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

[Coconuts]

10 minutes ago, aGENT said:

So.... like Konecny and Jiricek?

Jiricek could be pretty useful for a magic bean 

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

Jiricek could be pretty useful for a magic bean 

Jiricek = golden goose?

[mll]

At the 2019 TDL Marc Stone got Brännström (15th overall 2017) + 2nd round pick in 2020.  

 

Can Miller bring back more than this without an extension in place.  It's no longer possible to get additional assets in case of an extension signed post-trade.

 

[D-Money]

11 minutes ago, mll said:

At the 2019 TDL Marc Stone got Brännström (15th overall 2017) + 2nd round pick in 2020.  

 

Can Miller bring back more than this without an extension in place.  It's no longer possible to get additional assets in case of an extension signed post-trade.

 

Brannstrom was a pretty highly touted prospect at the time. A lot of the shine has worn off since then. But that’s always the risk when you trade for futures.

It would be like if we traded Miller to L.A. for Brandt Clarke. It would look like a decent move on paper, and fill a glaring organizational need. But if Clarke doesn’t pan out - which is a distinct possibility - it would end up similar for us.

[Pure961089]

On 5/3/2022 at 1:40 PM, aGENT said:

Actually the "mythology" (fact) is that players generally decline a bit around 32 and a LOT around 34 +/-.

 

And Stamkos has a bit more of a high level track record than Miller (disregarding injuries).... But I digress..

 

It's this sort of "half truth" spin that really grinds my gears. It's sort of close to truth and making salient points. But it's not actually.

The agent said players nowadays are taking care of themselves.  And it’s true, look at Matt Duchene, he’s in he’s 31 and scored 43 goals this year.  There are more older players putting up career seasons than you may think.  Look at the Kings.  Kopitar had a solid season (67 points) for a 34 year old. It’s not a half truth.  And there are many more examples of players in their mid 30s putting up career seasons.  

[Coconuts]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

Jiricek = golden goose?

Golden goose

GOLDEN GOOSE 

Golden goose

GOLDEN GOOSE

[Pure961089]

On 5/3/2022 at 2:11 PM, Provost said:

There are very detailed long term historical patterns of likely decline as players age.

 

I had found and posted it a couple months ago, but am on my phone at the moment so can’t really look it up.

…. But in general, if you take the average line of declining for players, you could say Miller is maybe worth at most $9.5 million for the first year or two of his deal, then probably $7 for the next couple years, then probably $4-5 million for years 4-6, then $1-2 million in years 7-8.

 

I just made up those numbers but you could plug in the exact average decline and get a very good approximation of his value…. The curve would look like that though.

 

if his camp accepted that basic reality then the AAV goes way down on longer deals.  His true value would be in the $46-52million range over 8 years ($6-6.5 AAV) Or on a 6 year deal he would be in the $7-7.5 million range.  That would be fair value.  Then there is some opportunity that he doesn’t decline as fast as possible where it becomes team friendly and some risk that he falls off a cliff faster than average and we have an anchor for years 2-6.

 

If they just want to pretend he will buck Mother Nature and be as good in 5 years as he is now (it isn’t impossible… just highly unlikely), then there really isn’t a basis for a deal as there is no upside to the contract as the team would just have to pray Miller is in the 1% of guys that could he worth $8 million plus after he is 35 years old.  Cap inflation isn’t nearly enough to offset that kind of risk.

 

If a team knows they are near the end of their contention window it can make sense to just not care about an anchor contract 5 years from now as they would likely be a rebuilding team at that point with a bunch of young players and no cap issues.

 

We aren’t in that phase and I don’t think we want Hughes, Demko, and Petterson in their prime on a bad roster because we are paying a 4th line Miller top line money.

 

This graph is just one look at expected decline and this takes just some elite players and sees how they regress.  You can Google a bunch of other studies, a bunch of them are from 2014 before the league got even younger and faster.

How old is this study?  There have been a lot of technological advancements in sports over the last 10 years. Whether it be better equipment, training, lifestyle.  We’ve come along way. 

[canuck73_3]

26 minutes ago, Pure961089 said:

The agent said players nowadays are taking care of themselves.  And it’s true, look at Matt Duchene, he’s in he’s 31 and scored 43 goals this year.  There are more older players putting up career seasons than you may think.  Look at the Kings.  Kopitar had a solid season (67 points) for a 34 year old. It’s not a half truth.  And there are many more examples of players in their mid 30s putting up career seasons.  

This, some players age out at 30 some at 32-34 some 35+ and some even <30. There’s no magic age a player declines we could be better of with a 32-34 year old Miller than the 22-24 year old we trade him for. 

Edited May 12, 2022 by canuck73_3

[Provost]

42 minutes ago, Pure961089 said:

How old is this study?  There have been a lot of technological advancements in sports over the last 10 years. Whether it be better equipment, training, lifestyle.  We’ve come along way. 

Cite some evidence that hockey players are having longer careers and producing later then.

 

The game has gotten younger and faster in the last ten years, not older.  Veterans are losing their jobs to younger players.  The average age of players dropped from 2012-2019 (with the Covid shortened seasons taken off the charts as they can’t be accurately compared).

 

Advances in training and equipment benefit all players, so there isn’t much to suggest it benefits older players more and lengthens their careers.  If everyone is a step faster… then that doesn’t help an aging veteran who loses half a step.

[Pure961089]

8 minutes ago, Provost said:

Cite some evidence that hockey players are having longer careers and producing later then.

 

The game has gotten younger and faster in the last ten years, not older.  Veterans are losing their jobs to younger players.  The average age of players dropped from 2012-2019 (with the Covid shortened seasons taken off the charts as they can’t be accurately compared).

 

Advances in training and equipment benefit all players, so there isn’t much to suggest it benefits older players more and lengthens their careers.  If everyone is a step faster… then that doesn’t help an aging veteran who loses half a step.

site evidence? besides older players having career years.  Well evidence is in plain sight, you just compare the equipment, computers, training they used 10 years ago to the equipment, computers. training NHL players are using now.  no need to scour the internet for "evidence"

[Provost]

56 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

This, some players age out at 30 some at 32-34 some 35+ and some even <30. There’s no magic age a player declines we could be better of with a 32-34 year old Miller than the 22-24 year old we trade him for. 

It Isn’t impossible, but it is remarkably unlikely.  There is a ton of data and history to show that on average players are declining rapidly after 30 years old.  We are also not talking about how he does at 32… he isn’t signing a 2 year deal.  We are talking about how he does at 36-38.

 

Paying Miller like he is going to be in the top 1% or less of that bell curve and one of the few exceptions that lasts way beyond the average is just begging for having an albatross contract.  There is no upside to it for the Canucks at all.  If Miller ages like an average player or faster than average… we are in cap hell carrying an anchor contract that is overpaid by many millions of dollars a year.  If Miller happened to be a unicorn who produced at a top level until his late 30s, then the team is just getting fair market value performance out of him.

 

Here is the list of the players over 34 who are still in the top 50 point producers in the league:

 

Ovechkin

Pavelski

 

That is it.  If you want to drop it and include 34 year olds you get to add:

 

Crosby

Zuccarello

[Pure961089]

17 minutes ago, Provost said:

Cite some evidence that hockey players are having longer careers and producing later then.

 

The game has gotten younger and faster in the last ten years, not older.  Veterans are losing their jobs to younger players.  The average age of players dropped from 2012-2019 (with the Covid shortened seasons taken off the charts as they can’t be accurately compared).

 

Advances in training and equipment benefit all players, so there isn’t much to suggest it benefits older players more and lengthens their careers.  If everyone is a step faster… then that doesn’t help an aging veteran who loses half a step.

And you're right Advances in equipment and the aforementioned benefit both young and old, but young players don't have nearly the need as a mid 30's player trying to prolong his career.  I mentioned Duchene scored a career high 43 goals as a 31 year old.  Too soon to write him off just yet.   

[Provost]

9 minutes ago, Pure961089 said:

site evidence? besides older players having career years.  Well evidence is in plain sight, you just compare the equipment, computers, training they used 10 years ago to the equipment, computers. training NHL players are using now.  no need to scour the internet for "evidence"

Ahh I see.  A couple of exceptions ignoring the masses of guys having normal and steep age rested performance declines.  That is a silly response.

 

It veers into pure nonsense when you trot out a 31 year old as the best example.  Not only is it showing he is unusual… that would also still be the first year of a new Miller contract when he turns 31.  If he wants to sign a 1 year deal no one is going to argue that.  Probably no one argues with a 3-4 year deal even knowing he is more than likely to decline pretty sharply even by the end of that.    He is going to be looking for a long term 6-8 year deal.

 

I asked what makes you think that advances in equipment or training is helping old players but not helping young players?  The evidence is that the average age of players is getting younger by the year in the last 10+ years, not older.   Those advances are having younger players coming into the league earlier and producing faster since they are already fully up to speed on the best training and nutrition advances.  
 

You are making a wild leap in logic that isn’t supported by anything at all… so ya, you should scour the Internet for evidence.  Not sure why to put evidence on quotes… because you don’t believe in it?

Edited May 12, 2022 by Provost

[Pure961089]

28 minutes ago, Provost said:

It Isn’t impossible, but it is remarkably unlikely.  There is a ton of data and history to show that on average players are declining rapidly after 30 years old.  We are also not talking about how he does at 32… he isn’t signing a 2 year deal.  We are talking about how he does at 36-38.

 

Paying Miller like he is going to be in the top 1% or less of that bell curve and one of the few exceptions that lasts way beyond the average is just begging for having an albatross contract.  There is no upside to it for the Canucks at all.  If Miller ages like an average player or faster than average… we are in cap hell carrying an anchor contract that is overpaid by many millions of dollars a year.  If Miller happened to be a unicorn who produced at a top level until his late 30s, then the team is just getting fair market value performance out of him.

 

Here is the list of the players over 34 who are still in the top 50 point producers in the league:

 

Ovechkin

Pavelski

 

That is it.  If you want to drop it and include 34 year olds you get to add:

 

Crosby

Zuccarello

again you're right it is more unlikely than likely but when you have a player that buck the trend that's a good thing.  all these players are over 30 

 

Edited May 12, 2022 by Pure961089

[Pure961089]

12 minutes ago, Provost said:

Ahh I see.  A couple of exceptions ignoring the masses of guys having normal and steep age rested performance declines.  That is a silly response.

 

I asked what makes you think that advances in equipment or training is helping old players but not helping young players?  The evidence is that the average age of players is getting younger by the year in the last 10+ years, not older.  You are making a wild leap in logic that isn’t supported by anything at all… so ya, you should scour the Internet for evidence.  Not sure why to put evidence on quotes… because you don’t believe in it?

ignoring the masses.  Not really. just recognizing when you have an exception to the rule. You take full advantage of it.  you're on this 34 hard cap and I'm like JT Miller is still just 29.  You seem to assume Miller is going to recede when it's just as possible he's finally finding his game.  

[Provost]

21 minutes ago, Pure961089 said:

again you're right it is more unlikely than likely but when you have a player that buck the trend that's a good thing.  all these players are over 30 

Actually that is a list that includes a bunch of 30 year olds… not “over 30”.  You should include the ages on your graph.  The thing in common most of the top players there have is they are 30 or 31.  That doesn’t support signing Miller even remotely since, as I have explained, he will be 31 before he finishes the first season of a new long term extension.  Literally no one is arguing about the merits of a 1 year extension for Miller.

 

It is showing the opposite of what you think it is.  Your graph shows just 10 guys in the entire league who are 30 or over that cracked the 82 point mark.  Of those 10, seven of them are either 30 or 31 years old.

 

If you want a better look and representation.  Go find your graph and and sort by age.  Then scan down for the production of all those guys.  It is pretty non existent.  
 

If Miller wants to sign a deal based on the “average” age related decline of players, something that can be precisely calculated… then sure, sign him.  Of course that is going to be a cap hit of around $6 million dollars at most on a max term deal, even assuming he is really a 100 point player for the next 3 years and this one career season isn’t an outlier.  A deal assuming he declines just like an average player has an even amount of risk on both sides.  Maybe he bucks the trend and the Canucks actually extract a little extra value from him compared to his cap hit.  Maybe he completely falls off a cliff and he is an anchor before his extension even kicks in.

 

He just isn’t signing a deal for under $6 million AAV to make it a fair contract, at least not according to the messaging from his agent.  He isn’t signing a 1 year deal so stop trotting out a bunch of 30 and 31 year olds as proof players don’t decline by their mid to late 30’s when his extension would end.   it has no relevance to his contract extension at all.

Edited May 12, 2022 by Provost

[Pure961089]

2 minutes ago, Provost said:

Actually that is a list that includes a bunch of 30 year olds… not “over 30”.  You should include the ages on your graph.  The thing in common most of the top players there have is they are 30 or 31.  That doesn’t support signing Miller even remotely since, as I have explained, he will be 31 before he finishes the first season of a new long term extension.  Literally no one is arguing about the merits of a 1 year extension for Miller.

 

It is showing the opposite of what you think it is.  Your graph shows just 10 guys in the entire league who are 30 or over that cracked the 82 point mark.  Of those 10, seven of them are either 30 or 31 years old.

 

If you want a better look and representation.  Go find your graph and and sort by age.  Then scan down for the production of all those guys.  It is pretty non existent.  

So you set goalposts for what you call evidence and because my example shows 30 year olds somehow my argument is invalid?  The criteria isn't that Miller has to be a superstar hitting 90 points into ages 34-36, you want to set that as the bar for success.  I think success is 50 -60 points. Top 6 production not Alex Ovechkin

[Provost]

2 minutes ago, Pure961089 said:

So you set goalposts for what you call evidence and because my example shows 30 year olds somehow my argument is invalid?  The criteria isn't that Miller has to be a superstar hitting 90 points into ages 34-36, you want to set that as the bar for success.  I think success is 50 -60 points. Top 6 production not Alex Ovechkin

Umm… that is exactly the criteria, and yes showing 30 year olds makes your argument completely invalid.  Not just because you said they were “over 30” but because Miller will be 30 before his current contract even expires, so pointing out what a few 30 year old guys managed literally has zero to do with the merits of signing him to a long term extension where he will be older than that by the end of his first season.

If you are paying a guy $8-9 million dollars a season into his late 30’s “hoping” he bucks the normal age related decline to just reach your vaunted heights of 50-60 points (which almost no one at that age is actually reaching) you are overpaying him by close to double what his production would be worth.
 

That is truly a terrible idea.

 

Like I posted.  Out of 700-800 skaters in the entire league… there are just four guys 34 and older who managed to reach the 82 point mark.  The back half of Miller’s deal is almost 100% guaranteed to be a nightmare for whoever signs him.

[Pure961089]

17 minutes ago, Provost said:

Umm… that is exactly the criteria, and yes showing 30 year olds makes your argument completely invalid.  Not just because you said they were “over 30” but because Miller will be 30 before his current contract even expires, so pointing out what a few 30 year old guys managed literally has zero to do with the merits of signing him to a long term extension where he will be older than that by the end of his first season.

If you are paying a guy $8-9 million dollars a season into his late 30’s “hoping” he bucks the normal age related decline to just reach your vaunted heights of 50-60 points (which almost no one at that age is actually reaching) you are overpaying him by close to double what his production would be worth.
 

That is truly a terrible idea.

 

Like I posted.  Out of 700-800 skaters in the entire league… there are just four guys 34 and older who managed to reach the 82 point mark.  The back half of Miller’s deal is almost 100% guaranteed to be a nightmare for whoever signs him.

But you don't get to set the rules to fit your argument and neither do I, you keep on going on about contract and Miller has to be a certain age for this or that, Nonsense! Rubbish! 

Miller is 29, he has 5 more years before he hits 34.  And him being paid 8-9 million isn't going to be the Canucks problem.  He's going to the highest bidder and there will be a lot of suitors.  All the things you mentioned are not the Canucks problem, Whether he makes 8 or 9 million at 34 is irrelevant to the Canucks.  My argument would be valid if everyone on the list was 29. and only got 50-60 points each. you don't seem to get it. 

Edited May 12, 2022 by Pure961089

[Pure961089]

19 minutes ago, Provost said:

Umm… that is exactly the criteria, and yes showing 30 year olds makes your argument completely invalid.  Not just because you said they were “over 30” but because Miller will be 30 before his current contract even expires, so pointing out what a few 30 year old guys managed literally has zero to do with the merits of signing him to a long term extension where he will be older than that by the end of his first season.

If you are paying a guy $8-9 million dollars a season into his late 30’s “hoping” he bucks the normal age related decline to just reach your vaunted heights of 50-60 points (which almost no one at that age is actually reaching) you are overpaying him by close to double what his production would be worth.
 

That is truly a terrible idea.

 

Like I posted.  Out of 700-800 skaters in the entire league… there are just four guys 34 and older who managed to reach the 82 point mark.  The back half of Miller’s deal is almost 100% guaranteed to be a nightmare for whoever signs him.

My "evidence" doesn't have to fit in your 1x1x1 inch cube for it to be valid