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

[Proposal] Miller + 11OA to Columbus for 3OA


Recommended Posts

It's the offseason for us and the draft is coming, time for a proposal. There's an ongoing discussion regarding this in the Provorov thread anyway so it may as well get it's own thread. 

 

To Columbus

 

JT Miller 

11OA

+? 

 

To Vancouver

 

3OA, or one of Carlsson/Fantilli 

 

There's been speculation that Patrick Allvin is really high on Leo Carlsson, who presumably will be available at 3OA unless Anaheim surprises everyone and doesn't select Fantilli. Which is fine, Fantilli is a stud I'd happily take at 3OA. 

 

Columbus has upgraded their D with Provorov and are likely looking to make the playoffs next season, Miller would immediately become their 1C ahead of Jenner and anyone else they have. Miller is an Ohio guy even if he grew up a Pens fan, it could very well be that he'd be receptive to Columbus as a landing spot. But hey, until his clause kicks in he doesn't really get a say and it hasn't yet. I think Miller could be a compete and growth piece. If the idea is to shift the culture by being genuinely competitive while bringing their prospects along it'd make sense.

 

LA just set the market by dumping cap on Philly, moving out cap would more than likely cost us imo and moving Miller is the easiest way to shed cap while getting positive value back. Miller and 11OA may seem like a lot to some but top 3 picks are rarely moved and the price to acquire such a pick would understandably have to be huge. One could argue that cap space would also be part of the return if we're not taking cap back. It could be we may have to add a bit though, this is the 3OA we're talking about, there could be other moving pieces involved. 

 

If Columbus were to acquire Miller their top six would look like: Miller, Gaudreau, Laine, Johnson, Roslovic, and Jenner. Sillinger could platoon the third line behind Miller and Jenner/Johnson. Columbus has two young centers already in Sillinger and Johnson, Carlsson isn't essential. 

 

Miller, Laine, and Gaudreau would be their pricy forwards. Jenner is on a sweetheart deal. Johnson may get a bridge, Roslovic was born in Columbus and may take a discount to stay. That's a very competitive top six. And they'd get a very good player at 11OA. 

 

We'd get to run with a 1-2 punch of Pettersson and one of Carlsson and Fantilli, both of which who fit our window better imo. Any draft that didn't feature Bedard would likely see one of them going 1OA, we'd be getting a premium talent on an ELC. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Coconuts
  • Like 1
  • Vintage 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

Maybe Chicago doesn't want Bedard, and we can use the 3OA+ to trade up to 2OA?  :bigblush:

This trade happens and Bedard subsequently announces he will only play for Vancouver e5

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This actually does make a lot of sense based on the needs and timelines of both teams.  Miller gives them the exact type of player they need to push for the playoffs, be a bit more hardnosed (Assuming that is why they hired Babcock) and they still get 11 which will be one heck of a player potentially.  We get some cap flexibility and the young C with a higher upside than whoever goes at 11, but it's not a slam dunk as we see prospects not materialize all the time.  

 

It would be nice to sneak Peeke out of them as well if they consider it a cap savings to offset Miller.  Likely need to add something for them.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

It's the offseason for us and the draft is coming, time for a proposal. There's an ongoing discussion regarding this in the Provorov thread anyway so it may as well get it's own thread. 

 

To Columbus

 

JT Miller 

11OA

+? 

 

To Vancouver

 

3OA, or one of Carlsson/Fantilli 

 

There's been speculation that Patrick Allvin is really high on Leo Carlsson, who presumably will be available at 3OA unless Anaheim surprises everyone and doesn't select Fantilli. Which is fine, Fantilli is a stud I'd happily take at 3OA. 

 

Columbus has upgraded their D with Provorov and are likely looking to make the playoffs next season, Miller would immediately become their 1C ahead of Jenner and anyone else they have. Miller is an Ohio guy even if he grew up a Pens fan, it could very well be that he'd be receptive to Columbus as a landing spot. But hey, until he clause kicks in he doesn't really get a say and it hasn't yet. I think Miller could be a compete and growth piece. If the idea is to shift the culture by being genuinely competitive while bringing their prospects along it'd make sense.

 

LA just set the marking by dumping cap on Philly, moving out cap would more than likely cost us imo and moving Miller is the easiest way to shed cap while getting positive value back. Miller and 11OA may seem like a lot to some but top 3 picks are rarely moved and the price to acquire such a pick would understandably have to be huge. One could argue that cap space would also be part of the return if we're not taking cap back. It could be we may have to add a bit though, this is the 3OA we're talking about, there could be other moving pieces involved. 

 

If Columbus were to acquire Miller their top six would look like: Miller, Gaudreau, Laine, Johnson, Roslovic, and Jenner. Sillinger could platoon the third line behind Miller and Jenner/Johnson. Columbus has two young centers already in Sillinger and Johnson, Carlsson isn't essential. 

 

Miller, Laine, and Gaudreau would be their pricy forwards. Jenner is on a sweetheart deal. Johnson may get a bridge, Roslovic was born in Columbus and may take a discount to stay. That's a very competitive top six. And they'd get a very good player at 11OA. 

 

We'd get to run with a 1-2 punch of Pettersson and one of Carlsson and Fantilli, both of which who fit our window better imo. Any draft that didn't feature Bedard would likely see one of them going 1OA, we'd be getting a premium talent on an ELC. 

 

 

 

 

This was an interesting idea. Well argued for why Columbus might do it. I doubt it would actually happen, but I guess you never know. Depends in part on if Columbus thinks there will be someone there they like at 11. Maybe they expect Michkov will fall that far. They get Miller and their number two ranked guy and call it a day. I still think it's worth it for Vancouver to offload Miller's contract and get a sure chance at one of Carlsson or Fantilli.

  • Cheers 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

This actually does make a lot of sense based on the needs and timelines of both teams.  Miller gives them the exact type of player they need to push for the playoffs, be a bit more hardnosed (Assuming that is why they hired Babcock) and they still get 11 which will be one heck of a player potentially.  We get some cap flexibility and the young C with a higher upside than whoever goes at 11, but it's not a slam dunk as we see prospects not materialize all the time.  

 

It would be nice to sneak Peeke out of them as well if they consider it a cap savings to offset Miller.  Likely need to add something for them.  

That's actually a wrinkle I forgot to add, Babcock. He's not a coach you bring in to develop players per say, he's a coach you bring in if you plan to compete. I could see Miller being right in his wheelhouse as a 1C. And they'll get a top 10 talent at 11OA, no question. This allows them to add another stud to what's already a strong prospect pool. Bringing in Babcock and Provorov could potentially indicate a shift in direction for Columbus, you can't just stockpile high picks forever, sooner or later you need to compete, and Columbus is a team that historically hasn't seen much of the playoffs. Miller also gives them a home state player to market. 

 

It's not a slam dunk but drafting a top 3 talent isn't something we've done since the Sedin's, it's as close as you can be to a sure bet in regards to drafting a player. 8M in cap space allows us flex to potentially address our D and 3C as well, this offseason or next. Or it allows us to be a team that takes advantage of another cap strapped team, it's nice flexibility. 

 

I don't think they'd be looking to weaken their D by moving Peeke though, unless they plan on upgrading their D further. 

 

21 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I'm in...

Credit it to you, it's our back and forth that got the wheels turning

 

19 minutes ago, HighOnHockey said:

This was an interesting idea. Well argued for why Columbus might do it. I doubt it would actually happen, but I guess you never know. Depends in part on if Columbus thinks there will be someone there they like at 11. Maybe they expect Michkov will fall that far. They get Miller and their number two ranked guy and call it a day. I still think it's worth it for Vancouver to offload Miller's contract and get a sure chance at one of Carlsson or Fantilli.

It's a longshot, absolutely, but it's something I'd be exploring if I were our management. Hell, I'd be willing to add, although how much we'd have to add is anyone's guess. Hard to say who they project at 11 but they'd likely have to like the players available on their own draft list to consider it. 

 

I think so too, we'd be set with top six centers for most of a decade.

Edited by Coconuts
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we were supposed to be GETTING 2 1sts for JT, then why do WE have to give up the equivalent of 3 firsts to get one of them? 

 

I think that :

JT + 11 oa = 3oa + prospect or 2024/5 first 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, grumpyone said:

If we were supposed to be GETTING 2 1sts for JT, then why do WE have to give up the equivalent of 3 firsts to get one of them? 

 

I think that :

JT + 11 oa = 3oa + prospect or 2024/5 first 

Position and player

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, grumpyone said:

If we were supposed to be GETTING 2 1sts for JT, then why do WE have to give up the equivalent of 3 firsts to get one of them? 

 

I think that :

JT + 11 oa = 3oa + prospect or 2024/5 first 

Because top 3 picks are almost never moved and the price to acquire such a pick will reflect that. Picking top 3 could allow us to select a franchise player. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, grumpyone said:

If we were supposed to be GETTING 2 1sts for JT, then why do WE have to give up the equivalent of 3 firsts to get one of them? 

 

I think that :

JT + 11 oa = 3oa + prospect or 2024/5 first 

Those two 1sts for Miller would have been middle 1sts or even late ones.  11OA + two middle firsts is the equivalent of 3OA in a top heavy draft where the top 3-4 picks could easily be 1OA in other drafts.  I would want Columbus to add a roster player like Sean Kuraly who could be our 3C.  That would seal the deal for me...

 

Pettersson

Carlsson

Raty

Aman

 

We are set at centre for the next 10-12 years.  Only problem is Raty would have to change his nationality to Swedish...

Edited by Elias Pettersson
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Those two 1sts for Miller would have been middle 1sts or even late ones.  11OA + two middle firsts is the equivalent of 3OA in a top heavy draft where the top 3-4 picks could easily be 1OA in other drafts.  I would want Columbus to add a roster player like Sean Kuraly who could be our 3C.  That would seal the deal for me...

 

Pettersson

Carlsson

Raty

Aman

 

We are set at centre for the next 10-12 years.  Only problem is Raty would have to change his nationality to Swedish...

Or just put Karlsson at C and Raty on W.  Either way having Pettersson and Carlsson for the next 10 years would be pretty awesome.  Lead their own lines and then combine on the power play with Hughes.  

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Kenny Powers said:

wasn’t this your idea?

It was…  :)

 

I was like a week ahead of CoCo and I get zero credit for it.  My proposal was even sexier and hotter than this one.  I prefer 3 ways…
 

On 6/1/2023 at 12:40 PM, Elias Pettersson said:

Okay, so Chicago didn't bite.  Well, what about Columbus?  And what about Dubas making a big splash in Pittsburgh?  I think this might be the one...

 

To Vancouver:

2023 3OA

Mikael Granlund

Andrew Peeke

Sean Kuraly

 

To Columbus:

2023 11OA

2023 14OA

2024 1st round pick (Pittsburgh)

2024 1st round pick (Vancouver)

Anthony Beauvillier

Nils Hoglander

Jack Rathbone

Owen Pickering

Samuel Poulin

 

To Pittsburgh:

JT Miller

Thatcher Demko

 

Sign Ryan Graves, Adin Hill, Ryan Reaves and Luke Schenn as UFA's.

 

 

Kuzmenko    Pettersson   Mikheyev

Granlund      Carlsson      Boeser

Podkolzin     Kuraly          Garland

Joshua         Aman           Reaves

PDG

 

Hughes        Peeke

Graves         Hronek

OEL             Myers

Brisebois     Schenn

 

Hill       Silovs

 

Pearson/Poolman   LTIR

 

Oh baby...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HighOnHockey said:

This was an interesting idea. Well argued for why Columbus might do it. I doubt it would actually happen, but I guess you never know. Depends in part on if Columbus thinks there will be someone there they like at 11. Maybe they expect Michkov will fall that far. They get Miller and their number two ranked guy and call it a day. I still think it's worth it for Vancouver to offload Miller's contract and get a sure chance at one of Carlsson or Fantilli.

It's possible the trade waits until the 11OA pick to be completed. If CLB likes a player still on the board they swap who ever they picked at 3 (assuming it's Carlsson or Fantilli) for 11 and Miller. That way they are not guessing at who they could have. If their list of players with enough value at 11 is empty they don't accept the trade and we pick at 11. In this case I think CLB holds all the leverage and VAN would have to accept those terms. Miller isn't the only piece they could get if they wanted to move 3OA.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Highstickin said:

It's possible the trade waits until the 11OA pick to be completed. If CLB likes a player still on the board they swap who ever they picked at 3 (assuming it's Carlsson or Fantilli) for 11 and Miller. That way they are not guessing at who they could have. If their list of players with enough value at 11 is empty they don't accept the trade and we pick at 11. In this case I think CLB holds all the leverage and VAN would have to accept those terms. Miller isn't the only piece they could get if they wanted to move 3OA.

Nah they'd never do that.  Imagine the pick happening at 3OA, all the photos, all the interviews, then 20min later... BOOM!  TRADED.  Can't see it happening that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Miller, 11OA, Rathbone for 3rd OA, Peeke?

 

I don't see Rathbone as really having NHL value imo, I don't think they'd move Peeke unless they have an upgrade in mind

 

Jiricek could steal an RD spot but I'm not sure that's a surefire thing

 

14 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

It was…  :)

 

I was like a week ahead of CoCo and I get zero credit for it.  My proposal was even sexier and hotter than this one.  I prefer 3 ways…
 

 

I'd do that too, although I question whether Miller may not be a better fit in Columbus than Pittsburgh now post Provorov trade and Babcock hire 

 

7 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Nah they'd never do that.  Imagine the pick happening at 3OA, all the photos, all the interviews, then 20min later... BOOM!  TRADED.  Can't see it happening that way.

Yeah, just seems messy, I think a trade would likely involve Columbus being prepared to take a number of players at 11OA

Edited by Coconuts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

I don't see Rathbone as really having NHL value imo,

IMO, he could be playing in the NHL right now in a lesser pair/more sheltered version of Hughes' role. We just happen to have one of the best guys in the NHL already in that role (offensive usage/PP time) already on the team and blocking him (and an OEL, with a better 2 way game that can fill in there if Hughes is out).

Edited by aGENT
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Miller, 11OA, Rathbone for 3rd OA, Peeke?

 

Methinks you have to at least add a future 1st from our end to even get that convo prompted. 
 

30 other teams will be coveting 3rd overall and with a flat cap, there may be better value than JTM’s term deal at the moment unfortunately. 

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...