Both were good signings, but, just too long of term. Vrbata was great last year. So was Miller. But, Vrbata was wasted $$ this season, and Miller is only so/so, and also a waste for next year.
We need some vets, but I hope we can sign some UFAs with heart and skill. And, keep the terms short, so they don't become road blocks,
I don't think anyone saw Vrbata's rapid fall coming - and he's gone July 1, so really, was it a bad signing?
Miller was brought in to bring some stability to the net. The 3 year signing was long enough to let Markstrom or Lack develop into a starter without the pressure, while still giving us a chance to win most/many nights.
As for a short term signing? If 2 and 3 years are too long, what kind of UFA vet are we going to get on 1 and 2 year terms? :/ Most of these short term signings are done so a player can re-establish his career - like Vrbata might be looking at in July (and generally those aren't 'heart and skill' guys).
Y'know what kind of vets we get on 1-2 year deals? The Matt Bartkowskis and Yannick Webers of the league!
There was really nothing wrong with the Miller and Vrbata signings. Short term solutions with low risk, and they aren't paid a ton. Not to mention who the hell else do we sign that could've helped at the time? Cap space is great and all if there are players available to use it on, oh and those players have to want to sign with the Canucks.
C'mon Tciso!! You act as though we had free run at all the UFAs throughout the league could determine salary and term at our leisure.
There's 29 other teams competing for the same pool of players.
Honestly, can you let me know who you would have rather spent the $11M on that we paid Miller and Vrbata?
Before you assemble that extensive list don't forget the had to be UFA, want to play in Vancouver, fall within our cap structure, we would have to outbid other suitors, fill the positions we needed, oh and by your standards be better players than Miller and Vrbata. I won't hold my breath.