Seravalli: Official JT Miller Trade Thread - NEW Update (1/25/22) - Rangers Interest "Next Level"

[FoxysExpensiveNYDigs]

That one article mentions Kakko or Lafreniere being potentially in play for Miller i think that would be the best case scenario for the Canucks getting one of those two plus maybe a mid round pick or a low end prospect.

i would prefer one of those two over schneider/lundqvist and a 1st

Seney is a contributor at the hockey writers and has no connections with the Rangers. Purely speculative BS. You arent getting Laf or Kakko for Miller.

 

[Richard88]

Makes sense and I can respect that. In the 2nd deal are we retaining? If so we'd want a little extra

2023 1st, Baron, Jost, 2024 2nd

Future picks often have a bit less value, and thus spreads it out.


On a side note, idk how well connected this writer is, but interesting read if he does have some insider knowledge.

NHL Rumors: Rangers Trying to Acquire Canucks Forward in Mega-Deal - NHL Rumors - NHLTradeRumors.Me

Adding a 2nd seems excessive even with retention. Big, mobile, NHL-ready RHD's like Barron carry a lot of value. Jost is also a young cost-controlled roster player. Retention won't add as much as you think to the value considering that every contender in the bidding will require it too. If it's Compher instead of Jost in the trade though you could probably knock $1.5m of retention off as that's basically the same cap impact.

 

[Trxjw]

There's not a shot in hell that the Rangers trade Laf or Kakko for Miller. Good lord.

 

[Kocur Dill]

That one article mentions Kakko or Lafreniere being potentially in play for Miller i think that would be the best case scenario for the Canucks getting one of those two plus maybe a mid round pick or a low end prospect.

i would prefer one of those two over schneider/lundqvist and a 1st

In the words of thee immortal John McAfee. "I'll eat my own dick" if Drury trades either Kakko or Lafreniere for Miller, let alone any additional pieces.

 

[EP to Kuzmenko]

Adding a 2nd seems excessive even with retention. Big, mobile, NHL-ready RHD's like Barron carry a lot of value. Jost is also a young cost-controlled roster player. Retention won't add as much as you think to the value considering that every contender in the bidding will require it too. If it's Compher instead of Jost in the trade though you could probably knock $1.5m of retention off as that's basically the same cap impact.

Picks being in future drafts does diminish their value a little. The 2024 2nd could be a 2022 3rd instead.

 

[Boondock]

Whoa...
What you're saying isn't false, but let's provide some context. He has played:

19 more games than Barkov (8 more points)
31 more games than Stamkos (13 more points)
39 more games than Crosby (22 more points)

And I certainly would not rate him better than Bergeron, Tavares, Point, Kopitar, Backstrom...

He's a good player. He's definitely not the 8th best center (not saying you are saying that, but people may read that). He's a 28 year old mid tier first liner.

I have never stated Miller is a top whatever number C, but you point out context - I would argue that actually playing the games is a pretty important piece of context. Miller has more games played so he has been able to have a positive impact when on the ice. Playing 31 more games than Stamkos is important - I value players that are actually on the ice. It's great to score 4 points per game, but if you only play 3 games a year...

Secondly you are comparing Miller's stats to Barkov, Stamkos and Crosby - if those are the comparable you are using that should speak to a certain level of quality.

 

[John Johnson]

Laf and Kakko are both busts and yet their value is too high for Miller. Smh.

 

[Peter Griffin]

If Newhook is off the table I’d want Barron, Olausson and a ‘23 2nd for Miller. Compher could be added for salary purposes if necessary.

 

[John Mandalorian]

If Newhook is off the table I’d want Barron, Olausson and a ‘23 2nd for Miller. Compher could be added for salary purposes if necessary.

No.

 

[TGWL]

That one article mentions Kakko or Lafreniere being potentially in play for Miller i think that would be the best case scenario for the Canucks getting one of those two plus maybe a mid round pick or a low end prospect.

i would prefer one of those two over schneider/lundqvist and a 1st

Call me crazy but as a NYR fan I'd prefer to give Kakko up before Schneider.

 

[Peter Griffin]

No.

Based on past trade values, that’s the going rate. If Colorado isn’t willing to pay the price that’s fine, there’ll be more than enough interested parties to deal with.

 

[Edgelord]

Its been oddly quiet regarding the Leafs. Kinda makes me think they are up to something.

 

[John Mandalorian]

Based on past trade values, that’s the going rate. If Colorado isn’t willing to pay the price that’s fine, there’ll be more than enough interested parties to deal with.

No. Keep in mind, a fire sale in Dallas, Chicago, or both influences the market signifantly for other sellers.

 

[Peter Griffin]

No.

Yes.

 

[Boondock]

I wonder who the 1st best is?

Chychrun

 

[John Mandalorian]

Yes.

See my revision. Vancouver has to give buyers a reason not to deal with Philadelphia, San Jose, Chicago, or Dallas, Arizona, et al.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Based on past trade values, that’s the going rate. If Colorado isn’t willing to pay the price that’s fine, there’ll be more than enough interested parties to deal with.

Miller's price is too high for what we need. Especially since our need is a big improvement to our PK.

 

[Peter Griffin]

See my revision. Vancouver has to give buyers a reason not to deal with Philadelphia, San Jose, Chicago, or Dallas, Arizona, et al.

What players on those teams would Colorado be acquiring that are equal in ability to Miller and are signed for a very reasonable amount through next season?

 

[Boondock]

Depending on if Strome could be flipped elsewhere and perhaps Lindgren too, it’s actually not the worst. The Podkolzin/Kravtsov swap made zero sense though.

you know what doesn't make sense - trading a good producing NHLer for lesser pieces that you have to sell off individually to try to extract the value. Trade Miller with 1.5 seasons left for Strome who's a UFA and then have to trade him to get the futures package you need. I can imagine every GM in the league holding your feet to the fire saying take my offer, you need to extract some value from Strome. I won't offer much, but a 2nd and a B prospect is better than nothing......

If secondary deals come about and value is there, sure go for it, but the idea you would make a trade and then need to move those pieces to get value seems like very poor asset management to me.

 

[Peter Griffin]

Miller's price is too high for what we need. Especially since our need is a big improvement to our PK.

That’s understandable and I can respect that.

 

[John Mandalorian]

What players on those teams would Colorado be acquiring that are equal in ability to Miller and are signed for a very reasonable amount through next season?

You're overvaluing the 1.5 years given the other options available. Keep in mind, the Avs have at least 9 million coming off the books with Kadri and Burakovsky alone. They'll have the flexibility to make moves (trades or FA). Don't get me wrong. It has some appeal but it's not an end all be all decision driver.

 

[Peter Griffin]

you know what doesn't make sense - trading a good producing NHLer for lesser pieces that you have to sell off individually to try to extract the value. Trade Miller with 1.5 seasons left for Strome who's a UFA and then have to trade him to get the futures package you need. I can imagine every GM in the league holding your feet to the fire saying take my offer, you need to extract some value from Strome. I won't offer much, but a 2nd and a B prospect is better than nothing......

This is literally what Sakic did when he flipped Turris to Nashville for Girard, Kamenev and a 2nd. It would obviously take more maneuvering but it’s something a competent GM could take advantage of.

If secondary deals come about and value is there, sure go for it, but the idea you would make a trade and then need to move those pieces to get value seems like very poor asset management to me.

I don’t think any GM would make such a move without first having such a deal in place.

 

[Peter Griffin]

You're overvaluing the 1.5 years given the other options available. Keep in mind, the Avs have at least 9 million coming off the books with Kadri and Burakovsky alone. They'll have the flexibility to make moves (trades or FA). Don't get me wrong. It has some appeal but it's not an end all be all decision driver.

I’m not overrating it at all. Miller if retained or a salary like Compher is sent back allows you to slot JT in your lineup and keep a guy like Burakovsky.

Giroux may not even be traded. Pavelski while having a good season is also 37 years old, I wouldn’t expect the same performance next year if re-signed. And Hertl if dealt will go for as much if not more than Miller and will cost minimum $8M per on a long term commitment.

 

[Avs44]

If Newhook is off the table I’d want Barron, Olausson and a ‘23 2nd for Miller. Compher could be added for salary purposes if necessary.

Yeah — I’d do that.

 

[kanucks25]

Retention won't add as much as you think to the value considering that every contender in the bidding will require it too.

That's like saying gas prices won't go up because everyone needs it for their car.