[Value Of] Horvat - To build a contender.

[kloubek]

Ok, hear me out before you lynch me.  What I am about to suggest is not going to be popular, nor is it going to be likely.  Let's make that clear.  Especially the latter portion.  THIS IS NOT LIKELY.

 

But let's say, just say it happened.

 

First, it relies on us acquiring Tavares.  There are plenty of reasons why he might be willing to come to Vancouver, and while most don't think it is possible I imagine most of it relies on whether he believes he could win a cup here or not.  If we showed him a plan where it seemed likely, and we also offered him the best contract option, I do think it is at least feasible that we could make an offer he would consider.  So let's just say we did that, and let's say we got him.

 

In this circumstance, we would have Tavares, Horvat, and Pettersson as high end center material.  We COULD play Pettersson on the wing but there are two reasons I'm not keen on that.  First, if a player is able to play center properly (as Pettersson is) I feel it is a waste to put them on wing.  I could see a scenario where our 1-2 punch would be Tavares and Pettersson, and that would put Horvat as the odd man out.  The second is to reunite him with Dahlen.

 

I know everyone loves Horvat.  I do too.  But if we already have two elite centers, it would actually make him expendable and you need to give up quality to get quality.

 

...and what we don't have, however, is a quality #1 d-man.  

 

So how about this: Acquire Tavares, then trade Horvat + Hutton + ? for a guy like Klingberg.  He would dramatically help Dallas's center position.

 

Then next season if he goes UFA, sign OEL.

 

In the end, our team looks something like this:

 

______* Tavares Boeser

Dahlen Pettersson Lind
Virtanen Sutter Eriksson

Gadjovich Gaudette Archibald

 

Gagner and Baertschi are traded for picks to help ensure we maintain a winning team in years to come.

 

* This spot could be Virtanen.  Could be Goldobin.  Or maybe Eriksson finds chemistry with Tavares. Or Leipsic takes a step up.  Maybe Gadjovich explodes on the scene.  Or maybe we luck out and draft Zadina.  There are options for this position.  Having Tavares at #1 shelters him to flourish in a #2 position. Before he is put into the lineup, he plays one full year in Utica and we sign a UFA center for 1 year in the meantime while we tank one last year.

 

Then for the d:

Klingberg Tanev - One of the top scoring d and one of the top defensive d in the league.  (Yes I know, people want to trade Tanev.  We can work on that and maybe get a young defender in return)

OEL Gudbranson - Solid scoring defender for the 2nd pp unit, and a physical defensive defender.  Not SUPER keen on Gudbranson, but we have him under contract now)

Edler* Stecher  - (*Re-signed for 2m)  Edler would thrive in a 3rd pairing offensive role.  Stecher would compliment him well.

We tank for next season, then after that... BAM.  Assuming Demko can hold the fort or Markstrom finds consistency, we have a contender the following season.  The above is a VERY good team, and we can actually fit it under the cap for the duration of the contracts in play.

 

Is all this likely?  No.  Not at all.  But COULD it happen?

 

Do you guys feel this is a heavily contending team as I do? I realize it is a long shot but if all the stars fell into place, I do think it is possible...

[Alflives]

I've got the rope.  Anyone have a good, solid tree, with a low branch in their backyard?  

 

 

[kloubek]

11 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I've got the rope.  Anyone have a good, solid tree, with a low branch in their backyard?  

 

 

hehehe.... I knew from the get-go this wouldn't be popular.  But I think that lineup is undeniable.

I'd like to make clear I love Horvat.  He's great in every way and is likely to be an elite #2 guy but I don't think he's a #1 guy.  So if we were indeed to have 2 #1 guys, we really don't need him as much as he does indeed bring to the table.  I figure the leadership would be taken over by Tavares, and this would be come his team.

[Rob_Zepp]

6 minutes ago, kloubek said:

I know everyone loves Horvat.  I do too.  But if we already have two elite centers

I have no trouble with the concept - pro hockey is about asset management....but what two players are you talking about here when you say this?   I don't see anyone yet on the Canucks who is an "elite center"....were you including Tavares and projecting EP to become one?

[Rush17]

I am a big suppporter of not naming Bo captain of our team. But moving him would be immensely challenging.  If we got Tavares we could probably keep Pettersson on the wing.  The only scenario I would be ok moving Bo Horvat would be to address our biggest need a potential #1 defender.  

 

If we did a Bo Horvat for Seth Jones type deal I would then consider it. But Bo brings so much to our team. Faceoffs, energy, leadership etc.  I'd sign Tavares if we can and keep Pettersson on the wing for now.

 

No one should Lynch you but I know what Bo means to this fanbase. He was our first young new core member. He has represented a lot to our team and city. Moving him would be less then ideal. If we do eventually I hope it's to address a major need more then just another skilled forward.  We have pretty good center depth but I wouldn't be surprised if we add one more C.

[kloubek]

Just now, Rob_Zepp said:

I have no trouble with the concept - pro hockey is about asset management....but what two players are you talking about here when you say this?   I don't see anyone yet on the Canucks who is an "elite center"....were you including Tavares and projecting EP to become one?

Exactly.  This really only depends on Pettersson being an elite #2 guy, and I think at this point he's actually projecting higher.

[Rush17]

I know bettersson is a stud but does anyone know his FO% when he did play that bit at C?

 

Pettersson is bettersson

[Rush17]

Just now, kloubek said:

Exactly.  This really only depends on Pettersson being an elite #2 guy, and I think at this point he's actually projecting higher.

His ceiling does look first line like I agree. Some scouts see him as a winger long term. Jim seems pretty confident with him at C tho.

 

I trust our scout over others.  Kids got razzle and dazzle

[NewbieCanuckFan]

12 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I've got the rope.  Anyone have a good, solid tree, with a low branch in their backyard?  

 

 

I figured you already had the handcuffs & whip as a result of your other extra-curricular activities.

 

(I start to REALLY get worried about you when I saw all those cosplay outfits in your closet)

 

Tavares ain't coming here.../end thread.

[Rush17]

Pettersson's strength on draws is less of a concern then whether he has the skill and practice at C 

[peaches5]

If Horvat can land you the first overall and we can draft Dahlen I'd do that in a heart beat.

[kloubek]

4 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

Tavares ain't coming here.../end thread.

Yeah, that's pretty much the consensus of most on CDC.  Yet, "experts" insist that Benning either will or should make a play for him so they seem to think there is a chance. And really, as I said, if he didn't come here it is most likely because he wants to go to a contender.  Yet, I believe the lineup I came up with IS a contender in 1 year's time.

 

If nothing else, it shows you how adding just a couple of UFAs could make this team turn around in very short order. 

[kloubek]

3 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

If Horvat can land you the first overall and we can draft Dahlen I'd do that in a heart beat.

Unfortunately, he couldn't.  As good as he is, he's not a franchise player like Dahlin will almost certainly be.  I had considered writing about how we might be able to move up from whatever spot we get 7th? to 1st, but the price of that will be very, very high if it could happen at all, and then while we do have our #1 d, we still lack in other areas of the lineup. 

[khay]

I get what you mean but I don't like the idea.

 

First, if the management team met with Tavares and proposed your plan, where Horvat gets traded for Klingberg, I think Tavares camp will be unimpressed.  Not because it's a bad idea but this is just a hypothetical plan and Tavares camp will have tough time believing in such proposal becoming a reality. It's like, "if you sign with us, we will do this" and he will say, "what if Dallas doesn't agree to the trade?" "..." 

 

I think we have a lot better chance of selling the vision with Horvat than without Horvat. Horvat is already named to team Canada and is projected for 2022 olympic team. The sales pitch I would make to Tavares is as follows:

 

1. To pitch Horvat as Bergeron or Toewes in the making. Tavares played against Bergeron and he has never had a player of that type playing behind him (Barzal is the offensive type, the same one as Tavares) so he should know the value of having such player on the team.

2. Pettersson. Pettersson can be a great center but will be an even better winger where he is allowed to focus more on scoring and less on center duties. Pitching to Tavares that we want he and Pettersson to replace Henrik and Daniel will leave a very strong impression. Someone made a comparison between Patty Kane and EP, I think that comparison actually has good merit.

3. Boeser. Nothing needs to be said. Tavares should know what Boeser can do.

 

Tavares will question our goaltending and defence. And I guess that's the part that you wish to address but I think we have a better chance to sign him with Horvat than based on a hypothetical scenario with defenceman blah obtained in a trade involving Horvat.

 

 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

4 minutes ago, kloubek said:

Yeah, that's pretty much the consensus of most on CDC.  Yet, "experts" insist that Benning either will or should make a play for him so they seem to think there is a chance. And really, as I said, if he didn't come here it is most likely because he wants to go to a contender.  Yet, I believe the lineup I came up with IS a contender in 1 year's time.

 

If nothing else, it shows you how adding just a couple of UFAs could make this team turn around in very short order. 

.....nevermind

[Zhukini]

I don't think trading Horvat is that ridiculous of a notion, fans here were possibly spoiled by the Sedins staying their entire career in Vancouver, that's the exception, not the norm. We'd be lucky if 2 of our current and coming young core retire Canucks. 

 

That said I don't think now is the right time to move Bo, he showed in his rookie year he has another gear in the playoffs, and we need a style like his down the middle to contrast EP. 

 

 

 

 

[kloubek]

1 minute ago, khay said:

I get what you mean but I don't like the idea.

 

First, if the management team met with Tavares and proposed your plan, where Horvat gets traded for Klingberg, I think Tavares camp will be unimpressed.  Not because it's a bad idea but this is just a hypothetical plan and Tavares camp will have tough time believing in such proposal becoming a reality. It's like, "if you sign with us, we will do this" and he will say, "what if Dallas doesn't agree to the trade?" "..." 

 

I think we have a lot better chance of selling the vision with Horvat than without Horvat. Horvat is already named to team Canada and is projected for 2022 olympic team. The sales pitch I would make to Tavares is as follows:

 

1. To pitch Horvat as Bergeron or Toewes in the making. Tavares played against Bergeron and he has never had a player of that type playing behind him (Barzal is the offensive type, the same one as Tavares) so he should know the value of having such player on the team.

2. Pettersson. Pettersson can be a great center but will be an even better winger where he is allowed to focus more on scoring and less on center duties. Pitching to Tavares that we want he and Pettersson to replace Henrik and Daniel will leave a very strong impression. Someone made a comparison between Patty Kane and EP, I think that comparison actually has good merit.

3. Boeser. Nothing needs to be said. Tavares should know what Boeser can do.

 

Tavares will question our goaltending and defence. And I guess that's the part that you wish to address but I think we have a better chance to sign him with Horvat than based on a hypothetical scenario with defenceman blah obtained in a trade involving Horvat.

 

 

First point is a fair one. It's a fair amount of moving pieces.  But then, Klingberg isn't the only one we could target.  There are several other players that would serve the same purpose.  Main point is that we dangle Horvat to acquire our #1d.  Maybe it's Makar.  Who knows....

 

I can also appreciate your desire to have Pettersson on wing where he doesn't have as much responsibility.  But I think you're looking at it from a development perspective.  If he can play center (and he has), then why not exploit that as an ability rather than let it die completely?

[peaches5]

4 minutes ago, kloubek said:

Unfortunately, he couldn't.  As good as he is, he's not a franchise player like Dahlin will almost certainly be.  I had considered writing about how we might be able to move up from whatever spot we get 7th? to 1st, but the price of that will be very, very high if it could happen at all, and then while we do have our #1 d, we still lack in other areas of the lineup. 

Horvat is a top 6 forward even top 3 on some teams. Dahlen hasn't proven anything. If an outside team wins the lottery that is pushing for the playoffs they may be interested in Horvat and not Dahlen and in those circumstances, if Horvat can land us Dahlen, I am doing it. 

[Fateless]

So just to be clear, your proposal is that we would give up Horvat + Hutton + X for Klingberg, who you yourself mentioned may walk in free agency the following season.

That just seems like a terrible option. 

[kloubek]

1 minute ago, khay said:

I get what you mean but I don't like the idea.

 

First, if the management team met with Tavares and proposed your plan, where Horvat gets traded for Klingberg, I think Tavares camp will be unimpressed.  Not because it's a bad idea but this is just a hypothetical plan and Tavares camp will have tough time believing in such proposal becoming a reality. It's like, "if you sign with us, we will do this" and he will say, "what if Dallas doesn't agree to the trade?" "..." 

 

I think we have a lot better chance of selling the vision with Horvat than without Horvat. Horvat is already named to team Canada and is projected for 2022 olympic team. The sales pitch I would make to Tavares is as follows:

 

1. To pitch Horvat as Bergeron or Toewes in the making. Tavares played against Bergeron and he has never had a player of that type playing behind him (Barzal is the offensive type, the same one as Tavares) so he should know the value of having such player on the team.

2. Pettersson. Pettersson can be a great center but will be an even better winger where he is allowed to focus more on scoring and less on center duties. Pitching to Tavares that we want he and Pettersson to replace Henrik and Daniel will leave a very strong impression. Someone made a comparison between Patty Kane and EP, I think that comparison actually has good merit.

3. Boeser. Nothing needs to be said. Tavares should know what Boeser can do.

 

Tavares will question our goaltending and defence. And I guess that's the part that you wish to address but I think we have a better chance to sign him with Horvat than based on a hypothetical scenario with defenceman blah obtained in a trade involving Horvat.

 

 

First point is a fair one. It's a fair amount of moving pieces.  But then, Klingberg isn't the only one we could target.  There are several other players that would serve the same purpose.  Main point is that we dangle Horvat to acquire our #1d.  Maybe it's Makar.  Who knows....

 

I can also appreciate your desire to have Pettersson on wing where he doesn't have as much responsibility.  But I think you're looking at it from a development perspective.  If he can play center (and he has), then why not exploit that as an ability rather than let it die completely?