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

[HKSR]

Just now, Timråfan said:

Please, tell me who talks like that about the Millertrade?

Partly some of us are damaged by Bennings bad record regarding communication and loosing out on players without anything coming back.

But we’re not fools 

 

You're not one of them, but trust me, the past couple weeks while I've been touting that we should do what we can to keep Miller, I've been blasted for the idea.  Those same posters expect we would get a Schneider or Laf or Kakko out of NYR.  

[Junkyard Dog]

4 minutes ago, HKSR said:

You're not one of them, but trust me, the past couple weeks while I've been touting that we should do what we can to keep Miller, I've been blasted for the idea.  Those same posters expect we would get a Schneider or Laf or Kakko out of NYR.  

On the contrary. For a period you were making like 1-2 threads a day stating how we should keep Miller. Instead of keeping it all in one thread. 
 

Also people who’ve stated they are fine moving Miller have literally have had their fandom questioned by people who don’t want to see him traded.
 

There’s been a lot more blasting from the other side IMO. 

[aGENT]

4 hours ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

This will be my last attempt.  There is an over emphasis on asset management in the dialogues on these forums.  Inevitably more than one variable must be considered.  Contract term and length are part of that.  You have no idea whether or not Miller will be here after his contract expires( if it even gets to that point) neither do I.  You assert opinions not facts.  The logic is not plain wrong that we likely wont get Miller back in a trade.  The odds are heavy against that.  I get the sentiment well we should try our best to make it happen.  Basic understanding of mathematics and statistics will make it plain that any trade for futures leads to a low probability of obtaining a player like Miller in the future.  That doesn't mean its not possible.  It is simply improbable.  Again, I get the sentiment that something is better than nothing.  I am not arguing that every players contract should be allowed to expire without receiving anything return.  Its that it is better to make a hockey trade if possible.  Not a trade for futures.  It wouldn't be difficult to cherry pick draft picks from the last 10 years in the first round and construct a team of high quality NHL players.  It also wouldn't be difficult, easier in fact, to construct a team of non-NHL players with 1st round draft picks in the last 10 years.  There are 32 teams full of highly skilled professional scouting personnel spending all of their time assessing these players.  They don't do it in-between their day jobs at Microsoft or the Subway.  That's all they do.  They get it wrong a lot.  Like a lot a lot...

 

Here comes the main point.  When you have a top 50 player in the NHL, you don't trade them just to manage the cap or their contract length or whatever other asset management technique.  They are essentially irreplaceable.  The difficulty in obtaining another one is very high.  I know that means potentially being a mediocre team as they win you enough games to maybe sneak into the playoffs but not enough to win the cup.  That is frustrating.  There is no sure fire fix for this.  You can't stockpile 7th round picks by trading Matthew Highmore's and 3rd round picks by trading Luke Schenn's and tanking for a 1st overall and guarantee yourself a contender for the cup.  You can't asset manage your way to the cup.  You have to build a team.  You have to get lucky by getting some truely exceptional players.  There is no logical formula of getting a McDavid.  You might get DiPietro or Diagle instead.  Most importantly, everything is obvious in hindsight.  

 

I would argue that truely exceptional players (top 50 in the NHL), unless they are locker room cancers, make younger players better than good coaching makes them better.  Nashville became a defensive factory for a long time Weber, Suter, Josi, Ellis, Ekholm, etc...precisely because the younger incoming players had someone to learn from and lookup to.  The Sedin's learnt a lot from Naslund, Bertuzzi and Morrison.  That experience is unquantifiable.  This isn't a video game.  They are human beings they have feelings and experience emotion.  It's is exciting and intimidating to be on an NHL roster as a young man.  You don't just achieve your potential just because the coaching is good.  There are many factors that go into it.  Winning games also has a significant impact on development.  Sports is about confidence.  If you are loosing all the time that means you have less of the puck.  No matter how good you are, you are not going to play as well as you can under those circumstances.  That has a cumulative affect on players.  Bad games turn into slumps and slumps into demotions and then you find yourself in Europe...I would argue that there a lot of players that never made it to the NHL that could have great careers under different circumstances.  We simply undervalue the human element here.  This isn't the stock market, and they are not robots. 

 

Lastly, Miller doesn't need to be traded.  I think Alvin is showing that realization as well.  If its just a 1st round pick and two B level prospects then its sounds great asset management wise, but its not going to make the team meaningfully better in the future.  Again it can, but it is improbable.  I am not against a trade.  I just don't want low quality.  They have to get a significant young player back.  Someone already in the NHL.  Linden for Bertuzzi and McCabe comes to mind.  Two young players with promise already playing the NHL.  Yes it was a gamble, but it always had a higher probability of working out as both players were already playing pro-hockey successfully.  There was no doubt that they were NHL players.  I don't know if a trade like that is available for Miller.  If it is then I would hope that they would consider it.  Lafreniere and Schnieder comes to mind...Maybe you add something as Lafreniere is a former 1st overall, but its the type of trade that makes sense.

 

Trading Miller just to manage the asset is nonsense.  Keep him and let him help improve the young forwards this team already has.  A year is forever in hockey.  A lot could change.  Boeser could get trade or go down with a career ending injury or whatever else.  You never know what is going to happen between now and the end of next season.  Heck Miller might score 100 points next season in Vancouver and lead them to a division title.  Not likely, but it is possible.  hahahahaha that's a joke in the same vain as the certainty of getting a Miller back for a random first round pick which is likely 20-30th overall as only a cup contender is going to want him.

Largely agree with this. I will say that I don't recall anyone suggesting we move Miller for a late 1st and B prospects. 

 

Also, the reason that won't happen is simply because we don't have to 'asset manage' yet. Having him under contract for another year means we don't HAVE to do anything but keep a really good player, if that what happens.

 

For now anyway.

 

If teams want Miller, for two runs, on bargain deal, they're going to need to PAY.

 

I'd be surprised if this gets past this summer though. Perhaps he gets moved at the draft, or after teams miss out on free agency. But the team won't want this as a distraction all season, or be forced to 'asset manage'' with a team (hopefully) competing for a playoff spot (towards the 23 TDL).

 

I don't see him wanting to stay, or us being in position to extend him for what he'll get even if he did, but that's also potentially an outcome this summer as well.

Edited February 19, 2022 by aGENT

[KirkSave]

1 hour ago, stanleysteamersmyl said:

Jannick Hansen was on the radio the other day, saying the Nucks need a big tough guy on the 4th line.  Who can response to the other tough guy tactics.  He said the other players will feel 3 inches bigger taller and bigger.

 

Like Macewan...or Gadjovich.

 

It's ok, Chiasson and Petan have been worth losing those 2, young guns.

[stawns]

2 hours ago, SilentSam said:

Happy to see Alvin say that Miller is our best player and his leadership qualities are something that can not be replaced.

 

Having said that, imagine the Leadership Hole with this club if he is moved.

We basically move back to Bo Brock and Hughes ? Lmao

Leadership, like Millers is worth 1-2 m a season on top of a ppg as a player.

 

If age is red flag for some ,  

then raise a red flag once you get “younger” by trading in him and his leadership is gone, and we turn to hoping our draft picks turn into players.

 

 

Oel

Myers

Petey

Hamonic

Motte

Schenn

Pearson

 

Plenty of leadership.  

 

 

[Alflives]

9 minutes ago, KirkSave said:

Like Macewan...or Gadjovich.

 

It's ok, Chiasson and Petan have been worth losing those 2, young guns.

guns?  

[wai_lai416]

31 minutes ago, HKSR said:

You're not one of them, but trust me, the past couple weeks while I've been touting that we should do what we can to keep Miller, I've been blasted for the idea.  Those same posters expect we would get a Schneider or Laf or Kakko out of NYR.  

Well ya your suggestion of keeping Miller included idea such as keeping all the core players such as ep boeser horvat garland oel hughes demko Miller when clearly those core players ain't good enough or ain't the right mix to work with each other.. ok so you'll prolly say fine keep miller and trade one of the other cores. So what do you expect in a trade for any of the other core players that would make this team competitive immediately within the next couple years? Any core players traded is going to be for prospect and or picks. You likely won't get any player that would likely make an impact right away and will probably be years away. If team aint competitive no chance Miller even think about re signing.

 

Ok so you trade away a boeser or bo or ep.. the team is still struggle next year and likely will be since theres no one replacing those cores in a trade or ufa. Miller decides to not re-sign ok we trade him at the deadline. So instead of having the options to retool having the core mostly intact minus Miller. We likely have to end up going into a full rebuild since you traded away 2 or more of your top 6 core. Moving Miller now gives u the option to retool if u feel the team is close. Moving any of the other core basically gives you no option to retool and straight into a rebuild if Miller doesn't re-sign and no guarantees horvat would re-sign either if we go into a full rebuild. 

 

Moving Miller this year can let the management evaluate whether or not the team can compete with a retool. If they think it can then theyll retool with the core minus miller. If they decides its not good enough for retooling then they can move out the boeser ep horvat and kick start the rebuild with a ton of 1st and prospect. Much harder to retool keeping Miller and trading one of the other cores as at its current value its not even close to what they can bring.. boeser with no contract guarantees ain't gonna fetch u a haul that can help the team and you would still need to use his cap space to find a top line player. Moving horvat who's ur best faceoff guy and ur shutdown center man you'll need to replace him and likely won't get one back that can help within the next 2 season. Miller can fetch you a haul that might not help within the next couple season but can help in 3-4 when our current young core hits 26-27.. similar to when Miller started to take off.

[stawns]

2 hours ago, HKSR said:

Problem is the proposals here are unrealistic.  What do you think we would get for Miller?

Why are they unrealistic, he's the biggest fish in the pond right now.  The ones with laffy, Schneider and a first are a little out there, but millers value isn't far off and teams don't have long windows to win anymore.

[CaptainLinden16]

1 hour ago, Timråfan said:

Well, J Gaudreu was picked in the 4th round so we might go after ten 4th rounders instead…

 

What almost all here say is that we trade Miller for a kings ransom. 
If we don’t get the perfect players/picks he stays. 
If we as fans have an unrealistic view of Millers value is one thing but he stays if we don’t get what we want.

First is a talented RHD.

The percentages are significantly lower for 4th round picks, but I am sure you know that and its just a joke.  We are talking about 1% or so.  32 picks in the 4th round every year.  You should find a Miller esque player every 3 drafts or so. That doesn't bode well for trading our Luke Schenns.  

 

Going back to the human factor.  I think one of the biggest subtle mistakes management made was letting go of Luke Schenn to Tampa.  He won two cups there and was clearly well liked and performed well.  He also was very good with Quinn Hughes.  He is absolutely a team first character guy.  A 4th round pick is probably fair asset value for someone like him.  His value will very soon be zero as he is an older veteran player who could pop off at any moment really.  He is already quite slow.  But when he hits 5+ guys in a game, the lift in the team is noticeable.  Maybe a player like this allows the younger guys to have more freedom and less fear in their game.  Maybe managing the asset isn't worth it. 

 

The main problem with a Miller trade is that a contender is going to want him at this stage in the season.  Contenders don't typically have a lot of a grade NHL ready prospects and top 10 picks because they are built to win now.  If we have to trade him, it is better in the off-season when an aspiring team that wants to jump to the next level is willing to make a trade offering an 8th overall and A grade NHL ready prospect.  So if we are committed to trading him now then we are inevitably going to get quantity over quality which is always bad news.  

 

To address your post, most asset managers are terrified of loosing him for "nothing."  So they are itching to make a deal...That is the mentality that I am afraid of.  If he walks in 1.5 years, we still have potential received more value than a 25th overall and two AHL players that are a .75pts per game.  

Edited February 20, 2022 by CaptainLinden16

[stawns]

2 hours ago, stanleysteamersmyl said:

Jannick Hansen was on the radio the other day, saying the Nucks need a big tough guy on the 4th line.  Who can response to the other tough guy tactics.  He said the other players will feel 3 inches bigger taller and bigger.

 

unless he's an effective player otherwise, it's a complete waste of cap space.......toughness can't be anyone's primary role in a lineup anymore

[SilentSam]

19 minutes ago, stawns said:

Oel

Myers

Petey

Hamonic

Motte

Schenn

Pearson

 

Plenty of leadership.  

 

 

I think 50 pts in 48 games played so far this season,  plus his style of game, and NOTEABLE on ice, vocal in game leadership,

shreds that list to pieces that would be lost without having the Miller they have had.

Lets not forget, it was this player to first air his opinion about playing hockey to soon after a complete Team Covid Shutdown without much practice or ice time.

That showed other players he’s got their back, when others stayed silent, or joined in agreement after the fact.

 

Unfortunately if traded, we’re turning the clock back 6 years, and gambling our re-set on rookies..  yippee!

 

[CaptainLinden16]

34 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Largely agree with this. I will say that I don't recall anyone suggesting we move Miller for a late 1st and B prospects. 

 

Also, the reason that won't happen is simply because we don't have to 'asset manage' yet. Having him under contract for another year means we don't HAVE to do anything but keep a really good player, if that what happens.

 

For now anyway.

 

If teams want Miller, for two runs, on bargain deal, they're going to need to PAY.

 

I'd be surprised if this gets past this summer though. Perhaps he gets moved at the draft, or after teams miss out on free agency. But the team won't want this as a distraction all season, or be forced to 'asset manage'' with a team (hopefully) competing for a playoff spot (towards the 23 TDL).

 

I don't see him wanting to stay, or us being in position to extend him for what he'll get even if he did, but that's also potentially an outcome this summer as well.

The draft is when teams are their most aspirational.  Thats when a non-playoff team decides to commit to trying to make it the next year.  Thats the trading partner we want.  Someone with some really solid young players.  

 

Trade deadline buyers only have late firsts.  The predominantly only have B prospects.  As again they are built to win now.  So the time period dictates the type of assets that are available. 

 

Now if someone like the Rangers wants to trade a Kakko who maybe like Bertuzzi or even Miller (Late bloomer) or Lafrienere who just needs to play a lot of minutes and be the man then its go time. There just aren't a lot of these type of players on really good teams.  This makes a trade really difficult this season.  He is in his prime now.  That narrows what types of teams are going to after him.

[stawns]

3 hours ago, HKSR said:

Problem is the proposals here are unrealistic.  What do you think we would get for Miller?

I said from the begnning, a A defensive prospect, a young solid two way B/B+ roster fwd and a 1st.  Hence my schneider/Chytil/1st proposal long ago.

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

I think 50 pts in 48 games played so far this season,  plus his style of game, and NOTEABLE on ice, vocal in game leadership,

shreds that list to pieces that would be lost without having the Miller they have had.

Lets not forget, it was this player to first air his opinion about playing hockey to soon after a complete Team Covid Shutdown without much practice or ice time.

That showed other players he’s got their back, when others stayed silent, or joined in agreement after the fact.

 

Unfortunately if traded, we’re turning the clock back 6 years, and gambling our re-set on rookies..  yippee!

 

they'd survive and move on

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

The draft is when teams are their most aspirational.  Thats when a non-playoff team decides to commit to trying to make it the next year.  Thats the trading partner we want.  Someone with some really solid young players.  

 

Trade deadline buyers only have late firsts.  The predominantly only have B prospects.  As again they are built to win now.  So the time period dictates the type of assets that are available. 

 

Now if someone like the Rangers wants to trade a Kakko who maybe like Bertuzzi or even Miller (Late bloomer) or Lafrienere who just needs to play a lot of minutes and be the man then its go time. There just aren't a lot of these type of players on really good teams.  This makes a trade really difficult this season.  He is in his prime now.  That narrows what types of teams are going to after him.

Colorado, Carolina and New York are all playoff teams that have those players IMO. There's any number of combinations those teams could offer up.

 

Teams like Boston or Washington would need to get a lot more creative.

[CaptainLinden16]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

Colorado, Carolina and New York are all playoff teams that have those players IMO. There's any number of combinations those teams could offer up.

 

Teams like Boston or Washington would need to get a lot more creative.

Colorado I assume you mean something like Newhook and Byram.  That would be a great deal but from a team building standpoint a big bust.  Another LHD offensive player.  Newhook also seems more redundant than complimentary.  Great young talents no doubt, but we aren't building a better team.  Carolina I am not sure who they would trade off their NHL roster for Miller.  I would be very reluctant to trade a player like Miller for players not even in the NHL.  They don't have a 1st round pick this year.  So I am not sure what you mean....

 

NYR seems like the only viable option for a solid trade right now.  What if they don't really see Miller as that piece to get them over the top?  

[KirkSave]

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Colorado, Carolina and New York are all playoff teams that have those players IMO. There's any number of combinations those teams could offer up.

 

Teams like Boston or Washington would need to get a lot more creative.

I think Nashville could be a potential trade partner too if they want to make a splash. They have been struggling to win as of late and could afford Miller in the short and long term. Just not sure Fabbro + whatever they have in their system would suffice for us. I think we have more enticing options with teams like the NYR, BOS, MIN for example. 

[stawns]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

Colorado, Carolina and New York are all playoff teams that have those players IMO. There's any number of combinations those teams could offer up.

 

Teams like Boston or Washington would need to get a lot more creative.

I think Nashville could be in the mix too.  They've got some nice pieces and cap space.........tomasino would be a nice add as a righty C, as would Prokop

 

tomasino

Prokup

Carrier

2022 1st

 

 

Miller

Woo

[CaptainLinden16]

10 minutes ago, stawns said:

I said from the begnning, a A defensive prospect, a young solid two way B/B+ roster fwd and a 1st.  Hence my schneider/Chytil/1st proposal long ago.

If Schnieder isn't Chris Pronger light then this looks pretty bad.  Chytil has 200 games in the NHL, and he so far has only achieved 14 goals.  Very Jake Virtanenny...not saying they are the same players, but he is certainly way off on getting close to Millers level.  200 games is a decent amount to get some kind of an idea of what type of player you are going to be.  The first is a late first.  The odds on that are terrible.  This trade puts a lot of pressure on Schnieder being a really good player; otherwise its an ugly loss.  The fact he is a defensive defensman and RHD is what is needed, but it will also add more pressure on him as he will never really be able to show big offensive numbers that make fans feel like he is a top player and not Erik Gudbrandson.  It wont be obvious to the average fan that he is worth the trade.  That puts pressure on management right from the start.  

[stawns]

21 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

I think 50 pts in 48 games played so far this season,  plus his style of game, and NOTEABLE on ice, vocal in game leadership,

shreds that list to pieces that would be lost without having the Miller they have had.

Lets not forget, it was this player to first air his opinion about playing hockey to soon after a complete Team Covid Shutdown without much practice or ice time.

That showed other players he’s got their back, when others stayed silent, or joined in agreement after the fact.

 

Unfortunately if traded, we’re turning the clock back 6 years, and gambling our re-set on rookies..  yippee!

 

not sure where you get that idea from.  You're gambling on the emerging core of Bo, Petey, Hughes, Podz, Hogz, Motte and surrounded by vets like OEL, Myers, Pearson, Schenn and Hamonic as well as younger support guys like Highmore and Lammiko......not to mention using the freed up cap space on some good, experienced depth UFA's.  Young guys coming in from a Milelr trade would have a couple of years of solid support before stepping into a more prominent role.

 

Two moves could balance out roster nicely and build a line of succession behind Bo, Pearson etc etc.