Rumor: ALL PURPOSE JT MILLER THREAD PT2 - It's Been 84 Years....

[Canuck86]

Go look at what mid-level wingers are being traded for right now, even high-level wingers like Bjorkstrand and Pacioretty...and tell me what Garland's value is. It isn't much.

Your comparing 2 teams that were well over the salary cap limit to the Canucks who are NOT well over the cap and have ZERO need to "giveaway" as you say a player like Garland...

You might want to look at their cap sheets. Over half the league has less than $5M in cap space. They can't absorb Garland without moving money.

Going beyond those clubs, teams like NJD, CGY, NYI, and DAL have key RFAs to re-sign, which would eat up most of their available space.

What's your trade market? WPG and DET basically?

Once again, you haven't considered the actual cap environment of the league. No club is valuing a mid-level scoring winger on a $5M AAV highly when they don't have any cap space. Especially when you can just sign a scoring winger for cheap in UFA.

We DON'T need to trade Garland tho...so who cares how may teams have 5m in cap space...holy crap man!

Why would CAR ever have been interested in JT when they could get paid to take Pacioretty?

JT would be in addition to Patches...who they got for free because Vegas was in cap hell and every team knew it and no GM was going to give them assets for him

 

[bossram]

NAS just got McDonagh and have Carrier, Fabbro can be available if they want to improve forward depth. Car has over 8m in space and Necas is likely bridged, they can afford to send prospects for him. NYI I only mentioned because they do have space until Kadri is signed.

Garland is at the upper tier of top 6 forwards, Mid-Range is a term generally used for players better suited for the 3rd line, but can play 2nd line. Garland is much better than that.

If NAS trades Fabbro, their only competent RHD is Carrier. They're not moving Fabbro for a small winger. CAR does not have $8M in cap space. Gardiner is reportedly healthy and will show up to camp - he's taking up $4M of that space. They would have to move him (difficult), and they still need to re-sign Necas and Bear. NYI doesn't have space. Almost all of their "available" cap space will be allocated to Dobson and Romanov. Again, you clearly haven't considered the other club's situations.

And again, as I've said repeatedly, I am personally fairly bullish on Garland. I like him. But you have to look at deals from the perspective of how other clubs would value him, which you are not doing. He's a higher-end wing than what's available, but the scrap heap UFAs would come much cheaper - in a capped out world, that is valuable. No other club is going to value him as a high-end top-six forward.

Your comparing 2 teams that were well over the salary cap limit to the Canucks who are NOT well over the cap and have ZERO need to "giveaway" as you say a player like Garland...

We DON'T need to trade Garland tho...so who cares how may teams have 5m in cap space...holy crap man!

JT would be in addition to Patches...who they got for free because Vegas was in cap hell and every team knew it and no GM was going to give them assets for him

Again, you guys are arguing things I never claimed. I never said the Canucks have to trade Garland. I never brought him up as a trade candidate. @Retinalz did. In fact, I don't really think the Canucks should trade him at all.

But if other people are going to talk about him as a trade chip, then be realistic about what his trade value is.

For people being so condescending, you'd think you would actually address the arguments at hand.

 

[Canucklehead94]

The Canucks need to do something about Miller. Yes, they do. They are certainly in a position of weakness. It's re-sign Miller to a big deal, trade him, or he walks next summer.

And yeah, Pacioretty is an example. Bjorkstrand is an example. Teams have no cap space. I'm not saying the Canucks will sell Miller for free. They won't. As I've said repeatedly, the return on Miller will be hampered because other teams can't afford to absorb his salary without sending salary back.

Other clubs have made their moves this offseason and are capped out. Allvin/JR overplayed their hand on Miller and are going to be scrambling now.

The Canucks don't need to do anything with Miller. If the trade offers are pathetic, and if his contract demands are outside of the Canucks budget, then I think they will just treat him as a rental and roll the dice. Based on what the market is showing, that's what they should do, and if he walks, he walks. Miller is PPG centreman in his prime. Keep him and see how the season goes. The Canucks really won't have lost too much it seems like.

Also, summer is when every GM in the league overestimates their chances of success for next season. After a couple months into the season, the paper tigers will start to appear. Maybe they move Miller then at 50% retained. We'll see.

 

[UrbanImpact]

The Canucks don't need to do anything with Miller. If the trade offers are pathetic, and if his contract demands are outside of the Canucks budget, then I think they will just treat him as a rental and roll the dice. Based on what the market is showing, that's what they should do, and if he walks, he walks. Miller is PPG centreman in his prime. Keep him and see how the season goes. The Canucks really won't have lost too much it seems like.

They already stated that they wont let JT walk away for nothing. The Canucks have given themselves and JT's camp a deadline which is 1 month before the trade deadline to either sign an extension, or they will move him.

I'm 100% more excited to see what Miller can fetch at the deadline instead of the low ball offers now.

At the deadline there will be more cap space available from teams due to injures and other factors.

A retained JT Miller of 2.5 mil pro rated at the deadline with an expiring contract is going to be the hottest asset in a while.

I'd be expecting a 1st, 2nd and top prospect.

 

[Canucklehead94]

They already stated that they wont let JT walk away for nothing. The Canucks have given themselves and JT's camp a deadline which is 1 month before the trade deadline to either sign an extension, or they will move him.

I'm 100% more excited to see what Miller can fetch at the deadline instead of the low ball offers now.

At the deadline there will be more cap space available from teams due to injures and other factors.

A retained JT Miller of 2.5 mil pro rated at the deadline with an expiring contract is going to be the hottest asset in a while.

I'd be expecting a 1st, 2nd and top prospect.

For sure. If they can get a decent return, they probably will trade him at the deadline. But if the offers are still crap then, then you just simply keep him and push for the playoffs. There's no sense trading him for the sake of trading him.

 

[bossram]

The Canucks don't need to do anything with Miller. If the trade offers are pathetic, and if his contract demands are outside of the Canucks budget, then I think they will just treat him as a rental and roll the dice. Based on what the market is showing, that's what they should do, and if he walks, he walks. Miller is PPG centreman in his prime. Keep him and see how the season goes. The Canucks really won't have lost too much it seems like.

Also, summer is when every GM in the league overestimates their chances of success for next season. After a couple months into the season, the paper tigers will start to appear. Maybe they move Miller then at 50% retained. We'll see.

In my opinion, that would be an abject failure by management.

 

[UrbanImpact]

In my opinion, that would be an abject failure by management.

It wont be ideal but id rather we let JT walk for nothing than sign him to an awful contract because we were worried about letting him for nothing

 

[Killer Orcas]

I'm bored so here's a block buster franchise altering move for Alvin to put his stamp on the Canucks. Not going to propose any specific trade but just an idea.

What about moving Miller and Horvat for futures and or young assets then using the savings on signing Kadri?

Trading both with max retention for the year they have left and adding players/picks for the future.

We'd be really restocking the cupboard trading those two and signing Kadri mitigates there loss somewhat. Just a thought.

We'd have to move some salary if we retained max to sign Kadi though.

 

[topshelf15]

Pretty obvious by now Van is trying to figure out a way to keep him long term

 

[Canucklehead94]

It wont be ideal but id rather we let JT walk for nothing than sign him to an awful contract because we were worried about letting him for nothing

Exactly. Say for example, the most teams are willing to offer is a 3rd round pick (I would assume that's not the case but you never know). It would be absolutely stupid to move him for that instead of just keeping him. There's a line here. If the offers suck then you just keep him for the season and lose him for nothing next summer. It's not ideal, but it might be the best option.

In my opinion, that would be an abject failure by management.

So it would be better to get some mediocre assets and lose a 99 point centreman for next season? To me that's the bigger failure.

 

[bossram]

It wont be ideal but id rather we let JT walk for nothing than sign him to an awful contract because we were worried about letting him for nothing

Exactly. Say for example, the most teams are willing to offer is a 3rd round pick (I would assume that's not the case but you never know). It would be absolutely stupid to move him for that instead of just keeping him. There's a line here. If the offers suck then you just keep him for the season and lose him for nothing next summer. It's not ideal, but it might be the best option.

So it would be better to get some mediocre assets and lose a 99 point centreman for next season? To me that's the bigger failure.

The long-term cap flexibility opens up future options for the club to jump on a similar Bjorkstrand or Buchnevich or Marino trade.

The Canucks aren't contenders. With or without Miller. Plan for the future accordingly.

Yeah, I wouldn't trade him for a 3rd round pick either. But I agree that's an unrealistic assumption.

 

[Canucks LB]

 

[benedictTavares]

Someone teach Taj how to use a twitter thread.

 

[JellyRamp]

i have at least a little bit of faith that rutherford and miller could strike a deal

 

[Love]

So what you’re saying is Miller for Dobson+ E4?

 

[Peen]

Your comparing 2 teams that were well over the salary cap limit to the Canucks who are NOT well over the cap and have ZERO need to "giveaway" as you say a player like Garland...


We DON'T need to trade Garland tho...so who cares how may teams have 5m in cap space...holy crap man!


JT would be in addition to Patches...who they got for free because Vegas was in cap hell and every team knew it and no GM was going to give them assets for him

we can act like this but there's a diminishing return with having so much salary on the wings. we have 7 wingers who should have top nine ice time next season, and it's likely you'll be putting a player like hoglander in a spot that they should not be in on the fourth line.

sat shah suggested they were offered a non-first round pick at the tdl for garland, and turned it down. judging by what similar wingers have gone for. i think in hindsight, they would have taken that offer.

 

[bringbacktheskate604]

we can act like this but there's a diminishing return with having so much salary on the wings. we have 7 wingers who should have top nine ice time next season, and it's likely you'll be putting a player like hoglander in a spot that they should not be in on the fourth line.

sat shah suggested they were offered a non-first round pick at the tdl for garland, and turned it down. judging by what similar wingers have gone for. i think in hindsight, they would have taken that offer.

First off depth is never a bad thing. Second if a winger were to get moved because we don't want a top 9 guy on the 4th line why in God's name would we move a guy making under 5 million who was a team leading +18 who had 55 points almost all 5on5? And why would we for a Fn 2nd? For a guy like Zub or Severson sure makes sense but if moves are made for the example you gave wouldn't it make sense to move someone like Dickinson or Pearson? I mean I just don't see how you think 2nd> Garland.

 

[Peen]

First off depth is never a bad thing. Second if a winger were to get moved because we don't want a top 9 guy on the 4th line why in God's name would we move a guy making under 5 million who was a team leading +18 who had 55 points almost all 5on5? And why would we for a Fn 2nd? For a guy like Zub or Severson sure makes sense but if moves are made for the example you gave wouldn't it make sense to move someone like Dickinson or Pearson? I mean I just don't see how you think 2nd> Garland.

In a vacuum, I don't. I think the market price indicates that small wingers who don't have defensive utility are valued as such.

What you are not factoring in the opportunity cost of the capspace available - that's what makes me say I wish they would have done a trade like that. You gain capspace to take advantage of cap strapped teams. i just think about it as Garland for Marino or something like that - it's what you're doing with the capspace and asset gained.

It's a diminishing value of returns thing. I think Hoglander makes up for Garland moreso than someone like Schenn or Poolman making up for a guy like Marino, Severson - (whatever).

 

[Figgy44]

I'm bored so here's a block buster franchise altering move for Alvin to put his stamp on the Canucks. Not going to propose any specific trade but just an idea.

What about moving Miller and Horvat for futures and or young assets then using the savings on signing Kadri?

Trading both with max retention for the year they have left and adding players/picks for the future.

We'd be really restocking the cupboard trading those two and signing Kadri mitigates there loss somewhat. Just a thought.

We'd have to move some salary if we retained max to sign Kadi though.

As a Flames fan I'd be very interested in Horvat, but we'd want him long term at a reasonable contract. What would be your ask from Calgary?

I can't say I'm as interested in Miller. Flames want to lock up some contracts going forward and probably compete for 3-4 seasons or do a NYR type of sell off retool/rebuild over 2-3 seasons. I think the Flames would be able to put together a reasonably competitive package of either roster players or futures that would fit with what Vancouver wants.

I don't get why you'd move both Miller and Horvat though. If Miller is out, I assume you can keep Horvat. If Horvat is out, I don't understand why you wouldn't just give Miller Kadri money... unless you're basically saying you're trying to pick up an extra asset and use the extra assets towards sorting out the issues on the roster?

 

[bringbacktheskate604]

The Canucks don't need to do anything with Miller. If the trade offers are pathetic, and if his contract demands are outside of the Canucks budget, then I think they will just treat him as a rental and roll the dice. Based on what the market is showing, that's what they should do, and if he walks, he walks. Miller is PPG centreman in his prime. Keep him and see how the season goes. The Canucks really won't have lost too much it seems like.

Also, summer is when every GM in the league overestimates their chances of success for next season. After a couple months into the season, the paper tigers will start to appear. Maybe they move Miller then at 50% retained. We'll see.

100% agree I think most actual paying fans would prefer to keep him for the playoffs then trade him to a team that would be picking probably between 25-32.
One thing that needs to be considered is there is the real possibility that he might not have ad good of a season therefore lowering what his next deal may look like, perhaps a little more in line with whatever 6 year deal presently on the table

There is also a scenario where the stars align for us and we go on a decent run in the playoffs in which JT is a big part of that, which motivates both sides to find common ground. Let's say we win 2 rounds and lose in 7 in the WCF after a really good season. Lots of cap comes off the books next off-season and it's a great UFA crop.
Those kind of variables change how our GM will look at things.

We have so much young talent would it really shock any real nuck fan if Brock, Petey, Quinn, Garland and Podz, Demko have career years next season?
Health has been the biggest factor with Petey and Brock, Quinn made huge gains as did Demko, both are none of those guys have peaked yet.
And Podz was a monster once he truly got top minutes and Garland has improved 3 years in a row and I'm not even mentioning Horvat, Kuzmenko or Hogz. Defence is iffy overall but there isn't a team anymore where you can say they are elite in every facet. The Avs goaltending is a question mark, they lost some good forwards and the honestly I think for sure in our division possibly the west we added pieces that make us a better team especially on the pk.
Flames, Oilers, can't say that yet, Vegas got worse, the Kings not sold on Quick. Keep JT and roll the dice, in the end a 1st that late and a prospect isn't moving the needle imo.
But I'm sure people will feel the opposite but as a season ticket holder I want the best product for the amount I spend. Cheers.

 

[Fatass]

As a Flames fan I'd be very interested in Horvat, but we'd want him long term at a reasonable contract. What would be your ask from Calgary?

I can't say I'm as interested in Miller. Flames want to lock up some contracts going forward and probably compete for 3-4 seasons or do a NYR type of sell off retool/rebuild over 2-3 seasons. I think the Flames would be able to put together a reasonably competitive package of either roster players or futures that would fit with what Vancouver wants.

I don't get why you'd move both Miller and Horvat though. If Miller is out, I assume you can keep Horvat. If Horvat is out, I don't understand why you wouldn't just give Miller Kadri money... unless you're basically saying you're trying to pick up an extra asset and use the extra assets towards sorting out the issues on the roster?

What’s “Kadri money”?

 

[Figgy44]

What’s “Kadri money”?

Rumored to be wanting around 8, so I assume something between Hayes 7.1 AAV max term and Zibenejad 8.5 AAV max term money is what he is aiming for?

I think there's about 2.5 year age difference between Miller and Kadri. If I'm Vancouver, I'd personally rather overpay Miller up to 1-2 per season vs paying Kadri 1-2 mil less than what I'd offer to Miller.

 

[EP to EP back to EP]

As a Flames fan I'd be very interested in Horvat, but we'd want him long term at a reasonable contract. What would be your ask from Calgary?

I can't say I'm as interested in Miller. Flames want to lock up some contracts going forward and probably compete for 3-4 seasons or do a NYR type of sell off retool/rebuild over 2-3 seasons. I think the Flames would be able to put together a reasonably competitive package of either roster players or futures that would fit with what Vancouver wants.

I don't get why you'd move both Miller and Horvat though. If Miller is out, I assume you can keep Horvat. If Horvat is out, I don't understand why you wouldn't just give Miller Kadri money... unless you're basically saying you're trying to pick up an extra asset and use the extra assets towards sorting out the issues on the roster?

Trading him to Calgary would be value +50%. Horvat can be a nightmare to play against, and has shown to be a playoff performer.

 

[Figgy44]

Trading him to Calgary would be value +50%. Horvat can be a nightmare to play against, and has shown to be a playoff performer.

Yeah, I expected that. But that means you would ask for what type of package defenseman roster players wise or futures wise?

I'm curious to know if the interconference premium negates itself. Like if there's a piece you don't expect that is normally available that maybe we'd make available because it's interconference.

I'm curious to know what Vancouver would be interested off our roster and see if there's a conversation, or if the gap is too wide. Not many top 6C that Calgary can target league wide and we'd love to have a 1A/1B scenario for a few years down the middle with Lindholm.

 

[EP to EP back to EP]

Yeah, I expected that. But that means you would ask for what type of package defenseman roster players wise or futures wise?

I'm curious to know if the interconference premium negates itself. Like if there's a piece you don't expect that is normally available that maybe we'd make available because it's interconference.

I'm curious to know what Vancouver would be interested off our roster and see if there's a conversation, or if the gap is too wide. Not many top 6C that Calgary can target league wide and we'd love to have a 1A/1B scenario for a few years down the middle with Lindholm.

To me it would start with an Extended Horvat for an Extended Weeger + 2023 1st and a 2023 cond 2nd(upgrades to your 2024 unprotected 1st if make WCF). Or Anderson ++