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

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, SilentSam said:

“young core's contention window,”

 

More fantasy thoughts like the declining one,.

 

 

Happily, Rutherford seems to disagree with you.

 

Are you now denying we have a young core? Or are you denying their ages are factual? Or is it the age at which players historically peak? Or the age range that is considered their prime? Because all of those things are pretty basic, established facts.

[SilentSam]

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

Miller:

 

Our best asset for trades and maxed return.

 

Expiring next year on a very friendly contract

 

Almost 29

 

Will command $8+ million in his next contract without question.

 

My question, and it's important.  A team like ours with a long, decades long history of watching assets if this nature walk away for nothing, can it afford to run that same risk with Miller in this instance?

 

With where this team is and where it still needs to travel to be where it's a contender, can we run the risk of not trading him?

 

Simple question.

We haven’t had a true leader like him for years,.  He thrives on that.

He moves,  that to me leaves and it never returns.

He is a huge on ice example for all of our young core and assets to play with.  .  . That will be lost as well.

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Miller:

 

Our best asset for trades and maxed return.

 

Expiring next year on a very friendly contract

 

Almost 29

 

Will command $8+ million in his next contract without question.

 

My question, and it's important.  A team like ours with a long, decades long history of watching assets if this nature walk away for nothing, can it afford to run that same risk with Miller in this instance?

 

With where this team is and where it still needs to travel to be where it's a contender, can we run the risk of not trading him?

 

Simple question.

 

My option would be to offer him a high dollar value short term contract, 1-2 years extension if we intend to keep him and just trade him at some point regardless.

 

If he WANTS to be here, he'll have to take a shorter term deal or one with a longer term lower cap.

 

This is his retirement deal coming up.  Can we afford it?  Can we risk losing him for nothing?

 

If both those answers are no....

I think you answered your own question. If this is his retirement deal (which it is) he won't be interested in the risk of a 1-2 year deal. Blow a knee and it costs him 30 million.

 

 

[SilentSam]

2 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Happily, Rutherford seems to disagree with you.

 

Are you now denying we have a young core? Or are you denying their ages are factual? Or is it the age at which players historically peak? Or the age range that is considered their prime? Because all of those things are pretty basic, established facts.

That core has not been getting any examples of how to play the game from neither Horvat, who is Captain, or Boeser either.

Neither of them play that in your face tenacity that Miller does.

That are vets now,.  And I still don’t see their game rubbing off on EP, Podz, Hogz LikeMiller has been to them and others.

Its not about age, it’s about how you play, and continue to play.

 

go ahead write him off to your fantasy deals.

 

id rather keep him.

[khay]

40 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Others here are saying he’s washed up next year because he’s approaching 30 !?!

 

Why would anyone want to trade arguably besides Demko ,.  The best player on their team, one that has brought more grit to this club that we haven’t seen for almost 10 years.. and gives us a ppg?

 

For the fantasy of draft picks !  Lol that’s why.

 

Trade the lesser assets.. Bo and Brock included.     
 

The veteran leadership Miller brought to this club was never here before with any of our “leadership groups” after the Sedins.

not one play shines that bright.

 

Finally We have an offensive player to build a winning club around,  a leader and mentor that neither Horvat or Boeser seem to be,

.. and posters here want to move him for fantasy.    
 Might as well change the team  logo to a Dog chasing its tail.

 

 

If just for draft pick, then we don't trade Miller at this TDL.

 

Two NHL roster players must come back. 

[Steven Stamkos]

I think the best idea for Miller would be to hold out until the TDL and hope a bidding war happens with a few teams. It will also help the new management determine where the state of the franchise is. 

[SilentSam]

8 minutes ago, JM_ said:

the biggest issue I see Sam is that we can't extend Miller now. Its a pure unknown. Even if he's leaning to stay, who knows what he wants July 1? maybe he changes his mind and wants to be a UFA and write his own ticket. We just don't know.

 

So at best, we have him for 1 more year. Which is nice. But is that the right thing for building a contending team going forward?

 

A lot of teams have moved good players and still improved overall. 

I’d say , see what you can bring in by trading other lower assets around him.

He will still be worth the Fantasy treasure chest at the end of next season.

Miller is one to build our strengths around.. it’s real, and it exists.

He leads far more with example than anyone on the team,.   That alone is hard to find.

[SilentSam]

3 minutes ago, Steven Stamkos said:

I think the best idea for Miller would be to hold out until the TDL and hope a bidding war happens with a few teams. It will also help the new management determine where the state of the franchise is. 

Next season  

[Warhippy]

1 minute ago, SilentSam said:

We haven’t had a true leader like him for years,.  He thrives on that.

He moves,  that to me leaves and it never returns.

He is a huge on ice example for all of our young core and assets to play with.  .  . That will be lost as well.

The last time we traded a player like him we saw Bertuzzi coming back.  My mindset is that if he is unwilling to sign under a viable deal $7 million or less he's unaffordable or we're trading multiple assets for less of a return to compensate.

 

If there's a trade of the 1st, top prospect and solid roster player available for him or something there in.  You make the deal if he refuses to commit to a decent contract.

 

Just now, JM_ said:

I think you answered your own question. If this is his retirement deal (which it is) he won't be interested in the risk of a 1-2 year deal. Blow a knee and it costs him 30 million.

 

 

That's the fear.  Next year he's still valuable.  But what if he gets injured?  Or covid gets him?  This club has a history of that kind of luck and you don't temp the universe

[SilentSam]

2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

The last time we traded a player like him we saw Bertuzzi coming back.  My mindset is that if he is unwilling to sign under a viable deal $7 million or less he's unaffordable or we're trading multiple assets for less of a return to compensate.

 

If there's a trade of the 1st, top prospect and solid roster player available for him or something there in.  You make the deal if he refuses to commit to a decent contract.

 

That's the fear.  Next year he's still valuable.  But what if he gets injured?  Or covid gets him?  This club has a history of that kind of luck and you don't temp the universe

I think the beauty of the situation is that Horvat or Boeser may bring the same back to a cup contender.

Personally I’d rather keep our better asset in Miller.

(Demko not include

 

[JM_]

7 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

I’d say , see what you can bring in by trading other lower assets around him.

He will still be worth the Fantasy treasure chest at the end of next season.

Miller is one to build our strengths around.. it’s real, and it exists.

He leads far more with example than anyone on the team,.   That alone is hard to find.

for sure he's a gem. But if he doesn't want to be here for his last deal, no amount of trading other assets will keep him here. Sure I guess if we throw 9 mil at him, but then we're entering into screwing our cap again. 

[JM_]

7 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

The last time we traded a player like him we saw Bertuzzi coming back.  My mindset is that if he is unwilling to sign under a viable deal $7 million or less he's unaffordable or we're trading multiple assets for less of a return to compensate.

 

If there's a trade of the 1st, top prospect and solid roster player available for him or something there in.  You make the deal if he refuses to commit to a decent contract.

 

That's the fear.  Next year he's still valuable.  But what if he gets injured?  Or covid gets him?  This club has a history of that kind of luck and you don't temp the universe

Its also "easier" to find F depth than RHD. If we can make that conversion then we have to do it, particularly if the RHD prospect has 1st line potential. Thats the hardest thing to get. 

[aGENT]

28 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

That core has not been getting any examples of how to play the game from neither Horvat, who is Captain, or Boeser either.

Neither of them play that in your face tenacity that Miller does.

That are vets now,.  And I still don’t see their game rubbing off on EP, Podz, Hogz LikeMiller has been to them and others.

Its not about age, it’s about how you play, and continue to play.

 

go ahead write him off to your fantasy deals.

 

id rather keep him.

That's all great.

 

You want to address all your straw man positions and refuting of facts before going off on yet another tangent?

[Warhippy]

39 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

I think the beauty of the situation is that Horvat or Boeser may bring the same back to a cup contender.

Personally I’d rather keep our better asset in Miller.

(Demko not include

 

But there has been a multi page argument about how horvat and boeser are not the same as miller so we'd be trading both for the return miller would net us

 

It's at a point where we have to maximize the value of one of Boeser or Miller 

[Me_]

10 hours ago, Warhippy said:

The last time we traded a player like him we saw Bertuzzi coming back.  My mindset is that if he is unwilling to sign under a viable deal $7 million or less he's unaffordable or we're trading multiple assets for less of a return to compensate.

 

If there's a trade of the 1st, top prospect and solid roster player available for him or something there in.  You make the deal if he refuses to commit to a decent contract.

 

That's the fear.  Next year he's still valuable.  But what if he gets injured?  Or covid gets him?  This club has a history of that kind of luck and you don't temp the universe

What if a bus stops on the road at the top of a mountain and starts to fall down into the wilderness at the bottom of the mountain and Miller happens to be hunting there and the bus falls on him.

 

What a catastrophe that would be.

 

Edited January 24, 2022 by Me_

[Coconuts]

3 hours ago, SilentSam said:

Others here are saying he’s washed up next year because he’s approaching 30 !?!

 

Why would anyone want to trade arguably besides Demko ,.  The best player on their team, one that has brought more grit to this club that we haven’t seen for almost 10 years.. and gives us a ppg?

 

For the fantasy of draft picks !  Lol that’s why.

 

Trade the lesser assets.. Bo and Brock included.     
 

The veteran leadership Miller brought to this club was never here before with any of our “leadership groups” after the Sedins.

not one play shines that bright.

 

Finally We have an offensive player to build a winning club around,  a leader and mentor that neither Horvat or Boeser seem to be,

.. and posters here want to move him for fantasy.    
 Might as well change the team  logo to a Dog chasing its tail.

 

 

That's not what people are saying though. Part of people's concern going forward is related to his age though, yes, because players typically begin to fall off during their 30's. Particularly when it comes to their production. Yes, there are always outliers who continue to produce at a high level into their 30's, but that's more an outlier thing than the norm. Every player has a peak. 

 

Now, is Miller guaranteed to fall off? No, and I haven't really seen people arguing that. But is his beginning to decline more likely than his continuing to play at his current level for an extended period of time? Probably. Could he be an outlier? Of course. Will he? Now that's where it becomes a gamble. Why? Because signing players to large dollars and long term, which Miller will get, is always a bit of a gamble. Why? Because you pay for past performances in this league, and gamble on players producing enough to be worth the deal. Obviously that doesn't always work out. We saw that recently with Loui. Would he age like Loui? Probably not, that's a hard drop. Could he end up being an anchor when the young core is hitting their prime and peaking though? There's absolutely a chance. 

 

Will he? I don't know, but that's just it. I'm not pretending to know. None of us know, which is why anyone pretending they do is silly. But not knowing doesn't mean people seeing signing him as a risk are wrong, because it is a risk. Sign any forward to big dollars and term at age 30 and you're gambling. 

 

Sign Miller to the 8-9.5M he's likely to command, with 8 likely being optimistic, and to the 7-8 years of term he'll likely want and you're gambling. Could he take less term? Yeah, but why would he on what's likely to be his last large contract? Could he take less dollars? Sure, but why would he? I've seen folks argue for his taking some sort of discount and I question the thought process there. We didn't draft him, this is his third season here, we're his third team and it's not as if there are deep roots. Why would we get a discount? If he does stay, and it's possible, we likely pay full price. 

 

As for the why? It's been covered in several different threads now. Because a lot of folks don't feel he lines up with when our young core will be hitting it's prime and peaking. Lot of people don't think we'll be contending over the next 2-3 years while Miller's got a chance of still being a top player who's worth his shiny new contract. Some don't like the prospect of paying Miller 8M+ at age 33 or 34 to bring less offense and intangibles, because you can pay a helluva lot less for intangibles.

 

Also, because he's our most valuable trade chip and we're a capped out team. A Miller trade likely wouldn't be focused around picks as the primary target so much as younger players who can step into the lineup. Could picks be included in a package? I'd damn well hope so. Go poke through the proposals section, you'll see that most proposals are mostly focused on bringing in high end youth who can play sooner than later. Do people want a 1st round pick in most packages? Yeah, but most people aren't interested in trading Miller for scratch and wins. 

 

Leadership? Man, really? You don't think anyone else on this roster is capable of leading? We literally brought in Garland this season, who plays with the same drive and intensity. Different kind of player? Absolutely, but it's there and I've seen it all season. We literally brought in Arizona's captain, but yeah, I'm sure he doesn't know anything about leadership. You never have one leader in the room, you don't even need a letter to lead. Bo's our captain, he's been one of our main drivers all year, he leads. Leadership isn't just about being fiery and vocal on the ice, or being animated, leadership shows up in all sorts of different ways for all sorts of different people. I don't worry about leadership with this team, Miller or no Miller. 

 

We have several offensive players, Miller is just one. Move out Miller and you've theoretically still got a top six featuring Horvat, Pettersson,  Garland, Pearson, Boeser, and Hoglander. Throw Podz in there too if you'd like, what we see from him and Hoglander isn't the finished product, they'll take steps forward. But you've also got whatever we get in return for Miller, which includes cap space and whoever we bring back. You've also got OEL, Hughes, and Demko. There are holes in this lineup, we need to get younger, these are both things we've heard Rutherford say, but we'd still have a solid foundation to build on going forward. There's no reason we couldn't be competitive next season without Miller, it's not as if moving him out would be our only move until next season. 

 

If you'd rather keep Miller that's fine, plenty of folks would make arguments to keep him. But the flip side exists as well, like it or not there are valid reasons to consider moving him. 

 

 

Edited January 23, 2022 by Coconuts

[SilentSam]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

That's all great.

 

You want to address all your straw man positions and refuting of facts before going off on yet another tangent?

Not unlike your fantasies I guess Sherlock.    On your planet, no one but Miller can be moved,.  how’s your oxygen levels?

Edited January 23, 2022 by SilentSam

[aGENT]

9 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Not unlike your fantasies I guess Sherlock.

My "fantasies" are all based on actual facts and historical trends. Ages of our young, core players. Historical trends/ages of players at their peak/in their prime. Historical trends/ages of players declining. Contract comparables of what we should expect Miller's extension to look like etc, etc.

 

Your opinions are based on straw men arguments no one made, about players falling off a cliff the second they hit 30. And moving Miller solely for picks.

 

It's pretty clear whose posts are actually in the realm of fantasy here.

Edited January 23, 2022 by aGENT

[SilentSam]

6 minutes ago, aGENT said:

My "fantasies" are all based on actual facts and historical trends. Ages of our young, core players. Historical trends/ages of players at their peak/in their prime. Historical trends/ages of players declining. Contract comparables of what we should expect Miller's extension to look like etc, etc.

 

Your opinions are based on straw men arguments no one made, about players falling off a cliff the second they hit 30. And moving Miller solely for picks.

 

It's pretty clear whose posts are actually in the realm of fantasy here.

Well,  nice work !

Hopefully we keep Miller and move one or 2 of your untouchables, ect, ect.

Edited January 23, 2022 by SilentSam

[SilentSam]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

But there has been a multi page argument about how horvat and boeser are not the same as miller so we'd be trading both for the return miller would net us

 

It's at a point where we have to maximize the value of one of Boeser or Miller 

So we trade he best away,  hang onto the mediocre we have,  and wish upon an unknown return.

 

that’s like one step forward, 2 steps back.

 

Miller is not the one to move if we can help it.