Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

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


Podzilla

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, JM_ said:

I wonder if we're getting a little carried away with our expectations around the Miller deal? not so long ago Chytil and Schneider would have been seen as a great return on Miller. 

Pretty sure it was always Chytil, Schneider and a first for Miller alone (x 2 cup runs). If we're downgrading the first to a late 2nd and adding Schenn, I don't think it's out of line to ask for Barron at all.

 

Barron likely has a 3C ceiling... It's not like I'm trying to slap Kakko or Laffy in there :lol:

Edited by aGENT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

Pretty sure it was always Chytil, Schneider and a first for Miller alone (x 2 cup runs). If we're downgrading the first to a late 2nd and adding Schenn, I don't think it's out of line to ask for Barron at all.

that trade would be a big win for both teams, particularly if Miller inks an extension (which I think they agree to in principle before the deal). 

 

If its going to happen, I hope it happens early and not down to the TDL. 

 

Last thing I want is Miller going to Calgary for lesser pieces if the Rangers make their moves before we decide on what to do. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps it's just my pessimistic nature but I just get the feeling that contenders are going to feel like "we'd love to have him but we don't need him; if we're spending assets at this deadline it should be for a D-man".

 

Which is why I find it hard to believe that we'd get a 1st and an A prospect like Schneider, instead of a 1st + two B pieces.

 

I hope I'm wrong but you guys know the chances of this are slim.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Perhaps it's just my pessimistic nature but I just get the feeling that contenders are going to feel like "we'd love to have him but we don't need him; if we're spending assets at this deadline it should be for a D-man".

 

Which is why I find it hard to believe that we'd get a 1st and an A prospect like Schneider, instead of a 1st + two B pieces.

 

I hope I'm wrong but you guys know the chances of this are slim.

We could settle for Laugher or Crappo, and hope they improve?  Bad to give up Miller for a bustaroo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, JM_ said:

that trade would be a big win for both teams, particularly if Miller inks an extension (which I think they agree to in principle before the deal). 

 

If its going to happen, I hope it happens early and not down to the TDL. 

 

Last thing I want is Miller going to Calgary for lesser pieces if the Rangers make their moves before we decide on what to do. 

Yeah, I do not want miller going to Calgary.  I do think his agent would likely let it be known he probably would re-sign in Calgary which would probably squash it

  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, JC2 said:

Based on the rangers needs you'd think Miller would be their prime target yet they are pushing hard for Chychrun as well. They do have the assets to acquire both but I don't see them depleting their system for two players. Maybe put out their best offer for both players and take whoever bites first.

If they push all their chips in and go for it, NYR can do both.  Just means no prospect pools.

 

Sometimes you have to bet big to win big.  And it’s not like it’s a rental.  Both Miller and Chychrun has some term left on their contracts.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Rags are already pretty stacked with young dmen, I'm not sure why they'd be so in on JC......seems redundant to me.  There's only one puck and so much ice time you can allocate.  I think if they land Chycrun they are out on Miller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Perhaps it's just my pessimistic nature but I just get the feeling that contenders are going to feel like "we'd love to have him but we don't need him; if we're spending assets at this deadline it should be for a D-man".

 

Which is why I find it hard to believe that we'd get a 1st and an A prospect like Schneider, instead of a 1st + two B pieces.

 

I hope I'm wrong but you guys know the chances of this are slim.

This is my exact feeling.

 

At this point, if we become seller at the deadline, I’ll be happy with Chytil, Lundkqvist, and a conditional 2nd (covert to a 1st, if the Rangers make the conference finals). 
 

I just believe Schneider is probably on their untouchable list, based on Gallant mentioning one of the reason why he took the job was because of Schneider, when he coached him at the Worlds. 
 

If they were to trade Schneider, it would be for someone like Chychrun. A player who fits their core group range and has a more terms on his contract.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the hiring of Constanguay (i hope i spelled that correctly) and her connection to Lafreniere, would it make sense to take a run at him in a Miller trade? Its definitely a futures trade and some guys just don't hit the ground running in their first 2 years (see Jack Hughes) but still end up as elite players. 

 

Miller at 50% retained for Lafreniere + 2nd?

 

As far as i can remember, the Canucks haven't had a 1st OA on their team since Jovocop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BabychStache said:

With the hiring of Constanguay (i hope i spelled that correctly) and her connection to Lafreniere, would it make sense to take a run at him in a Miller trade? Its definitely a futures trade and some guys just don't hit the ground running in their first 2 years (see Jack Hughes) but still end up as elite players. 

 

Miller at 50% retained for Lafreniere + 2nd?

 

As far as i can remember, the Canucks haven't had a 1st OA on their team since Jovocop.

Big risk taking Lafreniere in a Miller deal.  We would need a first at least (maybe two firsts) to cover for the serious bust issues swirling around the Laugher.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, shiznak said:

This is my exact feeling.

 

At this point, if we become seller at the deadline, I’ll be happy with Chytil, Lundkqvist, and a conditional 2nd (covert to a 1st, if the Rangers make the conference finals). 
 

I just believe Schneider is probably on their untouchable list, based on Gallant mentioning one of the reason why he took the job was because of Schneider, when he coached him at the Worlds. 
 

If they were to trade Schneider, it would be for someone like Chychrun. A player who fits their core group range and has a more terms on his contract.

I'd say a C who can play pp, pk and gives them an incredible 1-2 punch down the middle is just as coveted as a dman........for the Rags are already deep at d, they don't even need Chycrun

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JM_ said:

I wonder if we're getting a little carried away with our expectations around the Miller deal? not so long ago Chytil and Schneider would have been seen as a great return on Miller. 

You could be very right about this... Surely NY knows, what Canucks needs as well... 

Tend to be a comment theme, building it up, and then all the criticism afterwards for not getting, what folks expected...

Lets hope for a Kings ransom, but not be too disappointed should it not materialise...

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, stawns said:

The Rags are already pretty stacked with young dmen, I'm not sure why they'd be so in on JC......seems redundant to me.  There's only one puck and so much ice time you can allocate.  I think if they land Chycrun they are out on Miller.

Because the Rangers’ left side is pretty weak, aside from Lindgren.

 

Lindgren - Fox

Chychrun - Trouba

K’Miller - Nemeth

 

That defensive core would probably be one of the best core, since Nashville circa 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, stawns said:

I'd say a C who can play pp, pk and gives them an incredible 1-2 punch down the middle is just as coveted as a dman........for the Rags are already deep at d, they don't even need Chycrun

Miller is definitely a bigger need. Even organizationally, they don't have a lot of F's (prospects even) that bring Miller's playoff style grit with top 6 scoring. He's EXACTLY what they're lacking.

 

Chychrun would/could be a nice add for them as well, but he's far less of a need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, stawns said:

I'd say a C who can play pp, pk and gives them an incredible 1-2 punch down the middle is just as coveted as a dman........for the Rags are already deep at d, they don't even need Chycrun

Strome isn’t a slouch of a player, who can kill penalties as well. Plus the known chemistry with Panarin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, spook007 said:

You could be very right about this... Surely NY knows, what Canucks needs as well... 

Tend to be a comment theme, building it up, and then all the criticism afterwards for not getting, what folks expected...

Lets hope for a Kings ransom, but not be too disappointed should it not materialise...

I think Rutherford is a crafty old dude too. Stating publicly that "Miller is our best forward" certainly doesn't downgrade his value any. 

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...