Confirmed with Link: [VAN/NYR] JT Miller, Erik Brannstrom, & Jackson Dorrington for Filip Chytil, Victor Mancini, and 1st 2025 (Top-13 Protected, Unprotected after)

[F A N]

Of course I can and have. But you are not an honest actor. I know your tactics.

What kind of an answer are you looking for on Räty's training?

His physical tools did not improve because his training was not planned correctly. This is what I am talking about.

He became better at ice hockey. Especially faceoffs.

I'm not using any tactics. You make these big claims using vague language and I don't want to respond without understanding what you mean. Just take what you wrote here, "His physical tools did not improve because his training was not planned correctly." Do you realize how vague that is? Plain reading suggests that what you're saying is that Raty didn't improve because the Canucks didn't give him a proper plan for the summer.

Also, now you're saying he became better at ice hockey but you were saying he was not training properly because he didn't know how to. Are you saying training doesn't matter or did Raty miraculously get better by training aimlessly?

f***. Here we go again. I know you intentionally bog down these conversations. Be ready for me to bail out the moment you do it.

Bog down "these conversations?" What conversations? Like this:

Or EP just found him self in the hands of a quack.

Or. It was the doings of our very own sports medicine staff from the Canucks organisation.

 

[ExarKun80]

As much as we got fleeced, this trade also doesn't make sense for the rangers, this is a trade you should be doing when you are contending, the rangers is no where near contending for the cup.

We got fleeced due to Miller's reputation and JR's impatience. Miller had to go but JR traded him when his value was all time low and not before going to the media to throw both Miller and Skinny under the bus to cover his ass for his poor negociating skills.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I'm not using any tactics. You make these big claims using vague language and I don't want to respond without understanding what you mean. Just take what you wrote here, "His physical tools did not improve because his training was not planned correctly." Do you realize how vague that is? Plain reading suggests that what you're saying is that Raty didn't improve because the Canucks didn't give him a proper plan for the summer.

Im not going to be so specific that people can tell where my source of information is.

Again. Explain what kind of an answer you would find satisfying? Please be extremely specific so we dont have to go 500 times back and forth because you find a comma in the wrong place.

Also, now you're saying he became better at ice hockey but you were saying he was not training properly because he didn't know how to. Are you saying training doesn't matter or did Raty miraculously get better by training aimlessly?

No.

You misunderstand my earlier point.

I am talking about his physical training specifically.
- speed, power, mobility etc.

Bog down "these conversations?" What conversations? Like this:

I am just speculating on what the reasons might be that he wasnt able to fix his knee issue during the summer.

Why are you having trouble comprehending this?

Seriously. This is exactly what Im talking about. ... edit wait. Did you just do the thing...? You did didnt you. And I fell for it.

 

[F A N]

Im not going to be so specific that people can tell where my source of information is.

Right because your source in Finland would be exposed here for being wrong.

Again. Explain what kind of an answer you would find satisfying? Please be extremely specific so we dont have to go 500 times back and forth because you find a comma in the wrong place.

I'm just asking you to either use English that we can understand or explain what you mean.

No.

You misunderstand my earlier point.

I am talking about his physical training specifically.
- speed, power, mobility etc.

So you're saying Raty didn't improve any of that yet he improved as a hockey player to go from where he was last season to making the Canucks opening night roster?

I am just speculating on what the reasons might be that he wasnt able to fix his knee issue during the summer.

Why are you having trouble comprehending this?

Like Raty, you're appear to be suggesting that the Canucks' training AND medical staff are incompetent but when I ask you if that's what you're suggesting you shy away.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I'm just asking you to either use English that we can understand or explain what you mean.

Tell me what you are looking for.

Be EXTREMELY specific.

edit. actually Ill remover everything else. Lets nail this one thing down.


Tell me what kind of an answer you are looking for.

 

[F A N]

Tell me what you are looking for.

Be EXTREMELY specific.

edit. actually Ill remover everything else. Lets nail this one thing down.


Tell me what kind of an answer you are looking for.

Umm... I'm merely looking to understand the point you're trying to make because it is not easily understood by what you wrote. That's all I was doing but somehow asking you to explain/clarify what you meant is taken by you as some sort of affront and offence.

To be specific, you make pompous statements about how 99,999999% of athletes don't have the education to work on things properly (while seemingly suggest that you do) and then you don't think you need to explain yourself when asked to explain what you mean and what education is lacking.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Umm... I'm merely looking to understand the point you're trying to make because it is not easily understood by what you wrote. That's all I was doing but somehow asking you to explain/clarify what you meant is taken by you as some sort of affront and offence.

To be specific, you make pompous statements about how 99,999999% of athletes don't have the education to work on things properly (while seemingly suggest that you do) and then don't think you don't need to explain yourself when asked to explain what you mean and what education is lacking.

There isn't anything "pompous" or even controversial about that statement.

You are making a false assumption that it should be expected that they can program their own training.

 

[F A N]

There isn't anything "pompous" or even controversial about that statement.

You are making a false assumption that it should he expected that they can program their own training.

So what does it mean to "program their own training" and what are Canucks players and prospects doing wrong? You won't explain it would you?

 

[PuckMunchkin]

So what does it mean to "program their own training" and what are Canucks players and prospects doing wrong? You won't explain it would you?

"Programming your own training" typically refers to designing and planning your own workout or fitness routine, rather than following a pre-made plan from someone else. It involves determining the exercises, sets, reps, rest intervals, and progression based on your specific goals (e.g., strength, endurance, muscle growth, or weight loss). It gives you more control over your fitness journey and allows you to tailor the routine to fit your needs, preferences, and schedule.

It can also apply to other areas like mental or skill-based training, where you're creating a structure to improve a specific ability or skill, whether it's in sports, music, or other areas.

 

[ahmon]

Interesting that Friedman is also relaying the information that the Canucks were interested in Drew Fortescue instead of Mancini. But Rangers wouldn't budge.

I feel Fortescue has potential to be a very good defensive top 4 dman.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I think it’s clear Miller can expect too much from his teammates, and I think it’s clear that Miller was hard on Pettersson. What you are glossing over is that, at least initially, there appears to be good reason for this. Allvin has already confirmed Pettersson was not preparing well enough and putting in the kind of effort required to succeed, and Pettersson has basically agreed. And this accords with the Halford and Brough rumour that Pettersson came into camp out of shape.

So, Pettersson isn’t this totally innocent party as you make him out to be. Players hold other players accountable. This is reasonable. And it appears that a lot of the friction came from Miller trying to hold Pettersson accountable for his lack of preparation and resulting poor play. And that in and of itself isn’t unreasonable.

Personally, I think Miller kept on being hard on Pettersson and their relationship continued to degrade, coaching staff stepped in and told him to knock it off, he didn’t, and that led to the benching and LOA.

If that’s what happened, who is more to blame? Personally, I blame both. I still like Pettersson’s personality more, but I don’t really blame Miller in that context, at least initially. Pettersson sort of started the problem, and Miler certainly ended it. Lots of blame to go around.

I think it’s clear Miller expects a lot of his teammates and is hard on them. And he’s a strong personality. It seems also clear that he’s popular in the room.

I question how popular Miller ever was in the room. (Robinson on Hughes and Demko not being impressed, Horvat, the LOA, his past etc...)

Nobody has said Pettersson is without fault. Nobody. His play has slipped. That's his failing. But his play is unlikely to have disrupted the room to such an extent. It has to be something over and above the tension a struggling star would cause. There's almost nothing on that front though.

Conversely, there's a lot to suggest Miller went overboard with the natural accountability teammates would have for each other.

Given those two parameters, how is Pettersson seen as equally culpable in disrupting the room? Forget full innocence. There would be other players like Hughes holding him accountable. Yet none caused a stir like Miller...

Allvin can talk all he wants about preparation. As I said, he wasn't saying anything after twig Pettersson put up 102 points. Now that Pettersson has failed though, improving physically is worth a shot. Why not?

That’s actually not a fact. The only fact is that they signed Miller and traded Horvat. And I have already given reasons for why that may have been. You don’t need to read in prioritization, although that may have been the case.

I mean, that’s just a rumour. And if it’s true, it’s more likely that it was coaching vs. management. But I agree it would be a dumb thing to do in the context if true. Personally, I doubt it, given how long this issue has been going on for.

I mean, he easily could have become complacent after that season or signing his big contract. Just because your are mentally dialed in and preparing at one point doesn’t mean you always will.

This just seems like a conspiracy theory that’s not really worth addressing on its merits.

The fact, if we are using rumours (which you've done above), is that they re-signed Miller first at a higher cap hit than what Horvat's projected ask was in the offseason. That indicates which one was the priority.

You think the coach is going to green light Miller against Petterson without management's OK? I'm laughing now...

I'm saying Pettersson could be mentally dialed in, physically weak, and still dominate. Which means, the physical preparation Allvin wants is superfluous. It's only now a talking point because he's failing to dominate. Not that it ever was a requirement for him to succeed.

 

[VanJack]

I guess we'll never know all the 'ins and outs' of the Miller deal.

But I see one beat writer picked up by the Hockey Writers website is reporting that the Canucks themselves had an internal, players-only team meeting a couple of months back to try and get Miller and Pettersson back on track. But I suspect it might also have had something to do with Miller's prickly relationship with other players in the room--something Allvin hinted at in his press conference.

And when any change failed to happen, Miller took his leave of absence to decide his future in Vancouver. And once he'd come back with his mind made up, the trade wheels starting turning.

That scenario has a ring of truth to it for me. So all the so-called 'insider reports' that the Canucks were weighing deals for either Pettersson or Miller, and that one of them was heading out of town, turned out to just 'spin'. It was Miller on the block from the very beginning.

And there's another report that the deal the Rangers and Canucks finally agreed on, was the same deal the Canucks wanted two months ago. I don't know if the sticking point then was Mancini or the first round draft pick. But whatever it was, the Rangers finally 'blinked and the deal got done.

I suspect that sometimes the 'insiders' like Seravalli and Friedmann, really don't have a clue what is really going on.

 

[Isi]

we will either never know the full story, or larry brooks will spill the beans whenever jt miller has a rough spell in new york

 

[Oliewud]

canucks will win this trade

 

[AzNightmare]

A thing that bothers me is that JR is getting a free pass for the Horvat saga. He bungled that even worse than the Miller saga. Bo was having an insane season and we only got Beauvillier(garbage)+Raty and a 3rd . Right now that trade has become Bo Horvat for Raty, a 3rd and 5th. Uncle Lou may be a little senile but he took JR to the clearners. If Jimbo made that trade he would have been crucified here and i hated Jimbo with passion.

Didn't we also get a 1st, which was flipped for Hronek?
If I recall, it was basically Horvat for Hronek.

 

[ExarKun80]

Didn't we also get a 1st, which was flipped for Hronek?
If I recall, it was basically Horvat for Hronek.

You are right. I forgot about that pick. It makes sense now. I was under the wrong impression that we've used our pick for Hronek but we drafted Willander in the first round with our pick.

 

[AzNightmare]

You are right. I forgot about that pick. It makes sense now.

You're gonna forget about the 1st on the most recent trade too.
It got flipped so fast, almost forget we had it