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

[J-23]

Which teams can hand Miller that 8.5 by 8 year contract?

[Slegr]

12 minutes ago, J-23 said:

Which teams can hand Miller that 8.5 by 8 year contract?

Canucks. Final answer.

[J-23]

1 minute ago, Slegr said:

Canucks. Final answer.

He ain't getting that from the Canucks lol

[cripplereh]

Many as we want 1 good player back us , meaning we will need to pay a player which would help the deal go threw or retain some for this year

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, J-23 said:

Which teams can hand Miller that 8.5 by 8 year contract?

Teams make room. Every year. Any team looking to win now and with expiring money and/or the ability/desire to give up futures to clear cap.

 

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Given the Kadri leaked contract details, I would say Miller is looking at an 8 year deal with Vancouver in the $8.5 to $9 million range, which is pretty much the middle of the Huberdeau and Kadri deals.  JR is not going to sign off on that.  Miller will be traded at some point.  I hope it is before the start of the season...

 

Almost sounds like the numbers some of us have been stating as clear comparables for months now... 

[Gawdzukes]

19 hours ago, aGENT said:

Are we though? Given management's comments, they don't seem to think so. Our roster holes, right D succession issues, cap, organizational depth, core not/barely in their prime... Don't seem to jive with that either.

 

 

This is becoming the central point of this discussion. Whether or not people think we are currently in a window of contention or at a point of being competitive.

 

Firstly, I think everyone can agree that the start to last year was absolutely horrendous. It was horrible to be a part of and it was tough to watch.

 

I personally feel a lot of folks here were completely enamored/blinded when Bruce came in and we started putting some wins together. It's totally understandable some would get swept away after the debacle of the season start though. Eventually we went on a huge run and made an incredibly hard comeback effort, in which we ended up just short.

 

However, we were still playing an absolutely horrible brand of hockey and relying on our goaltender to bail us out. We spent entire nights running around in our end sometimes not even showing up until the second period. In addition our wins were built on great individual efforts by players like Miller, Bo, Petey, and Hughes. We seem to be in the Oilers mode of hockey. Try to outscore our woeful defence and team play, which for me is not a successful or long-term approach. People also seem to willfully ignore the coaching bump, the Covid plagued season, our horrific overall defensive effort, slow starts, lack of RD personnel, depth, cap space, and overall competitiveness of the league. In this sense we were not a strong team, and it showed in the standings.

 

So, in my opinion the first thing we need to do is fix these issues. Playoffs are inconsequential. If you don't fix the underlying issues the playoffs will never matter. This is my biggest worry with the folks who keep pushing for playoffs (experience) and forcing this so called window. If people are actually honestly satisfied with this level of play then we have no reason to fix things or get any better. Also, if enough fans are accepting of this level then management doesn't really have any reason to get better either.

 

I don't hate Miller or anything and I don't think we're complete garbage either. However, we're currently a (exciting) borderline playoff team with some major issues that will take some time (2 years or so) to resolve. We need to face the facts. For that reason I believe it's prudent to move on from Miller. It just makes to much organizational sense. I don't think we're only going to get a late first but at the same time it doesn't even matter. I feel we should just get what we can get and move on to focusing on the Vancouver Canucks and our future.

 

Part of this situation is also realizing just how competitive the NHL is and even small wins are important (Miller return). We need to get out of the mindset of compromising our own goals to meet short term satisfaction. It really doesn't matter if the draft pick is 2 or 4 years away it's more about continually making good decisions for the club. Some people seem really hellbent on making sure the return is immediately relevant which to me is just another example of youthful impatience and once again sacrificing the future for a bleak hope right now.

 

Move Miller because he is too expensive and he doesn't fit our timeline. Trade Miller for the best return you can get because assets like picks, prospects, and players are better then no picks, players, or prospects. It's quite simple really, or at least it should be lol.

[HorvatToBaertschi]

4 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

This is becoming the central point of this discussion. Whether or not people think we are currently in a window of contention or at a point of being competitive.

 

Firstly, I think everyone can agree that the start to last year was absolutely horrendous. It was horrible to be a part of and it was tough to watch.

 

I personally feel a lot of folks here were completely enamored/blinded when Bruce came in and we started putting some wins together. It's totally understandable some would get swept away after the debacle of the season start though. Eventually we went on a huge run and made an incredibly hard comeback effort, in which we ended up just short.

 

However, we were still playing an absolutely horrible brand of hockey and relying on our goaltender to bail us out. We spent entire nights running around in our end sometimes not even showing up until the second period. In addition our wins were built on great individual efforts by players like Miller, Bo, Petey, and Hughes. We seem to be in the Oilers mode of hockey. Try to outscore our woeful defence and team play, which for me is not a successful or long-term approach. People also seem to willfully ignore the coaching bump, the Covid plagued season, our horrific overall defensive effort, slow starts, lack of RD personnel, depth, cap space, and overall competitiveness of the league. In this sense we were not a strong team, and it showed in the standings.

 

So, in my opinion the first thing we need to do is fix these issues. Playoffs are inconsequential. If you don't fix the underlying issues the playoffs will never matter. This is my biggest worry with the folks who keep pushing for playoffs (experience) and forcing this so called window. If people are actually honestly satisfied with this level of play then we have no reason to fix things or get any better. Also, if enough fans are accepting of this level then management doesn't really have any reason to get better either.

 

I don't hate Miller or anything and I don't think we're complete garbage either. However, we're currently a (exciting) borderline playoff team with some major issues that will take some time (2 years or so) to resolve. We need to face the facts. For that reason I believe it's prudent to move on from Miller. It just makes to much organizational sense. I don't think we're only going to get a late first but at the same time it doesn't even matter. I feel we should just get what we can get and move on to focusing on the Vancouver Canucks and our future.

 

Part of this situation is also realizing just how competitive the NHL is and even small wins are important (Miller return). We need to get out of the mindset of compromising our own goals to meet short term satisfaction. It really doesn't matter if the draft pick is 2 or 4 years away it's more about continually making good decisions for the club. Some people seem really hellbent on making sure the return is immediately relevant which to me is just another example of youthful impatience and once again sacrificing the future for a bleak hope right now.

 

Move Miller because he is too expensive and he doesn't fit our timeline. Trade Miller for the best return you can get because assets like picks, prospects, and players are better then no picks, players, or prospects. It's quite simple really, or at least it should be lol.

Wasn't our defense extremely solid under Boudreau? I know Demko is our saviour and we all worship him and everything he does for us, but he was relied on less than during the dark ages of Travis Green's tenure. 

 

The fact of the matter is that our PK was atrocious, we made internal changes and improved it, and then improved it during the offseason by adding one of the best PK forwards in the league. 

 

At the end of the day, we can keep trading away our players, but some of us want playoffs. It's not superficial either, we believe that for our core's development, they need to play in important games where whistles are put away and where the checking is tighter and relentless. That's when they'll learn the important lessons that they'll use once we make an actual cup run when all the stars align. 

 

Bottoming out year after year is what Buffalo, Arizona, Ottawa, Edmonton, and Columbus do. Those are not the models I want our team to follow. 

[luongianone]

21 minutes ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

Wasn't our defense extremely solid under Boudreau? I know Demko is our saviour and we all worship him and everything he does for us, but he was relied on less than during the dark ages of Travis Green's tenure. 

 

The fact of the matter is that our PK was atrocious, we made internal changes and improved it, and then improved it during the offseason by adding one of the best PK forwards in the league. 

 

At the end of the day, we can keep trading away our players, but some of us want playoffs. It's not superficial either, we believe that for our core's development, they need to play in important games where whistles are put away and where the checking is tighter and relentless. That's when they'll learn the important lessons that they'll use once we make an actual cup run when all the stars align. 

 

Bottoming out year after year is what Buffalo, Arizona, Ottawa, Edmonton, and Columbus do. Those are not the models I want our team to follow. 

Your defence needs to do more than just prevent goals. Demko stood on his head A LOT and that explains our low goals allowed. Hughes/Schenn and OEL/Myers were fairly solid defensively, yes. The problem is the only consistent producer on those pairings offensively was Hughes. Your D needs to be able to get the puck out with control, and they need to produce. Our defence's inability to move the puck out effectively and keep control holds our forwards back and isn't playing to our forwards' strengths. We did okay at "punt and hunt" but our forwards are at their best when the pucks firmly on their stick giving them the ability to make plays.

 

Now, the additions of Lazar and Mikheyev will help our punt-and-hunt strategy, but that doesn't mean our D still won't hold us back. 

 

Our 2nd pairing simply cannot only produce 47 points. Luke Schenn cannot out pace Myers for points and score more than him. Myers had 1 goal. ONE!!! Schenn had 5. 

 

It's the D's job to make the goalies job easier AND the forwards. It's why teams are built from the net out. We need to find Hughes a partner and we need to replace Myers with a more suitable partner. It's an extremely difficult job to do. This team is missing 2 top 4 RHD and also overall D depth. top 4 RHD are probably the most expensive commodity in the NHL outside of a 1C. 

[204CanucksFan]

59 minutes ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

Wasn't our defense extremely solid under Boudreau? I know Demko is our saviour and we all worship him and everything he does for us, but he was relied on less than during the dark ages of Travis Green's tenure. 

 

The fact of the matter is that our PK was atrocious, we made internal changes and improved it, and then improved it during the offseason by adding one of the best PK forwards in the league. 

 

At the end of the day, we can keep trading away our players, but some of us want playoffs. It's not superficial either, we believe that for our core's development, they need to play in important games where whistles are put away and where the checking is tighter and relentless. That's when they'll learn the important lessons that they'll use once we make an actual cup run when all the stars align. 

 

Bottoming out year after year is what Buffalo, Arizona, Ottawa, Edmonton, and Columbus do. Those are not the models I want our team to follow. 

No, our breakouts became top 10 in the league after Boudreau took over but still at or near the bottom of the league in shot suppression and high danger chances against.

 

My opinion on this whole situation is I think we can compete for a playoff spot (and be competitive when we make it) and that our forward depth is among the best in the league right now. The fact that we have a 21 year old in Höglander who has 116 games and 0.4ppg who is most likely starting the season on the 4th line with the roster we have now is insane.

 

I think our depth is good enough that we can (and because of our cap situation, we don't have much choice without really hurting aforementioned depth) trade Miller for a young, high-end shot suppressing RHD like Whitecloud in Vegas plus whatever futures we can get. I think that between that addition on D, our newly added forwards and a few players (Petey, Boes) having bounce back seasons we can more than absorb the loss of Miller and be even more competitive because how much our overall team D and PK will have improved.

Edited August 10, 2022 by 204CanucksFan

[luongianone]

27 minutes ago, 204CanucksFan said:

No, our breakouts became top 10 in the league after Boudreau took over but still at or near the bottom of the league in shot suppression and high danger chances against.

 

My opinion on this whole situation is I think we can compete for a playoff spot (and be competitive when we make it) and that our forward depth is among the best in the league right now. The fact that we have a 21 year old in Höglander who has 116 games and 0.4ppg who is most likely starting the season on the 4th line with the roster we have now is insane.

 

I think our depth is good enough that we can (and because of our cap situation, we don't have much choice without really hurting aforementioned depth) trade Miller for a young, high-end shot suppressing RHD like Whitecloud in Vegas plus whatever futures we can get. I think that between that addition on D, our newly added forwards and a few players (Petey, Boes) having bounce back seasons we can more than absorb the loss of Miller and be even more competitive because how much our overall team D and PK will have improved.

I do agree that a Miller trade for a RHD would instantly make us a LOT better because of the forward depth we have and the inevitable improved PK.

 

Even though our breakouts became better our D still needs to produce. Rathbone hopefully makes a successful leap because that will help a lot. OEL could possibly improve since this year should be more "normal" and "stable", but I'll never be a fan of having Myers as his partner because I think he holds him back immensely. We also know Myers can't work with Hughes (we've tried) and it's reasonable to assume he won't work with Rathbone. 

 

I don't think Myers is a bad d-man. I think he was best used when he was on the 3rd pair with a stay at home d-man and moved up a pair when we needed a goal. Unfortunately this team does not have that ability. For marked improvement in this team we need to find players that fit with each other. I think we've done that with most of our forward group, but there's a lot to be desired on the defensive end. 

[Gawdzukes]

42 minutes ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

Wasn't our defense extremely solid under Boudreau? I know Demko is our saviour and we all worship him and everything he does for us, but he was relied on less than during the dark ages of Travis Green's tenure. 

 

The fact of the matter is that our PK was atrocious, we made internal changes and improved it, and then improved it during the offseason by adding one of the best PK forwards in the league. 

 

At the end of the day, we can keep trading away our players, but some of us want playoffs. It's not superficial either, we believe that for our core's development, they need to play in important games where whistles are put away and where the checking is tighter and relentless. That's when they'll learn the important lessons that they'll use once we make an actual cup run when all the stars align. 

 

Bottoming out year after year is what Buffalo, Arizona, Ottawa, Edmonton, and Columbus do. Those are not the models I want our team to follow. 

I guess it comes down to whether people actually watch the games or are they just stat watching and checking scores or reading cdc. I would have to guess that from your first statement you didn't watch many games. Maybe also cause your location says Montpellier.  

 

Anyways from my viewpoint our defence clearly wasn't "extremely solid", under Boudreau. We were hemmed in our zone for extremely long periods and almost toyed with like children by some clubs. Our forwards didn't backcheck and we were routinely outshot. As anyone who watched the games can attest to Demko was stellar almost every night and heavily relied upon to save the day and make highlight reel saves.  We were also extremely sloppy in our own end, couldn't make passes and our exits were simply atrocious. I would actually say we were very poor defensively. The following is from our GM Rutherford:

 

“I want to see us get to a point where we don’t have to lean on him as much,” said Rutherford recently when he was on the Daily Faceoff Rundown Podcast.

Demko faced the second-most expected goals against at 5-on-5 this season, as well the third most shots against. Despite this heavy workload, he managed to have the third-highest save percentage at 5-on-5, giving the Canucks a chance to win most games, even when they were heavily outplayed.

 

From Rutherford’s macro perspective of the team, it’s clear that this is not a sustainable way to build a team that can contend every season. He’s right. Anyone that watches enough Canucks hockey knows that Demko is the key component to the team’s success, and if he even just has an average night, it likely means a loss.

 

 “We’d like to see our team play a more structured game and not rely on our goalie as much,” commented Rutherford when he addressed the media in early May. “We’re very fortunate we have a terrific goaltender…but at the same time, we’ve got work to do.”

 

“I think it's the structure of the team of how we're going to play to give players a chance when they get in trouble, like, our exits from our defensive zone are not good, probably one of the worst in the league,” Rutherford said later. Allvin talked about building culture with the Canucks.May 4, 2022

 

“We felt that we needed to get more balance with our forwards. I believe that we’ve done that. We have to address our defence, which has been harder to do in the offseason.

 

So yeah ... ah no it was not good at all if you're paying attention. I'm curious if the Miller crowd actually notice any of the deficiencies in our game or if they just don't care about stuff like that. Clearly you don't and just want to see the team in the playoffs next year regardless of the conflicting priorities. Being in the playoffs this year isn't going to make or break Petterson's, Hughes, or Demko's career.

[JM_]

4 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

So yeah ... ah no it was not good at all if you're paying attention. I'm curious if the Miller crowd actually notice any of the deficiencies in our game or if they just don't care about stuff like that. Clearly you don't and just want to see the team in the playoffs next year regardless of the conflicting priorities. Being in the playoffs this year isn't going to make or break Petterson's, Hughes, or Demko's career.

see, why is this part necessary?

 

If a Miller trade doesn't solve the defensive issues, why make it? We have a great goalie, and Rutherford seems to think he's put out a better F group. 

 

Why does a Miller trade have to be the way the d is improved? 

[Gurn]

3 minutes ago, JM_ said:

Why does a Miller trade have to be the way the d is improved? 

It does not have to be; it is just the most likely, as Miller will probably cost to much cap and term.

[JM_]

4 minutes ago, gurn said:

It does not have to be; it is just the most likely, as Miller will probably cost to much cap and term.

maybe. 

 

I just see other options like moving Pearson and Dickie, e.g., that creates cap room as well. 

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, JM_ said:

maybe. 

 

I just see other options like moving Pearson and Dickie, e.g., that creates cap room as well. 

We need both to give raises, as well as fix the D. And we can't/shouldn't be spending assets to clear contracts like Pearson right now anyway. Especially when he expires soon and will have actual value as a rental that TDL.

[HorvatToBaertschi]

13 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

I guess it comes down to whether people actually watch the games or are they just stat watching and checking scores or reading cdc. I would have to guess that from your first statement you didn't watch many games. Maybe also cause your location says Montpellier.  

 

Anyways from my viewpoint our defence clearly wasn't "extremely solid", under Boudreau. We were hemmed in our zone for extremely long periods and almost toyed with like children by some clubs. Our forwards didn't backcheck and we were routinely outshot. As anyone who watched the games can attest to Demko was stellar almost every night and heavily relied upon to save the day and make highlight reel saves.  We were also extremely sloppy in our own end, couldn't make passes and our exits were simply atrocious. I would actually say we were very poor defensively. The following is from our GM Rutherford:

 

“I want to see us get to a point where we don’t have to lean on him as much,” said Rutherford recently when he was on the Daily Faceoff Rundown Podcast.

Demko faced the second-most expected goals against at 5-on-5 this season, as well the third most shots against. Despite this heavy workload, he managed to have the third-highest save percentage at 5-on-5, giving the Canucks a chance to win most games, even when they were heavily outplayed.

 

From Rutherford’s macro perspective of the team, it’s clear that this is not a sustainable way to build a team that can contend every season. He’s right. Anyone that watches enough Canucks hockey knows that Demko is the key component to the team’s success, and if he even just has an average night, it likely means a loss.

 

 “We’d like to see our team play a more structured game and not rely on our goalie as much,” commented Rutherford when he addressed the media in early May. “We’re very fortunate we have a terrific goaltender…but at the same time, we’ve got work to do.”

 

“I think it's the structure of the team of how we're going to play to give players a chance when they get in trouble, like, our exits from our defensive zone are not good, probably one of the worst in the league,” Rutherford said later. Allvin talked about building culture with the Canucks.May 4, 2022

 

“We felt that we needed to get more balance with our forwards. I believe that we’ve done that. We have to address our defence, which has been harder to do in the offseason.

 

So yeah ... ah no it was not good at all if you're paying attention. I'm curious if the Miller crowd actually notice any of the deficiencies in our game or if they just don't care about stuff like that. Clearly you don't and just want to see the team in the playoffs next year regardless of the conflicting priorities. Being in the playoffs this year isn't going to make or break Petterson's, Hughes, or Demko's career.

I've watched every single game since 2004. WHEN I lived in Montpellier, I would get up at 4 am and watch the games live. I've also kept a close eye on solid players being buried on middling teams and never reaching their potential, mainly due to a franchise CULTURE of losing, country club feeling etc... I don't want that for any of our players. 

 

The defense needs work, sure. It was good though, and much better than people anticipated starting the season. Yes, a lot of the credit goes to Demko. However, once OEL settled in, he was solid in transition, started putting up points and was a leader. Hughes' defensive role grew considerably this year, and he's established himself as a reliable defenseman in his end. 

 

The bottom pairing needs work; Poolman's injury played a part in that, and Hamonic's drama didn't help either. Chemistry wasn't able to be formed, and we relied on career journeymen like Burroughs and Hunt to be regular contributors. That was just unfortunate.  Myers also took an incredibly steep dive on the offensive side, and in transition. He was strong in his end but that offensive loss was brutal. 

 

What I guess I'm saying is, the defense isn't perfect, but our team has the tools in place to make noise. If a Miller deal makes sense and nets us a strong top 2-3 RHD, do it. They're just not available, and better yet, Miller is doing so much good for our team that a significant portion of the fanbase doesn't think it's absolutely necessary to get rid of him to have success.

 

It's just not that black and white. I want what's best for the team and I think retaining Miller is a reasonable thing to do. They aren't mutually exclusive ideas. 

[Gurn]

5 minutes ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

I think retaining Miller is a reasonable thing to do

Every one thinks keeping Miller is a good idea, the problem is keeping Miller at large cap and a long term is not a good idea.

 

Miller at $5 mill for 5 years and almost everyone says yes.

Miller at $9.5 for 8 years and most say no

Edited August 10, 2022 by gurn

[HorvatToBaertschi]

Just now, gurn said:

Every one thinks keeping Miller is a good idea, the problem is keeping Miller at large cap and a long term is not a good idea.

I don't agree. I see a certain amount of posters who argue that we need to trade him no matter what, because our "window" isn't for another X amount of years, and that the late 1st round pick we get from the trade and the prospect etc... will be ready by then. 

 

[Coconuts]

15 minutes ago, JM_ said:

maybe. 

 

I just see other options like moving Pearson and Dickie, e.g., that creates cap room as well. 

Given the current market I question whether even Pearson wouldn't require a sweetener at this point though, he's also got a modified NTC this coming season so he can submit a list of seven teams he won't go to. He ain't going to Arizona. 

 

Dickinson would absolutely require a sweetener to move.

 

Miller would require no sweetener, so we wouldn't have to give up assets to potentially gain cap space. 

Edited August 10, 2022 by Coconuts

[Coconuts]

On that note, Myers also possesses a limited NTC, he can submit a list of ten teams he won't go to this coming season and next.