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

aGENT

Members
  • Posts

    52,033
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    68

Everything posted by aGENT

  1. By "now", I assume you mean this summer? In that case, given I don't think there's any realistic scenario we extend him, we do have to get "something" for him. Likely including a first. Yes, that will likely be a late first (though the possibility of a team in the middle, looking at him as a cherry on top, to push them forward, might offer a mid one). But people need to just stop with the borderline-straw man "only a late first " comments, simply so they have something to attack. Nobody is suggesting it will be the main piece of the trade. Solid, sure. IMO, guys like Othmann, Lundqvist, Chytil etc are pretty safe bets to be NHL players. And players with some (though not likely current-Miller) upside. Which again, isn't the point. Again, nobody is suggesting a high risk player like Kravstov as the key piece coming back. Could he be a 3rd or 4th piece... ? Sure. Main piece? Nope. Again, let's stop with the borderline-straw men here, and posting like there's a bunch of insane Canuck fans who want to move Miller for Kravstov, a late first and future considerations. Have the decency to at least argue with reality. There's no reason to turn the discussion in to a trucker convoy with alternate facts and half truths.
  2. While we're away it, can I win the lotto max and land a super model? All about as likely.
  3. That said @Elias Pettersson, assuming we make some larger moves this summer, and that he'd perhaps sign a bargain "show me" deal, there's worse guys to take a flyer on forb potential mid 6 (maybe wing) spot.
  4. Lacks the grit., ,defensive/2way play etc required of a solid 3C IMO. Rather target Paul, Tierney or Sturm in the offseason (after we clear some cap).
  5. I'm surprised they didn't seem to make a bigger go of it this TDL. These next couple years are probably their best shot at a cup And a $5.25M (or less, with retention) Miller would have made them silly deep, AND been a pretty great sub for expiring Kadri this summer. If I was Sakic, I would have thrown all the kitchen sinks at landing him. Hedge-betting doesn't win you cups.
  6. Picks to "everyone" (particularly the late firsts we're likely talking about here) are a throw in, no? I honestly don't get why this keeps coming up? Unless some team wants to give us a top 5 pick for him, I don't think anyone, anywhere, is under the illusion that any potential late first is going to be the key piece in any trade return. This should be understood...like water is wet, sky is blue etc. Why keep bringing it up? It's mutually agreed upon information. Any late 1st is likely the 3rd or 4th most important asset in any Miller trade. Ice is also cold. I'd be perfectly fine with Lundqvist as part of a return for Miller personally. He's a damn good D prospect. Possibly even better than Schneider in fact. And he's 21 (almost 22) FYI. Certainty costs you potential. You can get a "certain", 25 year old say #4D (who will stay a #4D) or you can get a 22 year old, probably currently #5D, with top pair/#3D potential. And again, I think you're ignoring the time frame management has already laid out. Two + years... In two years, a guy like Lundqvist is entering that prime, right on schedule.
  7. Why make such an arbitrary goal post? Why does it have to be a 25-26 year old? Does he have to be a top 4 D NOW? Can't he be a top 4 D in say, 2 years? I think we could assume guys like Marino, Lundqvist, Schneider etc, that management has already been rumoured to be interested in. There's probably a few guys none of us would see coming either.
  8. Why would we blow up a team with it's 3 biggest core players at their peaks?
  9. I agree, which means he's getting a 7 or 8 year deal at +/- $9.3 or $8.125m... neither of which we should be signing either. Still too much money and that term is terrifying with where we're at in our cycle. Like I've said numerous times. I just don't see overlap of a contract that works for the player, that also works for the Canucks. It's a non starter. I don't care if management is saying the "right things" about "talking extension in the summer" etc. It's pure PR. The math is pretty overwhelmingly clear and plain, that it's simply not going to (and shouldn't) happen. We need to trade a couple-three of them (include Boeser and Myers in that list as potentials as well).
  10. Any team looking to win now/exiting their contention window. Nashville, Boston, Pittsburgh etc. He's going to get +/- $65m from someone. I hope it's not us.
  11. I think his agent will be looking for $65m +/-. You can divide that by how ever many years you like and get whichever AAV that equals. Less years, higher AAV. More years, lower AAV. Personally I think signing him for longer than 5-6 years for us would be insane. At 5 or 6 years, you're looking at +/- $13m or $10.833m AAV.... So shall we talk about that trade return?!
  12. Recall - COL recalls Jansen Harkins @Mike Vanderhoek
  13. To make space for those moves... Assignment - COL Assigns Givani Smith to the Springs @Mike Vanderhoek
  14. COL has the bulk of our desired moves done but still has interest in a playoff bound, starting goaltender and we'd be willing to add to exchange McNabb for a playoff bound D as well.
  15. Coconuts largely covered this already but... You absolutely can justify not signing him. You need to have a walk away number/term, and IMO there's simply not likely an overlap there for team and player on a contract. It's not as simple as "good player now = sign him". There's all the factors Coconuts mentioned to consider around his age, production, cap, term, age of core/contention window, whether he wants to even stay, etc, etc... And any trade is not going to likely "replace" him. At least not "current him" (though it would be great/lucky if it did.. And it's certainly possible, if unlikely). That's not what this move is about. Moving him now gets you assets to fill our other, plentiful holes (RD, 3C, prospects etc). It's selling high to multiply assets, some of whom you hope will be contributing in 3+ years from now, while not committing $9m+ to what will eventually be a declining, middle 6 player. Chances are, at least one of those pieces is as productive as him in 5 years, at our core's peak, for far less cap. Cap efficiency is arguably the biggest factor required to win a cup. Worst case, none of those pieces amount to anything and we still have $9m of cap to fill the holes we hoped they would (and have the opportunity and cap space to trade for the "next Miller", on his value deal, just like we did with this Miller) a. And it's unlikely NONE of the pieces turn in to serviceable players. Only way we move Myers is if there's a deal bringing in at least one, younger, top 4 RHD... That's going to require moving one or two of Miller/Boeser/Garland. Agreed on Pearson. His major drawback is his speed (and longer term, age). And that probably wouldn't be as much of a problem if we didn't also have a slower Boeser in the top 6 as well. Both there causes us major speed matchup issues. It probably won't be linear progression but both have tonnes of headroom to progress IMO.
  16. Teams move out salary to add good players all the time. See: Vegas or Florida as recent examples. Nashville could also easily afford to add him. As could up and coming teams like Anaheim or older (last gasp) teams like Boston or Pittsburgh.
  17. Yeah...just look at how different the Hertl contract is, right!! Wait...what?
  18. Right. And I don't see any way we could/should sign him to the contract he'll command. He's going to want +/- $65m-$70m IMO based on comparables. Divide that by how ever many years you want. None of them make sense for the Canucks to sign. Especially with where we are in our cycle (coming out of a rebuild/window just cracking open). That's a deal teams sign when they're trying to win now/wind down, where the back half of the deal doesn't matter, as you're rebuilding anyway. The rest of the arguments, platitudes, goal post movement etc don't really matter. Ergo... the only option left is...?
×
×
  • Create New...