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

[BigTramFan]

Lundkvist is a small offense orientated Dman and hasn't exactly been showing he can generate offense at AHL level (15 pts in 34 games).

 

Compared to Rathbone who is a similar size and has 46 pts in 41 games at AHL level.

 

Not sure how Lundkvist becomes our top prospect on those numbers, but regardless, trading Miller for a lesser version of Rathbone (but right handed) would be the definition of selling low.

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:

Lundkvist is a small offense orientated Dman and hasn't exactly been showing he can generate offense at AHL level (15 pts in 34 games).

 

Compared to Rathbone who is a similar size and has 46 pts in 41 games at AHL level.

 

Not sure how Lundkvist becomes our top prospect on those numbers, but regardless, trading Miller for a lesser version of Rathbone (but right handed) would be the definition of selling low.

Rather than moving Miller for several pieces, why not trade him straight across for one very good young player?

(if we trade, which I don’t think we will do)

[Gawdzukes]

1 hour ago, JM_ said:

But Lundqvist hasn't proven anything at the NHL level, if he was better than Schneider he'd be playing instead of Schneider. This is exactly the kind of deal I want to see JR/PA avoid, its the magic beans scenario that could lead to nothing for Miller. 

I'd likely make that trade with a first and Lundqvist as a primary pieces along with a good forward prospect and/or a roster player of subsequent value. You're likely going to have to assume some risk in order to obtain a top prospect. They're not just going to trade a Makar straight up. Of course if you're looking at next years playoffs then Schnieder probably isn't the right call either.

[Coconuts]

3 hours ago, JM_ said:

Do we really want to make decisions based on our hack media though? I know I don't want our GM caring one bit about that.

 

Sometimes teams lose players for nothing, its not specific to us tho. Look at Dallas, they are going to lose Klingberg for nothing. 

 

I just don't see us getting the kind of return people were hoping for at the TDL. I'd much rather lose Garland or Boeser for the value of a 20 something pick and/or Lundqvist. Its far easer to replace wingers than top C's. The trade value of Garland or Boeser probably isn't far off what we'd get for Miller, imo. 

It's not about decisions are made via the media or not, it's about whether or not the noise surrounding an unsigned Miller would get to the team or not. I'm of the belief that it would, I believe it'd be a significant distraction. We're not talking about retaining a Tyler Motte or not here. 

 

Sometimes teams do, but like I said, we are clearly not in a position where we can afford to. Our prospect depth is weak and we've got question marks all over the roster. Klingberg has also made it known he wants out, and that came out during the season as opposed to before it began, completely different scenario. Given the ages of their top players they were never just going to throw in the towel. They've got a couple younger forwards who are doing great in Robertson and Hintz, but Pavelski, Seguin, Benn, and Radulov aren't getting any younger. Klingberg will likely ask for more than they'd want to pay him in terms of an extension anyway, I'm hoping we steer clear of him. 

 

Boeser you're likely selling low on unless you can facilitate a sign and trade. Neither him or Garland would bring back the return Miller would. 

 

Miller's a top center right now, having just turned 29. So many folks have fallen in love with 26-29 year old Miller, and that's fine, but 33 year old Miller could be a verrrry different player. And that absolutely matters, because he will get massive dollars and 7-8 years. He's not signing a Landeskog deal. 

 

Miller isn't going to simultaneously be one of the best forwards in the league this year and not expect to be paid like a top 20 forward. He could very well break 100 points, he'll get paid an astronomical amount of money. Think 9M+x7 or 8.5x8 like Zibanejad, if not more. That's a terrifying contract for someone who'll be 30 when it kicks in. It's an anchor waiting to happen. I want no part in it. 

Edited April 16, 2022 by Coconuts

[bishopshodan]

5 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Think 9M+x7 or 8.5x8 like Zibanejad, if not more. That's a terrifying contract for someone who'll be 30 when it kicks in. It's an anchor waiting to happen. I want no part in it. 

What teams do you think would want Miller for 7 years at 9mil?

[Westcoastcanucks777]

Next time Miller gets the belt after the game I want Milsey to slap the heck outta someone who’s with me?!

[Coconuts]

25 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

What teams do you think would want Miller for 7 years at 9mil?

Good question. Possibly New Jersey, they aren't actually paying too many players big numbers up front, they'll have two in Hischier and Hughes next season. They're a team that wants to take the next step. Columbus doesn't have much in the way of center's and have a tough time attracting players, they could use him. Maybe Anaheim, they don't have much in the way of center's either and with Getzlaf retiring maybe they bite the bullet to bring him in as their vet. Henrique is their top paid forward right now at just over 5M. Players like Cali.

 

Maybe the Rangers, moving out Goodrow would cover most of any raise Miller gets, if they allow Strome to walk that covers a good chunk too. It'd be a very Rangers move. Boston is going to need someone to step into the Bergeron spot sooner than later, they could really use a center. He's a pending UFA who'll be 37 in July. Hell, even with Bergeron in the fold they could really use another top six center. Seattle's got a whack of cap, they could make a splash. The Avs could have 9M that'll be freed up between Kadri and Burakovsky this offseason, and I don't see them paying Kadri what he'll want. Burakovsky? Who knows. Compher comes off the books the year after, if Mac takes 10M that'd cover his raise. What the Avs do depends on what MacKinnon wants in an extension. 

 

LA Kings are sleeper pick, Kopitar has two years left at 10M and will be 35 in August. Dustin Brown comes off the books and frees up nearly 6M, Edler comes off and frees up 3.5M, Quick's 5.8M will expire at the end of next season when Miller's contract would begin. Athanasiou's 2.7M comes off after this season. Miller might take less to play in Cali, who knows? They should be a team on the rise. Maybe Pittsburgh? Depends on what they do with Malkin and what his new contract looks like if he signs one. Him and Crosby aren't getting any younger as their top two center's. Malkin will be 36 in July, Crosby will be 35 in August. They'll need someone to step in sooner than later. 

 

Maybe Carolina? Jordan Stall's 6M comes off the books after next season and he'll be 35 going into his final season with them. Depends on what they wanna do with the remainder of their players and cap space. Chicago? Toew's 10.5M expires at the end of next season and he'll be 35 before that deal expires. Vegas? Pacioretty's 7M expires at the same time Miller's new deal would be kicking in. He'll be 35 before his deal expires. They'd need to free up more cap, but Vegas has shown repeatedly they're willing to make a splash to get who they want. 

 

Could be other teams too, a lot can happen. But yeah, there are plenty of teams who could potentially make space for Miller, even at a high cap hit. We're actually fortunate to be in a place where we could move him and still have two quality center's in Pettersson and Horvat, and I believe at some point you've got to let Pettersson sink or swim as a top six center, he's certainly talented enough and smart enough defensively. Just needs to work on his draws, but if anyone can figure that piece out it's him. 

Edited April 16, 2022 by Coconuts

[bishopshodan]

5 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Good question. Possibly New Jersey, they aren't actually paying too many players big numbers up front, they'll have two in Hischier and Hughes next season. They're a team that wants to take the next step. Columbus doesn't have much in the way of center's and have a tough time attracting players, they could use him. Maybe Anaheim, they don't have much in the way of center's either and with Getzlaf retiring maybe they bite the bullet to bring him in as their vet. Henrique is their top paid forward right now at just over 5M. Players like Cali.

 

Maybe the Rangers, moving out Goodrow would cover most of any raise Miller gets, if they allow Strome to walk that covers a good chunk too. It'd be a very Rangers move. Boston is going to need someone to step into the Bergeron spot sooner than later, they could really use a center. He's a pending UFA who'll be 37 in July. Hell, even with Bergeron in the fold they could really use another top six center. Seattle's got a whack of cap, they could make a splash. The Avs could have 9M that'll be freed up between Kadri and Burakovsky this offseason, and I don't see them paying Kadri what he'll want. Burakovsky? Who knows. Compher comes off the books the year after, if Mac takes 10M that'd cover his raise. What the Avs do depends on what MacKinnon wants in an extension. 

 

LA Kings are sleeper pick, Kopitar has two years left at 10M and will be 35 in August. Dustin Brown comes off the books and frees up nearly 6M, Edler comes off and frees up 3.5M, Quick's 5.8M will expire at the end of next season when Miller's contract would begin. Athanasiou's 2.7M comes off after this season. Miller might take less to play in Cali, who knows? They should be a team on the rise. Maybe Pittsburgh? Depends on what they do with Malkin and what his new contract looks like if he signs one. Him and Crosby aren't getting any younger as their top two center's. Malkin will be 36 in July, Crosby will be 35 in August. They'll need someone to step in sooner than later. 

 

Maybe Carolina? Jordan Stall's 6M comes off the books after next season and he'll be 35 going into his final season with them. Depends on what they wanna do with the remainder of their players and cap space. Chicago? Toew's 10.5M expires at the end of next season and he'll be 35 before that deal expires. Vegas? Pacioretty's 7M expires at the same time Miller's new deal would be kicking in. He'll be 35 before his deal expires. They'd need to free up more cap, but Vegas has shown repeatedly they're willing to make a splash to get who they want. 

 

Could be other teams too, a lot can happen. But yeah, there are plenty of teams who could potentially make space for Miller, even at a high cap hit. We're actually fortunate to be in a place where we could move him and still have two quality center's in Pettersson and Horvat, and I believe at some point you've got to let Pettersson sink or swim as a top six center, he's certainly talented enough and smart enough defensively. Just needs to work on his draws, but if anyone can figure that piece out it's him. 

You said, good question.

Well, better answer. 

 

I guess there quite a few possibilities. If age is the question, I was curious who would/could give him money and term.

 

Thanks. 

[JM_]

4 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

Hey JM. The debate continues lol. You're wrong by the way. Ha, no just joking.

don't worry, I'm wrong a lot 

 

4 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

It's been interesting especially how the team has kept it's level of play and winning ways up. I have to concede it definitely makes the idea of keeping Miller more sound logically and gives the management team a lot to think about. It's tough on CDC I find we try so hard to defend our points we end up losing sight of what's best for the team sometimes. I'd like to think we're kind of like a hive mind similar to Allvin and co discussing the pros and cons of such a big decision. There's definitely some good analysis on both sides of the coin.

 

If Miller does get signed they are going to have to play one of Petey, or Miller on the wing in the top 6. Even then our winger depth is super thin as it is. A lot depends on the development of Podkolzin and Hoglander or whether Hoglander, Garland, Boeser, or a combination get traded. At some point we're going to need some more consistent 5v5 contributors there if we want to compete with the big boys. I like Pearson but I don't think he's a top 6 guy. We need more playmaking ability. I think Pearson is tradeable this year if they want, he's a good piece and the price isn't too bad. As it stands we have one top 6 and four 3rd line/2nd line in a pinch tweeners, although Pods and Hogz definitely have top 6 potential. I have yet to see a line-up with Miller making $8.5 that doesn't look shoddy with UFA penciled in, guys like Lammikko on the third, or Klimovich (lol), and even Lockwood on it. That worries me.

 

The entire RD of course is an area that will require much attention in the near future. If we could somehow sign Manson or get a suitable player in trade this summer it goes a long way to helping that situation. The bottom 6 also needs a complete overhaul or revamp, and we may need to address the PK as well. Not that all teams don't experience similar types of troubles but these are some of my concerns. It's possible we only see one big move made this summer whether it's Boeser, Miller, Garland, or Bo, and then more moves made the following year. I hope it's fairly significant though.

 

 

actually special teams under BB is back to pretty respectable. I do think the bottom six need a Nick Paul and a Deslauries tho. Lammikko has been a nice surprise and tbh I'd be just fine with Richardson back too. 

 

 

 

[JM_]

1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

It's not about decisions are made via the media or not, it's about whether or not the noise surrounding an unsigned Miller would get to the team or not. I'm of the belief that it would, I believe it'd be a significant distraction. We're not talking about retaining a Tyler Motte or not here. 

 

Sometimes teams do, but like I said, we are clearly not in a position where we can afford to. Our prospect depth is weak and we've got question marks all over the roster. Klingberg has also made it known he wants out, and that came out during the season as opposed to before it began, completely different scenario. Given the ages of their top players they were never just going to throw in the towel. They've got a couple younger forwards who are doing great in Robertson and Hintz, but Pavelski, Seguin, Benn, and Radulov aren't getting any younger. Klingberg will likely ask for more than they'd want to pay him in terms of an extension anyway, I'm hoping we steer clear of him. 

 

Boeser you're likely selling low on unless you can facilitate a sign and trade. Neither him or Garland would bring back the return Miller would. 

 

Miller's a top center right now, having just turned 29. So many folks have fallen in love with 26-29 year old Miller, and that's fine, but 33 year old Miller could be a verrrry different player. And that absolutely matters, because he will get massive dollars and 7-8 years. He's not signing a Landeskog deal. 

 

Miller isn't going to simultaneously be one of the best forwards in the league this year and not expect to be paid like a top 20 forward. He could very well break 100 points, he'll get paid an astronomical amount of money. Think 9M+x7 or 8.5x8 like Zibanejad, if not more. That's a terrifying contract for someone who'll be 30 when it kicks in. It's an anchor waiting to happen. I want no part in it. 

I would be really surprised if anyone gave him something in the 9's, or even more than 8.0. I do think there is a chance he signs with us in the 7's. But we just have to wait and find out.

 

I think we can recover similar assets with Brock e.g., I mean is it really that different to get 18th oa vs 27th? e.g. Or someone's #2 RHD on the prospect depth chart?

 

[JM_]

4 hours ago, aGENT said:

 

That's not necessarily true. There's limited offensive minutes/usage behind Fox et al. Similar reasons Rathbone hasn't been playing here.

 

 

Lundqvist would instantly be our best prospect, and at a very shallow position. It's not anymore "magic beans" than Schneider would be. That's just silly.

no, its not silly. Players have either proven themselves in the NHL, or they haven't. Its a pretty bright line actually. 

 

Edited April 17, 2022 by JM_

[Gawdzukes]

37 minutes ago, JM_ said:

don't worry, I'm wrong a lot 

 

actually special teams under BB is back to pretty respectable. I do think the bottom six need a Nick Paul and a Deslauries tho. Lammikko has been a nice surprise and tbh I'd be just fine with Richardson back too. 

 

 

 

Haha, me too. I'd love too get those two on the team. It would definitely address some issues. Just picture Scott Walker working with those two. Lammikko has been a re-sign for sure. Terrific pick up.

[Phil_314]

6 hours ago, Coconuts said:

I'd say so, because if we actually want to retain him allowing him to go into next season unsigned isn't a good idea. For one, it'll be a distraction the entire season until he's either inevitably re-signed or traded. Trust me, we both know how the media works in Vancouver well enough to know it'd be a constant conversation topic. 

 

Two, we risk losing him for nothing. The longer he goes unsigned the closer he is to free agency, he could elect to go to market and see what's out there. And if we do and are competing for a playoff spot we put ourselves in the tough spot of either holding on to him, hoping we make it, or electing to trade him prior to the deadline if it's uncertain he'll stay. Holding on to him could result in a contract negotiation game of chicken, or have him simply decide to explore his options. Signing him this offseason, while he holds the leverage of having the season he's had, at least locks him in albeit for probably more than we'd like to pay. Letting the scenario continue just feeds into the ongoing uncertainty. You think the Miller talk is bad now? Just wait and see what happens if he goes into next season unsigned. 

 

We are not a team who can afford to lose a player of that caliber for nothing, we don't have the organizational depth at the NHL level or in our prospect pool. 

I agree with signing Miller as long as he agrees to sign without a clause (move bad contracts and give him more money, so be it-- it won't be any more advantageous to sign him and give him a NMC, only to have his play tail off given age (if it does happen -- in that case we'd have a last year Jeff Skinner on our hands).

Having looked into recent examples of trading stars in retooling moves, I think (at least anecdotally) there may be a case for moving him, and the presumption is that we get true blue-chip prospects in return (e.g. Ryan O'Reilly trade, Sabres had no leverage since he wanted to leave, and the Blues wanted a #1 C; 1st season he did deliver as their shutdown #1 and led them to a Cup.  Fast forward to now, and Tage Thompson is outproducing him.  Example B, Erik Karlsson trade, sure he's still elite with a 0.7 point/ game rate, but (while this is probably an extreme case given the circumstances) the Sens came away with two 50 point guys so far, in Norris and Stutzle; even Kesler going to Anaheim, where we had limited leverage, yielded us McCann as a pretty good player -- had we chosen to keep him and not flip him for Gudbranson, but I digress).  If someone has recent examples of where such star trades turned into busts for the team trading the star player, I've love to learn about them.

[Nucker 67]

Miller will re-sign.  I the post game interview after the Coyotes game, he said about Podz, I can't wait to see what he does for us. I think JT will be around for a while. Heck, the Canucks haven't had an impactful player like Miller since Henrik Sedin. 

 

 

 

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, JM_ said:

I would be really surprised if anyone gave him something in the 9's, or even more than 8.0. I do think there is a chance he signs with us in the 7's. But we just have to wait and find out.

I think a contender could happily offer him $8x 7 / $56m, lower taxes, and a better chance at a cup.

 

1 hour ago, JM_ said:

 

I think we can recover similar assets with Brock e.g., I mean is it really that different to get 18th oa vs 27th? e.g. Or someone's #2 RHD on the prospect depth chart?

 

 

1 hour ago, JM_ said:

no, its not silly. Players have either proven themselves in the NHL, or they haven't. Its a pretty bright line actually. 

 

 

Apparently it is that different  Or at least one side of your mouth is attempting to argue it is 

 

Nils has "proven himself" to the the tune of 25 games at the NHL level FWIW.

[guntrix]

1 hour ago, JM_ said:

actually special teams under BB is back to pretty respectable. I do think the bottom six need a Nick Paul and a Deslauries tho. Lammikko has been a nice surprise and tbh I'd be just fine with Richardson back too. 

Aren't we second last in the entire league in penalty killing just slightly ahead of Arizona? 

[kloubek]

1 hour ago, guntrix said:

Aren't we second last in the entire league in penalty killing just slightly ahead of Arizona? 

That is primarily due to how record-breakingly bad our PK was under Green. Under BB, it's been very good.

Edited April 17, 2022 by kloubek

[Coconuts]

4 hours ago, JM_ said:

I would be really surprised if anyone gave him something in the 9's, or even more than 8.0. I do think there is a chance he signs with us in the 7's. But we just have to wait and find out.

 

I think we can recover similar assets with Brock e.g., I mean is it really that different to get 18th oa vs 27th? e.g. Or someone's #2 RHD on the prospect depth chart?

 

If he walks to UFA he could absolutely get 9M, he'd likely be top dog. Could easily get 8.5M imo. He'll likely be 100 point player, you aren't getting that for something in the 7's imo. 

 

I don't think so, I think Brock's shaky season will drop his value a bit. I could see a team trying to buy low on him. I don't think we'd get the return we'd have gotten even a couple seasons ago. 

 

Depends, particularly when it comes to prospects are each player plays a different style, brings something different, ect. As for picks, hard to say. 

 

2 hours ago, Phil_314 said:

I agree with signing Miller as long as he agrees to sign without a clause (move bad contracts and give him more money, so be it-- it won't be any more advantageous to sign him and give him a NMC, only to have his play tail off given age (if it does happen -- in that case we'd have a last year Jeff Skinner on our hands).

Having looked into recent examples of trading stars in retooling moves, I think (at least anecdotally) there may be a case for moving him, and the presumption is that we get true blue-chip prospects in return (e.g. Ryan O'Reilly trade, Sabres had no leverage since he wanted to leave, and the Blues wanted a #1 C; 1st season he did deliver as their shutdown #1 and led them to a Cup.  Fast forward to now, and Tage Thompson is outproducing him.  Example B, Erik Karlsson trade, sure he's still elite with a 0.7 point/ game rate, but (while this is probably an extreme case given the circumstances) the Sens came away with two 50 point guys so far, in Norris and Stutzle; even Kesler going to Anaheim, where we had limited leverage, yielded us McCann as a pretty good player -- had we chosen to keep him and not flip him for Gudbranson, but I digress).  If someone has recent examples of where such star trades turned into busts for the team trading the star player, I've love to learn about them.

I figure he'll get a NTC of some sort, but whether it's a full NTC or not.. I dunno. I don't think we'll give him a NMC, but I don't think it'd really matter as there's no way we'd be waiving him anyway. 

 

Ideally NHL ready players, blue chip guys on the cusp, top prospects, and a top pick. I'd be fine without be pick but it'd be nice to get a 1st. I'll place emphasis on Miller being moved for known quantities over packages built around picks. We need help on D, so that's something I'd be looking to bolster in the form of young players. I'm even open to players who've been playing for a while depending on who is, I'd take Carlo from Boston for example though I doubt they'd ever move him. 

 

The other upside to bringing in NHL ready youth, blue chip players, and top prospects is also that they're cost controlled RFA assets. 

[Baggins]

7 hours ago, guntrix said:

Aren't we second last in the entire league in penalty killing just slightly ahead of Arizona? 

15th in the entire league since Bouda took over Dec 5th. That we're still sitting 2nd worst for the season shows just how bad it was under Green to start the season.

[filthycanuck]

15 hours ago, JM_ said:

But Lundqvist hasn't proven anything at the NHL level, if he was better than Schneider he'd be playing instead of Schneider. This is exactly the kind of deal I want to see JR/PA avoid, its the magic beans scenario that could lead to nothing for Miller. 

I get the magic beans scenario, but what team is going to trade a young player that they know is trending up though? Miller for Caufield? Miller for Jack Hughes? All we can hope is we get as many assets as we can and HOPEFULLY one hits. Guys like Caufield, Hughes, Jason Robertson, etc, its not just the production, but their contract statuses  which make them so valuable