Kreider was in a different situation. One game played counted as a full year off the ELC. Kreider was 21. The NHL proposed changing that in the new CBA. They didn't like players signing out college and losing a full year. Agents would demand their clients play one NHL game and the player becomes a free agent soon. Until the actual CBA is released nobody knows if the NHL got that change. The Rangers always liked Miller in the middle. Even when they drafted him. Gorton and Clark felt Miller was better suited for the middle. The Rangers have nothing to lose giving Miller the five game look. If he is not ready and they return him to CT,the SPC slides as long as he does play more than 5 NHL games. Poor mans Mike Richards. A Richards type of player. Someone made that comparison. May have been Clark.
Yup.
Miller was always more valuable as a center. He has underrated playmaking skills, he's responsible. The more involved and active he is the better he is.
Clark and Gorton had always said he's a center. I'm sure they weren't overly thrilled with the fact Plymouth liked to use him on the wing. Still think he should have gone to North Dakota. But that's water under the bridge.
Never understood where the "his future is on the wing" stuff came from. It wasn't from the organization, who continually mentioned he is regarded as a center.
Told folks he would be a one-two year player at most. The Rangers and Miller had an accelerated development path for him. When he was drafted he was a more well rounded, more polished player then Kreider was, who needed more time to round out his game.
The plan was put in place for this player before he was drafted. They wanted a player they could control ASAP. He agreed, he wanted an ELC ASAP. That's why he didn't go to North Dakota.
There is nothing about Miller mentally or in his game that suggests he can't handle it. He MAY not be ready to stay up. But he's close.
Recall, in camp last year, he was arguably one of the Rangers better players. And he could have easily made the club then.
