Player Discussion What do we have in J.T. Miller? | Part 2

[Bourne Endeavor]

It wasn’t a poor trade based on the timing at all. We have a good young core, there is no issue selling some picks for some talented support players. Gillis refused to do this and got almost all of our support in free agency, this took far longer than it should have and opened our competitive window too late. That’s why our last core had such a short competitive peak, it was pissed away for many years.

Our playoff window is open now. As our young core gets better, we should be doing everything we can to get them proper support pieces. That includes trading picks, signing free agents, and developing prospects. Miller was an exceptional piece, that trade could not have turned out any better. We have him for several years, it’s not like he was a rental. At the price we paid we got an extreme bargain, we could trade him away for way more than that right now.

As good as Gillis was for us, that was his biggest mistake. We never reinforced the core when it was at its most deadly. Imagine if we packaged Hodgson when people actually thought he was a good prospect and our first for someone like Miller.

Was the trade a gamble? Absolutely. But I'd rather have a GM willing to take risks than a passive one who sits around hoping opportunity knocks. Before anyone jumps, I'm not referring to Gillis with that statement but more Montreal. Bergevin fits that bill to a tee; always waiting. And the Habs, who had a pretty strong core years ago are right back to where they started, hoping this new crop of kids work out.

Miller has basically become our Burrows. Trading for him was by far Benning's best decision even if it initially looked bad.

 

[Catamarca Livin]

Miller is team's best player, he is what we want Horvat snd Boeser to be. He has exposed the other forwards on the team with his great play. It should help raise their games. He has come at the perfect time because if the canucks are no good in two years you sell everyone 25 and older to start again. Lineup needs more good players Miller is one.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

He is, but that doesn't change the fact Benning shouldn't trade our first round for him, which could a be lottery pick next season.

JT Miller is on pace to hit over 80 pts
many top 3 picks cant even do that in their prime

 

[Vancouver_2010]

JT Miller is on pace to hit over 80 pts
many top 3 picks cant even do that in their prime

While doing so in a non playoff year (most likely), that is really useful for us. Another four years his prime is over, sorry you couldn't possibly convince me this is a good trade. The evidence against it is too much.

 

[sting101]

While doing so in a non playoff year (most likely), that is really useful for us. Another four years his prime is over, sorry you couldn't possibly convince me this is a good trade. The evidence against it is too much.

Evidence?
The trade still isn't defined yet?

If we hand over a 16-22nd OA plus the 3rd the 'evidence" as you say is completely a win no matter who New Jersey selects.

If the 'evidence" becomes a top3 lottery pick which is still a possibility then it's a really bad deal.

So far what we know is JT Miller is our best player and an impact player who meshes like a glove with Pettersson. If you drafted him instead of almost any of our top10 selections we would be pretty happy. He's mentoring Virtanen and is PPG with 3 position effectiveness and PP and PK abilities.

The concept of the deal is still a gamble. But it also has 2 chances to work out not just one. IF it had lottery protection i would make it 10 out of 10 given our roster needs and the player, age and contract, But it didn't so i totally understand the negativity given the timing and risk.

We'll just have to see how it plays out because it's dependent on the price tag which we don't even know yet

 

[Vancouver_2010]

Evidence?
The trade still isn't defined yet?

If we hand over a 16-22nd OA plus the 3rd the 'evidence" as you say is completely a win no matter who New Jersey selects.

If the 'evidence" becomes a top3 lottery pick which is still a possibility then it's a really bad deal.

So far what we know is JT Miller is our best player and an impact player who meshes like a glove with Pettersson. If you drafted him instead of almost any of our top10 selections we would be pretty happy. He's mentoring Virtanen and is PPG with 3 position effectiveness and PP and PK abilities.

The concept of the deal is still a gamble. But it also has 2 chances to work out not just one. IF it had lottery protection i would make it 10 out of 10 given our roster needs and the player, age and contract, But it didn't so i totally understand the negativity given the timing and risk.

We'll just have to see how it plays out because it's dependent on the price tag which we don't even know yet

I feel like i have to repeat over and over again, base on our late collapse year after year. Most likely we are going to miss the playoffs, and even we did we will lose in 4 games anyways against a top team. I agree this trade is a big gamble, but this gamble shouldn't happen until we are a contender. Base on our streaky record, i don't think they are there yet. And that is after a few years being a basement team.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

JT Miller is on pace to hit over 80 pts
many top 3 picks cant even do that in their prime

There are other factors.

 

[Canucks1096]

Let's have the same conversation over again. People don't like the timing of the trade, fair point, as of right now it's looking at the pick will be in the mid to late teens. That is definitely worth a 1st round pick. If Canucks don't take there game to another level in the next year or so, you still have the Miller asset and can trade him and recover a a 1st round pick. What if we don't make the trade, a few years down the road Canucks are rising, there might not be a 1st line winger available in a trade.

Some people are saying we shouldn't have to pay that much for a middle 6 winger/second line winger. Comments like that proves you are not too familiar with Miller. There is no way he is a middle 6 winger at the time we made the trade. Playing on third line at the time on a stacked team doesn't make you a middle 6 winger. It's like Malkin plays behind Crosby, Malkin is not a second line center. I guess if you like, you can call him a second line winger. But he did put first line production of 56 and 58 points.

People can say all you want
Like there other factors to considered when saying someone is a 1st line winger. But the fact is when comparing other top 6 wingers. His production of 56 and 58 points puts him closer to the top.

Also some other people were calling a Miller a middle 6 winger/second line at the time because people love to exaggerate and find ways to make Benning a lot worst than he really is

 

[sting101]

I feel like i have to repeat over and over again, base on our late collapse year after year. Most likely we are going to miss the playoffs, and even we did we will lose in 4 games anyways against a top team. I agree this trade is a big gamble, but this gamble shouldn't happen until we are a contender. Base on our streaky record, i don't think they are there yet. And that is after a few years being a basement team.

this is not the same team as before....using the past as reasoning is questionable. The Pacific is wide open i fail to see your logic on getting swept and being so defeatist also.

How do you even know this trade is available then and would a team be willing to give you a ppg game 26yr old on a good contract (not UFA 28-30yr old) off their roster for a late 1st and a 3rd when you are a "contender"?

I'm not saying i completely disagree on the timing aspect but from a value stand point Miller is not old or on a bad contract. In fact his contract increases his value and if we regress its still completely likely you recoup the value in a trade in a few years. You have to take advantage of all opportunities to leverage asset value if it makes sense and simply put Miller vs a 16-22 pick and a 3rd is straight up positive value. I don't think it's even arguable.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Personally, I think the timing of the trade was fantastic. The only problem has been how poorly Miller has played.

Discuss.

 

[mathonwy]

The JT Miller trade might turn out to be as impactful as the Cam Neely trade (in reverse obviously).

The value this team is getting right now from Miller is off the chart.

He drives possession on every single line Greener puts him on and the last individual player we had that could do that was Kesler which didn't last very long because of hip issues.

He can play rush hockey. He can play possession hockey. He always wants the puck. He's extremely elusive and hard to pin down. He's got a good shot and his hockey IQ is world class.

He also brings it (almost) every game and that's not a common thing to see.

JT is one of the best American hockey players in the league right now.

He is a slightly less-skilled, less ratty, higher grit, normal nosed Brad Marchand and..

Assuming that JT will continue to put in the work that he's shown everyone this season that he's capable of....

Signed to an amazing deal.

This is a real big win for the Canucks. A real big one.

However...

Tying up 30M in cap space for 5 years on Tyler Myers is not.

#FireBenning. #RestoreAccountability

 

[Vancouver_2010]

this is not the same team as before....using the past as reasoning is questionable. The Pacific is wide open i fail to see your logic on getting swept and being so defeatist also.

How do you even know this trade is available then and would a team be willing to give you a ppg game 26yr old on a good contract (not UFA 28-30yr old) off their roster for a late 1st and a 3rd when you are a "contender"?

I'm not saying i completely disagree on the timing aspect but from a value stand point Miller is not old or on a bad contract. In fact his contract increases his value and if we regress its still completely likely you recoup the value in a trade in a few years. You have to take advantage of all opportunities to leverage asset value if it makes sense and simply put Miller vs a 16-22 pick and a 3rd is straight up positive value. I don't think it's even arguable.

If there isn't a Miller available, that is okay as well because we will have our picks, instead we should have built our teams around the draft when we are rebuilding/retooling. You are right, the pacific is wide open and we are still barely holding on to the wild card, that speaks volume truly how weak this team is. That isn't defeatist, that is just logic.

A mid first round? Without Miller we would be a lottery team.

 

[Hockey Nebula]

I doubt there is a single GM in the league who doesn't look at the Miller trade and think "Well done. Great trade."

 

[PuckFather]

He is, but that doesn't change the fact Benning shouldn't trade our first round for him, which could a be lottery pick next season.

I'm just happy people like you are not our GM.

 

[Vancouver_2010]

I'm just happy people like you are not our GM.

Don't worry, me too. I am sad Benning is our GM though

 

[PuckFather]

Don't worry, me too. I am sad Benning is our GM though

Likewise I am sad fans like you are okay with a losing culture, Oilers and Sabers style rebuild.

 

[Vancouver_2010]

Likewise I am sad fans like you are okay with a losing culture, Oilers and Sabers style rebuild.

I am glad that Washington, Pittsburgh, Colorado, Lightning, and even the Oilers (So far they are ahead of us in standings) work with building their teams with so call losing culture. I am sad we aren't going through that route.

Because trying to compete and failed miserably every year is infinitely better.

 

[PuckFather]

I am glad that Washington, Pittsburgh, Colorado, Lightning, and even the Oilers (So far they are ahead of us in standings) work with building their teams with so call losing culture. I am sad we aren't going through that route.

Because trying to compete and failed miserably every year is infinitely better.

Once you think Oilers decade of failed rebuilt is completed just because they are ahead of us by 3 points, you lose all the credibility or you simply prove you're an Oilers fan.

 

[bandwagonesque]

I am glad that Washington, Pittsburgh, Colorado, Lightning, and even the Oilers (So far they are ahead of us in standings) work with building their teams with so call losing culture. I am sad we aren't going through that route.

Because trying to compete and failed miserably every year is infinitely better.

Every team you mention, and pretty much every team cited as evidence of the benefit of tanking, happened to win the lottery when there was a dominant superstar available.

 

[Vancouver_2010]

Once you think Oilers decade of failed rebuilt is completed just because they are ahead of us by 3 points, you lose all the credibility or you simply prove you're an Oilers fan.

I am an Oilers fan too, read my avatar. I have to admit they went through a lot of crap as well, but at least they have McDavid and Draisaitl to show for it. Have I mentioned that they have won more playoff round than us since the lockout? How many playoffs round have we won since 2011? Have I mentioned hey still have their first round pick this year regardless making the postseason or not? Do we still have a pick in the first few rounds if we made the playoffs this year? No? In a deep draft? Is that a joke?

Stop supporting a losing cause. You can't win.

 

[Numba9]

Every team you mention, and pretty much every team cited as evidence of the benefit of tanking, happened to win the lottery when there was a dominant superstar available.

Not to mention each one of them before the lottery rules changed.

 

[Vancouver_2010]

Every team you mention, and pretty much every team cited as evidence of the benefit of tanking, happened to win the lottery when there was a dominant superstar available.

How about St Louis? They have won the cup last year and most of their roster is built through draft. Imagine if we have tanked and traded our veterans for pick (instead of letting them go for nothing). This should be a cup year, not a struggle to make the playoffs.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Not to mention each one of them before the lottery rules changed.

Exactly. It doesn't completely discredit the idea of tanking, but everyone overlooks it. Chicago too -- they got a 1st overall in a year when a clear superstar was available. That isn't likely to happen to any particular team that spends 4-5 seasons drafting in the high lottery.

 

[Vancouver_2010]

Not to mention each one of them before the lottery rules changed.

Okay, how about Colorado then?
Colorado Avalanche Draft History at hockeydb.com

A few picks in the top ten propels them in to a great team this year, not to mention Bowen Byram is gonna make their team really soon.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Evidence?
The trade still isn't defined yet?

If we hand over a 16-22nd OA plus the 3rd the 'evidence" as you say is completely a win no matter who New Jersey selects.

If the 'evidence" becomes a top3 lottery pick which is still a possibility then it's a really bad deal.

So far what we know is JT Miller is our best player and an impact player who meshes like a glove with Pettersson. If you drafted him instead of almost any of our top10 selections we would be pretty happy. He's mentoring Virtanen and is PPG with 3 position effectiveness and PP and PK abilities.

The concept of the deal is still a gamble. But it also has 2 chances to work out not just one. IF it had lottery protection i would make it 10 out of 10 given our roster needs and the player, age and contract, But it didn't so i totally understand the negativity given the timing and risk.

We'll just have to see how it plays out because it's dependent on the price tag which we don't even know yet

If we make a deep run in thr playoffs with Miller, its a good deal.

If we dont its more a premature ejaculation.