Grub's Canucks & NHL News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | Rumour Has It

[sandwichbird2023]

Offer sheeting Luke Hughes would be the funniest thing this team could do. Unless it’s 11M+, New Jersey probably matches lol.

I gotta think on this a bit. Offer sheeting Luke something ridiculous that NJ can’t match to ensure Quinn, our best player, stays, is one ballsy ass f***ing move and has the potential to go down as one of the ballsiest moves in NHL history.

Trade them JTM for cheap to ensure they carry an extra $8m cap for the next few years, then offersheet Luke like you said. In a couple seasons Jack will be tired of all the JTM bullying and force his way west to join his brothers. Now that is 4D chess!

Or, the Nucks would implode the next couple seasons and we gave up some very high picks due to the offersheet, Quinn say "F it, I'm out" and sign with NJ. Luke then force his way out and join his brothers out east. Lol.

 

[bossram]

He has a significant amount of trade value in the context of a rising cap (his salary is not particularly high) but he does not have much trade value right now as a result of lack of cap flexibility from contenders and his NMC. I am in the camp that we should not move Miller unless one of those teams agrees to part with a very good asset of real value to the Canucks. Otherwise, Miller should remain with the team until the end of the season where he can discuss with his family other potential teams he may consider. The trade can be done at or around the draft. It also gives the Canucks one more chance to try to gel as a team. It was not long ago they were only one win away from the WCF (albeit with a much better defence corps).

I don't think he ever had significant value. Even the trade rumours surrounding him prior to his extension (when he had a $5.25M cap hit) had the packages being underwhelming to Canucks fans. Now his value is just all-around much worse.

I think they could get more in the offseason, when his cap hit is easier to manage, but that doesn't mitigate the other factors I listed. I also don't think management can afford to wait that long. They've already decided they have to move him for the sake of team cohesion and probably don't want this thing festering for another 3 months.

I don't think there are any more chances to make it work with Miller. He had an incident egregious enough that the club forced him to leave the team for a month. Upon his return, he has evidently not really changed his behavior.

 

[JT Milker]

You’d probably hold onto the NY 1st and see what you can get at the draft. The thing is there arent many teams who are in the bottom of the standings that have pieces we’d want. And the teams who are middle in the pack with nice young assets like Columbus and Ottawa likely don’t care for futures.

I’d be shocked if we picked with both 1sts in that scenario. I’d be less surprised if we traded both of them.

E: I realize I misread what you wrote, I now assume you mean see what we can acquire at the draft, not use the pick.

 

[Lupuls Grit]

I don't think he ever had significant value. Even the trade rumours surrounding him prior to his extension (when he had a $5.25M cap hit) had the packages being underwhelming to Canucks fans. Now his value is just all-around much worse.

I think they could get more in the offseason, when his cap hit is easier to manage, but that doesn't mitigate the other factors I listed. I also don't think management can afford to wait that long. They've already decided they have to move him for the sake of team cohesion and probably don't want this thing festering for another 3 months.

I don't think there are any more chances to make it work with Miller. He had an incident egregious enough that the club forced him to leave the team for a month. Upon his return, he has evidently not really changed his behavior.

You may be right about his behaviour having gone too far. The reality is that we really don't know what has happened behind closed doors. We don't even really know what happened to cause his leave. Ultimately though it is up to Allvin to maximize the return on an asset, whether it is in-season or after the season. At his best, JT Miller is a unique player that is well-worth his contract and should continue to be worth his contract for the next several years. Unless something comes out to demonstrate that the Canucks really had no choice but to move him early for scraps, Allvin better get a very good return or wait until after the season.

 

[bossram]

You may be right about his behaviour having gone too far. The reality is that we really don't know what has happened behind closed doors. We don't even really know what happened to cause his leave. Ultimately though it is up to Allvin to maximize the return on an asset, whether it is in-season or after the season. At his best, JT Miller is a unique player that is well-worth his contract and should continue to be worth his contract for the next several years. Unless something comes out to demonstrate that the Canucks really had no choice but to move him early for scraps, Allvin better get a very good return or wait until after the season.

I'm not expecting Allvin to get a great return. It's not a realistic bar. JT doesn't have much trade value.

Part of the "return" in a JT Miller trade is getting him out of the room and moving on from this soap opera. If anything, that is the primary return. They wouldn't be trading him otherwise, if Miller could simply not be a toxic asshole to everyone around him. Unfortunately, once you reach this conclusion (as brass seemingly has), there's not much you can do other than take your lumps, move him, and move on.

 

[I am toxic]

I'm not expecting Allvin to get a great return. It's not a realistic bar. JT doesn't have much trade value.

Part of the "return" in a JT Miller trade is getting him out of the room and moving on from this soap opera. If anything, that is the primary return. They wouldn't be trading him otherwise, if Miller could simply not be a toxic asshole to everyone around him. Unfortunately, once you reach this conclusion (as brass seemingly has), there's not much you can do other than take your lumps, move him, and move on.

You say that like it is a bad thing

 

[Nick Lang]

I’d be shocked if we picked with both 1sts in that scenario. I’d be less surprised if we traded both of them.

Yes, very likely. It seems like it is really the only assets(s) we have that could get us the Dman we need for our roster. Not likely to find that in UFA or with scraps. I would say one or both are 90% gone already.

 

[TruGr1t]

I'm not expecting Allvin to get a great return. It's not a realistic bar. JT doesn't have much trade value.

Part of the "return" in a JT Miller trade is getting him out of the room and moving on from this soap opera. If anything, that is the primary return. They wouldn't be trading him otherwise, if Miller could simply not be a toxic asshole to everyone around him. Unfortunately, once you reach this conclusion (as brass seemingly has), there's not much you can do other than take your lumps, move him, and move on.

I don't think he's getting premium first-line value in relation to his production, but at the same time Miller's "value" is directly correlated to the Canucks ask. They have been trying to trade him for effectively a younger 1/2C (or probably a top-four D) plus spare parts. As has become exceptionally obvious, this is not a good strategy and these 1-for-1 hockey trades are going the way of the Dodo bird in a cap system wherein mid-20s, controlled players are basically the premium asset on the market. Contenders interested in Miller will simply not make this deal, and even teams in the upper trajectory of a rebuild will not want to part with such players who are likely part of their core.

Your prime audience is mature teams looking to add the piece that puts them over the top over the next 2-3 years. These teams also, obviously, do not want to give up younger parts of their core because that defeats the purpose of the trade for them, but will be more incentivized to make more future-rich offers in a bid to "win now".

If you really want to realize Miller's value you need to do it under conditions that make sense, otherwise you're shooting yourself in the foot.

I would argue, if you really want to see Miller's value, trade him around the deadline for a futures package, maybe with a bit of retention depending on the return. Especially if all you want to do is "get rid of him".

 

[Jerry the great]

I’d be shocked if we picked with both 1sts in that scenario. I’d be less surprised if we traded both of them.

IF we trade Miller and IF the return includes picks, there is significant risk in making them vs trading them IMO, particularly if they're mid to late 1st rounders. Maybe you hit a homerun and the player(s) picked develop exceptionally well in their D+1 season and they become trade chips....but lord have mercy if you miss (even slightly) on the picks, those prospects are dead money for an indeterminable amount of time. Unless we get back a lottery pick (and probably even then) those picks should be used to bring in players that can help now.

 

[theguardianII]

I don't think he's getting premium first-line value in relation to his production, but at the same time Miller's "value" is directly correlated to the Canucks ask. They have been trying to trade him for effectively a younger 1/2C (or probably a top-four D) plus spare parts. As has become exceptionally obvious, this is not a good strategy and these 1-for-1 hockey trades are going the way of the Dodo bird in a cap system wherein mid-20s, controlled players are basically the premium asset on the market. Contenders interested in Miller will simply not make this deal, and even teams in the upper trajectory of a rebuild will not want to part with such players who are likely part of their core.

Your prime audience is mature teams looking to add the piece that puts them over the top over the next 2-3 years. These teams also, obviously, do not want to give up younger parts of their core because that defeats the purpose of the trade for them, but will be more incentivized to make more future-rich offers in a bid to "win now".

If you really want to realize Miller's value you need to do it under conditions that make sense, otherwise you're shooting yourself in the foot.

Forget this year, forget this core.
The Canucks might have to be the best team in the league to make the playoffs now if only 98 pts are needed.
There is no possibility of winning a trade that helps that much for this year and trading for another aged veteran is a bad move unless they are bringing in 2 or 3 younger top six guys under 24yrs old and just want a settling influence sort of what Giroux brought to Ottawa.

Many will only look at the players now and not the future or the other big return, maybe bigger than players, cap space. With cap space they open a huge area of possibilities.

Please don't let the "owned" media/marketing shows sell fans on how much worse a rebuild might, could, is possibly would be. This core group has lost 7 out of 8 times. They are not young, only one player of consequence under 26 yrs old, Hughes.
I hope they try to build a team with unconfirmed Hughes intentions in two years. I do think that if they target two years from now as the "window" with a bunch of younger players all close in age they will have a much better chance to re-sign Hughes if the team is on the upward swing and not treading water like it has been for years.
If the team still sucks that badly next year then they will have enough younger experienced NHL players that trading Hughes for the #1 pick overall possibly McKenna to then step in and they grow together for 8 years while under cap CBA) control.

I know so many posters think trading him is ludicrous but the team has won without him or a player like him, he does help with wins but also is covering up big holes on defence.

Rutherford could start to build for that event, the rest of this year and all of next year, who knows maybe hey do a Tampa and go to the bottom and get the #1 without trading Hughes but even if that is the case trading him then might still be the best time to maximize the return. If he gets a lot of Norris and Hart votes that only increases trade returns.

Boeser, Miller and Pettersson are not as young as the local media shows market.
GM's will be much more inclined to trade futures so returns might be better.
Boeser has played himself to a mid pick and AAA prospect, I still think Minnesota, Jiricek and an exchange of picks, Minny 2nd for a Nux 4th.
Pettersson will get a lot more.
Miller less than EP but a lot more than BB
Enough that the core is altered and possibly the losing culture erased

 

[TruGr1t]

Forget this year, forget this core.
The Canucks might have to be the best team in the league to make the playoffs now if only 98 pts are needed.
There is no possibility of winning a trade that helps that much for this year and trading for another aged veteran is a bad move unless they are bringing in 2 or 3 younger top six guys under 24yrs old and just want a settling influence sort of what Giroux brought to Ottawa.

Many will only look at the players now and not the future or the other big return, maybe bigger than players, cap space. With cap space they open a huge area of possibilities.

Please don't let the "owned" media/marketing shows sell fans on how much worse a rebuild might, could, is possibly would be. This core group has lost 7 out of 8 times. They are not young, only one player of consequence under 26 yrs old, Hughes.
I hope they try to build a team with unconfirmed Hughes intentions in two years. I do think that if they target two years from now as the "window" with a bunch of younger players all close in age they will have a much better chance to re-sign Hughes if the team is on the upward swing and not treading water like it has been for years.
If the team still sucks that badly next year then they will have enough younger experienced NHL players that trading Hughes for the #1 pick overall possibly McKenna to then step in and they grow together for 8 years while under cap CBA) control.

I know so many posters think trading him is ludicrous but the team has won without him or a player like him, he does help with wins but also is covering up big holes on defence.



Boeser, Miller and Pettersson

It is not even necessarily rebuilding, it's maximizing asset value. You absolutely reserve the right to take said futures and use them to retool the roster in the summer around Hughes and a different "core" group. Trading Miller, or Boeser, for futures today does not even mean you are rebuilding. It is just adjusting cap optionality and giving you a larger war chest to make moves.

Frankly, it seems fairly obvious to me the best course of action at this point is to basically "sell" at the deadline, and use those assets to retool during the summer and especially around the draft.

 

[bossram]

I don't think he's getting premium first-line value in relation to his production, but at the same time Miller's "value" is directly correlated to the Canucks ask. They have been trying to trade him for effectively a younger 1/2C (or probably a top-four D) plus spare parts. As has become exceptionally obvious, this is not a good strategy and these 1-for-1 hockey trades are going the way of the Dodo bird in a cap system wherein mid-20s, controlled players are basically the premium asset on the market. Contenders interested in Miller will simply not make this deal, and even teams in the upper trajectory of a rebuild will not want to part with such players who are likely part of their core.

Your prime audience is mature teams looking to add the piece that puts them over the top over the next 2-3 years. These teams also, obviously, do not want to give up younger parts of their core because that defeats the purpose of the trade for them, but will be more incentivized to make more future-rich offers in a bid to "win now".

If you really want to realize Miller's value you need to do it under conditions that make sense, otherwise you're shooting yourself in the foot.

I would argue, if you really want to see Miller's value, trade him around the deadline for a futures package, maybe with a bit of retention depending on the return. Especially if all you want to do is "get rid of him".

I agree. This is partly what I'm getting at. He's not going to get "absolute value" in terms of being a point-per-game forward, given he is a malcontent with an NMC. He's also not going to return a premium asset that's already in the NHL (i.e. young player), because contenders and rebuilding teams don't want to give that kind of piece up.

Contenders will give picks, but he's still not going to return a massive pick haul even to contenders because the cap hit + contract is difficult to integrate.

I'm just saying most fans should accept that the trade return will not be nearly as high as what they think it should be, because of market + league dynamics.

 

[SnapIt]

We’re basically relying on
(1) a dumb GM,
(2) a team that thinks they’re one piece away from winning the cup and is infatuated with what Miller brings, and/or
(3) a team that doesn’t want another team to get Miller
To boost Millers value in a trade.

I for one have faith that there’s some stupid out there.

 

[TruGr1t]

I agree. This is partly what I'm getting at. He's not going to get "absolute value" in terms of being a point-per-game forward, given he is a malcontent with an NMC. He's also not going to return a premium asset that's already in the NHL (i.e. young player), because contenders and rebuilding teams don't want to give that kind of piece up.

Contenders will give picks, but he's still not going to return a massive pick haul even to contenders because the cap hit + contract is difficult to integrate.

I'm just saying most fans should accept that the trade return will not be nearly as high as what they think it should be, because of market + league dynamics.

Depends what you're expecting. I would be happy with something around a top prospect, 1st rounder, and maybe a supplementary draft pick at this stage. Again, it's hard to even criticize the NYR package without knowing who the "prospect" was ... you should also not have much trouble getting a condition-free pick from a contender.

 

[Vector]

I agree. This is partly what I'm getting at. He's not going to get "absolute value" in terms of being a point-per-game forward, given he is a malcontent with an NMC. He's also not going to return a premium asset that's already in the NHL (i.e. young player), because contenders and rebuilding teams don't want to give that kind of piece up.

Contenders will give picks, but he's still not going to return a massive pick haul even to contenders because the cap hit + contract is difficult to integrate.

I'm just saying most fans should accept that the trade return will not be nearly as high as what they think it should be, because of market + league dynamics.

Like I said many times before and even wrote in an article, the Hertl trade is actually a decent comparison. Brought back a decent prospect and a 1st round pick. To bridge the gap between Miller & Hertl, since Miller is a far superior player, remove the retention and 3rd round picks from San Jose.

Upside is San Jose turned that return around for Askarov.

 

[bossram]

Depends what you're expecting. I would be happy with something around a top prospect, 1st rounder, and maybe a supplementary draft pick at this stage. Again, it's hard to even criticize the NYR package without knowing who the "prospect" was ... you should also not have much trouble getting a condition-free pick from a contender.

I think that would be a very good package. Judging by how most fans view the Chytil + 1st package, I think the general consensus of a prospect + 1st + mid pick would be that it's a lowball.

 

[TruGr1t]

I think that would be a very good package. Judging by how most fans view the Chytil + 1st package, I think the general consensus of a prospect + 1st + mid pick would be that it's a lowball.

I'd not be at all surprised if you get something like that around the deadline when everyone starts loading up for the playoffs and a few teams either love Miller, or miss out on their first target.

 

[bossram]

Like I said many times before and even wrote in an article, the Hertl trade is actually a decent comparison. Brought back a decent prospect and a 1st round pick. To bridge the gap between Miller & Hertl, since Miller is a far superior player, remove the retention and 3rd round picks from San Jose.

Upside is San Jose turned that return around for Askarov.

I agree. I think a good-but-not-elite prospect + 1st is probably what the expected return should be.

Judging by most people on this board and Canucks twitter, I also think most people would view that as a disappointing return. I think that is a worse deal than Chytil + NYR 1st, and people hate that package.

 

[credulous]

i think the miller return will be poor mostly because i think there's a number of teams who just won't touch him because of his reputation. that plus the salary cap and his age greatly limits the number of teams interested in taking him on. the reason carolina and the rangers are interested is because they both see an opportunity to take advantage of that

 

[Vector]

I think a good-but-not-elite prospect + 1st is probably what the expected return should be.

Judging by most people on this board and Canucks twitter, I also think most people would view that as a disappointing return. I think that is a worse deal than Chytil + NYR 1st, and people hate that package.

I don't like the NYR because of the significant risk in Chytil and the rumblings about them wanting retention and draft protection.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

At some point people here have to realize Miller is not a particularly tradeable asset. He will be 32 soon, has too large of a cap hit for contenders to fit easily, has an NMC, and is a known malcontent. He doesn't have much trade value.

While I agree Miller won't get the value he should, what the Rangers offered is just insultingly low.

Chytil is 25, can't stay healthy and hasn't managed to be anything more than a middle six forward. He's not bad per se, but hardly a "main" piece. Lindgren is near negative value. UFA with abysmal analytics this season. Yes, he's been better in the past, but he's our version of Hoglander. "Include him if you want, but he's worth nothing."

The fact they wanted us to retain on top of that is laughable.

We need one of Schneider or KAM coming back.

 

[TruGr1t]

I don't like the NYR because of the significant risk in Chytil and the rumblings about them wanting retention and draft protection.

Same, I'd rather take extra value on the pick/prospect side, and shop for something better down the road. Retention in a deal like that, and conditions on the pick, should just be off the table unless it's quite rich.

 

[credulous]

Like I said many times before and even wrote in an article, the Hertl trade is actually a decent comparison. Brought back a decent prospect and a 1st round pick. To bridge the gap between Miller & Hertl, since Miller is a far superior player, remove the retention and 3rd round picks from San Jose.

Upside is San Jose turned that return around for Askarov.

hertl had significant retention tho. the canucks aren't going to retain on miller (i hope)

 

[Vector]

hertl had significant retention tho. the canucks aren't going to retain on miller (i hope)

I said that in the post you're quoting. Because Miller is a far superior player you shouldn't need any retention nor to send draft picks back.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

hertl had significant retention tho. the canucks aren't going to retain on miller (i hope)

Like Vector said, Miller is also a substantially better player than Hertl. So that kind of evens it out.