Rumor: ALL PURPOSE JT MILLER THREAD - New Update - (Post #1123)

[Canucks LB]

This thread is for ALL JT MILLER POSTS/NEW THREADS for the current time period.

PLEASE POST ALL RUMORS, VALUES, TRADES, EVERYTHING JT MILLER in this thread.

Click to read more...

 

[bringbacktheblack604]

As a Canuck fan, I would prefer to see Miller traded. The reason why is simple, the Canucks have often had players who outplayed their contracts with big years. When Burrows was on his last year at $2 million and wasn't really playing his best, I thought that the Canucks could have gotten a 1st and a solid prospect to a cup contending team based on his history. Instead, the Canucks kept him and gave him a raise in recognition of his underpayment in years previous. Henrik and Daniel both went up to $7 million despite having their best years when they were paid $6.1 million. In earlier years, the Canucks would overpay for players that had their best years behind them.

Now, do I think that Miller would still be a key player? Yes, I don't see him regressing for another 2-3 years. However, I do not want to sign a 6-8 year contract for a player that could take up a significant portion of a cap when we could return two very good pieces (maybe 3-4) for an asset that the Canucks haven't had the opportunity to trade for some time.

As others have mentioned, the Canucks have often let expiring contracts leave for nothing in the past and it has hampered the rebuild. So yes, I'm happy that Miller had 99 points last season and 217 in just over 200 games for the Canucks. But I'd be happier if they were able to secure some better talent than Shakir Mukhamadullin and Hugo Alnefelt who were selected with the picks we gave up for him.

While I agree losing someone for nothing sucks but is no reason to trade him with a year left on his contract.
Maybe I'm wrong but I feel this team based off the 60 games under Bruce, a fully healthy Petey and the podz we saw the last month are just a few examples of why we should be a playoff team and that's not even including using our 11 million in cap space plus more space from moving some of the non core guys.

Moving JT and picks and prospects shouldn't be in the same sentence, we're not rebuilding and you don't re-tool by trading your best forward and leader, especially since replacing him @ 5.5 million would quite literally next to impossible via ufa.

As far as his contract no matter where he signs he will most likely get term or money but I doubt he gets both. And since we have a very favorable cap situation after next season and the expected jump in 2 seasons fitting him in at 8-9 on a 5 or 6 year deal considering only Petey based on a current team might Crack the 10 million mark.

There's also the option of more term less money, even if his game declines at 35-36-37? Honestly who gives a shit if during the productive years he helps us potentially win a cup at a lower cap hit when needed opposed to 7 years from now when who knows what the team and cap or even his health will look like.

Let’s say we keep him and at the trade deadline we suck ass and he's not committed to stay here, if he's still producing we would still get a haul from a contender, especially with 50% retention.

Unless we get a elite RHD to play with Quinn as a return I just don't see how it makes sense to trade him since he makes us better right through our expected window and at some point in the next 2-3 years there's a good chance we're chasing a guy too put us over the top. Considering the cost a guy of his caliber will cost especially if the cap has gone up to its expected amount or the fact only twice in 30 years has a 99 point player been traded, its doubtful we will find someone better and certainly not at what he will sign for now nevermind the cost to trade for that replacement.

 

[CanucksSayEh]

If people think EP can come even close to what JT is now, then why the hell would we trade JT? That would be 2x top 20 or better scorers, to go with our top 10 Dman and goalie. Lots of good wingers, and another legit center in Bo.

That's a win now roster regardless of the depression up until now. Past seasons mean nothing, you don't get to carry wins over to the next year. Plenty of less consequential pieces to move around and tweak. You don't just go and trade your best forward in his prime without a request.

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

If people think EP can come even close to what JT is now, then why the hell would we trade JT? That would be 2x top 20 or better scorers, to go with our top 10 Dman and goalie. Lots of good wingers, and another legit center in Bo.

That's a win now roster regardless of the depression up until now. Past seasons mean nothing, you don't get to carry wins over to the next year. Plenty of less consequential pieces to move around and tweak. You don't just go and trade your best forward in his prime without a request.

Unless Miller himself requested for a trade, I say we keep him. The problem, though, is signing Boeser, and that might affect the cap hit and the future re-signing of Miller.

 

[NiftyCanuck19]

Van/Phi Trade:

Van receives:
- Travis Konecny
- Scott Laughton
- 5th OA

Phi receives:
- JT Miller (Extended)
- Tanner Pearson
- 15th OA (could be substituted for a lesser pick I guess)

Van does this because:
- Cost certainty. Konecny is on a 5.5M for 3 more seasons and Laughton is on a 3M for 4 more seasons
- Less of a drop off after trading Miller. Konecny can fill into the top 6 (he's also only 25), Laughton fills in the 3rd line center position
- Potential RD prospect. Moving up in the draft allows Van to likely get one of Nemec or Jiricek, giving them a top notch RD prospect
*Bonus* Konecny and Horvat are cousins according to EP, not that it would make a difference but I thought that's a cool little piece of info

Phi does this because:
- Receives best player. JT Miller is clearly the best player involved in the deal and helps out their center position after losing Giroux. I also feel he'd be a good fit in Philly
- Scoring depth. Pearson gives them some scoring depth as a middle-six winger (put up 34 pts in 68 games this past year)
- Still have a draft pick to maintain prospect pool. The drop off between 5th OA and 15th OA is likely a bit steep but there'll still be good prospects at 15th OA.

Thoughts? Am I way off on this or is there a basis for something here? I'll be honest I'm a big canucks fan (obviously with my name) but I tried to propose something at least somewhat fair for both sides.

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

Van/Phi Trade:

Van receives:
- Travis Konecny
- Scott Laughton
- 5th OA

Phi receives:
- JT Miller (Extended)
- Tanner Pearson
- 15th OA (could be substituted for a lesser pick I guess)

Van does this because:
- Cost certainty. Konecny is on a 5.5M for 3 more seasons and Laughton is on a 3M for 4 more seasons
- Less of a drop off after trading Miller. Konecny can fill into the top 6 (he's also only 25), Laughton fills in the 3rd line center position
- Potential RD prospect. Moving up in the draft allows Van to likely get one of Nemec or Jiricek, giving them a top notch RD prospect
*Bonus* Konecny and Horvat are cousins according to EP, not that it would make a difference but I thought that's a cool little piece of info

Phi does this because:
- Receives best player. JT Miller is clearly the best player involved in the deal and helps out their center position after losing Giroux. I also feel he'd be a good fit in Philly
- Scoring depth. Pearson gives them some scoring depth as a middle-six winger (put up 34 pts in 68 games this past year)
- Still have a draft pick to maintain prospect pool. The drop off between 5th OA and 15th OA is likely a bit steep but there'll still be good prospects at 15th OA.

Thoughts? Am I way off on this or is there a basis for something here? I'll be honest I'm a big canucks fan (obviously with my name) but I tried to propose something at least somewhat fair for both sides.

I think Laughton does the grinding for his team, so I don't know if Philadelphia will move down their draft pick while giving him up. Of course, Miller is a gem, but I feel Philly's getting too offensive over defensive.

 

[NiftyCanuck19]

I think Laughton does the grinding for his team, so I don't know if Philadelphia will move down their draft pick while giving him up. Of course, Miller is a gem, but I feel Philly's getting too offensive over defensive.

Maybe replacing Laughton in the deal with Frost? I'm sure they wouldn't want to give him up since he's only 23 but given he's a center and they're bringing in Miller at the center position it would make sense. They'd have Couturier, Miller, and Laughton as their top 3 centers

 

[Qwijibo]

Van/Phi Trade:

Van receives:
- Travis Konecny
- Scott Laughton
- 5th OA

Phi receives:
- JT Miller (Extended)
- Tanner Pearson
- 15th OA (could be substituted for a lesser pick I guess)

Van does this because:
- Cost certainty. Konecny is on a 5.5M for 3 more seasons and Laughton is on a 3M for 4 more seasons
- Less of a drop off after trading Miller. Konecny can fill into the top 6 (he's also only 25), Laughton fills in the 3rd line center position
- Potential RD prospect. Moving up in the draft allows Van to likely get one of Nemec or Jiricek, giving them a top notch RD prospect
*Bonus* Konecny and Horvat are cousins according to EP, not that it would make a difference but I thought that's a cool little piece of info

Phi does this because:
- Receives best player. JT Miller is clearly the best player involved in the deal and helps out their center position after losing Giroux. I also feel he'd be a good fit in Philly
- Scoring depth. Pearson gives them some scoring depth as a middle-six winger (put up 34 pts in 68 games this past year)
- Still have a draft pick to maintain prospect pool. The drop off between 5th OA and 15th OA is likely a bit steep but there'll still be good prospects at 15th OA.

Thoughts? Am I way off on this or is there a basis for something here? I'll be honest I'm a big canucks fan (obviously with my name) but I tried to propose something at least somewhat fair for both sides.

You can probably take Laughton and Pearson out altogether. They’re more or less a wash and just muddy the waters.

The issue I see is the vague Miller “extended” part.

He can’t be extended prior to the draft. So it leaves a lot of grey area. Assuming he’d even be willing to extend in Philly. He might be sick of losing and prefer to go to more of a contender.

 

[EP to Kuzmenko]

You can probably take Laughton and Pearson out altogether. They’re more or less a wash and just muddy the waters.

The issue I see is the vague Miller “extended” part.

He can’t be extended prior to the draft. So it leaves a lot of grey area. Assuming he’d even be willing to extend in Philly. He might be sick of losing and prefer to go to more of a contender.

This is what I don't fully understand and would like someone more knowledgeable in the CBA to explain. Generally July 1st is when extensions can be discussed in the NHL as the last year of the contract technically starts July 1. Does FA being July 13th push this date due to the fact that negotiating extension used to fall on July 1st(Free Agency)?

 

[Peter Griffin]

This is what I don't fully understand and would like someone more knowledgeable in the CBA to explain. Generally July 1st is when extensions can be discussed in the NHL as the last year of the contract technically starts July 1. Does FA being July 13th push this date due to the fact that negotiating extension used to fall on July 1st(Free Agency)?

As far as I know, yes.

 

[Qwijibo]

This is what I don't fully understand and would like someone more knowledgeable in the CBA to explain. Generally July 1st is when extensions can be discussed in the NHL as the last year of the contract technically starts July 1. Does FA being July 13th push this date due to the fact that negotiating extension used to fall on July 1st(Free Agency)?

Yes. Free agency being later this year has pushed the date for when contracts can be renewed.

 

[wonton15]

Van/Phi Trade:

Van receives:
- Travis Konecny
- Scott Laughton
- 5th OA

Phi receives:
- JT Miller (Extended)
- Tanner Pearson
- 15th OA (could be substituted for a lesser pick I guess)

Van does this because:
- Cost certainty. Konecny is on a 5.5M for 3 more seasons and Laughton is on a 3M for 4 more seasons
- Less of a drop off after trading Miller. Konecny can fill into the top 6 (he's also only 25), Laughton fills in the 3rd line center position
- Potential RD prospect. Moving up in the draft allows Van to likely get one of Nemec or Jiricek, giving them a top notch RD prospect
*Bonus* Konecny and Horvat are cousins according to EP, not that it would make a difference but I thought that's a cool little piece of info

Phi does this because:
- Receives best player. JT Miller is clearly the best player involved in the deal and helps out their center position after losing Giroux. I also feel he'd be a good fit in Philly
- Scoring depth. Pearson gives them some scoring depth as a middle-six winger (put up 34 pts in 68 games this past year)
- Still have a draft pick to maintain prospect pool. The drop off between 5th OA and 15th OA is likely a bit steep but there'll still be good prospects at 15th OA.

Thoughts? Am I way off on this or is there a basis for something here? I'll be honest I'm a big canucks fan (obviously with my name) but I tried to propose something at least somewhat fair for both sides.

it's not bad. We don't really need Konecny and I'd rather extract a D out of the trade as well. Not sure how Philly fans would feel about it but I could see Fletcher going HARD after JT.

 

[Vancouver Canucks]

Maybe replacing Laughton in the deal with Frost? I'm sure they wouldn't want to give him up since he's only 23 but given he's a center and they're bringing in Miller at the center position it would make sense. They'd have Couturier, Miller, and Laughton as their top 3 centers

Yeah, personally, I wouldn't mind.

 

[EP to Kuzmenko]

Yes. Free agency being later this year has pushed the date for when contracts can be renewed.

On thing I always point out is that teams always(though not allowed) discuss with agents what an extension looks like and if the player is willing to sign with that team. Flyers can most definitely be secretly given the green light to ask Millers agent if he would be open to staying there long term, and what the deal will look like. If all that is agreeable, trade for him and extend him July 13th.

Are teams allowed to do this? no, do they do it anyways? yes.

 

[Qwijibo]

On thing I always point out is that teams always(though not allowed) discuss with agents what an extension looks like and if the player is willing to sign with that team. Flyers can most definitely be secretly given the green light to ask Millers agent if he would be open to staying there long term, and what the deal will look like. If all that is agreeable, trade for him and extend him July 13th.

Are teams allowed to do this? no, do they do it anyways? yes.

Oh for sure. I’m just saying you can’t assume that Miller will be willing to extend. And even if he is you can’t assume the team will want to meet his terms. Those things affect the value of the deal. Look at how Vancouver’s options were limited in the Kesler trade.

The value of a 1 year rental Miller is probably lower than the value of an extended Miller.

 

[EP to Kuzmenko]

Oh for sure. I’m just saying you can’t assume that Miller will be willing to extend. And even if he is you can’t assume the team will want to meet his terms. Those things affect the value of the deal. Look at how Vancouver’s options were limited in the Kesler trade.

The value of a 1 year rental Miller is probably lower than the value of an extended Miller.

Kesler trade doesn't count. He started with 2 team list and narrowed it to 1. Miller has no NTC so he will play next year with what ever team we send him to. He does have a say in where he plays after that, but if Philly made the above deal, they would have an idea of what he wants in $ and term and are ok with it, and an assurance that he is willing to sign there. If both of those are not favorable, i doubt they spend those assets on Miller.

 

[NiftyCanuck19]

Kesler trade doesn't count. He started with 2 team list and narrowed it to 1. Miller has no NTC so he will play next year with what ever team we send him to. He does have a say in where he plays after that, but if Philly made the above deal, they would have an idea of what he wants in $ and term and are ok with it, and an assurance that he is willing to sign there. If both of those are not favorable, i doubt they spend those assets on Miller.

For sure. The proposed deal is definitely contingent on an extension. As good as Miller has been the past few years, the deal wouldn't make sense for Philly if they can't agree on $ and term of an extension.

 

[Qwijibo]

Kesler trade doesn't count. He started with 2 team list and narrowed it to 1. Miller has no NTC so he will play next year with what ever team we send him to. He does have a say in where he plays after that, but if Philly made the above deal, they would have an idea of what he wants in $ and term and are ok with it, and an assurance that he is willing to sign there. If both of those are not favorable, i doubt they spend those assets on Miller.

I bring up the Kesler trade because it applies in the sense that there’s probably only a few teams thst are a fit. Teams where Miller will be willing to extend and the team is willing to pay the price to get him AND agree to acceptable terms to re-sign him. Every other team will be looking to pay the 1 year rental price on him.

 

[EP to Kuzmenko]

I bring up the Kesler trade because it applies in the sense that there’s probably only a few teams thst are a fit. Teams where Miller will be willing to extend and the team is willing to pay the price to get him AND agree to acceptable terms to re-sign him. Every other team will be looking to pay the 1 year rental price on him.

I'd say there are a bout 10 teams that would be wanting to trade for Miller and good with the price. Of those 10 i'd say 6 or 7 have the assets to actually make a deal.

 

[Qwijibo]

I'd say there are a bout 10 teams that would be wanting to trade for Miller and good with the price. Of those 10 i'd say 6 or 7 have the assets to actually make a deal.

And how many of those are places Miller would extend? Tough to say

 

[drax0s]

For Philly fans - how seriously do you think the Flyers are about trying to be competitive next year with the Torts hire and other comments? Does a trade around JT Miller + OEL for Provorov + JVR with picks to balance things out make any sense?

On paper it looks like it makes the Flyers better next year (or more if JTM re-signs) while also helping the Canucks get younger and clear cap space for an eventual push in a couple of years. Risk-wise, if things go sideways the Flyers can recoup some assets by flipping JTM at the deadline as a rental but will have OEL for 4 more years.

 

[Maddogy]

And how many of those are places Miller would extend? Tough to say

Extension is difficult but can be somewhat addressed with conditional draft picks in case Miller does resign.

 

[EP to Kuzmenko]

And how many of those are places Miller would extend? Tough to say

One. MAYBE two of them will care about extension

 

[Maddogy]

And how many of those are places Miller would extend? Tough to say

Extension is difficult but can be somewhat addressed t with conditional draft picks in case Miller does resign.

 

[Qwijibo]

Extension is difficult but can be somewhat addressed with conditional draft picks in case Miller does resign.

The new CBA doesn’t allow for picks conditional on a player re-signing

 

[Canadian Canuck]

No? It's completely garbage.

What an awful take Keep overrating a draft pick over two established top young players