Horvat is a Boss

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,976 Gaming the system

About Horvat is a Boss

  • Rank
    Canucks Third-Line

Recent Profile Visitors

2,965 profile views
  1. Center depth is important? We're short on centers? Good thing we didn't need to sign 1-2 more this offseason to keep in Utica.
  2. Does anybody else find it weird that the news came directly from Benning? If it was an injury that Juolevi suffered in that game, wouldn't Cull or Johnson be the first to know and relay it to us? Makes me think that they either planned for this re-evaluation period in advance or that it's a significant injury and they had to report to the higher ups in Vancouver immediately.
  3. The bolded is where you're still missing my point. The main benefit of signing a Groavac level player is having flexibility when injuries hit in terms of call ups. You've made it clear that you don't think this is important, but there's a reason why one of Benning's main goals was to acquire sufficient depth at every position. He talked about how beneficial it would be to be able to call up Baertschi for an injury in the top 6. He has acquired depth for the most part, just not at center. There's no way a signing at this level would make any significant change on our Playoff chances. There's no way a signing at this level would be the difference between a prospect turning into Motte or Arvidsson.
  4. @GoldenAlien Same thing, just saving space. You're taking the point that @UticaHockey and I were making and blowing it way out of proportion. There's no way at all that signing someone like Groavac should be related to players like Tavares or Arvidsson in any way. The prospects that play in the AHL are guys who will more than likely be middle/bottom 6 contributors, not top line producers. With regards to depth, nobody is saying that a Groavac type player should be able to replace 100% of Sutter's on ice abilities. We're saying that if our centers get injured, we have someone who can play center available. Obviously the AHL player wouldn't be as good as the NHL player. That doesn't mean he's useless. It's about having the depth to be able to have roster flexibility in times of need, which we don't have at center and haven't had for the last couple of years. You know what's worse than playing an AHL center at center in the NHL? Playing a winger there, or an AHL winger, or a young player who isn't ready for it, etc. This is the overwhelming benefit that center depth provides, everything else is relatively insignificant compared to this. If the team wanted to address the lack of centers in the summer, they didn't have to sign Bailey or Perron and could have signed two centers instead. There you go, same number of contracts, but way better depth at that position. We already have an overflow of wingers anyway and it's much easier to play someone like Groavac on the wing than it is to play someone like Bailey at center. Again, flexibility. The Leafs signing all those players for the AHL goes a long way in building a winning environment and providing the luxury of being able to put their prospects in positions to succeed. Bracco lead the AHL in scoring last year and Sandin has been putting up incredible numbers because they are such a strong team. When the Comets started strong, Boucher and Lind were tearing it up and Lind was scoring at a pretty good rate. Boucher then missed some games and Lind's production plummeted. I get what you're saying about development vs. production, but the two aren't mutually exclusive. Why do you think that good AHL producers are far more likely to find any measure of success in the NHL than bad AHL producers? We're not trying to develop Lind into a Motte level player are we? And again, this isn't even the discussion that was being had. This is completely unrelated to having enough depth for callups in case of an injury. You took a simple point and blew it up way bigger than it was supposed to be by trying to justify a situation which could be fixed very easily. Prospect pools and 1st line players are unrelated to the topic being discussed.
  5. Fair enough on the not enough value for Detroit argument. One thing I would like to say though is that an asset like Goldobin has slightly more value once he clears waivers. If Detroit claimed him in October and decided to send him down, they would risk losing him for nothing. Now, Goldobin is already in the minors so they can call him up for 30 days or 10 games (not sure on the specifics but something like that) without fear of losing him for nothing. When I mentioned potentially moving the contract to a cap floor team like Ottawa, I didn't mean right now. Ottawa has 18 contracts expiring at the end of the year (including LTIR contracts like Callahan) and over 40 million in cap space. That would be the time to see if we can dump the contract there.
  6. This trade would be similar to the Neal - Lucic trade in that it is a swap of bad contracts hoping that the players involved can bring something new to the respective teams. Both player's contracts expire at the same time and the cap hits are comparable. To DET: Eriksson Goldobin 4th Round Pick 2020 To VAN: Nielsen Detroit takes the higher cap hit ($750,000 difference), but also saves around 5 million in actual salary for this year as Eriksson's base salary is 1M while Nielsen's is 5.5M. The remaining year's of the contract are fairly comparable with only a $500,000 difference in total salary, but Detroit saves big this year in terms of actual dollars. To sweeten the pot for taking the higher cap hit, they also get a relatively young forward with good numbers who's already in the AHL and a mid round pick. Eriksson could carve out a role by helping the league's worst penalty kill. Vancouver saves an extra $750,000 a year against the cap, which does help considering how tight against it we are. Nielsen brings more speed and versatility than Eriksson as he can player center or wing. Nielsen's contract would also be more attractive to a team like Ottawa trying to reach the cap floor in the offseason because he owed slightly less over the remainder of his contract. Being the more versatile player, he could also be more attractive to Seattle to take (along with other assets from the Canucks) for one year. If worst comes to worst he also has the more buyout friendly contract.
  7. You're talking about everything besides the point. Can you show me where in my post I was talking about cap space, prospect pools or the Playoffs? It looks like you saw the word Toronto and nothing else. I'm talking about signing 1-2 more players for Utica. Toronto signed 5 or so players specifically for the AHL this past summer. That's all I'm comparing.
  8. This is an interesting idea, but a lot of things have to go right for it to work. Barrie stepping in and getting good minutes at all under Green is tough to see given the chemistry of the Edler - Myers pairing and the fact that Barrie won't play with Hughes. His style of play won't do him any favors either. Barrie will really only round back into form when he's running a 1st unit powerplay, so do you want him there instead of Hughes? I think our best bet at adding a 1st is with either Tanev or Markstrom, if we even want to move those guys.
  9. Sakic was going through the ringer in the media for like 8 months leading up to the Duchene trade. He waited until the season after his trade request to move him. They had one of the worst seasons in recent memory at that time as well. To be honest, the one person that deserves all the credit for the incredible turn around in Colorado is MacKinnon. I still think his 2017-18 is one of the best seasons by a player in recent memory for the way he single-handedly turned a franchise around by himself, similar to Karlsson's performance for Ottawa in the 2017 Playoffs. That Colorado team that finished last in the NHL traded away Duchene and MacKinnon still got them to the Playoffs. McDavid, as great as he is, still hasn't done that (although this could be the year it happens). He brought the best out of Rantanen and let him reach his ceiling while reviving Landeskog's play after a couple of down years. He was far and away the Hart trophy winner that year over Hall in my eyes. In an interview, he talked about how he got a sports psychologist before that year and how much it helped him. He was also watching Kucherov tear up the league, who was drafted a full round below him. Something clicked and he hasn't looked back. The effect that he had on an entire franchise by himself if truly mind boggling and I still don't think he get's enough credit for that. For me, he's an undisputed top 3 player in the league with Crosby and McDavid. Sakic had nothing to do with the actual turn around in Colorado, but he has done a fantastic job filling out the team now that MacKinnon has proven it's a worthwhile investment. He brought in a second line, filled out the team depth and added some high end pieces to the prospect pool in like 2 years while constantly having a large amount of cap space. They signed Rantanen for over 9 million this summer and still had way more cap space than us. They made a bunch of smart moves to bring in cheap, effective depth (emphasis on cheap) and essentially filled out the rest of the roster with players like Calvert, Donskoi, Kadri, Wilson, Burakovsky, Bellemare and Nieto. The most expensive player on that list is Kadri at 4.5M per, or essentially what we're paying Sutter. It doesn't matter if you're first or last in the league, you have to smart with your spending. This was way off topic for the Rathbone thread, sorry about that. Hopefully Rathbone continues his play in the NCAA for this year, signs in the summer and has a good year in the AHL next year.
  10. I would probably lean towards not offering Lockwood a contract anyway. A physical player with a bad shoulder isn't a good mix, especially when you add in relatively low IQ and production.