[Signing] Canucks re-sign J.T. Miller

[Chris12345]

5 minutes ago, -DLC- said:

It's pouring rain here right now.

 

I LOVE IT

No fricking way really? I HATE rain. Absolutely the worst.

 

I'm sitting on the beach right now, not a cloud in the sky. A bit cooler now but should hit 35.

 

About to start er off with a caeser.

Edited September 4, 2022 by Chris12345

[Attila Umbrus]

34 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Can you please point out where I said anything regarding "completely destroying the chance of the team" or "dumpster fire"?

 

I too think this team is very "build-able". But we're not going to be able to keep everyone in the process. We don't have the cap space to do that AND improve as you seemed to suggest in your post. There will need to be tough decisions made to actually build what is currently a good team, in to a contender. And regardless of what you think of the JT extension, paying him $8m, long term, does make that process more difficult (while also retaining a VERY good player, at least in the near term).

Definitely not saying you called it a dumpster fire. By no means was that directed at anything you said, that was me generalizing what I feel is a lot of people on CDC's issue with our defense is, which I brought up in my first post. As for destroying the chance of the team. That's the way it sounded to me when you talk about JT's contract causing all sorts of issues down the line for us. Apologize if that's not what you meant. 

 

I don't disagree paying JT 8 M won't make things more difficult. But I respectfully think it was the right move to do. With the young guys we have we need to make a statement that we want to win and put our best effort forward. Letting JT go no matter what reflects in my opinion a different direction...then we go into another rebuild/retool again? Try to rebuild another team identity...eventually this cycle needs to stop and the young players we have developed need to take a step forward, delaying this process and dragging it out another 2 or so years will not be beneficial in my mind. All the guys on this team want to win now, not tomorrow.

 

I guess we can at least agree that no matter what, this the team going forward and it's anyones guess as how it's gonna really go lol. I really do hope this group can keep building and proving to us they are the team they say they are...I am so tired of "rebuilding" hockey...seems like 2011 was so long ago now. All my years of being a Canucks fan we have lost so much and won so little, so the idea of a step back right now is un appealing to me, whether that is right or not.

[aGENT]

7 minutes ago, -DLC- said:

Well my point is more to take it out of the zoomed in lens you're using to project "our difficulties" down the road to remember that many teams will be in this position and that it's just part of this deal.  You take some risks. You do what's right in the here and now as well as the long term. Their landscape will also factor into ours down the road.

 

You're really putting out the idea that this is "difficult"...you may not have said other teams would have it easy but they also may find it difficult. 

To paraphrase one of my favourite posters: Who cares about other teams? I'm taking about our team 

 

And FWIW, general "difficulty" in building a contender in the NHL is a separate (if related) discussion to the Canucks specifically, signing a 30 year old, to 7 years of term and $8m cap, as it relates to making it more difficult to address our specific roster issues. If you don't see/can't agree that having those $8m X 7 would make it easier to address other roster issues...I'm not sure what to tell you. It's a completely separate discussion to what either of us think of Miller the player.

 

Does having an extra $8m over the next 7 years make it easier to address other roster issues? Don't muddy it with other teams, or what you think of Miller or what a trade return for Miller might have been, etc, etc... Does having an extra $8x7 make it easier to address our other roster issues? Yes/no.

 

7 minutes ago, -DLC- said:

 

You don't believe they're a contender but that's your opinion. We'll find out soon enough but, until then, you can't claim this as fact. 

Your own management has told you we're not. You seem to trust them re: the Miller extension, why not their comments on that?

 

We have an ill fitting dog's breakfast on RD, no succession plan for 2/3rd of it expiring this and next season, little cap space flexibility to address any of this, a lack of prospect/organizational depth, two of our most important players and a lot of support/complimentary players aren't even in there primes yet... Until at least the majority of that is addressed, we're not a contender. 

 

That doesn't mean we're not a good, or even likely (bubble) playoff team, but we are most certainly not a contender. There's too many (current) structural issues. That doesn't mean the bones aren't there or that we shouldn't continue building towards being one.

 

7 minutes ago, -DLC- said:

 

I think it's more difficult to "build a contender" if you take away the heart and soul leading us there because they're too expensive. They're too valuable NOT to retain as part of that process.

 

You don't build a contender down the road...you start building the foundation along the way. JT is a very important part of that. So to look down the road without also considering what this team would be without him is tunnel vision.

It's certainly one of the factors in this decision, absolutely. As I've said all along, retaining JT on a team friendly deal, has it's benefits. He clearly has skill, leadership, heart, etc, etc. He's a GOOD player with loads of intangibles. I don't think many (any?) disagree with this. Like I said earlier in that post about the eye-rolling argument regarding leadership, the obvious risks that come with his extension don't require silly, off tangent and baseless debates about leadership.

 

6 minutes ago, Wanless said:

Exactly 

 

if BB is running Miller Petey and Horvat with their own lines this year that isnt stopping them from trading Boeser or Garland for a dman and using the freed up money from Pearson to sign a third line center or maybe even Klimovich gets a call up this year and shows he ready next year for thirdline center

Klimovich is a winger.

[Hogs & Podz]

Lol!!!

I go away for a bit... come back to this?!!!

Play nice folks... 

Should be a good year... Poop and all!

[Jester13]

24 minutes ago, -DLC- said:

I didn't hear/see that? Where did he say that?

I'll try to find it. BRB...

[-DLC-]

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

To paraphrase one of my favourite posters: Who cares about other teams? I'm taking about our team 

 

And FWIW, general "difficulty" in building a contender in the NHL is a separate (if related) discussion to the Canucks specifically, signing a 30 year old, to 7 years of term and $8m cap, as it relates to making it more difficult to address our specific roster issues. If you don't see/can't agree that having those $8m X 7 would make it easier to address other roster issues...I'm not sure what to tell you. It's a completely separate discussion to what either of us think of Miller the player.

 

Does having an extra $8m over the next 7 years make it easier to address other roster issues? Don't muddy it with other teams, or what you think of Miller or what a trade return for Miller might have been, etc, etc... Does having an extra $8x7 make it easier to address our other roster issues? Yes/no.

 

Your own management has told you we're not. You seem to trust them re: the Miller extension, why not their comments on that?

 

We have an ill fitting dog's breakfast on RD, no succession plan for 2/3rd of it expiring this and next season, little cap space flexibility to address any of this, a lack of prospect/organizational depth, two of our most important players and a lot of support/complimentary players aren't even in there primes yet... Until at least the majority of that is addressed, we're not a contender. 

 

That doesn't mean we're not a good, or even likely (bubble) playoff team, but we are most certainly not a contender. There's too many (current) structural issues. That doesn't mean the bones aren't there or that we shouldn't continue building towards being one.

 

It's certainly one of the factors in this decision, absolutely. As I've said all along, retaining JT on a team friendly deal, has it's benefits. He clearly has skill, leadership, heart, etc, etc. He's a GOOD player with loads of intangibles. I don't think many (any?) disagree with this. Like I said earlier in that post about the eye-rolling argument regarding leadership, the obvious risks that come with his extension don't require silly, off tangent and baseless debates about leadership.

 

Klimovich is a winger.

Submit this to the management group, I'm over all of it at this point.

 

Back/forth/back/forth/back/forth

 

I respect all the opinions on here, including yours. But that's all any of us have at this point and it's pointless to perpetually point out our points. That includes me so...out now. Have fun folks.

[HKSR]

7 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

No fricking way really? I HATE rain. Absolutely the worst.

 

I'm sitting on the beach right now, not a cloud in the sky. A bit cooler now but should hit 35.

 

About to start er off with a caeser.

Where are you??

[Gurn]

1 hour ago, -DLC- said:

Anyhow, not biting any further here

 This seems to be you implying I'm trolling or fishing, and not just someone with a different opinion.

Bad form.

 

edit

 after a nice lunch. I edit to add, no need to answer, just going to keep on keeping on, paddling my boat the way I wish, and leave others to do it their way.

Have great day. 

 

 

Edited September 4, 2022 by gurn

[JeremyCuddles]

Things are getting heated up in here. I was team trade Miller, so I get why many are kinda let down. But lets not pretend Miller hasn't been a beast for us. Point per game guy this first 2 seasons. So even if last season was an anomaly, a point per game is great production for 8m. Especially given he also plays with a Kesler-like edge.

 

I also get the fear of his play dropping off. But life's a gamble baby. For the next 3-4 years this is a great deal. The next 3-4? Well, I doubt it'll be he-who-shall-not-be-named bad. So lets put down the pitch forks and try be excited for next season. Worrying about half a decade from now is bad for your health. 

[Chris12345]

9 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Where are you??

Canada.....lol shhhhh

 

Not living in Van you can almost tell when the weather sucks.

 

Yall start arguing instead of day drinkn at the beach.

[Dr. Crossbar]

19 minutes ago, Devron said:

Some of us need to go outside lol. I’m going to fix the driveway. 
 

Cant wait to hear the PA say J! T! Miller!

This is your "window" to fix the driveway. 

[Dr. Crossbar]

37 minutes ago, Devron said:

Some of us need to go outside lol. I’m going to fix the driveway. 
 

Cant wait to hear the PA say J! T! Miller!

 

Edited September 4, 2022 by Dr. Crossbar
Double post

[aGENT]

28 minutes ago, The Lock said:

While they don't have to be lesser players, they're certainly most likely to be lesser players.

 

Think of it this way: when was the last time we had a player score like Miller has for us? It would be the Sedins right? When was the last time they made such a feat? 2010-11. After that, they were a PPG and started losing steam. So we've had an 11 year gap between having players score even close to 100 points. And sure, we were building, but even then, most players that score that number of points are drafted by the team they are on.

 

So then you think maybe we can get an equal to Miller. Let's see if we can: Here's the situation with almost every player last season who was above a PPG and played most or all of the season (I only say almost because I'm going down the list of total points produced last season):

 

McDavid, never traded

Huberdeau, traded for another 100 point producer

Gaudreau, signed for almost 10mil per season with competition from other teams to sign him

Draisaitl, never traded

Kaprizov, never traded

Matthews, never traded

Stamkos, never traded

Tkachuk, traded for another 100 point producer

Marner, never traded

Panarin, signed for over 11.5mil caphit

Josi, never traded (my god this shows how good this guy is but that's another story

Conner, never traded

Rantanen, never traded

Patrick Kane, never traded

Ovechkin, never traded

MacKinnon, never traded

Barkov, never traded

 

So we have to wait until a player's scord less than 88 points to even see any players we could get to replace Miller for an alright amount of money (also, here on out ignoring the other players never traded, but there's still a lot below this line):

 

Kadri, signed for 7mil... finally the 1st player signed for under Miller's contract.... would you really consider him to be our saviour?

Duchene, signed for 8mil, perhaps the closest comparable somehow? (laughable at best)

Fiala, trade for a player and a 1st round pick, good player but he's no Miller

Foresberg, signed for 8.5mil for 8years.... less bang for your buck than Miller but perhaps the best alternative so far

 

Many of the ones after this have also been never traded (Crosby, Guentzel, Tarasenko, etc)

 

So, honestly, look at the stats before you respond would be my request. You ask who says they have to be lesser players than Miller? My response is by far the most likely scenario is that they would be lesser players than Miller. Any player as valuable as Miller right now either hasn't be traded, has signed for more than Miller, or was traded for another player like Miller. There are NO examples that currently indicate we'd get an equal to Miller, only lesser players.

 

 

They most likely would be, at least in the present, you're right. Though Miller could have a career threatening injury and that could turn on it's head real quick. Or maybe we could have made a "Duchene-like" trade and ended up with the equivalent of Girard + Byram ++ out of moving him? Either way, we'll never know as we'll likely never find out what teams might have been willing to offer in this alternate reality.

 

I also notice you failed to address literally any of the other points and only focused on that one. The risk with a Miller extension has always been more about the mid-long term than the present. Even if your theoretical "two lesser players" are lesser now, are they still lesser in 4 years? Could the overall team have been better with a better RHD given our overflowing F depth and dog's breakfast right side? Will we be better/worse giving up the younger Boeser/Garland (and likely getting lesser returns)? 

 

There's no way of answering any of that, but it's clearly not the black and white situation many are making it out to be here. And is an entirely separate discussion from whether Miller is a good player or not. He clearly is.

[BarnBurner]

31 minutes ago, -DLC- said:

I didn't say the team "will" make the playoffs. I think they will and, based on their play in the latter part of the season, am quite confident they will if injuries don't get in the way of that. 

My point was that you don't know until you get there/try. Some here are convinced we're "not".

 

Anyhow, not biting any further here because you've switched to a new lane again. Without finishing up the last discussion. Too much for my little (happy) brain right now. Cheers.

 

 

This is what I find with some of these "realistic/Devil advocate" posters on  here, or other places - they speak as though it's absolute. 

 

Which I find quite ridiculous. 

[Barnstorm]

Some people aren’t happy, ever. 
Enjoy this signing and cross those distant bridges when you get to them . So much bickering . 

[Gurn]

1 minute ago, Barnstorm said:

Some people aren’t happy, ever. 
Enjoy this signing and cross those distant bridges when you get to them . So much bickering . 

some people aren't- realists, ever.

 

generalizations, are generally wrong.

 

Also it is good to make sure there will be a bridge to cross in 5 years.

However you view might differ than others.- Nothing wrong with that.

[DeNiro]

1 minute ago, Barnstorm said:

Some people aren’t happy, ever. 
Enjoy this signing and cross those distant bridges when you get to them . So much bickering . 

I swear we look to the future and wring our hands more than any other fan base.

 

You’re right just enjoy it one season at a time. So many people want to look forward and imagine a hypothetical cup winner, and ignore the good team they have right in front of them. It’s almost like they forgot how bad this team has been the last 10 years.

[BarnBurner]

17 minutes ago, N7Nucks said:

Things are getting heated up in here. I was team trade Miller, so I get why many are kinda let down. But lets not pretend Miller hasn't been a beast for us. Point per game guy this first 2 seasons. So even if last season was an anomaly, a point per game is great production for 8m. Especially given he also plays with a Kesler-like edge.

 

I also get the fear of his play dropping off. But life's a gamble baby. For the next 3-4 years this is a great deal. The next 3-4? Well, I doubt it'll be he-who-shall-not-be-named bad. So lets put down the pitch forks and try be excited for next season. Worrying about half a decade from now is bad for your health. 

Let's hope he endures like Pavelski.

[TheRussianRocket1994]

1 hour ago, AV. said:

What exactly am I "wrong" about?  The signing changes nothing.  The complexion of this team still requires fixes and those haven't been addressed.  The only thing that changes now is that there will be less to money to work with going forward because we've committed it to a 30 year old.  This is a fact.  The cap may rise, but this just means AAVs will also rise.

As this forum has come to learn, I've been ahead of the game for quite some time now.  Almost a certainty most of what I'm talking about will be correct again.  So, while you and your gang of homers continue to practice anti-intellectualism for the sake of celebrating every little thing this team does, I will continue to provide the hard-hitting truths/analysis and be as objective as possible.

Hope this helps.

Same Schtick as the last couple years from you!!! What’s your deal anyway?? It’s same nonsense from last summer & throughout the year and I’m done with it (as are sooo many others). You and few others are why I’ve mostly avoided this place during the last year, which is unfortunate, because there is some great people on here and I generally enjoy it, minus you and a few others dragging every thread down. 
 

It’s always the same with you…know it all, negative, hateful and just s******* on all this organization does.
 

Opinions and conversation are fine, but that should come with positives & negatives / good & bad / constructive criticism and at least acknowledging others / accomplishments of the team / those on it. You seem to ONLY be able to do one half of that! Just negativity / hate and never credit for the good / positive. You seem incapable of listening, looking in the mirror, taking responsibility and most importantly changing!! Just constantly driving your ignorant narrative down everyone’s throats. 
 

You constantly / consistently s*** on Benning and everything he did, plus everything else to do with the team. You gloated / rubbed it in everyone’s face when he got fired, then praised the new management before they even did anything and made out like they will be superior to Benning, now after they’ve barely been on the job / only made a few moves, your back at it with your usual agenda…i knew you couldn’t keep up your hype about the changes (management) long. Your true self is showing yet again. 
 

And, I’m not having a repeat of last summer and getting into with you over & over, so this is my only response! You need to take a serious look in the mirror or find something better to do / follow another team!! 

Edited September 4, 2022 by IRR

[The Lock]

Just now, aGENT said:

They most likely would be, at least in the present, you're right. Though Miller could have a career threatening injury and that could turn on it's head real quick. Or maybe we could have made a "Duchene-like" trade and ended up with the equivalent of Girard + Byram ++ out of moving him? Either way, we'll never know as we'll likely never find out what teams might have been willing to offer in this alternate reality.

 

I also notice you failed to address literally any of the other points and only focused on that one. The risk with a Miller extension has always been more about the mid-long term than the present. Even if your theoretical "two lesser players" are lesser now, are they still lesser in 4 years? Could the overall team have been better with a better RHD given our overflowing F depth and dog's breakfast right side? Will we be better/worse giving up the younger Boeser/Garland (and likely getting lesser returns)? 

 

There's no way of answering any of that, but it's clearly not the black and white situation many are making it out to be here. And is an entirely separate discussion from whether Miller is a good player or not. He clearly is.

There's a couple of problems I have with what you've said here:

 

1. Sure, Miller could get injured, but so could any player. That's the reality of a physical sport such as hockey. Does it mean we become paranoid of players getting injured and making decisions on worst case scenarios? Is that even healthy?

 

2. Sure, later on in Miller's contract it could get worse. It probably will be worse as he ages (unless if he becomes Pavelski but that's another story). Does that mean we take a step back now and not benefit from having a player of his caliber right now? We've both agreed at this point that we can't replace him at the moment.

 

And then there's the question of if we'd be able to replace him at all within the 8 years. I'll tell you what, if you can find me an actual scenario where a team has been able to replace a player of Miller's caliber without trading a player of Miller's contract for 8mil of less, I'm more than willing to listen and hear you out. Otherwise, it seems to me like that's wishful thinking.

 

Those 2 lessers players later on are still a risk. We could even use your arguments against them: maybe they get injured. Maybe one becomes another Miller at Miller's age. Do we then trade that person too in a never-ending cycle of trading our best players because we're afraid of doing contracts?

 

You also talk about black and white. Where have I mentioned it's black and white? I haven't. It isn't, but I can provide you with what I provided in terms of stats and looking at where players are to give more an educated understanding of the scenario, enough to the point where I can confidently say that to have traded Miller would have set us back and we haven't had another player of Miller's caliber for 11 years. You want to worry about injuries? Perhaps worry about that 11 years as well.