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

Miller is a core player

Rate this topic


cdgraham

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Just out of curiosity, do you have any examples of packages you think JT Miller would fetch if we traded him now (presumably at his peak)?

 

I'm just curious, because I've gone through scenarios in my head, and honestly can't think of any trade partners willing to give up what JT Miller is worth that wouldn't result in a trade in the loss column for GMJR and Co.

One popular scenario I've seen thrown around is us making a trade with the Rangers. They're second in their division and firmly in the playoff mix. They've got standouts like Panarin, Krieder, Zibanajed, Trouba, Strome, and now Fox. They've also got top end ELC talent in Lafreniere and Kaako. 

 

They've also got the cap to fit Miller right now, capfriendly has em at 6.7M in cap space as of today. I'm not super familiar with their prospects, but I've seen Schneider+ thrown around, the Rags top talent is either 30 or pushing 30, could be a good time for them to make a push. 

 

Having drafted him they'd also be familiar with Miller as a person and player. 

Edited by Coconuts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

One popular scenario I've seen thrown around is us making a trade with the Rangers. They're second in their division and firmly in the playoff mix. They've got standouts like Panarin, Krieder, Zibanajed, Trouba, Strome, and now Fox. They've also got top end ELC talent in Lafreniere and Kaako. 

 

They've also got the cap to fit Miller right now, capfriendly has em at 6.7M in cap space as of today. I'm not super familiar with their prospects, but I've seen Schneider+ thrown around, the Rags top talent is either 30 or pushing 30, could be a good time for them to make a push. 

 

Having drafted him they'd also be familiar with Miller as a person and player. 

Schneider may or may not be an impact player in the NHL.  He's 20 years old, same age as Podz and Hogs I believe.  So now we've added a prospect to our prospect pool to play in Abbotsford. 

 

What else?  Surely there's gotta be more for the 12th highest scoring forward in the entire NHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cdgraham said:

I would keep both. 

 

Also Miller's has more ppg seasons then pettersson, who not to nit pick has none. Very close and flirting with it consistently, but look at petterssons stats the past 3 seasons and look at Miller's. Plus everything else Miller does well. 

 

Regardless I'd keep both. 

You're right, but to be a few points off from PPG seasons at ages 19-22 is remarkable. He's essentially been PPG to begin his career and should be kept imo. 

 

Miller wasn't the player he is to begin his career, rare is the player that is. Players grow, learn and develop, there's no reason Pettersson couldn't evolve into a better player too. Not that you've made an argument against that. 

 

If you'd keep both that's your opinion and you're welcome to it, I'm just making cases for my own arguments and I've got my own opinions and rationale. I'm not looking to make disagreements personal or change people's opinions. If some of what I say gets people thinking that's fine, if not we're just going back in forth on a forum and I've lost nothing but time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

You're right, but to be a few points off from PPG seasons at ages 19-22 is remarkable. He's essentially been PPG to begin his career and should be kept imo. 

 

Miller wasn't the player he is to begin his career, rare is the player that is. Players grow, learn and develop, there's no reason Pettersson couldn't evolve into a better player too. Not that you've made an argument against that. 

 

If you'd keep both that's your opinion and you're welcome to it, I'm just making cases for my own arguments and I've got my own opinions and rationale. I'm not looking to make disagreements personal or change people's opinions. If some of what I say gets people thinking that's fine, if not we're just going back in forth on a forum and I've lost nothing but time. 

I'll give you one thing, you're definitely not being a dick about any of this lol.  Then I looked and saw you're a fellow Islander and realized that's why you're not a dick hahaha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

One popular scenario I've seen thrown around is us making a trade with the Rangers. They're second in their division and firmly in the playoff mix. They've got standouts like Panarin, Krieder, Zibanajed, Trouba, Strome, and now Fox. They've also got top end ELC talent in Lafreniere and Kaako. 

 

They've also got the cap to fit Miller right now, capfriendly has em at 6.7M in cap space as of today. I'm not super familiar with their prospects, but I've seen Schneider+ thrown around, the Rags top talent is either 30 or pushing 30, could be a good time for them to make a push. 

 

Having drafted him they'd also be familiar with Miller as a person and player. 

 

Interesting how a team like the Rangers, who did an honest rebuild, was honest about it with their fans, and now see the benefits with their prospects and picks they kept, and traded for to stock their cupboards, entering their early prime, and contributing, and that they can now afford to actually take on a Miller as a key veteran support player for their, hopeful, playoff runs for presumably the next number of years.  And we, who never got a proper rebuild, have now overshot that first window and have to give up a player like Miller to NY instead of us being able to use of what he brings to the game for any playoffs we hope to get to.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HKSR said:

Schneider may or may not be an impact player in the NHL.  He's 20 years old, same age as Podz and Hogs I believe.  So now we've added a prospect to our prospect pool to play in Abbotsford. 

 

What else?  Surely there's gotta be more for the 12th highest scoring forward in the entire NHL.

It's true, but he's also a well thought of prospect who was drafted 19th overall at the last draft. He's also an RD, and we really need help on that side. The best way to get quality young RD is to draft and develop them, they're expensive to trade for once developed. Most teams won't move em. There'd have to be more of course, it wouldn't just be for Schneider. 

 

As for other options, I'm not sure. All I can tell you is that given his reasonable 5.25M it wouldn't require drastic surgery for a team to fit him in. There are teams who wouldn't even have to make space. Nashville, NYR, New Jersey. Could be we take a roster player back to make some of the cap work, that opens up a lot of doors. Could be we get a package involve picks and a player, a player and prospects, a package of all three. I'm not gonna pretend to be a prospect guru, but if he was on the market there would be teams interested. Much better informed people than me would be making those decisions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, HKSR said:

I'll give you one thing, you're definitely not being a dick about any of this lol.  Then I looked and saw you're a fellow Islander and realized that's why you're not a dick hahaha

I just don't see any reason to be you know? People have strong feelings on this site, about players and the direction of the team, about prospects, about coaching and management. But nothing that takes place here impacts what actually happens, so why make it personal? We're all just fans who put time into following a team fans with different views and takes on all sorts of things. 

 

Also fellow islander, nice. 

 

3 minutes ago, kilgore said:

 

Interesting how a team like the Rangers, who did an honest rebuild, was honest about it with their fans, and now see the benefits with their prospects and picks they kept, and traded for to stock their cupboards, entering their early prime, and contributing, and that they can now afford to actually take on a Miller as a key veteran support player for their, hopeful, playoff runs for presumably the next number of years.  And we, who never got a proper rebuild, have now overshot that first window and have to give up a player like Miller to NY instead of us being able to use of what he brings to the game for any playoffs we hope to get to.

Yeaaaah, if we'd done a true rebuild we'd likely be in a very different spot right now. I definitely see the irony. 

 

Pushing to retool as opposed to a legitimate rebuild didn't help, it's likely set us back years. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

It's true, but he's also a well thought of prospect who was drafted 19th overall at the last draft. He's also an RD, and we really need help on that side. The best way to get quality young RD is to draft and develop them, they're expensive to trade for once developed. Most teams won't move em. There'd have to be more of course, it wouldn't just be for Schneider. 

 

As for other options, I'm not sure. All I can tell you is that given his reasonable 5.25M it wouldn't require drastic surgery for a team to fit him in. There are teams who wouldn't even have to make space. Nashville, NYR, New Jersey. Could be we take a roster player back to make some of the cap work, that opens up a lot of doors. Could be we get a package involve picks and a player, a player and prospects, a package of all three. I'm not gonna pretend to be a prospect guru, but if he was on the market there would be teams interested. Much better informed people than me would be making those decisions. 

See that's the thing?  It sounds great to some to just trade him for a bunch of assets, but really... those assets need to make sense.  We're talking about one of the most complete power forwards in the entire NHL.  They don't grow on trees. 

 

Rangers maybe...

NJD?  Why would they want him?  Their core is even younger than ours. 

Nashville maybe... but again, what could they offer?  Do we feel that Cody Glass is the centrepiece?  I'd say it would need to start with Fabbro.  Nashville says no.

 

Most top tier teams don't have cap space for him.

 

It is not an easy thing to trade a player of Miller's value. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HKSR said:

See that's the thing?  It sounds great to some to just trade him for a bunch of assets, but really... those assets need to make sense.  We're talking about one of the most complete power forwards in the entire NHL.  They don't grow on trees. 

 

Rangers maybe...

NJD?  Why would they want him?  Their core is even younger than ours. 

Nashville maybe... but again, what could they offer?  Do we feel that Cody Glass is the centrepiece?  I'd say it would need to start with Fabbro.  Nashville says no.

 

Most top tier teams don't have cap space for him.

 

It is not an easy thing to trade a player of Miller's value. 

The assets do need to make sense, all trades have to make sense for both sides in theory. That's just it though, trades aren't easy to make but we see em every year. 

 

If we were to take a contract to facilitate the cap space we may even get more in return. Doesn't have to be a 3-4 year anchor, there's no guaranteeing the player would even necessarily be useless to us, at that point it's about making the cap work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

I just don't see any reason to be you know? People have strong feelings on this site, about players and the direction of the team, about prospects, about coaching and management. But nothing that takes place here impacts what actually happens, so why make it personal? We're all just fans who put time into following a team fans with different views and takes on all sorts of things. 

 

Also fellow islander, nice. 

 

Yeaaaah, if we'd done a true rebuild we'd likely be in a very different spot right now. I definitely see the irony. 

 

Pushing to retool as opposed to a legitimate rebuild didn't help, it's likely set us back years. 

Has it really though?  We now see what our Top 9 are capable of.  We know we have a Norris level defenceman in Hughes, and a great all-around Dman in OEL.  We also know we have a Vezina level goaltender in Demko.  What else do we need?

 

I'd say the only thing is maybe an upgrade on either Poolman or Hamonic to truly being a contender out of the west.

 

Many analysts had the Canucks finishing tops in the division before the season started.  We are now seeing why.  Boudreau has unlocked the potential.

 

We even have a great supporting cast with 2 of our better wingers on ELC, and one of our best agitating wingers (Garland) on a very cap friendly deal.

 

The window is open. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Canuck Luck said:

Yes they do, as do you.

 

Yours are no more right than any others regardless of your interpretation of what Rutherford has said.

Doesn't matter if my feelings are right or not, I haven't been discussing my feelings. All my of posts in this thread have been based on reasoning. If you don't agree with my reasoning it is what it is, won't impact what happens one way or another. Nothing said on this site does. 

 

16 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Has it really though?  We now see what our Top 9 are capable of.  We know we have a Norris level defenceman in Hughes, and a great all-around Dman in OEL.  We also know we have a Vezina level goaltender in Demko.  What else do we need?

 

I'd say the only thing is maybe an upgrade on either Poolman or Hamonic to truly being a contender out of the west.

 

Many analysts had the Canucks finishing tops in the division before the season started.  We are now seeing why.  Boudreau has unlocked the potential.

 

We even have a great supporting cast with 2 of our better wingers on ELC, and one of our best agitating wingers (Garland) on a very cap friendly deal.

 

The window is open. 

We're missing a 3c, we're weak at 3LD and our right side could certainly use a boost. Myers has been serviceable, Poolman's been alright. Could def use another top 4RD. Could use a legitimate 4c too. We never really replaced Beagle or Sutter, Dickinson is clearly more effective as a winger and that's how he was deployed in Dallas. 

 

There were also analysts that likely had us as a fringe playoff team, which isn't necessarily a bad thing as it means you're in the mix but it ain't exactly a ringing endorsement. Going into the season we had to compete with what looked to be a dog top in Vegas, a McDaid led Oilers club, a reinvigorated Flames club, a Sharks club that with aging but talent players, two teams trending up in Anaheim and LA, and a wildcard in Seattle. I never saw us as top dog. 

 

The window is open, but it could be opened wider. 

Edited by Coconuts
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Coconuts said:

Doesn't matter if my feelings are right or not, I haven't been discussing my feelings. All my of posts in this thread have been based on reasoning. If you don't agree with my reasoning it is what it is, won't impact what happens one way or another. Nothing said on this site does. 

 

We're missing a 3c, we're weak at 3D and our right side could certainly use a boost. Myers has been serviceable, Poolman's been alright. Could def use another top 4RD. Could use a legitimate 4c too. We never really replaced Beagle or Sutter, Dickinson is clearly more effective as a winger and that's how he was deployed in Dallas. 

 

There were also analysts that likely had us as a fringe playoff team, which isn't necessarily a bad thing as it means you're in the mix but it ain't exactly a ringing endorsement. Going into the season we had to compete with what looked to be a dog top in Vegas, a McDaid led Oilers club, a reinvigorated Flames club, a Sharks club that with aging but talent players, two teams trending up in Anaheim and LA, and a wildcard in Seattle. I never saw us as top dog. 

 

The window is open, but it could be opened wider. 

We have Petey, Bo, and Miller down the middle.  How are we missing a 3C? 

 

Wait... what?  Myers has been much more than serviceable lol.  Ok, I'm not sure if you've been analyzing the Canucks play that well if you think Myers has only been serviceable. 

 

I don't think you could add another top 4RD to this without moving one out:

Myers

Poolman

Hamonic

Schenn

Burroughs

If you added another one, that's completely a waste of assets.  I could see an upgrade on one though.

 

An upgrade on 4C could certainly help, but with 1C, 2C, and 3C playing 50-55min a night, really wouldn't waste too much assets on acquiring one.

 

The fact there were analysts predicting us to finish atop the division shows what level of talent we have on this roster though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Depends, if he does regress, and he's likely to, is it worth having what could be an anchor of a contract for "intangibles"? You can pay less for intangibles and leadership. Leadership on this team ain't exclusive to JT Miller. You ain't, but folks make it out as if he brings something to the team that Garland isn't also bringing. You can have players on the team like Miller and not have them be Miller. Is what he brings to the room and on the ice worth losing him? It's not about losing him, or even replacing him, it's about getting value for him and gambling on the future. Are we winning with Miller? Right now? Yes, we're also still a longshot to make the playoffs any way you spin it. If he's traded to you replace him? Of course not, it ain't that easy and nobody's arguing that, but you bet on a lengthier window built around younger pieces of the core. The team ain't thrown into a static situation upon losing Miller, there would be other moves going forward. 

 

I don't agree that what he brings is irreplaceable. What does he bring that's so irreplaceable? Heart? Talent? Emotion? Garland brings all those things too, as do other players on the team. If the team falls to pieces without one player that'd say a lot about the rest of the team. Miller was good in Tampa, but he wasn't what we've seen now. If he had been they'd likely have moved someone else. As for how you feel about Miller, those are your feelings and I ain't gonna argue with those. 

 

Our window ain't a static thing, our window could be changed. Benning did what he did, that doesn't mean Rutherford and co are obligated to keep the status quo going. If we're out of the playoff race near the deadline, and there's still a good chance we will be, Miller absolutely should be on the table. It also depends on who management views as the core going forward, you may see Miller as a future core piece but don't be surprised going forward if management sees it otherwise because it's entirely possible. Maybe they see things the way you do, that ain't a sure thing though. Could be they want to build around the younger core and look to extend our window by acquiring prospects and draft picks, by insulating our young core while looking to make way for the coming waves of future talent. 

 

I disagree, he's not so important that their psyche would be irreversibly damaged by his leaving. These are professionals, they've all seen teammates come and go, they've worked their entire lives to get where they are. They aren't going to fall to pieces over JT Miller. And I disagree, if we're out of the race closer to the deadline we should absolutely be looking hard at moving him because his value will never be higher than it is this season as a trade piece. Two seasons at 5.25M, two potential runs, that's more valuable to someone who fancies themselves a contender than a single season. It's better value, it's worth more. 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry Coco, seems like you are getting piled on.

But I just have to say this. If Millers "intangibles" are so easily replaced, why can you only name one other Canuck, Garland, who has these elusive "intangibles"? And imply we have one, so....we're good?  And Garland only came onto the team this season. I think you are vastly underestimating what those intangibles represent for a winning team to keep on winning. And how easy it is to replace that.

 

You are right, its up to management. I do trust this present management to make the smart decision regarding Miller. They may see it as you do or as I do.  I trust them to judge as experienced hockey people.  The window isn't static for sure, but JB has basically pushed us into this position by maxing out the cap, signing or taking on new players to multi year deals. And not having a lot to hope for coming out of Abbotsford anytime soon, which is now one of the oldest, vet laden teams in the AHL. 

 

No its not going to irreversibly damage the psyche of the team if he were traded away, but its just another deadly stab at the heart of the team's chemistry on a team that is barely afloat confidence wise, and just now finding its legs again.  You can say all you want how they are professionals and they should just suck it up. but in reality, like when you strip away important pieces like a Tanev, along with the other pieces in that infamous summer, it does have an effect.  And to remove such a loud, passionate, physical, and productive force on the team? It has to. It also has an effect on players not being comfortable with management, especially if there is lack of communication, and it affects things like if other players even want to play here.  Did Schmidt leave because of the schmidt show? 

 

Yes there is a dollar value worth, cap hit worth,  but there is also other types of worth. An NHL team is not like a machine you can just unplug one piece and replace it with another and it will all be back to normal.  A piece with those 'intangibles' is worth much more than one which doesn't have them, even if they are a few years younger.  We need Miller, and Motte, and Garland, and add to that even more players who have those kind of intangibles that truly shine in the playoffs. When you have them, you hold onto them.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, kilgore said:

 

Interesting how a team like the Rangers, who did an honest rebuild, was honest about it with their fans, and now see the benefits with their prospects and picks they kept, and traded for to stock their cupboards, entering their early prime, and contributing, and that they can now afford to actually take on a Miller as a key veteran support player for their, hopeful, playoff runs for presumably the next number of years.  And we, who never got a proper rebuild, have now overshot that first window and have to give up a player like Miller to NY instead of us being able to use of what he brings to the game for any playoffs we hope to get to.

They also had the benefit of winning the lottery two years in a row...something we could never do.  Also, I believe the Rangers are being held up by a good goaltender.  They got some good pieces, but they have some of the worst analytics in the entire league.

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

10 minutes ago, HKSR said:

We have Petey, Bo, and Miller down the middle.  How are we missing a 3C? 

 

Wait... what?  Myers has been much more than serviceable lol.  Ok, I'm not sure if you've been analyzing the Canucks play that well if you think Myers has only been serviceable. 

 

I don't think you could add another top 4RD to this without moving one out:

Myers

Poolman

Hamonic

Schenn

Burroughs

If you added another one, that's completely a waste of assets.  I could see an upgrade on one though.

 

An upgrade on 4C could certainly help, but with 1C, 2C, and 3C playing 50-55min a night, really wouldn't waste too much assets on acquiring one.

 

The fact there were analysts predicting us to finish atop the division shows what level of talent we have on this roster though. 

Because Pettersson is miscast as a 3C imo, and long term he's miscast in that position given his historical production and age. Bo is a legitimate 2c, probably a 1c on some teams. Miller's playing C this year but I view him more as a winger, and he's played a whole lot of wing. 

 

Additions wouldn't necessarily be made in season, we're capped out right now and it ain't likely. Myers will be 32 in a month or two, he'll be 34 when his contract expires. Hamonic will be 32 before next season begins and 33 when his deal expires. That's two players we'll have to make decisions on sooner than later. Poolman likely stays put, Schenn is a 5-6 at best. Burroughs, while playing admirably, isn't someone I'm necessarily sold on moving forward if we can improve on him. Poolman's fine as a third pairing guy and will probably be here til his deal is done. The only two long term locks I see are Hughes and OEL. 

 

It's a talented roster, no question, but a lot of our talent is on the younger side which is why there are many who would prefer to bet on the future. 

Edited by Coconuts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Because Pettersson is miscast as a 3C imo, and long term he's miscast in that position given his historical production and age. Bo is a legitimate 2c, probably a 1c on some teams. Miller's playing C this year but I view him more as a winger, and he's played a whole lot of wing. 

 

Additions wouldn't necessarily be made in season, we're capped out right now and it ain't likely. Myers will be 32 in a month or two, he'll be 34 when his contract expires. Hamonic will be 32 before next season begins and 33 when his deal expires. That's two players we'll have to make decisions on sooner than later. Poolman likely stays put, Schenn is a 5-6 at best. Burroughs, while playing admirably, isn't someone I'm necessarily sold on moving forward if we can improve on him. Poolman's fine as a third pairing guy and will probably be here til his deal is done. The only two long term locks I see are Hughes and OEL. 

 

It's a talented roster, no question, but a lot of our talent is on the younger side which is why there are many who would prefer to bet on the future. 

I don't think anyone is saying 1C, 2C, or 3C with Petey, Bo, and Miller.  It's more like 1A, 1B, and 1C at this point.  Followed up by a 4th line that is a hybrid 3rd/4th checking/energy unit.

 

Most analysts are saying Miller looks fantastic at centre.  It's being proven true based on the play on the ice too.  This is the best he has looked in awhile.

 

Again, I think you undervalue Myers and what he brings as our top RHD.  Teams would lineup for his services right now.  Even at $6M AAV.

 

I'm of the opinion the window is open right now, and will remain open as long as we keep the core together.  Move Miller and it'll set us back 2 or 3 years.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, kilgore said:

 

Sorry Coco, seems like you are getting piled on.

But I just have to say this. If Millers "intangibles" are so easily replaced, why can you only name one other Canuck, Garland, who has these elusive "intangibles"? And imply we have one, so....we're good?  And Garland only came onto the team this season. I think you are vastly underestimating what those intangibles represent for a winning team to keep on winning. And how easy it is to replace that.

 

You are right, its up to management. I do trust this present management to make the smart decision regarding Miller. They may see it as you do or as I do.  I trust them to judge as experienced hockey people.  The window isn't static for sure, but JB has basically pushed us into this position by maxing out the cap, signing or taking on new players to multi year deals. And not having a lot to hope for coming out of Abbotsford anytime soon, which is now one of the oldest, vet laden teams in the AHL. 

 

No its not going to irreversibly damage the psyche of the team if he were traded away, but its just another deadly stab at the heart of the team's chemistry on a team that is barely afloat confidence wise, and just now finding its legs again.  You can say all you want how they are professionals and they should just suck it up. but in reality, like when you strip away important pieces like a Tanev, along with the other pieces in that infamous summer, it does have an effect.  And to remove such a loud, passionate, physical, and productive force on the team? It has to. It also has an effect on players not being comfortable with management, especially if there is lack of communication, and it affects things like if other players even want to play here.  Did Schmidt leave because of the schmidt show? 

 

Yes there is a dollar value worth, cap hit worth,  but there is also other types of worth. An NHL team is not like a machine you can just unplug one piece and replace it with another and it will all be back to normal.  A piece with those 'intangibles' is worth much more than one which doesn't have them, even if they are a few years younger.  We need Miller, and Motte, and Garland, and add to that even more players who have those kind of intangibles that truly shine in the playoffs. When you have them, you hold onto them.

 

 

 

 

It's fine, I know what I'm signing up for when I discuss Miller the way I have been the last couple months. 

 

I listed Garland, but I also said there are others. Horvat leads, produces, plays with heart. Yes, Horvat, he's historically done these things. OEL plays hard, he's been a captain, he likely rejoined the lineup despite not be 100%, we all know what we've got in Motte. Schenn throws down for his team, plays hard, does the dirty/thankless worth for less than a million, just spent two seasons winning back to back cups. We've got Myers, Hughes. Pearson is well regarded, plays hard. Heart, talent, and emotion aren't unique to Miller, nor do they have to be displayed the way Miller expresses them in order to exist. Swearing, getting visibly upset, wearing his heart on his sleeve, Miller does these things. But his doing so doesn't mean players who aren't the same person/player as hi don't possess these things too. 

 

Benning def put us in a tough spot, but if Ruthorford's shown anything over his tenure as a GM it's his willingness to be ruthless. I don't see why that'd change as president. Benning put us in a tough spot but that doesn't mean we couldn't change our scenario, it'll be interesting to see what our new management does. 

 

It's not easy, they are people, but it's also a business and every single one of them knows that. Hockey, like life, is full of tough choices. They're paid hundreds of thousands of dollars, often millions, to play a game. Coaches, management, they're all well paid to make tough decisions. 

 

Like I said, intangibles aren't unique to certain players. Or even exclusively players on this team. If Miller is moved it won't be the last move we make, there's always turnover on rosters. Players move every year. Rare is the player who spends his entire career with one team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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