Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Arbour
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:54 am

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Arbour »

2Fingers wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 11:37 am
Except you haven't calculated what it would cost to move him in 3+ years?

Thats the kicker, what would they have to add to move him once he is no longer worth his cap hit? Probably a 1st regardless of how his salary is structured. Not many teams are taking on other players garbage anymore unless it is worth it.
It appears you think Miller is going to be absolutely useless at 32, such that he is garbage. Really? Look at the league there are any number of 32 yr. old players and older who are anything but garbage. The Canucks would be more than fortunate if Miller was relegated to a second or third line centre at the end of his contract since it would mean they had that many more talented centres in the system.

Further more players are payed on a per diem basis so if the Canucks aren't cup contenders, someone like Miller at the end of his contract with the Canucks becomes an extremely attractive trade deadline acquisition, should he wish to be moved to a contender.
User avatar
donlever
CC Legend
Posts: 10291
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:07 pm

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by donlever »

Arbour wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 2:10 pm The Canucks would be more than fortunate if Miller was relegated to a second or third line centre at the end of his contract since it would mean they had that many more talented centres in the system.
...been thinking on this for a while Arbour and the linear permutations of such a thought process.

Was going to pen a post based on a theorem of Miller being the defacto #3 centre in the latter half of the deal and how we could manifest that from a Management versus current player versus future incoming prospect versus cap hit, incremental cap increase level.

So blah blah blah...I agree.
DeLevering since 1999.
ESQ
MVP
MVP
Posts: 4477
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by ESQ »

Arbour wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 8:58 am
In every UFA situation the balance becomes measure potential worth in terms of contractual term and price. In Miller's case I would speculate any negotiation is going to be the higher the dollar amount the shorter the term and vice versa.
Unlike other UFA decisions, where you are calculating cap hit, term, and ice time/fit, with Miller you also have the opportunity cost of all the assets you miss out on.

Look at Colorado, trading Duchene with 2 years left for Girard and the pick that became Bowen Byram. While their contention window was just starting to open.

So, if you keep Miller you're also foregoing an extra 1st and A+ prospect at least. That's in addition to the opportunity cost of players you lose or are unable to acquire due to $9+mil being committed to one player.

[/quote]
User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 13355
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Meds »

Arbour wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 2:10 pm
2Fingers wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 11:37 am
Except you haven't calculated what it would cost to move him in 3+ years?

Thats the kicker, what would they have to add to move him once he is no longer worth his cap hit? Probably a 1st regardless of how his salary is structured. Not many teams are taking on other players garbage anymore unless it is worth it.
It appears you think Miller is going to be absolutely useless at 32, such that he is garbage. Really? Look at the league there are any number of 32 yr. old players and older who are anything but garbage. The Canucks would be more than fortunate if Miller was relegated to a second or third line centre at the end of his contract since it would mean they had that many more talented centres in the system.

Further more players are payed on a per diem basis so if the Canucks aren't cup contenders, someone like Miller at the end of his contract with the Canucks becomes an extremely attractive trade deadline acquisition, should he wish to be moved to a contender.
I don't think anyone here is thinking Miller will be absolutely useless, but if he were to sign a $9M x 6 and then drop back to being a 60 point contributor at a time when Pettersson and any other young players require big paydays (3 years from now), then one has to weigh is usefulness against the expense of him being here and what that means to building around a younger core.

I think if we had won a cup in the last 4 years, and were a competitive team in the playoffs with a decently stocked cupboard of prospects in Abby, and some quality young players who were already contributing while on team friendly deals for another few years, well then sure, you don't bat and eye at signing Miller.

JT Miller is NOT in a class with guys like Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, Stamkos, and Kane. Those guys are super talents that produce consistently year in and out and the only reason for them to notch anything less than 70 points is because they played fewer than 70 games.

I think Miller fits with the guys below.....

Jonathan Toews (33) - 37 points in 71 games
Jamie Benn (31) - 46 points in 82 games
Alexander Radulov (34) - 22 points in 71 games
Niklas Backstrom (33) - 31 points in 47 games
Phil Kessel (33) - 52 points in 82 games
Anze Kopitar (33) - 67 points in 81 games
Blake Wheeler (34) - 60 points in 65 games
Claude Giroux (33) - 65 points in 75 games
Jakub Voracek (31) - 62 points in 79 games
James van Riemsdyk (32) - 38 points in 82 games
Logan Couture (33) - 56 points in 77 games

All of these players have a cap hit north of $6M, and only Radulov makes less than $8M. They are still good players, however all of them have been top line contributors for the majority of their careers, and only 3 of them (Couture, Backstrom, and Benn) have more than 2 years left on their contracts. None of them inked their current deals at 30 years of age, which is the crux of the matter here.
User avatar
UWSaint
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by UWSaint »

ESQ wrote: Sat May 14, 2022 5:07 pm I don't buy the "best market is the off-season" drivel, when literally any team could fit Miller's cap hit, especially with $2 mil retained.
The markets are different, and its not drivel if the claim is more modest -- for this player and what is needed, the offseason is a better time to make a trade. Even that statement is subject to the prevailing conditions in the offseason market (what's the cap adjustment, what's the depth of UFA's available, etc.), but there are a few things that are structurally different about the offseason vs. the trade deadline.

The main item is the nature of the return. What doesn't get traded (much) at the deadline is a player who is making a meaningful impact for the team acquiring the player. To be sure, roster players are traded at the deadline from the "buying" team, but this is generally because of roster or cap limitations -- the team will have to make a player waiver eligible so they might as well move a player as it is; the team would have too many skaters in the organization; the team needs to move a little salary to fit under the cap. In the offseason, though, a team has an improved chance at acquiring a player who plays a different player or who is simply a younger version of the player being moved. Another difference is that suitors expand to not only those making a push for the Cup, but also those who think they can be in the position of the traded player in the near future, if not as a total replacement, as a competent one. This "increased market" has pros and cons -- there's more on the market potentially as well as more potential buyers -- and how it shakes out can determine whether in any one snapshot it makes sense to move on from a player.

So adding these facets together into an example, the Jets traded Trouba (who either had a year on his contract or was a year from UFA) for a 1st and Neal Pionk. Pionk was a 24 year old NHL caliber defenseman worth of a 5-6 pair who was also a late developer (undrafted) and was showing progress towards a higher ceiling. Now, the Jets were a playoff team during the Spring of 2019, so they didn't have the option of being a deadline seller and the Rangers were in sell mode and wouldn't have a premium on acquiring Trouba for a couple of months.

But at the end of the day, the most important thing about the differences between the offseason and deadline markets is this: JT Miller was almost certainly "available" at this deadline. If not being actively market by the club, there's no way Allvin took a call from a GM and said, "we are not interested in hearing what you have to say, JT's untouchable." To be sure, the club's willingness to trade Miller factored in the collateral impacts to the club still clawing for a shot at the playoffs and the less transparent evaluation of the team as a whole, but I am fairly confident the club was running the marginal benefits (or not) of trading at the deadline. Of course the club could have got the evaluation wrong according to the calculus Esq. or Mëds or whoever might use, but my sense is that they know what they are doing and they aren't particularly emotionally invested (or sunk costs invested) into the current composition of the team, and therefore were pretty steel-eyed about their evaluation of offers and their demands.

The last thing to consider in all of this is that unless Miller is injured or has a huge decline in performance next year (like 60 points or fewer), he'll still be a very tradeable asset at the deadline next year. So what's given up is the marginal value of "two playoff runs," and I've never studied the question, but my guess is that the difference is a little less that you might imagine when you are looking at higher end players.
Hono_rary Canadian
Arbour
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:54 am

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Arbour »

Mëds wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 9:35 am I don't think anyone here is thinking Miller will be absolutely useless, but if he were to sign a $9M x 6 and then drop back to being a 60 point contributor at a time when Pettersson and any other young players require big paydays (3 years from now), then one has to weigh is usefulness against the expense of him being here and what that means to building around a younger core.

I think if we had won a cup in the last 4 years, and were a competitive team in the playoffs with a decently stocked cupboard of prospects in Abby, and some quality young players who were already contributing while on team friendly deals for another few years, well then sure, you don't bat and eye at signing Miller.

JT Miller is NOT in a class with guys like Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, Stamkos, and Kane. Those guys are super talents that produce consistently year in and out and the only reason for them to notch anything less than 70 points is because they played fewer than 70 games.

I think Miller fits with the guys below.....

Jonathan Toews (33) - 37 points in 71 games
Jamie Benn (31) - 46 points in 82 games
Alexander Radulov (34) - 22 points in 71 games
Niklas Backstrom (33) - 31 points in 47 games
Phil Kessel (33) - 52 points in 82 games
Anze Kopitar (33) - 67 points in 81 games
Blake Wheeler (34) - 60 points in 65 games
Claude Giroux (33) - 65 points in 75 games
Jakub Voracek (31) - 62 points in 79 games
James van Riemsdyk (32) - 38 points in 82 games
Logan Couture (33) - 56 points in 77 games

All of these players have a cap hit north of $6M, and only Radulov makes less than $8M. They are still good players, however all of them have been top line contributors for the majority of their careers, and only 3 of them (Couture, Backstrom, and Benn) have more than 2 years left on their contracts. None of them inked their current deals at 30 years of age, which is the crux of the matter here.
Your point is more than valid. I'm not advocating Miller be signed for a high price contract with a six year term. Boudreau stirred the pot and seem to find chemistry amongst the present players, a lot of it driven by Miller, and that in a pro league is a valuable commodity. Miller with Petey on his wing was an effective line offensively, and if it takes Miller to make Petey flourish over the next three years so be it.

The Canucks have three thirty goal scorers and one each at 23 and 19 respectively. I appreciate that trading Miller when his value is highest may get picks and prospects, but absent some Allvin voodoo most GM's aren't going to give up on a young player that's a sure thing. You would be looking at 4 yrs at best to fill what Miller gives now, and disrupt what seems to be a team that is finally finding its way.

Yes things still need to be done in respect to player personnel, but having core pieces such as Miller, Horvat, Demko, Petey and Hughes for the next four years is a decent start in having a team that can hopefully compete in the playoffs.

[Mod Edit - quote fixed]
Arbour
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:54 am

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Arbour »

Sorry screwed up the quote.

[Mod Edit - fixed]
User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 13355
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Meds »

UWSaint wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 10:41 am
ESQ wrote: Sat May 14, 2022 5:07 pm I don't buy the "best market is the off-season" drivel, when literally any team could fit Miller's cap hit, especially with $2 mil retained.
The markets are different, and its not drivel if the claim is more modest -- for this player and what is needed, the offseason is a better time to make a trade. Even that statement is subject to the prevailing conditions in the offseason market (what's the cap adjustment, what's the depth of UFA's available, etc.), but there are a few things that are structurally different about the offseason vs. the trade deadline.

The main item is the nature of the return. What doesn't get traded (much) at the deadline is a player who is making a meaningful impact for the team acquiring the player. To be sure, roster players are traded at the deadline from the "buying" team, but this is generally because of roster or cap limitations -- the team will have to make a player waiver eligible so they might as well move a player as it is; the team would have too many skaters in the organization; the team needs to move a little salary to fit under the cap. In the offseason, though, a team has an improved chance at acquiring a player who plays a different player or who is simply a younger version of the player being moved. Another difference is that suitors expand to not only those making a push for the Cup, but also those who think they can be in the position of the traded player in the near future, if not as a total replacement, as a competent one. This "increased market" has pros and cons -- there's more on the market potentially as well as more potential buyers -- and how it shakes out can determine whether in any one snapshot it makes sense to move on from a player.

So adding these facets together into an example, the Jets traded Trouba (who either had a year on his contract or was a year from UFA) for a 1st and Neal Pionk. Pionk was a 24 year old NHL caliber defenseman worth of a 5-6 pair who was also a late developer (undrafted) and was showing progress towards a higher ceiling. Now, the Jets were a playoff team during the Spring of 2019, so they didn't have the option of being a deadline seller and the Rangers were in sell mode and wouldn't have a premium on acquiring Trouba for a couple of months.

But at the end of the day, the most important thing about the differences between the offseason and deadline markets is this: JT Miller was almost certainly "available" at this deadline. If not being actively market by the club, there's no way Allvin took a call from a GM and said, "we are not interested in hearing what you have to say, JT's untouchable." To be sure, the club's willingness to trade Miller factored in the collateral impacts to the club still clawing for a shot at the playoffs and the less transparent evaluation of the team as a whole, but I am fairly confident the club was running the marginal benefits (or not) of trading at the deadline. Of course the club could have got the evaluation wrong according to the calculus Esq. or Mëds or whoever might use, but my sense is that they know what they are doing and they aren't particularly emotionally invested (or sunk costs invested) into the current composition of the team, and therefore were pretty steel-eyed about their evaluation of offers and their demands.

The last thing to consider in all of this is that unless Miller is injured or has a huge decline in performance next year (like 60 points or fewer), he'll still be a very tradeable asset at the deadline next year. So what's given up is the marginal value of "two playoff runs," and I've never studied the question, but my guess is that the difference is a little less that you might imagine when you are looking at higher end players.
I don't think I ever advocated for trading Miller this season. If he's to be moved it is in the off-season this summer, and that is when you apply my calculus because that's when you'll have an idea of what he's looking for next year.
Arbour
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:54 am

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Arbour »

UWSaint wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 10:41 am But at the end of the day, the most important thing about the differences between the offseason and deadline markets is this: JT Miller was almost certainly "available" at this deadline. If not being actively market by the club, there's no way Allvin took a call from a GM and said, "we are not interested in hearing what you have to say, JT's untouchable." To be sure, the club's willingness to trade Miller factored in the collateral impacts to the club still clawing for a shot at the playoffs and the less transparent evaluation of the team as a whole, but I am fairly confident the club was running the marginal benefits (or not) of trading at the deadline. Of course the club could have got the evaluation wrong according to the calculus Esq. or Mëds or whoever might use, but my sense is that they know what they are doing and they aren't particularly emotionally invested (or sunk costs invested) into the current composition of the team, and therefore were pretty steel-eyed about their evaluation of offers and their demands.

The last thing to consider in all of this is that unless Miller is injured or has a huge decline in performance next year (like 60 points or fewer), he'll still be a very tradeable asset at the deadline next year. So what's given up is the marginal value of "two playoff runs," and I've never studied the question, but my guess is that the difference is a little less that you might imagine when you are looking at higher end players.
Teams are also allowed a certain cap overage in the off season as well, which makes it easier to move assets around in the off season as long as their ducks are in order by opening day.

As to your above points out there is no doubt the Canucks fielded inquiries about Miller at this years TD, and I as you state even at next years TD Miller still remains a very tradeable asset. I would add and can only assume the business side also weighs heavy on any decision management makes in their considerations regarding Miller. Trading your best forward and then not making the playoffs would be a PR nightmare, reflected no doubt in ticket sales and in particular season ticket sales, and while fans don't care about playoff revenues the PHO had better.
Arbour
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 802
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 11:54 am

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Arbour »

ESQ wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 8:43 am
Arbour wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 8:58 am
In every UFA situation the balance becomes measure potential worth in terms of contractual term and price. In Miller's case I would speculate any negotiation is going to be the higher the dollar amount the shorter the term and vice versa.
Unlike other UFA decisions, where you are calculating cap hit, term, and ice time/fit, with Miller you also have the opportunity cost of all the assets you miss out on.

Look at Colorado, trading Duchene with 2 years left for Girard and the pick that became Bowen Byram. While their contention window was just starting to open.

So, if you keep Miller you're also foregoing an extra 1st and A+ prospect at least. That's in addition to the opportunity cost of players you lose or are unable to acquire due to $9+mil being committed to one player.
Yes there are opportunity costs, but a can't miss A+ prospect is not going to get traded. GM's in this league are protective of that kind of asset, unless they are getting something similar in return that better suites their needs, then it becomes a hockey trade. Yes Miller will get you picks and prospects, but their value will be better measured down the road.

Rutherford and Allvin don't appear to be treating the Canucks as if they are in a complete rebuild. I would suggest their record under Boudreau in spite of their shortcomings, is evidence that there are foundational players that should be built around. Miller being one of them. Again that assumes Miller's contractual demands fit logically into that end.
User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 13355
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Meds »

Arbour wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 2:29 pm
ESQ wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 8:43 am
Arbour wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 8:58 am
In every UFA situation the balance becomes measure potential worth in terms of contractual term and price. In Miller's case I would speculate any negotiation is going to be the higher the dollar amount the shorter the term and vice versa.
Unlike other UFA decisions, where you are calculating cap hit, term, and ice time/fit, with Miller you also have the opportunity cost of all the assets you miss out on.

Look at Colorado, trading Duchene with 2 years left for Girard and the pick that became Bowen Byram. While their contention window was just starting to open.

So, if you keep Miller you're also foregoing an extra 1st and A+ prospect at least. That's in addition to the opportunity cost of players you lose or are unable to acquire due to $9+mil being committed to one player.
Yes there are opportunity costs, but a can't miss A+ prospect is not going to get traded. GM's in this league are protective of that kind of asset, unless they are getting something similar in return that better suites their needs, then it becomes a hockey trade. Yes Miller will get you picks and prospects, but their value will be better measured down the road.

Rutherford and Allvin don't appear to be treating the Canucks as if they are in a complete rebuild. I would suggest their record under Boudreau in spite of their shortcomings, is evidence that there are foundational players that should be built around. Miller being one of them. Again that assumes Miller's contractual demands fit logically into that end.
I agree, the only way to truly get that A+ prospect without trading something of equal value is to draft said prospect.....you almost have to gamble and trade Miller to a team that thinks he puts them over the top but your own assessment makes you think that things could easily go off the rails and you secure yourself a lottery pick.

Basically I'm saying that IF you move Miller, for the future of the team, you have to move him in exchange for picks to a team that is not a playoff contender.
User avatar
UWSaint
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by UWSaint »

Mëds wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 6:02 am Basically I'm saying that IF you move Miller, for the future of the team, you have to move him in exchange for picks to a team that is not a playoff contender.
I disagree. Playoff contenders -- those who fail in the playoffs -- are forever looking for that ONE player that would put them over the edge. A player who profiles as a "competitor." Or maybe they need another guy at the dot because they couldn't win faceoffs or lacked the up the middle punch.

These teams -- especially with a short window for their core -- will be willing to move prospects or young players that don't fit their (often knee-jerk) analysis about why the playoffs were a failure or who aren't going to peak fast enough to make a meaningful difference.

What makes JT Miller so attractive to the team that thinks they are a player away is that he profiles as so many parts of that "attitude" or skill set a team who lost a playoff round because (1) they played on their heels; (2) they were soft in the middle; (3) they ran into a scoring drought. The list can go on and on -- he's a power forward, he's a playmaker, he's a sniper.

To be sure, trading a close-as-you-get-to-sure-thing-next-season-player to a playoff team means no lottery pick -- unless they traded for one, they won't have it at the draft and if they are right they are a player away, they won't be a lotter team the following year. But if the team has prospects or young players? These players move. Tyler Seguin was traded in the off season at 21 years old because he didn't profile with the attention to detail and courage the Bruins wanted. (The Bruins did the same thing for basically the same reasons with Phil Kessel when he was 22, even though Phil had been fine in the playoffs). For both these moves, the Bruins were a playoff team the year before.

Then there are prospects. While Filip Forsberg was acquired at the deadline, the Caps thinking was the same -- we are a player away and we are willing to give up this guy we picked #11 overall last summer and who is coming off a good year playing with men in the SEL. This is probably the more typical -- and higher risk -- transaction. A recent draft pick who is truly a prospect. That risk is usually hedged with and additional pick or prospect or both or multiple. But never discount a centerpiece being the availability of a quality young player from a team that that is in the window and believes they are only one JT Miller away.
Hono_rary Canadian
User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 13355
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Meds »

UWSaint wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 10:01 am
Mëds wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 6:02 am Basically I'm saying that IF you move Miller, for the future of the team, you have to move him in exchange for picks to a team that is not a playoff contender.
I disagree. Playoff contenders -- those who fail in the playoffs -- are forever looking for that ONE player that would put them over the edge. A player who profiles as a "competitor." Or maybe they need another guy at the dot because they couldn't win faceoffs or lacked the up the middle punch.

These teams -- especially with a short window for their core -- will be willing to move prospects or young players that don't fit their (often knee-jerk) analysis about why the playoffs were a failure or who aren't going to peak fast enough to make a meaningful difference.

What makes JT Miller so attractive to the team that thinks they are a player away is that he profiles as so many parts of that "attitude" or skill set a team who lost a playoff round because (1) they played on their heels; (2) they were soft in the middle; (3) they ran into a scoring drought. The list can go on and on -- he's a power forward, he's a playmaker, he's a sniper.

To be sure, trading a close-as-you-get-to-sure-thing-next-season-player to a playoff team means no lottery pick -- unless they traded for one, they won't have it at the draft and if they are right they are a player away, they won't be a lotter team the following year. But if the team has prospects or young players? These players move. Tyler Seguin was traded in the off season at 21 years old because he didn't profile with the attention to detail and courage the Bruins wanted. (The Bruins did the same thing for basically the same reasons with Phil Kessel when he was 22, even though Phil had been fine in the playoffs). For both these moves, the Bruins were a playoff team the year before.

Then there are prospects. While Filip Forsberg was acquired at the deadline, the Caps thinking was the same -- we are a player away and we are willing to give up this guy we picked #11 overall last summer and who is coming off a good year playing with men in the SEL. This is probably the more typical -- and higher risk -- transaction. A recent draft pick who is truly a prospect. That risk is usually hedged with and additional pick or prospect or both or multiple. But never discount a centerpiece being the availability of a quality young player from a team that that is in the window and believes they are only one JT Miller away.
Yes. I agree. I clearly misrepresented my thought.

I meant that in the event that you are trading JT Miller for only draft picks. In that event you want your draft picks to be lottery picks at the very least.....if your return is only picks you don't make that trade with Tampa or Florida or Colorado because their draft picks are almost certainly to be in the bottom 10 of the draft.

IF you can get that prospect player in the return, or make a hockey trade like was done by Boston in the Seguin deal, then yes. But that was a different scenario and I was responding to the statement that very few teams give up on the very good, under 22, player that they already have.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
MVP
MVP
Posts: 31125
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Blob Mckenzie »

Arbour wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 1:27 pm
UWSaint wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 10:41 am But at the end of the day, the most important thing about the differences between the offseason and deadline markets is this: JT Miller was almost certainly "available" at this deadline. If not being actively market by the club, there's no way Allvin took a call from a GM and said, "we are not interested in hearing what you have to say, JT's untouchable." To be sure, the club's willingness to trade Miller factored in the collateral impacts to the club still clawing for a shot at the playoffs and the less transparent evaluation of the team as a whole, but I am fairly confident the club was running the marginal benefits (or not) of trading at the deadline. Of course the club could have got the evaluation wrong according to the calculus Esq. or Mëds or whoever might use, but my sense is that they know what they are doing and they aren't particularly emotionally invested (or sunk costs invested) into the current composition of the team, and therefore were pretty steel-eyed about their evaluation of offers and their demands.

The last thing to consider in all of this is that unless Miller is injured or has a huge decline in performance next year (like 60 points or fewer), he'll still be a very tradeable asset at the deadline next year. So what's given up is the marginal value of "two playoff runs," and I've never studied the question, but my guess is that the difference is a little less that you might imagine when you are looking at higher end players.
Teams are also allowed a certain cap overage in the off season as well, which makes it easier to move assets around in the off season as long as their ducks are in order by opening day.

As to your above points out there is no doubt the Canucks fielded inquiries about Miller at this years TD, and I as you state even at next years TD Miller still remains a very tradeable asset. I would add and can only assume the business side also weighs heavy on any decision management makes in their considerations regarding Miller. Trading your best forward and then not making the playoffs would be a PR nightmare, reflected no doubt in ticket sales and in particular season ticket sales, and while fans don't care about playoff revenues the PHO had better.
Hanging onto this best forward and walking him to UFA after 0 -5 playoff games would be a worse nightmare. A decision (trade or signing) needs to happen between now and UFA season. You don’t start next season with Miller on the last year of his deal. Would be the height of stupidity. Same with Horvat. Figure it out.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
ESQ
MVP
MVP
Posts: 4477
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Trade Rumours & Armchair Pipe Dreams 20-21-22 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by ESQ »

Arbour wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 2:29 pm
Yes there are opportunity costs, but a can't miss A+ prospect is not going to get traded.
"Can't miss"? Maybe not, but going back to the Duchene example I'd call him an A asset. Sure Miller won't get you a Petey (unless you gamble on getting an unprotected 1st, like Colorado did). But Girard is a 23 year old, right-shot, top-4d with cost control for another couple of years. He was traded 5 games into his NHL career. Sure he wasn't "can't-miss, A+", but he's a pretty difficult piece to acquire.
Locked