Player Discussion Tyler Myers thread

bandwagonesque

I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
Mar 5, 2014
7,543
5,956

thekernel

Registered User
Apr 11, 2011
6,476
3,941
Just checking in to see how some of our ex-Jets are doing. First page read was very promising but the subsequent pages have turned really negative on him.

1 point in his past 17 games? YIKES!
He really hasn't been half as bad as the nutters are suggesting. Actually he's been quite decent. The defense is a lot better in transition compared to last year, and bless Quinn Hughes for his godlike ability in that category, but Myers has proven to be a good fit for the system too. Very adept at using his legs in open ice.
 

forty47seven

Registered User
May 2, 2009
757
223
... And on what do you think they base their opinions...?

On the behaviour of the average GM in past free agent markets and Benning's track record specifically? People miss read the market. The free agent class this offseason was probably the deepest in a decade or more while like half the league was in cap trouble. Things shifted and we didn't see the same numbers of contracts with crazy term handed out to second tier players.

Benning still managed to give by far the most term and money to a defenseman if that's any consolation. He still paid higher and for longer than anyone else just like years past. We just didn't see a 2016 like frenzy for these type of second line/pairing guys. It wasn't unreasonable to say Myers or Gardiner would get 7X7 before July 1 and no one needed to hear it from the Canucks to draw that conclusion.

Edit: The salary cap being stagnant, and forecasts of the same, after years of growth played a part in the market changing as well.
 
Last edited:

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,207
28,115
Vancouver, BC
On the behaviour of the average GM in past free agent markets and Benning's track record specifically? People miss read the market. The free agent class this offseason was probably the deepest in a decade or more while like half the league was in cap trouble. Things shifted and we didn't see the same numbers of contracts with crazy term handed out to second tier players.

Benning still managed to give by far the most term and money to a defenseman if that's any consolation. He still paid higher and for longer than anyone else just like years past. We just didn't see a 2016 like frenzy for these type of second line/pairing guys. It wasn't unreasonable to say Myers or Gardiner would get 7X7 before July 1 and no one needed to hear it from the Canucks to draw that conclusion.

No, but lebrun an Lavoie are insiders and if they did base their opinions on insider info that was released by the canucks it would manifest itself in a way that is indistinguishable from what we saw, so whether they did or didn't, you can't tell from the quotes you were citing. So I'm not sure what your point was.
 

bandwagonesque

I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
Mar 5, 2014
7,543
5,956
No, but lebrun an Lavoie are insiders and if they did base their opinions on insider info that was released by the canucks it would manifest itself in a way that is indistinguishable from what we saw, so whether they did or didn't, you can't tell from the quotes you were citing. So I'm not sure what your point was.
If it's your stated opinion both that 1) there's no evidence the Canucks are floating rumours of higher contracts and that 2) there's no way to infer whether they are or not from anything anyone has said, why are you suggesting it's likely the Canucks are floating rumours of higher contract numbers?
 

forty47seven

Registered User
May 2, 2009
757
223
No, but lebrun an Lavoie are insiders and if they did base their opinions on insider info that was released by the canucks it would manifest itself in a way that is indistinguishable from what we saw, so whether they did or didn't, you can't tell from the quotes you were citing. So I'm not sure what your point was.
Journalists generally preface their opinions and hear say or rumours differently so this is moot anyway. But by that same logic we could never know or not know if information was leaked by the Canucks. What's your point? This was given as proof the Canucks floated the 7X7 numbers.

Or do you believe Lavoie had insider information from Carolina to make signing Jake three weeks later look even better too?
 

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,207
28,115
Vancouver, BC
Journalists generally preface their opinions and hear say or rumours differently so this is moot anyway. But by that same logic we could never know or not know if information was leaked by the Canucks. What's your point? This was given as proof the Canucks floated the 7X7 numbers.

Or do you believe Lavoie had insider information from Carolina to make signing Jake three weeks later look even better too?

I don't believe I have offered an opinion on if he did or didn't. I basically agree with what you said that we could never know or not. My point was that you seemed to assert that becuase Lavoie didn't prelude what he said with "based on what the Canucks have told me," that this somehow proves he didn't get that info from the Canucks.

His opinion is always going to be based on whatever information he has, same as you or me. But he has access to different information than you or I do. Whether the Canucks did or didn't do this I don't know but we can't say they didn't based on his words. If the Canucks did do this, his statement would be exactly the same IMO.
 

bandwagonesque

I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
Mar 5, 2014
7,543
5,956
I don't believe I have offered an opinion on if he did or didn't. I basically agree with what you said that we could never know or not. My point was that you seemed to assert that becuase Lavoie didn't prelude what he said with "based on what the Canucks have told me," that this somehow proves he didn't get that info from the Canucks.
He isn't saying it proves that, it isn't what he's trying to argue, and you know it. He's contradicting the implication that the team likely did leak the higher numbers, which most posters in this thread are putting forth despite their being no reason to believe it's true and which you're making every effort to passively defend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: forty47seven

forty47seven

Registered User
May 2, 2009
757
223
I don't believe I have offered an opinion on if he did or didn't. I basically agree with what you said that we could never know or not. My point was that you seemed to assert that becuase Lavoie didn't prelude what he said with "based on what the Canucks have told me," that this somehow proves he didn't get that info from the Canucks.

His opinion is always going to be based on whatever information he has, same as you or me. But he has access to different information than you or I do. Whether the Canucks did or didn't do this I don't know but we can't say they didn't based on his words. If the Canucks did do this, his statement would be exactly the same IMO.

Great, you agree there's no way to prove the Canucks floated the numbers based on the links. That was my point.
 

Regal

Registered User
Mar 12, 2010
26,498
16,398
Vancouver
Account4Hockey is a scribe that writes down quotes he hears from the radio.





I'm not saying the leak to look better isn't plausible, but I'm pretty sure Friedman is referring to if they had traded for him this offseason as was rumoured and re-signed him during the year. He was just unsure if they could re-sign him to 8 years right away after the trade, or if there was a waiting period for when they could until after the trade deadline. He's referring to this deadline, not last year's. The wording in the CBA says the player has to be on the roster since the most recent trade deadline, so I believe he's correct. James's criticism that he wasn't on the roster or eligible doesn't make sense to me because he seems to be thinking Friedman meant last year's deadline
 
Last edited:

Nomobo

Registered User
Feb 20, 2015
6,588
3,310
Victoria
What are you seeing specifically that makes you believe Edler, our best overall defender, is the problem here?
I think Edler is too slow now at either end of the rink especially when he’s overplayed and his decision making suffers because of it. He’s often late to react and has no choice but to take a penalty or throw the puck away. He still has games where he shines but his status as best overall defender is waning imo, I see Hughes as a better option. Way more suited to how the game is evolving. I’d like to see a Hughes-Myers pairing for a few games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PuckMunchkin

Jyrki21

2021-12-05
Sponsor
You're leaving out two pretty important details:

1. There's no evidence this actually happened and as far as I know no reputable journalist has even suggested it, and
In the very post you quoted, I said "but I don't think they're really self-aware enough to do it for real." I referred to us joking about this possibility in the summer. So as usual, I'm not sure what your beef is.

I don't think the team floated the numbers, but I was agreeing with @vancityluongo that whatever the source, the expectations created by those numbers that did get floated caused fans to react more positively to the ultimate deal when it happened.
 

Grantham

Registered User
Mar 28, 2017
1,412
1,499
In my mind Edler is the wrong partner for him and I’d go as far as to say that he has been an anchor for Myers.
Good call! Looked much better against Washington. Still love Eddy, but you could see him use his reach and skating more and be a bit more aggressive on a different pairing.
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
22,688
16,172
Tyler Myers Depreciation Thread
My thoughts exactly. He is what he is. He's at best a #5 on a good NHL team, and a top-four guy on a mediocre one. The only GM in the league who couldn't or wouldn't see it is Jimbo.
 

Pavel96

Registered User
Apr 7, 2015
2,452
2,318
My thoughts exactly. He is what he is. He's at best a #5 on a good NHL team, and a top-four guy on a mediocre one. The only GM in the league who couldn't or wouldn't see it is Jimbo.
But wait, I thought one of the Pierre's said he was worth 7 million x infinity?
 

y2kcanucks

Better than you
Aug 3, 2006
71,249
10,344
Surrey, BC
My thoughts exactly. He is what he is. He's at best a #5 on a good NHL team, and a top-four guy on a mediocre one. The only GM in the league who couldn't or wouldn't see it is Jimbo.

Myers would only be considered a top 4 defenseman by someone who is just looking at his name.
 

4Twenty

Registered User
Dec 18, 2018
9,987
11,831
Myers would only be considered a top 4 defenseman by someone who is just looking at his name.
Quinn Hughes might be able to make him look passable.

Was 13 GF - 22 GA at 5 on 5 prior to last night.

Was 3 GF - 0 GA last night.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad