Post-Game Talk: Tkachuk? More like Tkasuck

[Beer League Sniper]

Miller has been garbage. There's no glossing over that.

However, I don't think you're getting back a young-ish 2C for Miller. I think you get another team's problem child that might, but probably won't, turn into anything good.

The kid took a leave of absence earlier this season. I'm inclined to believe his poor play is connected to whatever he's dealing with off the ice. You don't give up on players with his measurables. Not at 24. And that's not even taking into account that we're paper-thin on LD depth.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Miller still has potential to grow into a stud defenseman. There's hope. He's young with a lot of physical skills and size. A bunch of teams would want him. I just don't think he's ever getting to that stratosphere.
It's funny though that guys on here think Lindgren is the worse offensive player in history and his body is breaking down and he's due for a new contract so he has to go. Yet, teams are giving us cheap, young offensive talent for him. You can't have it both ways. There's still hope for Miller. Teams will pay for that. Lindgren is what he is. No sex appeal for him on the market.

I don't think Lindgren has THAT kind of value but I do know that his ilk are generally the most overpaid players in the sport, both as trade assets and in the free agent market. We have decades of data to support this.

At this point, I want to move on from him not so much for the return but because I don't want him dragging down Fox anymore and you can't really slot him in anywhere else. Thats before getting to the durability concerns, the prospect of signing him long term and the fact that he just really isn't that good.

 

[Mandar]

My phone battery is permanently stuck at 21%

Pete Stemkowski?

 

[hardnosed]

Nobody is suggesting we trade Lindgren for a better LD. Nobody would do that.

The consensus is that we would put together a package for a LD, and that package includes Lindgren because it makes cap sense, it makes positional sense, and because he's a decent piece to start a package with.

You're trying to trade Miller for a good player that plays the same position as Miller, and get an add. That's exactly what you say people are trying to do with Lindgren.

And even if you did...let's say Ottawa trades us Chychrun and Pinto for Miller because they're absolutely stupid: you lock Chychrun in and who's our other top 4 LD for the next several years? Erik Gustafsson?

You're trading Miller from a position we can't afford to lose players at.

Who's our other top 4 LD in 4 years if you still have Miller? It's the same problem if Chychrun was #1 or Miller stays as #1. The GM needs to fill that spot in the offseason.

Miller could command a 2 for 1. Lindgren cannot. We need a 3C now. What will probably happen is Drury will trade prospects or picks for a center. I think that's a really stupid move. Prefer the Miller trade possibility. And if anybody thinks trading Lindgren for a center and using Jones is a possibility, then you haven't been paying attention. Drury will go out and spend more future assets on a Braun type because that's what he always does.

 

[Machinehead]

Who's our other top 4 LD in 4 years if you still have Miller? It's the same problem if Chychrun was #1 or Miller stays as #1. The GM needs to fill that spot in the offseason.

Miller could command a 2 for 1. Lindgren cannot. We need a 3C now. What will probably happen is Drury will trade prospects or picks for a center. I think that's a really stupid move. Prefer the Miller trade possibility. And if anybody thinks trading Lindgren for a center and using Jones is a possibility, then you haven't been paying attention. Drury will go out and spend more future assets on a Braun type because that's what he always does.

And again, we're back to "Miller's not a top 4 D but he's getting two pieces back."

Makes zero sense.

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Who's our other top 4 LD in 4 years if you still have Miller? It's the same problem if Chychrun was #1 or Miller stays as #1. The GM needs to fill that spot in the offseason.

Miller could command a 2 for 1. Lindgren cannot. We need a 3C now. What will probably happen is Drury will trade prospects or picks for a center. I think that's a really stupid move. Prefer the Miller trade possibility. And if anybody thinks trading Lindgren for a center and using Jones is a possibility, then you haven't been paying attention. Drury will go out and spend more future assets on a Braun type because that's what he always does.

What do you suggest they do with Lindgren?

 

[hardnosed]

What do you suggest they do with Lindgren?

Deal with him in the offseason. Drury needs to remake the defense. But that can't happen now. It's absolutely ridiculous that Mackey is our option when 2 guys are missing. We are lucky that hasn't happened before now.

And again, we're back to "Miller's not a top 4 D but he's getting two pieces back."

Makes zero sense.

Where did I say that he isn't a top 4 guy? I said he won't reach superstar status and that if someone is willing to pay, expecting him to turn into a star, we have to listen.

 

[Machinehead]

Deal with him in the offseason. Drury needs to remake the defense. But that can't happen now. It's absolutely ridiculous that Mackey is our option when 2 guys are missing. We are lucky that hasn't happened before now.


Where did I say that he isn't a top 4 guy? I said he won't reach superstar status and that if someone is willing to pay, expecting him to turn into a star, we have to listen.

Your previous response heavily implies that you don't think Miller is a top 4 D.

 

[hardnosed]

Your previous response heavily implies that you don't think Miller is a top 4 D.

Let me ask.you, if you know guaranteed that Miller would not get any better than he is right now, would you consider trading him before everyone else comes to that conclusion? Yes, he's a top 4 guy but not superstar. That's where I'm at. I don't think he becomes anything more than he is now. He's always going to have the screw ups. That's opinion, not fact. Don't claim to have a crystal ball. Just my opinion. But there's GMs out there that might think he's still capable of that.

 

[Machinehead]

Let me ask.you, if you know guaranteed that Miller would not get any better than he is right now, would you consider trading him before everyone else comes to that conclusion? Yes, he's a top 4 guy but not superstar. That's where I'm at. I don't think he becomes anything more than he is now. He's always going to have the screw ups. That's opinion, not fact. Don't claim to have a crystal ball. Just my opinion. But there's GMs out there that might think he's still capable of that.

It all depends on the context and everyone has a price. That being said, even if Miller never got any better, no, he wouldn't be on my list of guys I'm itching to trade.

Of course you have to consider the value guys can fetch, but you also have to consider the value they add being on the team. The position that Miller plays is not a position of strength for this team.

If he gets a full season with a better partner, my answer might change.

 

[hardnosed]

It all depends on the context and everyone has a price. That being said, even if Miller never got any better, no, he wouldn't be on my list of guys I'm itching to trade.

Of course you have to consider the value guys can fetch, but you also have to consider the value they add being on the team. The position that Miller plays is not a position of strength for this team.

If he gets a full season with a better partner, my answer might change.

Fair enough

 

[Ruggs225]

I would trade milller in a heartbeat for a young center. Centers have much more value than a LD.

Someone mentioned Lundell. If miller for Lundell trade was on the table i would take it and run.

I would think long and hard about zegras for miller, but i dont think anaheim would bc they are stacked at D.

But i woulsnt trade miller for an older player. Thats a hell no.

Then u just trade for a LD. No matter what we need to trade for a 3c so we are going to lose assets anyway. I just think its easier to fond a 2nd pairing Ld.

And i dont tbink Milller is going to be more than a 2nd pairing dman. He just hasnt shown the brains yet.

 

[McRanger]

Nobody is suggesting we trade Lindgren for a better LD. Nobody would do that.

The consensus is that we would put together a package for a LD, and that package includes Lindgren because it makes cap sense, it makes positional sense, and because he's a decent piece to start a package with.

You're trying to trade Miller for a good player that plays the same position as Miller, and get an add. That's exactly what you say people are trying to do with Lindgren.

And even if you did...let's say Ottawa trades us Chychrun and Pinto for Miller because they're absolutely stupid: you lock Chychrun in and who's our other top 4 LD for the next several years? Erik Gustafsson?

You're trading Miller from a position we can't afford to lose players at.

Gustafsson is too old to be a long term solution to anything but I think I would be ok with him and Miller being our top 2 LD for a few seasons, assuming one played with Fox and the other played with a competent partner.

 

[McRanger92]

Nobody is suggesting we trade Lindgren for a better LD. Nobody would do that.

The consensus is that we would put together a package for a LD, and that package includes Lindgren because it makes cap sense, it makes positional sense, and because he's a decent piece to start a package with.

You're trying to trade Miller for a good player that plays the same position as Miller, and get an add. That's exactly what you say people are trying to do with Lindgren.

And even if you did...let's say Ottawa trades us Chychrun and Pinto for Miller because they're absolutely stupid: you lock Chychrun in and who's our other top 4 LD for the next several years? Erik Gustafsson?

You're trading Miller from a position we can't afford to lose players at.

They need to play Miller in a role where he never has to play defense (with Fox) or move him. Trouba needs to play with a guy who will actually defend. Trouba is his best when he is stepping up to make hits and pinching down in the O zone. He can't do that with Miller. Let Miller and Fox make beautiful music together and get an Edmundson/Oleksiak/Middleton type to cover for Trouba and allow that pair to force guys to pay a price to get to the net. Even the biggest optimists on Miller have to admit he cant keep anything to the outside in his own zone. We know Trouba's warts, weve covered them ad nauseum, but they need to put both guys in a position to succeed this season.

 

[kovazub94]

A couple of factors. 1. Miller is not a good partner for Fox. We talked about keeping them split to control about 50 min per game. 2. Miller cost will rise significantly and for a long term after the next season.
These things are important in assessing the situation: do the Rangers entertain Miller trade with a sight on bringing someone still to anchor the “other” pair and separately finding a cheap partner for Fox (whom I’m sure everyone will hate)? Miller surely has the appeal to help Drury accomplish this but I doubt it’s possible to do in-season (and on top this bring help at C).

 

[will1066]

I just noticed that Brett Howden resembles Austin Butler