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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Boondock

Registered User
Feb 6, 2009
5,783
2,391
where do you get he is worth 3 firsts.............
Tweets , articles and interviews of hockey insiders discussing the availability of Chychrun
1) "The ask for Chychrun is huge" -
2) An NHL executive said "the ask was similar to the ask for Eichel"
I haven't gone back through all the tweets and articles, but the ask was in my mind the equivalent to a player and 3 x 1sts either picks or prospects - obviously every pick and every prospect has a different value and asking price and actual selling price aren't always the same, but either way - who are the assets being used to get Crouse and Chychrun?
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
49,318
102,034
I keep seeing "if we retain 50%, the return will be higher" type comments. Isn't significant retention pretty much a given right now in this flat cap environment? How many top teams can even take him on without significant retention?

Top 10 teams the NHL right now (Points %):

Carolina: Need retention
Colorado: Need retention
Florida: Doesn't need retention, but also doesn't really need JT Miller given their stacked forward line-up.
TB: Need retention
NYR: Do NOT need retention (for this year), but likely do because of next year.
TOR: Need retention
MIN: Do NOT need retention
PIT: Need retention?
WSH: Need retention?
STL: Need retention?

Now, instead of retention there are other ways to get cap space, but of the viable candidate, it looks like only the MIN and NYR's can accept Miller without retention, and NYR are likely going to want retention for next year.

If pretty much every team is going to want retention, then how does that add to the trade value?
 

sandwichbird2023

Registered User
Aug 4, 2004
4,061
2,192
Carolina , Rangers , Avs ,Panthers .
Not saying they would need JT but they technically are contenders with assets that could be used.

Is it for sure a contender that he goes to?
My Devils need a player of this type . Only way that it makes sense though is if he resigns for sure. No point giving up assets for 2 years while the Devils are still going to be crappy for at least one more year.
It gives the Devils some actual veteran presence and someone that can actually score on the PP and knows how to PK .

would any combination of this work?
2022 1st (top 2 protected )
Mercer
Holtz
Ty Smith
Severson
Bahl
Foote
Zacha
Okhotyuk
Boqvist

Mercer would be the last one I’d want to trade but I’m guessing him or Holtz would be a must included in a deal.
Mercer Smith and a 2nd ?
Yes from the Nucks, IMO. Smith isn't the type of D we need as we already have Hughes and Rathbone coming up, both playing the similar style of game as Smith. I guess we can either move Smith or Rathbone later on if they become redundant. But Mercer is going to be an excellent 2C behind Petey long term. I'll happily take this deal.
 

John Mandalorian

2022 Avs: The First Dance
Nov 29, 2018
11,647
7,367
It looks like there’s certainly a bidding war going on, I can’t blame teams, it’s not every day at top 20 Top line player, Who plays three positions, costs only 5 million for 1.5 years, And can win face-offs like nobody’s business.

This is not a rental, should get a huge haul.

If there was truly a bidding war, would it even be necessary to leak it to the media?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flan the incredible

Big Daddy Cane

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 8, 2010
14,068
34,270
Western PA
More likely the Canucks have contacted him about possibly re-tooling and asked him if he wants to be here long term. He’s an UFA after next season and the Canucks aren’t a contender, they gotta decide if he’s a fit long term.

There’s potentially motivation to move on other than just the return with either explanation. That makes this a bit different than dangling him just to potentially cash out, which was my initial point.
 

sandwichbird2023

Registered User
Aug 4, 2004
4,061
2,192
The cost is going to be outrageous but the idea of Hall-Miller-Pastrnak is quite tantalizing.
I wonder if the Bruins somehow got Klingberg, would they part with Carlo for Miller one for one? I don't know the situation in Boston so this might be way off, but I always envision Carlo as the perfect D-partner for Hughes. He is still young enough to be part of our core if/when our next cup window opens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PatriceBergeronFan

dbaz

Registered User
Jan 29, 2010
1,164
501
If we retain 50% on Miller then yes minimum is high end prospect + 1st + small add or 3 1sts value + small add. If we arent retaining on Miller, the main reason Coleman returned 2 late 1sts is the extra year and that its only 1.8M which makes it extremely easy to fit on a cap strapped team. 2 1sts + 2nd value is the minimum for Miller at full salary. I'd expect these teams would have to send salary back in the form of a roster player like Compher for the Avs, Lindgren from NYR, Demelo from WPG that could be flipped for an additional 3rd round pick.

Mark Stone returned a high end prospect + 2nd. Stone was a UFA to be but thats 2 1sts + 2nd value. i'd say Miller at full salary for 1.5 years is about as valuable as Mark Stone for 0.5 years. Miller might get a little more due to the term.

Lets say Canucks were the powerhouse contender. Would you trade Podkolzin + 1st + Hamonic for a JT Miller at 5.25M for 1.5 years? Probably not. We'd be offering 1st + Rathbone/Klimovich + 2nd +

im assuming if hes going to a contender he would be retained. the player he is and the aspect of having him at 2 and change is why id be looking at 3 peices or high end and a 1st.
yes, if the canucks were a powerhouse contender id trade that for miller. its basically 2 pieces and a cap dump. hamonic is nothing to write home about.
 

Just A Bit Outside

Playoffs??!
Mar 6, 2010
17,733
17,460
Carolina , Rangers , Avs ,Panthers .
Not saying they would need JT but they technically are contenders with assets that could be used.

Is it for sure a contender that he goes to?
My Devils need a player of this type . Only way that it makes sense though is if he resigns for sure. No point giving up assets for 2 years while the Devils are still going to be crappy for at least one more year.
It gives the Devils some actual veteran presence and someone that can actually score on the PP and knows how to PK .

would any combination of this work?
2022 1st (top 2 protected )
Mercer
Holtz
Ty Smith
Severson
Bahl
Foote
Zacha
Okhotyuk
Boqvist

Mercer would be the last one I’d want to trade but I’m guessing him or Holtz would be a must included in a deal.
Mercer Smith and a 2nd ?
I love Mercer so that’s a deal I absolutely take
 

Mikeshane

Registered User
Jan 15, 2013
6,175
3,924
I can't imagine Bo Horvat is happy about this, he's in his prime years and would want to try to make a run at making the playoffs this year not build for the future.
 

BenningHurtsMySoul

Unfair Huggy Bear
Mar 18, 2008
26,789
14,307
Port Coquitlam, BC
I can't imagine Bo Horvat is happy about this, he's in his prime years and would want to try to make a run at making the playoffs this year not build for the future.

Likely he gets moved, along with Boeser. These guys unfortunately are not going to fit the timeline the team will need to retool.

Thank Benning for mishandling cap space and trading away/losing key core players.
 

Boondock

Registered User
Feb 6, 2009
5,783
2,391
I can't imagine Bo Horvat is happy about this, he's in his prime years and would want to try to make a run at making the playoffs this year not build for the future.
I hope none of the Canucks players are happy about the way this season, last season or almost any of the last decade of seasons have gone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GirardSpinorama

AslanRH

Not a Core Poster
Sponsor
Jun 5, 2012
15,654
2,465
Wyoming, USA
If it happens soon, I think it ends up being a team under performing expectations that thinks he'll spark their run to make the playoffs. May not even have to travel too far
 

Peter Griffin

Registered User
Feb 13, 2003
35,198
7,744
Visit site
There’s potentially motivation to move on other than just the return with either explanation. That makes this a bit different than dangling him just to potentially cash out, which was my initial point.

Well they’re definitely doing their due diligence and I’m sure Rutherford will have a price that has to be met in order to move him. There’s the option of dealing him at the draft where all 31 other teams could be interested in him if he’s willing to extend at that point.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
49,318
102,034
Well they’re definitely doing their due diligence and I’m sure Rutherford will have a price that has to be met in order to move him. There’s the option of dealing him at the draft where all 31 other teams could be interested in him if he’s willing to extend at that point.

Maybe. The way I see it is that a team would have to give him a huge deal to get him to extend and not go UFA. I clearly don't know what's in his head, but that's how I see it. I'm not sure Miller, who will be 30 when his next contract starts, is the type of player team would want to give a huge, long term deal to, just so that he doesn't go UFA in a year.

It can happen for sure, just not sure how likely it is to happen, or how many teams would be willing to give that type of deal to him this off-season.

I agree with the rest of what you said though. Rutherford is likely going to have a minimum price or he'll just keep him and move him either at the draft or next deadline.
 

Peter Griffin

Registered User
Feb 13, 2003
35,198
7,744
Visit site
I keep seeing "if we retain 50%, the return will be higher" type comments. Isn't significant retention pretty much a given right now in this flat cap environment? How many top teams can even take him on without significant retention?

Top 10 teams the NHL right now (Points %):

Carolina: Need retention
Colorado: Need retention
Florida: Doesn't need retention, but also doesn't really need JT Miller given their stacked forward line-up.
TB: Need retention
NYR: Do NOT need retention (for this year), but likely do because of next year.
TOR: Need retention
MIN: Do NOT need retention
PIT: Need retention?
WSH: Need retention?
STL: Need retention?

Now, instead of retention there are other ways to get cap space, but of the viable candidate, it looks like only the MIN and NYR's can accept Miller without retention, and NYR are likely going to want retention for next year.

If pretty much every team is going to want retention, then how does that add to the trade value?

Salary retention is absolutely worth something, especially in Miller's case since he's signed thru next season. As for how it adds value to a trade, look no further than the David Savard trade last season. Tampa traded an additional 4th round pick to Detroit, simply so they'd retain 50% of the remainder of his contract for last season. Toronto did the same with Nick Foligno and San Jose. If a team wants Miller for this post-season and next, and they can't fit him to their cap structure, that's really not Vancouver's problem. I'm sure they'd be willing to retain for the right offer, but they aren't just going to do it so that one team can have him over another.
 

Canuck Luck

Registered User
Jun 15, 2008
5,613
2,011
Vancouver
im assuming if hes going to a contender he would be retained. the player he is and the aspect of having him at 2 and change is why id be looking at 3 peices or high end and a 1st.
yes, if the canucks were a powerhouse contender id trade that for miller. its basically 2 pieces and a cap dump. hamonic is nothing to write home about.
you're assuming rather than listening to your fellow posters. If you read anything of what other fanbases have said, overwhelming majority have stated guys like Schneider/Newhook weren't available and were non starters for trade talks for Eichel IRL and here. So with that in mind sure we'd want those guys and are willing to retain on Miller to get them, but its a want and hope that other fanbases want no part of. They have also said if thats the price on Miller at 50%, they'd rather no ret on Miller.

For any discussion (thats not just a no we arent doing that well then no you're not getting Miller) will have to be without those pieces. So we'd have to look at what we want without those pieces for Miller at 50% and Miller at full cap hit since the other fanbases would rather that.

starting point of where I'd consider a trade for Miller at 50%:
Avs is Barron + 2023 1st + Helleson + Foudy.
NYR is Lundqvist + 2022 1st + 2023 1st

Miller at full salary:
Avs is Compher + Barron + 2023 1st + small add
NYR its Lindgren + Lundqvist + choice of 2022 or 2023 1st + small add
 
Last edited:

Canuck Luck

Registered User
Jun 15, 2008
5,613
2,011
Vancouver
I keep seeing "if we retain 50%, the return will be higher" type comments. Isn't significant retention pretty much a given right now in this flat cap environment? How many top teams can even take him on without significant retention?

Top 10 teams the NHL right now (Points %):

Carolina: Need retention
Colorado: Need retention
Florida: Doesn't need retention, but also doesn't really need JT Miller given their stacked forward line-up.
TB: Need retention
NYR: Do NOT need retention (for this year), but likely do because of next year.
TOR: Need retention
MIN: Do NOT need retention
PIT: Need retention?
WSH: Need retention?
STL: Need retention?

Now, instead of retention there are other ways to get cap space, but of the viable candidate, it looks like only the MIN and NYR's can accept Miller without retention, and NYR are likely going to want retention for next year.

If pretty much every team is going to want retention, then how does that add to the trade value?
Theres also taking roster players back in trade. Salary retention is definitely not a must and will cost more since the ret is dead cap space. A roster player is a tradeable or useable piece. If Vegas can fit Eichel's 10M with no ret, teams can fit Miller's 5.25M with no ret
 
  • Like
Reactions: LuckyBoeser
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad