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

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, JM_ said:

Stamkos, Killorn, Pierre-Edouard, Perry, Maroon, Hedman, McDonagh, Bogozian, Rutta

 

Pararin, Kreider, Reaves, Nemth, Braun.

 

But other than that, yeah them 30+ guys aren't contributing much 

I think you missed the gist of my post...

Edited June 13, 2022 by aGENT

[Gawdzukes]

23 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I think you missed the gist of my post...

Also Zibanejad but he wasn't that noticeable I guess. 

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

Also Zibanejad but he wasn't that noticeable I guess. 

Good thing our team is chock a block full of elite players in their late 20's/early 30's and we're heading to conference finals like them... oh wait.

[Gawdzukes]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Good thing our team is chock a block full of elite players in their late 20's/early 30's and we're heading to conference finals like them... oh wait.

Myers counts right?

[Coconuts]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Good thing our team is chock a block full of elite players in their late 20's/early 30's and we're heading to conference finals like them... oh wait.

So you're telling me Horvat, Miller, Pearson, Myers, OEL, Schenn, Poolman, and Hunt don't cut it? 

 

Oh, wait.. you said a bunch of elite players and something about the conference finals.. but we had one elite player in their late 20's this season that's something right?

 

Are you saying we shouldn't place all our hopes in that one late 20's player and build around him? 

[SilentSam]

3 hours ago, aGENT said:

I must have missed when the Canucks made the conference finals this year, on the backs of a bunch of +/- 30 year old guys.

Perhaps they didn’t have any or they would have .

[SilentSam]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

I think you missed the gist of my post...

I don’t think you get the “gist” sometimes.

[aGENT]

11 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

So you're telling me Horvat, Miller, Pearson, Myers, OEL, Schenn, Poolman, and Hunt don't cut it? 

 

Oh, wait.. you said a bunch of elite players and something about the conference finals.. but we had one elite player in their late 20's this season that's something right?

 

Are you saying we shouldn't place all our hopes in that one late 20's player and build around him? 

I mean OEL qualifies as well but the team isn't winning a cup with just Miller and OEL.

 

I don't think some folks really grasp where this team is in reality  

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Perhaps they didn’t have any or they would have .

Correct. Glad we agree 

[SilentSam]

28 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Correct. Glad we agree 

 .. but you want to trade Miller for a couple of looks in a crystal ball?

..and leave us with the leadership of Horvat?

 

 

Ive never been against having older players,  

 

you on the other hand think 29 is the start of the declining asset.

Its having that right mix,  and Miller is a big part of that mix.

your quote “ I must have missed when the Canucks made the conference finals this year, on the backs of a bunch of +/- 30 year old guys“

 

Tampa for example

Stamkos Killorn Maroon Perry Bellamare Nash 

Hedman Bogosian Rutta Palat Macdonagh 

all 30 or over.

Kucherov 28

 

?        I’m sure you’ll have an excuse or explanation?

 

 

[aGENT]

3 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

 .. but you want to trade Miller for a couple of looks in a crystal ball?

..and leave us with the leadership of Horvat?

 

 

Ive never been against having older players,  

 

you on the other hand think 29 is the start of the declining asset.

Its having that right mix,  and Miller is a big part of that mix.

your quote “ I must have missed when the Canucks made the conference finals this year, on the backs of a bunch of +/- 30 year old guys“

 

Tampa for example

Stamkos Killorn Maroon Perry Bellamare Nash 

Hedman Bogosian Rutta Palat Macdonagh 

all 30 or over.

Kucherov 28

 

?        I’m sure you’ll have an excuse or explanation?

 

 

You clearly don't have the first clue what I think.  Hint, it's not that: "29 is a declining asset".

 

You're still miles away from the gist of my post.

 

Here's a hint: How old are Pettersson, Hughes and Demko?

 

Now compare that to your list of conference final players leading the way on their teams.

 

 

[SilentSam]

15 minutes ago, aGENT said:

You clearly don't have the first clue what I think.  Hint, it's not that: "29 is a declining asset".

 

You're still miles away from the gist of my post.

 

Here's a hint: How old are Pettersson, Hughes and Demko?

 

Now compare that to your list of conference final players leading the way on their teams.

 

 

Hint?   ..  playing mind games now or pretending to be ?

perhaps that’s your problem, or it’s the scape goat stances you take.

 

 

Even this quote above from above: ^ 

 

“ Now compare that to the conference final players leading the way on their teams”

 

now you’ve expanded the 30+ age group of players to a team, to “players leading the way on their teams”.

 

Do you see the oxy moronic part of it?

 

now your breaking it down individually,  on a TEAM where contributions ARE AS A TEAM, and every player on that TEAM was assigned with a different role or task to get them in that position.

 

    ^  That’s called Zig Zagging agent.

 

  Perhaps cast for “ the Riddler” in the next Batman….    What’s after that?  another hint?

 

Contributions on a conference finalist team come in all shapes , sizes , personalities, skill sets and ages,  that’s what is unique about this Sport..  all players and coaches will tell you that..  because it’s true.

 

Theres no analytical column for it,.  Perhaps  It might only be accounted for if you were to stick a “mood ring “ on every player,  but the bio rythym of a team is unpredictable and can not be accounted for properly, because all comparisons are unique, and their own.

 

Age is and can be a gauge, but genetics supersedes it.

 

 

Chemistry,.  a room all on the same page with the energy level they play at,

is a key to that success , as much as it might be to have one or two players standing out in the Goals / Assists / Points brackets.

Lady Luck can love or hate you,.  And there’s always an ambulance standing by if your not paying attention to minor details.

 

Petterson Demko and Hughes need to get to 28/ 29 / 30 +.  wisely ,  with the right mentorship,  and leadership with the right Team and Right Team mates that put them on the right winning curve and with the right experiences to bring the best out of them.

 

That dosent happen by introducing more inexperienced youth and trading away your experienced players who lead with that example to get them.

 

Trade Miller,    and you might have Horvat and Boeser here as “leaders” or “Captains” to march the Demkos Peterssons and Hughes forward..

that’s weak.

 

Miller and OEL  bring far more of the aptitude necessary.

Bring Demko Hughes EP Podz and a few others along with them, it’s already having a positive effect.

 

one of Boeser or Horvat may bring a helpful return to offset the ELC to UFA cap issues and keep a good progression.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JM_]

10 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

Also Zibanejad but he wasn't that noticeable I guess. 

was just going for 30+

 

the age thing is overblown. NYR average F group age is 27.2. Canucks 27.4. We move Pearson and leave Dowling in the AHL where he belongs and we're younger than NYR. Are we better now? 

[JM_]

11 hours ago, aGENT said:

I think you missed the gist of my post...

couldn't help myself. 

 

We really don't have an age problem with this team per se, there's lots of room to bring in younger talent AND have the current best players still be on this team when they can start contending. If our window isn't for two years, there's no reason Miller at 31 won't be a solid part of that imo. 

 

We're certainly not in a position like SJS on their d e.g.

[Coconuts]

28 minutes ago, JM_ said:

couldn't help myself. 

 

We really don't have an age problem with this team per se, there's lots of room to bring in younger talent AND have the current best players still be on this team when they can start contending. If our window isn't for two years, there's no reason Miller at 31 won't be a solid part of that imo. 

 

We're certainly not in a position like SJS on their d e.g.

The difference is where their top players are vs ours right now, and their current but brief window vs the window I don't think will open for at least another four years for us

 

The players who are likely to be the catalyst for this team are all still rather young whereas almost all of New York's top talent is already in that late 20's/early 30's bracket 

 

I think a two year turnaround from fringe playoff team to contending is incredibly optimistic and unlikely 

Edited June 13, 2022 by Coconuts

[JM_]

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

The difference is where their top players are vs ours right now, and their current but brief window vs the window I don't think will open for at least another four years for us

 

The players who are likely to be the catalyst for this team are all still rather young whereas almost all of New York's top talent is already in that late 20's/early 30's bracket 

maybe? thats what I keep hearing but I think this team is closer to what we saw under Bruce than others I guess, particularly if we can upgrade on d and take some pressure off Demko. 

[Coconuts]

1 minute ago, JM_ said:

maybe? thats what I keep hearing but I think this team is closer to what we saw under Bruce than others I guess, particularly if we can upgrade on d and take some pressure off Demko. 

We'll see, but being in the mix for a playoff spot isn't remotely the same as being contenders and our being a playoff team this coming season is far from a sure thing.

 

If Vegas is even slightly healthier they likely make it, and then you've got Edmonton, Calgary, and LA with San Jose as a dark horse. Maybe Anaheim.

 

I think we'll be in the mix for a spot these next few seasons but by no means do I imagine we'll contend.

[aGENT]

4 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

The difference is where their top players are vs ours right now, and their current but brief window vs the window I don't think will open for at least another four years for us

 

The players who are likely to be the catalyst for this team are all still rather young whereas almost all of New York's top talent is already in that late 20's/early 30's bracket 

 

I think a two year turnaround from fringe playoff team to contending is incredibly optimistic and unlikely 

Yeah, I think the 2-3 year time frame would be just the very tip of the contending window opening (assuming things go relatively well). Certainly not the depths of it. Hopefully that's the start of some deeper playoff runs that set the stage for eventual finals runs/cups in 4+ years.

[JM_]

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

We'll see, but being in the mix for a playoff spot isn't remotely the same as being contenders and our being a playoff team this coming season is far from a sure thing.

 

If Vegas is even slightly healthier they likely make it, and then you've got Edmonton, Calgary, and LA with San Jose as a dark horse. Maybe Anaheim.

 

I think we'll be in the mix for a spot these next few seasons but by no means do I imagine we'll contend.

if thats true, then why not go full teardown then? let those teams windows go by for the next few years.

[BPA]

6 minutes ago, JM_ said:

maybe? thats what I keep hearing but I think this team is closer to what we saw under Bruce than others I guess, particularly if we can upgrade on d and take some pressure off Demko. 

Under Bruce…the team is likely 3rd in the conference or in a wild card spot.  Not likely be a powerhouse like TB and COL.

 

If the goal is just to make the playoffs, then not much change is needed.  If the goal is to be a perennial contender, then some tough decisions need to be made (think back to when COL traded Duchene).