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

[NucknAsia]

3 hours ago, Me_ said:

Damn son! 
If we knew it were that easy!

 

Heres what I think we should do:

VAN

Barré-Boullet

Bellemare

Cirelli

Colton

Hagel

Killorn

Kucherov

Maroon

Nash 

Palat

Perry

Point

Richards

Stamkos

Bogosian

Cernak

Foote

Hedman

McDonagy

Rutta

Sergachev

Elliott

Vasilevskiy

 

TBL

Boeser

Chiasson

Dickinson

Garland

Highmore

Hoglander

Horvat

Lammikko

Miller

Pearson

Pettersson

Richardson

Bowey

Burroughs

Dermott

Ekman-Larsson

Hughes

Hunt

Myers

Poolman

Schenn

Demko

1OA22

1OA23

1OA24

1OA25

1OA26

1OA27

1OA28

1OA29

1OA30

 

And then I’d do:

 

VAN

Aube-Kubel

Butakovsly

Cogliano

Compher

Helm

Kadri

Landeskog

Lehkonen

MacKinnon

Meyers

Newhook

Nichushkin

O’Connor

Rantanen

Sturm

Byram

Girard

E. Johnson

J. Johnson

MacDermid

Makar

Manson

Murray

Toews

Francouz

Kuemper

 

COL

Barré-Boullet

Bellemare

Cirelli

Colton

Hagel

Killorn

Kucherov

Maroon

Nash 

Palat

Perry

Point

Richards

Stamkos

Bogosian

Cernak

Foote

Hedman

McDonagy

Rutta

Sergachev

Elliott

Vasilevskiy

 

The only sticking point I could see in this very easy and cunning transaction, is fans’ disappointment in replacing Myers with another Meyers.

 

And then we tank for the next 9 years to recoup our nine trades 1sts.
 

interesting. You see one trade with one team as the equivalent to all that

 

weird

 

While trades like I suggested don't happen often these days (primarily because of cap), they have happened and it was only a 3 player deal. I am a little confused how you equate a 3 roster player deal (Miller, Garland, and Myers) with the 80 moves you posted. Happy to hear how you equate those.

 

I am not sure how old you are but given your response probably a teenager. You may want to look back at the trade the Canucks made with STL years back to get Momesson, Ronning, Courtnall - a deal that put us in a position to make a run for a cup. Three player deals can and have happened in the past.

 

March 5, 1991
Trade: Geoff Courtnall, Robert Dirk, Sergio Momesso, Cliff Ronning and future considerations traded from St. Louis to Vancouver for Dan Quinn and Garth Butcher.

 

I appreciate your input.

Edited May 29, 2022 by NucknAsia

[Alflives]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

Yes. So something like exactly what I laid out there. The "Hamonic maneuver" but with bigger pieces. Exchanging older, expensive pieces for younger, cheaper (and in the case of Myers) better fitting pieces.

So the plan (now) is to build but don’t take a step back, right?  Sure sounds exactly like the Benning era.  

[JM_]

6 hours ago, aGENT said:

Washington would likely be mostly your "magic beans" (probably multiple firsts) along with maybe some Iorio, Lapierre, Protas etc.

 

We can likely do better. 

 

That said, the more teams bidding...

yeah I was trying to make something work, but unless its unprotected 2022, 2023 1sts and a whack of prospects I can't see it happening. 

[nergish]

30 minutes ago, NucknAsia said:

I believe he may be overrated. His skyrocketing is a result of a brief tournament (yes amongst men) but brief nonetheless. The top 2 RD are franchise RD and given where we lack talent its stupid to pass on them. They are the BPA for this franchise and not a reach by any means given the above.

 

Unless of course JR told you what his draft list looks like? Seems you view your opinon like its a fact, yet your "opinion"  is no more or less valid than mine, thank you.

 

So please take your "loooooool" and realize no one here is "Right"

 

I appreciate your input

Huge fan of Slaf, but I’m taking both Jiricek and Nemec ahead of him. At least for our Nucks.

[aGENT]

43 minutes ago, Alflives said:

So the plan (now) is to build but don’t take a step back, right?  Sure sounds exactly like the Benning era.  

I think you're making too much of the "small step back"/"don't take a step back" comments. They really mean basically the same thing. If (as we're likely to do IMO) we move Miller,, it inherently means taking some level of "step back". At least at in our top 6 F group. You simply don't replace that level of player on your roster no matter what you do.

 

But that doesn't mean that you can't still make other moves that improve your overall roster, elsewhere. Like say trading for Marino, moving out Myers and signing Lyubushkin, targeting guys like Nick Roy (3C) and Hague (physical LD) out of Vegas and/or signing guys like Paul/Tierney/Sturm, bringing in some more size/grit, speed and PK'ers, maybe Kuzmenko to replace some of Miller's lost offense...etc.etc. There's zero reason that with the right corresponding moves we can't be just as/near as competitive next season, even with the "step back" of moving Miller out.

 

That has really always been the plan. Make the required changes, while continuing to push forward and build a long term, contending, more cohesive team.

 

36 minutes ago, JM_ said:

yeah I was trying to make something work, but unless its unprotected 2022, 2023 1sts and a whack of prospects I can't see it happening. 

I mean there '22 1st, '22 WPG 2nd, unprotected '23 1st, Iorio and Protas isn't an awful offer. I'd expect we could do better but that would give a lot of ammo for potentially acquiring guys like Roy/Hague.

Edited May 29, 2022 by aGENT

[Warhippy]

37 minutes ago, NucknAsia said:

I believe he may be overrated. His skyrocketing is a result of a brief tournament (yes amongst men) but brief nonetheless. The top 2 RD are franchise RD and given where we lack talent its stupid to pass on them. They are the BPA for this franchise and not a reach by any means given the above.

 

Unless of course JR told you what his draft list looks like? Seems you view your opinon like its a fact, yet your "opinion"  is no more or less valid than mine, thank you.

 

So please take your "loooooool" and realize no one here is "Right"

 

I appreciate your input

One of those RHD already has a suspect knee.  Wanna test Canuck luck on that?

 

Slafkovksy is a big game player who might be (bodily and skating) possibly the closest possible Jagr type I have seen since Ovechkin in terms of size skating and vision.  He put up 10 points in 31 games as a 17 year old against men in one of the hardest scoring leagues in Europe.  While playing 3rd line minutes I might add.  He is nearly a pure PPG player in international and big game play barring last year for some reason and was an olympic MVP and the reason Slovakia won a bronze.  He's one of the best skating large bodies in this draft and hits like a truck, has just turned 18 as of the end of March and fits the exact mold we are looking for in a left wing player

 

Rutherford has a significant history in his drafts as well.

 

You can claim your beliefs and I can claim mine.

 

But if the Canucks have the 2nd overall they are drafting Slafkovsky.

[stawns]

1 hour ago, higgyfan said:

$5m  Garland for M. Roy $3.1m                          Hughes   Roy

$6m  Myer for Geekie (3C-r) $2.5m                    OEL    Luybushkin

                      UFA Luybushin $2.2m                  Dems   Schenn

                                                                            Rath    Burr

$11m - $7.8m =  $3.2m savings

why do you want to move Garland?

[DeNiro]

2 hours ago, higgyfan said:

$5m  Garland for M. Roy $3.1m                          Hughes   Roy

$6m  Myer for Geekie (3C-r) $2.5m                    OEL    Luybushkin

                      UFA Luybushin $2.2m                  Dems   Schenn

                                                                            Rath    Burr

$11m - $7.8m =  $3.2m savings

Are we a better team?

[Me_]

1 hour ago, NucknAsia said:

interesting. You see one trade with one team as the equivalent to all that

 

weird

 

While trades like I suggested don't happen often these days (primarily because of cap), they have happened and it was only a 3 player deal. I am a little confused how you equate a 3 roster player deal (Miller, Garland, and Myers) with the 80 moves you posted. Happy to hear how you equate those.

 

I am not sure how old you are but given your response probably a teenager. You may want to look back at the trade the Canucks made with STL years back to get Momesson, Ronning, Courtnall - a deal that put us in a position to make a run for a cup. Three player deals can and have happened in the past.

 

March 5, 1991
Trade: Geoff Courtnall, Robert Dirk, Sergio Momesso, Cliff Ronning and future considerations traded from St. Louis to Vancouver for Dan Quinn and Garth Butcher.

 

I appreciate your input.

That’s 31 years ago.

[Alflives]

33 minutes ago, stawns said:

why do you want to move Garland?

[Coconuts]

7 hours ago, Alflives said:

Yup.  And in JR’s recent interview he said he doesn’t want to take a step back.  He wants to change the roster while moving forward.  Any players we bring in will be 23-27.  Any picks we get will be used to bring in guys 23-27.  JR is (now) not taking a step back.  

Kinda hard to change the roster without clearing out cap space. Miller doesn't fit in with that age bracket and neither does Myers, Myers will be gone in a couple seasons anyway if we don't move him out. Can't take change the roster without cap space, can't take advantage of other teams without cap space and assets to give them in return for their players.

 

I wanna get through university without spending tens of thousands of dollars, probably won't happen. Gotta give to get, spinning our wheels won't change anything. 

 

Not taking a step back doesn't mean coming back with the same top players either if you can move players out and bring in players who can replace or improve upon some of what you've lost. Hell, if it turns out Miller peaked last season (and I think he did) and he regresses you're losing some of that offense whether you've kept him or not. 

 

[Coconuts]

9 hours ago, Me_ said:

Canucks…

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Also:

 

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Kinda hard to change the roster without clearing out cap space. Miller doesn't fit in with that age bracket and neither does Myers, Myers will be gone in a couple seasons anyway if we don't move him out. Can't take change the roster without cap space, can't take advantage of other teams without cap space and assets to give them in return for their players.

 

I wanna get through university without spending tens of thousands of dollars, probably won't happen. Gotta give to get, spinning our wheels won't change anything. 

 

Not taking a step back doesn't mean coming back with the same top players either if you can move players out and bring in players who can replace or improve upon some of what you've lost. Hell, if it turns out Miller peaked last season (and I think he did) and he regresses you're losing some of that offense whether you've kept him or not. 

 

I totally agree.  But does our owner agree?  Imhao our owner has set the direction to continue compete.  JR says he is going to be very careful that any moves don’t stop us from moving forward.  So that sounds like any trades will be more switching players than getting picks and prospects to build from.  

[Coconuts]

10 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I totally agree.  But does our owner agree?  Imhao our owner has set the direction to continue compete.  JR says he is going to be very careful that any moves don’t stop us from moving forward.  So that sounds like any trades will be more switching players than getting picks and prospects to build from.  

I don't think it matters what our owner agrees with as Rutherford is the one steering the ship now. Yeah, Rutherford meets up with them fairly regularly to discuss hockey if I'm not mistaken, but that's the business, doesn't mean he's taking pointers from Aqua after decades of running NHL teams and getting himself into the hockey hall of fame as a result. 

 

I've said it before, but I'm not remotely worried about Rutherford being a yes man. Not as his age, not with the money he's made, and not after all he's accomplished in the NHL. 

 

JR's going to have to be very careful, but that's every other president and GM out there too. They'll make the best management decisions they think they can and we'll see what happens. Some will work, some won't. Wanting to be cautious, and following through with being cautious, isn't a guarantee being cautious will actually work out. 

 

It also depends on what "moving forward" means to Rutherford and the rest of management. Is it trying to reach the playoffs? Is it trying to remain competitive while making the roster younger as a whole? Is it moving on from assets who aren't viewed as long term pieces, current core pieces or not? Is it selling high to patiently build the organization up? 

 

We don't know, all we can do is speculate. But "moving forward" could mean a lot of different things. 

Edited May 29, 2022 by Coconuts

[aGENT]

8 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I totally agree.  But does our owner agree?  Imhao our owner has set the direction to continue compete.  JR says he is going to be very careful that any moves don’t stop us from moving forward.  So that sounds like any trades will be more switching players than getting picks and prospects to build from.  

Why not both?

[Alflives]

Just now, aGENT said:

Why not both?

Didn’t we just try doing both (compete while resetting the roster) for the Benning years?  JR is smarter and has smarter people helping him, so I hope it works.  

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

I don't think it matters what our owner agrees with as Rutherford is the one steering the ship now. Yeah, Rutherford meets up with them fairly regularly to discuss hockey if I'm not mistaken, but that's the business, doesn't mean he's taking pointers from Aqua after decades of running NHL teams and getting himself into the hockey hall of fame as a result. 

 

I've said it before, but I'm not remotely worried about Rutherford being a yes man. Not as his age, not with the money he's made, and not after all he's accomplished in the NHL. 

 

JR's going to have to be very careful, but that's every other president and GM out there too. They'll make the best management decisions they think they can and we'll see what happens. Some will work, some won't. Wanting to be cautious, and following through with being cautious, isn't a guarantee being cautious will actually work out. 

 

It also depends on what "moving forward" means to Rutherford and the rest of management. Is it trying to reach the playoffs? Is it trying to remaining competitive while making the roster younger as a whole? Is it moving on from assets who aren't viewed as long term pieces, current core pieces or not? Is it selling high to patient build the organization up? 

 

We don't know, all we can do is speculate. But "moving forward" could mean a lot of different things. 

Our owner sets the direction.  He’s not suggesting hockey moves.  He’s just telling JR he wants the team to keep moving forward.  No steps back.  That directive limits what JR can do in his trades though.  He needs to return guys more along in their careers.  No younger prospects and picks, unless he can move those out to get the older guys.  We just saw this happen with how we got Dermott.  

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Didn’t we just try doing both (compete while resetting the roster) for the Benning years?  JR is smarter and has smarter people helping him, so I hope it works.  

And we largely accomplished it (despite some miscues along the way). We have a new, young core in place, do we not? Now we need to make smart moves by selling valuable vets for other pieces (futures included), tweaking the ill fitting parts of the roster and flesh out the roster with depth and role players while building a better team, organizational depth etc

[Coconuts]

6 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Our owner sets the direction.  He’s not suggesting hockey moves.  He’s just telling JR he wants the team to keep moving forward.  No steps back.  That directive limits what JR can do in his trades though.  He needs to return guys more along in their careers.  No younger prospects and picks, unless he can move those out to get the older guys.  We just saw this happen with how we got Dermott.  

That's probably where we disagree. Our owner pays the bills, which includes paying our hockey management handsomely to do their jobs. Which is why he went to meet Rutherford personally to try and convince him to come to Vancouver and take a crack at turning this team and organization around. Rutherford likes to let folks do their jobs, he's said as much, one could assume he likes being allowed to do his job too. He's got decades of experience and three Stanley cups to his credit, I reckon Aqua's gonna let the lifelong hockey man do his thing.

 

Aqua directing JR when it comes to hockey would be like Rutherford giving Aqua advice about how to have success in real estate. 

Edited May 29, 2022 by Coconuts