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

[NewbieCanuckFan]

11 minutes ago, JM_ said:

 

I do think its an interesting exercise tho. What level of trade return would you (or anyone else) be OK walking away from, to have the kids get the benefit of playoff experience?

 

Alot of the "kids" aren't "kids" anymore.  Horvat is 27.  Boeser is 25.  Demko turns 27 at the end of this year.  EP turns 24 in a few months.  Not "old" obviously but their time is now imho (to stress your point even more).  For example, Tanev was 24 years old when Jim Benning was first hired (and his prime years were wasted here).

Edited August 9, 2022 by NewbieCanuckFan

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, -DLC- said:

Where are you getting your numbers from?

Market comparables, media reports, logical deduction.

 

1 minute ago, -DLC- said:

Here's the thing that happens over time....the reality of the situation is revealed and what someone may want/ask for may not be out there as the dust settles. Just as the Canucks are likely worried about term/age, other teams will also factor that in. Sure, other teams don't have the cap crunch that we do and are in a better position to offer top dollars...but the question is will they (for the long term)? So far it seems that no team's been desperate enough to sell the farm to acquire him and that'll factor in to his asking price the longer his side waits it out. There's obvious risk in that, it's not a given.

Problem being, even with a "soft" year, he can get the discounted amount/term we're offering, in a lower tax state, closer to home. Or simply accept our offer then. He's in the driver seat. 

 

No team has thus far ponied up the likely over the top, eye popping return management has asked for. That doesn't mean there are no good offers, just none so far that have been so good they couldn't say no. I'd wager they probably have 3-4 "good" offers currently on the table and are waiting to try to squeeze a bit more from someone/see if they can get Miller to cave on his price.

 

1 minute ago, -DLC- said:

 

He will have an offer here that will guarantee some stability (he knows his role here and seems to embrace it) whereas no offer is a bit of a gamble. The middle ground is that, as time goes on, will he keep up at the same performance level and repeat the big money production. There are risks from his end as he waits it out...his age is a factor so time isn't on his side. As much as people weigh out and argue about the risk to our team keeping him, other teams will also have those concerns.

 

Miller has earned a market value contract but the sample size is small in support of that earning level...as time goes on he will have to maintain that pace or the value will drop (likely significantly as he enters his 30's). I mean, the argument against signing him here (beyond we don't have the $$) is that he'll be on the decline and so that matters for other teams too as they factor in his age and recognize that his peak is likely now and could be shortlived.....how long will he sustain that pace?

 

It's not like 25 year olds...these contracts in the latter years to see players out aren't just about having the money available to sign them...it'se about the value down the road and assessing that.

The argument for not signing him isn't that we don't have the money. We "could" afford him, at market value, if we wanted to. The question is the wisdom in doing so given we're not presently a "win now" team, we lack the cohesive roster, the prospect/organizational depth to be a win now team, our core is not yet in their primes, retaining him would cost us cap and depth to do so, and he's going to decline, half way through his extension, right in the meat of our core's prime.

 

You think you guys would actually try to understand the arguments rather than continuing with the hyperbole and straw men.

[Coconuts]

12 minutes ago, JM_ said:

 

I do think its an interesting exercise tho. What level of trade return would you (or anyone else) be OK walking away from, to have the kids get the benefit of playoff experience?

 

Something is always better than nothing I'm this case imo, I'm adamant that we as an organization aren't in a position to lose top players for nothing. We aren't deep enough and we've gotta bolster our D or prospect pool.

 

If this were say.. a player of Pearson's value I wouldn't fret as much. 

 

I've long said I believe we can compete without Miller tho.

[-DLC-]

42 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Market comparables, media reports, logical deduction.

 

 

That's what I thought, to which I respond:

Quote

You think you guys would actually try to understand the arguments rather than continuing with the hyperbole and straw men.

Market comparisons change (often related to supply/demand) and age is relevant. Media...lol...their focus is to keep talking and have people listening. They're driven by speculation and rumours but they don't always come to fruition. Past history tells us to be careful when listening, in particular to Vancouer media. Logical deduction is another way of saying "my opinion".

 

I guess my issue is that people think they can think for him. Here he plays a lead role and he seems to thrive in that role. Elsewhere he may have it a bit different.

 

Quote

Problem being, even with a "soft" year, he can get the discounted amount/term we're offering, in a lower tax state, closer to home. Or simply accept our offer then. He's in the driver seat.

He isn't fully in the driver's seat because there is risk involved as he waits it out. And other players are signed, reducing his options as he goes into his 30's having to reach a bar he's set at a pretty high level for himself.

 

It's something to consider and no one knows how he thinks or what he'll do. His family seems to love it here...there's something in that. There's a reason some of our players stay on long after their careers end. It's not a bad place to be. Money isn't everything to families...when you're millionaires, there are other things that also come into play. You can afford to be away from home during the winter. I mean, he could go to a market where hockey isn't the driving force or quite as important as it is here. 

 

Look if you know anything about negotiations they often are pretty far apart...until they're not and a compromise is reached. It's strategizing and "hoping" as much as it's a firm stand. If you just make a hard line from the start and aren't willing to budge it can backfire. Especially WHEN age is a factor and past performance doesn't necessarily indicate long term performance sustainability. The reality is that JT didn't generate the offers that some here thought he would and that's a good indicator of the risk involved for that side. 

 

 

[JM_]

17 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

I've long said I believe we can compete without Miller tho.

this is kind of an interesting new wrinkle in the discussion (I mean in the context of 1000+ pages ).

 

Moving Miller now for the picks n' prospects return doesn't do much for cap space, but it would potentially let us bank space to make a trade for a playoff push. Would you be OK with a TDL addition (assuming it fits the age range of the team)?

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

If JB let Miller walk for nothing the entire fanbase would implode.  Short of s Cup, losing him for nothing would be tye biggest failure for this franchise in the "orca" era

 

We have a damaged fanbase.  We can't hold the last 50 years against the current management group even though that's exactly what will happen if a couple of things go sideways here. 

[JM_]

6 minutes ago, VancouverHabitant said:

We have a damaged fanbase.  We can't hold the last 50 years against the current management group even though that's exactly what will happen if a couple of things go sideways here. 

yep. It was embarrassing when Don Taylor put that in Rutherfords face a few weeks back. All of Canucks history isn't on Jim Rutherford. 

[aGENT]

18 minutes ago, JM_ said:

this is kind of an interesting new wrinkle in the discussion (I mean in the context of 1000+ pages ).

 

Moving Miller now for the picks n' prospects return doesn't do much for cap space, but it would potentially let us bank space to make a trade for a playoff push. Would you be OK with a TDL addition (assuming it fits the age range of the team)?

 

Not a new wrinkle at all.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

1 minute ago, JM_ said:

yep. It was embarrassing when Don Taylor put that in Rutherfords face a few weeks back. All of Canucks history isn't on Jim Rutherford. 

Jim Rutherford should've just blamed Mike Gillis for leaving him this mess he inherited.

[Coconuts]

17 minutes ago, JM_ said:

this is kind of an interesting new wrinkle in the discussion (I mean in the context of 1000+ pages ).

 

Moving Miller now for the picks n' prospects return doesn't do much for cap space, but it would potentially let us bank space to make a trade for a playoff push. Would you be OK with a TDL addition (assuming it fits the age range of the team)?

 

I think given the state of the league it's more likely we see cap coming back, even if only on a short term basis. But even if we free up a bit of cap there are still free agents to be had for less than they'd probably take given the cap squeeze.

 

So it could potentially end up being the return for Miller plus either cap space or additional depth.

 

I firmly believe we could be in the mix for the third divisional spot or a wildcard spot without Miller, I'll follow that up by noting I don't see us as a slam dunk playoff team with Miller though. But if the goal is to be competitive and in the mix? Yeah, I think that's doable.

[JM_]

12 minutes ago, Muttley said:

We sure looked ready to "compete now" last year and if the coaching change had of happened in the off season, I have no doubt we would have made the post season.

Saying the core is not yet in it's prime is also arguable. Demko, Hughes and even Petey are in their primes now. Podkolzin was coming along nicely, particularly when

he was working with Miller towards the end of the year. Regardless, it's all about what a new contract would look like and it may well be way too rich but nothing

is in stone and him playing this year is simply the best thing for the team. IMO.

We are deeper now then we've been in years.

waiting for some perfect window to appear doesn't feel like a plan to me. As far as prime's go, well you really don't know when that will be. Look at Toews and Kane, e.g., good thing Chicago didn't wait for a perfect window for their 1st cup. 

 

We clearly need some work on defence, but we can build towards being a top 8 contender over the next 2 years as we shed some of our more inefficient salary players and bring in better fits. 

 

We do have a window with this group imo once the d is upgraded a bit. But not if we take the 'step back' thing and that doesn't work out perfectly. 

 

Edited August 9, 2022 by JM_

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, combover said:

Totally agree.

The miller trade sign distraction (especially in van ) with our future media won’t help either. 
Then to do what should be done regardless of playoff implications  at the TDL with our owners… good luck. 
 

The best time to move in is now.

I have to agree as it's sounding like they're miles apart on the extension and this media will constantly not only drill into management but also our players. 

 

I've often wondered why the fans don't give more pushback to the media here. We always hear the same tired line from the media "we're keeping the team accountable" like they're some self-appointed cops or the Governor General. 

 

St Louis has Ryan O'Reilly and Tarasenko in the exact same situation as JT Miller, however the media is not going to create the insurmountable distraction there and their GM will feel a lot less pressure to resolve the situation.  

 

I just hate having the inherent disadvantage in this market. It's been talked about by Bieksa, Friedman, Burkie, and lots of other hockey people. 

[Gurn]

5 minutes ago, JM_ said:

waiting for some perfect window to appear doesn't feel like a plan to me.

Has anybody suggested waiting for a "perfect" window?

[JM_]

1 minute ago, gurn said:

Has anybody suggested waiting for a "perfect" window?

Seems implied in many comments. 'core isn't ready' stuff. No one knows when peak Petey is e.g. Maybe we've seen it, maybe he's a 0.9 ppg player. Maybe he's never a good face off guy, maybe he needs a Miller on his wing. Lots of moving parts. 

 

F group seems ready. Demko seems ready. OEL and Hughes are ready. We're missing two legit top 4 d, but cap space for that is coming in the next 2 years. Maybe one comes via training Garland, e.g. 

 

[Gurn]

3 minutes ago, JM_ said:

Seems implied in many comments.

Maybe to you, but I've never seen someone say wait for the perfect window, or even an almost perfect window. 

I've seen plenty of 'wait for a better window' but not 'perfect'.

[-DLC-]

7 minutes ago, gurn said:

Maybe to you, but I've never seen someone say wait for the perfect window, or even an almost perfect window. 

I've seen plenty of 'wait for a better window' but not 'perfect'.

Thing is, "implied". Saying things like "we're not a playoff team/close" and:

 

Quote

given we're not presently a "win now" team, we lack the cohesive roster, the prospect/organizational depth to be a win now team...

sort of presents that way. Some of us feel the window is currently open and why not give it a go?

[Coconuts]

1 minute ago, -DLC- said:

Thing is, "implied". Saying things like "we're not a playoff team/close" and:

 

sort of presents that way. Some of us feel the window is currently open and why not give it a go?

Boy, have I got a 1k+ page thread for you 

[Baratheon]

11 minutes ago, JM_ said:

cap space for that is coming in the next 2 years

 

6 minutes ago, gurn said:

'wait for a better window

Are you two just arguing out of habit at this point?  It seems like you almost agree lol.

 

2-3 years!  We'll have a better window at that time.  JR keeps saying it and you guys seem to agree on this.  JR has also hinted that (in his view) you probably get about 3 good years from Miller and then hope he doesn't fall off too bad.  So the question becomes, is that worth it to lock up JT long term?  The answer seems to be yes but only if JT comes in at a number that our management is happy with.  Hopefully that happens but if it doesn't then I hope we get something in return for him.  

[Gurn]

Just now, -DLC- said:

Thing is, "implied". Saying things like "we're not a playoff team/close" and:

 

sort of presents that way.

It 'implies' waiting for a better chance- not a perfect chance. 

 

This whole conversation has been full of continually moving goalposts for some.

 

Miller will sign a team friendly deal, has become- pay him what he asks for- he's worth it.

Miller is a good leader, has become the team is doomed with out him.

Miller on a decent mid length deal has become- Miller won't age like most players, so sign him to a full 8 year deal.

 

 

Now someone is trying to say people want to wait for the 'perfect' opportunity.

 

 

 

 

[-DLC-]

5 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Boy, have I got a 1k+ page thread for you 

Haven't been around much lately....I see my summer reading list has expanded.