i think it's more that the canucks' cap for the short/medium term is not looking good. if they're going to take the next step, they'll need some cap flexibility going forward (to re-sign their own high end players and sign/trade for win-now players).

while louie is an obvious choice for a compliance buyout (if there is one), myers' contract may look really bad in a couple years. as vantel pointed out, louie's only got a couple years left and most of the money will have been paid out. it may just be better to hold your nose and let it run out (or package with a pick to a team that wants the cap hit or will buy him out).

buying out myers would be a proactive move before the contract really stings.

most of us here don't think it will happen but think it's worth having the discussion.
- RealityChecker

The thing is, we don't have many defencemen in the pool to replace Myers, and who knows how we'll look in 2-3 years when potentially his contract looks bad. We hope at that point we're contenders and pushing for the Cup but it's not a guarantee. I'm not saying Myers or his contract is great, clearly he/it's not, but at the time of the signing we needed someone who could upgrade the D since it was a tire fire back there most nights (yes, it still is today, but that's not all on Myers) and Myers was good enough.

I doubt OJ ever makes it the NHL, so that means we're going to need someone to replace Tanev and Edler in the near future (Tanev probably is gone in July anyways) and Stetcher is not the player we hoped he would be. Other than Q. Hughes who is our number 1, Edler who's winding down his career as your #2/3, Rafferty who you hope can replace Edler as your 2/3 and Myers who probably is a serviceable 4 but more likely a 5/6. If you get rid of him, now all of a sudden you're back to 2018 and 2019 where you're using 7-8-9 D men in your lineup as your 4-5-6 and leaning heavily on Hughes, Edler and Rafferty. That's not a great idea.

100% accurate. Always the bridesmaid, never the bride.

We should do a pool on when a cup will be ours... Maybe easier to do an over/under? Should we set the number at 75 years from NHL conception?
- bloatedmosquito

It's too bad Jake Milford passed so suddenly back in the day as he was probably the best GM the Canucks have ever had, followed Pat Quinn, Brian Burke and Mike Gillis, in that order.

Whoever takes over from Benning should enjoy the fruits of his losses and hopefully take this team to the promise land.

So Myers is the latest whipping boy for the team, and Benning is an idiot for signing him as a UFA. Interesting, although I disagree (not surprising), but interesting non the less.
- Makita

Ditto

The thing is, we don't have many defencemen in the pool to replace Myers, and who knows how we'll look in 2-3 years when potentially his contract looks bad. We hope at that point we're contenders and pushing for the Cup but it's not a guarantee. I'm not saying Myers or his contract is great, clearly he/it's not, but at the time of the signing we needed someone who could upgrade the D since it was a tire fire back there most nights (yes, it still is today, but that's not all on Myers) and Myers was good enough.

I doubt OJ ever makes it the NHL, so that means we're going to need someone to replace Tanev and Edler in the near future (Tanev probably is gone in July anyways) and Stetcher is not the player we hoped he would be. Other than Q. Hughes who is our number 1, Edler who's winding down his career as your #2/3, Rafferty who you hope can replace Edler as your 2/3 and Myers who probably is a serviceable 4 but more likely a 5/6. If you get rid of him, now all of a sudden you're back to 2018 and 2019 where you're using 7-8-9 D men in your lineup as your 4-5-6 and leaning heavily on Hughes, Edler and Rafferty. That's not a great idea.
- DariusKnight

So after 6 years at the helm we have one Dman drafted that is playing significant minutes?

If there's ever a compliance buyout, which I don't think there will be as Donald Fehr was on 650 radio three days ago and said that from his conversations with the league that hasn't been discussed, it's only going to be used on Loui Eriksson....end of story.

Tyler Myers had a decent year, he is what he is, much like Edler when you overuse him he's prone to mistakes and or defensive gaffs. Get some better dmen to fillout the lineup and manage the guys minutes properly.

So Myers is the latest whipping boy for the team, and Benning is an idiot for signing him as a UFA. Interesting, although I disagree (not surprising), but interesting non the less.
- Makita

#teamwhiner is running out of ammo...need something new...

So after 6 years at the helm we have one Dman drafted that is playing significant minutes?
- golfingsince

Yes. I wonder if one of those traded picks could be a defenseman knocking at the door.
Draft and develop and trade picks every year.

So after 6 years at the helm we have one Dman drafted that is playing significant minutes?
- golfingsince

Sadly, yes, if there was one MAJOR failure of the Benning regime, it's the lack of foresight in drafting/developing D-men. He signed Hutton, Stetcher, Rafferty all from the NCAA. He drafted OJ at #6 which in hindsight was a bad move seeing as Tkachuk was there, or even if he was stubborn about a D-man, so was Sergachev. Yes, we do have Rathbone and Jett, but they're at least 3-4 years away from playing significant minutes in the NHL so Myers was supposed to be a stopgap.

If there's ever a compliance buyout, which I don't think there will be as Donald Fehr was on 650 radio three days ago and said that from his conversations with the league that hasn't been discussed, it's only going to be used on Loui Eriksson....end of story.

Tyler Myers had a decent year, he is what he is, much like Edler when you overuse him he's prone to mistakes and or defensive gaffs. Get some better dmen to fillout the lineup and manage the guys minutes properly.
- LeftCoaster

https://theprovince.com/s...-agent-seeks-canucks-deal

The thing is, we don't have many defencemen in the pool to replace Myers, and who knows how we'll look in 2-3 years when potentially his contract looks bad. We hope at that point we're contenders and pushing for the Cup but it's not a guarantee. I'm not saying Myers or his contract is great, clearly he/it's not, but at the time of the signing we needed someone who could upgrade the D since it was a tire fire back there most nights (yes, it still is today, but that's not all on Myers) and Myers was good enough.

I doubt OJ ever makes it the NHL, so that means we're going to need someone to replace Tanev and Edler in the near future (Tanev probably is gone in July anyways) and Stetcher is not the player we hoped he would be. Other than Q. Hughes who is our number 1, Edler who's winding down his career as your #2/3, Rafferty who you hope can replace Edler as your 2/3 and Myers who probably is a serviceable 4 but more likely a 5/6. If you get rid of him, now all of a sudden you're back to 2018 and 2019 where you're using 7-8-9 D men in your lineup as your 4-5-6 and leaning heavily on Hughes, Edler and Rafferty. That's not a great idea.
- DariusKnight

1) this is precisely one of my problems with benning. the calculations are always skewed heavily on "how is the team performing now and how can we improve the most this season?" this has led to bad contracts that seem decent the first year or two. i'd rather a longer view taken especially with respect to the cap. his bad contracts will be magnified x10 when the team needs every cap dollar. it's been asked many times but bears repeating: why has a bottom 10 team spent to nearly the cap limit every year since he's gotten here?

2) the d needed improvement no doubt. that doesn't mean that myers was the answer and i'm not implying one player could fix it. what i am saying (and it's not revisionist history) that a lot of people, including a lot on this board, stated that myers was not a quality defender. he has offense but his d-game is lacking. when the offense isn't at a high level, he's a bottom pairing guy.

3) tanev and edler: tanev should have been traded 3-4 seasons ago when he had value. benning could have actually gotten some good value in return. i don't care for the "well the d would have been a disaster without him," argument. the d was a disaster with him and the team finished bottom 10. the only thing that keeping him showed was that he's injury prone to every gm around the league driving his trade value down each season to the point that there was no good return to trade him.

edler was never going to accept a trade but they definitely could have tried to talk to him into it. there's many players who didn't want to leave but did. bieksa got a second round pick. great trade for a player who was quoted as saying that he wanted to "go down with the ship." edler signed a decent/deal last year but it's troubling that he's still a top pairing d on this team.

the win-now benning mentality didn't work. the "young players won't develop under a losing atmosphere," was wrong.

#teamwhiner is running out of ammo...need something new...
- LordHumungous

If there's ever a compliance buyout, which I don't think there will be as Donald Fehr was on 650 radio three days ago and said that from his conversations with the league that hasn't been discussed, it's only going to be used on Loui Eriksson....end of story.

Tyler Myers had a decent year, he is what he is, much like Edler when you overuse him he's prone to mistakes and or defensive gaffs. Get some better dmen to fillout the lineup and manage the guys minutes properly.
- LeftCoaster

and the PA said they would never accept a cap. he could also be telling the truth in so much as the league won't present the "bitter pills" until they figure out a comprehensive return to work plan.

it's posturing on his part combined with a "we don't know what's going to happen."

Sadly, yes, if there was one MAJOR failure of the Benning regime, it's the lack of foresight in drafting/developing D-men. He signed Hutton, Stetcher, Rafferty all from the NCAA. He drafted OJ at #6 which in hindsight was a bad move seeing as Tkachuk was there, or even if he was stubborn about a D-man, so was Sergachev. Yes, we do have Rathbone and Jett, but they're at least 3-4 years away from playing significant minutes in the NHL so Myers was supposed to be a stopgap.
- DariusKnight

He also drafted Tryamkin who played but the key words used are Is Playing

Not drafted but Stecher was also his find

Briesbois has seen limited time and will see more

As you pointed out Rathbone is getting very close.

OJ is closer to NHL ready than most believe but he may never be a Canuck

and the PA said they would never accept a cap. he could also be telling the truth in so much as the league won't present the "bitter pills" until they figure out a comprehensive return to work plan.

it's posturing on his part combined with a "we don't know what's going to happen."
- RealityChecker

I have been agreeing lately with a lot you are saying. This is a very good point about not knowing until the hard numbers are out.

For all we know when Hockey is ready to start up again Loui's contract may have expired . It is not likely but no one knows what will happen in the next two years.

I have been agreeing lately with a lot you are saying. This is a very good point about not knowing until the hard numbers are out.

For all we know when Hockey is ready to start up again Loui's contract may have expired . It is not likely but no one knows what will happen in the next two years.
- VANTEL

and i'm sure this troubles both of us greatly.

and i'm sure this troubles both of us greatly.
- RealityChecker

My days of getting into heated arguments are hopefully behind .

My days of getting into heated arguments are hopefully behind .
- VANTEL

- Codes1087

Thanks codes, much better than Lefty's version.

This has been an unusual year. Benning has been in the hunt of a top 6 forward for years.

Jake has been the recipient of this . First of all the team auditioned him there to see what they had . Then the extended injury time to Brock gave Jake more time in the top 6. Let's be truthful . Jim had Brock on extended leave so he could get his top 6 guy. The day Canucks drop out of the playoff numbers Brock is magically better.

So Jake should have gone to Gauds line but gets beaten out by Zack and is placed on the Sutter Beagle line.
- VANTEL

It amazes me how you but also many on this board want to jettison young talent. I can at least understand Myers, the contract is high. But it’s not like he’s underperforming, were kinda getting what we thought we would and im surprised people are upset.

We finally have good young depth for the first time in about 8 years, so let’s trade the depth away!?

It amazes me how you but also many on this board want to jettison young talent. I can at least understand Myers, the contract is high. But it’s not like he’s underperforming, were kinda getting what we thought we would and im surprised people are upset.

We finally have depth for the first time in about 8 years, so let’s trade the depth away!?
- neem55

Jake has arbitration rights this year and that scares the hell out of me. He could be awarded north of 3 mil dollars . In his NHL career he has had about 50 noteworthy games . That is just my opinion.

I think Jake has value league wide and could help fix the D in a trade. I would like to see the shots numbers come down from 40-50 per night.

I think the Canucks have enough talent on forwards this year without Jake and will have even more next year.

Again it is just my views.

Jake has arbitration rights this year and that scares the hell out of me. He could be awarded north of 3 mil dollars . In his NHL career he has had about 50 noteworthy games . That is just my opinion.

I think Jake has value league wide and could help fix the D in a trade. I would like to see the shots numbers come down from 40-50 per night.

I think the Canucks have enough talent on forwards this year without Jake and will have even more next year.

Again it is just my views.
- VANTEL

I also agree with that, Jake + C prospect and maybe a low draft pick could net us a decent D-man like Severson in NJ or something of that ilk. We have enough forwards in the system to give up on Jake and not hurt that much. And Jake /= Cam Neely, different time and different circumstances.

It amazes me how you but also many on this board want to jettison young talent. I can at least understand Myers, the contract is high. But it’s not like he’s underperforming, were kinda getting what we thought we would and im surprised people are upset.

We finally have good young depth for the first time in about 8 years, so let’s trade the depth away!?
- neem55

You shouldn't be. It was a reach at the time and many were upset then.

*In best Trump voice:

I might be wrong, doubt it, know a lot about this stuff. Probably should have done this instead of driving trains. Know more about it than anybody. Contract's not gonna age well.

I also agree with that, Jake + C prospect and maybe a low draft pick could net us a decent D-man like Severson in NJ or something of that ilk. We have enough forwards in the system to give up on Jake and not hurt that much. And Jake /= Cam Neely, different time and different circumstances.
- DariusKnight

Signing Jake at 3 mil brings me right back to the Sven Baertschi discussions. Well he is a 20 goal potential guy

Move him when his value is high.

Thanks codes, much better than Lefty's version.
- Makita

It amazes me how you but also many on this board want to jettison young talent. I can at least understand Myers, the contract is high. But it’s not like he’s underperforming, were kinda getting what we thought we would and im surprised people are upset.

We finally have good young depth for the first time in about 8 years, so let’s trade the depth away!?
- neem55

No. If you read it carefully enough, the topic was buyouts. Learn to read.