Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

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


Podzilla

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, stawns said:

What's wrong with Chytil, still young and he's got a lot of tools in his toolbox.  He's got the potential to be a very solid two way C.  

But he can't be the foundational piece for a Miller trade. In a package? Sure. 

 

I can't see Kravstov being a foundational piece either for Miller. 

 

None of these players are foundational pieces for Miller.

 

Schneider to me is a foundational piece to work a deal around. Without him, Rangers better be giving a lot more, or there's no deal to be had. If Drury can play hard ball, so should we. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, N4ZZY said:

But he can't be the foundational piece for a Miller trade. In a package? Sure. 

 

I can't see Kravstov being a foundational piece either for Miller. 

 

None of these players are foundational pieces for Miller.

 

Schneider to me is a foundational piece to work a deal around. Without him, Rangers better be giving a lot more, or there's no deal to be had. If Drury can play hard ball, so should we. 

 

Of course, I don't think anyone would think that chytil would be a centre piece of a deal.  I do think they'd want to send a roster player and mud range contract back and chytil fits Vancouver's needs pretty well.

 

Again, Schneider would 100% be my target, but I do think people are sleeping on lundqvist........he's going to be very good.

 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, stawns said:

Really, manyNorris winners aren't 1st rounders anyway.  I think Schneider is going to be an excellent dman, but he's not at that level, imo.  I don't think he has the offensive upside needed to be considered a potential Norris candidate.

You stating most norris winners aren’t first rd picks only proves my point though.... it’s pretty hard to predict who’s going to become that calibre of defenceman. Not saying he’s a shoe in or anything but he’s got as much a shot as anyone else imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, stawns said:

I'm not arguing hes the guy theyre going for, but if he truly is untouchable, there's still a pretty good match for NY

If Schneider has in fact entered the untouchable category for NY, which wouldn't surprise me, then perhaps Allvin changes tactics:  Miller for K'A & Lafrenier. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, coryberg said:

He scored 27 in a 69 game season... that would be on pace for 32 in 82

 

This season he has scored 17 in 47... that would be on pace for 30 in 82.

 

Classic Reaction GIF

 

Being on pace for x isn't the same as actually scoring x. People have been using that argument for Boeser, but it just doesn't pan out. Until players actually do something, projecting that they're an x goal scorer doesn't really mean all that much. 

 

Boeser's scored 29 goals once, it's his career high, otherwise he's been a guy you can count on to get maybe a few maybe 20+ if all goes well. One could argue he could maybe be a 30-40 goal scorer if he was able to consistently stay healthy, but that hasn't been the case thus far.

 

Miller's got one 27 goal season, that was his first season in Vancouver. He's also got two 22 goal seasons. Then he's got six other seasons with 10+. Obviously he's probably at his peak right now, and his deployment and all that was different in New York and Tampa, but he's not a 30 goal scorer. I'll be surprised if he doesn't get there this season, but he hasn't done it yet. 

 

One can project this or that, but until a player actually produces x amount it doesn't really matter. 

Edited by Coconuts
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

Being on pace for x isn't the same as actually scoring x. People have been using that argument for Boeser, but it just doesn't pan out. Until players actually do something, projecting that they're an x goal scorer doesn't really mean all that much. 

 

Boeser's scored 29 goals once, it's his career high, otherwise he's been a guy you can count on to get maybe a few maybe 20+ if all goes well. One could argue he could maybe be a 30-40 goal scorer if he was able to consistently stay healthy, but that hasn't been the case thus far.

 

Miller's got one 27 goal season, that was his first season in Vancouver. He's also got two 22 goal seasons. Then he's got six other seasons with 10+. Obviously he's probably at his peak right now, and his deployment and all that was different in New York and Tampa, but he's not a 30 goal scorer. I'll be surprised if he doesn't get there this season, but he hasn't done it yet. 

 

One can project this or that, but until a player actually produces x amount it doesn't really matter. 

I agree. I think the “on pace” isn’t fair, because the player might be on pace for 30 goals, but like you’ve said, until they actually get there, it doesn’t matter. I always thought Brock would be a perennial 30 goal scorer, but he’s never actually cracked 30 goals, let alone get there. 

 

 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stawns said:

Of course, I don't think anyone would think that chytil would be a centre piece of a deal.  I do think they'd want to send a roster player and mud range contract back and chytil fits Vancouver's needs pretty well.

 

Again, Schneider would 100% be my target, but I do think people are sleeping on lundqvist........he's going to be very good.

 

 

I think Lundqvist will be a very good player as well. I just like Schneider’s size on the right side. And he’d fit with Hughes as top pairing one day, I’d think. Lundqvist if paired with Hughes would be such a small defensive pairing. Size does matter to a certain extent. Lundqvist is what? 5’11? Hughes isn’t much taller than that. That would be a small pairing. And I’m assuming Rathbone’s going to be in the line up eventually. 

 

That defensive corps is tiny. Vegas really played Hughes physically in the bubble playoffs, and it took a toll on him. Lundqvist will be a good defenseman? Yeah, I think so. But with Van, probably not a fit. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, people are so fixated about getting a big tough defensemen. You look at Minnesota, they’re one of the better defensive teams in the league, yet they have one of the smallest top 4 defensive core. 
 

Goligoski - 5’11, 173lbs

Dumba - 6’0, 181lbs

Spurgeon - 5’9, 167lbs

Brodin - 6’2, 196lbs

  • Cheers 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

I think Lundqvist will be a very good player as well. I just like Schneider’s size on the right side. And he’d fit with Hughes as top pairing one day, I’d think. Lundqvist if paired with Hughes would be such a small defensive pairing. Size does matter to a certain extent. Lundqvist is what? 5’11? Hughes isn’t much taller than that. That would be a small pairing. And I’m assuming Rathbone’s going to be in the line up eventually. 

 

That defensive corps is tiny. Vegas really played Hughes physically in the bubble playoffs, and it took a toll on him. Lundqvist will be a good defenseman? Yeah, I think so. But with Van, probably not a fit. 

 

5'11, but 190lbs, as is JR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Coconuts said:

Being on pace for x isn't the same as actually scoring x. People have been using that argument for Boeser, but it just doesn't pan out. Until players actually do something, projecting that they're an x goal scorer doesn't really mean all that much. 

He played every single game that season, was never injured. In fact he even played all 17 playoff games for us. So in total that season he had 33 goals in 86 games that's  a pace of 31.46 goals per 82 games. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

I think Lundqvist will be a very good player as well. I just like Schneider’s size on the right side. And he’d fit with Hughes as top pairing one day, I’d think. Lundqvist if paired with Hughes would be such a small defensive pairing. Size does matter to a certain extent. Lundqvist is what? 5’11? Hughes isn’t much taller than that. That would be a small pairing. And I’m assuming Rathbone’s going to be in the line up eventually. 

 

That defensive corps is tiny. Vegas really played Hughes physically in the bubble playoffs, and it took a toll on him. Lundqvist will be a good defenseman? Yeah, I think so. But with Van, probably not a fit. 

 

Both players are bigger than Fox

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol what a joke.  So the rags DO have a Ballard Raymond and a 1st mentality.

 

Suggesting Chiarot is worth a 1st AND prospect but Miller is worth just as much a day earlier.

 

Crazy

 

https://www.foreverblueshirts.com/rangers-and-canadiens-engaged-in-trade-talks-who-is-chris-drury-targeting/#amp_tf=From %1%24s&aoh=16451115292654&csi=0&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foreverblueshirts.com%2Frangers-and-canadiens-engaged-in-trade-talks-who-is-chris-drury-targeting%2F

 

 

Trade Proposal: Rangers acquire Ben Chiarot and Artturi Lehkonen from Canadiens in exchange for 2022 First Round Pick, Nils Lundkvist, and Vitali Kravtsov.

Edited by Warhippy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sound  like there could be some teams that were interested in Miller, are now looking at other options, because the Canucks haven't made a decision on whether to keep him or commit to a trade. I can't seeing Miller going anywhere this season, that'll buy them some time to make a trade in the off season or next season. 

 

I could see guys like Garland and Pearson being dealt, possibly Myers.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Lol what a joke.  So the rags DO have a Ballard Raymond and a 1st mentality.

 

Suggesting Chiarot is worth a 1st AND prospect but Miller is worth just as much a day earlier.

 

Crazy

 

https://www.foreverblueshirts.com/rangers-and-canadiens-engaged-in-trade-talks-who-is-chris-drury-targeting/#amp_tf=From %1%24s&aoh=16451115292654&csi=0&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foreverblueshirts.com%2Frangers-and-canadiens-engaged-in-trade-talks-who-is-chris-drury-targeting%2F

 

 

Trade Proposal: Rangers acquire Ben Chiarot and Artturi Lehkonen from Canadiens in exchange for 2022 First Round Pick, Nils Lundkvist, and Vitali Kravtsov.

Remember Hippy these are just the fans and media, not the the actual people (GM) doing the trading. These guys are basically the NY version of the idiots at Canucks Army.

  • Cheers 2
  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, stawns said:

Of course, I don't think anyone would think that chytil would be a centre piece of a deal.  I do think they'd want to send a roster player and mud range contract back and chytil fits Vancouver's needs pretty well.

 

Again, Schneider would 100% be my target, but I do think people are sleeping on lundqvist........he's going to be very good.

 

 

Yeah, I don't get it either. I mean, it's fine, the Canucks have time to keep pressing for Schneider until closer till the TDL. But if that's the hill the Rangers are dying on, we can still get a solid package with Lundkvist.

 

Chytil, Lundkvist, 1st and one or two of Kravstov, Robertson, Othmann, Barron , is still a good deal.

 

9 hours ago, garthsbutcher said:

I wonder if we go to Colorado , Miller for Newhook and byrom( concussion concerns) and all.

I'd prefer Compher, Newhook, 23 1st and Barron.

 

7 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

I think Lundqvist will be a very good player as well. I just like Schneider’s size on the right side. And he’d fit with Hughes as top pairing one day, I’d think. Lundqvist if paired with Hughes would be such a small defensive pairing. Size does matter to a certain extent. Lundqvist is what? 5’11? Hughes isn’t much taller than that. That would be a small pairing. And I’m assuming Rathbone’s going to be in the line up eventually. 

 

That defensive corps is tiny. Vegas really played Hughes physically in the bubble playoffs, and it took a toll on him. Lundqvist will be a good defenseman? Yeah, I think so. But with Van, probably not a fit. 

 

You probably pair Lundkvist with OEL (other than the PP).

 

It would probably spell a Rathbone trade, but I'm not sure that's not going to happen at some point anyway, as he's an ill fit as 3LD behind Hughes and OEL.

  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...