From Bountiful to Ponoka

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 5428
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by Meds » Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:12 pm

Eriksson was a bad idea from the start because the reason for getting him was to have him play with the Sedins in hopes of recreating their WC's magic. Sounds good in theory, but it was 5 years too late and the Sedins are in massive decline.

Doc will argue that Loui's contract is a smart one because in the final 2 years his NTC changes to allow for them to move him to 15 teams of Eriksson's choosing, and because his salary will drop to $4M in real dollars. Problem with that is that Loui will want to go to a contender, so his $6M cap hit won't be an easy thing to absorb. The Canucks could, of course, retain salary. However, in 4 years the hope is that they are close to being in that mix of contenders and cap space may be valuable to us, on top of that, the player they are trying to deal will be 35 years old and have 2 years remaining on his deal.

A cap floor team might want his cap hit and reduced salary you say? I say that very few cap floor teams are going to be on his list of teams.

Giving Eriksson $6M with 6 years of term was a poor decision unless the plan was for him to be productive AFTER the Sedins are gone.

User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
Posts: 8497
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by Blob Mckenzie » Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:13 pm

Re Docs drivel about Miller :Not really. Markstrom has performed almost as well and is younger and improving. Thanks for the drama though. :lol:
TELL ME HOW MY ASS TASTES

User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
Posts: 14763
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by Strangelove » Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:53 pm

Meds wrote: Eriksson was a bad idea from the start because the reason for getting him was to have him play with the Sedins in hopes of recreating their WC's magic.
Oh was that the reason! :P
Meds wrote: Doc will argue that Loui's contract is a smart one because in the final 2 years his NTC changes to allow for them to move him to 15 teams of Eriksson's choosing, and because his salary will drop to $4M in real dollars.
Actually this is what I said:

http://www.canuckscorner.com/forums/vie ... 72#p274772

16 teams and only $1M in real dollars for 2020-21 (after Canucks pay the $3M signing bonus on July 1).
Meds wrote: Problem with that is that Loui will want to go to a contender, so his $6M cap hit won't be an easy thing to absorb.
Are there 16 "contenders"? :eh:

How do you know if he wants to go to a contender?

Perhaps after winning a Cup or two with the Canucks he's good with going back to Europe. :D

This may come as a surprise to you but even contenders care about the bottom line.

(ask the Ducks about dat dere)
Meds wrote: A cap floor team might want his cap hit and reduced salary you say? I say that very few cap floor teams are going to be on his list of teams.
16 teams buddy!!!

Right now there is only one team anywhere near the floor (Carolina).
Meds wrote: Giving Eriksson $6M with 6 years of term was a poor decision unless the plan was for him to be productive AFTER the Sedins are gone.
Yeahno, they thought the Sedins were going to play another 6 years! :lol:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
Posts: 14763
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by Strangelove » Tue Jan 31, 2017 9:57 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:Re Docs drivel about Miller :Not really. Markstrom has performed almost as well and is younger and improving. Thanks for the drama though. :lol:
Miller has been good value for his entire 3-yr contract, .917 sv% over that time.

(slightly above his career average)

Benning did very well by bringing Miller in at a discount from his previous salary. :shock:

That's a free asset... and usually UFAs get a raise.

This team would be seriously fucked-up right now without Miller...
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 9020
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by Topper » Wed Feb 01, 2017 6:50 am

Sadly, Jacob 's development has stalled and he has done nothing to wrestle the #1 job from Miller. It is unfortunate.

In hindsite, for those who see with their myopic brown eye, the LE signing has been disappointing. he is definitely a streaky point scorer and if you were to look at the stats, he's about 6-8 points behind where you'd expect him in the lineup.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.

User avatar
micky107
CC Legend
Posts: 3185
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 6:27 am

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by micky107 » Wed Feb 01, 2017 8:53 am

I think tomorrow is the day the NHL goalies have to have their "equipment" in order. :hmmm:
"evolution"

Ronning's Ghost
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by Ronning's Ghost » Wed Feb 01, 2017 4:56 pm

Strangelove wrote:
Blob Mckenzie wrote:Re Docs drivel about Miller :Not really. Markstrom has performed almost as well and is younger and improving. Thanks for the drama though. :lol:
Miller has been good value for his entire 3-yr contract, .917 sv% over that time.

(slightly above his career average).....


This team would be seriously fucked-up right now without Miller...
True, but how does a rebuilding team, hoping to peak 2-3 years after the end of Miller's contract, benefit from this quality goaltending? Wouldn't they have been better off losing the games Miller kept them in, and drafting higher?

User avatar
rats19
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 7789
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:21 am
Location: over here.....

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by rats19 » Wed Feb 01, 2017 4:58 pm

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Strangelove wrote:
Blob Mckenzie wrote:Re Docs drivel about Miller :Not really. Markstrom has performed almost as well and is younger and improving. Thanks for the drama though. :lol:
Miller has been good value for his entire 3-yr contract, .917 sv% over that time.

(slightly above his career average).....


This team would be seriously fucked-up right now without Miller...
True, but how does a rebuilding team, hoping to peak 2-3 years after the end of Miller's contract, benefit from this quality goaltending? Wouldn't they have been better off losing the games Miller kept them in, and drafting higher?
Probably last year yah, but look at what happened anyways. This year and next not so deep...
You are who you hang with.....

Ronning's Ghost
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by Ronning's Ghost » Wed Feb 01, 2017 5:14 pm

rats19 wrote:
Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Strangelove wrote:
Blob Mckenzie wrote:Re Docs drivel about Miller :Not really. Markstrom has performed almost as well and is younger and improving. Thanks for the drama though. :lol:
Miller has been good value for his entire 3-yr contract, .917 sv% over that time.

(slightly above his career average).....


This team would be seriously fucked-up right now without Miller...
True, but how does a rebuilding team, hoping to peak 2-3 years after the end of Miller's contract, benefit from this quality goaltending? Wouldn't they have been better off losing the games Miller kept them in, and drafting higher?
Probably last year yah, but look at what happened anyways. This year and next not so deep...
My comment referred to the wisdom of signing Miller in the first place, and so how he affected their performance in the three years of his contract, (including the year McDavid was drafted -- and guaranteed to the team that finished last), which are now widely acknowledged to have been rebuilding years for the Canucks. Next year, the Canucks may no longer receive Miller's quality goaltending, depending on their plans, and his. In either case, it is unlikely he will still be playing in 2-3 years, when experts predict that the Canucks will be relevant again, so their current goaltending plans would appear to hinge on the development of Demko.

User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
Posts: 14763
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by Strangelove » Wed Feb 01, 2017 7:53 pm

Ronning's Ghost wrote: My comment referred to the wisdom of signing Miller in the first place, and so how he affected their performance in the three years of his contract, which are now widely acknowledged to have been rebuilding years for the Canucks.
When the Genius signed Miller, I argued furiously that the contract was great value for Canucks.

Now that the Genius (and yours truly) have been proven right

... someone demands to know why the Genius signed a great value contract for Canucks! :lol:
Ronning's Ghost wrote: (including the year McDavid was drafted -- and guaranteed to the team that finished last),
Nope, the team that finished last in 2015 only had a 20% chance of winning the lottery (McDavid). :drink:
Ronning's Ghost wrote: Next year, the Canucks may no longer receive Miller's quality goaltending, depending on their plans, and his. In either case, it is unlikely he will still be playing in 2-3 years, when experts predict that the Canucks will be relevant again, so their current goaltending plans would appear to hinge on the development of Demko.
Miller gave Canucks a great deal of leadership, and has mentored Marstrombone.

(Marstrombone will hopefully pass that on to Demko)

See, your young players must learn proper preparation, professionalism, winning attitude, etc.

Highly doubtful, Miller or no, Canucks would have done any better than Boeser, Juolevi, and Whoever.

Now please ensure that your seatbelt is securely fastened and your seat is in it's upright position. :mex:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3310
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by ukcanuck » Wed Feb 01, 2017 8:14 pm

Topper wrote:Sadly, Jacob 's development has stalled and he has done nothing to wrestle the #1 job from Miller. It is unfortunate.

In hindsite, for those who see with their myopic brown eye, the LE signing has been disappointing. he is definitely a streaky point scorer and if you were to look at the stats, he's about 6-8 points behind where you'd expect him in the lineup.
it seems LE = Geoff Courtnall


when he cashes in its so frustrating that he doesnt do that all the time

User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3310
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by ukcanuck » Wed Feb 01, 2017 8:15 pm

Strangelove wrote:
Ronning's Ghost wrote: My comment referred to the wisdom of signing Miller in the first place, and so how he affected their performance in the three years of his contract, which are now widely acknowledged to have been rebuilding years for the Canucks.
When the Genius signed Miller, I argued furiously that the contract was great value for Canucks.

Now that the Genius (and yours truly) have been proven right

... someone demands to know why the Genius signed a great value contract for Canucks! :lol:
Ronning's Ghost wrote: (including the year McDavid was drafted -- and guaranteed to the team that finished last),
Nope, the team that finished last in 2015 only had a 20% chance of winning the lottery (McDavid). :drink:
Ronning's Ghost wrote: Next year, the Canucks may no longer receive Miller's quality goaltending, depending on their plans, and his. In either case, it is unlikely he will still be playing in 2-3 years, when experts predict that the Canucks will be relevant again, so their current goaltending plans would appear to hinge on the development of Demko.
Miller gave Canucks a great deal of leadership, and has mentored Marstrombone.

(Marstrombone will hopefully pass that on to Demko)

See, your young players must learn proper preparation, professionalism, winning attitude, etc.

Highly doubtful, Miller or no, Canucks would have done any better than Boeser, Juolevi, and Whoever.

Now please ensure that your seatbelt is securely fastened and your seat is in it's upright position. :mex:
such a genius in hockey, such a nemesis in politics ...

Ronning's Ghost
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by Ronning's Ghost » Wed Feb 01, 2017 8:22 pm

Strangelove wrote:When the Genius signed Miller, I argued furiously that the contract was great value for Canucks.
And I agree, Miller has performed up to the value of his contract.
Strangelove wrote:... someone demands to know why the Genius signed a great value contract for Canucks! :lol:
Yeah, that would be me.
Strangelove wrote:
Ronning's Ghost wrote: (including the year McDavid was drafted -- and guaranteed to the team that finished last),
Nope, the team that finished last in 2015 only had a 20% chance of winning the lottery (McDavid). :drink:
OK, I botched that one, but even 20% would have been much higher than the chance they had.
Strangelove wrote:
Miller gave Canucks a great deal of leadership, and has mentored Marstrombone.

(Marstrombone will hopefully pass that on to Demko)

See, your young players must learn proper preparation, professionalism, winning attitude, etc.
So it is your stance that the organization needs those qualities modeled individually by position, such that the Sedins, for example, would not suffice ? Even then, the Canucks could have found a veteran goalie who could have modeled all of the those traits, but was less talented at actually stopping pucks.
Strangelove wrote:Highly doubtful, Miller or no, Canucks would have done any better than Boeser, Juolevi, and Whoever.
So it is your position that the Canucks are further ahead with Boeser, Juolevi, and Whoever (+ Miller's no doubt exemplary leadership) than they would have been with McDavid, Matthews, and Whoever (+ some other goalie's only adequate mentorship) ? That is to say, two players who have yet to play in the NHL will be more useful in the crucial 2-3 years than two players of the same age who are already having NHL success ? This strains any sober credulity to the breaking point. What is in that kool-aid Doc ?
Strangelove wrote: :mex:
Does it interact synergistically with whatever that emoticon is smoking ?

User avatar
Reefer2
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 2963
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by Reefer2 » Wed Feb 01, 2017 8:27 pm

Strangelove wrote:
Ronning's Ghost wrote: My comment referred to the wisdom of signing Miller in the first place, and so how he affected their performance in the three years of his contract, which are now widely acknowledged to have been rebuilding years for the Canucks.
When the Genius signed Miller, I argued furiously that the contract was great value for Canucks.

Now that the Genius (and yours truly) have been proven right

... someone demands to know why the Genius signed a great value contract for Canucks! :lol:
Ronning's Ghost wrote: (including the year McDavid was drafted -- and guaranteed to the team that finished last),
Nope, the team that finished last in 2015 only had a 20% chance of winning the lottery (McDavid). :drink:
Ronning's Ghost wrote: Next year, the Canucks may no longer receive Miller's quality goaltending, depending on their plans, and his. In either case, it is unlikely he will still be playing in 2-3 years, when experts predict that the Canucks will be relevant again, so their current goaltending plans would appear to hinge on the development of Demko.
Miller gave Canucks a great deal of leadership, and has mentored Marstrombone.

(Marstrombone will hopefully pass that on to Demko)

See, your young players must learn proper preparation, professionalism, winning attitude, etc.

Highly doubtful, Miller or no, Canucks would have done any better than Boeser, Juolevi, and Whoever.

Now please ensure that your seatbelt is securely fastened and your seat is in it's upright position. :mex:
Yawn, fart, burp.

User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
Posts: 14763
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: From Bountiful to Ponoka

Post by Strangelove » Wed Feb 01, 2017 8:51 pm

Ronning's Ghost wrote: OK, I botched that one, but even 20% would have been much higher than the chance they had.
So as GM you would've what... broken all 4 Sedin legs... for a 20% shot in a rigged lottery? :shock:
Ronning's Ghost wrote: Canucks could have found a veteran goalie who could have modeled all of the those traits, but was less talented at actually stopping pucks.
Yeah you're not getting any of this "Winning Culture" stuff at all are ya buds....
Ronning's Ghost wrote: So it is your position that the Canucks are further ahead with Boeser, Juolevi, and Whoever (+ Miller's no doubt exemplary leadership) than they would have been with McDavid, Matthews, and Whoever
UMMMM... no way were Canucks going to get McDavid there Bright Eyes.

If you love losing so much you should jump on board the Golden Knights bandwagon! :thumbs:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

Post Reply