Canucks News and Notes

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

Moderator: Referees

dbr
CC Legend
Posts: 3093
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by dbr »

Hockey Widow wrote:That article talks about how Benning and Linden inherited a more than capable core. Funny, how under Gillis those same pundits were saying the core was done, the window was closed and hung Gillis out due to his inability or unwillingness to change the core. Now it was a more than capable core.
He's right.

People talking about how rotten the core was sixteen months ago were drawing conclusions based too heavily on the tire fire 2013-14 season.

Obviously they're not going to help us in five years but the Sedins, Edler etc. had bounceback seasons that accounted for a huge part of our improvement from a bottom ten team to a top ten team.

I don't see what the big deal is about pointing that out.

I do think the article is biased (for example, anyone can accuse a franchise of "not having a plan" if they try to find a middle ground between win now moves and a complete teardown, and Willis doesn't hesitate to do so) though, and of limited value.

We can probably expect a lot of this unless/until Benning's moves start panning out, as a lot of his approach is not exactly fashionable with the media, or fans.
User avatar
Chef Boi RD
MVP
MVP
Posts: 28935
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by Chef Boi RD »

Benning walks the walk - doesn't say we need to make bold moves he just makes them

Gillis talks the talk - says we need to make bold moves but doesn't make them

The media and fans are just shocked that we have a GM who actually has the balls to make bold moves instead of just talking about making bold moves

Go Benning go. Three first round embarrassments and one non playoff in the last 4 years. There is nothing to like about this team other than the prospects coming down the pipeline. Rebuild baby!
“Tyler Myers is my guy... I was taking to Scotty Bowman last night and he was bringing up his name, and saying he’s a big guy and big guy need big minutes to play, he is playing great for ya… and I agree with him… He’s been exceptional” - Bruce Boudreau
Dr. Tobias Funke
AHL Prospect
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 5:30 pm

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by Dr. Tobias Funke »

Mëds wrote:
TDA Rum wrote:The bedwetters are reporting for Rogers Sportsnet now.... what an ignoramus Jonathan Willis is...

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/canu ... past-year/
If you adjust Miller and Lack's GP by 60 minutes of TOI Miller got the "W" 68.4% of the time. Lack only got his team 2 points 46.5% of the time.

If you only want to count games started, then the Canucks won with Miller 64.4% of the time, but still only 51.4% of the time with Lack.

Point to whatever other stats or intangibles that you want to, at the end of the day the decision comes down to which guy the team wins more games with, and that's who you go with if you are in the Canuck's position right now with several other young goaltenders in the pipeline.

The Lack vs Miller trade isn't even up for debate.
Yeah, it really isn't, but not in the way you think. You're failing to consider the quality of starts each goalie got. Until Miller got injured, he played every easy game, with Lack playing something like 80% of his starts against playoff teams. Lack also played the second end of back to backs every time. Note how Miller got all 5 games against the Oilers - normally you'd expect the team's worse goalie to get more games against bottom of the barrel teams like that.

Also, I hope when you are doing your calculation, that you are adjusting out the 4 times Lack had to mop up Miller's mess after he got pulled (21 mins in, 40 mins in, 25 mins in, and 28 mins in after giving up 5, 4, 4, and 5 goals respectively) - hard to win coming into that, wouldn't you think? That time should be added to Miller's side, as he had already lost those games. You'll see about a 5% swing in each way based on that, so ~63% Miller and ~52% Lack.

Yes, Miller had 6 shutouts - but five of them were against EDM, NJ, CBJ, PHI, CAR, and one against PIT (Lack also had a SO against PIT). Miller had a .911 SV% despite 5 shutouts against crap teams. Look at the game logs between the two goalies and honestly ask yourself which goalie had the easier schedule.

Note also that when Lack was finally given a chance to go less than 2-3 weeks before starts after Miller got injured (22 games in 46 days), he posted a .929 SV% and took the Canucks into the playoffs, helped by two clutch wins against LAK (.968 SV% over two games, 63 shots against). Your boy Miller put up a .887 SV% against the Kings last year for comparison, getting pulled in both starts.

Also, consider this: Miller started 9 games against Western Conference playoff teams (only 4 wins). Lack started 15 (9 wins) - that's 44% for Miller and 60% for Lack against western playoff teams. To me, that is a more meaningful winning percentage statistic than the one you cite as proof of Miller's superiority. I'm sure Miller could pump his up even higher in the AHL.

Like you said, it's not up for debate. Lack was the better goalie, played the better teams, got the better results against the stronger teams. But he was turfed out due to politics so that Jimbo wouldn't have to admit that he made a horrible mistake in giving Miller that term and money when there was no other team interested in him last summer. The way the two goalies were deployed last year screams of management/coaching trying to protect Miller to make their erred investment look better, yet he still ended up with a bottom 5 SV% among starting goalies.

Some of Jimbo's reasons for trading Lack have been 1) Miller got more wins, 2) The league thinks of Lack as a backup, and 3) Lack was going into UFA and would be expensive to re-sign. I think I've addressed 1) above - it's BS. Don't 2) and 3) just kind of contradict each other? If Lack is the scrub Jimbo wants us to think everybody in the league thinks he is, why would he cost much to re-sign? I know hardball has proven to be an incredibly difficult concept for the guy, but he could tell Lack to go ahead and test out UFA if he thinks he's better than the low-potential scrub of a backup he's been smeared as. Also it was abundantly clear that Lack loved it here and wanted to stay above all else.

For the future of this team's sake, I hope that they don't do the same with Markstrom, and instead let him build his confidence in this league instead of throwing him in against tough opposition to protect the washed up $6 million man.
Last edited by Dr. Tobias Funke on Fri Aug 07, 2015 8:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Chef Boi RD
MVP
MVP
Posts: 28935
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by Chef Boi RD »

This city's love affair and overvaluing of backup goalies is comical. Goes back to Essensa, Hedberg, Irbe blah, blah, blah. Lack is not that good. The rest of the league considers him a 'good' backup. Is he better than Dubnyk? No. Dubnyk was traded to Minny for a 3rd. The Lack vs Miller shit is a joke. Markstrom is a blossoming goalie with a higher ceiling than Lack. Keeping the wryly vet in Miller around for a couple more years to transition in Markstrom, there is nothing wrong with that.

Lack! OMG benning traded lack! WHAAAAAAA!!!
“Tyler Myers is my guy... I was taking to Scotty Bowman last night and he was bringing up his name, and saying he’s a big guy and big guy need big minutes to play, he is playing great for ya… and I agree with him… He’s been exceptional” - Bruce Boudreau
Dr. Tobias Funke
AHL Prospect
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 5:30 pm

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by Dr. Tobias Funke »

RoyalDude wrote:This city's love affair and overvaluing of backup goalies is comical. Goes back to Essensa, Hedberg, Irbe blah, blah, blah. Lack is not that good. The rest of the league considers him a 'good' backup. Is he better than Dubnyk? No. Dubnyk was traded to Minny for a 3rd. The Lack vs Miller shit is a joke. Markstrom is a blossoming goalie with a higher ceiling than Lack. Keeping the wryly vet in Miller around for a couple more years to transition in Markstrom, there is nothing wrong with that.

Lack! OMG benning traded lack! WHAAAAAAA!!!
I've actually laid out an argument based on facts that you can look up and verify yourself. Your argument has zero substance whatsoever.

When you say the city's love affair over backups is comical, are you also referencing the last one, Cory Schneider? Were the fans wrong about how good Schneider is? Based on recent history (ever since Luongo came here in 2007), the fanbase has not been anywhere near as off-base on goaltending as you are suggesting.

I get it though, slurpers gotta slurp.
dbr
CC Legend
Posts: 3093
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by dbr »

Tobias, it's okay, we're just betting on Ryan Miller reversing course from the last three years, or on Jacob Markstrom finally looking like an NHL goaltender after I don't know how many disastrous appearances. Or more likely, both.

Or we're telling ourselves that the next time our goaltending matters, it'll be Thatcher Demko between the pipes.
damonberryman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1430
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 9:07 am

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by damonberryman »

RoyalDude wrote:Benning walks the walk - doesn't say we need to make bold moves he just makes them

Gillis talks the talk - says we nee/d to make bold moves but doesn't make them

The media and fans are just shocked that we have a GM who actually has the balls to make bold moves instead of just talking about making bold moves

Go Benning go. Three first round embarrassments and one non playoff in the last 4 years. There is nothing to like about this team other than the prospects coming down the pipeline. Rebuild baby!
After careful review of your posts RD I am going out on a limb to say you prefer Benning to Gillis. Now this may be my interpretation but I am going to stick with it.

As an aside, I will be in Van from 9/28-10/12. I will go to the Princeton at some point and anyone who is interested can come and check out who the DamonBerry is. I will put the time up as the date gets closer. i do hope Rats reads this while catching fish.
damonberryman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1430
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 9:07 am

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by damonberryman »

RoyalDude wrote:This city's love affair and overvaluing of backup goalies is comical. Goes back to Essensa, Hedberg, Irbe blah, blah, blah. Lack is not that good. The rest of the league considers him a 'good' backup. Is he better than Dubnyk? No. Dubnyk was traded to Minny for a 3rd. The Lack vs Miller shit is a joke. Markstrom is a blossoming goalie with a higher ceiling than Lack. Keeping the wryly vet in Miller around for a couple more years to transition in Markstrom, there is nothing wrong with that.

Lack! OMG benning traded lack! WHAAAAAAA!!!
Good post
damonberryman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1430
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 9:07 am

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by damonberryman »

Dr. Tobias Funke wrote:
Mëds wrote:
TDA Rum wrote:The bedwetters are reporting for Rogers Sportsnet now.... what an ignoramus Jonathan Willis is...

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/canu ... past-year/
If you adjust Miller and Lack's GP by 60 minutes of TOI Miller got the "W" 68.4% of the time. Lack only got his team 2 points 46.5% of the time.

If you only want to count games started, then the Canucks won with Miller 64.4% of the time, but still only 51.4% of the time with Lack.

Point to whatever other stats or intangibles that you want to, at the end of the day the decision comes down to which guy the team wins more games with, and that's who you go with if you are in the Canuck's position right now with several other young goaltenders in the pipeline.

The Lack vs Miller trade isn't even up for debate.
Yeah, it really isn't, but not in the way you think. You're failing to consider the quality of starts each goalie got. Until Miller got injured, he played every easy game, with Lack playing something like 80% of his starts against playoff teams. Lack also played the second end of back to backs every time. Note how Miller got all 5 games against the Oilers - normally you'd expect the team's worse goalie to get more games against bottom of the barrel teams like that.

Also, I hope when you are doing your calculation, that you are adjusting out the 4 times Lack had to mop up Miller's mess after he got pulled (21 mins in, 40 mins in, 25 mins in, and 28 mins in after giving up 5, 4, 4, and 5 goals respectively) - hard to win coming into that, wouldn't you think? That time should be added to Miller's side, as he had already lost those games. You'll see about a 5% swing in each way based on that, so ~63% Miller and ~52% Lack.

Yes, Miller had 6 shutouts - but five of them were against EDM, NJ, CBJ, PHI, CAR, and one against PIT (Lack also had a SO against PIT). Miller had a .911 SV% despite 5 shutouts against crap teams. Look at the game logs between the two goalies and honestly ask yourself which goalie had the easier schedule.

Note also that when Lack was finally given a chance to go less than 2-3 weeks before starts after Miller got injured (22 games in 46 days), he posted a .929 SV% and took the Canucks into the playoffs, helped by two clutch wins against LAK (.968 SV% over two games, 63 shots against). Your boy Miller put up a .887 SV% against the Kings last year for comparison, getting pulled in both starts.

Also, consider this: Miller started 9 games against Western Conference playoff teams (only 4 wins). Lack started 15 (9 wins) - that's 44% for Miller and 60% for Lack against western playoff teams. To me, that is a more meaningful winning percentage statistic than the one you cite as proof of Miller's superiority. I'm sure Miller could pump his up even higher in the AHL.

Like you said, it's not up for debate. Lack was the better goalie, played the better teams, got the better results against the stronger teams. But he was turfed out due to politics so that Jimbo wouldn't have to admit that he made a horrible mistake in giving Miller that term and money when there was no other team interested in him last summer. The way the two goalies were deployed last year screams of management/coaching trying to protect Miller to make their erred investment look better, yet he still ended up with a bottom 5 SV% among starting goalies.

Some of Jimbo's reasons for trading Lack have been 1) Miller got more wins, 2) The league thinks of Lack as a backup, and 3) Lack was going into UFA and would be expensive to re-sign. I think I've addressed 1) above - it's BS. Don't 2) and 3) just kind of contradict each other? If Lack is the scrub Jimbo wants us to think everybody in the league thinks he is, why would he cost much to re-sign? I know hardball has proven to be an incredibly difficult concept for the guy, but he could tell Lack to go ahead and test out UFA if he thinks he's better than the low-potential scrub of a backup he's been smeared as. Also it was abundantly clear that Lack loved it here and wanted to stay above all else.

For the future of this team's sake, I hope that they don't do the same with Markstrom, and instead let him build his confidence in this league instead of throwing him in against tough opposition to protect the washed up $6 million man.
My bad. The 'good post' was supposed to be here. Nice contribution man.
User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8392
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by Island Nucklehead »

dbr wrote:Tobias, it's okay, we're just betting on Ryan Miller reversing course from the last three years, or on Jacob Markstrom finally looking like an NHL goaltender after I don't know how many disastrous appearances. Or more likely, both.

Or we're telling ourselves that the next time our goaltending matters, it'll be Thatcher Demko between the pipes.
I think Dr. Funk's post is spot on. Benning was in a tough spot because he did not believe Lack was a capable 50+ game starter, or that Lack/Markstrom was a credible combo for the team he wanted to build. He bet on Miller, and I think it's fair to say that Miller hasn't been that 50+ game starter that Benning was betting on. Once he signed Miller, the writing was on the wall for one of Lack/Markstrom. We got lucky sending Markstrom through waivers last year, he had a great year in the minors, and hopefully he's ready to be a backup next year. But Lack also proved that he was at least Miller's equal last season. If Benning had that decision over again, and Miller was a UFA this summer, would he sign him to a 2-year, $6M per deal? I have my doubts. Then again, Benning seems to get his sights fixed on certain players, numbers, cost and return be damned.
User avatar
Chef Boi RD
MVP
MVP
Posts: 28935
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by Chef Boi RD »

Island Nucklehead wrote: Then again, Benning seems to get his sights fixed on certain players, numbers, cost and return be damned.
Anything wrong with that? Or have you become terminally illed by the staleness, fence sitting,waffling, indecision by the previous regime? Benning is a man with a plan, he's a year old here, sit back, relax and see what becomes of his plan.
“Tyler Myers is my guy... I was taking to Scotty Bowman last night and he was bringing up his name, and saying he’s a big guy and big guy need big minutes to play, he is playing great for ya… and I agree with him… He’s been exceptional” - Bruce Boudreau
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 19129
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by Hockey Widow »

IN, I think that is bang on. Benning decided, after consultation with who knows who in the organization/on the team, that an upgrade in net was needed. Since the team wasn't going for a full rebuild and their goal was to support the core signing Miller made sense. Once Benning decided on this course of action he locked himself in.

The Calgary embarrassment made him want to make more changes to the core but he is still locked into the twins so the goal of no full re-build/transition team is still in the forefront.

I like Lack, had high hopes for him. I wasn't so keen on a Lack/Markstrom combo though. Not if our goal is to still be playoff competitive. But I think you are right, Benning was locked into this course of action and wasn't going to change course.

And let's face it, if Markstrom had had a horrible year in Utica we wouldn't be having this discussion. The choice was never about Miller versus Lack. It was always about Lack versus Markstrom.

I'd love to know what offers he had for Miller though.......no, maybe I don't want to know, yikes :mrgreen:
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8392
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by Island Nucklehead »

RoyalDude wrote:
Island Nucklehead wrote: Then again, Benning seems to get his sights fixed on certain players, numbers, cost and return be damned.
Anything wrong with that? Or have you become terminally illed by the staleness, fence sitting,waffling, indecision by the previous regime? Benning is a man with a plan, he's a year old here, sit back, relax and see what becomes of his plan.
Nothing wrong if the players work out or are notable improvements on the players they are replacing. But this is the same guy that apparently targetted Bonino and Clendening and Vey. And the targetting of depth players and culture carriers and overpaying for them is curious. Many of these guys are not unique (ie mediocre goalies, 4th liners, bottom-pairing D), so I'm not sure why there has to be a fixation and a willingness to overpay for them.
Dr. Tobias Funke
AHL Prospect
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 5:30 pm

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by Dr. Tobias Funke »

If Benning had bitten on one of the offers for Miller (my honest opinion is that there were none, and he made this up to try to generate a perception to the fanbase that Miller has value), we would have the cap space to sign Franson. I believe Franson carries culture to boot.

Does anybody think we would be a worse team with Lack + Franson than Miller?
User avatar
2Fingers
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7672
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:47 am

Re: Canucks News and Notes

Post by 2Fingers »

RoyalDude wrote:
Island Nucklehead wrote: Then again, Benning seems to get his sights fixed on certain players, numbers, cost and return be damned.
Anything wrong with that? Or have you become terminally illed by the staleness, fence sitting,waffling, indecision by the previous regime? Benning is a man with a plan, he's a year old here, sit back, relax and see what becomes of his plan.
Give it a freaking rest RD, you comments are getting so old and boring. Isnt it time for you to change you tune or do we have to wait until Jan/Feb to hear about how good Gillis was and Benning sucks?

Dr. T provided very good evidence of the stats for last season that shows Lack was not as bad as people want to make it look. Benning made the trade he made but it was not based upon Lack being a bad goalie.
Locked