Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

(Proposal) Miller to Kings


brian42

Recommended Posts

To Kings:

Miller (50% retained) 

 

to canucks:

Peter Budaj

2017 2'nd Rd pick 

 

Budaj is a UFA but fills miller's spot for this year and he could be resigned for much cheaper than Miller's 6 million until Demko is ready.

 

with the kings possibly missing the playoffs I think this is the best pick the canucks could get considering the lack of a goaltending trade market.

 

i would not think the kings would want to do this trade because of their position in the standings and the fact Budaj has played well for the most part but according to HNIC (kypreos) they are interested in Miller.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, brian42 said:

I don't disagree but this proposal is based on the reported interest the kings have in Miller would be a great trade for vancouver.  If I was JB I'd even take a 3'rd. 

They want to possibly add a 3rd goalie for insurance.  The roster limit is lifted at the TDL - teams only have to be under the cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

I hope Wlllie isn't dumb enough to start Miller on tuesday. 

You know for sure he will. Miller isn't going anywhere. The offers will be a pittance compared to his value. JB won't be giving up Miller for a lowball offer which I believe is all he will receive. I'd hang on to Miller and try to re sign him unless we are getting a head turning deal in return.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hammertime said:

You know for sure he will. Miller isn't going anywhere. The offers will be a pittance compared to his value. JB won't be giving up Miller for a lowball offer which I believe is all he will receive. I'd hang on to Miller and try to re sign him unless we are getting a head turning deal in return.  

Yeah let's keep him for the cup run (sarcasm). 

F that, get rid of him. Whatever we can get is fine with me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ken kaniff said:

Quick played today. They don't need Miller anymore

7 hours ago, numb3r 16 said:

Budaj had been lights out in the net for LA this year, better than quick. Don't see them giving him up

7 hours ago, qwijibo said:

Yeah. This makes absolutely zero sense for the Kings. 

Yup to all of these. They won't be adding an expensive third or even backup, and even if they did, Budaj was leading the league in shutouts. Just because Kyprios said it doesn't mean they'll give us much of worth for him. I'd be very surprised if this has any real legs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, hammertime said:

You know for sure he will. Miller isn't going anywhere. The offers will be a pittance compared to his value. JB won't be giving up Miller for a lowball offer which I believe is all he will receive. I'd hang on to Miller and try to re sign him unless we are getting a head turning deal in return.  

I'm surprised ANA didn't offer that conditional 1st for Miller instead of Eaves.... but I'm no `GM :lol: After losing to the Kings I would think ANA is looking harder at Miller. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, hammertime said:

You know for sure he will. Miller isn't going anywhere. The offers will be a pittance compared to his value. JB won't be giving up Miller for a lowball offer which I believe is all he will receive. I'd hang on to Miller and try to re sign him unless we are getting a head turning deal in return.  

Exactly.  This is like trading San Diego for Tijuana, without the character and intangibles.  I'd far prefer to lose 3-2 than 6-2.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, brian42 said:

Turns out this proposal wasn't so off considering the kings did trade for a goalie and Budaj did go the other way.  I consider this a failure for the canucks. 

If Tampa had gotten a 2nd back, I might agree with you, but considering they took an extra contract, retained salary and only upgraded a 7th into a 5th, there isn't a lot of incentive for us to make a deal like that. We expect to be active among the NCAA free agents and might have to take a contract of two to make other deals work, I'd rather have the 4 free contract spots than a C prospect and a late round pick upgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...