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

[John McClane]

2 hours ago, -DLC- said:

 

 

OK ok I'm leaving now. But I'll be back, count on it....

 

We will continue on and do your bidding….

[Honky Cat]

1 hour ago, T.Demko said:

It is your personal opinion, as you've stated, so it is your entitlement.  

 

However, that is definitely not the pride and emotional thinking the management should approach this situation with.  I'm assuming what you've stated in terms of trade value to be the equivalent rumor of Lundqvist, Chytil, and  1st.  If that is the best offer on the table and we risk Miller to walk for nothing, I sure hope the management pounces on that.  

 

If by fleecing, you're stating something like a 3rd for Miller, that won't happen so we really don't have to worry about that.

Lundquvist,Chytil, and a late 1st is getting bent over IMO . If they make that trade, that sets an absolute shit precedence for this management group. I know its a depressed market for players like Miller, but obviously some people dont know the difference between quality and quantity.

[JM_]

1 hour ago, steviewonder20 said:

Not necessarily. Picks and prospects are basically a currency that can be exchanged for other assets. We are “forward rich” and “rhd poor”. It makes sense to focus on building up our defence by using whatever currency we have. If we can’t trade Miller for a future partner for Quinn, maybe the assets we get from a Miller trade help facilitate that a year later. In addition, we can’t afford what Miller is worth without risk losing other important assets in the future when they need raises.

sure thats logical, and also carries risk. Its assuming that we can get assets that we can flip for exactly what we need later on. 

[stawns]

4 hours ago, JM_ said:

bingo. Trading Miller for picks and prospects is all about what the next window is, not the current one. 

I certainly have never advocated a Miller trade focused on picks.........at the tdl I thought a top prospect, roster player and now I think a hockey trade is the most likely outcome

[Dr. Crossbar]

Hey JT ... now Jerome ...

 

[stawns]

50 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

Lundquvist,Chytil, and a late 1st is getting bent over IMO . If they make that trade, that sets an absolute shit precedence for this management group. I know its a depressed market for players like Miller, but obviously some people dont know the difference between quality and quantity.

we don't know what he was being offered or what he might have got because it was pretty clear that Miller was off the market

[Hairy Kneel]

1 hour ago, steviewonder20 said:

Not necessarily. Picks and prospects are basically a currency that can be exchanged for other assets. We are “forward rich” and “rhd poor”. It makes sense to focus on building up our defence by using whatever currency we have. If we can’t trade Miller for a future partner for Quinn, maybe the assets we get from a Miller trade help facilitate that a year later. In addition, we can’t afford what Miller is worth without risk losing other important assets in the future when they need raises.

I think for prospects we should look at 1st rounders or players that have developed quickly in their yeams system. We want blue chippers.

[Provost]

Yikes, I am starting to believe that we are going into the season with an unsigned Miller.

 

I was assuming that was JR playing the media.  
 

Pretty bonkers if it happens as it opens up a big chance of seeing our most valuable trade asset in years walk away for nothing…

[stawns]

10 minutes ago, Provost said:

Yikes, I am starting to believe that we are going into the season with an unsigned Miller.

 

I was assuming that was JR playing the media.  
 

Pretty bonkers if it happens as it opens up a big chance of seeing our most valuable trade asset in years walk away for nothing…

huge gamble

[Baratheon]

35 minutes ago, stawns said:

we don't know what he was being offered or what he might have got because it was pretty clear that Miller was off the market

I have noticed on CDC that the media makes up rumours to stir up drama but those rumours are also the gospel truth.  It’s a fascinating contradiction to observe.

[Fanuck]

53 minutes ago, stawns said:

 I think a hockey trade is the most likely outcome

But how does that help our organization?

 

To me a 'hockey trade' is typically same-for-same or close to it.  By that I mean a player of relatively the same age, experience,  salary,  and term - not necessarily the same position though.   To me that's the proverbial 'hockey trade' and if management does that with Miller we're in the exact same position as we are at the moment so why bother?  

[stawns]

7 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

But how does that help our organization?

 

To me a 'hockey trade' is typically same-for-same or close to it.  By that I mean a player of relatively the same age, experience,  salary,  and term - not necessarily the same position though.   To me that's the proverbial 'hockey trade' and if management does that with Miller we're in the exact same position as we are at the moment so why bother?  

a hockey trade is roster player(s) for roster player(s) where similar money is going both ways, imo.  As I've said previously, a girard/newhook for Miller kind of deal

[Fanuck]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

a hockey trade is roster player(s) for roster player(s) where similar money is going both ways, imo.  As I've said previously, a girard/newhook for Miller kind of deal

That's not a hockey trade to me at all, that's Col acquiring a potential rental for premium young asset(s).  Which I'm not opposed to, but it's not the proverbial hockey trade to me.

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

That's not a hockey trade to me at all, that's Col acquiring a potential rental for premium young asset(s).  Which I'm not opposed to, but it's not the proverbial hockey trade to me.

well Girard is an established player on a $5m aav contract. The Newhook add is the prospect component.  I would likely be a rental, but teams pay that price all the time for rentals

[Gurn]

21 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

But how does that help our organization?

 

To me a 'hockey trade' is typically same-for-same or close to it.  By that I mean a player of relatively the same age, experience,  salary,  and term - not necessarily the same position though.   To me that's the proverbial 'hockey trade' and if management does that with Miller we're in the exact same position as we are at the moment so why bother?  

Forward out- defenseman in.

Which is why they bother.

We have forward depth, with good talent level, but are weak on right d- especially in the years to come.

 

[stawns]

4 minutes ago, gurn said:

Forward out- defenseman in.

Which is why they bother.

We have forward depth, with good talent level, but are weak on right d- especially in the years to come.

 

and Girard is cost controlled for the forseeable future

[Fanuck]

10 minutes ago, stawns said:

well Girard is an established player on a $5m aav contract. The Newhook add is the prospect component.  I would likely be a rental, but teams pay that price all the time for rentals

 

3 minutes ago, gurn said:

Forward out- defenseman in.

Which is why they bother.

We have forward depth, with good talent level, but are weak on right d- especially in the years to come.

 

Miller at 50% retained for Byram.   Col can fit that salary easily and I'd say value for each club is there respectively given existing organizational needs.

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

 

Miller at 50% retained for Byram.   Col can fit that salary easily and I'd say value for each club is there respectively given existing organizational needs.

That's what I was saying at the tdl.  Sadly, I think that ship has sailed after the playoffs he had.

[TmanVan]

16 minutes ago, stawns said:

a hockey trade is roster player(s) for roster player(s) where similar money is going both ways, imo.  As I've said previously, a girard/newhook for Miller kind of deal

Im not saying this is a good idea for the Canucks, Im just bored right now... but I wonder which teams would hypothetically have the one for one RHD man we would want, and be in a playoff position for JT Miller?

 

Maybe Ryan Pulock, Sean Durzi, Matt Dumba, Colton Parayko, Neal Pionk, Rasmus Ristolainen, Brandon Carlo, Nakita Zaitsev? You could make lots of arguments here, like whether any of these players are good enough to do a one for one  for JT, or if the other teams even want JT.

[stawns]

1 minute ago, TmanVan said:

Im not saying this is a good idea for the Canucks, Im just bored right now... but I wonder which teams would hypothetically have the one for one RHD man we would want, and be in a playoff position for JT Miller?

 

Maybe Ryan Pulock, Sean Durzi, Matt Dumba, Colton Parayko, Neal Pionk, Rasmus Ristolainen, Brandon Carlo, Nakita Zaitsev? You could make lots of arguments here, like whether any of these players are good enough to do a one for one  for JT, or if the other teams even want JT.

again, Girard, who plays  both sides and Newhook is a great option, imo.