Photo Credit: Arlen Redekop / PNG

First Look: Canucks Overpay Tyler Myers

It’s no secret that the Canucks’ defense has been in dire need of a shakeup over the past few years. They’ve been in the bottom-half of the league in goals allowed per game for the past three seasons (including back-to-back years in the bottom six in 2016-17 and 2017-18), and have been one of the league’s worst teams at getting offense from the back end over that span. The team’s front office did their best to fix these issues on July 1, signing Tyler Myers to a five-year deal worth $30 million, Jordie Benn to a two-year deal worth $4 million, and Oscar Fantenberg to a one-year deal worth $850k.

Fantenberg is a low-cost, depth signing and Thomas Williams did a good job explaining what the Canucks can expect from Jordie Benn; so today we’ll be taking a look at the biggest new addition, Tyler Myers, and what he can bring to the Canucks over the next five years.

On paper, Tyler Myers looks like a fine addition to the Canucks’ right side, where the Canucks have struggled with injury and poor performance for years. At 6’8″, he’s one of the biggest defenders in the league, he’s hovered around the 50% mark in shot shares for most of his time with the Winnipeg Jets, and he had 31 points last year, more than any Canucks defender not named Alex Edler.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

If you take a deeper look into his profile beyond simple counting stats and underlying shot-based metrics, however,  the issues with Myers’ contract will start to come into focus. Out of the 20 defenders to suit up for the Jets since he joined them in 2015, Myers has been the fourth-worst by expected goals and fifth-worst in raw goals-for percentage.

Micah Blake McCurdy’s Threat model, which attempts to isolate the individual impact of a player on shot rates from the impact of a number of confounding factors such as teammates, their opponents, score effects, zones starts, and home-ice advantage, doesn’t look very favourably on Myers, either. Threat estimates Myers to be slightly below league average in both the offensive and defensive zones and on the man advantage.* The EvolvingHockey Goals Above Replacement (GAR) model doesn’t look very kindly on Myers, either, placing him in the bottom-fifty among qualifying defenders.


Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

The one area Tyler Myers has been significantly above average in over the course of his career is time-on-ice, both at even-strength and on the power play. He’s been the Jets third-most utilized defenseman in all situations behind Dustin Byfuglien and Jacob Trouba. That’s what’s allowed him to put up relatively impressive counting stats despite being only an average offensive producer on a per-minute basis. In this respect, he’s similar to Brandon Sutter, another player the Canucks overpaid who had a similar affliction and whose salary they will be in tough to shed this off-season.

Based on my viewings of Myers over the past few seasons, I’d say the assertions that he’s a below-replacement-level player are a little extreme. He can skate; he’s got a shot; he’s very big, which still has some value in the postseason; and he can help a team’s third pair even if his two-way play isn’t what you’d hope for from a player with his reputation.

The issue is that the Canucks didn’t sign Myers to play on the bottom pairing. They’ve made him the 27th-highest paid defender in the league, indicating they believe he’s more than capable of holding down a role in the top-four. While he’s certainly an upgrade on a lot of the players that made appearances on the right side last season, my concern is that the biggest effect he’ll have on the roster will be taking playing time away from Troy Stecher, who is probably the team’s best right-shot defender at the moment now that Chris Tanev has suffered a pretty steep decline and he’s proven himself against tougher competition in a top-four role in Tanev’s absence.

The Canucks have certainly improved their defense heading into this summer, though perhaps not to the extent the Vancouver media would have you believe. Jordie Benn and Quinn Hughes are obvious upgrades on Ben Hutton and the revolving door of bottom-pairing left-handed defenders the Canucks trotted out last season, but replacing Stecher with Myers in the top four is a lateral move at best and Alex Edler and Chris Tanev are another year older and in all likelihood less effective, too. Despite the additions, the Canucks still lack organizational depth at the position, and our only an injury or two away from being in a similar position to the one they found themselves in in 2018-19. If the Canucks’ plan remains to lean heavily on the Edler-Tanev pairing, recent history would suggest it’s even money the Canucks will be without half of their top-four for significant stretches.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Overpaying in free agency is often just the cost of getting better, but Tyler Myers isn’t exactly the soundest bet to make. It’s one thing to hand out big contracts to elite play-drivers or offensive producers, but Myers is neither. He’s a 4-5 defenseman at absolute best, who’s rapidly approaching a decline if not already declining. 

Meanwhile, the cap space issues many dismissed just a few months ago are finally beginning to come to fruition. They currently don’t have enough space to sign Brock Boeser without moving out salary, and that’s with Quinn Hughes and Elias Pettersson still on entry-level deals. 

It’s nearly impossible for a team to improve and become a contender without running into cap space issues. The Chicago Blackhawks of years past had to jettison a lot of talent to stay financially solvent during their heyday and the present-day Toronto Maple Leafs and Winnipeg Jets are currently dealing with similar issues. The difference is that those teams have/had a large collection of high-end talent and a winning record to show for their investment. The Canucks have been one of the league’s worst teams over the span of four years, and already have cap trouble. What’s going to happen when they actually have some good players they have to pay?

*Micah does some of the best publicly available work in hockey analytics, if you would like to support him, you can do so here.

    • DJ_44

      These are highly selective pesky “facts”. Dayal at the Athletic did a far more balanced (not to mentioned detailed) analysis of the Myers acquisition. He stated he was overpaid, but that he would definitely help the Canucks in the first three years of his contract.

      He excels (and the stats also show it) and moving the puck out of his zone and creating offence. I have watched at least 10 Jets games from last season and Myers looks pretty solid. He can struggle in his own zone, but no more that Trouba in my viewings. He was also partnered with Kulikov throughout his time in Winnipeg.

      He needs to be with a defensively responsible partner and he will be fine. He is definitely top-four calibre offensively. He can pass, shoot and skate. Defensive abilities will be the question.

  • Captain Video

    A fair assessment of Myers. But I don’t think that anyone is suggesting it wasn’t an overpay.

    As for what’s going to happen? Well … it won’t be Jim Beijing’s problem.

  • Mellowyellow

    I think you might have to rethink your headline.. Most of the discussion is in regards to his performance metrics.. there is no really true analysis of his metrics in conjunction with his $$ amount.. Don’t just look at all D in general… take the salary of players playing the RIGHT side!… 1) is there a shortage of D man on the right side.. 2) does the inflated $$ justify the supply/demand AND performance value.. I hate it when people start including the Left side guys which clearly theres a ton of dman for those positions…

    • DogBreath

      and a 3rd point to Mellowyellow’s list. Isolate RHD UFA contracts from RHD RFA across the league because clearly they are different markets (ie, cost-controlled vs not cost-controlled). Avg salary of RHD RFA is significantly lower so by extension it UFAs are more likely to appear overpaid.

      Time will tell whether Benning paid too much.

  • hm

    There is a lot of debate about Banning and his moves and for the most part I am with the detractors. However, i think, it can sometimes get a little overly negative and some of the conclusions in this piece go there. Most importantly, the Canucks do not have a long term cap problem. In 2 to 3 years, all the bad contracts will be done or near done and movable. (even next year looks better) and even accounting for big deals for Petey and Hughes, there will be flexibility because of that expiration but also because there is a decent pipeline of young prospects, (podklozin, Woo, Madden, Rathbone, Lockwood, this years second round choice, and other marginal but usable players currently in Utica) to feel that there is a decent chance to replace anything left that is problematic with young players on ELC’s. Yhey have a cap problem now, because Benning has made a bunch of mistakes that he is paying for today, but next year will be better. And frankly if those problems make it hard to spend any more this year (for sure) and means that they are dragged down this year by mediocre players on bad contracts, all the better as they get one more shot at the lottery. And frankly, all the mistakes Benning has made have had a silver lining as they have kept us out of the playoffs for a bunch of years, meaning better drafting position.

    • Dirty30

      Kind of like saying “everyone in my family died, but at least it means I won’t have to buy anyone Christmas presents!”

      For once it would be nice to have good news that is good news instead of the very long list of mistakes made under Benning’s term. There are positives— mainly at the draft table — but free agents, trades, and contracts just too often end up a problem that really wasn’t necessary in the first place. That’s the kicker — too many times it’s an over payment in a trade and a contract, and there just seems to be no logic behind it.

      There’s a couple months to go to see if the latest changes pan out or simply become another problem to solve.

  • Puck N A

    “The difference is that those teams have/had a large collection of high-end talent and a winning record to show for their investment. The Canucks have been one of the league’s worst teams over the span of four years, and already have cap trouble. What’s going to happen when they actually have some good players they have to pay?”

    That’s what’s scared me about Jim “Santa Claus” Benning from his first season as GM. He’s on the other end of the spectrum from Ebeneezer Scrooge. I used to bring this up years ago on another board, and the naive posters dismissed this because “money comes off the books from the Sedins, lots of entry level contracts”, etc. But Benning showed me then, with Sutter, Sbisa, Dorsett, that he’s a marshmallow when it comes to negotiating. It didn’t affect the Canucks immediately, but, like a Princess just married to a banking CEO, multiple max platinum CCs tucked away, Jim’s shopping spree expeditions sting, then cause pain, and eventually are gonna bankrupt and crash this org even before the party decorations go up.

    Aquilini better have a damn good and thoughtful plan on who’s gonna replace this Peter Principle disaster of a GM.

    • CanucksRealist

      Well, well guys… Goon aka disgraced former CA ‘contributor’ Matthew Dolmage slithers back in under a new user name. Matty boy just can’t stay away, despite being humiliated by his own ineptitude – easier to spot than a straight male walking along Davie St!

      ‘Puck N A’ aka ‘Goon’ – The Dawson Creek dip$h(i)t busted again.

    • Dirk22

      This hasn’t nothing to do with ‘Benning haters’ – these were numbers given by numerous media sources (some Vancouver based, some otherwise). Where do these numbers get leaked from? Hmmmm

      • Bud Poile

        The same Benning hating morons on Twitter stated Ferland was $5 million X 4 years that the broadcasters then started mouthing on 650 and the other site.
        I listened to 1.5 hours about this signing being a terrible Benning contract before it was verified at $3.5X4.
        So,your confusion comes from the same ‘fans’ like you,Fraud and PQW’s thirty personas that spread manure on this site.

        • CanucksRealist

          Who the f(c)uk do you think you are branding passionate Canucks fans who will not tolerate this five year failure as ‘moron’s you little cowardly p(r)i-ck???

          Tell you what, come on down to 8 rinks and see how your ignorant disingenuous mouth works against us many justified Benning haters down here… tick tock a$$wipe.

      • DogBreath

        Not so sure about that one, Dirk, The haters pounced on it, debated it for days, crucified him etc. It wasn’t the haters finest hour. Even you have got to admit that.

        • Dirk22

          Renaud Lavoie, formerly from TSN, went on Sportsnet 650 talking about 7 years x 8 million which is probably where these numbers/rumours came from. Forever is making it out to be some creation by people who want something to pounce on Benning for. I’m just, as usual, providing the proper context.

          Before the contract was signed it was almost universal on these forums that a Myers contract would not be in the Canucks best interest. The Benning detractors and supporters all in agreement. Suddenly 6 x 5 comes out and now it’s ‘wait and see.’ Benning could sign Kyle Wellwood to a 5 x 4 contract and Forever would still be in support because it wasn’t a NTC, can be bought out and the cap issues aren’t that big a deal.

          • DogBreath

            I don’t read Forever’s post that way. I think he’s referring to the group that harangued Benning before the contract was signed. Go back to the threads – the haters bit hard, early on the 7X7. There was another group that said ‘lets see the contract before we judge’. I suspect most of this group thought 7X7 was too ridiculous to be true.

            If it ended up being true we would have been unified in vilifying him for the signing.

          • Dirk22

            Show me the threads where the 7 x 7 or 7 x 8 money and term are debated as the prevailing issue in signing Myers. Nobody wanted Myers signed …. at least not until July 1st when he was actually signed and the apologists resumed their positions. This wasn’t suddenly a good deal once those numbers dropped to 6 x 5.

          • DogBreath

            Those who have accepted it probably recognize it as a slight overpay but not crazy given it was July 1, he’s a RHD with no real 2019 UFA comparable, it was a 10% increase on his previous salary and the Canucks have no one coming in the short term that could have otherwise stepped in. The alternative, 32 yo Stralman, went for $5.5 for 3 years. The ‘apologists’ tend to factor those kinds of pieces in in their evaluation as well.

          • I’m just, as usual, providing the proper context.

            Well done, Dirk22. I applaud you for including relevant context, however, you still need to work on truth: “I’m just providing the proper context. You are more accurate this time as you historically do not add context.

            Benning could sign Kyle Wellwood to a 5 x 4 contract and Forever would still be in support because it wasn’t a NTC, can be bought out and the cap issues aren’t that big a deal.

            Well, here is an example of you casting me as a blind Benning supporter. I’ll allow you to correct yourself and find what my actual responses are. In my most recent posts regarding GAR/WAR and Corsi/Fenwick, I point out that Myers had poor advanced statistics last year when he had to sub in for injured top-pairing defencemen in Winnipeg. But I also pointed out that in the two years prior, he had positive GAR/WAR and Corsi/Fenwick when he was playing Bottom 4 minutes. Therefore, I concluded that signing Myers to play Top 4 minutes despite the stats showing he’s clearly Bottom 4 (i.e. not top pairing) is a legitimate cause for concern.

            Oops. This is an example of how blind the anti-Benning haters are. If you aren’t exclusively anti-Benning and spew hatred 100% of the time, you are obviously wrong. I’m actually agreeing that the Myers signing is not a good one, in fact I advocated skipping Myers this year and going for a RHD next year when more legitimate Top 4 / Top pairing RHD would be available, thus leading to more competition and lower costs.

            TL;DR – I actually agree with the Benning haters that the Myers signing is not good but the Benning haters are so blindly hating anything that’s even remotely pro-Benning, you don’t even read what’s posted and automatically assumed I was taking a contrary position. You need to realize that debates are not solely the defense of exclusively binary positions and worse, falsely attribute ideas that are both false and hyperbolic (e.g. Wellwood comment) to those people is inappropriate.

          • Here’s another example from the other day:

            canucksfan: Anyways, let’s cut the [email protected] here – briefly, who would you rather have on the Vancouver Canucks hockey club Forever… Matthew Tkachuk or Olli Juolevi, because thats the only question that matters… this will tell me all i need to know about you?

            So I agreed that I would have drafted Tkachuk over Juolevi and that to this day, I still think it’s a mistake to have drafted Juolevi over Tkachuk because Tkachuk was the best player available. However, I qualified my response by saying that I hoped Juolevi would still develop into a Top 4 defender for the Canucks long-term.

            I responded to the question directly. The absence of a response from canucksfan (and whatever other handles he/she uses here) is told me all I needed to know about that person.

          • Dirk22

            Continually defending management despite not liking the moves they make is the definition of blind loyalty.

            Who began this thread with a made up dig at ‘Benning haters’ anyways?

          • Continually defending management despite not liking the moves they make is the definition of blind loyalty.

            Thanks Dirk22. This is a perfect example of the unrealistic binary positions you expect people to take, in which the only appropriate position is to 100% hate Benning. Any other position contrary to yours is derided with exaggerations like “blind loyalty” despite documented examples that show otherwise.

            I believe that Benning’s ability to draft outweighs the mistakes that he’s made in the past. Moreover, I believe that the majority of mistakes that he made were done under conditions that no longer exist. That’s not to say that he won’t make mistakes that I’d be happy to (have) criticize with verifiable support.

            At the end of the day, I still subscribe to the traditional foundation of a franchise: Build through the draft, build from the goal out, and always take the best player available. Based on an analysis of draft picks from 1998 to 1997 from EliteProspects that I did in January 2018, I concluded that Benning was far superior in this regard compared to Burke, Nonis, or Gillis.

          • Dogbreath: Thanks for another example of the anti-Benning crowd at it again. Didn’t read the posts *just above* where I did not support Benning where the data did not agree. Data said no to Myers and no to Juolevi. Yet you conclude that I exhibit only blind loyalty, even though facts that prove contrary are literally a few posts above.

        • DogBreath

          Forever, I was being sarcastic. ReReading my post, though, it’s likely I’m the only one who knew I was being sarcastic …..Keep doing what you’re doing – I generally agree with your takes ….

      • CanucksRealist

        Oh dear. Get ready for a bible-sized reply full of skewed cut n paste spreadsheet based nonsense now Freud. I think the word you are looking for is… slurper. :-p

        Forever’s #fakenews nonsense is not to be taken credibly or seriously… remember, this is the same clown who tells us DiPietro is an NHL starting goalie and Woo is a legit top 4 NHL Defenseman…


  • rediiis

    I must say that I’m in awe at how Jim Benning is insecure in his position. He was given a blank check and the forward community has grown in rat-like numbers. I really am curious as to how he fixes this mess this summer. I am still and always be a Canuck fan, but the lack of fiscal responsibility will carry over to next year when Stecher and Markstrom need money. I think his been counting is off, unless Barts retires and one of Tanev/Sutter/Eriksson get sucker punched by Ferland in camp and go on IR. I’d rather Ferland saved his Knuckles for the regular season.

    • Ty Webb

      By this time next year Tanev, Sutter, and Eriksson will be gone and with them their combined 14M cap hit. Add on Baers impending retirement which will free up another 3.6M. It’s a one year cap crunch. People really need to go outside and get some fresh air…

      • Puck N A

        The cap hit can’t be seen in isolation. When you’ve spent to the cap before the season even kicks off, it means you have few options left when opportunities arise — and they always arise –during the season. It also means that, in order to get under the cap or below, Benning may very well have to attach value to the Erikkson/Sutter anchor(s).

        Then, as the article rightly concludes, you’ve got huge raises coming when — you know — it really matters. That is, when the Canucks supposedly compete. Petterson is gonna get PAID. Ditto Hughes. And if this is a bridge contract, soon after, Boeser.

        Benning has demonstrated in every year he’s been the GM that he can’t, or won’t, negotiate to a lower cap or term. And it’s not like the Canucks are in a position where one or two pieces will push them over the top. They should have an internal player/dollar/term evaluation, and if the market says they must go higher, then PASS.

        When a team is paying its true stars big $$, you can’t afford the multiple overpays — Eriksson, Sutter, Myers, Beagle. This is about far more than getting under the cap for next year.

  • j2daff

    Myers is a #4 dman paid like a #2, that’s what you get on the UFA market though so it’s not really a matter of debating the price. The thing that should be debated is whether or not this was the season to make a push for the playoffs by letting go of the patient rebuild mentality.

    The defense is better this year, I’d argue that Stecher and Tavev are #4 dmen on RD as well so there is good balance there. The left side could be even stronger if Hughes comes as many hope he does.

    That said this article should never have been written as a focus on Myers himself. The only valid point that we should take from it is the issues we are going to have starting with Boeser and then into the next off season (Stecher/Markstrom) resigning players that we definitely want to keep if we cannot move out the bad contracts on the roster. It is possible Myers may be one of those in 4 years but unlike Sutter and LE he will have been a key player that you can justify a year(not 3-5) of a bad contract

    • JDMay101

      No, he’s not. He’s a replacement level D-man paid like a #2. Fair value for Tyler Myers is maybe 3 million on a two year deal. He isn’t noticeably better than Jordie Benn, who got 2×2. This was a stupid deal to sign.

      • Tellmore

        Who was a top 25 point producer amongst right handed defenders…

        What kind of production are you expecting from an AHL call up? Which is what replacement level is. Jackson doesn’t understand the term.

  • Colby7

    “They currently don’t have enough space to sign Brock Boeser without moving out salary, and that’s with Quinn Hughes and Elias Pettersson still on entry-level deals. ”

    Why do all of the writers on this site lack a basic understanding of the cap system? No, the team does not need to move out any contracts in order to sign Boeser. They may move out contracts, but nothing is forcing their hand. Either your value for Boeser is out to lunch of your don’t understand the fact the numbers on capfriendly don’t paint a totally accurate picture of what the NHL teams 23 man roster cap is going to be. If they sign Jake Gardiner as well, then you can make that statement.

    • JDMay101

      With a 22 man roster, the Canucks have about 6.8M in cap space. They have Boeser and Goldobin to sign. That is impossible without moving out salary.

      It is possible to sign Boeser for less than a 6.8AAV – he could get something like Timo Meier’s deal, for example. But that’s just kicking the problem down the road, because you’re not buying any UFA years. Ideally, you would like to get him signed for 6 to 8 seasons. With the way Benning has managed the team’s cap (read: poorly) that isn’t possible.

      It’s not just Myers, of course. Signing Beagle last year, the Sutter deal, the Eriksson deal before that, the Gudbranson and Sbisa contracts that are now mercifully a bitter memory (though Gubranson’s legacy is still being felt through Pearson being on the cap)… all of these things show that Jim Benning cannot be trusted to manage a hockey club. He is best suited to running an amateur scouting department. He should not be negotiating with free agents or making trades.

      • DJ_44

        Your numbers are not quite correct. They can, through roster manipulation, free up $7M to $7.5M of cap space to be cap compliant for the start of the season. That is enough to sign Boeser to either a bridge (6-6.5) or a longer term deal. A bridge does not “kick the problem down the road”; it allows both parties to evaluate at a later date. Boeser is a UFA in 5 season (I stand to be corrected if it is four… no time to look it up). A bridge will take him to one to two years prior to that date (like Meier). I doubt Boeser wants to go more that one UFA season (examples are too numerous to mention). If he produces — which I have little doubt he will — then he will get paid, and you may want to lock him up for more UFA years.

        Eriksson is an anchor, no question. As far as the Sbisa contract ($3.5M for a 4/5 defenceman moving to into UFA) or even Gudbranson …. they were not bad contracts. Gudbranson’s contract allowed the Canucks to retain and asset that they flipped for solid middle six forward in Pearson … who they got in a down year. Pretty sure they could move Pearson for assets tomorrow if they wanted. Same with Baertschi (although it is one or the other).

        Sutter’s problem is health. If he shows he is healthy, he can also be moved for assets in November-December.

        As far as Goldobin….. Sign him to $1M. It has no effect on the cap, since if he makes the team, someone else is displaced.

        • Beer Can Boyd

          Gudbransons contract was bad, the trade was worse. We gave up on a now 23 year old centre who has just delivered a 19 goal, 35 point campaign, for a plug who definitely did not come as advertised. To say nothing of the 2 other draft picks Jimbo threw in just for laughs. To put this in perspective for y’all, McCanns goal total last year was higher than Ferland (17), Miller (13), Leivo (14), Pearson (18) and Virtanen (15). And he’s making $1.25 mil this season. For a bit more perspective, he’d be taking the place of Sutter and Gaudette, who combined for a whopping 9 goals last year. But yeah, great trade Jim.

          • DJ_44

            Nice strawman BeerCan.

            Trade and contract are two different things.

            The $4M contract retained and injured asset and allowed for an additional asset to be acquired in Pearson. Who was only a goal shy of McCann despite three trades in one season, and playing with a terrible LA team for the first 17 games.

            The same GM that picked up McCann has no problem with Gudbranson playing (and playing well) earning $4M per.

      • Tellmore

        What is your source on these numbers? Cap friendly says 5.06 with 24 on the roster. 23 makes 6.135, 23 with Boeser makes 7.21.

        Remember that we get 1.075 mil relief with each contract sent down over that.

  • wojohowitz

    Up to now Myers has always played second fiddle to Byfuglien so his best years might be ahead of him. Paired with Edler and playing 25 minutes a night and if all goes well they could dominate every game they play. Huge turnaround if they both stay healthy. That`s something past performance wouldn`t indicate.

    • Puck N A

      When Buff went down last season, Myers had to step up and play more minutes against better opposition. He failed at it. With the Canucks, he’s gonna get even bigger minutes in many situations as one of Benning’s shiny new toys.

  • Killer Marmot

    The Canucks have been one of the league’s worst teams over the span of four years, and already have cap trouble.

    With the Ferland signing, the Canucks will be over the cap ceiling if they sign Boeser for more than $6 million. They will need to do something before the season opener.

    Will they feel a cap space crunch over the next two years, with players like Pettersson, Hughes, Demko, Stecher, Virtanen, and (possily) Leivo needing re-signing? Those players might be asking for much as $20 million in raises in total.


    o The Roussel injury adds $3 million to the cap hit at the start of next season. That will go away.
    o Spooner’s buy out will be done in two years.
    o Eriksson will likely have been traded (I’m guessing next summer.)
    o Not all of Edler, Sutter, Tanev, Pearson, Baertschi, and Benn will be re-signed.
    o The cap space might increase over two years by perhaps $4 million.

    In total, the above list represents about $36 million in cap space. The potential net savings is around $30 million. Not all of it will happen, but much of it will.

    So the “cap crunch” looks pretty tame right now.

  • Bucket

    Benning has a plan and he is working to that. Whether it is a plan that will bring us success is yet to be seen but it is a plan. Yes the last 4 seasons have been tough for the fans to swallow but if you are on board with the rebuild then one isn’t expecting us to make the playoffs so getting annoyed with the team for this is futile. Last season Benning said he wanted all of our bluechip prospects in the lineup. Except for Juolevi, he accomplished that. We are now moving into the next phase of the rebuild where we are trying to get decent supplementary pieces to work with our now very young core. Some of these guys will draw your ire, others will pleasantly surprise you. Nobody liked the Rousell signing at the time but once he played we saw his value. One of the best things for a coach to have is competition for places and we have that in abundance now. This will help the Goldobins and Virtanens who will no longer be able to take their spot on the team for granted and hopefully generate some friendly competition which is vital for a young team moving up. Jettisoning Hutton and Granlund will also show the players that if they dont perform they will be done and left behind. They are building a culture here as well as a competitive team, it takes time but if you take off the anti-Benning goggles when viewing every move they make you will see that there is some rhyme to their reason.

    One day Jackson might understand that fans want to come to fan sites to read positive news and positive takes on their team rather than painting everything in such a negative and depressing light.

    • I am Ted

      Wise up Rowe, why should he or any CA writer provide a false narrative just to keep homer fans like you happy when there has been no sustained success or playoffs in Vancouver for close to half a decade. The only depressing thing here is that you ‘fans’ can’t handle the truth. Maybe try Canucks dot com if you want company line fairytale takes.

      • Bucket

        Close to half a decade, lol. Sounds so much worse than 4 years, speaking of creating false narratives…

        If you accept your team is in a rebuild but then spend your time moaning and criticising them for not making the playoffs then that is not only counter productive it is, let’s be honest, pretty stupid. Oh, and ‘Homer fans’ lol, where else do the majority of your fans come from if not your home city? Duhhhhhh

  • Kanuckhotep

    Over analysis aside I think Canucks fans have no choice but to see what Myers can actually bring to the lineup. Admittedly I didn’t want them to sign Tyler Myers but the contract wasn’t that obscene actually as most postulated it would be. Let’s just hope his size and offensive capabilities do make a difference.

  • canuckfan

    The Canucks were a team that got pushed around last year. Petey and Brock were wacked and hacked and given shots they should not have had to take after the play. Sven took a bad rap to the head that wasn’t called for and wasn’t called by the ref.
    The players who did this to the Canucks will now have to pay a price for going near anyone of our young stars. Canucks can now push the play and have a heavier fore check and in their own end they have players who can either carry the puck out or pass the puck out of our end and defenders who won’t be intimidated. A much more balanced lineup that should be able to score more and prevent goals that in itself should mean more points in the standings.
    Canucks will be able to now have at least one of their bigger players on the ice at all times to make sure Hughes, Petey, Brock, Bo, Sven, Gaudette, and Stecher have more room and will not have as many cheap shots performed on them.

  • J-Canuck

    Meyers also spent a majority of his time playing with Kulikov, who is terrible! His numbers playing with someone else look better, but I guess numbers exist in a vacuum and who your partner is doesn’t matter.
    Also a lateral move? In what way possible? Schenn or Guddy?
    Instead of taking away minutes from Stetcher, seems tome that he will lighten the load on Tanev, reducing his minutes and hopefully injuries.

  • Burnabybob

    Myers certainly seems like an upgrade over Gudbranson, and that’s really who Myers is replacing in the lineup. There’s no reason to think Myers is going to take a lot of ice time away from Stecher.

    • Killer Marmot

      The optimum situation is to give each defensive pairing about the same ice time per game, so that your best defensemen are not worn down to the nub by February. Until injuries strike, at least, Green might be able to pull that off this season.

  • Tellmore

    What kind of bad math do they teach these writers?

    Cap friendly has the Canucks with 5.06 mil in cap space with 24 players on the roster. That means there can immediately be 1.075 mil in cap relief (league minimum of 0.7 plus .375 as per cba) when the roster becomes 23.

    So that’s 6.135 in cap space. And when Brock takes another, that’s another 1.075 in cap relief when he bumps out a roster spot.

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t that leave us 7.21 million to sign Brock?

    Daniel Wagner just projected his contract at 6.9, but it feels high considering the Pasternak, Meir and Karlsson contracts.

    But let’s say he gets 7.

    That means Goldoblin can still get 1.25 mil and we’d STILL be cap compliant.

    Does Jackson think Goldy is getting 2.5 mil? And that Benning signs that counter offer?

    I also find it amusing that a top 50 scoring defenseman who is top 25 amongst right handed defenseman in scoring is considered replacement level. Jackson clearly doesn’t understand what replacement level means. If he thinks any AHL callup can produce those numbers playing on the right side, he might want to dig a little deeper.

    I won’t say we didn’t overpay, but to think we could fetch Myers production for league minimum is just ignorant. Right handed defenseman are a rare commodity, and you have to pay a premium in free agency for that. If we can get 15 goals out of him and maybe provide a shot threat from the right on the PP, I don’t think we should complain that hard.

    But seriously, learn to do basic math CA. You used to understand how the CBA worked, this kind of sloppiness, over a span of articles, should feel embarrassing.

    • Cageyvet

      Yet, strangely, they seem to feel no shame over this, nor evince any desire to speak to the moves that are at JB’s disposal to dodge the cap even if he moves nobody – at least until Roussel comes off LTIR.

      Basically he’s got 5 months to move one Sutter-sized contract to have zero concerns for this year, with just a little to spare for EP and Hughe’s bonuses, and probably some more injury relief along the way, it’s the Canucks after all.