Prospect Info: 2020 Draft #111 - Mitchell Miller (RHD) [Mod Warning post #312]

[rt]

I get he is a child and I surely hope no one is jumping off a bridge over this, but I'd rather be the "fool" that simply takes a chance on any other fourth round selection than the "fool" that is already a gongshow and selects somebody with a track record of being un-kind towards others that are different than him.

Completely agree. The Coyotes should not have been the team to do this.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

I'll wait until they are given a chance to comment before freaking out. It's going to come up. Might have met the kid and he had his come to jesus moment for all we know.

What are they going to say? Everybody deserves a second chance? He was only 14? How about "We are aware of his misdoings as a young teenager and we will be on his ass like a fly on shit. One wrong move and he's out of here faster than you can say "Tony DeAngelo.""

 

[hbk]

It’s just hard when an organization goes out of their way to talk about changing the mentality here. Most of us asssumed that they meant positive changes.

that being said. I was also a shut head at 14. But what he did was heinous. Very hard to look past it.

 

[YotesFan47]

I totally get the outcry, what he did was horrible. If he fell 2 rounds because of this and the end goal is to ice a competitive team, I totally get taking a shot too. It's especially true if you think he was just being a shit for brains and is growing out of it. This was a 4th round pick, just because it was our first selection doesn't change the fact that this is where you take chances on guys who have rough skills or character.

I know nothing about Miller, could be a phenomenal hockey player with character warts. Whats better is if we can take kids with shit for brains and talent out the wazoo and turn them into highly respected adults.

Until I receive evidence to the contrary, I'm going glass half full on this selection. I'd have a different opinion if we took him in the 2nd round.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

I have raised four teenagers, so the argument that 14-year-olds should be given latitude to be horrible because of their age doesn't fly with me. Doing something this horrible, and then failing to show due remorse when in front of a judge raises red flags not only for the kid, but for the family who failed to install a level of accountability in him.

If Miller would own up to it and be candid about things, I'd be happy to give him another chance. You don't write kids off if they're capable of learning and changing. But Miller seems not only to be avoiding the issue, but the team around him won't address it either - which is a red flag of its own.

I hate bullies, and I hate assholes, and I really hate the combination of the two. This kid needs to prove that he's neither before I start giving him the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Murf]

Sounds like a real dick head to me. Great job Coyotes...

 

[Sinurgy]

Hope the kid has grown into a better person. Lots of pitchforks up in this thread.

 

[rt]

Interesting wrinkle:
Sylvania soccer dad charged with assault

Not intending to smear the victim or his family. Just showing that a lack of context and going only off of black and white words in official statements can make understanding a complicated situation difficult.

 

[rt]

So much for “ducking it”:

“The Coyotes were aware of the incident but Armstrong said that Miller satisfied their concerns.

“He was very open about it,” Armstrong said. “He actually wrote every NHL team about it and admitted that he made a big mistake. I liked the fact that he didn’t hide from it. It was impressive.”

Noreen also checked into the incident.
“Obviously, what happens in the past is part of their story and it’s something that you have got to look into, and it obviously paints a picture a certain way, but I am always going to go with what I saw firsthand by interacting with him,” Noreen said. “If we want things to change, we’ve got to allow for people to change. We can’t let something that happened in the past define who they are now if we want people to grow and change and get better. I think all of us need to be way more open to that; to allowing for that to be a possibility, and especially when you’re talking about a 14-year-old.

“He's embarrassed about it. He knows it was wrong but the very first time it was brought up, it was something that he owned and didn’t run away from. It’s something he certainly grew from and continues to grow from. And just like him getting drafted late, it’s something where he wants to prove people wrong.”

I did not ask Miller about the incident during his Zoom call with reporters on Wednesday. I didn’t feel it was appropriate to ask him about an incident that occurred when was 14 years old on the day that he was drafted into the NHL. Wednesday was a day for Miller to celebrate a lifelong dream with family and friends, but if and when he becomes a part of the Coyotes system, he will have to address that part of his past. While it occurred during his childhood, it is by no means insignificant, and it will always be a part of his story.”

Armstrong declares Coyotes’ draft ‘a small victory’ in face of numerous obstacles, OEL still on hold

 

[Prarievarg]

Makes me feel slightly better about it. Still, to justify the selection they have to be pretty sure he's a couple of tiers above the rest.

 

[rt]

Makes me feel slightly better about it. Still, to justify the selection they have to be pretty sure he's a couple of tiers above the rest.

I think there’s plenty to justify some other team taking him. Bad idea for this particular team.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Well, at this point we have to live with it. Let's all hope that he's not just saying what he thinks has to be said to keep his prospects open, and that he's actually made some changes and has a shot to really mature.

 

[BUX7PHX]

All we had to be excited about was a 4th round pick. And they chose the one player in the entire draft that could ruin what tiny little bit amount of fun we could have had.

Sorry for bringing this up, and not trying to be a troll, but didn't you insinuate that if Armstrong trusts Jankowski and Piankowski to make picks, that is enough for you and you take no issue with what they do?

Granted, when I was discussing the different viewpoints that one scout may have, it was with the idea that we were trading for a 1st round pick and what if the board of one of the "skis" was different enough from that of Armstrong to where we squander a pick.

All I am saying is that it went from "I trust that whomever Armstrong put in charge to do the right thing" to this is a pretty sizable 180.

 

[BUX7PHX]

My impression is this:

Clearly, the player has some level of talent. If he did not, he would not have been picked. There are players who have high opinions of themselves, which could be considered a bad thing, depending on the player's attitude.

For this case, you have someone who apparently did this consistently over a period of time. I do not know to what level this had been discussed with him. As an example, if a teacher in 5th grade told him to knock it off, and one in 6th grade told him to knock it off, the fact that it was done until 8th grade tells me that the individual does not sound like the type who likes to take instruction, or be told mistakes. In a team game, that would be the easiest way to make you the person branded as "unreliable." When the expectation is to do the right thing (or at the very least, do not do the wrong thing), he ignored that. It can change, and maybe it has somewhat. But something like this would put him on my Do Not Draft list because it tells me that the person is less likely to be trusted in the long term, especially when it has to do with someone who is clearly not at the same level as this individual who was assaulted. That is someone who would take advantage of everyone he possibly could if he thought he was "better" than them.

 

[YotesFan47]

My impression is this:

Clearly, the player has some level of talent. If he did not, he would not have been picked. There are players who have high opinions of themselves, which could be considered a bad thing, depending on the player's attitude.

For this case, you have someone who apparently did this consistently over a period of time. I do not know to what level this had been discussed with him. As an example, if a teacher in 5th grade told him to knock it off, and one in 6th grade told him to knock it off, the fact that it was done until 8th grade tells me that the individual does not sound like the type who likes to take instruction, or be told mistakes. In a team game, that would be the easiest way to make you the person branded as "unreliable." When the expectation is to do the right thing (or at the very least, do not do the wrong thing), he ignored that. It can change, and maybe it has somewhat. But something like this would put him on my Do Not Draft list because it tells me that the person is less likely to be trusted in the long term, especially when it has to do with someone who is clearly not at the same level as this individual who was assaulted. That is someone who would take advantage of everyone he possibly could if he thought he was "better" than them.

He was/is in one of the weirdest development times of his life. Chemical changes in his body are going nuts, he's learning where he stands in a pecking order, he was essentially following biology but went about it very poorly. It happens and many kids make far worse choices. I don't know this kids background, maybe his parents are shits and that's where he learned it. It could have been his friends were shits and he followed, eventually becoming the ring leader. He's about to be in a world where he's accountable for his own actions and will have to learn what is acceptable behavior as well as create a defined moral code for himself. Under all this he could be a really good, humble guy that is more easily influenced.

Point is, he needs good people to help influence what will be a very important few years. Don't write the kid off yet, let's see what happens first.

I said some really messed up things growing up, thank God no one took me seriously and I wound up finding good people to help guide me. I'm an infanately better adult now because I was taught better. I chose poor friends at a young age and followed their lead for years. I didn't know any better and my parents couldn't have guessed what some of these kids ended up becoming. If I had stayed with that group, who knows who I'd have turned out to be, even with a loving family behind me.

Let Miller finish maturing, give him time to learn and understand the mistake he's made. Kids know right from wrong but they are easily influenced and have next to zero foresight.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

He was/is in one of the weirdest development times of his life. Chemical changes in his body are going nuts, he's learning where he stands in a pecking order, he was essentially following biology but went about it very poorly.

Well, according to the account, he basically tortured that same kid from 2nd grade onward, so that's a heck of a long time for percolating hormones to warp his brain.

It happens and many kids make far worse choices.

Not without getting sent to prison.

Let Miller finish maturing, give him time to learn and understand the mistake he's made.

Let's hope that's what happens. He's got a fifty-fifty chance. Unfortunately, in a lot of instances, kids who are a-holes get worse when they get a taste of money and stardom.

 

[rt]

My impression is this:

Clearly, the player has some level of talent. If he did not, he would not have been picked. There are players who have high opinions of themselves, which could be considered a bad thing, depending on the player's attitude.

For this case, you have someone who apparently did this consistently over a period of time. I do not know to what level this had been discussed with him. As an example, if a teacher in 5th grade told him to knock it off, and one in 6th grade told him to knock it off, the fact that it was done until 8th grade tells me that the individual does not sound like the type who likes to take instruction, or be told mistakes. In a team game, that would be the easiest way to make you the person branded as "unreliable." When the expectation is to do the right thing (or at the very least, do not do the wrong thing), he ignored that. It can change, and maybe it has somewhat. But something like this would put him on my Do Not Draft list because it tells me that the person is less likely to be trusted in the long term, especially when it has to do with someone who is clearly not at the same level as this individual who was assaulted. That is someone who would take advantage of everyone he possibly could if he thought he was "better" than them.

There are a million important details that are critical to the overall context that we lack. It's pointless to speculate as there are so, so many potential factors. There was another boy involved. Does the opinion change if it turns out that other boy is severely mentally disturbed and was an extremely toxic and abusive influence in Miller's life? Miller has changed it seems, so how much of a mitigating factor would it be if Miller's turnaround was in large part due to psychological counseling and prescription medications that have leveled out a chemical problem he was having? We don't understand the state of Miller's mental health before, during, or after the incident(s). None of it is an excuse but it's all context. It's really absurd to try to form an opinion or come to a conclusion based the the big nothingburger of information we have to evaluate.

 

[rt]

Well, according to the account, he basically tortured that same kid from 2nd grade onward, so that's a heck of a long time for percolating hormones to warp his brain.



Not without getting sent to prison.



Let's hope that's what happens. He's got a fifty-fifty chance. Unfortunately, in a lot of instances, kids who are a-holes get worse when they get a taste of money and stardom.

You don't actually know what was done to the kid. I knew kids to who do sick shit and allow other kids to punch and kick and bully them for attention. Kids who encouraged it. There are degrees of punching and kicking. There are levels of complicity. You don't know anything about what happened.

I would say there is a VERY good chance that he's just some meat-head, jock, asshole who was picking on this kid because the kid is different. I'd say that's probably the most likely thing. But I really have no idea.

 

[XX]

Well I guess I totally underestimated the cartwheels people will do for a kid who hasn't earned it.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

You don't actually know what was done to the kid.

It was literally spelled out in the story.

 

[rt]

It was literally spelled out in the story.

You’re smarter than that.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

You’re smarter than that.

Apparently I'm not, because I can't fathom why on earth you're suddenly going on about the scale of the bullying, as if there is some level below which it's uncomfortable but tolerable or excusable because of age or hormones or whatever else.

 

[XX]

Apparently I'm not, because I can't fathom why on earth you're suddenly going on about the scale of the bullying, as if there is some level below which it's uncomfortable but tolerable or excusable because of age or hormones or whatever else.

Why be calm and collected about things when we can victim blame on behalf of a 4th round pick.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Why be calm and collected about things when we can victim blame on behalf of a 4th round pick.

I mean, I get the whole concept of second chances and maturing processes and all of that. I mentioned them upthread. And I reiterate, I hope the kid learns and grows and that he's a better person from now on.

But there's no downplaying what happened. It was brutal. It was heartless. It was inexcusable. And - according to the judge - it was remorseless.

At least nobody has tried going with the "affluenza" defense in this thread yet. That's a relief.

 

[BUX7PHX]

There are a million important details that are critical to the overall context that we lack. It's pointless to speculate as there are so, so many potential factors. There was another boy involved. Does the opinion change if it turns out that other boy is severely mentally disturbed and was an extremely toxic and abusive influence in Miller's life? Miller has changed it seems, so how much of a mitigating factor would it be if Miller's turnaround was in large part due to psychological counseling and prescription medications that have leveled out a chemical problem he was having? We don't understand the state of Miller's mental health before, during, or after the incident(s). None of it is an excuse but it's all context. It's really absurd to try to form an opinion or come to a conclusion based the the big nothingburger of information we have to evaluate.

This has little to do with the player though. Ultimately, yes, there may be extenuating circumstances resulting in what Miller did. Possible that he was influenced by others and has truly learned his lesson.

I was talking about the context of player evaluation and how you seemed fine with whatever the pick was because you trusted Jankowski and Piankowski because they had the approval of Armstrong. Where the hockey reward is high is not what I am questioning. It is where the risk of what might this player be to other teammates? Is he the next Avery or Ribeiro? If our scouts had him as the 50th best player on our board, and we secured a pick in the early 3rd round, we just took a much greater risk on a kid with a potentially checkered personality.

Mistakes can happen at any point in the draft, based on someone's evaluation of a player overall. While there are certainly some reclamation projects out there, this was the point of the question that i asked - would there be any worry that Jankowski or Piankowski would have a player on their list that our GM may not agree with. This doesn't sound like the case, but almost immediately after saying that either of those guys can do no wrong, you sounded as if though we made a pick that is highly questionable. Sounds like you are pivoting on your own statement, and if this is the player that our scout took in the 4th round with question marks on character, why is it safe to assume that if a 1st or 2nd round pick was available to us, that they would not be capable of also picking a player with red flags, the issue being that the player was taken with a much higher pick?