With all due respect, I think the consensus on this board that Miller is getting traded before the TDL and the Canucks aren't making the playoffs is highly premature

[aGENT]

14 minutes ago, Googlie said:

Maybe this.....?

 

https://thehockeywriters.com/maple-leafs-canucks-trade-could-produce-second-half-blockbuster/

Meh. Still like the potential Rangers and Avs pieces better. But the bigger the bidder market, the higher the price! 

[spook007]

42 minutes ago, Googlie said:

Maybe this.....?

 

https://thehockeywriters.com/maple-leafs-canucks-trade-could-produce-second-half-blockbuster/

To say I'd be less than overwhelmed would be an understatement...

[SuitnTie]

Playoffs or not, crazy not to trade Miller. The bidding war over him will bring in a haul. 

[Baggins]

2 hours ago, Mbnuckfan said:

I am fairly certain that they cannot talk term or dollars until he's in his final year, which would be in the summer.

They can't actually extend him before the season is over. They certainly can talk to him though to come to an understanding if he wants to stay or be moved. They can even ask what kind of term and money he'll be looking for. It's not like they're talking to a player on another team.

[-DLC-]

 

[Junkyard Dog]

Just now, -DLC- said:

 

Yeah it would also take a Miller-like return for me. Not really interested in parting with him. If we take a minor step back he's young enough to stick around. 

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, spook007 said:

To say I'd be less than overwhelmed would be an understatement...

This is a good example of the "high price"  fans of other teams feel is fair.   Kerfoot is decent enough - the other guys... well doesn't exactly scream "yippee!" does it.    But TO is definitely a reasonable target/trading partner as the article outlined.   They even got greedy enough to throw in a deal for Schenn too lol - taking away two of our best cap hit players.   

[on the cycle]

2 hours ago, spook007 said:

To say I'd be less than overwhelmed would be an understatement...

Worse than Ballard, Raymond, and a 1st

[on the cycle]

Just now, IBatch said:

This is a good example of the "high price"  fans of other teams feel is fair.   Kerfoot is decent enough - the other guys... well doesn't exactly scream "yippee!" does it.    But TO is definitely a reasonable target/trading partner as the article outlined.   They even got greedy enough to throw in a deal for Schenn too lol - taking away two of our best cap hit players.   

Take our scraps for your best player mentality

[Gollumpus]

12 hours ago, CanucksJay said:

I think trading all those guys makes us go backwards. 

Yeah, but it will bring the team core closer to a cohesive age, which seems to be a popular theme for some. Trade Miller because he's "too old", and "he's playing well so his value is high", and "his contract end is coming up so he may want more than what the team wants to pay out", and "OMG, <player> needs a new deal so how does he get paid? Trade Miller."

 

The assets acquired in a Miller trade are likely not going to be of use for the entire time of the window you see coming up (see below). If the Canucks trade Miller, and then trade Boeser and Horvat, the guys coming in will all be in the same age bracket, and closer to the guys who are going to be the core in 2 - 3 years (Pettersson, Highes, Podkolzin, etc).

 

12 hours ago, CanucksJay said:

Because Myers and OEL are even older than Horvat Boeser and co. 

So then we'd also have to rebuild our defence. 

Yup. This being said, those guys are not really going to be counted on to be part of the core, or if they are, then the team is in even more trouble than they are right now.. They will (assuming they are still with the Canucks in 4- 6 years, give or take), be part of the veteran presence who are soon to be on their way out the door. The main reason they will still be with the Canucks is because of their contracts.

 

12 hours ago, CanucksJay said:

I think our window is truly the next 2-3 years and then we have to rebuild whether we like it or not. 

I like your optimism, but I can't say that I share in it. There is talk of trading Miller, for all kinds of assets. Depending on what those assets are, maybe they could be involved in this window, but likely not. What are the chances that a lower third 1st round pick will result in a guy who can play in the NHL by the time he is 21/22? Not very likely

 

<insert look at Boeser, Pastrnak, Konecny. comments here>.

 

Look at the Canuck players who did make it to the NHL in their first season. Pettersson was a #5OA, so him making it wasn't too surprising. Similar to this is Hughes, who was a high pick (#7OA), and a couple of years older. Horvat was a #9OA. Boeser is the only one of the four who was a surprise at how effective he was right out of the gate, and he was a bit older, and developed some in college level hockey.

 

Trade Miller and the core disappears without what he brings to the team. They will have to make it on their own, and I don't believe that they will  be able to do it in this window. And the team (likely) can't count on the assets from a Miller trade to get them over the hump in the next three years. Miller is 28. In two years tm Horvat will be 28, and what will his contract demands be in a year's time?. Will he be traded sooner so that money can be directed to Boeser? Boeser will be 26 in two year's time, so what will his new contract be (cap/term), and will that deal become an anchor for the team (not for his play/production, but for how that deal will reduce the flexibility which the team has). 

 

As to the prospects/young roster players who might also be included: I suspect that they won't be NHL ready. If they were, then they likely wouldn't be involved in the trade.

 

12 hours ago, CanucksJay said:

If it was me, I'd wait until TDL and if we are playing .650 hockey under BB and look really good, I'd double down and add for the playoffs. 

Waiting until the TDL likely is a good idea, but then we don't really know what offers are rolling in the door. If Rutherford thinks that he has a great deal, and sees that there is a chance that another team will try to sneak in with a similar offer to the buying team, then he may jump a few weeks earlier. This being said, I suspect that the Canucks would be not too eager to trade away any more high picks, or any of the various prospects which are highly regarded around here. 

 

                                                                   regards,  G.

[Gollumpus]

22 hours ago, Me_ said:

 But why???

 

The kids are right here.

 

23OA15 Boeser

5OA17 Pettersson

7OA18 Hughes

10IA19 Podkolzin

 

These guys won't be kids anymore when the assets from a Miller trade (hopefully) come to fruition. How old will these "kids" be in four of years? I suggest four years because that is what I see as the likely turn around time of the assets the Canucks might get in a Miller trade. In that time, Boeser and Horvat will be 28 and 30, respectively. Pettersson will be 27 going on 28....

 

The only (significant) advantage which may be gained from trading Miller, in the short term, is extra cap space. 

 

                                                        regards,  G.

[Jack Burton]

4 hours ago, Googlie said:

Maybe this.....?

 

https://thehockeywriters.com/maple-leafs-canucks-trade-could-produce-second-half-blockbuster/

3 prospects is just not enough. Add a 1st and 3rd

[aGENT]

32 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

These guys won't be kids anymore when the assets from a Miller trade (hopefully) come to fruition. How old will these "kids" be in four of years? I suggest four years because that is what I see as the likely turn around time of the assets the Canucks might get in a Miller trade. In that time, Boeser and Horvat will be 28 and 30, respectively. Pettersson will be 27 going on 28....

 

The only (significant) advantage which may be gained from trading Miller, in the short term, is extra cap space. 

 

                                                        regards,  G.

I think your math might be off based on the packages being bandied about.

 

For example, the Rangers package is likely to include Chytil (22 and currently paying in the NHL, on a contender) and Schneider (20 and currently paying in the NHL, on a contender).

 

How/why are they going to be unable to contribute to the Canucks next year and going to take 4 years?

[hammertime]

On 1/28/2022 at 6:53 PM, Shayster007 said:

DG is still top 15 in WHL scoring, while playing at least 5 games (in some cases 10) less then every player above him. Guenther would have looked fantastic in our prospect cupboard. Love Garland and OEL has been good, but I wasn't a fan of that trade then and still would rather we didn't make it personally. DG and all that cap space would look might good right now.

 Guenther is a busterooo Bonsai!!!! 

Just kidding

 

He's a fine prospect. But once Brandt Clarke, Edvinsson, McTavish were off the board I was much happier with the trade. I would have taken Sillinger or Svechkov with the pick but neither of whom I was high enough on to have not made the trade I'll take Garland in the hand over Sillinger in the bush. We dumped hot garbage in their yard it cost us a 2nd. They gave us their Captain salary retained. OEL may decline but hes got good miles left and doing this allowed us to sign both Hughes and Pete's extensions. 

 

I mean what's not to like?

[Gollumpus]

3 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I think your math might be off based on the packages being bandied about.

 

For example, the Rangers package is likely to include Chytil (22 and currently paying in the NHL, on a contender) and Schneider (20 and currently paying in the NHL, on a contender).

 

How/why are they going to be unable to contribute to the Canucks next year and going to take 4 years?

I would ask, how do we know that they are actually in any discussion, other than in rumor/speculation by people who are not involved with either team? Chickens, hatched, and all that...

 

If these guys (playing on a contender) were to perform here as advertised, then great, it would take some of the sting out of losing Miller. People around here thought that Cody Hodgson was the greatest player ever, and refused to believe that he was playing sheltered minutes. This being said, Schneider has only 8 NHL games to his credit.

 

Chyril does have size, looks to be fairly mobile, and is defensively sound, but he doesn't appear to be an offensive force out there. I haven't looked up his ceiling potential, but does it look like he will be a top-6 forward around here? I'm thinking he'll be a middle-6 tweener, mostly on the third line (C/W), which isn't bad. Miller would more than adequately fill any void for the Rangers if they moved Chyril.

 

Perhaps the Canucks could offload Dickiinson, which would make some folks around here quite happy. 

 

I do have doubts that the Rangers would give up on Schneider, as he looks to be part of their long term future. At a quick glance, with the development of Fox, I could see the Rangers trying to move Lundkvist rather than Schneider. Trouba (NMC), Fox and Schneider looks a lot better than Trouba (NMC), Fox and Lundkvist (at least to me it does). 

 

So, overall, the Canucks lose offense from the forward lines, a iop-6 C/W, and an inspirational leader (maybe some other things?), and gain some cap space(?), potentially a 3C/W (which would be great, but is not a sure thing), a RD of some description who is still needing some development (I would like Schneider here, but I suspect that he is a year or so away from reaching his potential), and a mystery door prize from the Rangers 1st round pick (currently 27OA), assuming that is part of the deal. It looks like it would take the Canucks closer to being a contender, but....

 

                                                   regards,  G.

[Shirotashi]

5 hours ago, Grape said:

Miller is not in the same category as McKinnon, Crosby, and prime Stamkos at all. Pettersson isn't close to the same league as McDavid and Matthews. What kind of homer glasses are you wearing? I mean I thought at first you were just arguing that these were similar situations but to actually confidently say that those players are in the same category? Really? No one can successfully make that argument right now.

 

We all know how good Miller is and how important he is to the team, and no one wants to face the potential of losing Miller for nothing especially since we aren't real contenders currently. That's why there has been discussion of trading him; it's as obvious of a potential trade scenario as there can be in the NHL. If you can't see that that's a "you" problem and not a "the fanbase is crazy" problem.

 

No one is advocating for trading him for bits and pieces. We would need significant assets that could set us up well for our window of opportunity in the future.

Actually it was the media that was making the argument that Pettersson was in the same league as Mc David. I believe it was elliot Friedman that said "If someone where to argue that Pettersson is as good as Mc David and Matthews, id be willing to listen." Im arguing that they are on the same tier as those guys, but I digress because its subjective, its  not JUST about the numbers which is CLEARLY the basis for your counter argument. 

 

The reason its so hard for you to swallow is because your not seeing the numbers right now, so try to open up your mind a bit and stop hearing " PETTERSSON AND MILLER ARE THE EXACT SAME AS MC DAVID AND MATTHEWS" When what im saying is they are in that same elite tier just lower down the pecking. 

 

I mean FFS look at the team when you consider what those two guys COULD be with the right linemates I think its not unreasonable to think they are in the same tier as those guys. Not at all. And thats my subjective opinion, if you disagree go down to the beach and pound sand.

Edited January 30, 2022 by Shirotashi

[hammertime]

21 minutes ago, Shirotashi said:

Actually it was the media that was making the argument that Pettersson was in the same league as Mc David. I believe it was elliot Friedman that said "If someone where to argue that Pettersson is as good as Mc David and Matthews, id be willing to listen." Im arguing that they are on the same tier as those guys, but I digress because its subjective, its  not JUST about the numbers which is CLEARLY the basis for your counter argument. 

 

The reason its so hard for you to swallow is because your not seeing the numbers right now, so try to open up your mind a bit and stop hearing " PETTERSSON AND MILLER ARE THE EXACT SAME AS MC DAVID AND MATTHEWS" When what im saying is they are in that same elite tier just lower down the pecking. 

 

I mean FFS look at the team when you consider what those two guys COULD be with the right linemates I think its not unreasonable to think they are in the same tier as those guys. Not at all. And thats my subjective opinion, if you disagree go down to the beach and pound sand.

Pete couldn't walk Mcdavis dog. 

 

Love me some top form Pete playing with confidence but they aren't close in tier I don't care who's listening. 

[aGENT]

13 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

I would ask, how do we know that they are actually in any discussion, other than in rumor/speculation by people who are not involved with either team? Chickens, hatched, and all that...

 

We don't. Other than media reports anyway. Welcome to a fan discussion board.

 

13 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

If these guys (playing on a contender) were to perform here as advertised, then great, it would take some of the sting out of losing Miller. People around here thought that Cody Hodgson was the greatest player ever, and refused to believe that he was playing sheltered minutes. This being said, Schneider has only 8 NHL games to his credit.

 

Chyril does have size, looks to be fairly mobile, and is defensively sound, but he doesn't appear to be an offensive force out there. I haven't looked up his ceiling potential, but does it look like he will be a top-6 forward around here? I'm thinking he'll be a middle-6 tweener, mostly on the third line (C/W), which isn't bad. Miller would more than adequately fill any void for the Rangers if they moved Chyril.

There's risk in any move. There's risk in doing nothing.  We could keep Miller and he could have a career ending injury next year. No trade, no extension, no cup (with him anyway).

 

Schneider could end up being a HOF'er. Chytil a solid 2nd line guy. 

 

13 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

Perhaps the Canucks could offload Dickiinson, which would make some folks around here quite happy. 

Perhaps. Not sure that that has to do with trading Miller.

 

13 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

I do have doubts that the Rangers would give up on Schneider, as he looks to be part of their long term future. At a quick glance, with the development of Fox, I could see the Rangers trying to move Lundkvist rather than Schneider. Trouba (NMC), Fox and Schneider looks a lot better than Trouba (NMC), Fox and Lundkvist (at least to me it does). 

They can give up Schneider or they can have Miller go to one of their competitors. (Or offer up a suitable offer alternative).

 

13 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

So, overall, the Canucks lose offense from the forward lines, a iop-6 C/W, and an inspirational leader (maybe some other things?), and gain some cap space(?), potentially a 3C/W (which would be great, but is not a sure thing), a RD of some description who is still needing some development (I would like Schneider here, but I suspect that he is a year or so away from reaching his potential), and a mystery door prize from the Rangers 1st round pick (currently 27OA), assuming that is part of the deal. It looks like it would take the Canucks closer to being a contender, but....

 

                                                   regards,  G.

 

You're forgetting the opportunity cost again.

 

Again, nobody knows what's going to happen. Maybe Miller is an effective player until 38. Maybe he falls off drastically at 32. Maybe the trade return we get doesn't amount to much. Maybe they're key pieces in getting us our first cup win. We can play this game all day.

 

But we do know we're not good enough right now. We're not a contender WITH Miller. We need to make additional changes. He's the most obvious place to start. We need to build around our next core, and their window.

Edited January 30, 2022 by aGENT

[Shirotashi]

43 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Pete couldn't walk Mcdavis dog. 

 

Love me some top form Pete playing with confidence but they aren't close in tier I don't care who's listening. 

Pete maybe wont score like Mc David true but you only judge by one single attribute, the ability to put up 

points are not the only thing you build a team with. The other qualities that Miller and Petersson posses I 

find lacking in Mc David. Miller is more like Yzerman then Mc David and Petersson IMO is more like 

Datsyuk, in my ..... and I cannot stress this enough so calm your tits.... opinion.

[canuck73_3]

On 1/28/2022 at 4:38 PM, Devron said:

Here’s a thought. Cheer on the boys and see what happens? Instead making every GDT about trading Miller.

This