[Proposal] Miller to LA

[JM_]

3 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

 

Acquiring a guy like Vilardi needs consideration.  He's an RFA and we no longer would benefit from any ELC years which in today's NHL economy is like gold.  I could see our previous regime being all over an already-developed player ready to step right into the line-up next year, but I'm not so sure JR/Allvin prefer that route.  They've both spoken at length about specific team needs and the barren prospect pool in the organization.  JR has expressed a desire to acquire additional picks as well.  If Miller is traded I don't see the package not including pick(s) of some kind as well as a young roster player on ELC or not yet in the pro's.  

 

In a post I made a while ago which coco outright stole from me in his proposal ( - relax, I'm kidding, sort of) I suggested Miller for Clarke and this years 2nd.  If that doesn't move the needle for JR/Allvin I'd do the same package but try to get LA to include either Helenius or Pinelli to fit our young C prospect organizational need. 

for sure its something to consider carefully, but he would be on a pretty affordable bridge which if done right could be a steal. I trust our new management team to make this kind of call over Benning's gut instinct too. 

[IBatch]

8 minutes ago, JM_ said:

you never know, they do have other C's coming up their development pipeline. And we are still taking a risk on Clarke. 

A marginal risk.  Clarke ranking in the low teens before this years draft is tough to consider much of a risk really.   Only guys we've had since the JB era that did better then that were EP and QHs.   And even QHs wasn't far off.    For perspective that's in the same territory as Zegras and Boldy.   Podz managed the late teens (18-19) coming into this season after a couple years of percolation in the KHL.   Fighting for territory with usually 3 drafts including the one coming up - anyone in the top 20 is almost always going to make the NHL, and most of them as impact players.   

[Coconuts]

16 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

 

Acquiring a guy like Vilardi needs consideration.  He's an RFA and we no longer would benefit from any ELC years which in today's NHL economy is like gold.  I could see our previous regime being all over an already-developed player ready to step right into the line-up next year, but I'm not so sure JR/Allvin prefer that route.  They've both spoken at length about specific team needs and the barren prospect pool in the organization.  JR has expressed a desire to acquire additional picks as well.  If Miller is traded I don't see the package not including pick(s) of some kind as well as a young roster player on ELC or not yet in the pro's.  

 

In a post I made a while ago which coco outright stole from me in his proposal ( - relax, I'm kidding, sort of) I suggested Miller for Clarke and this years 2nd.  If that doesn't move the needle for JR/Allvin I'd do the same package but try to get LA to include either Helenius or Pinelli to fit our young C prospect organizational need. 

It's true, you'd have to sign him to something beyond an ELC which is why I'm more interested in a 1st round pick than Vilardi. Hell, I'd take it over Turcotte. 

 

If we could somehow grab Clarke and a 1st that'd be great. I don't remember that post, but I don't remember a lot of things..  

 

We're going to need players on ELC's going forward, having cost controlled assets is huge if you can get them into the lineup. 

 

14 minutes ago, JM_ said:

right shot C's with good size are hard to find too. Its all a risk, but given the Canucks ability to comb over Vilardi's development, I'd be more than happy if they valued that over the risk of our own pick.

Fair, that's a reasonable argument. I'd lean more towards a pick but I get where you're coming from.