Player Discussion Tyler Myers thread

[Green Blank Stare]

 

[Kryten]

Myers: Terrible pass to no one
Boeser: was not in a position to do anything if he got the pass
Miller: too deep for a Myers or Boeser pass

 

[VanJack]

Demko was quoted as saying that the Canucks re-signing Myers, was 'one of the best days of his life'. I guess the two are fast friends.

But after tonight, if signing Myers was still the 'best day' of his life, then the 'worst day' must really have been bad.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I mean I get why management brought him back, purely from the perspective of a) money, he wanted less to stay than he likely would have gotten from the open market. b) a desire to stay in Van, I think he lives in the Okanagan in the summer and loves the area. c) familiarity with the players, coaching staff and systems...all very good reasons to bring him back...however, he's just not good at the role he is given and it would seem that nobody in management or the coaching staff can see it because he's continually put in positions to fail and more often than not, fails....and rather than determine that he's a problem, he's given more rope.

I would hope that Desharnais wasn't a "desperation signing"...but he very well could be one. I just think that cap space is far too valuable a commodity to be throwing away at pieces that don't adequately fill needs...IMO the need was pretty clearly a legit top 4 defenseman who could move the puck, instead we went with some trees. Those trees are now an impediment to addressing our actual needs...as much as I like PA and company, for every 4-5 transactions they make that I think are decent to very good, they come up with a real headscratcher that make me wonder if they know what they're doing.

Hmmm, I actually think management wanted scoring in whatever form that could be secured. That's why the money went to DeBrusk over the defense.

Myers is fine as a stand alone 4/5 signing. He's prone to mistakes, but are options like Carrier, Fabbro and Walker appreciably better? I'm not sure. As maddening as he is, upgrades are few.

The right side D talent is weaker league wide. These defenders play up from where they are optimal (Hronek is no different). Another 4/5 RHD for $2m~ would have bought them time. (What Desharnais needed to be)

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

To be honest, I'm not even mad at Myers anymore. He is what he is: a very flawed but still effective third pairing defenseman. He can be rotated up the line up or work in a "platoon" style ala last season but deploying him as a regular top four and being surprised he can't handle it, reliably, isn't his fault. That's on management.

He's basically Ian Cole. Funny how he also worked in the exact same capacity but Allvin/Rutherford let him walk after he turned down 1.5M. They really thought Myers was better than he was.

 

[VanJack]

At this point in his career, Myers is a solid 5-6 d-man. He's never been a top four guy, not even in Winnipeg before Benning signed him to his six year contract.

So at 34, moving him into the top four was doomed to fail. But what choice is there without Hughes and Hronek?

And sadly until they get those two guys back, and get some help via the trade market, Myers will continue to be mis-cast and the Canucks will continue to pay the price.

 

[SillyRabbit]

I have consistently said that cap space is only valuable if you make good use of it. At the end of the day you need good players to fill key positions. But you quoted me and missed my point:



There's certainly "NHL defenseman" to be had in the offseason is my point. And no I'm not in favour of buying out Myers in the offseason.

This is where professional scouting comes into the mix.

If you have a good enough eye and a good set of evaluation metrics, you should be able to find some guys out there who can plug some of our defensive holes.

For example, Sherwood has been a home run pickup. We basically need a defenceman version of Sherwood (we actually need like three if we're being honest).

 

[F A N]

played 22 minutes tonight and a -2

I hate posts like this. The first goal against wasn't his fault. The second goal he could have done a better job but not really his fault. The third on OT, kind of his fault but maybe don't have him out in OT? The Soucy Juulsen pairing was worse.

He's basically Ian Cole. Funny how he also worked in the exact same capacity but Allvin/Rutherford let him walk after he turned down 1.5M. They really thought Myers was better than he was.

Cole has had several seasons where he appears to have slowed down towards the end of the season. In their respective primes Cole was much better defensively but Myers is a RHD and Cole isn't. Clearly Tocchet was playing Myers more.

Now Cole was willing to sign a 1 year deal and we needed to give Myers 3 so that is a significant difference but ultimately it's harder to find RHDs so there's a premium. Consider that $1.5M went to Forbort but 2x$2M went to Desharnais.

To be honest, I'm not even mad at Myers anymore. He is what he is: a very flawed but still effective third pairing defenseman. He can be rotated up the line up or work in a "platoon" style ala last season but deploying him as a regular top four and being surprised he can't handle it, reliably, isn't his fault. That's on management.

Ultimately I think this is the position we should be taking. He's not making $6M a year anymore. He's making $3M and he's been averaging close to 22 minutes a game in the month of December. And really Kraken's comeback victory can't be pinned on him.

 

[F A N]

This is where professional scouting comes into the mix.

If you have a good enough eye and a good set of evaluation metrics, you should be able to find some guys out there who can plug some of our defensive holes.

For example, Sherwood has been a home run pickup. We basically need a defenceman version of Sherwood (we actually need like three if we're being honest).

Sure but it's hard to hit home runs without trying to hit one . Sherwood has been a home run but the Canucks clearly didn't think he would be a home run. Otherwise they could have signed him to say a 4 year deal at $1.5M-$2M AAV.

The point is that you generally get what you pay for and there isn't an endless supply of good defensemen. Take away the minuses:

Bear had been a depth defenseman on a good team but he was making $2.2M. We were able to acquire him for a 5th and we got solid value out of him. But he wasn't a top 4 solution as expected. Cole was an aging top 4 defenseman who went to the highest bidder and we got similar performance to what he gave Carolina and Tampa. At $3M we got solid value out of him. We got a ton of value out of Zadorov but he was a very good #5 Dman that we were willing to re-sign for $4.6M AAV before the playoffs. We also acquired him for a 3rd more than what we paid for Bear and we got legit top 4 performance out of him in the playoffs. With Hronek, we traded a potential top 15 pick for him and what we got in return was a first pairing partner for Hughes. This is the way pro scouting is suppose to work. You make good trades but not necessarily home runs.

Take Rutherford's trade for Marcus Pettersson. At the time most thought the Ducks won the trade as Sprong was highly regarded. Rutherford also quickly signed Pettersson to a long term deal. It ended up being a very good trade but you can't take away the value of Sprong at the time.

 

[ratbid]

All I have to say is Myers overskating that puck then turning it over for a goal against is the most Tyler Myers thing I've seen in a while.

He just simply can't take on as much responsibility as he's being asked with Hughes and Hronek out, but at 3 million that's to be expected.

 

[Hit the post]

This is where professional scouting comes in..

For example, Sherwood has been a home run pickup. We basically need a defenceman version of Sherwood (we actually need like three if we're being honest).

Like for example last year when during the season we picked up the Russian. I have faith in this management doing this again. Might not be as good as Z but I don't see them standing pat.