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

[DeNiro]

56 minutes ago, King Loui said:

Of course it was coaching but what kind of window are you even talking about?  The making the playoffs window?  or seriously competing for the Stanley cup window?

 

Did it really just take a coaching change to take us from hot garbage to cup contender?

 

 

You start with making the playoffs and go from there.
 

Your window to contend will depend on what kind of success you have there and the subsequent moves to address weaknesses. Pretty much what every cup winner does along the road to a cup.

 

You can’t become a contender without making the playoffs and building off that though.

 

It took a coaching change to see what our roster really is. Not a cup contender but definitely not a bottom feeder.
 

That’s why we need to see a full season under competent coaching to know what this teams true weaknesses are. Under Green it looked like a complete rebuild. Under Boudreau it looked like we were a couple D men and some forward depth away from being a playoff team that could make some noise.

[combover]

5 hours ago, DeNiro said:

For a good GM like Treliving too apparently.

 

The reality is it’s not that black and white. And there are lots of examples of forwards who perform very well into their mid 30’s.

 

If the numbers make sense we re-sign him, if they don’t then we trade him. That’s all there is to it. You don’t trade a 29 year old who just had a career year because you’re afraid he might not play well 5 years from now. 
 

You mean a super desperate gm that had zero choice. A gm in full desperation mode to save his job after what could only be called a full on disaster.

Brad did good to do the above but it cost him and more than likely he won’t be the guy that’s gotta clean it up. 

 

Calgary will regret those  aged out overpaid vets in a few years when the window for them is slammed shut because as the article says production goes down and injuries go up with 30+ year old players. 

They’ll Paying to get rid of contracts. 

because some other desperate GM makes desperate moves we should follow? 
we aren’t desperate, our team is still building the previous gm did a terrible job and it’s going to take longer. Miller isn’t the X factor that makes or breaks this team but the assets we possible get back could set us up and undo some of the many mistakes made over the last 8 years. 

 

[Solinar]

9 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

You start with making the playoffs and go from there.
 

Your window to contend will depend on what kind of success you have there and the subsequent moves to address weaknesses. Pretty much what every cup winner does along the road to a cup.

 

You can’t become a contender without making the playoffs and building off that though.

 

It took a coaching change to see what our roster really is. Not a cup contender but definitely not a bottom feeder.
 

That’s why we need to see a full season under competent coaching to know what this teams true weaknesses are. Under Green it looked like a complete rebuild. Under Boudreau it looked like we were a couple D men and some forward depth away from being a playoff team that could make some noise.

The problem with a lot of people is that there is a very polarized view of how you get to be a contender.  One view is that you're hot garbage, trade everything not nailed down, use a plethora of picks that you of course hit on, and bam, 4 years of pain for 4 years of contention.

  The other way is to consistently grow your team, thru the trials and tribulations of being on decline, to the ascent, to culmination of the goal.  You knowingly judge your players/prospects well, you trade those that don't fit for picks and players that do, you hit on more than your first round picks, you have player development that culminates on your team able to produce surprise players, as well as replace players that you do trade, and you consistently hit more than you miss.  You don't get handcuffed with bad contracts, you don't keep players that aren't part of the plan so long that they don't have value, you don't over/under value players, and you are constantly on the hunt for reclaims for undrafted/overseas players.

  We aren't going to tank with the team we have now.  Now it is to either do the process of building it up, or, you have to very accurately diagnose who you can part with, to make up for the disadvantages facing the current roster.

  I'm thinking a lot of people would rather us blow it up, but I'm kind of curious to see if they can build it instead.

[Canucks Curse]

are we there yet?

[DeNiro]

8 minutes ago, combover said:

You mean a super desperate gm that had zero choice. A gm in full desperation mode to save his job after what could only be called a full on disaster.

Brad did good to do the above but it cost him and more than likely he won’t be the guy that’s gotta clean it up. 

 

Calgary will regret those  aged out overpaid vets in a few years when the window for them is slammed shut because as the article says production goes down and injuries go up with 30+ year old players. 

They’ll Paying to get rid of contracts. 

because some other desperate GM makes desperate moves we should follow? 
we aren’t desperate, our team is still building the previous gm did a terrible job and it’s going to take longer. Miller isn’t the X factor that makes or breaks this team but the assets we possible get back could set us up and undo some of the many mistakes made over the last 8 years. 

 

If we were to sign Miller to an 8 year 10.5 mil deal it would be desperate yes.

 

I’m still hopeful they can get a deal done in the 8-8.5 mil range for 6-7 years. Nothing desperate about that. I think most GMs would re-sign their best player to that deal even if they are an ancient age of 29.

[stawns]

12 minutes ago, Solinar said:

The problem with a lot of people is that there is a very polarized view of how you get to be a contender.  One view is that you're hot garbage, trade everything not nailed down, use a plethora of picks that you of course hit on, and bam, 4 years of pain for 4 years of contention.

  The other way is to consistently grow your team, thru the trials and tribulations of being on decline, to the ascent, to culmination of the goal.  You knowingly judge your players/prospects well, you trade those that don't fit for picks and players that do, you hit on more than your first round picks, you have player development that culminates on your team able to produce surprise players, as well as replace players that you do trade, and you consistently hit more than you miss.  You don't get handcuffed with bad contracts, you don't keep players that aren't part of the plan so long that they don't have value, you don't over/under value players, and you are constantly on the hunt for reclaims for undrafted/overseas players.

  We aren't going to tank with the team we have now.  Now it is to either do the process of building it up, or, you have to very accurately diagnose who you can part with, to make up for the disadvantages facing the current roster.

  I'm thinking a lot of people would rather us blow it up, but I'm kind of curious to see if they can build it instead.

I think everyone, regardless of where they stand on Miller, is firmly on the anti-tank side.  There's a solid core of young guys emerging and adding to that core will be the key.

[stawns]

4 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

If we were to sign Miller to an 8 year 10.5 mil deal it would be desperate yes.

 

I’m still hopeful they can get a deal done in the 8-8.5 mil range for 6-7 years. Nothing desperate about that. I think most GMs would re-sign their best player to that deal even if they are an ancient age of 29.

Dumb, not desperate.  

[combover]

2 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

If we were to sign Miller to an 8 year 10.5 mil deal it would be desperate yes.

 

I’m still hopeful they can get a deal done in the 8-8.5 mil range for 6-7 years. Nothing desperate about that. I think most GMs would re-sign their best player to that deal even if they are an ancient age of 29.

5 years 8-8.5. 

I’d be ok with and we’d still eat atleast one year when he’s not that player anymore. 

he’s still could sign another deal after that if he’s productive.
Signing till he’s 36- 38 why handcuff the team far better younger players will be available for less. 
 

[Devron]

[shiznak]

3 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Even if he performs like a 5-6 million dollar player through most of the contract that’s still a good player. As long as he doesn’t fall off a cliff like Loui it’s not the end of the world if he performs below his value.

 

I can think of other fat to trim in the lineup that would help us improve before trading Miller.

 

Think about if we could get a great value D man for Pearsons 3.25 mil or hell even a D man for 5 mil if we cut Poolman and Dickinson’s combined 5.1 mil. 
 

There are other creative options that need to be explored further before we make a hasty trade.

People are fine with Miller producing at a 50-60 points rate, at 8-9m, but want to quickly get rid of a 30-40 points guy making 3m. 
 

Oh the irony.

Edited September 1, 2022 by shiznak

[aGENT]

21 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

That’s why we need to see a full season under competent coaching to know what this teams true weaknesses are. Under Green it looked like a complete rebuild. Under Boudreau it looked like we were a couple D men and some forward depth away from being a playoff team that could make some noise.

No, we really don't. Last year's team weakness were, in no particular order:

 

Lack of speed, size/grit and players who can PK at a high level. Ill fitting mish mash of (in particular, right) D with no succession plan to replace two, soon expiring RD currently playing in our top 4. Lack of cap to deal with said D issues/inefficient cap/buyout cap. Too many, mid $, redundant "bottom 4" D. Lack of a strong, 2 way 3C. Not enough miles on young kids who will be driving the bus. Lack of prospect/organizational depth.

 

So far we addressed some of the size/speed/PK weakness and last year got rid of a redundant Hamonic and have just barely started backfilling some of that organizational depth. There's still PLENTY to do before we're a contending team and we don't need to "see" anything this season to confirm anything. Some, like kids getting more experience, will just need time.

 

*Not an exhaustive list

[aGENT]

7 minutes ago, shiznak said:

People are fine with Miller producing at a 50-60 points rate, at 8-9m, but want to quickly get rid of a 30-40 points guy making 3m. 
 

Oh the irony.

[DeNiro]

9 minutes ago, shiznak said:

People are fine with Miller producing at a 50-60 points rate, at 8-9m, but want to quickly get rid of a 30-40 points guy making 3m. 
 

Oh the irony.

We both know that he would bring more than just 50-60 points.
 

That’s like saying Bo isn’t much more valuable than a third liner.

 

8 million for a player that plays in all situations and is a leader in the room is not the worst thing. We could live with that deal if we got 3 or 4 really productive years out of it.

[shiznak]

1 minute ago, DeNiro said:

We both know that he would bring more than just 50-60 points.
 

That’s like saying Bo isn’t much more valuable than a third liner.

 

8 million for a player that plays in all situations and is a leader in the room is not the worst thing. We could live with that deal if we got 3 or 4 really productive years out of it.

I’m not the biggest Pearson fan, but you just described Pearson, who makes less than half of what Miller will make on his next contract.

[DeNiro]

9 minutes ago, aGENT said:

No, we really don't. Last year's team weakness were, in no particular order:

 

Lack of speed, size/grit and players who can PK at a high level. Ill fitting mish mash of (in particular, right) D with no succession plan to replace two, soon expiring RD currently playing in our top 4. Lack of cap to deal with said D issues/inefficient cap/buyout cap. Too many, mid $, redundant "bottom 4" D. Lack of a strong, 2 way 3C. Not enough miles on young kids who will be driving the bus. Lack of prospect/organizational depth.

 

So far we addressed some of the size/speed/PK weakness and last year got rid of a redundant Hamonic and have just barely started backfilling some of that organizational depth. There's still PLENTY to do before we're a contending team and we don't need to "see" anything this season to confirm anything. Some, like kids getting more experience, will just need time.

 

*Not an exhaustive list

Good thing that was last years team. 

 

Of course we need to see what this team can do. There’s lots of question marks that need to be answered under a full season of Boudreau. 
 

Can Petey continue off from his end of season form? Can Boeser get back to being that consistent too 6 threat? Can Hughes find another level to his game? Can Martin play enough games and get some W’s in order to give Demko some rest? Can Mikayev and Kuzmenko provide some depth scoring? Can Hoglander and Podkolzin take their game to another level next season? Can Joshua and Lazar provide some bottom 6 grit this team has desperately needed? Can OEL play the right side and give us a legit top pairing? Can Poolman and Dickinson regain their form and provide some quality depth?

 

Theres literally dozens of questions that you and I can’t answer to confidently say what this team is. Pretending otherwise is just speculation.

[DeNiro]

2 minutes ago, shiznak said:

I’m not the biggest Pearson fan, but you just described Pearson, who makes less than half of what Miller will make on his next contract.

Pearson plays powerplay/pk, is a leader in the room, and can score 25-30 goals?

 

Must have missed that…

[RWJC]

1 minute ago, DeNiro said:

Good thing that was last years team. 

 

Of course we need to see what this team can do. There’s lots of question marks that need to be answered under a full season of Boudreau. 
 

Can Petey continue off from his end of season form? Can Boeser get back to being that consistent too 6 threat? Can Hughes find another level to his game? Can Martin play enough games and get some W’s in order to give Demko some rest? Can Mikayev and Kuzmenko provide some depth scoring? Can Hoglander and Podkolzin take their game to another level next season? Can Joshua and Lazar provide some bottom 6 grit this team has desperately needed? Can OEL play the right side and give us a legit top pairing? Can Poolman and Dickinson regain their form and provide some quality depth?

 

Theres literally dozens of questions that you and I can’t answer to confidently say what this team is. Pretending otherwise is just speculation.

The last paragraph is a fair point.

At the same time, what you reference above it is based in hope and best case scenario. There’s a lot of variable in there.

For us to be a success and/or a threat, almost all of what you mentioned has to be realized. I’m optimistic, but it’s a tall order.

[DeNiro]

8 minutes ago, RWJC said:

The last paragraph is a fair point.

At the same time, what you reference above it is based in hope and best case scenario. There’s a lot of variable in there.

For us to be a success and/or a threat, almost all of what you mentioned has to be realized. I’m optimistic, but it’s a tall order.

I don’t necessarily agree almost all of it has to be realized.

 

Boeser could not regain his form as a legit top 6 player, Podkolzin and Hoglander could fail to reach another level next season, and Dickinson and Poolman could continue to be below average.

 

If Petey continues his play from the end of last season, Mikayev and Kuzmenko provide good scoring depth, and Martin is a solid backup that right there would help us win games.
 

One of the biggest weaknesses from last season was having a backup that couldn’t get us wins. Martin being legit would be a huge boost on its own.

[shiznak]

15 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Pearson plays powerplay/pk, is a leader in the room, and can score 25-30 goals?

 

Must have missed that…

Didn’t he score 21 goals in 64 games just two seasons ago, while having to play tough matchup and little-to-none first unit PP?

 

The point wasn’t that he can score 25-30 goals every season, not that Miller can either, he’s only done it twice in his career. The point was, Pearson can play in all situations and is a leader in the locker room, while being paid less than twice of what Miller will make. Yet people are so eager to get rid of him.

[aGENT]

30 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Good thing that was last years team. 

 

Of course we need to see what this team can do. There’s lots of question marks that need to be answered under a full season of Boudreau. 
 

Can Petey continue off from his end of season form? Can Boeser get back to being that consistent too 6 threat? Can Hughes find another level to his game? Can Martin play enough games and get some W’s in order to give Demko some rest? Can Mikayev and Kuzmenko provide some depth scoring? Can Hoglander and Podkolzin take their game to another level next season? Can Joshua and Lazar provide some bottom 6 grit this team has desperately needed? Can OEL play the right side and give us a legit top pairing? Can Poolman and Dickinson regain their form and provide some quality depth?

 

Theres literally dozens of questions that you and I can’t answer to confidently say what this team is. Pretending otherwise is just speculation.

Again, we addressed a couple of those (many) things. This year's team, minus those few changes, still has most of those issues. So no, it's not speculation. Those issues still need addressing.

 

Those things you listed are outside of the clear organizational issues I listed.

Edited September 1, 2022 by aGENT