Speculation: 2018 Off-Season: We fell short again... now what do we do?

[Sky04]

Have you looked closer at their numbers? Miller was 82gp 23g 35a 58p and Johnson was 81gp 21g 29a 50p. Looks like Miller is the better producer right? 5ake away PP goals and points and you have Miller 12g 28a 40p while Johnson 17g 20a 37p. So Miller put up more points but Johnson was the better goal scorer. Johnson was a 2nd liner all year while Miller was getting top line minutes at least here. Namestnikov showed that you can get very good production no matter who you put next to Stamkos and Kucherov. Do we really need Miller at 5mil in that spot?

How did I list two Johnson replacements when neither of them are right handed? They can play their off wing but both are more natural LW. They are Miller replacements. We can leverage Miller as a center just as easily as Johnson. It's also highly likely that Miller will be making more than Johnson at 5mil. The thing Miller has on Johnson is size, we got guys like Katchouk, Raddysh or Volkov who can play a similar game to Miller. Also Miller sucked hard in the playoffs. Johnson didn't have his best playoffs but he has a far superior track record than Miller who goes ghost once the playoffs come around.

Cause all of those 82 games were played in the same situation right? Miller on a full year in Tampa will easily outproduce Johnson while being more of a factor. Johnson was a 2nd liner for good reason, he also had time on the first line and got moved off of it, you talk like you can insert anyone in there and they'd see a 20pt increase.

Do we need Miller at 5m at that spot? No, we also don't need Johnson at 5m to play on the 2nd/3rd line either which was the point of this. I'd rather have Miller who's younger, more versatile and brings a different element then Johnson who we already have 2 better versions of in Point and Gourde already on the roster.

Does Miller have replacements possibly down the line? Sure, Johnson already has replacements right now already here.

 

[Stammertime91]

The Miller and Johnson debate is somewhat like the Killorn and Palat debate. Both ran it's course and I don't think it's definitive. Palat brings physicality and great defensive play but he is invisible or hurt half the year. Killorn is the definition of consistency regarding production and steps up in the playoffs (bar this last one). Still wouldn't care which one is moved. Both bring some good and some bad.

Miller has the potential to mold another similar debate. Johnson is money in the playoffs (bar this last one) and Miller brings size. The same size that disappears in the postseason and had one 5v5 goal in 17 of those games. Both bring things the other one cant or hasnt. I know we need size but we also need goals. There's not too much of a clear winner one way or another. Johnson seems to be slowly but surely losing a step or becoming too complacent. When he had the puck his first two seasons you knew good things were going to happen, much like Point right now. We know he can perform in the playoffs where on the other hand, Miller is younger and is top 6 material that's not a bite size forward. The problem is he was completely ineffective and his production is woeful when it really mattered.

I prefer Johnson when taking into consideration a return. We need size but we actually need guys who use it. Miller is a typical Tampa player who could have the frame of Zdeno Chara and still wouldn't play like it. Johnson threw his body around all ECF at least. Only thing I can remember Miller doing was hitting Orpik. We can put a kid or somebody else in the top 6 and move Johnson to alleviate 5M more. More than likely we keep one of them though. You have to move Johnson this summer or you move an unsigned Miller. If they're confident somebody from the A or an FA signing could fit for one year, move Miller and look at upgrading to a WINGER to replace Johnson. Just my two cents.

 

[Steazy Doo]

I would prefer Johnson for sentimental purposes.

 

[Stammertime91]

Happy birthday to kucherov today also

I just got off the phone with him and he wanted me to tell you:

"Thanks Todd1a ! I like your HF posts!"

 

[DFC]

Cause all of those 82 games were played in the same situation right? Miller on a full year in Tampa will easily outproduce Johnson while being more of a factor. Johnson was a 2nd liner for good reason, he also had time on the first line and got moved off of it, you talk like you can insert anyone in there and they'd see a 20pt increase.

Do we need Miller at 5m at that spot? No, we also don't need Johnson at 5m to play on the 2nd/3rd line either which was the point of this. I'd rather have Miller who's younger, more versatile and brings a different element then Johnson who we already have 2 better versions of in Point and Gourde already on the roster.

Does Miller have replacements possibly down the line? Sure, Johnson already has replacements right now already here.

Whichever one plays with Kucherov will outproduce the other. Miller was great on the top line when he first arrived and then it all but fell apart in the playoffs.

 

[Stammertime91]

Just saw the rumor there's interest from teams on Kevin Hayes. Say it ain't so Steve. Walk away. Don't do it. We have enough of them. It's getting like crack. No more rocks. Go home Steve. Don't link us with another Rangers player.

 

[Steazy Doo]

I just got off the phone with him and he wanted me to tell you:

"Thanks Todd1a ! I like your HF posts!"

Did he say anything about my an posts?

 

[Sky04]

Whichever one plays with Kucherov will outproduce the other. Miller was great on the top line when he first arrived and then it all but fell apart in the playoffs.

Put Miller with Point and he'd still outproduce Johnson with Kucherov, Johnson isn't suitable on a line with Stamkos who is stapled to Kucherov, nor is he a capable first liner anymore, so no I'm going to disagree here. Miller on the first line enhances it where as placing Johnson in that role would hinder it.

That's like saying we should play Callahan on the first line becaue we'll see 20+ points from him "because anyone can play with Kucherov/Stamkos" right?

 

[DFC]

Put Miller with Point and he'd still outproduce Johnson with Kucherov, Johnson isn't suitable on a line with Stamkos who is stapled to Kucherov, nor is he a capable first liner anymore, so no I'm going to disagree here. Miller on the first line enhances it where as placing Johnson in that role would hinder it.

That's like saying we should play Callahan on the first line becaue we'll see 20+ points from him "because anyone can play with Kucherov/Stamkos" right?

Well, kind of, yeah, "anyone can play with Kucherov/Stamkos." Namestnikov did it. Johnson and Stamkos are pretty terrible together, but Johnson's had some stellar chemistry with Kucherov in the past. Miller was great with them until the playoffs started, and then his game deteriorated as much or more than theirs.

I wouldn't be surprised if both guys wind up moved. I'm just not sure about giving Miller big money, after he did pretty much what Rangers fans predicted he would in the playoffs.

 

[Stammertime91]

Did he say anything about my an posts?

I texted him and he said he doesn't even an know who you are?

 

[HoseEmDown]

Cause all of those 82 games were played in the same situation right? Miller on a full year in Tampa will easily outproduce Johnson while being more of a factor. Johnson was a 2nd liner for good reason, he also had time on the first line and got moved off of it, you talk like you can insert anyone in there and they'd see a 20pt increase.

Do we need Miller at 5m at that spot? No, we also don't need Johnson at 5m to play on the 2nd/3rd line either which was the point of this. I'd rather have Miller who's younger, more versatile and brings a different element then Johnson who we already have 2 better versions of in Point and Gourde already on the roster.

Does Miller have replacements possibly down the line? Sure, Johnson already has replacements right now already here.

You think Miller will be a 77 point player next year? That's what his 18 in 19 projects to be. ES he was on a 21g 30p pace, Namestnikov was on a 16g 22a pace, PP Miller was 21g 4a while Namestnikov 11g 9a. So in total you're getting a 15-20 point upgrade over an average player but he will be making 5 times more than an ELC one. He was also a -3 while Namestnikov was a +11, so the extra offense we get we lose on the other end.

We could move Gourde up there who will produce similar while helping with the defensive issues for 5 times less as well. Bring up one of the kids to play 3rd line and get 40 point production with a strong two way game. Again not sure how only Johnson has replacements when our best RW prospect, Raddysh, hasn't even played a pro game yet? But Miller doesn't when we have more than one LW prospect who can make the jump next year?

 

[Stephen]

Question. What is the fear factor in Tampa that Stamkos turns into the next albatross contract? He's still extremely productive in the regular season for now, and could conceivably get better as he works his way back fully from health issues, but he is entering his late 20s, has been hurt a lot the past 3-4 years, and most troubling is he's a guy who has very limited touches of the puck on transitions, zone entries, in the offensive zone, etc. Is there some level of concern there?

 

[Stammertime91]

Question. What is the fear factor in Tampa that Stamkos turns into the next albatross contract? He's still extremely productive in the regular season for now, and could conceivably get better as he works his way back fully from health issues, but he is entering his late 20s, has been hurt a lot the past 3-4 years, and most troubling is he's a guy who has very limited touches of the puck on transitions, zone entries, in the offensive zone, etc. Is there some level of concern there?

Since he's the face of the franchise and hasn't exactly plummeted in production I think he gets a pass. Rightfully deserved and at times, like this postseason, not rightfully deserved. I think what he signed for was a plus and takes SOME of that pressure off as he's still an over 80 point producing center, the captain and still at his age the first thing that rings to people's minds - mainly - when you hear "Tampa Bay Lightning." I think the biggest problem and when it comes down to it, should be his biggest focus - winning a cup. Him not performing like we need him to in the postseason is the biggest problem. He's still a 30G guy and providing he doesn't dip into 20G and 70pt range, what he did in the regular season was fine. He had some unusual injuries so outside of that, he's typically ready to play. The downside is when hes hurt, its for a long time.

I don't look at his contract as an anchor as he's still producing, but I definitely look at other superstars near that range and see some with cup(s) or at the least, better postseason performances than him.

 

[Stephen]

Since he's the face of the franchise and hasn't exactly plummeted in production I think he gets a pass. Rightfully deserved and at times, like this postseason, not rightfully deserved. I think what he signed for was a plus and takes SOME of that pressure off as he's still an over 80 point producing center, the captain and still at his age the first thing that rings to people's minds - mainly - when you hear "Tampa Bay Lightning." I think the biggest problem and when it comes down to it, should be his biggest focus - winning a cup. Him not performing like we need him to in the postseason is the biggest problem. He's still a 30G guy and providing he doesn't dip into 20G and 70pt range, what he did in the regular season was fine. He had some unusual injuries so outside of that, he's typically ready to play. The downside is when hes hurt, its for a long time.

I don't look at his contract as an anchor as he's still producing, but I definitely look at other superstars near that range and see some with cup(s) or at the least, better postseason performances than him.

Yeah, his post season play was a bit up and down. I appreciate his energy level, willingness to take the body on the forecheck. He's certainly willing to engage in those glue guy, leadership things. On paper, everything looks to be in order too, but just concerned from a play by play basis that his ability to control the puck and dictate the play is a little lacking... the play never goes through him, he's not in control of it in big moments, which limits his effectiveness.

 

[Steazy Doo]

I texted him and he said he doesn't even an know who you are?

Wow dude, thats just a fool that we pull, pretending not to know eachother.

 

[Todd1a]

I just got off the phone with him and he wanted me to tell you:

"Thanks Todd1a ! I like your HF posts!"

Lol thanks

 

[TampaJay]

Anyone know anything about this “Rumor Break” guy?
https://thehockeywriters.com/tampa-bay-lightning-consider-trading-kucherov/
“Heard from a reliable source that the Lightning are quietly fielding offers on Nikita Kucherov.”

I posted this article about Kucherov because I’m concerned there may be some truth to it. Why? I think Kucherov is disgruntled. Why? Well, HE HELD OUT before signing his bridge deal. No one, especially a rink rat like him misses training camp if he is happy with the offer. And, he fired his agent after the contract. No one fires his agent if he is happy with his contract.

I didn’t like the bridge deal at the time and I blamed it on the dumb Killorn contract which left no money to give Kuch a long-term deal. Wrong priorities, sign Kuch first and then deal with Killorn. To defend Yzerman, I think he was planning to move Bishop and/or Filppula that summer to free up the money to give Kuch what he deserved. It fell through and there was no option left.

Fast forward. Kuch wants a big contract to make up for what he feels he was shorted in the bridge deal. Reasonable. Yzerman wants to draw the line (guessing 8.5) because he doesn’t think you can build a contender with no money left for depth players. Reasonable.

Add to this, the Vlady trade just exacerbated Kucherov’s already disgruntle attitude. I have no evidence other than a gut feeling watching him after the TDL.

I didn’t like the Kuch bridge deal because I was always worried it would come back to bite us. I hope I am wrong.

 

[HoseEmDown]

Even if Kucherov wants out that's not a good deal for us. Faulk and Lindholm are quality pieces while Gauthier and the 1st offer potential. It's the fact that Faulk makes what Kucherov does currently and then Lindholm will need to be signed and probably wants 4-5 so we would be adding a lot to the cap when we shouldn't. We could just sign Kucherov for 9-10 instead.

 

[Todd1a]

I posted this article about Kucherov because I’m concerned there may be some truth to it. Why? I think Kucherov is disgruntled. Why? Well, HE HELD OUT before signing his bridge deal. No one, especially a rink rat like him misses training camp if he is happy with the offer. And, he fired his agent after the contract. No one fires his agent if he is happy with his contract.

I didn’t like the bridge deal at the time and I blamed it on the dumb Killorn contract which left no money to give Kuch a long-term deal. Wrong priorities, sign Kuch first and then deal with Killorn. To defend Yzerman, I think he was planning to move Bishop and/or Filppula that summer to free up the money to give Kuch what he deserved. It fell through and there was no option left.

Fast forward. Kuch wants a big contract to make up for what he feels he was shorted in the bridge deal. Reasonable. Yzerman wants to draw the line (guessing 8.5) because he doesn’t think you can build a contender with no money left for depth players. Reasonable.

Add to this, the Vlady trade just exacerbated Kucherov’s already disgruntle attitude. I have no evidence other than a gut feeling watching him after the TDL.

I didn’t like the Kuch bridge deal because I was always worried it would come back to bite us. I hope I am wrong.

I always hated the Kucherov bridge deal killorn should have been traded if needed to get Kucherov to sign for 8 years! It will be interesting how yzerman deals with Brayden point next summer?

 

[TampaJay]

Even if Kucherov wants out that's not a good deal for us. Faulk and Lindholm are quality pieces while Gauthier and the 1st offer potential. It's the fact that Faulk makes what Kucherov does currently and then Lindholm will need to be signed and probably wants 4-5 so we would be adding a lot to the cap when we shouldn't. We could just sign Kucherov for 9-10 instead.

Totally agree. Faulk would be a nice centerpiece in a Johnson trade. In a Kucherov trade it is just flat out ridiculous.

 

[Todd1a]

Agent: Kucherov happy to stay with Lightning

 

[These Are The Days]

Well damn there goes our chances at Skinner and Svechnikov

 

[Todd1a]

Well damn there goes our chances at Skinner and Svechnikov

Ya that’s what Kucherov his agent said in May so I don’t know where the hockey writers got this BS .

 

[DFC]

Question. What is the fear factor in Tampa that Stamkos turns into the next albatross contract? He's still extremely productive in the regular season for now, and could conceivably get better as he works his way back fully from health issues, but he is entering his late 20s, has been hurt a lot the past 3-4 years, and most troubling is he's a guy who has very limited touches of the puck on transitions, zone entries, in the offensive zone, etc. Is there some level of concern there?

Most of us have pretty much accepted that Stamkos has flashes of elite play, but will never fully return to form, nor be an 8.5m player. That said, there were points early on in the season when he wasn't just milking Kucherov's points. He played very well in spurts. But he's never had a big playoff.

I don't know that I'd call it "concern" so much as "bitterness/disappointment." It's not a thing we're worried will someday happen. It's a thing we're pretty sure is all but bound to happen.

 

[DFC]

I posted this article about Kucherov because I’m concerned there may be some truth to it. Why? I think Kucherov is disgruntled. Why? Well, HE HELD OUT before signing his bridge deal. No one, especially a rink rat like him misses training camp if he is happy with the offer. And, he fired his agent after the contract. No one fires his agent if he is happy with his contract.

I didn’t like the bridge deal at the time and I blamed it on the dumb Killorn contract which left no money to give Kuch a long-term deal. Wrong priorities, sign Kuch first and then deal with Killorn. To defend Yzerman, I think he was planning to move Bishop and/or Filppula that summer to free up the money to give Kuch what he deserved. It fell through and there was no option left.

Fast forward. Kuch wants a big contract to make up for what he feels he was shorted in the bridge deal. Reasonable. Yzerman wants to draw the line (guessing 8.5) because he doesn’t think you can build a contender with no money left for depth players. Reasonable.

Add to this, the Vlady trade just exacerbated Kucherov’s already disgruntle attitude. I have no evidence other than a gut feeling watching him after the TDL.

I didn’t like the Kuch bridge deal because I was always worried it would come back to bite us. I hope I am wrong.

I'm a huge Kucherov supporter, but one thing that would make me turn on him is if it turns out there's any truth to this idea that he's upset we traded Vladdy. He's a professional, Vlad's a professional, and trades happen.