Canucks Managerial Thread | Part 19 | Maybe we are in on Tallon, maybe not? *Post #61

[I in the Eye]

Maybe, but all we have to go on is how he was this year instead of make believe what he could have been....

With Lack instead of Miller, do you think the Canucks would have had a better chance at a bottom 3 pick, instead of a bottom 5? With Miller, the Canucks were a bottom 5 team... With Lack, perhaps also a bottom 5 team. Miller didn't save the Canucks from being a bottom feeder. If that was the expectation and reason to keep Miller, then Miller failed (the calming veteran presence didn't calm anything). I think that Lack would have done a better job than Miller in net, but even if not, I don't see how Lack wouldn't be a better choice. There are apparently franchise players at the top of this draft.

 

[MS]

You've bought into nonsense...

Here's what the "succession plan" should be. You keep the best goalie you have available - the best combination of quality, cost, and longer term availability. When another goalie proves to be a better combination of quality, cost, and longer term availability... he now becomes the best option, until a better option eventually unseats him.

To make decisions now, based on the idea that Demko will be on the team at some point in the future, is nonsense. Investing that much money into Miller, at the expense of having the difference in Miller and Lack's salary that could have been used to address the defense, is nonsense. Continuing with Miller next season (to become some future mentor to Demko... who may or may not actually become a NHL player), when Markstrom has now shown himself to be at least comparable to Miller (which is a rather average bar), is nonsense.

You are supporting the actions of a jaded and delusional decision maker. No decisions should be made now, based on prospects who may or may not become NHLers one day... What you especially don't do, is give a time frame for when the prospect will be in the NHL, and make decisions around that in the present tense. If Demko is ready to be the best option one day, we will all know... just like we will all know if he's not. To me, that there are some people arguing to keep Miller (and not using his $ elsewhere) because it's a variable in a logical succession plan is a loss of plot from people who have bought into nonsense and fairytales about the "Prince that was Promised". If Demko is the Prince that was Promised, it will become clear, and Demko will be worth making NHL roster decisions around, at that time.

Exactly.

The notion of 'succession plans' at the expense of having the best goaltending possible is just nonsense. Even more so given the volatility and unpredictability of development at that position.

Moreover, the notion of 'goalie mentors' is just rubbish. Young goalies get better by playing lots once they're ready to, not sitting around watching some old dude start 65 games/season. Who was Quick's mentor? Lundqvist? Crawford? Gibson? Holtby? Price? Luongo?

Almost none of the league's top goalies have had a 'mentor' and certainly not at age 25-26. It's a rubbish concept with absolutely no foundation in reality that people buy into because it sounds like it makes sense. Oh, and it happened once with Schneider here, which is pretty much the only example in the last several years.

 

[Scurr]

Exactly.

The notion of 'succession plans' at the expense of having the best goaltending possible is just nonsense. Even more so given the volatility and unpredictability of development at that position.

Moreover, the notion of 'goalie mentors' is just rubbish. Young goalies get better by playing lots once they're ready to, not sitting around watching some old dude start 65 games/season. Who was Quick's mentor? Lundqvist? Crawford? Gibson? Holtby? Price? Luongo?

Almost none of the league's top goalies have had a 'mentor' and certainly not at age 25-26. It's a rubbish concept with absolutely no foundation in reality that people buy into because it sounds like it makes sense. Oh, and it happened once with Schneider here, which is pretty much the only example in the last several years.

That's the argument for Miller right there. And what Lack did this season justifies that position.

 

[Hit the post]

That's the argument for Miller right there. And what Lack did this season justifies that position.

You mean a goalie coach messing with what was working?

 

[FroshaugFan2]

Can someone tell me why Larsen isn't being signed until July 1st? There shouldn't be anything blocking him from signing earlier.

Is one side waiting for a qualifying offer? What am I missing?

 

[racerjoe]

That's the argument for Miller right there. And what Lack did this season justifies that position.

And Miller's season got us what? It was to a degree more predictable. Play well until overplayed get hurt. Bottom 3 finish.

If we use the previous season instead, Lack comes in and saves the season, and this isn't a slight on Markstrom, just cold hard facts about what Miller got us.

 

[rune74]

With Lack instead of Miller, do you think the Canucks would have had a better chance at a bottom 3 pick, instead of a bottom 5? With Miller, the Canucks were a bottom 5 team... With Lack, perhaps also a bottom 5 team. Miller didn't save the Canucks from being a bottom feeder. If that was the expectation and reason to keep Miller, then Miller failed (the calming veteran presence didn't calm anything). I think that Lack would have done a better job than Miller in net, but even if not, I don't see how Lack wouldn't be a better choice. There are apparently franchise players at the top of this draft.

I don't think the management was given the mandate to tank the team to get the best draft pick. It is obvious that it would be better if that was the case.

But, the issue you face here is that on these boards tanking for the pick was an ok thing to do whereas the owners didn't find the prospect of a losing team(even if that was a probable) as something they wanted. They rolled the dice hoping that they could continue to make money off a winning team.

 

[Bleach Clean]

That's the argument for Miller right there. And what Lack did this season justifies that position.

Justifies? No. Lend weight to, sure. It's something that one can use to bolster their argument, not prove it.

At the same time, Lack's performance alongside Luongo and Miller had him project well. Same context, better performance. Of course, the sample wasn't big enough. Again, a point in favour of keeping Lack and not signing Miller --> without justifying said position.

Edit: And obviously, there's youth + cap hit in his favour as well...

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

You mean a goalie coach messing with what was working?

Was the goalie coach messing with Cam Ward too, or just Lack

 

[Hit the post]

Was the goalie coach messing with Cam Ward too, or just Lack

Ward got them a cup - what's there to change?

 

[MS]

That's the argument for Miller right there. And what Lack did this season justifies that position.

Ha, what?

As opposed to what Miller did with St. Louis in 2014 or with us in 14-15?

Even ignoring how Lack was messed with in Carolina, what did Miller actually get us this year? And how were we better off than having Markstrom play more games?

 

[NoShowWilly]

Can someone tell me why Larsen isn't being signed until July 1st? There shouldn't be anything blocking him from signing earlier.

Is one side waiting for a qualifying offer? What am I missing?

UFA. i actually have no idea.

 

[MS]

UFA. i actually have no idea.

I don't think he's a UFA? He's not 27 or has 7 years pro so he should be an RFA on July 1.

That said, yeah, doesn't make a lot of sense either way.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

Ward got them a cup - what's there to change?

Wards been so bad the last couple years because of the goalie coach right?

 

[Hit the post]

Wards been so bad the last couple years because of the goalie coach right?

Goalie coach doesn't have access to a flux capacitor Homer.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

UFA. i actually have no idea.

If we sign him now it would void his current contract so he would not get paid in June? Something like this?

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

Goalie coach doesn't have access to a flux capacitor Homer.

Oh so the awful terrible worst goalie coaching in the world only effected Lack, how convenient for you all.

 

[Hit the post]

Oh so the awful terrible worst goalie coaching in the world only effected Lack, how convenient for you all.

I'll explain it very slowly for you.....

1) Look at how Lack played when told to adjust his style
2) Look at how Lack played when he went back to his old style

Questions or do I have to repeat it again?

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

I'll explain it very slowly for you.....

1) Look at how Lack played when told to adjust his style
2) Look at how Lack played when he went back to his old style

Questions or do I have to repeat it again?

And I'm saying to you Ward went from a SC winning goalie to crap for the same reason, right-that darn goalie coach!? I'm glad it's so easy to excuse crap play like this!

 

[Hit the post]

And I'm saying to you Ward went from a SC winning goalie to crap for the same reason, right-that darn goalie coach!? I'm glad it's so easy to excuse crap play like this!

And I'm saying to you is how about watching some Canes games involving Lack before & after the style change.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

And I'm saying to you is how about watching some Canes games involving Lack before & after.

Goalies get hot big whoop. Lack was awful this year and a major disappointment in Carolina. Good tweeter tho.

 

[Hit the post]

Goalies get hot big whoop. Lack was awful this year and a major disappointment in Carolina. Good tweeter tho.

Translation: I didn't see any Canes games involving Lack.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

Translation: I didn't see any Canes games involving Lack.

Your eye test doesn't disapprove the numbers. They are bad. Good trade for Benning.

 

[Peter10]

And I'm saying to you Ward went from a SC winning goalie to crap for the same reason, right-that darn goalie coach!? I'm glad it's so easy to excuse crap play like this!

I dont know the timeline but the current Canes goalie coach was hired after Wards "heydays" maybe that had something to do with him turning s*** as well?

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

Lack had something like an 850 save% the first 9 games of the season. That is just unbelievably bad. It's virtually impossible for him to have been that bad without being injured or having something else going on.

The fact that it was his first games with a new team absolutely lends credence to the notion that there was something going on with the new coach. If it was just a random blip in the middle of the season I'd believe it less so. But when a player goes to a new team and is unbelievably awful for 9 games before going back to his career numbers for the rest of the season pretty much, yeah, I think it has merit.

Because of his awful start he wasn't really able to get consistent playing time and got on much of a roll, but i am confident that the 920 he put up over the following 20 games or whatever is closer to what we can expect from Eddie next year. We will see.