Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign D Tyler Myers to 5-Year, $30m Deal ($6m AAV)

[MS]

Yikes.

You need to watch more Ben Chiarot. He would be the Canucks 8th best puck mover on the backend. His toughness doesn't make up for that fact for me. Not a fan of the glass and out, old school dmen like him.

Jets fans wanted absolutely no part of Chiarot at $3.5mil. They would have taken Myers back at those dollars in a heartbeat. Rightfully so. Chiarot has been a 6-7 his whole career and only was given a bigger opportunity last season because the Jets left side was terrible, and Morrissey missed 25 games to injury. Habs fans weren't happy with the signing either.

You're wrong on Benn too. Bergevin tried to sign him but Jordie wanted to play in his hometown. Not a whole lot separates Benn and Chiarot but I prefer Benn's superior puck moving ability.

You think Chiarot is a better player than Biega as well?

I watched a ton of Jets games last year as they're my second team.

Chiarot is a solid #5 physical defensive type who is basically the exact same player as Jordie Benn, albeit a few years younger. He's not an amazing puck mover (although he can skate it well at times) but is far from being a Gudbranson. And has produced identical ES numbers to Myers over the past two years and slightly better ES numbers than Benn. It's frankly comical to be hyping Benn up as a great signing but dumping on Chiarot as garbage.

Winnipeg fans wanted nothing to do with Myers as his mobility is circling the drain and his contract is horrific. Using their opinion on Chiarot (which was higher than their opinion of Myers) to disparage Chiarot while at the same time ignoring their views on Myers is again ... comical.

Biega is probably better than all three of them.

 

[HankNDank]

Some dmen that have averaged 20 min or more TOI/GP since 2012-13 (At a glance):

J. Johnson
F. Beauchemin
Z. Bogosion
Bouwmeester
Ristolainen
Girardi
W. Mitchell
D. Hamhuis
A. McDonald
C. Ceci
J. Gardiner
M. Streit
K. Russel
P. Martin
D. Phaneuf
J. Gorges
D. Kulikov
F. Tyutin
B. Hutton
K. Bieksa
T. Daley
M. Carle

All of them top2 dmen?

No, but you are the one who is arguing the notion that 20 min/G or more = top 2 dman. I never said that.

 

[4Twenty]

Yikes.

You need to watch more Ben Chiarot. He would be the Canucks 8th best puck mover on the backend. His toughness doesn't make up for that fact for me. Not a fan of the glass and out, old school dmen like him.

Jets fans wanted absolutely no part of Chiarot at $3.5mil. They would have taken Myers back at those dollars in a heartbeat. Rightfully so. Chiarot has been a 6-7 his whole career and only was given a bigger opportunity last season because the Jets left side was terrible, and Morrissey missed 25 games to injury. Habs fans weren't happy with the signing either.

You're wrong on Benn too. Bergevin tried to sign him but Jordie wanted to play in his hometown. Not a whole lot separates Benn and Chiarot but I prefer Benn's superior puck moving ability.

You think Chiarot is a better player than Biega as well?

Tyler Myers last season had 31 points in 80 games, Chiarot had 20 in 78....Myers 22 EV points, Chiarot 19. I think Myers is better but it seems as though you're just attempting to rag on Chiariot (who wasn't even the 2nd most utilized defensman at 5 on 5 with Myers). Transparent. You called Patrick Johnson out for not documenting anything about Chiarot who he played 200 out of 1200 possible mins/with yet you're blabbing on about him for some reason....15th most common skater linemate.....we shouldn't be talking about Chiarot for any reason other than you decided to bring him up.

Would you care to explain to me how you've come to the conclusion Jordie Benn is some kind of puck mover....never heard him described that way....are there numbers behind this....or is this more Myers was dragged by Chiarot crap too?

 

[Hoghandler]

It's frankly comical to be hyping Benn up as a great signing but dumping on Chiarot as garbage.

Biega is probably better than all three of them.

Not a whole lot separates Benn and Chiarot but I prefer Benn's superior puck moving ability.

Not once did I hype Benn as a 'great signing' and say he's in a different class as Chiarot. I explicitly stated 'not a whole lot separates Benn and Chiarot'. Never mind we gave Benn $4mil and Bergevin handed over north of $10mil to Chiarot. So in terms of signings, yeah the Benn signing looks much better. That's besides the point.

So you agree with me that Biega is better than Chiarot. Surely you're well aware Tyler Myers is a better play than Chiarot as well. So I'm assuming this 'comical' stance of mine comes down to the fact that I rate Benn slightly ahead of Chiarot on the depth chart?

Obviously there is nothing even remotely controversial about stating Benn is a slightly better player than Chiarot. Benn is a better puck mover and that's why I prefer him. There is a reason Chiarot has played 14-15 minutes a night throughout the prime of his career - he doesn't move the puck well enough. It took a woeful Jets left side for him to get his minutes up to the level of a #5 last season.

So you think he's a #7 in Vancouver and I think he's a #8? What a 'comical' difference of opinion.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Quite frankly it's laughable the mental gymnastics and semantic games some are using to attempt to justify this signing. It was a god-awful signing the minute the ink dried and absolutely nothing has changed.

Complete waste of valuable cap space and a roster spot for a player I've never liked.

 

[Hoghandler]

I think Myers is better but it seems as though you're just attempting to rag on Chiariot (who wasn't even the 2nd most utilized defensman at 5 on 5 with Myers). Transparent. You called Patrick Johnson out for not documenting anything about Chiarot who he played 200 out of 1200 possible mins/with yet you're blabbing on about him for some reason....15th most common skater linemate.....we shouldn't be talking about Chiarot for any reason other than you decided to bring him up.

You're mistaken. I didn't bring up Chiarot. I also didn't call out Johnston for not documenting anything about Chiarot. I pointed out Johnston refused to acknowledge any of Myers defense partners.

Chiarot is the best partner Myers had last season. That's the point. Not that he was Myers most common linemate. See the distinction?

 

[MS]

Not once did I hype Benn as a 'great signing' and say he's in a different class as Chiarot. I explicitly stated 'not a whole lot separates Benn and Chiarot'. Never mind we gave Benn $4mil and Bergevin handed over north of $10mil to Chiarot. So in terms of signings, yeah the Benn signing looks much better. That's besides the point.

So you agree with me that Biega is better than Chiarot. Surely you're well aware Tyler Myers is a better play than Chiarot as well. So I'm assuming this 'comical' stance of mine comes down to the fact that I rate Benn slightly ahead of Chiarot on the depth chart?

Obviously there is nothing even remotely controversial about stating Benn is a slightly better player than Chiarot. Benn is a better puck mover and that's why I prefer him. There is a reason Chiarot has played 14-15 minutes a night throughout the prime of his career - he doesn't move the puck well enough. It took a woeful Jets left side for him to get his minutes up to the level of a #5 last season.

So you think he's a #7 in Vancouver and I think he's a #8? What a 'comical' difference of opinion.

I think both Benn and Chiarot are #5-6 guys here. Biega is a solid #5 but nobody is smart enough to clue in. Myers is probably a #5 ... although it's hard to tell. In 17-18 he was a top-4 guy but is going downhill quickly. By year 3 of that deal I expect he'll be a Dion Phaneuf/James Neal situation and one of the most comically awful negative-value assets in the NHL.

What's comical is hyping the Benn signing and simultaneously calling Chiarot a '#8 guy'. They're the same player. If you think Chiarot is that bad, you should be criticizing the Benn signing (yes, it's a lower amount but anything over $2 million for a non top-6 guy is brutal). Or are you calling Benn a #7 defender?

As for Chiarot - guy was a late bloomer who was a no-talent nothing prospect who worked his way into a depth role and by last season was a key member on that blueline doing a solid job. His icetime from 3-4 years ago isn't relevant to the player he is now. He's one of those very rare unicorns who gets better every year past age 25 and has ended up being a better player at the NHL level than he was in the AHL or CHL.

 

[Hoghandler]

I think both Benn and Chiarot are #5-6 guys here. Biega is a solid #5 but nobody is smart enough to clue in. Myers is probably a #5 ..

What's comical is hyping the Benn signing and simultaneously calling Chiarot a '#8 guy'. They're the same player. If you think Chiarot is that bad, you should be criticizing the Benn signing (yes, it's a lower amount but anything over $2 million for a non top-6 guy is brutal). Or are you calling Benn a #7 defender?

His icetime from 3-4 years ago isn't relevant to the player he is now.

So you see Chiarot as a #7-8 on our depth chart and still think it's 'comical' that I had him at #8 on our depth chart?

Again, I didn't hype the Benn signing once. Benn is a 5-6 and signed to a reasonable deal. I would dislike the signing if he got Chiarot money.

I didn't cite Chiarot's icetime from 3-4 years ago. I cited it from 1 year ago.

 

[Pavel96]

You're mistaken. I didn't bring up Chiarot. I also didn't call out Johnston for not documenting anything about Chiarot. I pointed out Johnston refused to acknowledge any of Myers defense partners.

Chiarot is the best partner Myers had last season. That's the point. Not that he was Myers most common linemate. See the distinction?

You brought him up, indirectly, by writing that the Canucks worst dmen is better than any of Myer's partners last year. Then you felt the need to proclaim him as worse than the Canucks entire top 8, which obviously most find both comical and insincere.

 

[Pavel96]

So you see Chiarot as a #7-8 on our depth chart and still think it's 'comical' that I had him at #8 on our depth chart?

Again, I didn't hype the Benn signing once. Benn is a 5-6 and signed to a reasonable deal. I would dislike the signing if he got Chiarot money.

I didn't cite Chiarot's icetime from 3-4 years ago. I cited it from 1 year ago.

If he sees him as 7-8 on the canucks depth chart, myers and benn must fill the 8-9 spots. Who are these other dmen in the top 6? At least in this magical scenario the depth issue has been solved?

 

[MS]

So you see Chiarot as a #7-8 on our depth chart and still think it's 'comical' that I had him at #8 on our depth chart?

Again, I didn't hype the Benn signing once. Benn is a 5-6 and signed to a reasonable deal. I would dislike the signing if he got Chiarot money.

I didn't cite Chiarot's icetime from 3-4 years ago. I cited it from 1 year ago.

Huh?

I just said that both Benn and Chiarot are #5-6 guys.

The problem is that these are two basically identical players and you're crapping on one calling him a #8 guy and saying the other is a 5-6 guy. And using puck skills as the difference, when Chiarot has out-produced Benn offensively over the past couple years.

 

[Hoghandler]

You brought him up, indirectly, by writing that the Canucks worst dmen is better than any of Myer's partners last year. Then you felt the need to proclaim him as worse than the Canucks entire top 8, which obviously most find both comical and insincere.

You're mistaken. I didn't claim he was better than the Canucks top 8.

If he sees him as 7-8 on the canucks depth chart, myers and benn must fill the 8-9 spots. Who are these other dmen in the top 6?

Incorrect. MS clearly stated that Myers and Biega were higher on his depth chart than Chiarot was. So that gives you Edler, Tanev, Hughes, Stecher, Myers and Biega. That's 6 guys MS has ahead of Chiarot on his depth chart.

So is it comical if MS see's Chiarot as a 7-8 in Vancouver too? Or just if I do?

 

[Hoghandler]

Huh?

I just said that both Benn and Chiarot are #5-6 guys.

The problem is that these are two basically identical players and you're crapping on one calling him a #8 guy and saying the other is a 5-6 guy. And using puck skills as the difference, when Chiarot has out-produced Benn offensively over the past couple years.

You just said Biega and Myers are #5 dmen and higher on your depth chart than Chiarot. That means you have Chiarot as the Canucks 7 or 8th best defenseman, depending on who you prefer between Benn and Chiarot.

You thought it was comical that I had Chiarot as the teams 8th best defender. Now that I've shone a light on the depth chart you're seeing why there is absolutely nothing comical about it. You agree with me.

 

[Pavel96]

You're mistaken. I didn't claim he was better than the Canucks top 8.



Incorrect. MS clearly stated that Myers and Biega were higher on his depth chart than Chiarot was. So that gives you Edler, Tanev, Hughes, Stecher, Myers and Biega. That's 6 guys MS has ahead of Chiarot on his depth chart.

So is it comical if MS see's Chiarot as a 7-8 in Vancouver too? Or just if I do?

That's right you said he'd be their 8th dman. Lol whatever. Obviously, proclaiming him better than their top 7 had the same reaction, but ignore the main point of the statement as to deflect?

At this point what you are writing in it's entirety in this thread is comical.

 

[Hoghandler]

That's right you said he'd be their 8th dman. Lol whatever. Obviously, proclaiming him better than their top 7 had the same reaction, but ignore the main point of the statement as to deflect?

At this point what you are writing in it's entirety in this thread is comical.

Comical to have 7 Canuck defenders higher on my depth chart than Chiarot? Is it comical MS has him as our 7-8th best too?

Where do you rank him our our top 8?

 

[MS]

You just said Biega and Myers are #5 dmen and higher on your depth chart than Chiarot. That means you have Chiarot as the Canucks 7 or 8th best defenseman, depending on who you prefer between Benn and Chiarot.

You thought it was comical that I had Chiarot as the teams 8th best defender. Now that I've shone a light on the depth chart you're seeing why there is absolutely nothing comical about it. You agree with me.

Jesus Christ.

You literally said Benn was 5-6 and Chiarot is a #8. They're the exact same player.

I said that both Benn and Chiarot are comparable #5-6 guys. On this team with everyone healthy, either would be the #6 as Biega inevitably gets screwed.

The issue is that you somehow have decided that Chiarot absolutely sucks but that Benn was a good signing. If you think that Chiarot is a #8, you should think Benn is a #7-8.

For the record, I think Benn was a good signing and I think that Chiarot would have been a good signing although the AAV was a bit high.

 

[Zippgunn]

Quite frankly it's laughable the mental gymnastics and semantic games some are using to attempt to justify this signing. It was a god-awful signing the minute the ink dried and absolutely nothing has changed.

Complete waste of valuable cap space and a roster spot for a player I've never liked.

Quite frankly it's laughable that there are posters here who are declaring this signing as an abject failure before Myers has even set foot on the ice. You just know that not a one of them will change their minds no matter what Myers or the team does. It's almost like these people have an agenda or something...

 

[Hoghandler]

Jesus Christ.

You literally said Benn was 5-6 and Chiarot is a #8. They're the exact same player.

I said that both Benn and Chiarot are comparable #5-6 guys.

I said that Chiarot is a #8 on my depth chart in Vancouver. Not that he's a #8 league wide. He's a 5-6 on most teams as far as I'm concerned. There is a distinction there.

Which is why I keep trying to tell you that you haven't actually disagreed with anything I've said, as you yourself have stated you see him behind 6-7 other Canuck dmen.

This whole discussion started because you thought it was 'comical' that I ranked Chairot behind 7 other Canuck dmen. Turns out, you don't have him as a top 6 Canuck either.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Quite frankly it's laughable that there are posters here who are declaring this signing as an abject failure before Myers has even set foot on the ice. You just know that not a one of them will change their minds no matter what Myers or the team does. It's almost like these people have an agenda or something...

Myers has set foot on the ice, just not here. 10 seasons worth of data. That is sufficient information to judge whether the money paid to him is commensurate to his performance. No agenda necessary. Instead, that's looking at his deal with both eyes open.

In fact, I would say the opposite is true: The agenda resides with posters who willfully ignore his prior performance. That's the road that leads nowhere. It prevents any rationale discourse on what Myers actually is as a player.

 

[Bleach Clean]

8+ years of seasons where he has averaged over 20 min/game, 7 of which were 21+, 4 were 22+. Are you saying every coach he has ever had in the NHL, whose sole job is to evaluate talent on their roster and play them accordingly, has had him in the wrong position on their depth chart? Or is it possible he is not a 4/5 defenceman?

No, but you are the one who is arguing the notion that 20 min/G or more = top 2 dman. I never said that.

At worst, you implied that he's a #3 dman. Your previous quote is listed above. In that quote, you implied that the coach's utility of Myers disagrees with the data's assertion that he's a 4/5 dman. True or false?

If true, then the list of players I have provided would all have to be #3 dmen, at worst.

If false, then your initial statement is meaningless.

Do I have the right interpretation? If not, please clarify.

 

[HankNDank]

At worst, you implied that he's a #3 dman. Your previous quote is listed above. In that quote, you implied that the coach's utility of Myers disagrees with the data's assertion that he's a 4/5 dman. True or false?

If true, then the list of players I have provided would all have to be #3 dmen, at worst.

If false, then your initial statement is meaningless.

Do I have the right interpretation? If not, please clarify.

Well, I guess if you're asking me, I would say that if a player plays 20+ / game than he would be, mathematically speaking, at worst a 2nd pairing player on the team he is playing for. Some teams 2nd pairings are better than others, so where that would leave him league wide, I have no idea. But he's been on 2 teams and I don't know how many coaches, but none of them have deployed him in a bottom pairing role, so I'll trust their opinion of him, at least until I get to watch him play myself.

 

[Elias GOATtersson]

Quite frankly it's laughable that there are posters here who are declaring this signing as an abject failure before Myers has even set foot on the ice. You just know that not a one of them will change their minds no matter what Myers or the team does. It's almost like these people have an agenda or something...

Have you never once watched a non-canucks NHL game? Did you turn the tv off when they played the jets?

 

[MS]

Quite frankly it's laughable that there are posters here who are declaring this signing as an abject failure before Myers has even set foot on the ice. You just know that not a one of them will change their minds no matter what Myers or the team does. It's almost like these people have an agenda or something...

Jesus Christ.

AGAIN - most of us here complaining about this signing had Myers circled in red as a DO NOT SIGN guy dating back to January when discussion of this UFA period started.

These opinions of Myers were formed independently of him ever being a Canuck or signed by Benning based on actually watching him play, for years. There is no agenda. At all.

The only agenda here is from people who blindly defend every single move Benning makes and who would have been mocking Edmonton or Calgary if they made the same Myers signing.

 

[MS]

I said that Chiarot is a #8 on my depth chart in Vancouver. Not that he's a #8 league wide. He's a 5-6 on most teams as far as I'm concerned. There is a distinction there.

Which is why I keep trying to tell you that you haven't actually disagreed with anything I've said, as you yourself have stated you see him behind 6-7 other Canuck dmen.

This whole discussion started because you thought it was 'comical' that I ranked Chairot behind 7 other Canuck dmen. Turns out, you don't have him as a top 6 Canuck either.

So you're saying that Benn is #8 on our depth chart in your eyes?

 

[I am toxic]

"We need to trade our 2015 23rd OA pick for Lucic."

"Well, actually, . . . "

"Too bad, Edmonton got Lucic, they're so lucky."

"Well, actually, . . . "

"We need to sign Eriksson for 6x6."

"Well, actually, . . . "

"Awesome, we've got Loui locked up for 6 years - can you believe it? Six years!"

"Well, actually, . . . "

"We need to get Gudbransen. I wonder what FLA will want in addition to McCann?"

"Well, actually, . . . "

"Awesome, Guds is ours!"

"Well, actually, . . . "

"Time to look at some more UFA's."

"Well, actually, D has been a problem, but for heaven's sake stay away from Myers. Let some other team get hornswoggled."

"Hmmm, Myers would be a perfect fit."

"Well, actually, . . . "

"Awesome, Myers is ours!"

"Well, actually, . . . "

"You're toxic."