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

[aGENT]

53 minutes ago, tas said:

like I said originally, management, for the sake of their continued gainful employment, doesn't have the luxury of that mindset. 

They've already stated that's their mind set.

 

They have no interest in continuing to be "a team that competes for a playoff spot" and were hired by ownership, with that mindset clearly communicated. They're here to build a regularly contending team. Even if it takes some tough decisions and a few years to do so.

 

And Rutherford especially, in no way "needs" this job.

[T.Demko]

2 hours ago, stawns said:

I think there's almost no chance that Miller stays in Van if they don't trade him

And I also think there's no chance that Miller stays in Van if they do trade him

[tas]

22 minutes ago, aGENT said:

They've already stated that's their mind set.

 

They have no interest in continuing to be "a team that competes for a playoff spot" and were hired by ownership, with that mindset clearly communicated. They're here to build a regularly contending team. Even if it takes some tough decisions and a few years to do so.

 

And Rutherford especially, in no way "needs" this job.

where have they stated that they're building to contend 5+ years from now?

[Fanuck]

7 hours ago, tas said:

management doesn't have the luxury of planning to compete 5+ years from now, nor should they have that mindset in the first place considering the pieces they have in place. 

I've never heard 5+.  JR stated he feels it'll take two years to assemble the pieces to build a contender.  He also said he has no interest in being a 'one-and-done' type of team,  he wants a perennial contender.   Parts of that are here:

 

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/jim-rutherford-foresees-a-two-year-retool-for-the-canucks-5030162

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thecanuckway.com/2022/02/05/can-the-canucks-become-a-contender-in-two-years/amp/

[tas]

1 minute ago, Fanuck said:

I've never heard 5+.  JR stated he feels it'll take two years to assemble the pieces to build a contender.  He also said he has no interest in being a 'one-and-done' type of team,  he wants a perennial contender.   Parts of that are here:

 

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/jim-rutherford-foresees-a-two-year-retool-for-the-canucks-5030162

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thecanuckway.com/2022/02/05/can-the-canucks-become-a-contender-in-two-years/amp/

exactly. thank you.

[Smashian Kassian]

3 hours ago, Coconuts said:

So I'm not optimistic, deal with it. 

 

Not at all, I think we've got some good pieces to build around. Pettersson, Demko, Hughes. Good support pieces in place with Garland and Horvat, a reliable guy in OEL. A guy who's looked more solid as the season's gone on in Lammikko, potential in Podz. But sure, go ahead and assume eh? 

 

Believe it or not I can be skeptical of our ability to contend, let alone compete with the big boys come playoff time, and still think we've got good pieces to work with. So we've been better under Boudreau, great, I was advocating we hire him, but that doesn't mean I believe we've got what it takes to be more than a team that competes for the playoffs right now.

 

But sure, go off and make assumptions about me and my views I guess? Gotta love posts that make things personal for absolutely no reason. 

 

 

 Currently? Yeah, he is. But guess what? I don't think he'll stay beyond the length of his contract and I'm far from being alone in thinking that or this thread wouldn't have gotten to 224 pages. Deal with it. 

 

The problem with trading Miller is you'll never replace him, and he's the guy driving the bus. Not Pettersson/Horvat.

 

You gotta have a clear vision for how you reshape the roster without him.

 

This team isn't in a position to stock up on 1st/2nd round picks & wait 3+ years for them to materialize. Hughes & Demko are on deals w/ UFA years, the team can't take big steps back & waste their prime years.

 

 

Edited March 6, 2022 by Smashian Kassian

[Me_]

These Guys Don’t Grow On Trees

[Fanuck]

3 hours ago, BPA said:

There are 7 games left before TDL.  Canucks need to go 5-2 to catch up and possibly leapfrog past teams ahead of them.

It's not that simple,  they'll need other teams to falter which is no guarantee whatsoever. 

[DownUndaCanuck]

Not sure why there's such a rush to trade him at all let alone this season - we might as well hang on to him, use him up and if we're to make a decision, it should be at the next TDL. If he continues his dominant >PPG play then he'll earn us a big reward, whereas if he drops off then we may be able to re-sign him cheaply. In any case, trading him now in his peak when we're trending towards the playoffs is a stupid move, especially considering how hard he fights for this team.

[J-P]

7 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

It's not that simple,  they'll need other teams to falter which is no guarantee whatsoever. 

True. We need to win like 2 out of 3 the rest of the way while 1-2 of the other teams can't go much better than .500. It can happen but it's not something I would bet on.

 

Earlier in the season I expected both LA and Ducks to falter, but that hasn't happened with LA. Looking at the schedule LA and Vegas has schedules easier or equal vs ours. Nashville and Dallas have tougher schedules. And as an example of what the games at hand mean, even though we play Vegas 3 times we would have to win all 3 to get even with them. And I haven't even mentioned that we need to beat out the Oilers as well.

 

So I think the reality is we need to go .700 and even that is no guarantee as we still need 2 teams (if we include Edmonton) to play well below their previous point percentage.

 

Another aspect is whether one believes that wins like the last one vs Leafs is a sustainable pattern. I do not, the bounces have a way of evening out over time. I believe we are good enough to be a wild card team (i.e. without our bad start to the season) but not good enough to win over .700 for a 25 game stretch. Of course I hope I'm wrong and we go on a cinderella run, but again, rational thinking says it's a longshot.

[NHL97OneTimer]

3 hours ago, stawns said:

I think there's almost no chance that Miller stays in Van if they don't trade him

Even if they make him captain?

[higgyfan]

At this point, I don't think Miller will be traded before the deadline, unless the trade offer is overwhelming.

He may have become too expensive for a trade right now. 

 

Something might happen during the off season, but more likely (if they can't sign him) a trade will happen after the

new year.

[BlakeQuinnAndEggs]

I'm not sure where these rumors started but I don't think Miller's going anywhere, or Motte.

 

Our management group is now a top tier one, even though they haven't done anything yet to prove it, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt.

 

Miller and Motte are guys you win with and we are needing a re-tool/tweak not a full on rebuild.

 

I can't see JR and Co trading either player.

[T.Demko]

10 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

The problem with trading Miller is you'll never replace him, and he's the guy driving the bus. Not Pettersson/Horvat.

 

You gotta have a clear vision for how you reshape the roster without him.

 

This team isn't in a position to stock up on 1st/2nd round picks & wait 3+ years for them to materialize. Hughes & Demko are on deals w/ UFA years, the team can't take big steps back & waste their prime years.

 

 

The Miller trade wagon isn't suggesting we will replace Miller with our haul, not at least for the foreseeable future.  We all agree Miller is currently our best forward as well.

 

However, we see a large threat looming when Miller's contract expires, and that is him walking out with us having nothing to show for.  We have seen this story many and recently, even with players that clearly would have had far more tangible and intangible ties to this city.

 

Yes, some may have been due to poor management from the previous group, however it always takes 2 to dance, and there really is no real sign indicating Miller wanting to stay.  All we have received from him are professional comments where he will always play to his best in the given environment.  He is a true professional and we admire him for that.

 

Again, no one is suggesting Miller hates the city and wants out ASAP.  However, even if we had a small chance, what is the premium we have to pay and how is that going to impact us with our team cap structure, which correlates to team composition?  As we all agree, Miller is a premium forward and this will be his chance to really cash in,  and rightfully so, on all his hard work and accomplishments throughout his career so far.  It almost is guaranteed he will want to test the UFA market.  This imposes far too much risk for us.  In this scenario where we lose Miller for nothing, then there is a high chance we end up splurging on another 6 million dollar LE to make up for our loss and our vicious cycle of mediocrity continues.

 

The point being made, we see higher probability of success for our team in cashing Miller out for future vs retaining him for a hope to clinch a playoff spot when we're clearly not yet ready to contend this or the next year.  If that is the case, then we'd rather do it before this TDL so we maximize the value.  However, we're also not agreeing to trade him for scraps for the sake of fulfilling a trade lust.  We just believe, as we all agree on his value, that the right deals will be offered and we should take it.

[stawns]

9 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

Even if they make him captain?

I dont think so, nor do I think they should.  Committing that much cap to a declining player is stupid

 

[stawns]

3 minutes ago, T.Demko said:

The Miller trade wagon isn't suggesting we will replace Miller with our haul, not at least for the foreseeable future.  We all agree Miller is currently our best forward as well.

 

However, we see a large threat looming when Miller's contract expires, and that is him walking out with us having nothing to show for.  We have seen this story many and recently, even with players that clearly would have had far more tangible and intangible ties to this city.

 

Yes, some may have been due to poor management from the previous group, however it always takes 2 to dance, and there really is no real sign indicating Miller wanting to stay.  All we have received from him are professional comments where he will always play to his best in the given environment.  He is a true professional and we admire him for that.

 

Again, no one is suggesting Miller hates the city and wants out ASAP.  However, even if we had a small chance, what is the premium we have to pay and how is that going to impact us with our team cap structure, which correlates to team composition?  As we all agree, Miller is a premium forward and this will be his chance to really cash in,  and rightfully so, on all his hard work and accomplishments throughout his career so far.  It almost is guaranteed he will want to test the UFA market.  This imposes far too much risk for us.  In this scenario where we lose Miller for nothing, then there is a high chance we end up splurging on another 6 million dollar LE to make up for our loss and our vicious cycle of mediocrity continues.

 

The point being made, we see higher probability of success for our team in cashing Miller out for future vs retaining him for a hope to clinch a playoff spot when we're clearly not yet ready to contend this or the next year.  If that is the case, then we'd rather do it before this TDL so we maximize the value.  However, we're also not agreeing to trade him for scraps for the sake of fulfilling a trade lust.  We just believe, as we all agree on his value, that the right deals will be offered and we should take it.

This

[Me_]

11 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

Even if they make him captain?

I think that may be one of the plans they’re considering.

[48MPHSlapShot]

It seems as though the team's interested have a pretty hard cap on what they'd be willing to offer for anyone. The real question is, If we were to assume that Miller wasn't keen on staying, or prices himself out of here, what type of return would we be looking at for next year's deadline as opposed to this year's deadline? Obviously it would be less, but how much less? We've seen pure rentals go for quite the haul at the deadline before.

[stawns]

26 minutes ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

Not sure why there's such a rush to trade him at all let alone this season - we might as well hang on to him, use him up and if we're to make a decision, it should be at the next TDL. If he continues his dominant >PPG play then he'll earn us a big reward, whereas if he drops off then we may be able to re-sign him cheaply. In any case, trading him now in his peak when we're trending towards the playoffs is a stupid move, especially considering how hard he fights for this team.

Because he is at peak value right now.  Next tdl, they'll likely get half of what they'll get now.

 

However, as I said, if they're in or close to a playoff spot in two weeks that's the priority and you hang on to have m unless you get a deal you can't say no to

[BlakeQuinnAndEggs]

5 minutes ago, stawns said:

Because he is at peak value right now.  Next tdl, they'll likely get half of what they'll get now.

 

However, as I said, if they're in or close to a playoff spot in two weeks that's the priority and you hang on to have m unless you get a deal you can't say no to

You're not going to recoup his value any time soon. The draft is a crap shoot, barring a fluke, by the Time a draft pick or a young prospect that comes back is anywhere close to millers value to us now, our core players are all 3 or 4 years older and we are back to square one.

 

Miller's best value to the Canucks is playing on the Canucks