Quoting: coga16
you dont give him away for a rental, that is just poor asset management
I disagree. I would say it's poor asset management to keep something you have an excess of when you have other issues that need addressing, such as offensive depth when we are in a win-now mode. Girard, while he is a great player, isn't necessary, we won the cup without him for most of the run. Letting him go for someone who makes us much better
now is what we should be trying to do if we're trying to win
now.
Miller gives us two things: 1) A 1st line forward who will be playing 2nd line, and he could take minutes away from the lower lines and allow them more rest for things like penalty killing, plus he has great offensive upside. 2) Cap space after next season, it'll give us more flexibility to re-sign Newhook and Byram (accounting for EJ's contract satisfying Nate's extension).
Now, I get that Girard is a signed for a long time, but we need to give space and roster spots for players like Byram, and in the future, prospects coming up (Behrens, for instance). Girard is creating an unnecessary surplus that could be easily solved by simply trading him!
And even though Miller is a rental, by the time we trade for him and after this next post-season, I believe that Newhook will have shown he can be a 2C behind Nate. So I think we can fill the rest of the holes through free agency and further trading (we still do have a decent prospect pool).
Also I really don't think we should be paying a 3rd pairing defenseman $5 million after EJ's deal is up, cause that's the role he will have unless we move him (same thing if we move him to RD and send Manson down to the bottom pairing).
Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk