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

[aGENT]

Just now, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

Well no $&!#. Beyond Carlo, he's the only thing of value we'd want.

[Provost]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

Well no $&!#. Beyond Carlo, he's the only thing of value we'd want.

Miller costs them both of those pieces for sure.

[tas]

2 minutes ago, Provost said:

Miller costs them both of those pieces for sure.

and they can throw in a first rounder, too, because f*** them. 

[Jester13]

6 minutes ago, tas said:

and they can throw in a first rounder, too, because f*** them. 

Hahaha, I just pictured management on the phone: "And while you're at it, throw in a 1st as well, cause eff you." 

[Gawdzukes]

8 minutes ago, RWJC said:

Thanks! To me the logic behind it is that at base you only have 6 D spots, whereas F has 12.

 

To me that makes the back end farrrr more valuable and important to build off of, especially when those 6 share the brunt of it versus 12 others when it comes to ice time breakdown, usage and reliability/dependency.
 

To have come this far without having built a solid top 4 D already is somewhat ludicrous given the demand on that position.
 

Now, it’s owed to Demko and QH to support this area as first priority. 

We can't just keep throwing out squab on RD and expecting better results. 

[Coconuts]

6 hours ago, HKSR said:

 

I'm not gonna spend my day discussing this again.

 

You're kidding yourselves if you don't think having Miller around doesn't take immense pressure off Petey.  If Miller wasn't around, the media would be blasting Petey at this point, ESPECIALLY after his big fat new contract. 

 

Having match up centres does nothing for Petey.  Petey needs to carry the offence.  Tierney and Paul doesn't make one lick of difference in terms of Petey being THE #1 centre for this franchise and being expected to produce the big game offence. 

 

The Canucks are 26th in goals for in the entire league WITH a point-per-game centre in Miller.  Trading his 82 points away would help in that respect, how exactly???

I'm not arguing that Miller doesn't take pressure off Pettersson, but the reality is that if he's the player we think he is he's going to have to figure out how to handle that pressure regardless. Miller will not always be playing at his current level, even if he stays. If this team wants to have success with Pettersson on the team he's going to have to learn how to break through more focused attention, and I think he's capable of it.

 

The media hasn't been poking at him because of his production? The fanbase hasn't been going round in circles because of him? Nothing changes there, already happening. 

 

Having match up centers frees him up to play more plum offensive minutes, match up centers can do a lot for guys like Pettersson. Eat up some of Bo's PK time, take more of the defensive zone draws, line up against the other team's top talent. But sure, absolutely, of course Pettersson and the top guys will have to carry the offense. That's their job. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't take some time to adjust. If they're going to put him in that role they'll need to improve the rest of the team, which is Al and JR's agenda already. 

 

Pettersson's had the expectation that he'd produced placed on him since be blew folks away with a Calder caliber season. If he wants the job, and the money, that's what he's got to try and do. No earth shattering revelation there. 

 

Miller is PPG right now. Right now. And even with that, we're still not good enough. As Miller ages, and inevitably declines, this team is is going to have to figure things out offensively anyway. There's no kicking that ball down the road, that's an issue every single season. How exactly does it help? That depends entirely on what they get in return and what other moves they make between any Miller trade and the beginning of next season. Because yeah, there'd be other moves.

 

What are they? Beats me dude, my crystal ball's at the repair shop. You've every right to be skeptical of the prospect of moving Miller, and to be skeptical of potential trades, but you've also got to acknowledge that there's also a chance that maybe, just maybe, a Miller trade just might work out if management does their jobs. It's not just about Miller, or Pettersson, but building up the entire roster and organization. Our roster's got plenty of question marks, and the building process won't take place in one season/offseason, the building process will take time. 

 

I imagine management's got many irons in the fire at this point, one of which may very well be looking at a Miller extension. But there are plenty of ways to approach how to build the future, and it's their job to figure that out, not my job to sell you on trade proposals and theoretical what if's. 

 

 

[aGENT]

5 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

We can't just keep throwing out squab on RD and expecting better results. 

 

1 hour ago, RWJC said:

Thanks! To me the logic behind it is that at base you only have 6 D spots, whereas F has 12.

 

To me that makes the back end farrrr more valuable and important to build off of, especially when those 6 share the brunt of it versus 12 others when it comes to ice time breakdown, usage and reliability/dependency.
 

To have come this far without having built a solid top 4 D already is somewhat ludicrous given the demand on that position.
 

Now, it’s owed to Demko and QH to support this area as first priority. 

Seriously, where have you two been hiding 

 

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

I'm not arguing that Miller doesn't take pressure off Pettersson, but the reality is that if he's the player we think he is he's going to have to figure out how to handle that pressure regardless. Miller will not always be playing at his current level, even if he stays. If this team wants to have success with Pettersson on the team he's going to have to learn how to break through more focused attention, and I think he's capable of it.

 

The media hasn't been poking at him because of his production? The fanbase hasn't been going round in circles because of him? Nothing changes there, already happening. 

 

Having match up centers frees him up to play more plum offensive minutes, match up centers can do a lot for guys like Pettersson. Eat up some of Bo's PK time, take more of the defensive zone draws, line up against the other team's top talent. But sure, absolutely, of course Pettersson and the top guys will have to carry the offense. That's their job. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't take some time to adjust. If they're going to put him in that role they'll need to improve the rest of the team, which is Al and JR's agenda already. 

 

Pettersson's had the expectation that he'd produced placed on him since be blew folks away with a Calder caliber season. If he wants the job, and the money, that's what he's got to try and do. No earth shattering revelation there. 

 

Miller is PPG right now. Right now. And even with that, we're still not good enough. As Miller ages, and inevitably declines, this team is is going to have to figure things out offensively anyway. There's no kicking that ball down the road, that's an issue every single season. How exactly does it help? That depends entirely on what they get in return and what other moves they make between any Miller trade and the beginning of next season. Because yeah, there'd be other moves.

 

What are they? Beats me dude, my crystal ball's at the repair shop. You've every right to be skeptical of the prospect of moving Miller, and to be skeptical of potential trades, but you've also got to acknowledge that there's also a chance that maybe, just maybe, a Miller trade just might work out if management does their jobs. It's not just about Miller, or Pettersson, but building up the entire roster and organization. Our roster's got plenty of question marks, and the building process won't take place in one season/offseason, the building process will take time. 

 

I imagine management's got many irons in the fire at this point, one of which may very well be looking at a Miller extension. But there are plenty of ways to approach how to build the future, and it's their job to figure that out, not my job to sell you on trade proposals and theoretical what if's. 

 

 

There is the issue with Miller that he’s very likely not signing another contract with us unless we grossly overpay.  We need to trade him before this year’s TDL to maximize his value.  

[Provost]

18 minutes ago, tas said:

and they can throw in a first rounder, too, because f*** them. 

“Oh and throw in a first rounder because &^@#ing Marchand”

[Gawdzukes]

13 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

Hahaha, I just pictured management on the phone: "And while you're at it, throw in a 1st as well, cause eff you." 

"you piece of sh!t", 

[Coconuts]

4 minutes ago, Alflives said:

There is the issue with Miller that he’s very likely not signing another contract with us unless we grossly overpay.  We need to trade him before this year’s TDL to maximize his value.  

We certainly won't be getting him for peanuts if he does re-sign, that's for sure. But I don't think any team outside of a contender or tax friendly state will get him on a deal that has people going "man, that's a great deal". 

 

I'm def on the trade Miller train. 

[Alflives]

9 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

We certainly won't be getting him for peanuts if he does re-sign, that's for sure. But I don't think any team outside of a contender or tax friendly state will get him on a deal that has people going "man, that's a great deal". 

 

I'm def on the trade Miller train. 

Between Miller, Garland, and Boeser, who do we keep?  

[Provost]

48 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

I just read the actual link.  A Garland for Lysell trade is pretty intriguing.  Or Garland + for Lysell and Debrusk.

 

It helps free up cap space to the point (with another trade) we may actually be able to get under the LTIR and be able to bank some dollars and avoid pushing bonuses into next year.

 

We do have a bunch of potential overages, I haven’t really been tracking who is owed what aside from the oft mentioned Halak bonus.  Managing to get well under the cap for the rest of this season would pay huge dividends next year and could be the difference in being able to sign a guy like Motte rather than some fringe minimum wage NHLer.

Edited February 3, 2022 by Provost

[Coconuts]

23 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Between Miller, Garland, and Boeser, who do we keep?  

I'd keep Garland for sure, because of his age and drive. He brings a lot of the same things Miller does via his play style imo. He's tenacious, plays bigger than he is, and typically puts in a good effort night in and night out. He's got similar drive, plays with heart, he's actually one of the reasons I'm fine with moving Miller. You like to have guys like Miller on your team, but those guys don't have to be Miller. Garland has struggled of late, but he's not alone in that. 

 

I'd move Miller. I'm also open to moving Boeser though, though Boeser's in a bit of an odd spot. 

 

He's a pending RFA with a large qualifying offer, he's a forward who's shown he's capable of being an offensive contributor every season up til now, and he's a player you're probably selling low on if you move him imo. There's a fair chance he bounces back, Pettersson's struggled this season too for whatever reason(s), and that he may be receptive to a longer term deal with a smaller cap hit. Boeser could honestly go either way. Though despite my saying we'd probably be selling low, that doesn't mean I don't think we could get something of value for him. He's still valuable, he just inspires less confidence than he did at the end of last season. 

 

I think Miller probably goes. Garland? Maybe, but I'd rather he stay given his age and deal. Boeser? I think what happens with Boeser honestly depends on who JR an Al want from their top six and what they could potentially get from him. Boeser's got a great shot (or at least he did at one point) and he's an underrated passer imo, but he's not exactly fast or gritty. If management decides they want to add other elements to our top six he may be the guy who's moved to bolster another area of the roster and open up a top six slot. 

Edited February 3, 2022 by Coconuts

[70seven]

Rumour dujour

 

Miller to BOS for Debrusk, Lysell, 1st

 

 Not enough imo… tho I do love me some Lysell

Edited February 3, 2022 by 70seven

[Coconuts]

5 minutes ago, 70seven said:

Rumour dujour

 

Miller to BOS for Debrusk, Lysell, 1st

 

 Not enough imo… tho I do love me some Lysell

They'd have to add, we'd be doing them a favour by taking Debrusk. Taking him is basically them dumping him on someone because he wants out at this point. 

 

Average size, pending RFA, numbers haven't been great. I'm not interested in Debrusk and he doesn't move the needle. He's neutral value at best. 

Edited February 3, 2022 by Coconuts

[Jester13]

2 minutes ago, 70seven said:

Rumour dujour

 

Miller to BOS for Debrusk, Lysell, 1st

Carlo, Lysell, 1st. 

[flickyoursedin]

10 minutes ago, 70seven said:

Rumour dujour

 

Miller to BOS for Debrusk, Lysell, 1st

 

 Not enough imo… tho I do love me some Lysell

Offer seems very meh. Lysell is good but an undersized winger prospect (Hoglander type), Debrusk is a 35-45 point winger and a late first. There’s no way that’s the best offer on the table. Boston just doesn’t seem to have the right prospects for me to really get excited about a deal.

[Gurn]

I'm a few pages late, but wanted to put in

J.T. Millers best year, points wise before becoming a Canuck was 56 points, in 82 games with the Rangers 2016-17

As a Canuck Miller  scored 72 points in 2019-20

Bo Horvat's best  is 61  in 82 games  during 2018-19.

 

So I don't see a huge drop off.

Edited February 3, 2022 by gurn

[BPA]

Maybe package Miller with an unwanted contract and take somewhat less?

 

Miller + Hamonic for Schneider + Chytil + 2nd?