Arrow 1983
-
Posts
2,129 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Arrow 1983
-
-
9 minutes ago, aGENT said:
They're not though.
you just don't want to see it
you are one of those people that would say we need a #1 d-man but when it comes to paying for them you want to value them as a #2 or even # 3 d-man.
The fact of the matter is Hughes was 11th in scoring by defense men last season of those 10 above him only 2 where as young as him Fox and Maker. Fox will be worth more than Maker and Hughes behind Maker. They are rank 1,2,3 in the league and therefore, will be paid 1,2,3 in there age group. Col set the mid price with Maker as he is number 2. Dal set the 2nd tier price with the Heiskanen deal why you cant see this doesn't make sense to me
-
7 minutes ago, Viper007 said:
No, just a feeling I'm getting. Hughes already passed Reilly in offensive production with his 2 seasons, that Reilly got in 3 seasons. So that already puts him ahead of Reilly's $5 Mill. And comparing his 2nd contract now, Hughes rookie season has been better than Reilly's 2nd best offensive season ever. It's hard to say considering last season was an anomaly season where you only faced 6 other teams. Hard to make comparison on a season that will never happen again.
You cant compare Reilly to Hughes
Reilly signed his contract in 2016-17, He is now on the last year of that contract and he shot him self in the foot with it. It is one of the most cost friendly contracts in the league ranked up there with the Mackinnon deal
-
40 minutes ago, aGENT said:
First, the 'landscape' hasn't really changed. Buying UFA years of first pair/elite D has cost a lot for a while now. How many years ago did Doughty and Karlsson sign there $11m+ deals?
Second, as much as his agent would like people to think, he is not a beautiful or unique snow flake without comparables.
He's very talented, nobody is denying that. And he can certainly help create offense at a very high level. But other first pair D like Sergachev, McAvoy, Werenski, Chabot, Provorov, and yes Heiskenan and Makar... Are all comparables. Most with more complete games, if less offense.
I disagree the Landscape has change the players you show prove it
Werenski signed 2 years ago, 3 years 5 million cap hit,
Segachev 1 year ago 3 years @ 4.8 million
McAvory 2 years ago 3 years @ 4.9 million
With each of these players final years at 7.0, 7.20 7.3 mill which will be the qualifying offer
Chabot 3 lowest years (RFA year) are 4.0, 7.0, 7.00 average of 6 million is the Highest but on a 8 year deal.
Heiskanen 4 lowest (RFA years) 5.00, 6.6, 7.0, average 6.6 million
Maker Average is 7.8 mill
The number for the first 3 years is starting to increase.
lets look at the 4th year final year of RFA. 7.0, 7.2 and 7.3 for the past 3
and for Heiskanen 8.0 mill and Maker 9.00 million, again an increase from the past 2 years. Of the past contracts Chabot got 8 million again surpassing the other 3 but on an 8 year deal.
You are correct the UFA years do seem to be stagnate around that 10 mill Chabot number and 11 mill For Heiskanen and Makers = to past contracts like Doughty and Karlsson
But it isn't the UFA years that I or others are referring to it is the RFA years amounts that are increasing.
I am wondering are you saying that on a bridge deal you are valuing Hughes @ 5 mill per. I wonder this because this years contracts are not dictating that. The only thing JB could argue is that next season is technically his 3rd season.
Leaving Hughes with a contract structure, 5 mill for the first year (equal to Heiskanen) 7 million for the 2nd year ( 400k above Heiskanen 6.6mill) and 7.5 million ( 500k above Heiskanen 7.0 mill) for 19.5 million over 3 years = 6.5 mill Cap Hit. Remember Heiskanen is 6.2 mill over the same period.
For a longer term all other yearly values from my OP would stay roughly the same. So a 6 year term would be 46.5 million or 7.75 mill cap hit,
8 years would be 68.5 million or 8.5625 Cap Hit.
-
1 minute ago, Viper007 said:
In other words, it's not comparable. You need to compare Barrie to Larsson, that would be the equivalent. Offense vs Defense. Barrie got paid 4.8, Larsson 4.0. Offense gets paid more than defense. That's what Arrow was trying to say.
@BigTramFan has no clue what a comparable is
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:
But you said offense always gets paid more than defense....are you now saying there's more to it than that?? Well well well...
I was comparing apples to apples (same age to same age same circumstances to same circumstance) and you wanted to compare apples to oranges So suck your well well well because you did not trap me.
You clearly don't understand what comparable means
Jones and Barrie are not comparable. If you point Jones on Edm with McDavid, Jones would run his numbers up and Barrie would look Insignificant. See that is a comparable if you had the two players play for the same team who would fair better.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:
Hughes will likely improve from where he is now, but there is risk involved in how much he will improve. You can't pay him on a long term contract for what he "might" become. You pay him somewhere between what he is worth right now and what he might become, this way the risk is shared between both parties. He is probably worth about $5m right now and could be as good as a $9 or $10m player in the future. Should you pay him as a $10m player right now on a long term deal? Hell no.
In my opinion I think the middle ground of 7.5 (halfway between 5 - 10m) is about right long term, 6 years or more. If he wants more AAV than that then the risk is too high and you just sign him to a bridge deal e.g. 5-6m for 3-4 years and see if he improves enough to become that $10m player.
I don't disagree with you at all if JB believes he will not become an all round player he shouldn't give him a long term deal.
I do disagree with you about his worth now. He is worth far more then 5 million. Myers is payed 6 million and Hughes worth to the team and in the league is worth more than Myers.
3 years @ 7 million is fair for a bridge deal. If they go with a bridge deal and his defensive game improves you run the risk he will be worth as much as Maker. If some How his Defensive game improves and He is some how able to out produce Maker he will be worth more.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:
OK, just one example for you where defense gets paid more than offense...this off season:
Barrie, 48 pts in 56 games, new contract $4.5m x 3
Jones, 28 pts in 56 games, new contract $9.5m x 8
2 things would factor into that Age Jones is 27 at the start of that contract Barrie is 30
Barrie is still a defensive liability at 30 and has no protentional to have a complete game. (If JB and the Canucks believe this will be true for Hughes they should not sign him long term). I am not saying you do not have a valid point I am saying you cant project what he is today to what he will be in 6-8 year Hughes is 21 Barrie is 30.
Jones has shown to have offensive ability. Barries PPG jump well he was on one of the most offensive teams in the league (7th) No one can argue McDavid benefited from Barrie, most would agree Barrie benefited from McDavid. CBJ was 29 worst for GPG in the league and yet the underlying stats shows that Jones out preformed the rest of the team therefore, without Jones the team would have been worse.
-
15 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:
I'm quite aware of the relative points that each player has put up.
My opinion is that Heiskanen is already the better player, and that he will continue to be a better player.
He is a #1D man that can play in all situations. He plays the top pairing ES, plays PP and PK. He hits and blocks shots.
Hughes will probably never be a true #1D man. He will be a powerplay specialist that puts up lots of assists (not goals). His value is somewhat limited because he will probably always require another Dman to cover his deficiencies on defense.
Heiskanen had 87.27 mins on PK 3rd making him 2nd unit PK
Lindell 167.48 mins
Sekera 124.44 mins
If he is so good on defense why not 1st unit PK
-
12 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:
I'm quite aware of the relative points that each player has put up.
My opinion is that Heiskanen is already the better player, and that he will continue to be a better player.
He is a #1D man that can play in all situations. He plays the top pairing ES, plays PP and PK. He hits and blocks shots.
Hughes will probably never be a true #1D man. He will be a powerplay specialist that puts up lots of assists (not goals). His value is somewhat limited because he will probably always require another Dman to cover his deficiencies on defense.
You see him as what he is now and want to pay him for what he is now on a long term deal. I call that a fallacy
You do not see him for what he can become.
Hughes hit 8 goals in 68 games his first season
Heiskanen hit 12 goals in his 1st season 82 games.
Yes Hughes goals where only 3 this year but also the team as a whole was down last season.
Hughes Speed which is superior to Heiskanen will help him solve a lot of his defensive issues.
Heiskanen has 1 full season more experience in the NHL than Hughes and yet Hughes produces more offense.
Because you are not hearing it I will say it again offense gets paid more than defense therefore Hughes is worth more than Heiskanen. Show me even 1 time where defense got paid more than offense
I also point out that if Heiskanen is so much better than Hughes at defense why was he a -9 for last year.
-
20 minutes ago, Viper007 said:
Those #s seem pretty reasonable. Personally I hope they do the long term route.
It will come down to if JB has the Cap space after EP is signed
another possibility is a 7 year term and I am thinking this might be the most realistic. 70-11.00= 59mill / 7 years= 8.429 mill
That would allow The Canucks to go to 7.5 mill for 3 years for EP.
-
7 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:
$8.75 x 8 years is better than Heiskanen's recently signed contract (which was $8.45m x 8).
There's no way Quinn should be paid more than Heiskanen. I think there is an argument that QH should be about $1m lower than MH, so more like $7.5m x 8 years.
Last 2 seasons
Hughes 53 pts in 68 games, 41 pts in 56games, Years 1 and 2 of his career
Heiskanen 35 pts in 68 games, 27 pts in 55 games. years 2 and 3 of his career
-
3 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:
$8.75 x 8 years is better than Heiskanen's recently signed contract (which was $8.45m x 8).
There's no way Quinn should be paid more than Heiskanen. I think there is an argument that QH should be about $1m lower than MH, so more like $7.5m x 8 years.
Hughes produces more Offense and offense often gets paid more for. Furthermore. Hughes Defensive game is not going to be the same as it is now.
SO you have to ask how much more can Heiskanen improve his defensive game I would say not much more. Will Heiskanen every produce like Hughes i would say no.
-
I bring this up because as many of you already know there really are not any good comparable for Hughes for a bridge deal or long term deals
First lets consider a bridge deal. Some of you might point out a guy like Sergachev 3 years at 4.8 mill and call that a comparable for a bridge deal. However, I would mention that was signed for the 2020-21 season and the Defensemen land scape has changed since than. Furthermore, Sergachev isn't TBL clear #1 (Hedman is) as Hughes is to the Canucks or, Maker is to Col, or Heiskanen is to Dal.
Which brings me to how one could find a bridge deal for Hughes. We must ask what Maker or Heiskanen bridge deal might have looked like. You are probable asking yourself how is this possible and I will explain.
First, I am going to determine that the definition of a bridge deal for this scenario is a 3 year term.
Second we must look at and break down of both Makers and Heiskanen deals.
Maker deal 6 years at a cap hit of 9.00mill
Breakdown
1st year 8.00
2nd year 9.00
3rd year 11.00
4th year 10.60
5th year 8.700
6th year 6.700
Heiskanen 8 years at a cap hit of 8.45 mill
1st year 5.00
2nd year 7.00
3rd year 10.00
4th year 11.00
5th year 11.00
6th year 9.00
7th year 8.00
8th year 6.60
So the propose of showing the break downs of these two contracts is to show that there should be a simple way of figuring out a bridge deal for Hughes. Both these players in a sense has signed a long term deal and a bridge deal and it is shown within their contracts.
If we take the 3 lowest earning years for Maker and add them up; 6.7+8.0+8.7 we get a value of 23.4 and if we divide that by 3 we get a 7.8 million Cap Hit
If we do the same for the Heiskanen contract 5.0+6.6+7.0 we get a value of 18.6 million and a cap hit of 6.2 million
So then the only question that would have to be determined is Hughes worth 9 mill over 6 years or 8.45 mill over 8 years. I would argue he is somewhere between this, 3 years @ 7.0 Million would be the exact middle. Hughes, has had better offensive production then Heiskanen but worse defensive ability then Maker. I think most of us agree that offense is often looked at as a bigger contributing factor then defense and therefore, Hughes is worth more than Heiskanen but less than Maker.
Second a Longer term deal 6 year and 8 years.
Maker and Heiskanen both had 4 years to UFA well Hughes has 5 years. For Maker, Col bought 2 years of UFA @ 10.6 and 11.00 million (his 2 highest payed years).
For Heiskanen, Dal Bought 4 years @ 9.00, 10.00, 11.00, and 11.00 million his (4 highest payed years)
We have to make some assumption here as I believe GMs and agents have to. My first assumption is that Hughes will become a better Defensive player then he is now but still be behind Maker in that aspect.
With is assumption and that the fact that on a 8 year deal Van would be buying 3 years of UFA from Hughes. His 7th and 8th year would total 11.00 million each (UFA years 2 and 3) His 1st UFA year would be less Like Makers is( Makers 1st UFA year is Valued @ 10.6 mill) Heiskanen 1st UFA is 9.00mill. So I am going to say 10 million for Hughes.
so far on a 8 year deal I have him at an avarage of 7 mill for the first 3 years and 10.0, 11.0 and 11.0 for the last 3 years. Value so far 53 mill.
We also have 4 years of a 6 year deal 3 years average 7.00 million and 10 mill for the last year. Value so far 31 mill
Now the hard part, years 4 and 5 both of these are RFA years. So I had to figure out a method to determine these Values so I looked at Heiskanen last RFA year and Makers last RFA year and got 8 mill and 9 mill. So I determined a fair Value for Hughes 4th year (2 years to UFA) would be 8 mill and his 5th year (last year for to UFA) should be 9 mill.
Conclusion
3 year bridge deal 7 million AVV (21 milllion)
6 years 8 million AVV deal (48 million, 7 mill average for the first 3 years, 4th year 8 mill for the 5th year 9 mill, 6th year 10 mill)
8 years 8.75 million AVV (70 million, 7 mill average for the first 3 years, 4th year 8 mill for the 5th year 9 mill, 6th year 10 mill, 7th and 8th years at 11.00mill)
-
3
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:
Rogers Place is in Edmonton.
Rogers Arena is in Vancouver.
Just lock this we all know this is going to get stupid quickly. Nothing against the post or poster itself but this will just turn into a bash Virtanen thread or bash media tread.
-
11 minutes ago, Patel Bure said:
Solid post.
Will respond a bit more in depth when I have time but just one minor correction:
The Canucks will actually have closer to 16.6 million in cap space today sign Petey and Hughes.
wow lets argue about small numbers
You .236k
@MattJVD 200k-300k
these are really petty arguments
Plus I'm sticking with what cap friendly says 21 man roster 16,364,341 remaining Ferland on LTIR
-
5 minutes ago, MattJVD said:
We also have ~650k of bonus carry-over applied to the current season. So Halak's bonus will only be a net increase of ~850k. Depends entirely on what bonuses Podkolzin and Hoglander earn (and how much, if any, cap space can be accrued this year to cover that) but re-signing Boeser at 7.5 is doable.
all of it cancels out Holtby Virtanen buy increases plus Halak bonuses = roughly Lou recapture penalty.
Performance bonus carry over from last year = roughly Performance bonus carry overs from this year
This is why I didn't get into it. What it means might be a 200k-300k difference I thought it was kind of generally known
-
5 minutes ago, MattJVD said:
We also have the Luongo recapture coming off the books: So our dead cap goes from 3.5 mil to 2.4 mil next offseason. That plus the rumoured 1 mil cap increase will take care of re-signing Boeser.
Halaks 1.5mill bonus will eat up half of that
-
With the Dickinson signing today the Cap situation has become much clearer. I see two roads that JB can still take. One leads them to a playoff spot and a possible first round victory but not much further another leads the Canucks to a true cup contending possibility.
The Cap situation Currently, 21 players signed with 16.364 mill in cap (Ferland on LTIR) to sign EP and Hughes according to Capfriendly numbers.
Miller _______ Boeser
Hoglander Horvat Garland
Pearson Dickinson Pods
Motte Sutter Highmore
________ 750,000 (league Min)
_______ Hamonic
OEL Poolman
Rathbone Myers
Juolevi Schenn
Demko
Halak
If JB wants to be a Playoff team next year and nothing else he could just sign Hughes and EP to 8mill contracts each to how ever long they will sign for. Or any 2 combinations that add up to 16 mill i.e. 1 with longer term 1 with a shorter term. I believe this is not what he will do and there might be a different plan in play. Moreover, I believe there is good reason not to just sign Hughes and EP to Max contracts as possible.
The first problem I see with maxing out the cap space this year on EP and Hughes is future cap Issues. Next year Boeser contract will be up and there will be no money remaining to sign him. If you look at the current roster next year the only true dollars that come off are Motte 1.225 mill and Sutter 1.125 mill. everyone else has league min contracts. If the Canucks replace Motte and Sutter with league min contracts the savings are roughly 0.85 mill. Boeser is making 5.875 mill this season and is due Minimum 7.5 mill next season as a qualifying offer or 1.625 mill raise. ( yes it is possible that he signs long term with a cap hit lower than 7.5mill however he will be 25 years old and on a 8 year contract it would expire when he is 32 years old most players would consider these their prime years). Other players coming up for contracts next year are Rathbone and Juolevi. One of these 2 are going to make the team as a top 6 d-man I would guess which ever one that is will have a good argument for a raise. The NHL has said that the cap could go up next season by 1 million dollars. That would leave the Canucks 1.85 million to Re-sign Boeser (to a raise) and Rathbone and OJ at the same time losing Sutter and Motte for League minimum players. (They also have to factor in 1.5mill for Halak bonuses that will carry over from this year and any performance bonuses from ELC contracts) So I have to ask would that be a better team next year.
Problem Number 2. This deals with what the team expects. JB has already mention they want to be a playoff team. TG has said that is the goal. But is making the playoffs enough to 1) keep their jobs and 2) keep the fan base happy. I have looked at the current rosters of our division very deeply and I would argue I have looked at them fairly. My conclusion is that Vegas will most likely take first and Edm and Van will fight it out for 2nd. If I am correct it wont matter who takes 2nd because that would be the first round match up in the playoffs. So the Question I propose is can Van beat Edm. If so The Canucks move on to the Second round to play either Col or Vegas (most likely) which I would argue that it is a High probability of defeat. A second round lose to Vegas or Col might be acceptable. But what if they lose in the first round to Edm. What if they Don't finish 2nd or 3rd but take a wild card spot instead and have to play Vegas or Col in the first round. Is losing in the first round acceptable.
The Second option.
I like many of you heard what EP had to say about winning and going far into the playoffs every year. Unlike a lot of people instead of jumping onto twitter and reacting quickly I thought about that comment and the timing of it. The first thing I thought is maybe he wants to see where the team is headed in term of a contract a shorter one would make sense. I looked at it as a player might look at it. If he signs a 3 year deal he is 1 year from UFA he could ask for a trade or just take the Qualifying offer which would then lead him to UFA. It could be a tactic to get the team to sign him long term for more money as they would be buying UFA years. But than I asked myself is this how EP would think is he trying to twist JBs arm. I don't believe that's EP. I think he and Hughes are going to take deals beneficial for the team aka leave money on the table. It is simple math, the less they take the better the team can be.
First, if EP and Hughes sign for 7 mill each this year ( I am not saying this is what I think the final number will be) There will be 2 mill more to help sign Boeser OJ and Rathbone next season without having to get worse.
Second, signing for a mill less each this year also makes them better this year. That 2 mill becomes 2.75 mill or even 3.50 mill this year remaining in cap actually a little more. In the Beginning of this topic I showed you the current roster and cap remaining at 16.364. 16.364-14.00= 2.364+0.75(1 league min contract)=3.114 or 3.114+0.725 (Highmore contract)=3.839
So why does these 2 numbers matter 3.114 mill or 3.839 mill to me they represent players either on at $3 mill or 2 @ roughly $1.9 million each.
I am predicting that JB is not done yet the UFA market still has some very decent players available if he is able to get EP and Hughes signed for less and they can see the value of it. JB might go after 1 or 2 more players still.
My final roster prediction. Cap remaining $39,341
Miller EP (7.00 mil) Boeser
Hoglander Horvat Garland
Pearson Dickinson Pods
Parise (1.9 mil) Bozak (1.9 mil) Sutter
Motte
Hughes (7.00mil) Hamonic
OEL Poolman
Rathbone Myers
Juolevi Schenn
Demko
Halak
One last point I am not completely sold yet if Sutter will be on the opening night roster. His Contract amount $1.125 mil is the exact dollar value that a team can completely bury which also makes me believe that JB has insured him self some extra wiggle room if he wants to sign further players. Highmore could easily be the 13th forward at 0.725k saving the team a extra 400k and Motto could take the 12th position.
-
1
-
-
43 minutes ago, King Heffy said:
Plus Vancouver's defense is actually NHL quality. Edmonton has nothing after Nurse. I'd be surprised to see the Soilers make the playoffs; Seattle is likely the other team from the division that makes it. LA is better than Edmonton too.
41 minutes ago, MikeBossy said:I actually think the Coilers might win the division as they seem to be built as a dominant regular season team - but I also see them being knocked out again in the 1st round as they did nothing to address the issues that plagued them in the playoffs
I agree I think Oilers are built for the regular season especially because they have a 140-150 point player in McDavid he can dominate weak teams in the regular season on his own. The Playoffs are a different story there are no weak teams and strong teams can limit McDavid
-
14 minutes ago, 70seven said:
I know it’s kinda cringe worthy to say… but I don’t think the league conversation will be about the Vancouver Canucks “making” the playoffs next season. It’ll be about battling for 1st in the West.
Still lots of question marks…. But it just feels like we have pieces to fit roles that we need. There are questions about performance, but I think you have to consider the teams mindset to prove that last year was an anomaly. They are younger, but more mature, they are faster, more skilled, they have more battle, more size, better hockey IQ…
If you like the Canucks at all and call yourself a fan, you should embrace the changes and give up the grudge. Future repercussions aside, this is the nicest looking roster since 2011, and it’s trending upwards! instead of downwards in 2011. This group as is will have 3-5 years to win Vancouver it’s first Stanley Cup.
Yes it’s a weak group on the RHD side of things and that may end up doing them in, but don’t think they won’t be active come trade deadline, and don’t be surprised to see that ‘22 1st dealt as well. They have to do everything they can to build around the core ASAP… not wait for picks to mature for support.
No risk, no reward. We are all in! And after 30 years of following this team… trust me… the all in years are the best.
I like the way you think
But personally I feel Vegas takes 1st place in the Division and the Canucks and Edm fight it out for 2nd and 3rd place. IMO I belive Van can take Edm in the 1st round of the playoffs. Van has a deeper forward group and the better goaltender.
-
1 hour ago, oldnews said:
Foegele 2.75 x 3
Dickinson 2.65 x 3
Foegele
10g, 10a, 20p in 53 games.
60 hits, 12 blocks
44.7% ozone starts, 52.9% corsi
28 giveaways, 16 takeaways.
2.3 on ice goals for per 60 5on5, 1.9 against
14:09 game, 1:01 pk
Dickinson
7g, 8a, 15p, 51 games
78 hits, 49 blocks
44.1% ozone starts, 55.3% corsi
17 giveaways, 28 takeaways
2.1 on ice goals for per 60, 2.1 against.
16:13 game, 1:41 pk
I was thinking Colton Sissons was a good comparable
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, VegasCanuck said:
Was hoping for closer to 2.25, but he definitely makes us better.
I was thinking around 2.8-2.9 mill for 4 years. I was thinking his best comparable was Nashville's Colton Sissons. Similar in stats and similar in age.
I am very happy about this deal
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, hammertime said:
Pretty happy with this. He is a clear upgrade on Roussel, Beagle, can take a load of hard minutes away from Bo. He's gonna be a fan favorite. I really like our middle 6 now now with.
Hoglander Bo Pearson
Motte Dickinson Podkolzin
would love to see a 4th line of
Gadjovich Sutter Lockwood/Highmore
This team is going to just keep applying pressure all night gotta love it.
Where does 1 of Miller, EP, Boeser or Garland go. All 4 of these guys are top 6.
-
36 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:
The real question is, how many pages will this thread hit now?
At least 4
-
1
-
What do you guys think, is this a good method for figuring out a bridge deal or longer term deal for Hughes.
in Canucks Talk
Posted · Edited by Arrow 1983
I don't think the Canucks Value him more or less because of the past. Hughes is valued based on the league market.
You asked has he earned it the answer is a clear yes read the post I wrote to Agent above for the reason why.