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

[PGT] Seattle Kraken at Vancouver Canucks | Feb. 21, 2022

Rate this topic


-Vintage Canuck-

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, JM_ said:

I get that,  but players do go to UFA all the time if teams are making a playoff run. Its just my preference, if we're getting lowballed on Miller I'd rather keep him. &^@# other teams. 

And that's fair, I don't see us being lowballed as we get closer to the deadline though

 

Rutherford also has a reputation for making trades that are fair to both sides, if you're always trying to win a trade you won't make very many, I imagine that'll continue under him and Al's leadership 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Coconuts said:

And that's fair, I don't see us being lowballed as we get closer to the deadline though

 

Rutherford also has a reputation for making trades that are fair to both sides, if you're always trying to win a trade you won't make very many, I imagine that'll continue under him and Al's leadership 

I'm fine with win-win. I hate the instant "who won the trade" thing the media does every year, you can never know that, even for years sometimes. 

 

My view on Miller is very qualified. "IF" we're being lowballed, "IF" the return is good, etc. 

 

I do wonder if we might see a 3 team deal for Miller. E.g., say AZ sends us Chychrun, and AZ gets prospects from NYR that fits their rebuild better than ours. 

  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, JM_ said:

it's s'all good. 

 

I know people are concerned about losing some trade value if we don't move on Miller soon, but the downside isn't really that bad, we'll have a super-motivated Miller for one more year that we still might move at next years TDL.

 

Worst case about not trading him is we get the cap hit back and can just enjoy having him on the team for 2 partial and hopefully, 2 full years.     Worst case trading him is we get zero back and instead use his cap savings poorly.   Personally i'm happy with trading someone else instead, but whomever we do trade instead there are equal risks involved.   That includes losing 3-4 million of cap by re-signing Miller to a deal he simply can't live up too.   Sucks this cap era sometimes.   Ok sucks often lol.   Loser points need to go.  And i'm 100% in favour of creating a hybrid cap system - one that gives some sort of allowance for teams that have high taxes to go at least 5 but preferably 10% over the cap, and also allow each team to have one "franchise player" who's cap doesn't count the same way.   That's the best i've got.   And that the cap should still count in the post season - the roster you ice - is one that meets the cap.   Too easy to get a doctor to sign off on getting a player either to somewhat "fake" his timeline or to use minor injuries as an excuse to load up on purpose.    The cap era is far from both fair and perfect. 

  • Like 1
  • Huggy Bear 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, JM_ said:

I'm fine with win-win. I hate the instant "who won the trade" thing the media does every year, you can never know that, even for years sometimes. 

 

My view on Miller is very qualified. "IF" we're being lowballed, "IF" the return is good, etc. 

 

I do wonder if we might see a 3 team deal for Miller. E.g., say AZ sends us Chychrun, and AZ gets prospects from NYR that fits their rebuild better than ours. 

Those are just playing with your x-box type deals - they don't happen often.   Miller and Brock and even Horvat (unfairly IMO) come up because we have cap problems.   All are on very decent - fair deals as of right now for what they do.    We probably should be sellers this year and i do love that management is still painting a lovely pictures that let's wait and see.   I don't even mind if we do zero at the TDL and push it back a year depending on how the season ends up one bit.    If we keep winning 2/3 games why would they?   Now that EPs back to form, JB vision isn't so bad is it?  Or Demko all year.    Re-sign Motte, take Brock to arbitration if need be and see what happens next season.   Miller has to have massive massive legacy dollar signs in his head the way he's played.  Brock will be motivated as ever ... and worse case we flunk out and can still move some guys next year which doesn't seem at all that likely given how the team is starting to get together.   It's a tough tough decision.     Feel it will take a winning streak like the one Bruce had at the start to shut all of this out.   And actually believe the team can do that.    Guess i'm a homer lol.   We are very close to becoming a better team IF the core keeps getting better.   Removing all the vets or good players for futures is too extreme.   

 

Edit:  What i think will happen is Brock is traded.    But who knows.   Maybe Garland or Miller and maybe even Horvat.   It will only be one.   Motte maybe...and one other as a cap dump to go with it to provide depth for a contender. 

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

17 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Those are just playing with your x-box type deals - they don't happen often.   Miller and Brock and even Horvat (unfairly IMO) come up because we have cap problems.   All are on very decent - fair deals as of right now for what they do.    We probably should be sellers this year and i do love that management is still painting a lovely pictures that let's wait and see.   I don't even mind if we do zero at the TDL and push it back a year depending on how the season ends up one bit.    If we keep winning 2/3 games why would they?   Now that EPs back to form, JB vision isn't so bad is it?  Or Demko all year.    Re-sign Motte, take Brock to arbitration if need be and see what happens next season.   Miller has to have massive massive legacy dollar signs in his head the way he's played.  Brock will be motivated as ever ... and worse case we flunk out and can still move some guys next year which doesn't seem at all that likely given how the team is starting to get together.   It's a tough tough decision.     Feel it will take a winning streak like the one Bruce had at the start to shut all of this out.   And actually believe the team can do that.    Guess i'm a homer lol.   We are very close to becoming a better team IF the core keeps getting better.   Removing all the vets or good players for futures is too extreme.   

 

Edit:  What i think will happen is Brock is traded.    But who knows.   Maybe Garland or Miller and maybe even Horvat.   It will only be one.   Motte maybe...and one other as a cap dump to go with it to provide depth for a contender. 

for sure lots of ways to work the cap problem, that doesn't have to come from Miller (and shouldn't imo).

 

You could be right about Brock, the gap might be too much right now and going into arbitration is a terrible option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, JM_ said:

it's s'all good. 

 

I know people are concerned about losing some trade value if we don't move on Miller soon, but the downside isn't really that bad, we'll have a super-motivated Miller for one more year that we still might move at next years TDL.

 

Doubt it makes it past the summer if nobody pays the TDL price. Either at the draft or after teams miss out on UFA's.

 

Otherwise the "Miller saga" risks being a distraction to the players all season, you risk him getting injured, you risk his play falling off and you risk pulling out the carpet from a team (hopefully) in the middle of a playoff push.

 

IMO, there's very little chance Miller is in a Canucks Jersey next training camp (or at least, not very long after).

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JM_ said:

I get that,  but players do go to UFA all the time if teams are making a playoff run. Its just my preference, if we're getting lowballed on Miller I'd rather keep him. &^@# other teams. 

Even though Miller isn't a rental he still only has one more year before Ufa.  So if they are giving up significan assets for him isn't it a concern they won't be able to resign him?

Once July 1st comes then an extension could be agreed on and a trade could happen with that team still having him cheap for a year.

Maybe it's better to wait? 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Doubt it makes it past the summer if nobody pays the TDL price. Either at the draft or after teams miss out on UFA's.

 

Otherwise the "Miller saga" risks being a distraction to the players all season, you risk him getting injured, you risk his play falling off and you risk pulling out the carpet from a team (hopefully) in the middle of a playoff push.

 

IMO, there's very little chance Miller is in a Canucks Jersey next training camp (or at least, not very long after).

yeah you are probably right. What we don't know is if he wants to stay here or not. 

 

As long as he's not a Leaf I'm OK. 

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

15 minutes ago, erkayloomeh said:

Even though Miller isn't a rental he still only has one more year before Ufa.  So if they are giving up significan assets for him isn't it a concern they won't be able to resign him?

Once July 1st comes then an extension could be agreed on and a trade could happen with that team still having him cheap for a year.

Maybe it's better to wait? 

personally I'd like to really take a run at re-signing Miller and move other guys. 

 

What I don't want to see is selling him low, due to a concern over not recouping assets. I think thats farther down the list of priorities. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Miller is ultimately being moved (doesnt want to re-sign in VAN/management wants to accumulate younger players) then waiting to deal him at next seasons TDL is a bad idea imo.  If the team is very close or in a playoff spot, trading a premier player sends mixed messages to the team.  Best to trade him at this year’s TDL or in the off season at the latest, and get your roster sorted out beforehand/roll with it. People complain about mixed messaging and this to me would seem like an obvious example of it. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Huggy Bear 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JM_ said:

I get that,  but players do go to UFA all the time if teams are making a playoff run. Its just my preference, if we're getting lowballed on Miller I'd rather keep him. &^@# other teams. 

Spot on... then we deal with the issue next year.

Folks were crying about Hamhuis leaving on a free, but I was happy the club said F you to the low balling offer received.

  • Cheers 1
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...