KingCanadain1976
Registered User
kings can't afford him @ 50% unless you're taking brown in exchange for him and i don't see that happening
Value of: Miller to LA (Assuming JQ is out long term)
- Thread starter Seatoo
- Start date
kings can't afford him @ 50% unless you're taking brown in exchange for him and i don't see that happening
KeninsFan
Fire Benning already
- Feb 6, 2012
- 5,489
- 0
Does LA not have a big expiring contract they can trade us?
Plus don't bring up Brown - I have a feeling Benning would love him.
KingCanadain1976
Registered User
the biggest expiring contract is toffoli and we want to resign him beyond him is dwight king and has much as i want to trade him it's still not enough cap wise Would van be interested in 2 years of greene at 2.5?
I wouldn't be opposed to Brown. He should be better then Dorsett (at a much worse Cap hit yes). Would something along the lines of Brown and a decent pick/prospect for Miller (50% retained) and Dorsett make sense. Gives LA cap relief in the future to the tune of 3.3mil in future years. That way if Willie wants to keep Horvat on the 4th line he could play with 2 players who at one time actually scored goals once in the big leagues.
Never going to happen.
1) canucks have been saying all off season that they are pushing for the playoffs this season. I think that is the wrong move, but if that is what they have been selling, they would kill their credibility with the season ticket holders if they dumped Miller to LA. Can't do the old bait and switch move on the ticket buyers.
2) backup goalies for la have done very well over the past few seasons. They play a sound defensive system.
KingCanadain1976
Registered User
Brown even after this season has 4 years left. Dorset has 2 after this season . A third is not worth eating like $15 million more in cap space and money. I am including Miller's salary too.
HabsQC
Registered User
KingCanadain1976
Registered User
Only way the kings can take miller is at 50% unless its a trade for brown straight up We dont have alot of cap space What do you think is a reasonable trade then ? browns money actually is less then his cap hit after this year
Benning won't deal Miller. He can't dump him right at the start of the season after they told their season ticket holders that playoffs is the goal. Bait and switch tactic.
Fans won't forgive.
KingCanadain1976
Registered User
he could lie and say brown is a upgrade on having miller Your other goalie is better Not saying that is right or anything but it could be sold that way The go for it now thing
100% Pipe-dream. If Vancouver trades Miller they need a back-up. Even if Markstrom is better, he can't be both starter and backup, and neither Bachman or Demko is a realistic option.
On the other side, once Quick is back, Miller is not going to get the playing time he wants (rightly or wrongly) to try and get another contract for next year.
If Miller is traded, it would be to back-up a more unproven Goalie for a playoff run, think Pittsburgh, if MAF is dealt, or maybe Dallas, although those teams are not trading buddies (Hamhuis).
The only way to do it would be to involve more pieces and other teams, and deals like that are extremely rare now.
Conclusion: it's not going to happen.
LA would be better off rolling with what they've got, or looking for a more traditional back-up (someone who is comfortable being the back-up and doesn't have higher dreams/potential)
On the other side, once Quick is back, Miller is not going to get the playing time he wants (rightly or wrongly) to try and get another contract for next year.
If Miller is traded, it would be to back-up a more unproven Goalie for a playoff run, think Pittsburgh, if MAF is dealt, or maybe Dallas, although those teams are not trading buddies (Hamhuis).
The only way to do it would be to involve more pieces and other teams, and deals like that are extremely rare now.
Conclusion: it's not going to happen.
LA would be better off rolling with what they've got, or looking for a more traditional back-up (someone who is comfortable being the back-up and doesn't have higher dreams/potential)
damacles1156
Registered User
- Feb 5, 2010
- 21,668
- 1,318
And if we are giving Miller at 50% and then taking on Brown LA better be giving us Kempe, Clauge, and a 2017 1st. Other wise its a pointless move turning 6M cap hit for 1 year into Retaining 3 this year while adding 5.8 for another 5 years.
KingCanadain1976
Registered User
KingCanadain1976
Registered User
if we are getting rid of brown we can afford to add a bit of salary for the rest of this season
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,278
- 12,406
Unless the Kings were going to trade the Canucks something of substantial quality, what on earth reason would they have to help a division rival out like that? A significant amount of time missed by Quick and the Kings goaltending falling apart is exactly the kind of window the Canucks need to have any real shot at a playoff spot. The Canucks aren't in the business of helping other teams beat them.
The Canucks are absolutely not looking to "get rid of" Miller at all. Nor should they be. A quality goaltending tandem is one of the few things the Canucks potentially have going for them.
So unless the Kings felt like dishing the Canucks a significant quality asset in return, it makes not sense. And i seriously doubt the Kings have any interest in dishing off a quality asset for a stopgap bandaid. Especially considering the mess it would make for when you have Miller still and Quick comes back and they're fighting for starts.
If the Kings are desperate, a deal for a guy like Pavelec would make far more sense. He's a guy the Jets really would want to just get rid of and off the books. Even if that meant retention, paying half Pavs salary is still less for the Jets ownership than paying all of his salary in the minors (and clears the way better for Comrie to get starts).
The Canucks are absolutely not looking to "get rid of" Miller at all. Nor should they be. A quality goaltending tandem is one of the few things the Canucks potentially have going for them.
So unless the Kings felt like dishing the Canucks a significant quality asset in return, it makes not sense. And i seriously doubt the Kings have any interest in dishing off a quality asset for a stopgap bandaid. Especially considering the mess it would make for when you have Miller still and Quick comes back and they're fighting for starts.
If the Kings are desperate, a deal for a guy like Pavelec would make far more sense. He's a guy the Jets really would want to just get rid of and off the books. Even if that meant retention, paying half Pavs salary is still less for the Jets ownership than paying all of his salary in the minors (and clears the way better for Comrie to get starts).
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,278
- 12,406
The Canucks aren't going to do division rival LA a pair of huge favours by not only giving them a solid goaltender to patch the hole, but take on that absolute monstrosity of a Dustin Brown contract in the process. Come on.
KingCanadain1976
Registered User
The Canucks aren't going to do division rival LA a pair of huge favours by not only giving them a solid goaltender to patch the hole, but take on that absolute monstrosity of a Dustin Brown contract in the process. Come on.
if you go back and re read i stated that i didn't think brown would be of interest. However cm respond he would be interested and that where i have been at It was only in response to him that i have gone on the trade brown to van route. Miller makes to much money to be able to be acquired without money going the other way Brown for miller would work.
KingCanadain1976
Registered User
the kings goalies will be fine with zatkoff and budja We went thru a quick injury before and did just fine with 2 backups (jones and scrivens) We don't really need a vet . Also quick is reportedly week to week so i good with what we have
Patrice Krejci*
Pastafarian
Why would we trade our starting goalie when we're going to be a playoff team?
But yeah, zero chance Benning trades him because he actually thinks we're a playoff team and still thinks of Miller as our starting goalie (despite being outplayed by the backup goalie for the past two years).
But yeah, zero chance Benning trades him because he actually thinks we're a playoff team and still thinks of Miller as our starting goalie (despite being outplayed by the backup goalie for the past two years).
I think the only way miller is traded if he asks for it.
Not sure he would but it would make sense for him to want to go there. inevitably he is going to be splitting time with Marky again, for him its probably better to go be a starter in LA for now, then help them in a backup role for what could very well be his last shot at a cup. as well as being back close to his wife and child
again I don't think Benning looks to trade him unless miller opens the idea up him self.
Not sure he would but it would make sense for him to want to go there. inevitably he is going to be splitting time with Marky again, for him its probably better to go be a starter in LA for now, then help them in a backup role for what could very well be his last shot at a cup. as well as being back close to his wife and child
again I don't think Benning looks to trade him unless miller opens the idea up him self.
Unfortunately the Canucks wouldn't have a decent back-up if they traded Miller, and they're not going to elevate Bachman from Utica or throw Demko to the wolves at this point in his career....a Miller trade more likely by trade-deadline if the Canucks are out of it.
