Proposal: Which JT Miller Deal do you prefer?

[BCNate]

Straight futures is exactly what we need.

I disagree. I'd like to target a trade that has a young, established NHL RD, and futures. So many D prospects excel at lower levels, then don't transition to the NHL game. That is too big a risk for me.

I'd be willing to bet that at least 2 of Morrow, Lundkvist, Mukhamadulin, Grans become nothing more than 3rd pairing D. That is a huge gamble.

 

[Canucker]

I disagree. I'd like to target a trade that has a young, established NHL RD, and futures. So many D prospects excel at lower levels, then don't transition to the NHL game. That is too big a risk for me.

I'd be willing to bet that at least 2 of Morrow, Lundkvist, Mukhamadulin, Grans become nothing more than 3rd pairing D. That is a huge gamble.

Personally, I'd take that risk because it comes with better additional pieces...Marino might be a decent established defenseman, but the rest of the deal is meh...same with the Bruins deal and Carlo....meh.

Deals like LA and NJ come with blue chip prospects as well as higher end defensive prospects, and the first rounder...I take that all day, every day.

 

[VanJack]

Voted the Rangers deal, but I wouldn't likely do any of these deals. OK with Kratsov, but Lundkvist is a smallish, puck moving d-man who plays the same side as Hughes and Rathbone. And the 2023 first rounder will be well into the back half of the first round, given the Rangers likely placing next season. So no immediate help there for the Canucks.

Now if the Blueshirts were willing to swap out Kaako for Lundkvist, then we're talking.

 

[Tomatoes11]

I disagree. I'd like to target a trade that has a young, established NHL RD, and futures. So many D prospects excel at lower levels, then don't transition to the NHL game. That is too big a risk for me.

I'd be willing to bet that at least 2 of Morrow, Lundkvist, Mukhamadulin, Grans become nothing more than 3rd pairing D. That is a huge gamble.

Need to take risks get out of our purgatory. No pain no gain.

The Duchene trade was all futures and some throw in projects. Two hit big. You just have to get back fair value and enough futures that 1 or 2 hits. And identify one of the non established projects are trending really well from a star defence factory in Nashville.

Sure there’s some risks but it’s not as dangerous as most think if you do it right like with stocks. Especially if you trust your scouts.

Besides, there’s always the risk that a young roster player regresses and tanks out too. Less risk yes, but less ceiling too. In our situation, take the ceiling.

We should actually include Nashville in on this 3 way as well now that I think about it… lol

Or just trade with them if they can’t resign forsberg. Jeannott, best d prospect that provides The attributes Hughes lacks, and 2023 1st unprotected. Doubt Nashville wants miller or does it though lol.

 

[Canucker]

Voted the Rangers deal, but I wouldn't likely do any of these deals. OK with Kratsov, but Lundkvist is a smallish, puck moving d-man who plays the same side as Hughes and Rathbone. And the 2023 first rounder will be well into the back half of the first round, given the Rangers likely placing next season. So no immediate help there for the Canucks.

Now if the Blueshirts were willing to swap out Kaako for Lundkvist, then we're talking.

Lundkvist plays the right side.

 

[BCNate]

Personally, I'd take that risk because it comes with better additional pieces...Marino might be a decent established defenseman, but the rest of the deal is meh...same with the Bruins deal and Carlo....meh.

Deals like LA and NJ come with blue chip prospects as well as higher end defensive prospects, and the first rounder...I take that all day, every day.

I get it, and understand the why, I'm just not as comfortable with that.

Our history of big trades have always had a key NHL piece in the trade, and it has served us well:
Linden got us McCabe and Bert
Bure got us Jovanovski
Bert got us Luongo

I don't include the Luongo or Kesler deal as they had different circumstances around them than a potential Miller deal.

I picked the Peeke and #12 deal. We get a big RHD coming off a strong season, as well as the highest draft pick option.

Like I said, I get why 70+% have gone with straight futures, but I do feel that with the age of JR and BB, any deal will have at least 1 player who can step in and contribute next season.

Just my 2 cents

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

NJD are now in a "make the playoffs" window. They have two or three young players that might have issues. Zacha (25), Bratt (23) and Boqvist (23)


Lots of contenders would love to get their hands on him but do they have enough to trade? Maybe Washington, they look like they might drop in the standings, a couple of their first, 2023 & 2024

I get that NJD are in a 'make the playoffs window' but I still dont see them coughing up a 2nd OA for JT Miller....even with our 15 OA chucked in with it.

They may part with Boqvist.

 

[kcunac]

Straight futures is exactly what we need.

I mean, yes our prospect pool is completely depleted but the organization’s biggest need is a defensively responsible young but established NHL top 4 RHD.

Also, don’t these packages usually include player, pick, prospect?

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I get it, and understand the why, I'm just not as comfortable with that.

Our history of big trades have always had a key NHL piece in the trade, and it has served us well:
Linden got us McCabe and Bert
Bure got us Jovanovski
Bert got us Luongo

I don't include the Luongo or Kesler deal as they had different circumstances around them than a potential Miller deal.

I picked the Peeke and #12 deal. We get a big RHD coming off a strong season, as well as the highest draft pick option.

Like I said, I get why 70+% have gone with straight futures, but I do feel that with the age of JR and BB, any deal will have at least 1 player who can step in and contribute next season.

Just my 2 cents

Agreed, JR said the team would be retooling, and gave a fairly short window to achieve that...We're currently using up the prime years of Pettersson,Hughes and Demko..So I'd say its a given that the prime asset coming back in the Miller trade is going to be a player that they can immediately plug in.

 

[theguardianII]

Agreed, JR said the team would be retooling, and gave a fairly short window to achieve that...We're currently using up the prime years of Pettersson,Hughes and Demko..So I'd say its a given that the prime asset coming back in the Miller trade is going to be a player that they can immediately plug in.

I think the only folks worrying about those players windows are fans that think about players and not TEAM.
Ya, they are important but this group was so built wrong their windows were going to be gone long before they ever won anything.
They were here for entertainment and to supply fans with hope, which is way easier to sell than actual improvement.
Every year under Benning there were thousands of fans that went with hope rather than numbers.
If losing it was all about how Hughes looked, how Pettersson played, how Demko stopped pucks.
These guys became assets under Benning, entertainers to put bums in seats.

After all these years under Benning lots of fans have been conditioned to support hope and every year expect something different no matter the outcome.
Benning had the fans doing the same over and over and expecting different results, that is an adhoc definition of insanity.

Numbers don't lie, they are just numbers and the goal of all sports teams is to be the best, be winners, to have the last win every season.

Forget these assets windows and think about the formation of the team in 5 years.

Demko's window might be now after those hip operations, maybe a trade after all the team has Ian Clarke who seems to be a goalie whisperer, they all performed better after his instruction

Lindros was traded and Philly never won a cup with him but Quebec/Colorado won two. And Quebec fans, back then were outraged at the trade.

This team is not called the Vancouver Demko's, Hughes' or Pettersson's. That may have been a mistake with the Sedins, a trade in their last year would have pole vaulted the rebuild and then resign them the next season to retire of maybe play out the season. They didn't and Vancouver didn't rebuild, they just sank into the bottom of the league, not even the mushy middle.

 

[kcunac]

Maybe it’s obvious, but with prospects there’s always asymmetric information. The team dealing will always have a better read on whether the prospect could bust, so a buyer always has to be extra weary when trading for prospects. So I often prefer picks and established players generally, though there are some exceptions. For example, LAK with their stacked RHD pipeline. Still, one has to be very savvy when acquiring prospects.

 

[MS]

Maybe it’s obvious, but with prospects there’s always asymmetric information. The team dealing will always have a better read on whether the prospect could bust, so a buyer always has to be extra weary when trading for prospects. So I often prefer picks and established players generally, though there are some exceptions. For example, LAK with their stacked RHD pipeline. Still, one has to be very savvy when acquiring prospects.

100%

GMs are always loath to move prospects so when it does happen it's usually because after a couple years in that team's system they've identified warts or personality issues they don't like and are selling high.

Ottawa giving us Dahlen in the Burrows trade is probably an example of this. It seemed like a great return, but then we saw the same warts and lack of compete/drive or willingness to play in the AHL that Ottawa was probably already aware of. And same thing with Goldobin being traded by SJ on the same day.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I think the only folks worrying about those players windows are fans that think about players and not TEAM.
Ya, they are important but this group was so built wrong their windows were going to be gone long before they ever won anything.
They were here for entertainment and to supply fans with hope, which is way easier to sell than actual improvement.
Every year under Benning there were thousands of fans that went with hope rather than numbers.
If losing it was all about how Hughes looked, how Pettersson played, how Demko stopped pucks.
These guys became assets under Benning, entertainers to put bums in seats.

After all these years under Benning lots of fans have been conditioned to support hope and every year expect something different no matter the outcome.
Benning had the fans doing the same over and over and expecting different results, that is an adhoc definition of insanity.

Numbers don't lie, they are just numbers and the goal of all sports teams is to be the best, be winners, to have the last win every season.

Forget these assets windows and think about the formation of the team in 5 years.

Demko's window might be now after those hip operations, maybe a trade after all the team has Ian Clarke who seems to be a goalie whisperer, they all performed better after his instruction

Lindros was traded and Philly never won a cup with him but Quebec/Colorado won two. And Quebec fans, back then were outraged at the trade.

This team is not called the Vancouver Demko's, Hughes' or Pettersson's. That may have been a mistake with the Sedins, a trade in their last year would have pole vaulted the rebuild and then resign them the next season to retire of maybe play out the season. They didn't and Vancouver didn't rebuild, they just sank into the bottom of the league, not even the mushy middle.

If you forget about your top core players windows,(and what it takes to keep them motivated) and wonder where you'll be in 5 years..it wont be pretty.
They're not trading Demko..this has been spelled out numerous times.
The Sedins had NMC's...and it takes two to tango as far as any movement is concerned...They wanted to play their entire careers for the Canucks.
The Canucks window to rebuild was 2013-17..and they didnt go in that direction..They chose to compete for the playoffs right up till 2017 when Linden could finally say the word rebuild.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Maybe it’s obvious, but with prospects there’s always asymmetric information. The team dealing will always have a better read on whether the prospect could bust, so a buyer always has to be extra weary when trading for prospects. So I often prefer picks and established players generally, though there are some exceptions. For example, LAK with their stacked RHD pipeline. Still, one has to be very savvy when acquiring prospects.

Yeah, it’s too bad previous management never got this memo. Vey, Goldobin, Clendening, Pouliot, Pedan, Etem, Baertschi, Larsen, etc. Oof

 

[theguardianII]

If you forget about your top core players windows,(and what it takes to keep them motivated) and wonder where you'll be in 5 years..it wont be pretty.
They're not trading Demko..this has been spelled out numerous times.
The Sedins had NMC's...and it takes two to tango as far as any movement is concerned...They wanted to play their entire careers for the Canucks.
The Canucks window to rebuild was 2013-17..and they didnt go in that direction..They chose to compete for the playoffs right up till 2017 when Linden could finally say the word rebuild.

That would be the last management group.
This one isn't overly impressed apart from Demko who they have really blown his tires up on, a very valuable asset.
The Sedins stated they were never asked. Just not being asked is the failure of management.
And if they that devoted and loved the team that much they would have sacrificed two months for the future of the team.

No the time for a retool was in 2013 to 2015, no goalies would have had them at the bottom without decimating the entire team, ala Tampa and other teams that dropped a bunch and then rebounded.
They were never going to bottom out with Schnides or Luongo in net, but Lack?

They traded off the board to get Horvat #9 in 2013, the heavily rumoured Gillis/etal pick for 2014 was Larkin and then the rest of the 2014 draft selections and 2015 they would have been bottomed right out and it was the last year of a guaranteed top three pick.

Horvat, Larkin and ? Eichel/McD? Hanafin? The veteran defence would still be intact, The Sedins around to mentor the forwards, Horvat to replace Kesler

Ahhh fantasy is so all encompassing, what coulda been, sort of like some fans projecting ultimate success on 3 players.

Use of the cap has to be flexible but there needs to be a plan.
Pettersson cannot be THE MAN and have another start like last year.
Hughes cannot be the player THAT NEEDS HELP to play defence
Demko cannot be the ONLY REASON the team is competitive

Those three players cannot be the ONLY pieces in a long term plan.
I am sure on their "board" players are listed as digits, 1A 2B....numbers that relate to cost benefit and results.
Line one - 20 mi
Line two - 15 mil
Line three - 3 mil
line four - 3 mil

top two D - 16 mil
Three - four - 9 mil
Five - six - 4 mil

Goal (both)- 7 mil

Something like that, assigned numbers because in order to make deals the man making the decision cannot be buddies with those he has to trade.


One other thing about this new management group and JR sure sounds like this.

When there is a new prime male Lion in the pride, the first thing he does is kill all the cubs.
If they sift through the team with as much diligence as they have the upper management there will be BIG changes fast.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I’m sure that all non playoff teams ..NJD,CBJ,PHI are thinking this way ..They’re not coughing up their high picks for a soon to be 30 year old.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

Agreed, JR said the team would be retooling, and gave a fairly short window to achieve that...We're currently using up the prime years of Pettersson,Hughes and Demko..So I'd say its a given that the prime asset coming back in the Miller trade is going to be a player that they can immediately plug in.

I'm not seeing how we can be competitive within the next couple years, regardless of the package we receive from the JTM trade. Say you take the Pens deal and get back an immediate piece in Marino, an established young RSD that is one of our biggest need. Then what? Are we a playoff team now? Who is going to replace Miller's 99 pts? We still have depth issues up front and on the backend. Also moving Miller's $5m cap hit with Marino's $4m, you aren't opening up any cap space to make more additions. So what is the end game if you take a "now" package and try to rush back to compete? We move up from a bottom 12 team to a bubble team at best, and get swept in convincing fashion ala Nashville? Missing out on some higher upside assets only to be first round fodder for the Avs? I would be disappointed if they go that path.

 

[MS]

I was really hoping that Philly would lose their minds and go full Benning but there is only one Jim Benning.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I'm not seeing how we can be competitive within the next couple years, regardless of the package we receive from the JTM trade. Say you take the Pens deal and get back an immediate piece in Marino, an established young RSD that is one of our biggest need. Then what? Are we a playoff team now? Who is going to replace Miller's 99 pts? We still have depth issues up front and on the backend. Also moving Miller's $5m cap hit with Marino's $4m, you aren't opening up any cap space to make more additions. So what is the end game if you take a "now" package and try to rush back to compete? We move up from a bottom 12 team to a bubble team at best, and get swept in convincing fashion ala Nashville? Missing out on some higher upside assets only to be first round fodder for the Avs? I would be disappointed if they go that path.

I am one of the few that are holding out hope that JTM will sign a team friendly deal, but realistically, its looking more and more like he's departing.

When you look at who is going to replace Millers 99 points, you would have to look at Pettersson who was MIA for 75% of the season..Boeser who had a poor year (well documented)..It will be more scoring by committee.(secondary scoring)...When a player leaves, its an opportunity for another one to step up....although the loss of Miller does leave a gigantic hole.

I think they will be in the pack of bubble playoff teams next season...(with Boudreau at the helm).

The end game, is to get younger and build depth around our existing core...Its not to hoard picks and start another core.

 

[Vector]

I was really hoping that Philly would lose their minds and go full Benning but there is only one Jim Benning.

Well, Jim Benning went full Benning right before the draft last year. There's lots of time for Fletcher to go full Benning.

 

[Tomatoes11]

I was really hoping that Philly would lose their minds and go full Benning but there is only one Jim Benning.

Yup he is definitely one of a kind.

 

[Tomatoes11]

We should be looking at something like the Duchene trade for Miller. Girard was a prospect but he wasn’t established. Correct me if I am wrong but he was less established than Brayden Schneider no? No one was established or a roster player unless you count the hamburgerler throw in. I don’t. Safely established young RHD probably cost more than Miller already so there’s going to be a risk element regardless with whatever we get in return so might as well shoot for the moon.

So yeah, definitely all futures but as many as you can so at least 1 or 2 hits.

If whatever we get busts at least it’s not a total loss because we would have the 8 million in cap put aside for a miller extension to play with and we won’t have another anchor contract in 3 years ala OEL.

 

[Hit the post]

Yup he is definitely one of a kind.

He broke the mold when he was made.

 

[TryamkinPleaseReturn]

When a team signs another team's RFA they have to pay compensation in draft picks. For tampering, there are punishments and sometimes compensation for the abused team. If a team violates the salary cap, there's supposed to be a penalty, usually in terms of money and draft picks. For example, as we all probably remember, Vancouver was punished (...retroactively...) for Luongo's contract.

Shouldn't there be some kind of compensation for Benning destroying our salary cap while getting rid of all our draft picks in the process? To make things right? Shouldn't the Canucks have some of their assets returned or compensated for?

 

[MS]

We should be looking at something like the Duchene trade for Miller. Girard was a prospect but he wasn’t established. Correct me if I am wrong but he was less established than Brayden Schneider no? No one was established or a roster player unless you count the hamburgerler throw in. I don’t. Safely established young RHD probably cost more than Miller already so there’s going to be a risk element regardless with whatever we get in return so might as well shoot for the moon.

So yeah, definitely all futures but as many as you can so at least 1 or 2 hits.

If whatever we get busts at least it’s not a total loss because we would have the 8 million in cap put aside for a miller extension to play with and we won’t have another anchor contract in 3 years ala OEL.

We just need to take the best value with the best centerpiece. Quality over quantity.

That might be (although unlikely) a top-5 pick in this year's draft. It might be a drafted player not established in the NHL yet. Or it might be a young roster player.

If the two best deals are that gross NYR futures package rumoured in the winter vs. a Carolina deal involving Necas, you take the Carolina deal without a second thought.