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

PuckMunchkin

Very Nice, Very Evil!
Dec 13, 2006
12,219
9,932
Lapland
Both are 'win now' trades..The Gudbranson trade was made with the intent of bolstering the blueline in the failed ' compete on the fly' era...

Benning didnt think this team was a lottery team last summer..after he landed his 1D, he was ready to gamble...and it paid off..Benning was right, Linden was wrong.

Wish I could see the world through your eyes for a day.
 

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,629
5,893
It's official. JT Miller traded for ....

2019 3rd (71) GK Hugo Alnefelt........Hugo Alnefelt Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com
2012 1st (20) D Shakir Makhamadullin.......Shakir Mukhamadullin Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com

Now that's a mouthful

Tampa certainly won the trade. But I think the Canucks are winners of that trade as well. New Jersey probably lost a bit here with the Canucks pick likely being lower than anticipated and New Jersey might have wanted Schneider instead of Makhamadullin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: timw33

Hahahax

Registered User
Apr 2, 2018
129
40
It may seem like a dumb question, but I don't get to watch enough Canucks games to be sure. I selected Vancouver in my fantasy league and can protect 3 roster players. EP and QH are obvious and I was thinking of going JT Miller as the 3rd option.

Should I consider Boeser or Horvat instead?
 

Lindgren

Registered User
Jun 30, 2005
5,943
3,849
If Miller's next season is like his last, what would his value be at the next trade deadline?
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,456
3,243
Vancouver
It may seem like a dumb question, but I don't get to watch enough Canucks games to be sure. I selected Vancouver in my fantasy league and can protect 3 roster players. EP and QH are obvious and I was thinking of going JT Miller as the 3rd option.

Should I consider Boeser or Horvat instead?

Miller. Unless you're looking for something beyond 1 season. In which case, it's still Miller.
 

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
It may seem like a dumb question, but I don't get to watch enough Canucks games to be sure. I selected Vancouver in my fantasy league and can protect 3 roster players. EP and QH are obvious and I was thinking of going JT Miller as the 3rd option.

Should I consider Boeser or Horvat instead?

Not a dumb question, I would go with JT Miller as well

Horvat will play agasint the top lines he will play with Pearson. Not sure who the other winger will be. He does play on the 1st pp unit. With the tough mins and so so linemates. Most likely will not get more than 60 points.

Boeser if healthy can probably get 65 to 70 points however he never played a full season.

JT Miller had over a ppg last year. I do expect him to put a lot of points beside Petey and on the first pp unit. Don't believe me will get a ppg but I do think he can still get 70 to 75 points.

Of course this assume that there is an 82 game schedule next year
 

Frankie Blueberries

Allergic to draft picks
Jan 27, 2016
9,099
10,546
It's official. JT Miller traded for ....

2019 3rd (71) GK Hugo Alnefelt........Hugo Alnefelt Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com
2012 1st (20) D Shakir Makhamadullin.......Shakir Mukhamadullin Hockey Stats and Profile at hockeydb.com

Now that's a mouthful

Huh, I didn't know that the Canucks were planning on drafting the same players. Do all teams share their draft ranking lists and is there always a 100% consensus across the board? This definitely seems like a fair and objective way to measure trades.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PuckMunchkin

sting101

Registered User
Feb 8, 2012
15,707
14,508
Huh, I didn't know that the Canucks were planning on drafting the same players. Do all teams share their draft ranking lists and is there always a 100% consensus across the board? This definitely seems like a fair and objective way to measure trades.
Take a chill pill. Just having some fun with the names of the guys that ended up being the picks.

Alnefelt to Makhamadullin. Say that one 5 times fast. Probably a few choice words from the commentators if that was the call

20 and 71 for JT Miller.........all day long i do that if it matters
 

Frankie Blueberries

Allergic to draft picks
Jan 27, 2016
9,099
10,546
Take a chill pill. Just having some fun with the names of the guys that ended up being the picks.

Alnefelt to Makhamadullin. Say that one 5 times fast. Probably a few choice words from the commentators if that was the call

20 and 71 for JT Miller.........all day long i do that if it matters

It’s just a pet peeve of mine when someone uses hindsight to evaluate a trade that isn’t indicative of what the value was when the Canucks traded those picks. Like, unless we knew who the Canucks were going to draft with those picks, you can’t really point to the value of them based on another team’s draft selection. Every team has different draft rankings so pointing to the results is kind of pointless.
 
Last edited:

sting101

Registered User
Feb 8, 2012
15,707
14,508
It’s just a pet peeve of mine when someone uses hindsight to evaluate a trade that isn’t indicative of what the value was when the Canucks traded those picks. Like, unless we knew who the Canucks were going to draft with those picks, you can’t really point to the value of them based on another team’s draft selection. Every team has different drank rankings so pointing to the results is kind of pointless.
agree somewhat. But the selection is always linked to the trade and player.

In isolation it's not a great indicator (if were arguing value) but when you start to stack up the similar trades and what the returns of these picks end up being it has some merits to what an expected return is.

fair enough on the PP
 

Frankie Blueberries

Allergic to draft picks
Jan 27, 2016
9,099
10,546
agree somewhat. But the selection is always linked to the trade and player.

In isolation it's not a great indicator (if were arguing value) but when you start to stack up the similar trades and what the returns of these picks end up being it has some merits to what an expected return is.

fair enough on the PP

IMO the only way to really conclude a pick didn’t have value (after the fact) is if none of the players selected after the pick make the NHL. Then you can kind of confirm that the pick wouldn’t have mattered. But if great players are drafted (like Point in the 3rd round), who is to say the Canucks scouting department wouldn’t have identified them? Unlikely, yes, but not impossible. All we can do is speculate so the whole thing is kind of pointless to debate.
 

4Twenty

Registered User
Dec 18, 2018
9,987
11,831
agree somewhat. But the selection is always linked to the trade and player.

In isolation it's not a great indicator (if were arguing value) but when you start to stack up the similar trades and what the returns of these picks end up being it has some merits to what an expected return is.

fair enough on the PP
I’d say it’s a way of tracking the transaction but it’s not the way you’d evaluate it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PuckMunchkin

Frankie Blueberries

Allergic to draft picks
Jan 27, 2016
9,099
10,546
I’d say it’s a way of tracking the transaction but it’s not the way you’d evaluate it.

Yep. It’s like if I gave you $50 and you spent it on worthless junk. It would be silly to conclude that the $50 didn’t hold value based on the result of how you spent it, as I might have spent it differently. The same logic applies for picks that are traded away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PuckMunchkin

sting101

Registered User
Feb 8, 2012
15,707
14,508
IMO the only way to really conclude a pick didn’t have value (after the fact) is if none of the players selected after the pick make the NHL. Then you can kind of confirm that the pick wouldn’t have mattered. But if great players are drafted (like Point in the 3rd round), who is to say the Canucks scouting department wouldn’t have identified them? Unlikely, yes, but not impossible. All we can do is speculate so the whole thing is kind of pointless to debate.
i would say all it takes is every team to have a pick then you could consider it was gonna be a whif. Not multiple picks after.

I’d say it’s a way of tracking the transaction but it’s not the way you’d evaluate it.

agree for the most part, i don't think i was ever contending that. But it's always a measuring stick (more for bragging rights) when you get to evaluate what the team turned it into vs what you got from them. It has relevance
 

supercanuck

Registered User
Mar 2, 2016
2,656
3,139
What are expectations for Miller this upcoming season? Is it reasonable to expect him to replicate last season if he stays on a line with EP (i.e. he has found a new level of play that we can maintain)?
 

PuckMunchkin

Very Nice, Very Evil!
Dec 13, 2006
12,219
9,932
Lapland
What are expectations for Miller this upcoming season? Is it reasonable to expect him to replicate last season if he stays on a line with EP (i.e. he has found a new level of play that we can maintain)?

Id say somewhere between last seasons production and the year before. With more weight on the more recent season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: supercanuck

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,629
5,893
It’s just a pet peeve of mine when someone uses hindsight to evaluate a trade that isn’t indicative of what the value was when the Canucks traded those picks. Like, unless we knew who the Canucks were going to draft with those picks, you can’t really point to the value of them based on another team’s draft selection. Every team has different drank rankings so pointing to the results is kind of pointless.

That's fair but then there's also not much of a way to evaluate trades then. Baertschi for a 2nd a good trade? Certainly in hindsight the trade looks much better for Calgary but what if they drafted Brisebois? The odds of a 2nd round pick developing into an NHL regular is between 20-25%. The last time we had two first round picks we came away with Lind and Gadjovich.

Yep. It’s like if I gave you $50 and you spent it on worthless junk. It would be silly to conclude that the $50 didn’t hold value based on the result of how you spent it, as I might have spent it differently. The same logic applies for picks that are traded away.

But it does depend on what you do with the money. Put it into a zero interest savings account and you're actually losing money. Similarly, draft picks have intrinsic value for sure but if you're bad at drafting and your then the value of a draft pick is, in reality, most likely worth less.

Moneyball/Moneypuck philosophy is identifying players who are undervalued in the market. But that's just in simple terms. When the Canucks signed Samuelsson, Gillis commented on how 20 goal scorers were undervalued in the league. Still, he paid more than anyone for Samuelsson. He also thought that Samuelsson, if given greater offennsive opportunities, would produce more. He did. Miller on paper was everything the Canucks were looking for in a winger. This past season, Miller was everything that the Canucks could have hoped for. Was it a fluke? Perhaps there was a bit of that but the value of the player is not just the value that was given up. One man's (or woman's) trash is another man's (or woman's) gold.
 

vanuck

Now with 100% less Benning!
Dec 28, 2009
16,797
4,012
If Miller's next season is like his last, what would his value be at the next trade deadline?

IF Miller keeps up this level of production (at PPG) next year he'd probably net a 1st + another prospect. So far it seems only the mid- and lower-tier forwards are being squeezed in terms of market value.
 
  • Like
Reactions: F A N and lindgren

BB06

Registered User
Jun 1, 2020
2,973
4,321
So what's the expectation for him this year?

As the year went on he got stronger with the Canucks. After Jan 1st these are his number

54 points in 43 games which include his 18 points in 17 playoff games.
 

Didalee Hed

I’m trying to understand
Sep 14, 2019
1,963
2,005
Both are 'win now' trades..The Gudbranson trade was made with the intent of bolstering the blueline in the failed ' compete on the fly' era...

Benning didnt think this team was a lottery team last summer..after he landed his 1D, he was ready to gamble...and it paid off..Benning was right, Linden was wrong.
What was Benning right, linden wrong about?
 

bandwagonesque

I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
Mar 5, 2014
7,099
5,400
agree somewhat. But the selection is always linked to the trade and player.
It shouldn't be, and I don't think it actually is for many people. The value of a pick is in the opportunity it affords to draft a player of your choice, not in whether the choice you made after having secured that opportunity was the correct one, and this is pretty obvious.
 

Pastor Of Muppetz

Registered User
Oct 1, 2017
25,986
15,856
What was Benning right, linden wrong about?
The year is 2018

Benning (and ownership) were right that his team was good enough to compete for a playoff spot..He took action in the 2019 off season

Linden was wrong in that the team needed a 4 year ‘slow cook’ rebuild..which would have lasted till 2022

it was over this disagreement that Linden left the organization.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iloovRMB

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->