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

[Funke]

Except Miller isn't being asked to play 75 games he's being asked to play less than 50 to help Markstrom's development along which is going perfectly.

Miller was the best goalie on the planet for a while, definitely top 5 for a long time, his work habits that got him there haven't changed and we want them rubbing off on Markstrom. The experience he has from being that high level a goalie for that long is priceless to have in your locker room for young goalies like Markstrom and every other player that shoots on him during practice or interacts with him. I don't see how people don't get that unless they're being intentionally dense.

Yes, it's really too bad for Matt Murray that as a 21 year old, he's had to play more than one out of every ten games over the past while. It's really crippling his development that he can't watch Fleury play over him. He needs to develop culture while watching and learning from a veteran. He needs to play minimal minutes for another 6 years before he can carry enough culture to be a 'proven number 1 goalie'.

Miller was never the "best goalie on the planet for a while". He has ONE season with a SV% .920 or higher.

 

[MS]

Miller was the reason why the score was close in most of the games he played this year.

Even if that was true relative to what Markstrom and Lack provided/could have provided (it isn't), it's completely pointless.

Except Miller isn't being asked to play 75 games he's being asked to play less than 50 to help Markstrom's development along which is going perfectly.

Miller started 28 of the first 35 games, a 66-game full-season pace. Then got hurt.

The started 13 of the next 18 games after getting hurt, a 59-game full-season pace.

Then they split games over the last month once the team was out of the playoffs. But if he didn't get hurt, he would have cleared 60 games last season even with the splitting of games late.

Markstrom was good right from the start last year. He doesn't need Miller. And neither did Lack.

Miller was the best goalie on the planet for a while, definitely top 5 for a long time, his work habits that got him there haven't changed and we want them rubbing off on Markstrom. The experience he has from being that high level a goalie for that long is priceless to have in your locker room for young goalies like Markstrom and every other player that shoots on him during practice or interacts with him. I don't see how people don't get that unless they're being intentionally dense.

Miller has 1 season in his career where he finished top-5 in Vezina or All-Star voting. And 3 where he finished top-10. You're greatly overstating his resume. He was an average to slightly-above-average goalie for a long time with one outlier season.

Also he's traditionally had a reputation as a terrible mentor who couldn't get along with his backups in Buffalo.

Markstrom isn't 21. He's 26 and should have been starting regularly last season once it was obvious how good he was, and should be starting 60+ games next season.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Except Miller isn't being asked to play 75 games he's being asked to play less than 50 to help Markstrom's development along which is going perfectly.

Miller was the best goalie on the planet for a while, definitely top 5 for a long time, his work habits that got him there haven't changed and we want them rubbing off on Markstrom. The experience he has from being that high level a goalie for that long is priceless to have in your locker room for young goalies like Markstrom and every other player that shoots on him during practice or interacts with him. I don't see how people don't get that unless they're being intentionally dense.

Miller won the Vezina in one year where he got hot and other goalies had down years, but he was not a definite top 5 for a long time. He's a career average NHL starter, who's always been grossly overrated by some.

 

[Toxic0n]

I'm sorry, Miller was not the best goalie on the planet at any point in his career. That's an absurd statement.
Even if he was, it does not justify his contract, despite all the menthorship BS.
Lack is the better goalie at this point in time

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

Giving up Hansen for a pick is a tough call. That guy brings a lot to the table and not all of it can be measured by analytics.

 

[DL44]

Any vet of value? Hamhuis, Hansen, possibly Vrbata. Maybe Burrows? Would be nice to get rid of that Miller contract.



A season ago people were willing to move Hansen as a throw in in most trades. He has one breakout season that's unlikely to be replicated and all of a sudden he's too valuable to move?

What i actually said was Hansen would be more valuable for us to hang on to then the pick return he would garner that wouldn't help for 3 or so yrs if at all.

I would easily consider packaging him in bigger trade in a heartbeat!

He wouldn't have. Even better. One less bad contract on the books. One less bad trade to his name.



No he's not better than Lack, as evidenced by him being outplayed by Lack in the only year they were on the same team.

Any mention of the D that were and weren't healthy...
during Miller's 930+ Jan. His crap Feb. Lack's great March/April.
Or is that a cop out as well?

Lots of players were available. This is just a cop out IMO.

Well maybe.
My statement was still a fact... and yours is speculation.

Not hyperbolic at all. The results this year prove this.


No. Just that we may not be a bottom 5 team. It takes a special kind of incompetence to do that with a cap max team. On second thought....maybe we will still be bottom 5.

Maybe.

 

[Hit the post]

Maybe.

Maybe not.

 

[TheWolf*]

I'm sorry, Miller was not the best goalie on the planet at any point in his career. That's an absurd statement.
Even if he was, it does not justify his contract, despite all the menthorship BS.
Lack is the better goalie at this point in time

Did he not win the Vezina trophy in 2010, the same year he won the MVP for the Olympic tournament where he stood on his head game after game? I think it's fair to say that in 2010, there was no better goalie in the world. It's pretty far from absurd.

 

[Toxic0n]

Any mention of the D that were and weren't healthy...
during Miller's 930+ Jan. His crap Feb. Lack's great March/April.
Or is that a cop out as well?

Why don't you tell us? I want to know who this great D was that improved only Lack's SV % when he returned to the line up?

Here are some facts for you, feel free to ignore them and push your agenda, as usual:
Miller Lack
Jan .937 .895
Feb .894 .923
Mar n/a .923
Apr .821 .935

I guess this awesome Defenceman only played well in front of Lack. Poor Miller.

Edit. Since I already looked up the data, I built a simple chart to demonstrate that outside of Oct and Jan, Lack was the better goalie. Unless this awesome D was only injured for Lack's games....

Did he not win the Vezina trophy in 2010, the same year he won the MVP for the Olympic tournament where he stood on his head game after game? I think it's fair to say that in 2010, there was no better goalie in the world. It's pretty far from absurd.

So one Vezina win = best goalie in the world? I would disagree. Otherwise, you are implying that Bobrovsky was the best goalie on the planet in 2013? I guess nobody bothered to tell Price or Lundqvist

 

[banme*]

He's still a ****** and has been poor relative to his salary here, but that doesn't change that Miller certainly played like the best goalie in the world in 2009-2010, no ifs/and/buts.

 

[TheWolf*]

Why don't you tell us? I want to know who this great D was that improved only Lack's SV % when he returned to the line up?

Here are some facts for you, feel free to ignore them and push your agenda, as usual:
Miller Lack
Jan .937 .895
Feb .894 .923
Mar n/a .923
Apr .821 .935

I guess this awesome Defenceman only played well in front of Lack. Poor Miller.

Edit. Since I already looked up the data, I built a simple chart to demonstrate that outside of Oct and Jan, Lack was the better goalie. Unless this awesome D was only injured for Lack's games....

So one Vezina win = best goalie in the world? I would disagree. Otherwise, you are implying that Bobrovsky was the best goalie on the planet in 2013? I guess nobody bothered to tell Price or Lundqvist

At that time, in 2010, for that one year, he was the best goalie in the world - or at least it could be argued he was. It's certainly not an absurd statement to suggest he was at that time.

 

[Toxic0n]

Was Bobrovsky was the best goalie on the planet in 2013? Yes or no?

 

[TheWolf*]

Was Bobrovsky was the best goalie on the planet in 2013? Yes or no?

Is that the year he won the Vezina? I guess it could be argued he was. I would certainly not classify it as "absurd" to suggest he was at that point.

 

[banme*]

Yes. Having the highest 5 on 5 Sv% in the NHL that season as evidence.

 

[Toxic0n]

Agree to disagree. I think the "best goalie in the world" should not be determined by who had the best 60 game stretch of a 7 month period. The whole body of work matters. We see goalies get hot and fade all the time. Miller is an above average goalie that had a one really good season. At no point in time, he was the BEST goalie in the world.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

There is a difference between being the best goalie and having the best results.

 

[TheWolf*]

There is a difference between being the best goalie and having the best results.

The criteria for the Vezina trophy:

"The Vezina Trophy is awarded annually to the National Hockey League's goaltender who is "adjudged to be the best at this position". At the end of each season, the thirty NHL general managers vote to determine the winner."

If we can agree that the NHL has the best goaltenders in the world, the goaltender that wins the Vezina trophy has been viewed as being the best goaltender in the NHL for that season. I don't see where it says this is for the "best results?" Is says the "best at this position."

My point, in 2010 and in 2013, you could argue that the winners of the Vezina trophy were the best goaltenders in the world at that time. It's certainly not an "absurd" argument. Ryan Miller in 2010 was not only the best goaltender in the NHL regular season, he was also the best player in the Olympics, a best on best tournament. [MOD]

 

[Hit the post]

"Best goalie" also let in a soft goal that let us win the Gold Medal....

In 2010, Mike Gillis was voted the best GM....

 

[Bleach Clean]

Why so down on Tallon as a GM? What poor moves has he made? (Honest question).

RFA Qualifying Offers, Horton trade, sat on Luongo trade for a year, Bolland signing, fired DeBoer, mis-evaluated Higgins' worth, traded for Jovo and gave him a hefty contract based on reputation, Khabibulin/Aucoin/Lapointe/Sopel signings, firing Denis Savard the way he did, constantly going to the Black Hawk 'well' for cast offs and more.

His best move, to me, is in trading for Patrick Sharp.

 

[TheWolf*]

"Best goalie" also let in a soft goal that let us win the Gold Medal....

In 2010, Mike Gillis was voted the best GM....

Yup and in that year he was the best GM. I am not sure what is so outlandish about that statement. Being the best is, in the words of Mike Gillis, a fluid situation. It is subject to change.

 

[TheWolf*]

RFA Qualifying Offers, Horton trade, sat on Luongo trade for a year, Bolland signing, fired DeBoer, mis-evaluated Higgins' worth, traded for Jovo and gave him a hefty contract based on reputation, Khabibulin/Aucoin/Lapointe/Sopel signings, firing Denis Savard the way he did, constantly going to the Black Hawk 'well' for cast offs and more.

His best move, to me, is in trading for Patrick Sharp.

Outside of the RFA offer debacle, I never considered any of that. Good points.

 

[DL44]

Maybe not.

I hope maybe not

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

RFA Qualifying Offers, Horton trade, sat on Luongo trade for a year, Bolland signing, fired DeBoer, mis-evaluated Higgins' worth, traded for Jovo and gave him a hefty contract based on reputation, Khabibulin/Aucoin/Lapointe/Sopel signings, firing Denis Savard the way he did, constantly going to the Black Hawk 'well' for cast offs and more.

His best move, to me, is in trading for Patrick Sharp.

Yeah its a tough one. The grass is always greener...

 

[Hyzer]

im not sure i could survive a year more of bennings ridiculous moves and dumb signings/trades

i dont think my young heart could take it

 

[Bleach Clean]

Yeah its a tough one. The grass is always greener...

It is, and this was my point when the fanbase was calling for Gillis's head. Certain fans figured there would only be upside with that move, and look how that went... However, with Tallon, I feel that his decidedly mixed record is still better than what we've seen from Benning thus far, so there's something to bank on there.



I'm not a Tallon fan at all, but I have noticed tendencies:

1. He shoots to get that long-term #1C + #1D + #1G combination. Usually opting for a veteran Goalie to complete the puzzle. Until he gets these pieces, he's usually in 'tank' mode.

2. He tends to defer to size when he can. If there's not a clear draft choice where he picks, he tends to lean towards tools. This a mixed bag in terms of strategy.

3. Will compliment his roster with 'soft' skill. Guys like Jokinen, Versteeg, Boyes, Flieschmann etc... It doesn't matter if these talents are not well rounded, he will take a chance on them.

4. Definitely has a preference for the 'checking' centre. Madden, Bolland, Sharp (was acquired as a checking C), Yanic Perrault, Goc etc...

5. Is generally regarded as not-so-good at the draft. For proof, have a look through the CHI boards. Seabrook and Keith preceded his hiring (Pulford picks, I believe).