[Proposals] Roster moves, assuming JR extends JT Miller

[BigTramFan]

This thread assumes that Miller is staying. Let's say Miller has agreed to a reasonably team friendly contract of 8.5m x 6 years.

 

Here are some ideas to help fix the defense starting this season, and also clear some cap, particularly for next season when we need to pay more for Miller and Horvat...

 

Trade #1

 

To VAN: Hornqvist (5.3 x 1) + Montour (3.5 x 2)

To FLA: Dickinson (2.65 x 2) + Poolman (2.5 x 3) + Hoglander (0.9 x 1) + Juulsen (0.75 x 1)

 

FLA are badly cap strapped. They have $3m in space with 6 roster spots to fill. They want to move Hornqvist (5.3m, 1 year remaining) but he has an 8 team no-trade list and I am assuming he won't go to a bottom feeder team. Options would be very limited as no contending team wants to take on his cap hit. In this trade FLA buys out Dickinson (costing them less than $1m over 4 years) and they keep Poolman as a 3rd pairing RD, Hoglander as a 3RW and Juulsen as #7D. So for FLA next season this deal means 2 players total $8.8m going out, and 3 players at $5.1m coming in. This leaves FLA with total of $6.7m in cap space with only 5 roster spots to fill...Denisenko comes onto their roster (1m), they resign Marchment (2.7m) and Luostarinen (1.5m) plus add two league minimum players (0.75m + 0.75m).

 

Trade #2

 

To VAN: A pick

To Anywhere: Myers

 

And sign UFA Josh Manson $4.8m x 4 years

 

There is reportedly a market for Myers. Although I think Myers is fine, his current contract expires in 2 years, which is the same time as Montour. Instead of having 2 of our top 4 RD expire the same year, I take the opportunity to get younger on D (Manson is 2 years younger) and sign someone for 2 years longer than Myers' current contract. All while saving a little bit more in cap space and getting a more physical RD to pair with Hughes.

 

Add $1m bottom 6 player such as Lazar and the roster for 2022/23 season at cap hit of $80.6m:

 

Pearson Miller Garland

Podkolzin Pettersson Boeser

Kuzmenko Horvat Hornqvist

Highmore Lammikko Lazar

(Lockwood)

 

Hughes Manson

OEL Montour

Rathbone Schenn

(Dermott Burroughs)

 

Demko (Martin)

 

 

 

Crucially this gives us $27.4m of cap space in 2023/24 with 8 players expiring. I assume we wouldn't resign Hornqvist, perhaps sign the following guys:

Miller 8.5

Horvat 7.0

Kuzmenko 3.5

Dermott 1.5

Schenn 0.85

Burroughs 0.85

 

And allows another 5.2m in space to replace Hornqvist (or is Klimovich ready to be 3RW?), or upgrade on Dermott (is he worth keeping at 1.5m?) or Schenn (is he getting too old?), etc.

 

Thoughts?

[Crabcakes]

I'd like to know what's happening with Lammikko and Highmore.  They're RFA's with Arb and today is the deadline for filing for arbitration.  

[mll]

26 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

I'd like to know what's happening with Lammikko and Highmore.  They're RFA's with Arb and today is the deadline for filing for arbitration.  

Team elected arbitration - it allows to by-pass the qualifying offer process.  It's very rare for a team to pull that move. 

 

Qualifying offers have to be issues by 11 July.  

 

[hammertime]

Manson isn't an upgrade on Myers and youre signing him for 4 years also he's going to get more money than your offer he just won a cup. 

[hammertime]

13 minutes ago, mll said:

Team elected arbitration - it allows to by-pass the qualifying offer process.  It's very rare for a team to pull that move. 

 

Qualifying offers have to be issues by 11 July.  

 

Interesting our 4th line was one of the bright points of last season. Hopefully they don't sour the relationship with U Haul he's got 3c potential.

[BigTramFan]

36 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Manson isn't an upgrade on Myers and youre signing him for 4 years also he's going to get more money than your offer he just won a cup. 

I'm not suggesting Manson is an upgrade on Myers. But I think his style of play is a better fit for Hughes than Myers. I don't think Manson will get much more than $4.8m x 4

[nameci]

It’s not happening.  No extension.

[Dixon Ward]

We need a big haul for Miller.  Needs to be a current RHD, a center or d prospect and a 1st rd pick.

 

We then need to sign 1 of Copp, Trochek, or Domi for some of Miller's money.

 

We need to draft center and d prospects.

 

 

[BigTramFan]

1 hour ago, Dixon Ward said:

We then need to sign 1 of Copp, Trochek, or Domi for some of Miller's money.

Here's what I project those players are looking to get paid and their pts last season:

Copp - $5.5 - 6.0m - 53 pts

Trocheck - $5.75 - 6.5m - 51 pts

Domi - $3.5 - 4.5m - 39 pts

 

Compared to Miller if he's willing to take a reasonable deal:

Miller - $8.5m - 99 pts

 

[BigTramFan]

One thing that I completely forgot about in the OP was the possibility of FLA buying out Hornqvist. They can save themselves $3.5m next season by doing that, and actually that seems a more likely route than the proposed trade with VAN. Back to drawing board haha...

[DownUndaCanuck]

My only concern with Manson and Montour is that they're good puck movers but not the strongest defensively, and both have played on very strong teams. Take the to a shaky defence like ours on teams which don't control the puck as much as Florida and Colorado and I think we'll see their defensive mistakes. Manson has big hype for his play but is pretty weak defensively when you watch him play, not sure of his advanced stats but his +/- is pretty bad for being on a team who blows out the opposition every other night. Don't know if he's the guy we want defending when Hughes is stuck up ice.

 

I understand the cap dump though but wonder if there's another way. For example, is there a team who will trade a 5th or 6th rounder for Poolman straight up? I don't think he has negative value, he was just injured a lot last year. Dickinson was bad though, and is playing like a 1M player. 

 

Basically we need one RD. Two if we trade Myers. Why not keep Myers, try and get the one we're looking for elsewhere, and simplify things:

 

1) Garland for Marino. Throw them a pick if they want too.

 

2) Sign Tierney 2.5m x 3y

 

3) Poolman to whoever for a late pick

 

4) Lock down Miller hopefully 8.5M cap

 

5) If we've got cash left over, Lazar for 1M

 

Pettersson - Miller - Boeser

Kuzmenko - Horvat - Podkolzin

Pearson - Tierney - Hoglander

Highmore - Lammikko - Lazar

Lockwood

 

Hughes - Marino

OEL - Myers

Rathbone - Schenn

Dermott

Burroughs

 

Some good balance there, a team of 6 good centers and insurance across the board if anyone gets injured

[48MPHSlapShot]

2 minutes ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

My only concern with Manson and Montour is that they're good puck movers but not the strongest defensively, and both have played on very strong teams. Take the to a shaky defence like ours on teams which don't control the puck as much as Florida and Colorado and I think we'll see their defensive mistakes. Manson has big hype for his play but is pretty weak defensively when you watch him play, not sure of his advanced stats but his +/- is pretty bad for being on a team who blows out the opposition every other night. Don't know if he's the guy we want defending when Hughes is stuck up ice.

 

I understand the cap dump though but wonder if there's another way. For example, is there a team who will trade a 5th or 6th rounder for Poolman straight up? I don't think he has negative value, he was just injured a lot last year. Dickinson was bad though, and is playing like a 1M player. 

 

Basically we need one RD. Two if we trade Myers. Why not keep Myers, try and get the one we're looking for elsewhere, and simplify things:

 

1) Garland for Marino. Throw them a pick if they want too.

 

2) Sign Tierney 2.5m x 3y

 

3) Poolman to whoever for a late pick

 

4) Lock down Miller hopefully 8.5M cap

 

5) If we've got cash left over, Lazar for 1M

 

Pettersson - Miller - Boeser

Kuzmenko - Horvat - Podkolzin

Pearson - Tierney - Hoglander

Highmore - Lammikko - Lazar

Lockwood

 

Hughes - Marino

OEL - Myers

Rathbone - Schenn

Dermott

Burroughs

 

Some good balance there, a team of 6 good centers and insurance across the board if anyone gets injured

If Miller is resigned, I imagine things will look something like this. I don't think Myers is the best fit for our blueline, but without using Miller as a trade chip, I doubt we're going to do any better. 

[JM_]

9 hours ago, mll said:

Team elected arbitration - it allows to by-pass the qualifying offer process.  It's very rare for a team to pull that move. 

 

Qualifying offers have to be issues by 11 July.  

 

I think it worked as a potential issue in Brock's case, but you wouldn't do it for 4th liners. 

 

I'm curious if PA/JR are considering any buyouts. I think the only way we see one before the 12th is if we make a trade that requires the cap space.

 

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

My only concern with Manson and Montour is that they're good puck movers but not the strongest defensively, and both have played on very strong teams. Take the to a shaky defence like ours on teams which don't control the puck as much as Florida and Colorado and I think we'll see their defensive mistakes. Manson has big hype for his play but is pretty weak defensively when you watch him play, not sure of his advanced stats but his +/- is pretty bad for being on a team who blows out the opposition every other night. Don't know if he's the guy we want defending when Hughes is stuck up ice.

 

I understand the cap dump though but wonder if there's another way. For example, is there a team who will trade a 5th or 6th rounder for Poolman straight up? I don't think he has negative value, he was just injured a lot last year. Dickinson was bad though, and is playing like a 1M player. 

 

Basically we need one RD. Two if we trade Myers. Why not keep Myers, try and get the one we're looking for elsewhere, and simplify things:

 

1) Garland for Marino. Throw them a pick if they want too.

 

2) Sign Tierney 2.5m x 3y

 

3) Poolman to whoever for a late pick

 

4) Lock down Miller hopefully 8.5M cap

 

5) If we've got cash left over, Lazar for 1M

 

Pettersson - Miller - Boeser

Kuzmenko - Horvat - Podkolzin

Pearson - Tierney - Hoglander

Highmore - Lammikko - Lazar

Lockwood

 

Hughes - Marino

OEL - Myers

Rathbone - Schenn

Dermott

Burroughs

 

Some good balance there, a team of 6 good centers and insurance across the board if anyone gets injured

I like the idea of using Garland as the key piece in a trade to get a top four right shot D.  Does Arizona have one of those guys? I just have a (usually in a drunken stupor) feeling Garland is getting trad d back to the Desert Dogs.  

[Crabcakes]

8 hours ago, Dixon Ward said:

We need a big haul for Miller.  Needs to be a current RHD, a center or d prospect and a 1st rd pick.

 

We then need to sign 1 of Copp, Trochek, or Domi for some of Miller's money.

 

We need to draft center and d prospects.

 

 

The more I hear about this the more I agree that Miller has to be moved.

 

Listening to a Jannik Hansen interview on 650, he made the options crystal clear.  The Canucks have 2 choices, extend Miller or trade him.

• Extending Miller means that they feel that they have the necessary core pieces to be competitive.  I don't think that this is the case at all.  While they are very good down the middle, they need to fill a hole at RHD.  This option means that they have a very real shot at the playoffs next year but a flawed team will see an early exit from the playoffs when they meet at top 4 team 
• Trading Miller means that the Canucks can demand a RHD in return because he is such a good player.  Filling this hole is crucial to raise the team to the next level.  I don't honestly care what else they get back as long as there is a young RHD involved.  Rutherford is always looking towards the long term success of the team and as such, I can't see him recommending a different path.

I think that all other talk involving Miller coming from Canuck management is simply posturing to get the best deal possible

[-DLC-]

43 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

The more I hear about this the more I agree that Miller has to be moved.

 

Listening to a Jannik Hansen interview on 650, he made the options crystal clear.  The Canucks have 2 choices, extend Miller or trade him.

• Extending Miller means that they feel that they have the necessary core pieces to be competitive.  I don't think that this is the case at all.  While they are very good down the middle, they need to fill a hole at RHD.  This option means that they have a very real shot at the playoffs next year but a flawed team will see an early exit from the playoffs when they meet at top 4 team 
• Trading Miller means that the Canucks can demand a RHD in return because he is such a good player.  Filling this hole is crucial to raise the team to the next level.  I don't honestly care what else they get back as long as there is a young RHD involved.  Rutherford is always looking towards the long term success of the team and as such, I can't see him recommending a different path.

I think that all other talk involving Miller coming from Canuck management is simply posturing to get the best deal possible

Except you overlook one very important fact:  trading Miller leaves another gaping hole, in that he's one of the driving forces on the team.

 

 

If you don't consider what the team is without Miller that's a huge oversight.

[higgyfan]

53 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

The more I hear about this the more I agree that Miller has to be moved.

 

Listening to a Jannik Hansen interview on 650, he made the options crystal clear.  The Canucks have 2 choices, extend Miller or trade him.

• Extending Miller means that they feel that they have the necessary core pieces to be competitive.  I don't think that this is the case at all.  While they are very good down the middle, they need to fill a hole at RHD.  This option means that they have a very real shot at the playoffs next year but a flawed team will see an early exit from the playoffs when they meet at top 4 team 
• Trading Miller means that the Canucks can demand a RHD in return because he is such a good player.  Filling this hole is crucial to raise the team to the next level.  I don't honestly care what else they get back as long as there is a young RHD involved.  Rutherford is always looking towards the long term success of the team and as such, I can't see him recommending a different path.

I think that all other talk involving Miller coming from Canuck management is simply posturing to get the best deal possible

I have trouble discerning what Hansen said and what you may have added here.  Could you clarify?  Thx

[Ghostsof1915]

11 hours ago, Dixon Ward said:

We need a big haul for Miller.  Needs to be a current RHD, a center or d prospect and a 1st rd pick.

 

We then need to sign 1 of Copp, Trochek, or Domi for some of Miller's money.

 

We need to draft center and d prospects.

 

 

You trade Miller you have to hope to get 70-99 points of offence by committee. That's to break even. You need 100+ to get a benefit.

 

[Alflives]

Just now, Ghostsof1915 said:

You trade Miller you have to hope to get 70-99 points of offence by committee. That's to break even. You need 100+ to get a benefit.

 

And with Miller producing 99 points did we make the playoffs?  With Miller producing 99 points are we a Cup level team?

Benning left a mess.  We are over the cap, and aren’t in the playoffs.  It’s going to take time for JR’s group to “unravel” the Benning problems.  

[Alflives]

2 hours ago, -DLC- said:

Except you overlook one very important fact:  trading Miller leaves another gaping hole, in that he's one of the driving forces on the team.

 

 

If you don't consider what the team is without Miller that's a huge oversight.

With Miller having a career year we aren’t good enough.  How long (if we keep Miller) until JR’s group can build a supporting cast that makes us good enough?  Can they accomplish that before Miller is in decline from his 99 points/season?  

It is not so easy to just keep Miller and we continue to get better.