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

[Timråfan]

1 hour ago, SilentSam said:

This is Bennings Team.

It seems to be playing very well with a Coaching change.

 

Miller is real. 

gaining other players, unknown, unknown outcomes, is gambling, like standing at the edge of a cliff with them and telling them to jump, hoping one or 2 can fly 4 or 5 years from now.

Another rebuild and im done ..  I don’t like re-runs..   it dose not excite me like it does others here.

Nope,this is about you love Miller.

I said before and again that Millers PP will almost all of it be taken by another player on the team.

We really need a ”Hughes” on the right side so our strategies become a bit harder to defend against.

 

And who is the goalie backup again if Demko gets injured?

[PlanB]

4 hours ago, HKSR said:

This is the one thing I still can't wrap my head around.  Many advocates for trading Miller are expecting our young guys to take significant steps forward in the next couple years.  If they do that without Miller, why can't they do that WITH Miller?  

Look no further than Miller himself - cap aside - he would never have gotten the chance to thrive in TB like he did in Van.  Now he's a potential Hart Trophy Candidate.  

Sometimes players need room to grow which won't happen if they're 'pigeon-holed' into set spots in the line-up because the 'better spots' are already filled.  I suspect Hog/Pod/Garland/Motte are all capable of a bit more if given more opportunity but they're behind other guys right now so they'll probably just level out at their current spots somewhat until they got more looks.  

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, PlanB said:

Look no further than Miller himself - cap aside - he would never have gotten the chance to thrive in TB like he did in Van.  Now he's a potential Hart Trophy Candidate.  

Sometimes players need room to grow which won't happen if they're 'pigeon-holed' into set spots in the line-up because the 'better spots' are already filled.  I suspect Hog/Pod/Garland/Motte are all capable of a bit more if given more opportunity but they're behind other guys right now so they'll probably just level out at their current spots somewhat until they got more looks.  

Like I mentioned to the other poster, I think Boeser makes much more sense to move.

 

Not sure how moving 1C Miller helps Hogs (winger), Podz (winger), Garland (winger), Motte (winger).

[Coconuts]

4 hours ago, HKSR said:

This is the one thing I still can't wrap my head around.  Many advocates for trading Miller are expecting our young guys to take significant steps forward in the next couple years.  If they do that without Miller, why can't they do that WITH Miller?  

 

Just my thoughts are if that is the case, sure as hell this team would be a contender in a couple years considering they're already playing .700 hockey.

Because I think he's peaking, I think this is probably his career season. Do I know it is? No, but you don't know that it's not either. Your guess is as good as mine. 

 

I'm not interested in paying 8.5-9M plus for a player I don't expect to maintain this current level of pay, I'm not interested in paying that for 50-60 points. I think by the time our young guns are hitting their stride Miller will have taken enough steps back that he won't be worth what we're paying him. 

 

Trust me, if we sign him to 8.5M-9M+ and his point totals begin to dip the knives will absolutely come out just like they do for every other player who falters on the Canucks. I'm not interested in paying premium term and dollars for "intangibles" when we can be less for them. 

 

 

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

Because I think he's peaking, I think this is probably his career season. Do I know it is? No, but you don't know that it's not either. Your guess is as good as mine. 

 

I'm not interested in paying 8.5-9M plus for a player I don't expect to maintain this current level of pay, I'm not interested in paying that for 50-60 points. I think by the time our young guns are hitting their stride Miller will have taken enough steps back that he won't be worth what we're paying him. 

 

Trust me, if we sign him to 8.5M-9M+ and his point totals begin to dip the knives will absolutely come out just like they do for every other player who falters on the Canucks. I'm not interested in paying premium term and dollars for "intangibles" when we can be less for them. 

 

 

I guess it all comes down to what one feels about this current roster.  I feel that this current roster with a couple tweaks could be a real threat for a Cup run.  The only major hole is a top pairing RHD.  What else is really missing?

[SilentSam]

13 minutes ago, Timråfan said:

Nope,this is about you love Miller.

I said before and again that Millers PP will almost all of it be taken by another player on the team.

We really need a ”Hughes” on the right side so our strategies become a bit harder to defend against.

 

And who is the goalie backup again if Demko gets injured?

Who is the D back up if Hughes gets targeted in the playoffs and injured because high physical play?

 

Miller commands the pp.… I know you like tic tac toe passing, but it dosent implement a goal or high scoring opportunity.

 

Martin looked pretty good in a couple of games replacing Demko..

and Silvos is no sleeper either in G.

… kind of a redundant statement isn’t that Timra??  Of course somebody will replace anybody if somebody leaves the pp.

Even our 2nd pp looks decent.

 

Yes,  I appreciate great leadership, emotional, Intelligent, intellectual, physical, leading by example….  Not Stoic in Silence,.  that can be baffling by way of Bull $&!# lol.

[Coconuts]

Just now, HKSR said:

I guess it all comes down to what one feels about this current roster.  I feel that this current roster with a couple tweaks could be a real threat for a Cup run.  The only major hole is a top pairing RHD.  What else is really missing?

See, now that we can agree with. You think this roster is close, plenty of us don't. 

 

It's come up repeatedly, some folks think we could contend within 2-3 years, I see us being further out. 

 

For one, I'm skeptical of everyone on our D outside of OEL and Hughes. I see it as a huge weakness, and we've got no succession plan in place. Myers will be 34 when his deal is done, Hamonic will be 33 when his expires. Schenn will be 33 before we're even halfway done next season. We've little to nothing in the prospect pool in the way of NHL ready D, it's basically Rathbone and maybe Woo. Neither of these players are likely to jump in and be top 4 guys sooner than later. I've been vocal about our needing to get younger on D for a while now, we're going to need players and we won't get them without giving up something great because we simply haven't drafted them. 

 

Having a coach who can get the most out of his defense isn't the same as having a good defense. Toronto and Edmonton are doing just that, I wouldn't say either of them have a good defense. 

 

I'm also skeptical of our bottom six, despite the play of that Motte line. Are they for real or are the catching fire in a bottle? Vancouver hasn't had a reliable backup in years, we're a team that plays like garbage for our backups. Halak, Holtby, these were solid tenders for other teams. Holtby wasn't the #1 starting goalie he used to be last season, but he was more than capeable and we'd repeatedly give him minimal run support. Halak backed up a legit playoff team in Boston for a while, he did fine there. Why'd he crap the bed here? Even Nilsson struggled in Vancouver. Even the year we went to the playoffs with Marky playing Vezina caliber tending, Demko looked shaky. After Markstrom got hurt we were sliding, and if the season hadn't been canceled we'd probably have missed.

 

And then there's the real kicker, how often do mediocre teams jump straight to being contenders? Most top teams bow out come playoff time before they get a sniff at a conference final, let alone a final. We've watched teams like Washington, St. Louis, and Tampa do this in recent years. Colorado, the big gun out west, is still in this place. And yet this team is supposed to somehow fast track their way to contention? Come on. We're likely in for some pain before we get anywhere near a cup final, and how many years of JT's remaining top end play is that going to take? 

 

People go on about wanting to get out of what they view as a perpetual rebuild, I'm tired of holding on to perpetual mediocrity. It's why I, and other fans, would like to see management actually cash out on a top asset for once and take his time building this team properly instead of trying to rush us to the playoffs or contention like Benning was. 

[SilentSam]

52 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Has anyone suggested Miller isn't a good player? An emotional leader (for good and bad)? A really good player? Nope, nope and nope. You're an old man yelling at a cloud here.

 

He's 29 in 3 days. He'll be 30 when any new deal kicks in. Forwards tend to regress pretty hard at 32+. That's not fantasy, that's cold, hard statistics. 

 

Again, nobody has suggested he isn't a valuable player. I fully agree we need players like Miller, just not a 30+ year old +/- $8.5m dollar version of one that's going to decline and become a boat anchor in the middle of our contention window.  

 

I'm hopeful too! Would love for the team to actually sneak in to the playoffs and win the cup this year. I'd also love Miller to extend at $7.5m x 4 years! Are either remotely likely...? Uh...no.

 

Do I think we stand a chance against the Tampas, Carolinas, Floridas, Colorados etc? Nope. We're not even at the tier down of Washington, Boston, Pittsburgh, Calgary etc level. We're probably a hair behind better bubble teams like Dallas and Nashville even. I want better than a bubble/*fingers crossed* team. I want the league to fear us and view us as a juggernaut that's almost certainly bound for the finals. We're nowhere close, as presently constructed. There's only so many ways to address that. Allocating vast swaths of our already tight cap space to a soon to be 30 year old, soon to be declining player, for 6-8 years is not how I'd suggest we go about that.
 

I've seen very few people (none I think) suggesting draft picks and years away prospects. NHL players, NHL ready prospects. Just stop with this lame straw man.

 

 We are definitely not just 2 players away from being the feared contender I wrote about above. And we're certainly bound to get further from those two players as our older D expire the next couple years and we allocate increasingly more cap to guys like Miller as you suggest.

Well if they trade Miller,  I’ll come back on here to heckle you for the next 6 years,  while your waiting for your nhl player ready prospects and draft picks nuts to drop..  and a declining Bo and Boeser become anchors on home friendly contracts that can’t be moved.

Lol 

You play the “sitting on the fence “ opinion pretty good , I have to admit.

I see your flip flops..

 

 

Edited March 11, 2022 by SilentSam

[SilentSam]

Just now, Coconuts said:

See, now that we can agree with. You think this roster is close, plenty of us don't. 

 

It's come up repeatedly, some folks think we could contend within 2-3 years, I see us being further out. 

 

For one, I'm skeptical of everyone on our D outside of OEL and Hughes. I see it as a huge weakness, and we've got no succession plan in place. Myers will be 34 when his deal is done, Hamonic will be 33 when his expires. Schenn will be 33 before we're even halfway done next season. We've little to nothing in the prospect pool in the way of NHL ready D, it's basically Rathbone and maybe Woo. Neither of these players are likely to jump in and be top 4 guys sooner than later. I've been vocal about our needing to get younger on D for a while now, we're going to need players and we won't get them without giving up something great because we simply haven't drafted them. 

 

Having a coach who can get the most out of his defense isn't the same as having a good defense. Toronto and Edmonton are doing just that, I wouldn't say either of them have a good defense. 

 

I'm also skeptical of our bottom six, despite the play of that Motte line. Are they for real or are the catching fire in a bottle? Vancouver hasn't had a reliable backup in years, we're a team that plays like garbage for our backups. Halak, Holtby, these were solid tenders for other teams. Holtby wasn't the #1 starting goalie he used to be last season, but he was more than capeable and we'd repeatedly give him minimal run support. Halak backed up a legit playoff team in Boston for a while, he did fine there. Why'd he crap the bed here? Even Nilsson struggled in Vancouver. Even the year we went to the playoffs with Marky playing Vezina caliber tending, Demko looked shaky. After Markstrom got hurt we were sliding, and if the season hadn't been canceled we'd probably have missed.

 

And then there's the real kicker, how often do mediocre teams jump straight to being contenders? Most top teams bow out come playoff time before they get a sniff at a conference final, let alone a final. We've watched teams like Washington, St. Louis, and Tampa do this in recent years. Colorado, the big gun out west, is still in this place. And yet this team is supposed to somehow fast track their way to contention? Come on. We're likely in for some pain before we get anywhere near a cup final, and how many years of JT's remaining top end play is that going to take? 

 

People go on about wanting to get out of what they view as a perpetual rebuild, I'm tired of holding on to perpetual mediocrity. It's why I, and other fans, would like to see management actually cash out on a top asset for once and take his time building this team properly instead of trying to rush us to the playoffs or contention like Benning was. 

You’d rather trade down into mediocrity than build around our strengths..

 

you want to have a house party at the draft with balloons, popping into nothing by the end of the night.

Than mortar on your floor putting in a heated tile floor and a new window investing in it.

 

Take your recycling to the depot and get a return, Keep your good scotch for those quiet moments.

 There are others on this team that will amount to assets .

One of Bo or Boeser,  will help with that.. not the best leader we’ve seen since Smyl.

 

 

[HKSR]

23 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

See, now that we can agree with. You think this roster is close, plenty of us don't. 

 

It's come up repeatedly, some folks think we could contend within 2-3 years, I see us being further out. 

 

For one, I'm skeptical of everyone on our D outside of OEL and Hughes. I see it as a huge weakness, and we've got no succession plan in place. Myers will be 34 when his deal is done, Hamonic will be 33 when his expires. Schenn will be 33 before we're even halfway done next season. We've little to nothing in the prospect pool in the way of NHL ready D, it's basically Rathbone and maybe Woo. Neither of these players are likely to jump in and be top 4 guys sooner than later. I've been vocal about our needing to get younger on D for a while now, we're going to need players and we won't get them without giving up something great because we simply haven't drafted them. 

 

Having a coach who can get the most out of his defense isn't the same as having a good defense. Toronto and Edmonton are doing just that, I wouldn't say either of them have a good defense. 

 

I'm also skeptical of our bottom six, despite the play of that Motte line. Are they for real or are the catching fire in a bottle? Vancouver hasn't had a reliable backup in years, we're a team that plays like garbage for our backups. Halak, Holtby, these were solid tenders for other teams. Holtby wasn't the #1 starting goalie he used to be last season, but he was more than capeable and we'd repeatedly give him minimal run support. Halak backed up a legit playoff team in Boston for a while, he did fine there. Why'd he crap the bed here? Even Nilsson struggled in Vancouver. Even the year we went to the playoffs with Marky playing Vezina caliber tending, Demko looked shaky. After Markstrom got hurt we were sliding, and if the season hadn't been canceled we'd probably have missed.

 

And then there's the real kicker, how often do mediocre teams jump straight to being contenders? Most top teams bow out come playoff time before they get a sniff at a conference final, let alone a final. We've watched teams like Washington, St. Louis, and Tampa do this in recent years. Colorado, the big gun out west, is still in this place. And yet this team is supposed to somehow fast track their way to contention? Come on. We're likely in for some pain before we get anywhere near a cup final, and how many years of JT's remaining top end play is that going to take? 

 

People go on about wanting to get out of what they view as a perpetual rebuild, I'm tired of holding on to perpetual mediocrity. It's why I, and other fans, would like to see management actually cash out on a top asset for once and take his time building this team properly instead of trying to rush us to the playoffs or contention like Benning was. 

I really appreciate your well thought out responses rather than just attacking me and questioning my intellect lol.

 

I can see where you're coming from, I just see this roster differently, and believe they can do serious damage in the playoffs.

 

LA didn't make the playoffs for 6 years, then finally made the playoffs and lost in the 1st round twice in a row.  After that, they won 2 cups in the 3 years after. 

Pittsburgh didn't make the playoffs for 4 years, then finally made it and lost in the 1st round.  The very next year they went to the Finals, and finally won the Cup the year after that.

Blackhawks missed the playoffs for 5 straight years, then finally made it to the playoffs and lost in the 3rd round.  The very next year, they won the Cup.

 

So clearly it doesn't always have to mean that a team needs to lose in the playoffs multiple years before finding success.

 

This Canucks core has seen the 2nd round in their first attempt....

 

Edited March 11, 2022 by HKSR

[Me_]

3 hours ago, stanleysteamersmyl said:

I agree.  I always like big, tough players with size who can score, like Miller.  Rick Tocchet, Ryan Getzlaf, Luc Debois, Ryan Kesler, no like Messier, Iginla, Jamie Benn..........   Like Bieksa said, keep him, they don't grow on trees.

But again, my friend said, if you can get a young big, tough stay at home defenseman who can defend and make it really hard for forwards in the front of the net........Pronger, Robinson and Peewee Human in Vegas.

You’re then taking away that collective compete he is so infectious about. And that puts the Canucks back a few years from where they’re currently going.

[BPA]

@Me_ @SilentSam

 

So just curious as to what you guys think it would take for Miller to re-sign with the Canucks?  I’m too lazy to go through all the pages to see what you may have wrote.

[Me_]

3 hours ago, aGENT said:

Moving one player does not equal a rebuild. And certainly not a perpetual one.

 

Fact is, this team isn't good enough WITH $5m Miller. An $8-9m, soon to decline Miller, isn't going to fix that or fix our dog's breakfast D (or it's massive succession holes). Him at a higher cap hit just erodes the depth and quality of that already not good enough team.

 

You say perpetual rebuild, I counter with perpetual not good enough bubble team that will slowly decline to an actual rebuild because we wasted years of our young core's prime, spending ever more money, desperately clinging to said mediocre team.

Cool.

 

And also, 20-8-4.

[HKSR]

2 minutes ago, Me_ said:

Cool.

 

And also, 20-8-4.

21-8-4

[Me_]

1 hour ago, Gawdzukes said:

This is actually what I'm against. Perpetual mediocrity. Since the Naslund years we've been hanging on to playoff hopes at all costs, trading picks and assets for the present, letting assets go to UFA, or if possible re-signing our players to retirement contracts for past glory and basically winding it down, ala the Sedin's (brutal results). So really from 2001-2018/present or earlier we've been perpetually sacrificing the future for the present. Even after the Sedin's were gone we still did that keeping Markstrom, Tanev, and Stetcher, and adding Toffoli for a playoff run while getting nothing back and once again re-building with no assets in the bank. We basically did a mini rebuild last year with about 10 new starters on the team as well.

 

This is actually what the trade supporters are trying to prevent. Another situation exactly like the past where we sign a player to a long contract past his prime only to have it handcuff us so bad we not only have to rebuild but we have to go through 3-4 vomit filled years just to get there. The people that want a trade don't want to perpetually rebuild we just want to rebuild/retool right for once. Re-upping Miller to a new contract on top of our already improper rebuild could leave us running out of runway once again in the near future. Having new management is an opportunity to do that right for once in decades.

 

After 40+ years I've come to the conclusion that simply sucking a bit, getting some high picks, developing them, and adding some high priced UFA's might have worked in the past, but not any longer. In the past I would have been all over re-signing Miller and going for it because I believe in the present, and I believe in standing behind my players, and that's exciting and right to do, even when we lose. However I also want to win it all someday too and that's why I think it may be in our best interest to trade him for a bevy of assets so we can have our young core, our prospects, our picks, additional picks, and added young players all aligned to peak at the same time. As it stands with our cap if we re-sign JT we'll be walking a cap tight rope for more than half a decade.

 

Either way I'm glad it's not up to me because I'm going against the grain here a bit. I'm certainly not going to be upset if we keep JT and we win a cup but this type of thinking seems to be the route we always take and it seldom works out. I would like to be like one of those American teams for once that have an embarrassment of riches and a blinding future instead of fighting for a playoff spot every year.

I’m glad you will not be upset if the Canucks keep Miller and win a Cup.

 

What other purpose is there in hockey if not to win the Cup?

 

I am baffled.

[Fanuck]

9 minutes ago, BPA said:

 

So just curious as to what you guys think it would take for Miller to re-sign with the Canucks?

[Timråfan]

49 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Who is the D back up if Hughes gets targeted in the playoffs and injured because high physical play?

 

Miller commands the pp.… I know you like tic tac toe passing, but it dosent implement a goal or high scoring opportunity.

 

Martin looked pretty good in a couple of games replacing Demko..

and Silvos is no sleeper either in G.

… kind of a redundant statement isn’t that Timra??  Of course somebody will replace anybody if somebody leaves the pp.

Even our 2nd pp looks decent.

 

Yes,  I appreciate great leadership, emotional, Intelligent, intellectual, physical, leading by example….  Not Stoic in Silence,.  that can be baffling by way of Bull $&!# lol.

Martin is a new goalie to analyse so we don’t know squat of him in a playoff situation.

 

Exactly, if Hughes go down we have OEL on left and the great new RHD on right.

So we can manage such injury.

If Miller gets injured someone else will step up.

I have to admit Miller is quite good now. But I still believe 4 more players is more important for a playoff run.

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, Timråfan said:

Martin is a new goalie to analyse so we don’t know squat of him in a playoff situation.

 

Exactly, if Hughes go down we have OEL on left and the great new RHD on right.

So we can manage such injury.

If Miller gets injured someone else will step up.

I have to admit Miller is quite good now. But I still believe 4 more players is more important for a playoff run.

That's asking a lot of our guys.  Who's gonna step up to be a Top 10 scorer in the NHL?  Petey needs to play his part in providing the secondary punch.  So who provides the primary?

[86Viking]

15 hours ago, J-23 said:

JT probably sign for 8-8.5 at 7 years. 
 

Will JT be worth the money at 34? Who really knows? That’s not a question anyone can really answer…At 7 years, I think JT gives you 5 solid season and average the last two.

 

JT on pace for 90 points, without him we are a bottom 10 team. If we move JT we might as well start rebuild 2.0. This team is pretty much .700 win percentage under BB right now. We should be looking to get better now. Trading JT doesn’t do that.

So bottom 10 team WITHOUT JT Miller but a bottom 15 team WITH JT Miller...if you get a great trade offer you pull the trigger, will that happen I think NOT. Does CDC have any idea what I consider a great return...hell no but you will hate on me regardless so never change!!

[stawns]

1 hour ago, Gawdzukes said:

I think this is the biggest conundrum currently. Are we really good enough to be a consistent top 8 NHL team? We look pretty good but gosh the sample is really messed up as this season has been a wild ride. Is this sustainable is anyone's guess but it's hard to support either claim with certainty really. I don't personally think we're quite that good as we have some major flaws but if we are how many trade supporters would be on board with re-signing JT then?

 

Unfortunately to really answer this we'd have to see how next year played out with JT on the ice. I'm sure they're leaning heavy on the analytics department to provide some answers here.

And like I said yesterday, regarding the "high" version of Miller.........it's been a great 33 games and it clouds our memory of what "low Miller" was like for the first two months.  Terrible giveaways, slamming his stick, slamming doors, screaming on the ice, quitting on plays. 

 

Boudreau hasn't seen that Miller yet and when he talks about leadership, he's looking at one side of that equation.  Tus run has covered up a lot of warts on this team that come to the surface when things go bad