Toggle sidebar

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Regal said:
At 5v5, he played 394:48 with Stamkos and 483:00 without, so he played 45% of his time with Stamkos, but Stamkos played 682:00 without Miller, which means he only played 36.7% of his time with Miller, so comparing Stamkos's totals as if he played half his time with Miller is flawed.

They also didn't mesh well. When on the ice together 5v5, Miller had 10 points, for a 1.52 P/60, and Stamkos had 17 for a P/60 of 2.58. When apart, Miller had 14 5v5 points for 1.74 P/60, playing with Cirelli, Killorn, Paquette, etc.

Playing with Stamkos didn't really help his game, and he produced at borderline 2nd line rates with bottom 6 players in his other minutes. This was also his worst season. He produced at a 2nd line rate 5v5 his previous 3 years before last year
Click to expand...

I suspect that when he played with Stamkos he was there for puck retrieval. Get the puck and pass to Hedman who passes to Kucherov/Stamkos who passes to Kucherov/Stamkos for a goal. If he played so poorly with Stamkos why would he play so many minutes with him? And why would his points/60 go up away from Stammer? One would assume his role with Stamkos was not one of offensive focus but to do the dirty work in the corners.
 
Regal said:
At 5v5, he played 394:48 with Stamkos and 483:00 without, so he played 45% of his time with Stamkos, but Stamkos played 682:00 without Miller, which means he only played 36.7% of his time with Miller, so comparing Stamkos's totals as if he played half his time with Miller is flawed.

They also didn't mesh well. When on the ice together 5v5, Miller had 10 points, for a 1.52 P/60, and Stamkos had 17 for a P/60 of 2.58. When apart, Miller had 14 5v5 points for 1.74 P/60, playing with Cirelli, Killorn, Paquette, etc.

Playing with Stamkos didn't really help his game, and he produced at borderline 2nd line rates with bottom 6 players in his other minutes. This was also his worst season. He produced at a 2nd line rate 5v5 his previous 3 years before last year
Click to expand...
Oh sorry, 45% not 50%.

And forgive me if I don't think the P/60 gap of 0.2 is really worth debating. But it's conceivable that he wasn't facing the top d pairings on the bottom lines.

He's a 50 point winger, who rode the coattails of Stamkos and Kucherov to a 19 game PPG stretch for a career high of 58 points. Odds are that will be his career high. And that's fine, he's a nice player to have, but the Canucks paid a premium for his services without even negotiating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hit the post
420Canuck said:
Oh sorry, 45% not 50%.

And forgive me if I don't think the P/60 gap of 0.2 is really worth debating. But it's conceivable that he wasn't facing the top d pairings on the bottom lines.

He's a 50 point winger, who rode the coattails of Stamkos and Kucherov to a 19 game PPG stretch for a career high of 58 points. Odds are that will be his career high. And that's fine, he's a nice player to have, but the Canucks paid a premium for his services without even negotiating.
Click to expand...

Oh they negotiated instead of giving a 2nd as always Benning does he said not today but take a 3rd. Can't believe people were getting upset about Canucks possibly giving up the 40th over all when the rumors first started and instead give a first and 3rd. These ass clowns have ruined this team and only a miracle will save Canucks fans moving forward until this management group changes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 420Canuck
Pastor Of Muppetz said:
Agree with most of this post...although I think it's a bit premature to say that JT Miller is not going to move the needle much for the team?..Its another year of experience for the younger core players, and I can only see Miller adding to that (unless you're forecasting a regression ?).

I believe the Canucks were 2nd in the league for losing by a single goal last year..A solid reinforcement in the top 6 is going to move the needle.

Now if they could only fix the D...
Click to expand...

I look at it this way...without Miller someone has to be I that spot and that someone is likely going to produce at, say, a 35-40 point clip. He’s just not better by enough to make a difference. Maybe a point or two in the standings. The real issue is on the back end which based on rumors I’m not excited about (besides Hughes who will have growing pains). I just don’t move that asset on this team where it stands on something other than a major long term blueline fix.

Regression? There might just be by Markstrom who while his overall numbers looked average, when people have dug into them it indicates a guy who was one of the biggest difference makers between the pipes. If he goes back to being truly average or below average they could indeed be regressing. I also don’t expect the West to be that weak two years in a row. This is more than the canucks improving...they need to improve significantly more than other teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PuckMunchkin
tantalum said:
I look at it this way...without Miller someone has to be I that spot and that someone is likely going to produce at, say, a 35-40 point clip. He’s just not better by enough to make a difference. Maybe a point or two in the standings. The real issue is on the back end which based on rumors I’m not excited about (besides Hughes who will have growing pains). I just don’t move that asset on this team where it stands on something other than a major long term blueline fix.

Regression? There might just be by Markstrom who while his overall numbers looked average, when people have dug into them it indicates a guy who was one of the biggest difference makers between the pipes. If he goes back to being truly average or below average they could indeed be regressing. I also don’t expect the West to be that weak two years in a row. This is more than the canucks improving...they need to improve significantly more than other teams.
Click to expand...
There’s holes throughout the lineup.
The Canucks are closer to the middle of the pack on SA whereas they’re towards the tail end in shots for. We only have 3 real top six players. We need to add top six wingers as badly as good dmen.
 
Katani Kalan said:
Oh they negotiated instead of giving a 2nd as always Benning does he said not today but take a 3rd. Can't believe people were getting upset about Canucks possibly giving up the 40th over all when the rumors first started and instead give a first and 3rd. These ass clowns have ruined this team and only a miracle will save Canucks fans moving forward until this management group changes.
Click to expand...

If you read the Tampa forums during that time you’ll see they were excited to get the 40th and the third round pick.

They expressed that they were grateful to clear up the cap space and were speculating on who’d they’d choose at 40.

When they found out it wasn’t the 40th but rather a 1st round pick... well... they forgot about Steve Yzerman real quick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Katani Kalan
sting101 said:
Bro Jake thinks we have TJ Miller
Click to expand...

I legit googled him to see if he was Miller's long lost hockey twin or something.

508013_v9_bb.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: sting101
Hawkyknowledge said:
We didn’t have anything other than our core to trade and in order to add to that core you need to trade picks without removing players in the process.
He will be a solid addition without subtraction to our roster who is already one of the youngest in the league.
Click to expand...
Yeah, if you are pissed off about this then you need to at least realize this is the truth. The Canucks simply don't have the organizational depth to do anything else. They don't have it at any position (which is insane considering how awful tehy have been for the last 5 years).
 
  • Like
Reactions: PuckMunchkin
Bonose said:
There’s holes throughout the lineup.
The Canucks are closer to the middle of the pack on SA whereas they’re towards the tail end in shots for. We only have 3 real top six players. We need to add top six wingers as badly as good dmen.
Click to expand...

Need to add? Sure. As bad as the blueline? Nope.

At the cost paid? Not a chance.
 
DonnyNucker said:
A conditional pick isn’t betting the farm
Click to expand...

Yes it is. That first is basically the only real asset they have to make a real net impact on the team via trade. Basically now the only trades they can make would be taking from one area to add to another since the organization has basically zero areas of depth.
 
RobertKron said:
Yes it is. That first is basically the only real asset they have to make a real net impact on the team via trade. Basically now the only trades they can make would be taking from one area to add to another since the organization has basically zero areas of depth.
Click to expand...
Well they could trade Podkolzin, Woo, Madden, virtanen, Juolevi, 2nd round picks, the 2022 first, Stecher, one of Markstrom or demko etc. I don’t agree with the trade but a conditional pick is certainly not the only assets they have to deal.

Boeser, Hughes, Elias and Bo are the only pieces they shouldn’t trade. I f***ing love 1st round picks. Love them. Draft day is my favourite day of the hockey calendar. That being said, the value of a first that will likely be a non- lottery pick is getting exaggerated on these boards.
 
DonnyNucker said:
Well they could trade Podkolzin, Woo, Madden, virtanen, Juolevi, 2nd round picks, the 2022 first, Stecher, one of Markstrom or demko etc. I don’t agree with the trade but a conditional pick is certainly not the only assets they have to deal.

Boeser, Hughes, Elias and Bo are the only pieces they shouldn’t trade
Click to expand...

I mean, yeah, Benning could also offer to wash their car.

None of those have near the same value as the pick Benning moved in this deal, and they're all either not worth much, or are a case of borrowing from a position of weakness to bolster another position of weakness.
 
I dislike the trade for two reasons: I think the Canucks could have acquired Miller for less, and, although he's a good player, I don't think his addition will mean the Canucks will make the playoffs.

For those who like the trade -- is that dependent on thinking the Canucks will make the postseason either this year or next, or does your opinion of the deal change if it turns out that the Canucks miss both years and give up a lottery pick in 2021?
 
PuckMunchkin said:
Most common linemate was Steven Stamkos.
Click to expand...

Most common =/= exclusive nor does it mean that he played a majority of his minutes with that player. In fact, he only played 45% of his ice time with Stamkos.

Plus, this doesn't invalidate the other season where he scored without a Stamkos level player on his line.
 
Regal said:
For less than half the time, and he produced better away from him
Click to expand...

So let me get this right, his production was hurt by playing away from their top six while he played more with Stamkos then anyone else, and produced mored when away from Stamkos? (5on5)
 
lindgren said:
I dislike the trade for two reasons: I think the Canucks could have acquired Miller for less, and, although he's a good player, I don't think his addition will mean the Canucks will make the playoffs.

For those who like the trade -- is that dependent on thinking the Canucks will make the postseason either this year or next, or does your opinion of the deal change if it turns out that the Canucks miss both years and give up a lottery pick in 2021?
Click to expand...

For me, I am ok with the trade. Canucks might of gave a little too much. Miller had 56, 58 and 47 points the last 3 seasons. The 56 and 58 points he was playing in the top 6. In those season he was 28th and 41st in winger scoring. We can make an argument that if Miller's gets top 6, he is first line winger. The numbers don't lie.

A top wingers that put up those numbers is worth a Mid to late 1st or two 2nds. I think the Canucks will make the playoffs for at least one of the next 3 years. That's guarantee the pick will be 16th or higher. To me when it all said and done, Canucks overpaid a 3rd round pick. However it turns out to be top 5 pick then I don't like the trade.

I am not understanding why people are sayinh we could gotten Miller cheaper. A player that capable of putting close to 60 points are sold for peanuts.

Tell me, what do you think Miller is worth? Before you answer remember Miller did put up 1st line winger numbers in 2 out of last 3 seasons.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom