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

[Zippgunn]

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.

Again the polarity with the Benning haters; if you don't hate everything he does then you are "blindly denfend(ing) every single move Benning makes" (something I have never done). Enough with this idiocy. I am NOT a fan of his but I also find it ridiculous the way people are parsing this trade to death before training camp has even started. The haters are completely ignoring the fact that we have no idea of a) who has been approached by the Canucks, b) who has declined the Canucks' offers and c) how many of the "obvious" trades that they propose have been tried and rejected by the other teams involved. Operating in what can only be described as an information vacuum and coming from a place of almost total negativity they come up with a bunch of theories that, however much these theories advance their agenda (that Benning is the worst GM in our history, the league etc. etc.) are COMPLETELY SPECULATIVE. Since I (and you) don't know what alternatives Benning tried we are left only with what he has managed to get actually done. I agree that Myers is not the ideal player for us to sign but it appears that he was the best available option at FA for our defense which needed improvement. I (like the majority of Canuck fans) am willing to at least see if Myers works here or not without worrying whether or not he plays like a #3 d man making #2 money (the horror!). I suggest the bean counters here give it up for awhile and watch the at least some of games before freaking out.

 

[Hoghandler]

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

Fantenberg is #8 on my depth chart. Biega at 7 and Benn at 6.

How many Canuck dmen would you put on the ice ahead of Chiarot?

 

[timw33]

I (like the majority of Canuck fans) am willing to at least see if Myers works here or not without worrying whether or not he plays like a #3 d man making #2 money (the horror!). I suggest the bean counters here give it up for awhile and watch the at least some of games before freaking out.

If this were a no-cap world, then sure, you can kinda just throw expectations of performance related to salary out the window to some extent.

This is the cap era, however, and has been for 13 seasons, and you cannot divorce players' performance from their contracts and you absolutely should have a level of expectations for player based on that contract. A contract that in this case dictates that we have just bought ourselves a top pairing D-man who is making the 22nd highest salary for D in this league. Even in the best case scenario most people feel that he'll top out as a middle pairing guy, so why are we paying the premium?

Just because someone was available and willing to come to Vancouver in free agency, does not mean we have to sign them if they aren't going to be as good as their contract's terms dictate.

The little note about bean counters is especially hilarious considering we currently have a shade over $7MM to get an actual needle mover player signed, all because the team is littered with guys who are severely underperforming their contract terms.

And this isn't even a problem that will go away this year, it's going to happen again next year after Hughes and Petersson earn their $3.7MM of bonuses and we have to nickel and dime Markstrom Stecher Tanev if we want to just maintain the roster we have.

I agree that Myers is not the ideal player for us to sign but it appears that he was the best available option at FA for our defense which needed improvement.

I agree that Eriksson is not the ideal player for us to sign but it appears that he was the best available option at FA for our scoring which needed improvement.

 

[vancityluongo]

I (like the majority of Canuck fans) am willing to at least see if Myers works here or not without worrying whether or not he plays like a #3 d man making #2 money (the horror!). I suggest the bean counters here give it up for awhile and watch the at least some of games before freaking out.

*3 months later and Tyler Myers as predicted, sucks*

 

[Zippgunn]

If this were a no-cap world, then sure, you can kinda just throw expectations of performance related to salary out the window to some extent.

This is the cap era, however, and has been for 13 seasons, and you cannot divorce players' performance from their contracts and you absolutely should have a level of expectations for player based on that contract. A contract that in this case dictates that we have just bought ourselves a top pairing D-man who is making the 22nd highest salary for D in this league. Even in the best case scenario most people feel that he'll top out as a middle pairing guy, so why are we paying the premium?

Just because someone was available and willing to come to Vancouver in free agency, does not mean we have to sign them if they aren't going to be as good as their contract's terms dictate.

The little note about bean counters is especially hilarious considering we currently have a shade over $7MM to get an actual needle mover player signed, all because the team is littered with guys who are severely underperforming their contract terms.

And this isn't even a problem that will go away this year, it's going to happen again next year after Hughes and Petersson earn their $3.7MM of bonuses and we have to nickel and dime Markstrom Stecher Tanev if we want to just maintain the roster we have.



I agree that Eriksson is not the ideal player for us to sign but it appears that he was the best available option at FA for our scoring which needed improvement.

...not with two concussions in one year. I think Loui was his worst move yet... and I don't hate Loui, good for him. 6 mil was nuts, 6 years even more so...

 

[Zippgunn]

Just because someone was available and willing to come to Vancouver in free agency, does not mean we have to sign them if they aren't going to be as good as their contract's terms dictate.

No but if we don't we literally won't sign any UFA's then...

 

[Zippgunn]

*3 months later and Tyler Myers as predicted, sucks*

Kindly define "sucks"...

 

[timw33]

No but if we don't we literally won't sign any UFA's then...

You're so close to getting it.

Pay for the high end talent or go bargain hunting. Don't overpay and give term for mediocre talent. It's really that simple.

 

[Zippgunn]

You're so close to getting it.

Pay for the high end talent or go bargain hunting. Don't overpay and give term for mediocre talent. It's really that simple.

Bargain hunting is an inexact science at best. Remember when we got Larsen for a 5th round pick? I thought that was a real coup for us. Wrrrroooooonnnnnng....

 

[timw33]

Bargain hunting is an inexact science at best. Remember when we got Larsen for a 5th round pick? I thought that was a real coup for us. Wrrrroooooonnnnnng....

You're citing an example of Benning's incompetence where we made a weird trade for a player who honestly would have been non-tendered/on waivers if we had just waited it out. Did the same thing with Pouliot + Pedan.

I'm speaking more to bargain hunting in free agency where you get might a good piece that you extend, move them at deadlines for surplus picks, or end up just waiving them/not extending. Benning actually had the right idea with a guy like Vanek, only he absolutely botched the part where you trade them for a pick-only package and took back a low-upside 4th line player instead.

Overpaying for mediocrity (Eriksson, Myers, Gagner, Beagle, etc.(speaking only to FA signigns)) hurts the teams ability to pay for actual talent when the time/opportunity comes.

 

[vancityluongo]

Kindly define "sucks"...

Not worth $6M per year. Which I'd then define a $6M defenseman as being closer to being a #2 defenseman than a #4. Feel free to define that as you'd like.

 

[Zippgunn]

Not worth $6M per year. Which I'd then define a $6M defenseman as being closer to being a #2 defenseman than a #4. Feel free to define that as you'd like.

So you refuse to believe that UFA's are by their very nature overpaid, fine. I'll be happy if he plays like a good $4 mil player (hopefully for at least 3 years) AND the team plays better d. I'm being realistic. I'm betting you expected 50 points out of Gagner too...

 

[F A N]

Bumping Captain Hindsight.

 

[Bleach Clean]

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.

The bold is incorrect, but to your main point:

Your initial comment ended with "Has every coach had him in the wrong position throughout his career [paraphrase]. Or, is he not a 4/5 dman?". Meaning, the coaches had him in a position that goes against my label of top4 dman or top5 dman.

Now, you're saying that his TOI/GP means he is at worst a 2nd pairing Dman... So this doesn't actually contest my initial label of #4 dman. It only seeks to eliminate the #5 dman label. Correct or not?

As you can see, your initial reply does not actually align with what you are saying now. Hence, the confusion.

As to the label of a #5 dman: There are points in Myers' performance where he has operated as a #5 dman. This analysis goes beyond just TOI/GP. That said, I'm now far more interested why you think he is "at worst a 2nd pairing Dman". What beyond TOI/GP do you have to help this?

 

[Numba9]

Not worth $6M per year. Which I'd then define a $6M defenseman as being closer to being a #2 defenseman than a #4. Feel free to define that as you'd like.

I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand, he is a UFA; the reason UFAs are overpaid is because teams don't have to give up any other asset except for cap space. Also, it's almost a guarantee that in 1-2 years 6M will not even be close to a UFA #2.

 

[HankNDank]

The bold is incorrect, but to your main point:

Your initial comment ended with "Has every coach had him in the wrong position throughout his career [paraphrase]. Or, is he not a 4/5 dman?". Meaning, the coaches had him in a position that goes against my label of top4 dman or top5 dman.

Now, you're saying that his TOI/GP means he is at worst a 2nd pairing Dman... So this doesn't actually contest my initial label of #4 dman. It only seeks to eliminate the #5 dman label. Correct or not?

As you can see, your initial reply does not actually align with what you are saying now. Hence, the confusion.

As to the label of a #5 dman: There are points in Myers' performance where he has operated as a #5 dman. This analysis goes beyond just TOI/GP. That said, I'm now far more interested why you think he is "at worst a 2nd pairing Dman". What beyond TOI/GP do you have to help this?

I suppose you are right, it only eliminates the 5 of the 4/5. But that is only "at worst". I don'th ability to see his toi/gm comparative to his teammates over that time frame, but yes that is my only basis of him not being a bottom pairing d. I wouldn't be surprised to see him 4th in toi/gm with buff, trouba, and morrisey on the team, and 3rd or even 2nd pre-morrisey, and on buffalo. If multiple coaches over multiple years didn't play him as a bottom pair(or 4/5), I'm going to trust them over what some random person on the internet says, no offense. I also will say that I wouldn't be surprised if he finishes 2nd on our team in toi/gm this year, whether they are effective positive minutes or not, I don't know, but he's going to get a long leash being the prized FA signing. I'll root for him rather than against him, especially since we have a potential lottery 1st round pick on the line if we don't make the playoffs in 1 of the next 2 years.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Again the polarity with the Benning haters; if you don't hate everything he does then you are "blindly denfend(ing) every single move Benning makes" (something I have never done). Enough with this idiocy. I am NOT a fan of his but I also find it ridiculous the way people are parsing this trade to death before training camp has even started. The haters are completely ignoring the fact that we have no idea of a) who has been approached by the Canucks, b) who has declined the Canucks' offers and c) how many of the "obvious" trades that they propose have been tried and rejected by the other teams involved. Operating in what can only be described as an information vacuum and coming from a place of almost total negativity they come up with a bunch of theories that, however much these theories advance their agenda (that Benning is the worst GM in our history, the league etc. etc.) are COMPLETELY SPECULATIVE. Since I (and you) don't know what alternatives Benning tried we are left only with what he has managed to get actually done. I agree that Myers is not the ideal player for us to sign but it appears that he was the best available option at FA for our defense which needed improvement. I (like the majority of Canuck fans) am willing to at least see if Myers works here or not without worrying whether or not he plays like a #3 d man making #2 money (the horror!). I suggest the bean counters here give it up for awhile and watch the at least some of games before freaking out.

Forget benning haters and benning backers. Your opinion on Myers is irrational, it has nothing to do with sides. However, instead of acknowledging the logical flaws in your argument, you are choosing to conflate the argument to be one of general bias. This is a poor choice.

To the points:

1. Training camp hasn't even started: Doesn't matter. This only matters if you think Myers is going to be a completely different player than his previous 10 years suggest. BTW, your argument here is eerily similar to the Gudbranson defense.

2. We don't know what the Canucks tried to do behind the scenes: Doesn't matter. The alternatives were presented when requested. That the Canucks failed to execute on those options is not a defense of Canucks management. It should be an indictment of their performance.

3. We can only judge what Benning actually did: Incorrect. We can judge what he failed to do by looking at what other teams did instead. From that we can also draw information.

4. Myers was the best available option in FA: Not exactly. If you go by the totality of what was available, including the players that were moved prior to the draft, then Myers was emphatically not the best option.

5. The Canucks defense needed improvement: That's been true for 4+ years. This rationale does not justify signing a poor contract now.

6. Fans are needlessly worrying that Myers is being paid #2 money for a #3 dman performance: If only. Myers is being paid #1 money while being a borderline #4/#5 dman. That's bad.


General bias has nothing to do with arguing whether or not Myers is a good signing. He's not a good signing.

 

[Hit the post]

I suppose you are right, it only eliminates the 5 of the 4/5. But that is only "at worst". I don'th ability to see his toi/gm comparative to his teammates over that time frame, but yes that is my only basis of him not being a bottom pairing d. I wouldn't be surprised to see him 4th in toi/gm with buff, trouba, and morrisey on the team, and 3rd or even 2nd pre-morrisey, and on buffalo. If multiple coaches over multiple years didn't play him as a bottom pair(or 4/5), I'm going to trust them over what some random person on the internet says, no offense. I also will say that I wouldn't be surprised if he finishes 2nd on our team in toi/gm this year, whether they are effective positive minutes or not, I don't know, but he's going to get a long leash being the prized FA signing. I'll root for him rather than against him, especially since we have a potential lottery 1st round pick on the line if we don't make the playoffs in 1 of the next 2 years.

Guess who was #2 in toi/gm this past season (by more than two minutes over the #3)?

Ben Hutton.

 

[MarkMM]

No but if we don't we literally won't sign any UFA's then...

Which is better than wasting cap space making it hard for us to retain young talent or make moves for when actually good players worth their salaries become available.

Not sure why that's hard to understand, especially with the situation with Boesser staring us in the face as was warned by many "bean counters" on this board for the past few years. (Who then get pegged by BenningBros as #Hindsight when what was predicted comes true.)

 

[Megaterio Llamas]

I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand, he is a UFA; the reason UFAs are overpaid is because teams don't have to give up any other asset except for cap space. Also, it's almost a guarantee that in 1-2 years 6M will not even be close to a UFA #2.

Anyway you slice it he's still a #4-5 defenceman blocking $6 million in cap space for the next five years with Pettersson and Hughes potentially needing huge money deals two or three years from now. It's a potential disaster.

 

[Hoghandler]

As to the label of a #5 dman: There are points in Myers' performance where he has operated as a #5 dman. This analysis goes beyond just TOI/GP.

There are also points in Myers performance where he has operated as a top pairing dman. Doesn't mean he's a top pairing guy.

If he's been given top 4 minutes his entire career, has posted counting stats of a clear cut top 4 dman, and would undoubtedly by a top 4 dman on the majority of teams in the NHL currently, isn't that a solid case for him being a top 4 dman?

It's more of a semantics argument than anything. If 2 people don't agree on what constitutes being considered a top 4 dman, they won't come to agreement on who ends up on that list. So until you clearly lay out the threshold one needs to hit to be considered such a player, you're likely going to continue spinning your wheels.

What is the benchmark for being a top 4 dman?

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

I'm excited to have Myers, he's going to help make our team better than it was.

Lots of debate about what he is, to me he's probably a #4D who can bring some extra offense. There's arguments he's been less at times, and arguments he's been fine as a top 4. At times in Winnipeg there was both from what I saw. As was the case in Buffalo before. I have that understanding going in, and I'll reserve further judgment beyond that & see how he fits in here.

I'm not expecting this contract to ever be a bargain, he's overpaid plain & simple, that is what it is (which is part of the nature of a rebuilding team) but he adds support our young core needs. Status-quo wasn't working, they needed to add a defenseman & after a Barrie trade couldn't be made the weren't an abundance of options that fit what we needed.

 

[Disappointed EP40]

Again the polarity with the Benning haters; if you don't hate everything he does then you are "blindly denfend(ing) every single move Benning makes" (something I have never done). Enough with this idiocy. I am NOT a fan of his but I also find it ridiculous the way people are parsing this trade to death before training camp has even started. The haters are completely ignoring the fact that we have no idea of a) who has been approached by the Canucks, b) who has declined the Canucks' offers and c) how many of the "obvious" trades that they propose have been tried and rejected by the other teams involved. Operating in what can only be described as an information vacuum and coming from a place of almost total negativity they come up with a bunch of theories that, however much these theories advance their agenda (that Benning is the worst GM in our history, the league etc. etc.) are COMPLETELY SPECULATIVE. Since I (and you) don't know what alternatives Benning tried we are left only with what he has managed to get actually done. I agree that Myers is not the ideal player for us to sign but it appears that he was the best available option at FA for our defense which needed improvement. I (like the majority of Canuck fans) am willing to at least see if Myers works here or not without worrying whether or not he plays like a #3 d man making #2 money (the horror!). I suggest the bean counters here give it up for awhile and watch the at least some of games before freaking out.

This post is hilarious.

I mean, what are your expectations and when would you be disappointed the signing?

 

[Disappointed EP40]

I'm excited to have Myers, he's going to help make our team better than it was.

Lots of debate about what he is, to me he's probably a #4D who can bring some extra offense. There's arguments he's been less at times, and arguments he's been fine as a top 4. At times in Winnipeg there was both from what I saw. As was the case in Buffalo before. I have that understanding going in, and I'll reserve further judgment beyond that & see how he fits in here.

I'm not expecting this contract to ever be a bargain, he's overpaid plain & simple, that is what it is (which is part of the nature of a rebuilding team) but he adds support our young core needs. Status-quo wasn't working, they needed to add a defenseman & after a Barrie trade couldn't be made the weren't an abundance of options that fit what we needed.

This pretty much where I'm at. Only concern is regression, but I don't expect it.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

No. He's a $4.5mil player in my estimation. Decent #4 that can play in all situations.

Isnt he pretty awful defensively?