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

[BPA]

2 minutes ago, Pears said:

Hopefully. I’d do up to $8.5m if that gets it done. 

Ouch.  A bit too rich for me.

 

Rumored Canucks wanted a 6yr term (think around $40M).  That almost a $30M difference.  A compromise would be in the $50-60M range.

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Pears said:

That’s quite the increase in price from your suggestion of Petry/Anderson/3rd from a few weeks ago…

A (supposed) Canucks’ fan actually proposed we trade Miller for a mid 30’s D man (who is on a terrible contract) and a cap dump in Anderson?  Holy crap that’s a horrid trade. 

[Gawdzukes]

3 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

So 50+ games is a small sample size to judge the team but the first 25-30 games of the season is enough for you to base your hesitant opinion on?

 

It's not like they finished the last 20 games the way they did. They did it for the majority of the season with a lineup that doesn't even compare to what it is now. Then you throw in a healthy Petey, a mentally healthy Brock, Kuzy, Mikehyev, Lazar, PK, PP, speed, grit, etc.

I don't know what else to tell you man. I've found in sports more often than not thinking you're going to drastically improve based on a what if (Green wasn't here) model usually doesn't work out. I'm judging the team on the actual results they achieved over the last 4 years, including last year. Overall they haven't been great. They've made some pretty good moves this year and as you say may be the most improved team in the West.

 

That "yet to be seen improvement" is good and all but are they good enough to beat Dallas, Nashville, Edmonton, Minnesota, LA, and Calgary over 82 games? That remains to be seen. In my opinion they are all still good teams and not as easily pushed aside as you think, even with our upgrades.

 

I would also bet Dallas, Nashville, Minnesota, LA, and even Edmonton's fans are all similarly sitting there saying they are way better teams this year too!

[Pears]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

A (supposed) Canucks’ fan actually proposed we trade Miller for a mid 30’s D man (who is on a terrible contract) and a cap dump in Anderson?  Holy crap that’s a horrid trade. 

Yup. It was either this thread or a different one but it’s out there. 

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, BPA said:

Ouch.  A bit too rich for me.

 

Rumored Canucks wanted a 6yr term (think around $40M).  That almost a $30M difference.  A compromise would be in the $50-60M range.

A fair deal for Miller is what he would most likely get on July 1, 2023.  That’s going to be right near that 50-55 million mark. So if we move to 7 years and Miller comes down from 60 million, there is a deal at 7 x 7.75

[BureBurrito]

I think the team over dealt their hand or had pressure from ownership to hold onto Miller. At this point it's either start of the season (first 20 games) or trade deadline if he gets dealt or not and walks for free.

 

Plus any return for Miller has to be a combo of 1 -70 pt return player or 2 x 55-65 point producers back (losing a 85-100 point player without replacing it is a huge fall down the standings)

[BPA]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

A fair deal for Miller is what he would most likely get on July 1, 2023.  That’s going to be right near that 50-55 million mark. So if we move to 7 years and Miller comes down from 60 million, there is a deal at 7 x 7.75

Make it $7.5M x 7yrs.

[Pears]

10 minutes ago, BPA said:

Ouch.  A bit too rich for me.

 

Rumored Canucks wanted a 6yr term (think around $40M).  That almost a $30M difference.  A compromise would be in the $50-60M range.

Maybe a little bit, but I think if he really wants to stay in Vancouver 7x$8m-$8.5m should be more than reasonable. 

[Meh]

18 minutes ago, Pears said:

Hopefully. I’d do up to $8.5m if that gets it done. 

 

[Scottydzik]

15 minutes ago, Pears said:

That’s quite the increase in price from your suggestion of Petry/Anderson/3rd from a few weeks ago…

Not really I think Petry is better player then Sverson even at his age. Anderson is proven leader top 6 forward good for 20-35 goals. Holtz is unproven and far from sure thing hence why I ask for first.

[BPA]

Just now, Pears said:

Maybe a little bit, but I think if he really wants to stay in Vancouver 7x$8m-$8.5m should be more than reasonable. 

See.  That’s the problem.  

What Miller is willing to accept and what the Canucks is willing to offer.  If they can’t reach a middle ground, then it becomes the scenario I mentioned before.  Make a trade (between now and TDL) or make a run for the playoffs and risk Miller walking as a UFA.  Both those cases would be a setback as undoubtedly Canucks are losing the best player.

[Pears]

17 minutes ago, Scottydzik said:

Not really I think Petry is better player then Sverson even at his age. Anderson is proven leader top 6 forward good for 20-35 goals. Holtz is unproven and far from sure thing hence why I ask for first.

This Josh Anderson?

 

Edit: He’s only crossed 20 goals once and hasn’t once come close to 35 lol what. 

Edited July 25, 2022 by Pears

[Jester13]

55 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

I don't know what else to tell you man. I've found in sports more often than not thinking you're going to drastically improve based on a what if (Green wasn't here) model usually doesn't work out. I'm judging the team on the actual results they achieved over the last 4 years, including last year. Overall they haven't been great. They've made some pretty good moves this year and as you say may be the most improved team in the West.

 

That "yet to be seen improvement" is good and all but are they good enough to beat Dallas, Nashville, Edmonton, Minnesota, LA, and Calgary over 82 games? That remains to be seen. In my opinion they are all still good teams and not as easily pushed aside as you think, even with our upgrades.

 

I would also bet Dallas, Nashville, Minnesota, LA, and even Edmonton's fans are all similarly sitting there saying they are way better teams this year too!

You keep putting words in my mouth like "guarantee" and "not as easily pushed aside as you think". We'll obviously have to agree to disagree, but I really think you're taking a middle ground fallacy approach to analyzing this team by ignoring the majority of the games last year under Bruce, the additions we made this year, the facts of Petey and Brock being healthy, etc., and instead debasing the season down to: "this group of players missed the playoffs again." Last year's group of players did miss the playoffs, but we've kept our stars and greatly upgraded our forward group with some legit scoring and PK threats. Anything can change between now and the season, and anything during the season can negatively affect any team in the league, but as it stands right now the other teams in the Pacific vying for a PO spot should be more worried about us this upcoming year than us them. Of course, we're not going deep if we make it, due to our D makeup, but that's another topic in itself. 

[aGENT]

2 hours ago, BPA said:

Probably because our D hasn’t improved.  Still looks like we are going with…

 

QH Schenn

OEL Myers

Dermott Burroughs 

?? ??

 

And relying on Demko to be Vezina calibre every night.

 

Don’t think we are in the top 3 in the Pacific Division (LV, EDM, CAL) and would be in the wild card mix with LA and NSH.  So definitely not a guarantee to be a playoff team.

People are so focused on "next year!"  For me, a Miller move has far more to do with medium-long term cap allocation, (hopefully) addressing some of our D issues (Myers doesn't fit well with any lefties in our top 4, Schenn is expiring end of this season, Myers the season after). We have major structural and succession issues there. Some of which we likely need to use Miller's future (+/- $9m) cap space, and likely some of the trade return assets, to fix.

 

We can be roughly as competitive with or without Miller next season IMO. We're a bubble playoff team either way. Moving him just allows us to start fleshing out the team properly moving forward, and correcting our major issues on the back end.

 

2 hours ago, JM_ said:

not an RFA. Not exactly young. Also a big question mark as to why Pits sold low on him. 

 

We've been discussing for months trading Miller for young RFA players, but thats the rarest thing to get in the trade market. 

He is an RFA though. He's under contract through those RFA years, but he's RFA aged.

 

1 hour ago, JM_ said:

true but he also seems to have regressed a bit from his first year. Is he good enough to be with Quinn? we could have had him apparently for Rathbone and a 2nd and passed. I'd really like to know why. 

Because PIT (like much of the league) was desperately trying to shed cap and they had depth at D to move him. Similar reason Patches went for a bag of Monopoly money.

Edited July 25, 2022 by aGENT

[Goal:thecup]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

A fair deal for Miller is what he would most likely get on July 1, 2023.  That’s going to be right near that 50-55 million mark. So if we move to 7 years and Miller comes down from 60 million, there is a deal at 7 x 7.75

Now you're getting there.

I've been saying it is 7.75m x 7 or 8 years for months now.

The 7 or 8 years part is total money; i.e. if JT wants the 8th year then the AAV comes down a step.

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Goal:thecup said:

Now you're getting there.

I've been saying it is 7.75m x 7 or 8 years for months now.

The 7 or 8 years part is total money; i.e. if JT wants the 8th year then the AAV comes down a step.

Agreed.  At what point (if ever) does JR move from the six years?  

[Fanuck]

18 minutes ago, Goal:thecup said:

Now you're getting there.

I've been saying it is 7.75m x 7 or 8 years for months now.

The 7 or 8 years part is total money; i.e. if JT wants the 8th year then the AAV comes down a step.

 

12 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Agreed.  At what point (if ever) does JR move from the six years?  

This is essentially the dollar/term that is widely speculated Horvat will be re-signed for (or veryclose to it anyway).   Not sure Miller's camp sees BoHo as a 'comparable" financially speaking. 

[JM_]

14 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Agreed.  At what point (if ever) does JR move from the six years?  

hopefully soon, so they can get to work improving other areas of the team. Move out Garland and Dickie and bringing Klingberg once a Miller extension is done. 

[Goal:thecup]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Agreed.  At what point (if ever) does JR move from the six years?  

I think JR has a total dollar amount he is willing to commit to Miller.

I think JT has a similar dollar amount.  (About $60 million, give or take 2 or 3 million.) 

On these they are not far apart; the difference is the term.

 

I don't know if JR put the 6 years thing out there or not.

But to get to Miller's ask, we will need at least the 7 year option or the AAV will be too high.

We are the only team able to offer the 8th year (at this point).

 

I could see 8 years at my $7.75.

I do not believe the last 3 years of JT's contract will be as damaging as some doomsayers here do.

 

As suggested by Jimmy M, we should be able to fine tune some protection for the team in the latter years (bonuses, reduced move clauses etc).

And the cap will have indubitably risen (quite a bit imo) after the first 2 or 3 years of the deal, and definitely in the last few years.

 

So JT will have received most of his money, his AAV will be higher than his actual cost, and we should have some flexibility as to trades etc.

I could go on, but bottom line is still, for me at least, 7 years at about $8.25, or 8 years at about 7.75 million dollars.

 

(For those worried about Bo, I think he too will get the 8 year deal but at about $7m AAV.)

 

 

 

[Mustard Tiger]

This is really getting on my nerves how long this is taking! Like seriously, What the heck is the holdup people!

 

This should be at 1000 pages already. Same ol' canucks fans