Canucks LB
My Favourite, Gone too soon, RIP Luc, We miss you
- Oct 12, 2008
- 78,724
- 33,579
Rumor: ALL PURPOSE JT MILLER THREAD - New Update - (Post #1123)
- Thread starter Canucks LB
- Start date
- Status
In all honesty.
The #1 thing people are failing to understand is that Miller does not control his destiny. If the Canucks trade him to a team that pays a premium for him, that team can look and decide if it's possible to retain him, or if the fit isn't right and then flip him at the trade deadline themselves.
Let's say the Canucks do something like a 1st round pick, blue chip prospect, quality young roster player. The team that acquired Miller can look at the fit or future and then trade him for a comparable or better return.
Like, there's no end to possibilities but people are so cemented in their views about his worth or lack thereof that they can not fathom how foolish GMs really are, or how dangerous they are when thinking clearly.
BayStBullies
Burn the Boats!
- Apr 1, 2012
- 5,492
- 4,950
Why doesn't Vancouver keep him? He seems incredibly valued by the fans. I don't see the reason for this thread.
You can clearly see the comparables I pointed out from this year alone.
Not a single one of those are "nuclear options" yet all of them should be the lowest end of starting points for Miller in a forum where people think he's not worth what 3rd line centres like Copp, or players like Chiarot were netting in return.
They need to trade Boeser, ya he's a goal scorer but I'd keep a near 30yr old Miller over Brock
Cap hit could be a serious issue. There are rumours about an unwillingness to sign, Vancouver has a history of allowing assets to walk for nothing. To watch what is arguably one of the best contracts per value in the league over the last 20 years walk without obtaining a return would be criminally stupid.
That’s what I’m saying. None of your examples are the nuclear option. Teams are willing to do those trades to better their chance at winning a cup. And yes. Miller is worth way more than those examples. The problem are the proposals where a team that clearly isn’t a contender is expected to give up a very high pick (top 5-10) plus top prospects for a guy that likely won’t be there or a difference maker when that teams window finally opens. Do you think Miller’s presence for 1 year is worth the 2nd OA, Holtz and Serverson to NJ? I’d be willing to bet that it’s not
If you look back at what i have stated a number of times, I believe that the valuations of fans are certainly off.
The most likely return for Miller is a combination of any 3 of the following as stated
1st round pick (single or multiples)
Top prospect/Blue chip
Solid young roster player in a position of need
Potential future picks outside of the 1st round
To increase that
Retain cap on Miller
Take back a rostered player with an ugly cap hit for 1-2 seasons.
That's really it. The reality is, Miller will return any 3 of those items. But not all of them. To increase that means retention and eating cap depending on the team in question. IE: Philli, eating JVR for one year or provorov (still dont get why they wanna get rid of him)
I fell a lot of fans will be disappointed in the return as they've built it up. Bu I also feel a lot of fans of other teams will consider the actual return as some sort of "overpayment" without looking at the historical returns top UFA's have gotten in their last year or at the TDL
Hopefully we do. I see no scenario where the Nucks are better over the next 5-6 years without Miller. By then the rest of the cores contracts are up and they'll surely be gone after whats likely a miserable half decade.
The funny thing is I don’t think we should be arguing. You and I generally agree on what he’s worth. I’m just taking issue with the people that get offended that a developing franchise isn’t willing to gut their future to acquire Miller. It’s not a reflection on him as a player. Simply where those teams are in their cycle. If he was worth the same to every team Vancouver would move mountains to retain him
Boondock
Registered User
- Feb 6, 2009
- 5,783
- 2,391
.....As the president and then followed that up with hiring a 47 yr old GM Allvin, a 38 year old Ass. GM Castonguay, a 52 yr old Ass. GM Clancey and a 51 yr old Ass GM Granato - so what was your point?
Just because someone is a top prospect for your team, doesnt mean they are a 1st value. Aiden McDonough is Vancouvers 3rd best prospect. Drafted 7th round and has made tremendous strides. Does being out 3rd best make him worth a 1st rounder? If we traded him, i'd look at him as being a 2nd rounder in value. Likely tops out as a 3rd liner, could be a bust. Iorio in Washington has increase his draft value from where he was taken, but I would hardly call a guy who tops out as a 2nd pairing dman, still potential AHL fodder a 1st in value. He is ranked 4th on most prospect charts for the Caps.
Fans see a 2 year turn around, and not liking the cap hit and term he will demand. I understand fans of other teams feel the same way about extension, but most of us talk about just trading him as an elite player for next year, so teams like NYR, Caps, etc that want to compete will want him. Teams like Ottawa, Buffalo, etc won't want to pay that price for 1 year of him.
Boondock
Registered User
- Feb 6, 2009
- 5,783
- 2,391
Wouldn't you also be able to argue that surrounding him with better offensive players on a team that produces more offense could potentially increase his point production? If you only look at an argument from 1 side you could create any narrative you want
Boondock
Registered User
- Feb 6, 2009
- 5,783
- 2,391
you're taking the extreme by a very small number of posters and applying it to all Canuck fans and their thoughts. Imagine if everyone thought all Habs fans were as brutal as you....
If you don't understand a teams window and the terrible cap situation the previous management group left the Canucks in - trying to explain it to you now is pointless.
VancouverJagger
Not trying to fit in
I just wanna say thank u for this thread.........as a Vancouver fan I was embarrassed by the genius's who felt the need to open a different Miller thread every 9 hours.
or let’s just assign him his actual value, which is low given he is a middle six winger with a brutal QO. He’s worth maybe a late second. I think he’ll remain in Vancouver on a 7.5mm one year deal.
So 1 year of 2nd line production, amidst a year of personal problems with a dying father, despite years of 1st line production makes him a middle six winger? Kid is top 6. 2nd line on his worst day, 1st on his best.
Then why would Vancouver trade him? The reason is yall know he’s a player that isn’t a top line player nor worth 7.5mm. He’s a slow, hard shooting middle six guy you’re hoping a dumb GM will overpay for. Won’t happen.
Vancouver needs to get him under contract first. 1 year x $7.5mm. See how he continues to perform in Vancouver. The guys you’ll trade area JT miller and garland. You’re stuck with Myers and Boeser.
Many fans don't, his 7.5m QO is worry some, but realistically we can afford it. I would much prefer to pay his 1 year 7.5, have him put up 30g 70 pts and sign him long term or trade him for an insane haul myself.
drax0s
Registered User
oceanchild
Registered User
This is in line with the prices paid at the deadline and imo he is as valuable as Seth Jones. I know it seems trendy to dispute but a first and a good prospect is totally reasonable and the move from 15 to 12 is not huge. We know from every reporter that is discussing this possible
Trade that a significant market exists. I don’t get the responses that think he should be a value buy.
VancouverJagger
Not trying to fit in
If you were more acquainted with our team and past management you would have a much better idea as to the answer of this question.
If it were up to me I wouldn't trade him............he's a solid first line sniper........he's had a few injuries which i term as the product of bad luck (running into an open door on the bench was one of those) but for his tenure here he's undoubtedly been a top line guy. I think he would gladly sign here for 3 x 7 ish - and that would not be bad value.
HOWEVER due to our previous management (or mismanagement if you want to term it correctly) we are in a position of having to shed salary - he's one of the higher ticket options of doing so.
To call him a middle six guy is just plain false...........the year before last many thought he was our best player.
We need to shed salary somewhere - him, Garland? In an ideal world we keep both but the reason we are even having this convo is they have value that are easy options for us to shed salary.
to be fair, I don't think we are arguing. More of a discussion
He'll get 2-3 years at sub $6.5 million to prove he's worth it. The belief that he'll ONLY take a $7.5 million contract is over blown
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.
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.
- Status
