[Rumour] J.T. Miller Trade/Contract Talks

[JM_]

1 minute ago, Goal:thecup said:

I don't think we need to pick this to death.  (seemed to indicate does not equal direct from his mouth, for example)

Suffice it to say I don't know what it is, lol.

1000+ pages. Yes we do need to pick this to death. 

[mll]

3 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Carolina as well

Pesce and Burns obviously unavailable so who do you have in mind?   

[aGENT]

23 minutes ago, Darius said:

Its starting to look more and more like signing Miller is the best outcome IMHO.  I was in the trade him camp before, but its looking like top tier players who are pushing 30 and are in last year of contract  dont have as much value as we think.  Its doubtful that any team will cough up their young top pair RHD , plus multiple high grade assets for Miller in this current NHL climate.

 

Im really concerned about our D, but maybe having 3 lines that can score, including Miller, plus a good checking 4th line can keep the puck out of our end is a partial solution.

 

 

This IMO is the wrong way to look at it. And we were never getting multiple, top, high grade assets in return for Miller. Regardless of "climate".

 

This has never been about "replacing" Miller, or getting four "Miller value" assets back. It's about mid-long term cap allocation and not allocating vast amounts of cap and term that will be increasingly declining in value the back half, right when our young core will be peaking. It's about filling other organizational holes and depth (RHD or otherwise). Even if we don't get a RHD back, barring him signing for a sizeable discount, a trade is still likely our best/most likely outcome.

[aGENT]

6 minutes ago, mll said:

Pesce and Burns obviously unavailable so who do you have in mind?   

Morrow, Seeley...

[Gawdzukes]

[VegasCanuck]

16 minutes ago, JM_ said:

and of those, who needs Miller bad enough to move a top RHD prospect? 

I think NJ or Rangers are our best option as trade partners, but I don't think either will jump until Kadri is off the market as it's keeping everything else in flux, not just for a team we might trade with, but the ripple effect of possible moves and trades anyone signing Kadri might have to make.

 

If you look at the depth of NYI. I don't believe that there are any circumstances where they would move Dobson, he fills a role for them that they can't easily replace. To me, for us to trade with NYI, it would have to be for a trade around Dobson, I think as the only asset that they have that would actually improve our defense. I think this is a dead end unless we decide to take a couple of lesser players and a 1st, which doesn't help us immediately.

 

NJ has LOTS of depth around the right side D, and although this is just speculation on my part, I would think that they are chasing Kadri hard right now. If they sign him, they will still need to make moves, but their need for Miller drops substantially.

 

Even if we look at Colorado and assume that they aren't able to resign Kadri, they don't have the RD assets that they would be willing to move, IMO, in a trade for Miller. My guess is, management would want to move him out East and not within the Western Conference and IF we trade him, my guess is also that Miller would want an Eastern team to sign a long-term extension with.

 

All the math that I'm doing, comes back to Miller (or Garland), to NJ for a package that includes at least 1 NHL ready RD. 

[mll]

Just now, aGENT said:

Morrow, Seeley...

That makes more sense.  Seeley is listed as an LD though.

 

Morrow from Connecticut playing at UMass.  Would need to make sure he'd be willing to cross the continent. 

 

[Darius]

3 minutes ago, aGENT said:

This IMO is the wrong way to look at it. And we were never getting multiple, top, high grade assets in return for Miller. Regardless of "climate".

 

This has never been about "replacing" Miller, or getting four "Miller value" assets back. It's about mid-long term cap allocation and not allocating vast amounts of cap and term that will be increasingly declining in value the back half, right when our young core will be peaking. It's about filling other organizational holes and depth (RHD or otherwise). Even if we don't get a RHD back, barring him signing for a sizeable discount, a trade is still likely our best/most likely outcome.

You make good points, ones that make me think again.  But what if they sign him to something thats reasonable - within market value- and move him when he is 31?  I think his market value has been clobbered here with what has transpired in Calgary.  I completely understand (and even agree) with what you are saying about cap management.  But if this is about cap management...might as well move him for picks...im sure he is worth a first rounder or two.

 

I also know that there is risk involved with signing him and then moving him early on in his contract.  He could get injured, could take a downslide production wise.  This is a tricky scenario that could go wrong many different ways...and maybe you are right (and ive basically agreed with you all along) that moving him now is the least risky move.

[VegasCanuck]

22 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Carolina as well

Maybe!

 

They have more depth on RD, but anyone that we would really want (that they would be willing to part with), doesn't really move our needle much in terms of actual RD upgrade past they guys we already have in the system. We don't know what Brady Keeper can do when healthy, would he be an upgrade over anyone depth wise on RD that Carolina would be willing to move.

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

I think NJ or Rangers are our best option as trade partners, but I don't think either will jump until Kadri is off the market as it's keeping everything else in flux, not just for a team we might trade with, but the ripple effect of possible moves and trades anyone signing Kadri might have to make.

 

If you look at the depth of NYI. I don't believe that there are any circumstances where they would move Dobson, he fills a role for them that they can't easily replace. To me, for us to trade with NYI, it would have to be for a trade around Dobson, I think as the only asset that they have that would actually improve our defense. I think this is a dead end unless we decide to take a couple of lesser players and a 1st, which doesn't help us immediately.

 

NJ has LOTS of depth around the right side D, and although this is just speculation on my part, I would think that they are chasing Kadri hard right now. If they sign him, they will still need to make moves, but their need for Miller drops substantially.

 

Even if we look at Colorado and assume that they aren't able to resign Kadri, they don't have the RD assets that they would be willing to move, IMO, in a trade for Miller. My guess is, management would want to move him out East and not within the Western Conference and IF we trade him, my guess is also that Miller would want an Eastern team to sign a long-term extension with.

 

All the math that I'm doing, comes back to Miller (or Garland), to NJ for a package that includes at least 1 NHL ready RD. 

NJ really does seem to be the only dance partner that makes sense, or at least could. There's still some bad deals to be made there, e.g., if Boqvist is the main return.

 

If they were willing to do something around Garland for Severson I'd be giddy, even with no extension in place.

 

 

[Coconuts]

3 hours ago, JM_ said:

couldn't it be that we just need better talent? looking at the contending teams, they all have a pretty big age spread. Young defensemen usually aren't all that good at playing defence. 

Yes and no. Getting younger on D is important, you get more longevity out of younger players. You also need cost controlled talent, which is typically younger. It'd also save us having to replace guys via UFA. 

 

Our RD being a mess is partially because of our lack of a succession plan, we suck at drafting and developing our own D. Hughes was the first reap big hit since what.. Edler? 

 

If all you have are older vets you're just cycling em out, and you pay through the nose for top 4D via UFA, particularly RD.

[King Heffy]

45 minutes ago, Darius said:

Its starting to look more and more like signing Miller is the best outcome IMHO.  I was in the trade him camp before, but its looking like top tier players who are pushing 30 and are in last year of contract  dont have as much value as we think.  Its doubtful that any team will cough up their young top pair RHD , plus multiple high grade assets for Miller in this current NHL climate.

 

Im really concerned about our D, but maybe having 3 lines that can score, including Miller, plus a good checking 4th line can keep the puck out of our end is a partial solution.

 

 

A hockey trade moving out a D for a RHD would work if Miller stays.

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, Darius said:

You make good points, ones that make me think again.  But what if they sign him to something thats reasonable - within market value- and move him when he is 31? 

The contract becomes harder and harder to move, the older he gets. Teams don't want the declining years, without the benefits of the good ones. Never mind, why are we retaining him the next two years...only to move him, at less value, later. Rip that band aid off and get more value now.

 

2 minutes ago, Darius said:

 

I think his market value has been clobbered here with what has transpired in Calgary.  I completely understand (and even agree) with what you are saying about cap management.  But if this is about cap management...might as well move him for picks...im sure he is worth a first rounder or two.

We still want to remain competitive. We just need to get younger and fill other holes. Even if it does include some picks.

 

2 minutes ago, Darius said:

I also know that there is risk involved with signing him and then moving him early on in his contract.  He could get injured, could take a downslide production wise.  This is a tricky scenario that could go wrong many different ways...and maybe you are right (and ive basically agreed with you all along) that moving him now is the least risky move.

It's definitely tricky circumstances! This is not an easy situation to navigate.

[King Heffy]

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Yes and no. Getting younger on D is important, you get more longevity out of younger players. You also need cost controlled talent, which is typically younger. It'd also save us having to replace guys via UFA. 

 

Our RD being a mess is partially because of our lack of a succession plan, we suck at drafting and developing our own D. Hughes was the first reap big hit since what.. Edler? 

 

If all you have are older vets you're just cycling em out, and you pay through the nose for top 4D via UFA, particularly RD.

We really need to hit on a Bieksa type in the later rounds again.

 

[aGENT]

4 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

Maybe!

 

They have more depth on RD, but anyone that we would really want (that they would be willing to part with), doesn't really move our needle much in terms of actual RD upgrade past they guys we already have in the system. We don't know what Brady Keeper can do when healthy, would he be an upgrade over anyone depth wise on RD that Carolina would be willing to move.

I'd happily take something around a Necas + Morrow + package.

[D.B Cooper]

Just now, aGENT said:

I'd happily take something around a Necas + Morrow + package.

I bet you would!    Lol.   
 

[D.B Cooper]

A lot of people are going to be VERY disappointed if Miller gets traded.  

 

[JM_]

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

Yes and no. Getting younger on D is important, you get more longevity out of younger players. You also need cost controlled talent, which is typically younger. It'd also save us having to replace guys via UFA. 

 

Our RD being a mess is partially because of our lack of a succession plan, we suck at drafting and developing our own D. Hughes was the first reap big hit since what.. Edler? 

 

If all you have are older vets you're just cycling em out, and you pay through the nose for top 4D via UFA, particularly RD.

if we were able to swap Myers for Klingberg, e.g. we could maintain that imo with younger players around those two as the older vets on the d group. Both are more likely to maintain their playing styles into their mid-30s e.g, vs. the bigger more bruising types. 

 

Succession plan has to be the draft for the top pair tho, just don't see that via Miller. It would be more likely maybe if we have to move Petey tho. 

[BC_Hawk]

2 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

A hockey trade moving out a D for a RHD would work if Miller stays.

Agreed. It's not that hard; we simply trade a player of one skill set for another, and use sweetners to accommodate the cap diff.

 

Myers + 3rd for Defensive RHD is not a bridge too far.

 

Even better...

 

Myers + Dickinson + 2nd for Defensive RHD

 

Get'r done JR ! (sorry Alf; couldn't resist)

[singing chef]

17 hours ago, eeeeergh said:

I mean.. 1st + Chytil + Lundkvist + Kravtsov is pretty spot on value, and its what we got offered. Id consider that a decent "haul". Maybe a different bundle of prospects b/c we have an abundance of what lundkvist could bring. 

For weeks I've been asking on this forum for someone - anyone - to provide proof of what was actually offered by NYR for Miller.  Thus far it hasn't happened.  There have been various speculative assertions of "trade offers on the table" but no one has provided reasonable substance, nor have any of them been debunked.  imo, the "offer" shown above would have been enough to grab the attention of Allvin & Rutherford, and the fact that it did not happen suggests it was merely speculation on the part of media.