Confirmed with Link: [VAN/TBL] Cond. 1st ('20 / '21), 2019 3rd, Marek Mazanec for J.T. Miller

[Drop the Sopel]

I have done the opposite in trying to give myself comfort. The numbers show his points are largely a by-product of playing with Stamkos and Kucherov and that Lightning power play last year.

Good analysis, but not deep enough.

Even strength production-

'15-16: 39 ES points - 20 ES goals
'16-17: 49ES points - 20 ES goals
'17-18: 40ES points - 12 ES goals

These are excellent even strength numbers, especially considering the Rangers didn't ice a 60 point player in any of these 3 seasons.

This deal was too risky to make, but Miller is a valuable player that will help drive even strength scoring.

 

[kanuck87]

Seeing that Stepan and Hartman are there brings me some comfort as they're worse options than Miller. Tatar however is far superior to Miller. At least nice to know two other GM's got beat up worse in losing their firsts.

This is the cost to acquire a relatively young legitimate top-6 forward. To say that those GMs got beat up isn’t necessarily true. Given the success/bust rates of first round picks, trading it for a young top-6 forward isn’t a bad idea.

 

[Hit the post]

This is the cost to acquire a relatively young legitimate top-6 forward. To say that those GMs got beat up isn’t necessarily true. Given the success/bust rates of first round picks, trading it for a young top-6 forward isn’t a bad idea.

Sure if the pick was lottery pick protected.

 

[kanuck87]

I just listed the guys we took the last three years. Bennings picks have been doing well.
It could also be the first or second overall pick if things go poorly and we win or come second in the draft lottery two years from now. Just like when the Leafs traded for
Kessel.
There is no way I would trade for Miller if it ends up being a top 10 pick.

What do you think are the odds that it becomes a top 5 or top 10 or that it lands completely outside the top-10?

 

[drivier]

This is the cost to acquire a relatively young legitimate top-6 forward. To say that those GMs got beat up isn’t necessarily true. Given the success/bust rates of first round picks, trading it for a young top-6 forward isn’t a bad idea.

When the timing is right....

 

[Hit the post]

What do you think are the odds that it becomes a top 5 or top 10 or that it lands completely outside the top-10?

Depends on how well Marky plays. He did have a more than solid year last season and look where we ended up. Any decrease will negate the 20+ goals we get from Miller.

 

[Melvin]

So I woke up this morning blissful in how the first four rounds went and then seething at the this trade.

(snip)

So, I go to his ESP/60 (even strength points per 60):

View media item 5639
And I cry a little inside... His points are inflated by ice time on the power play with Stamkos and Kucherov? Say it ain't so... The numbers must lie?! So, I race to his power play per 60 minutes... Trying to deny the logic that their has to be a correlative increase in PPP/60 if his ESP/60 is so low...

(snip)

Oh wow, 200th! That's really bad! Oh, wait, that's including all players, including guys who played like 3 games. Where does he rank among forwards who played the whole season? And where did he rank last season? I'm guessing he's around 80-100th in each of the last three years, which is about right for a good 2nd line forward, no? Is anyone saying he's a superstar?

As for his teammates, he essentially split time at ES between Stamkos/Cirelli/Killorn and put up about the same production with each. He didn't play much with Kucherov. But yes, he put up better totals with those guys on the PP, no duh.

 

[kanuck87]

Sure if the pick was lottery pick protected.

Risk and reward. That pick could also (and far more likelier) to land outside of the lottery, which would be a great trade to get a guy like Miller for that.

 

[Hit the post]

Risk and reward. That pick could also (and far more likelier) to land outside of the lottery, which would be a great trade to get a guy like Miller for that.

We aren’t in a position to take that kind of risk. A rebuilding team shouldn’t be making those kinds of moves. A great trade would be not to deal McCann for a #6 D. Hey, a goal scoring winger who can play center as well.

 

[TruGr1t]

For me, this deal comes down to timing and whether Miller is the right player to trade a 1st round pick for instead of on D where the deficiency is more glaring and the ability to cure that deficiency seemingly more difficult.

This is the central reason the deal is so freaking stupid, and everyone should hate it. They moved significant futures, and used a bunch of cap space, on an inefficient asset. If they were going to make a move like this (geared towards clearly making the playoffs) they'd have made a heck of a larger impact doing so on the blue line. Even our brain-dead management has acknowledged that the defense is a huge, smoking crater of a problem.

Miller is a good player, but the team still has one of the worst blue lines in the league and now has less assets and cap space with which to address it. If your primary goal was to make the playoffs I don't think this was the best way to do it.

At the end of the day, the Miller trade actually in itself makes the condition on the first rounder more risky because, as you said, it makes fixing the defense more difficult.

 

[Nomobo]

I’d be more supportive of such a gamble if said player was a defensemen. Fills a bigger hole on the team. But I guess it’s a trope to say you can more easily stick plugs on wings (especially with the centers we have; heck even with Sutter as he tends to play the same no matter who he has as wingers) than on D. We’ve seen that with the vast assortment of third pairing D Benning has acquired over the five years (of varying quality).

Are their #4’s out there in free agency we could get free (not give up any assets)? Sure, but not without giving them awful contracts.

I just think another D that can play 20 minutes a game decently will have a greater impact than another 20 goal scoring winger. It means less minutes for Edler and Tanev (less likely to get injured as their workload is decreased). Gives another option to shelter Hughes.

No the world isn’t ending (franchise survived Jack Gordon and Mike Keenan). Only I ain’t young anymore and want to see this team win the Cup before I die.

Yes, I agree. A dman or two should be a higher priority but beggars can’t be choosers, right? We don’t exactly have a wealth of assets so I still find myself supporting the move for mainly selfish reasons because like you, I ain’t no spring chicken either and would like to taste the champagne. Anything that moves the needle.
I do see the precariousness of our situation and the desperation in Benning’s work but choose to take the optimism path.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

What do you think are the odds that it becomes a top 5 or top 10 or that it lands completely outside the top-10?

At best 50/50.
I look at the playoff teams and the other non playoff teams that have improved and see us outside of the playoffs next year and who knows about the year after. The defense is held together by duct tape in the form of Tanev and Edler. Still a lot of holes in the lineup and Bennings history of acquiring decent defensemen is abysmal in his five year tenure. Probably league worst.
A lot of fans thought we’d be fighting for a playoff spot last year but the team just doesn’t have the depth to cover for injuries even when we had outstanding goal tending from Markstrom. What if he gets hurt?

 

[WetcoastOrca]

We aren’t in a position to take that kind of risk. A rebuilding team shouldn’t be making those kinds of moves. A great trade would be not to deal McCann for a #6 D. Hey, a goal scoring winger who can play center as well.

Imagine if we’d kept McCann and drafted Tkachuk instead of Juolevi. Both pretty obvious moves imo. (I can forgive the Virtanen pick as no GM is perfect at the draft) Bennings evaluation of defensemen has been brutal (see Sbisa, Guddy etc.).
I had hoped that changed with the Hughes pick but now we’re apparently looking at Myers?

 

[Pavel96]

This is the cost to acquire a relatively young legitimate top-6 forward. To say that those GMs got beat up isn’t necessarily true. Given the success/bust rates of first round picks, trading it for a young top-6 forward isn’t a bad idea.

He was centering Tampa's 4th line at the start and end of last season. How is he a bonafide top 6 player? Two years ago he was removed from the first line in game 3 of the first round and Tampa went on to win that round and the next one. He was also a healthy scratch last year for Tampa. Calling him a "legitimate top 6 forward" seems like a reach.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Wow. Why wait? Because the pick could end up 25th and the player taken may never make the NHL in any meaningful way. It is not really that hard to grasp. As long as the chance that Miller is the best player in this trade I think it is fair to wait to see the results. And as of this moment he is the best player in the trade. The definition of a win.

JT Miller might retire before the season starts. Lets wait untill he has played through his 4 year contract until we determine the value of this trade.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Yes, I do think Miller makes us better along with a full year of Pearson and Hughes and hopefully another decent dman. We should contend for the playoffs and Big Jim’s job depends on it.

Not sure where you’re going with asking me about my commenting.

Its probably a trap Bonose! Quick! Call him a son so he knows his place!

 

[Hal 9000]

Probably could've got Eakin out of Vegas for much cheaper, and a better contract.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Draft Podkolzin thread: 350 replies.
Trade JT Miller for a couple draft picks: 850 replies.

Never change hfvan, never change.

ECHO
Echo
echo

Its a sad state of affairs.

It will change once we get rid of the morons running the team currently.
Assuming they are replaced by competent people.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Cap space has value. We saw that yesterday with the Marleau and Subban trades. Tampa needed to shed space and Benning still way overpaid.
It’s clear that the good GMs know that he will overpay once he makes up his mind to acquire a player. They just wait him out.
It’s like a game of poker. Benning is the guy at the table who’s eyes bug out and he starts to sweat when he has a good hand.
The rest of the table figured him out years ago.

 

[Pavel96]

Cap space has value. We saw that yesterday with the Marleau and Subban trades. Tampa needed to shed space and Benning still way overpaid.
It’s clear that the good GMs know that he will overpay once he makes up his mind to acquire a player. They just wait him out.
It’s like a game of poker. Benning is the guy at the table who’s eyes bug out and he starts to sweat when he has a good hand.
The rest of the table figured him out years ago.

Here was the last post on Miller's Tampa HF page, last April:

Low ball offers are coming since the organization is in damage control this past week

Guess this guy doesn't know that under Benning, the Canucks have perpetually been operating in damage control.

 

[Melvin]

Probabilities are tough because of the variables involved. I liked your previous post in regards to the odds of them making the playoffs.

Using the pick slot as a benchmark is a good start. I feel comfortable saying that if it ends up a top-15 pick then it's a bad trade. Then inside that, it could go from bad to catastrophic.

But then there's the other part - JT Miller has to actually be good and that part is harder to quantify. And not just good - better than a player you could sign for a similar price for free or traded for at a lower price.

I just think you could have accomplished something similar without taking on so much risk. Once there is some more data in terms of trades and contracts in the next couple weeks we'll have a better picture.

The thing that I think that people are missing is that the conditions on the pick dramatically decrease the odds of it being a top-15 pick. All that needs to happen for it NOT to be a top-15 pick is for the Canucks to make the playoffs in EITHER of the next two seasons. Is that a bet I would make? Probably not, but it's really not outlandish. You think there is a 0% chance the Canucks make the playoffs in the next two seasons? Of course not. So what is it then? If it's 50/50 then does the trade become acceptable?

Your last point is fair though. We would all like to see the team bargain hunt in free agency the way Gillis used to, I just take issue with people saying the trade is poor value. You can criticize the timing of the trade, in that the Canucks need to be closer to contention in order to expose themselves to this much risk (and I think people are overstating the amount of risk, see above,) but I don't buy that it's not a good trade value-wise.

I had a similar take on the Kesler trade, which I also thought was good value and shrewdly targetting an undervalued player on an excellent contract, but also was the wrong trade for them to make at the time because they should have been targetting futures who would now, five years later, be in their primes.

It's sad that we still believe the Canucks should be targetting futures though. In reality, this is a trade that *should* make a lot more sense, if the Canucks hadn't spun their wheels and mismanaged the last five years so catastrophically.

 

[passive voice]

The likelihood that the Canucks surrender a lottery 1st round pick to Tampa is fairly low.

The chances of the Canucks being a lottery team in 2020-2021 are fairly low.

The probability of Tampa getting a lottery pick from Vancouver is quite low.
...
Given the development of our prospects, young players, etc, are chances of being a lottery team in 2020-2021 are fairly low.

Man I appreciate the optimism but like....you've seen the standings?

There is one Pacific team (LA) that I feel comfortable saying will be worse than Vancouver in 2021. Doesn't mean the Canucks can't or won't finish better than 7th in 22 months but we're swimming upstream.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Man I appreciate the optimism but like....you've seen the standings?

There is one Pacific team (LA) that I feel comfortable saying will be worse than Vancouver in 2021. Doesn't mean the Canucks can't or won't finish better than 7th in 22 months but we're swimming upstream.

Agreed. And the ironic thing is that many posters, myself included, would have said two years ago that the chances of our being a lottery pick this year were really low.
And yet here we are two years later still spinning our wheels.
Things always look optimistic in the summer time.
But what happens if Markstrom goes down along with the inevitable Edler and Tanev injuries.
And a third defenseman like Stecher is hurt at the same time which has happened every year.
Our top four would be Hutton, Hughes, Schenn and Biega?

 

[kanuck87]

He was centering Tampa's 4th line at the start and end of last season. How is he a bonafide top 6 player? Two years ago he was removed from the first line in game 3 of the first round and Tampa went on to win that round and the next one. He was also a healthy scratch last year for Tampa. Calling him a "legitimate top 6 forward" seems like a reach.

Guys get moved up and down the lineup all the time. Miller's ES production the last three seasons has been quite impressive given who he's played with.

 

[Vancouver_2010]

We are giving away picks as a rebuilding team (potentially a lottery pick in 2021)? Is that a joke? He is not even worth a second round to me. Let alone multiple assets. Producing only 47 points in 75 while playing for a stacked team. How far is he going to regress playing for us? So when Petterson said he wants a better linemate to play with, he probably aim for someone in a higher caliber. Like Panarin?

In short, Benning is an idiot, fire him now!