(Discussion) Horvat vs Miller

[canuckpuckluck1]

A little off topic but I am very intrigued to see what happens in Arizona with their "scorched earth" policy.

I want to see how that pans out over the next few years. Maybe its an avenue for the Canucks because the last 10 years in Vancouver has been nothing short of painful!

 

I can't go through another 10 year slow rebuild that we are all currently endurring to see ourselves right back where we started...capped out and not in the hunt for the playoffs.

 

I wonder how Arizona is going to build a team from scratch... will it work? How long will it take for them to be competetive? 

 

 

Is this something the Canucks would consider? 

Would the fans be able to stomach the two years it would take to completely dismantle the team and burn it all to the ground...maybe they could burn the Canucks curse and the club could rise from the ashes like a Pheonix 

[Russ]

10 hours ago, Alflives said:

I’m seeing us trading:  Miller, Motte, Dickinson, and Boeser.  We will return top young players, grade A prospects, and picks.  This team is going to look a lot different after the 2022 TDL.  

I don't think Dick has done enough for someone to want to take him on with extra years left on his deal unless its a player for player with similar salary like how Jim swapped Pearson and Guddy back in his Pitts days.

[smithers joe]

9 hours ago, Alflives said:

You can want to keep Miller all you want, but he’s not staying.  He’s a coming UFA (2023) and he’s not invested a single friggin’ penny in our city.  He’s leaving.  So trade him, and get what we can.  

who is your source, alfie?

[Phat Fingers]

At this point, I keep Miller and make him captain and retire him as a Canuck.  Horvat is a great player and if I was to move him, it would be for the same price as Miller, or more because of the contract and age… 

 

But keep both, because if we lose either, we destroy our Center depth.  
 

Look at the Penguins.  
 

They built from the Center ice and goal, building Tandem forwards and dropping in the third line mates at low cost and then flipping the third player every few seasons when they priced themselves out.  
 

We have too many people to work with up front.  
 

Garland, Miller Brock

Pearson Horvat Motte

Hoglander Petterson Podz

Chiasson Highmore Dowling

 

to me there is one person who is a stand out for trade and it hurts to say…

 

Flow… Brock is a clear trade candidate.   High salary, under preformed this season but that would not damper his value.  
 

with our team undersized and also with two super good centers at taking draws, why give one away for futures unless the price reflects the loss.  
 

first rounders do not equal Miller and we have a new front office.  No guarantee that the black hole of past GM’s prior to JB returns us to the dark days of prospect never living up to their draft position.  
 

Brock or Petey or second tier guys like Pearson, but he is a valuable net presence, so I vote move a big name guy, not named Miller and of it is Bo, be a kings ransom, Miller is the captain from here on until he retires.  But Brock moving hurst us the least and could offer a real good return and massive cap space.  Then Petey.  Hate to say it, but I would love to see Barzal in a nucks Uni and both could use a change of something.  
 

 

[kloubek]

If I was asked who is the more valuable player from purely a performance perspective, I think it's pretty clear Miller is leading this team right now, and pretty much since he arrived.

 

But the question is flawed, as there are other elements involved. Bo has bought into Vancouver - both figuratively and literally. He's our captain. He also leads the team when it comes to presenting the "right" face on behalf of the players to the public, and is always involved in for-community events.

 

Under these circumstances, I think it is unfair to ask as people will likely be inclined to reply in favour of Miller, simply based on points. But the fact is that Miller is getting older now, and will likely not perform at the same level throughout his next contract. Horvat, on the other hand, likely will. So I think we need to take this into account since although this is a purely hypothetical scenario, it has to be rooted at least a bit in reality. 

 

Also as others have pointed out, there are other options so restricting it to a decision between two of our players doesn't really serve much of a purpose to me. As much as I hate to say it because I love the guy, if we were to include a 3rd player into the mix, I'd say Boeser is a more movable candidate. He supports play (in a big way when he's on his game) but doesn't drive it. He isn't the fastest (JR has mentioned he wants speed), not particularly durable, and has a big QO coming up. Unless management can find a way to sign him under QA, I'd say he'd be the better candidate to move out.

[BPA]

20 minutes ago, kloubek said:

If I was asked who is the more valuable player from purely a performance perspective, I think it's pretty clear Miller is leading this team right now, and pretty much since he arrived.

 

But the question is flawed, as there are other elements involved. Bo has bought into Vancouver - both figuratively and literally. He's our captain. He also leads the team when it comes to presenting the "right" face on behalf of the players to the public, and is always involved in for-community events.

 

Under these circumstances, I think it is unfair to ask as people will likely be inclined to reply in favour of Miller, simply based on points. But the fact is that Miller is getting older now, and will likely not perform at the same level throughout his next contract. Horvat, on the other hand, likely will. So I think we need to take this into account since although this is a purely hypothetical scenario, it has to be rooted at least a bit in reality. 

 

Also as others have pointed out, there are other options so restricting it to a decision between two of our players doesn't really serve much of a purpose to me. As much as I hate to say it because I love the guy, if we were to include a 3rd player into the mix, I'd say Boeser is a more movable candidate. He supports play (in a big way when he's on his game) but doesn't drive it. He isn't the fastest (JR has mentioned he wants speed), not particularly durable, and has a big QO coming up. Unless management can find a way to sign him under QA, I'd say he'd be the better candidate to move out.

That is what some have mentioned.

 

Boeser and Motte contracts are up first.  Concentrate on those first.  If Boeser and Motte wants more than Canucks are willing to pay, then trade them.  Both players will get some value back in picks and prospects.

 

Since Canucks can’t officially extend Miller until the offseason, they can get an understanding of where Miller wants to be and how much.

 

 

[Bure_Pavel]

Horvat puts on for his city. Easy choice. 

[EternalCanuckFan]

Miller is the better player overall right now but Horvat is likely the better fit on a longer term.  Assuming the Canucks run with a #4C like Lammikko for another few seasons, they still need another productive C but at a cap hit that does not break the bank.  Miller does not meet those criteria.  They have too much money tied up on unproductive D (OEL and Myers mainly - notwithstanding their improved defensive play) to afford to frontload the roster and cap on expensive forwards.

 

Miller is playing at the level of a 1st line player and assuming he keeps this up next year, I can only assume that he's going to want a big payday which will be a significant raise over his current $5.25M per year cap hit.

 

Horvat is a solid top 6 center who has, on occasion, produced at high level.  Unless something significant changes however, I don't see Horvat ever putting up points at a point per game pace.  He does many other things well, not least of which is being good at faceoffs.  I assume that when Horvat's current contract is up, he may warrant a bit of a raise but nothing like what Miller can get if he keeps up this level of play.

 

The Canucks C depth is horrible so they cannot afford to give up both Horvat and Miller unless they get a C in return who can contribute right away.  If Petey is going to be cast as the #1C or at least a top-6 C for the Canucks, then Horvat probably fits better both in terms of roster composition (i.e. #2C) and cap structure.  Horvat's age is also a bit less of a concern, and if his next contract has a reasonable cap hit, then I can see Horvat transitioning into a good #3C toward the end of that next contract (if it's longer term).

 

 

[Mathew Barzal]

If I had to choose one, Horvat. If I had the option to choose who to sell, both. We need a hard retool around Hughes and Pettersson.

[BPA]

Horvat is a face off beast with over 50%

[dm_ranger]

I wonder about the team's long term view of Petey.  He is playing both wing and center right now -- moved to wing but returned to center due to missing BO and Miller. 

 

If they want him to be mostly wing I think we keep both Miller and Bo and maybe move Boes.  -- Can we afford two really expensive wingers?

If they want him to be mostly center we probably move Miller and keep Bo. -- Can we afford three really expensive centers.

 

This is assuming we can't keep all 4.  I would prefer we do that. 

[CaptKirk888]

19 hours ago, Filthy McNasty said:

Bad thread they are on the same damn team! There both great players 

 

no need for this 

 

/end thread 

Agreed! Why the need to hypothesize such a situation? 

[MrCanuck94]

6 hours ago, kloubek said:

If I was asked who is the more valuable player from purely a performance perspective, I think it's pretty clear Miller is leading this team right now, and pretty much since he arrived.

 

But the question is flawed, as there are other elements involved. Bo has bought into Vancouver - both figuratively and literally. He's our captain. He also leads the team when it comes to presenting the "right" face on behalf of the players to the public, and is always involved in for-community events.

 

Under these circumstances, I think it is unfair to ask as people will likely be inclined to reply in favour of Miller, simply based on points. But the fact is that Miller is getting older now, and will likely not perform at the same level throughout his next contract. Horvat, on the other hand, likely will. So I think we need to take this into account since although this is a purely hypothetical scenario, it has to be rooted at least a bit in reality. 

 

Also as others have pointed out, there are other options so restricting it to a decision between two of our players doesn't really serve much of a purpose to me. As much as I hate to say it because I love the guy, if we were to include a 3rd player into the mix, I'd say Boeser is a more movable candidate. He supports play (in a big way when he's on his game) but doesn't drive it. He isn't the fastest (JR has mentioned he wants speed), not particularly durable, and has a big QO coming up. Unless management can find a way to sign him under QA, I'd say he'd be the better candidate to move out.

Fair points, and the third paragraph is definitely a lot to consider.

 

I felt Brock was the easy choice if all three were presented, hence why I asked this specifically to gauge the thought process between these two.

[MrCanuck94]

41 minutes ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Agreed! Why the need to hypothesize such a situation? 

Because it's already been reported that the only untouchables the Canucks have are Petey, Hughes and Demko.

 

Not discussing a potential situation won't magically not potentially make it happen.

[CaptKirk888]

42 minutes ago, MrCanuck94 said:

Because it's already been reported that the only untouchables the Canucks have are Petey, Hughes and Demko.

 

Not discussing a potential situation won't magically not potentially make it happen.

Nor will us as fans discussing it make it “magically happen” lol

[MrCanuck94]

2 minutes ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Nor will us as fans discussing it make it “magically happen” lol

Welcome to a hockey discussion board, where 99% of things discussed will never happen

[CaptKirk888]

11 minutes ago, MrCanuck94 said:

Welcome to a hockey discussion board, where 99% of things discussed will never happen

Thanks for that. I was thinking you were part of the ‘1%’

[Baggins]

On 1/26/2022 at 5:20 PM, Alflives said:

Bye bye Miller.  Seriously, we keep the guy who bought a home home here, and is raising his family here.  Miller has no stake in our city.  He’s a really good player, but he’s not staying here.  Trade his ass, and the sooner the better!  

So we should determine the team by who makes a real estate investment? All that really means is Bo stands to make a nice tidy profit from this crazy market if he sells. 

 

Here's what really matters - the real world numbers over the past three seasons....

 

 

Miller is only two years older than Bo. He's slightly outcoring Bo but is also a far superior playmaker. Bo has outscored Miller on the PP but Miller is a landslide winner in PP points. It's not just the goals but who makes the entire line better. Miller's superior playmaking and more aggressive style of play has a greater effect on an entire line than what Bo provides. Plus there's virtually no difference in faceoff ability. 

 

When it comes to intangibles Miller is the clear cut winner as well. He's more physical, a better Pk'er, and will defend teammates. But there is another thing overlooked when it comes to aging players. We all know goal scoring typically declines with age. But playmaking doesn't decline at the same rate. For example: We all know Gretzky was both a great goal scorer and a great playmaker. He retired at 38. In his last two seasons combined he only scored 32 goals but still had 120 assists. If you go final three seasons he had 57 goals and 192 assists. For those that have difficulty with perspective, I'm in no way saying Miller is Gretzky. All I'm saying is good playmaking ability doesn't tend to decline as quickly as good goal scoring ability. Meaning Miller will likely remain a line influencer longer than Bo will.

 

All said and done Miller is more valuable than Bo and not by just a little. Were Petey better at faceoffs I would say either is expendable but Bo the more expendable of the two. Take the deal that is the best return for what you are giving up. But I would by far prefer to keep both. Which leads to the obvious conclussion that Boeser would be the most expendable of those top 4 players with big contracts. It would create more opportunity for Hogs and Podz as well. A quality winger is easier to replace than a quality center. Miller/Horvat is among the best 1/2 centers in the league.

 

Really what it should come down to is whether Miller is willing to sign an extension and for how much and how long. That should be the only determining factor in moving any of those top four forwards. If Miller isn't looking for the homerun contract he should be extended and Boeser/Horvat looked at as the cap hit trade options. Being a home owner is nice but it's utterly irrelevant to what's best for the team. If at all possible both should be kept.

[Baggins]

Dbl posted. 

Edited January 29, 2022 by Baggins

[IBatch]

On 1/28/2022 at 7:30 PM, Baggins said:

So we should determine the team by who makes a real estate investment? All that really means is Bo stands to make a nice tidy profit from this crazy market if he sells. 

 

Here's what really matters - the real world numbers over the past three seasons....

 

 

Miller is only two years older than Bo. He's slightly outcoring Bo but is also a far superior playmaker. Bo has outscored Miller on the PP but Miller is a landslide winner in PP points. It's not just the goals but who makes the entire line better. Miller's superior playmaking and more aggressive style of play has a greater effect on an entire line than what Bo provides. Plus there's virtually no difference in faceoff ability. 

 

When it comes to intangibles Miller is the clear cut winner as well. He's more physical, a better Pk'er, and will defend teammates. But there is another thing overlooked when it comes to aging players. We all know goal scoring typically declines with age. But playmaking doesn't decline at the same rate. For example: We all know Gretzky was both a great goal scorer and a great playmaker. He retired at 38. In his last two seasons combined he only scored 32 goals but still had 120 assists. If you go final three seasons he had 57 goals and 192 assists. For those that have difficulty with perspective, I'm in no way saying Miller is Gretzky. All I'm saying is good playmaking ability doesn't tend to decline as quickly as good goal scoring ability. Meaning Miller will likely remain a line influencer longer than Bo will.

 

All said and done Miller is more valuable than Bo and not by just a little. Were Petey better at faceoffs I would say either is expendable but Bo the more expendable of the two. Take the deal that is the best return for what you are giving up. But I would by far prefer to keep both. Which leads to the obvious conclussion that Boeser would be the most expendable of those top 4 players with big contracts. It would create more opportunity for Hogs and Podz as well. A quality winger is easier to replace than a quality center. Miller/Horvat is among the best 1/2 centers in the league.

 

Really what it should come down to is whether Miller is willing to sign an extension and for how much and how long. That should be the only determining factor in moving any of those top four forwards. If Miller isn't looking for the homerun contract he should be extended and Boeser/Horvat looked at as the cap hit trade options. Being a home owner is nice but it's utterly irrelevant to what's best for the team. If at all possible both should be kept.

Good post.  Unfortunately, it's always about the money now.   Save in some areas to pay in others.