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

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


Podzilla

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Pears said:

And that offer was rightfully turned down immediately because it was laughable at best. An average at best middle six center and two question marks for a 99 point top 10 scoring forward. At this point I’m keeping Miller if we aren’t getting what he’s worth. 

Then you're keeping Miller. Waste of a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Pears said:

And that offer was rightfully turned down immediately because it was laughable at best. An average at best middle six center and two question marks for a 99 point top 10 scoring forward. At this point I’m keeping Miller if we aren’t getting what he’s worth. 

I like Chytil but no thanks to Lundkvist. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

I keep thinking back to that deal that supposedly fell apart with the Isles.

 

The fact that the Isles already had the Romanov deal in place before the draft makes me wonder if he was gonna be part of the deal for Miller.

 

Can’t imagine we wouldn’t be asking for a young D man back in a deal and surely the Isles don’t wanna trade Dobson. The deal was rumoured to fall apart because Allvin asked for another piece last minute.
 

Maybe the deal centered around Romanov? Something around Romanov, Wahlstrom, and Raty? Not sure if Romanov can play right side but maybe someone can switch sides?

 

Will be interesting to see if it’s revisited either way.

 

11 minutes ago, combover said:

Need a poll - On what cdc page will this thread be when miller is signed or traded 


 

My guess page 1127 

 

 

Maybe something here was posted that they wanted Rathbone and we didn't want to add him,at this point we

Ay never know but I do want to know.The NYR deal that we did not take looks really good right noy guess was page 1251.

 

 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

Then you're keeping Miller. Waste of a year.

Sorry but making a deal for the sake of making a deal is bad business. I’m keeping my 99 point 1st line player over trading him for garbage thanks. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pears said:

Sorry but making a deal for the sake of making a deal is bad business. I’m keeping my 99 point 1st line player over trading him for garbage thanks. 

Yup.  Don’t want this new management to do a “Benning”.  A bad deal just makes the Benning mess bigger.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Yup.  Don’t want this new management to do a “Benning”.  A bad deal just makes the Benning mess bigger.  

Exactly. Doing this would make management no better than the Benning regime. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alflives said:

What about Miller + Garland for Pulock + Pageau? 

What is your obsession with both acquiring Pageau and dumping Garland?

 

Garland is younger, cheaper, and better than Pageau.

 

You also overrate Pulock. At 6 million signed long term it’s just gonna be another anchor contract we need to dump in a few years.

 

Overall horrible trade. Your proposal privileges are hereby revoked!

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

1 hour ago, DeNiro said:

I keep thinking back to that deal that supposedly fell apart with the Isles.

 

The fact that the Isles already had the Romanov deal in place before the draft makes me wonder if he was gonna be part of the deal for Miller.

 

Can’t imagine we wouldn’t be asking for a young D man back in a deal and surely the Isles don’t wanna trade Dobson. The deal was rumoured to fall apart because Allvin asked for another piece last minute.
 

Maybe the deal centered around Romanov? Something around Romanov, Wahlstrom, and Raty? Not sure if Romanov can play right side but maybe someone can switch sides?

 

Will be interesting to see if it’s revisited either way.

 

 

Lamoriello has stated that his off-season priority was to improve their defence  - he talked of trying to make a hockey trade using a F to acquire a D.  There probably was no one willing to move a top-4 D for the Fs they had available so he used the pick to get Romanov.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Alflives said:

What about Miller + Garland for Pulock + Pageau?

And Myers (1 mil retained) for Adam Larsson?

Wake up JR and get ‘er done! :frantic:

Pulock is starting his deal this season and has a full NTC.  It's defence that was their biggest concern this off-season.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mll said:

Lamoriello has stated that his off-season priority was to improve their defence  - he talked of trying to make a hockey trade using a F to acquire a D.  There probably was no one willing to move a top-4 D for the Fs they had available so he used the pick to get Romanov.  

 

 

He also wasn’t happy with his forward group either.

 

If he wants to acquire Miller its gonna cost a young D man. 
 

He can go after Klingberg if he wants another D.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

He also wasn’t happy with his forward group either.

 

If he wants to acquire Miller its gonna cost a young D man. 
 

He can go after Klingberg if he wants another D.

Defence was the priority.  Both Trotz and Lamoriello blamed the holes on D for their poor season - they couldn't get the puck out.  

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Pears said:

Exactly. Doing this would make management no better than the Benning regime. 

Not making a trade to recoup at least some kind of assets would make them exactly like Benning though.  People say Johnny is a cautionary tale but we already experienced the cautionary tale that was Tanev/Marky/Toffoli and it didn't help this club whatsoever. 

 

I'm NOT saying deal for the sake of a deal, but I do believe there is a lot of time to resolve the Miller situation.   Whether it's 6 days, 6 weeks or 6 months there's no hurry at this point. 

 

What we've seen over the past several weeks is that anything can happen and the media often has no idea what's actually happening behind closed doors despite their 'insider' claims. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mll said:

Defence was the priority.  Both Trotz and Lamoriello blamed the holes on D for their poor season - they couldn't get the puck out.  

 

They had lots of problems. Scoring also being one of them.

 

They’re not gonna telegraph all their moves through media interviews.

 

They wanted major shakeups. You think acquiring Romanov is gonna solve their problems?

 

Wouldnt be surprised if that move was just a precursor to several bigger moves.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

They had lots of problems. Scoring also being one of them.

 

They’re not gonna telegraph all their moves through media interviews.

 

They wanted major shakeups. You think acquiring Romanov is gonna solve their problems?

 

Wouldnt be surprised if that move was just a precursor to several bigger moves.

 

 

 

Can't score if they are stuck in their own zone.

 

Lamoriello thinks Romanov has the upside to help them - he gave 13th overall to acquire him.  They see him as a long term fit with Dobson.  

 

Wouldn't be all that surprised if they come back with the same group - they should have a healthy D-corps, a more normal schedule and a new coach.  

 

Lamoriello talked of trying to make a hockey trade up front - Beauvillier and Bailey believed to be the ones who were available in a trade.  Others have trade clauses and Barzal is obviously untouchable.  Not easy to move cap.

 

Edited by mll
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...