pass you speak of????? Whats was the owner's work orders to the new GM? Fan's are not giving him a free pass right now either... this makes no sense. If the owner says, "try your best to make the playoffs while not giving away our future"... then why would JB spend his money on a #1 C when he has 14mil tied up in the Sedins already on the 1st line? Why would he take a huge risk on the shaky Lack(came off a non inspiring run of play) he knew little about and a discarded prospect(Markstrom) who was not coming off this big season he just had in the AHL. The present goalie argument is 90% hind sight and too many people have tunnel vision on this situation.

Purposeful tank, maybe not but irresponsible for sure. These critics on about the signing would be nothing compared to the roar of everyone if Lack was the starter and he broke down after 30 games and Markstrom wasnt ready yet.... and for good reason The likelihood of that happening wasn't such a stretch last summer. We knew Markstrom wasn't ready and Lack was surrounded by questions. Even this season, Lack may have finished his last couple of games strong but the couple of weeks leading up to that, he was averaging 4 goals a game. He still is going to improve but still left to much for a new unfamiliar GM to worry about.

I don't know why people put so much emphasis on JB and ass covering. If doing his job is considered ass covering... then people had been idolizing Gillis for too many years and got confused along the way.

This team is not in a position to full tank. The only way the tank will come is naturally. That may be the case in the next couple of seasons... post Sedins(or in their final season) and Miller while our youth tries to develop into the new core that will carry the load. I'd like them to develop in a better than .500 environment personally.

Come on Bloated…the Canucks just came off one of the WORST 40 game stretches to close out the season two years ago with Eddie Lack at the helm due to the Luongo trade.

The core of veterans asked for a veteran goaltender because they felt like they could still compete for a Cup. Benning being new on the job did well to meet with the core and get their feelings on the team as a whole. He gave them their one year to prove themselves with Miller.

It's absolutely 100% hindsight to say we didn't need to acquire a goaltender who'd played more than 41 games in the league with a veteran core.

The only reason, IMO, that people are now so bent out of shape over the Lack situation is because he played well last year when Miller went down. They seem to have short memories from the season before though??
- LeftCoaster

See my post above.

And if JB believed that this core could compete for a cup knowing that kesler was being traded then he's a fuking dummy.

Remember, I'm agruing from a quick rebuild perspective. I don't care about losing in the first round of the playoffs anymore. I wan to be in the sme situation as the lightning. You can't do that on the fly. Got to commit to being bad for a few years.

ot

guy at work was home, yada yada, detached retina thing happened, his wife called in to work to let them know he wasn't coming in (not the sharpest knife in the drawer), left the voice mail message .... won't be in to work, has suffered a detached rectum...

wtf?
- hillbillydeluxe

Hopefully this happens to the other GM's after Benning's done with them

Hi,

New blog is up. I'm in Vegas—heading to the Awards this afternoon.

I think Eddie Lack to Buffalo for #31 is looking more and more like it's going to happen, petition or no petition...

http://www.hockeybuzz.com...ade-Clock-Ticks/194/69501

Hopefully this happens to the other GM's after Benning's done with them
- Mungo

JB rips them a new one.

What the perceived difference is NY is not desperate to move Talbot, VAN is with Lack. Herein lies the problem.
- VanHockeyGuy

This doesn't drive the price up, it just means if they don't like the offers he won't be traded. Van's issue may drive the price down on Lack. But Ultimately all you need is 3 or 4 teams interested and a 2nd is guaranteed. From there it is just about who will give the better 2nd?

See my post above.

And if JB believed that this core could compete for a cup knowing that kesler was being traded then he's a fuking dummy.

Remember, I'm agruing from a quick rebuild perspective. I don't care about losing in the first round of the playoffs anymore. I wan to be in the sme situation as the lightning. You can't do that on the fly. Got to commit to being bad for a few years.
- bloatedmosquito

Then getting rid of Lack to acquire a 2nd round pick and perhaps a good young dman is the way to go. Because in five years time Lack will be an older goaltender and Miller will be gone. Markstrom however, will be in his prime and Demko will be a star!!

How is the team handcuffed? Because they are going to most likely turn Lack into a draft pick? They probably will get something for Miller when he leaves as well. Not having Lack in the system is not a big deal... specially with his raise and ability to walk if he doesn't get his money next year.

You think the money could be better spent? Who's this #1 C you wanted signed for Miller's money that would make the Sedin's over paid second liners? This team did fine without having to bring in talent that would demote the Sedin's. A UFA C would be a short term solution to a problem that is not short term and still has no end game. The draft is the solution to that... and there may be a gem available this draft for the Canucks if they can acquire picks.

You ask how could JB flop right away? What is this free pass you speak of????? Whats was the owner's work orders to the new GM? Fan's are not giving him a free pass right now either... this makes no sense. If the owner says, "try your best to make the playoffs while not giving away our future"... then why would JB spend his money on a #1 C when he has 14mil tied up in the Sedins already on the 1st line? Why would he take a huge risk on the shaky Lack(came off a non inspiring run of play) he knew little about and a discarded prospect(Markstrom) who was not coming off this big season he just had in the AHL. The present goalie argument is 90% hind sight and too many people have tunnel vision on this situation.

Purposeful tank, maybe not but irresponsible for sure. These critics on about the signing would be nothing compared to the roar of everyone if Lack was the starter and he broke down after 30 games and Markstrom wasnt ready yet.... and for good reason The likelihood of that happening wasn't such a stretch last summer. We knew Markstrom wasn't ready and Lack was surrounded by questions. Even this season, Lack may have finished his last couple of games strong but the couple of weeks leading up to that, he was averaging 4 goals a game. He still is going to improve but still left to much for a new unfamiliar GM to worry about.

I don't know why people put so much emphasis on JB and ass covering. If doing his job is considered ass covering... then people had been idolizing Gillis for too many years and got confused along the way.

This team is not in a position to full tank. The only way the tank will come is naturally. That may be the case in the next couple of seasons... post Sedins(or in their final season) and Miller while our youth tries to develop into the new core that will carry the load. I'd like them to develop in a better than .500 environment personally.
- boonerbuck

It's a free pass because the new GM can sell the idea he's fixing problems created by the previous regime. See Shanahan, Brendan. Lots of examples of this in professional sports and even in politics. It's a smart move and it's commonly used. Of course it makes sense.

I've clarified my #1 centre comment. Whether as UFA or cap space for future trade, get young with potential to develop.

The reason lacks getting a raise and the ability to turn him into a draft pick is becuase he's either good or has the potential to be even better. If lack was crap he won't have value. Why not keep that asset?

It's all about the rebuild. That's it. Nothing else. The canucks even had the audasity to market it that way. Change is Coming! Fuk me. Absolute BS. But yet I'm not suppose to expect change? So what is it? Change is coming or try your best to make the playoffs while not giving away our future?

As a fan the canucks have not givin me a clear understanding what thier plan is.

Should have said future #1 centre or some youth with potential upside. I need to go back and see what’s available but signing an aging goalie to a bad contract specially after miller's disaster in the playoffs was not in the best interest of the canucks. Rebuild all the way
- bloatedmosquito

Wait, if Miller was a risk of playing very poorly, how would that hurt your rebuild? I don't understand?

How would the Canucks sign a "future" #1 C? Do you mean offer sheet? Do you mean sign a future #1 C that was undrafted?

If Miller is the reason we couldnt do that, then you are confused.

Also, because they signed Miller, Lack now has the potential to traded into the young player with upside you speak of. You are off track if you think the free agent market is where we are going to solve that problem.

Signing Miller meant JB could afford to gamble his 2nd on Baertchi. The gamble is looking good so far and JB is confident he can recoup the pick. If Miller turns into a pick as well, then the signing plays into the rebuild very much so like I said from the very beginning...specially since the one year extra in the AHL for Markstrom has had a tremendous boost to his development. I'm sure the draft is safer for a rebuild than signing prospect free agents... which you can still do anyways.

It's a short contract. The only handcuff is your reasoning.

Wait, if Miller was a risk of playing very poorly, how would that hurt your rebuild? I don't understand?

How would the Canucks sign a "future" #1 C? Do you mean offer sheet? Do you mean sign a future #1 C that was undrafted?

If Miller is the reason we couldnt do that, then you are confused.

Also, because they signed Miller, Lack now has the potential to traded into the young player with upside you speak of. You are off track if you think the free agent market is where we are going to solve that problem.

Signing Miller meant JB could afford to gamble his 2nd on Baertchi. The gamble is looking good so far and JB is confident he can recoup the pick. If Miller turns into a pick as well, then the signing plays into the rebuild very much so like I said from the very beginning...specially since the one year extra in the AHL for Markstrom has had a tremendous boost to his development. I'm sure the draft is safer for a rebuild than signing prospect free agents... which you can still do anyways.

It's a short contract. The only handcuff is your reasoning.
- boonerbuck

You talk a lot but you don't listen very well. I've answered these questions in posts above.

Signing Miller meant JB could afford to gamble his 2nd on Baertchi? Explain that. Your using hindsight because now lack is worth a 2nd. Now you're confused.

If you want to discuss then great but as soon as you turn into a fuking Richard and insulting a point of view then you lose credibilty. Your just getting angry because I'm making valid points. So you turn to insults. Right on que.

Never change booner.

I stated "if the reports are true and Kesler wanted out around the time of the Olympics..." There are CONFIRMED reports that this was the timeframe. Sure there are other rumours, but none that have been confirmed by anyone.

So what exactly are you reminding me of? That nothing has been confirmed? Or that there are also rumours out there that he made the request at an earlier date?
- KB3Point0

I stated that it was what *Kesler claimed*... not what was confirmed. You overlooked that apparently.

The reports were not that the Olympics where *when Kesler decided he wanted out*. The reports were that he was telling people he wanted out during the Olympics. Kesler saying he told Gillis the season before is not a rumor, he actually said that in interviews. Maybe he lied but it's not a rumor.

You are basing what you are saying on rumors... not me.

You talk a lot but you don't listen very well. I've answered these questions in posts above.

Signing Miller meant JB could afford to gamble his 2nd on Baertchi? Explain that. Your using hindsight because now lack is worth a 2nd. Now you're confused.

If you want to discuss then great but as soon as you turn into a fuking Richard and insulting a point of view then you lose credibilty. Your just getting angry because I'm making valid points. So you turn to insults. Right on que.

Never change booner.
- bloatedmosquito

You have this backwards buddy. You are getting bent out of shape and insulting. You just dedicated a post to insulting me and then make this claim...strange.

I will continue to address the debate without the name calling and swearing thank you.

I said that Lack has the *potential* to be traded into the young player you speak of. You reworded that so you could freak out on me...lol. Go read my post. You are the one getting bent about me disagreeing with you and once again go on a rant about how I have a problem about other opinions.... chill out.

Valid points? Mine are not valid? I addressed yours and expressed mine... no one was insulted till that post.

You claim I'm angry...not. You just flipped your lid and said I was the angry one.

He's usually ranked anywhere between the mid-late teens and mid 20's. I actually like him and would definitely be okay with the Canucks taking him since they need a d-man in their prospect pool and he has legit top 4 NHL upside from what I've read and also according to his numbers.
- Nucker101

Yeah, I would like him to fall onto our laps for sure. Don't think he'll be there myself.

Yeah, I would like him to fall onto our laps for sure. Don't think he'll be there myself.
- boonerbuck

He's my favourite in that next tier after the top d-men are gone but even if he's gone, I don't think guys like Roy/Juulsen are way behind him.

It's a free pass because the new GM can sell the idea he's fixing problems created by the previous regime. See Shanahan, Brendan. Lots of examples of this in professional sports and even in politics. It's a smart move and it's commonly used. Of course it makes sense.

I've clarified my #1 centre comment. Whether as UFA or cap space for future trade, get young with potential to develop.

The reason lacks getting a raise and the ability to turn him into a draft pick is becuase he's either good or has the potential to be even better. If lack was crap he won't have value. Why not keep that asset?

It's all about the rebuild. That's it. Nothing else. The canucks even had the audasity to market it that way. Change is Coming! Fuk me. Absolute BS. But yet I'm not suppose to expect change? So what is it? Change is coming or try your best to make the playoffs while not giving away our future?

As a fan the canucks have not givin me a clear understanding what thier plan is.
- bloatedmosquito

This free pass has it's limitations. I think it translates into not getting fired but by no means is it a free pass. Thats why I used the term strike 1. If you come in and are given a set of goals by the owner,,,, tell him you have a plan laid out to achieve those goals,,, and go a different route immediately,,, I'm pretty certain it will not be forgotten shortly.

Typically you see GM's come in and make a splash that sometimes creates more questions than answers and you have to wonder... what kind of immediate job securing promises were maid? Think back to Nonis lasting such a short time after staying stasus quo with the roster when hired and refusing to make the big moves demanded by the owner. Gillis then comes in and offers 2yr/20 mil to Sundin right away... later, nothing he does follows that kind of logic though. Same with JB and the Miller and Vrbada signings... two biggest names available...

He's my favourite in that next tier after the top d-men are gone but even if he's gone, I don't think guys like Roy/Juulsen are way behind him.
- Nucker101

I wish Roy were a bit bigger but seems like a safe pick.

I wish Roy were a bit bigger but seems like a safe pick.
- boonerbuck

Don't think there's such thing as a safe pick at 23

If we get a very high 2nd for Lack and Zboril/Roy are gone then I'd consider going with a forward and taking whoever is left from Juulsen/Kylington/Meloche at 31 or 33.