Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Baggins

Members
  • Posts

    11,793
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by Baggins

  1. Do you view either of those contracts as good deals for the teams? O'Reily signed his deal at 25. I would wager his deal involved anticipated improvement going into his prime. Much like Boeser's previous deal ending at $7.5m. That deal was gambling on continued improvement in play and production. High for time of signing and potentially a bargain in the final year. Team often do that with good young players. Didn't exactly work out for us. Hayes is quite good at pk but Philly overpaid him considering he was a 40+ pt guy on a 50+ pt contracxt yeasr. The NYR traded him because they weren't close on negotiations at the trade deadline. Winnipeg then traded his rights for a 5th rounder prior to free agency. Fans here would have been screaming about signing a 40 pt player for over $7m regardless of of being a good pk'er. Pretty good player imo but 7m+ good. And he got that money from a team he had no allegiance to with ufa market soon available. I still believe Miller will be the better player through the term than Horvat. Goal scoring tends to decline with age quicker than playmaking ability. Bo is a shooter. Miller is both a shooter and a good playmaker. The most I would have offered Bo prior to this season is $7m and I wouldn't have viewed that as a team friendly deal. Given Miller's previous production, and coming off a 99 pt season, he would have easily gotten 9m+ if he was two years younger. Tavares got 7x 11m at 27 and never had a 90+ pt season. But he was younger and had a history of high production. I get that we drafted Bo and he's really likeable. But that doesn't mean he's worth more money.
  2. Ok, I spent the time looking through the Horvat thread (thanks for nothing) and found one tweet from one source. Not exactly "hard evidence". On the flipside there was a tweet from one source saying the Horvat camp was asking $7.7m. Now management always starts low and the agent high but neither was remotely in the region of what Horvat was worth. I saw several hockey pundits on TV saying Horvat was looking for "close to" Miller money and "north of" $7m. If you're going to damn one for being unreasonable you have to damn both. Many so called insiders are actually just speculating. I say this because of how often they turn out completely wrong. Often it's nothing more than the rumor mill seeking likes and shares. But for a guy that wanted to be a career Canuck, Horvat seemed to be swinging for the fence on his contract demand.
  3. Actually this was the "contact year" for both. After last season both were elligible to extend with one year remaining on their deals. Management could have waited until into this season to extend Miller to see if he would keep up the pace but that likely would have upped his price if he did keep that same pace. Taveres got 7x 11m at age 27 without ever hitting 90 pts 5 years ago. Not much of a bargain considering playing for the Leafs was his childhood dream. Millers 8m after a 99 pt season pales in comparison. But he is older which lowers it but also has two seasons of solid production prior as well. Given his prior seasons I felt 8m was pretty fair. Neither a true bargain nor a homerun for the player. Compare Miller's deal to Kadri. Kadri got 7x 7m after an 87 pt career year and it runs until he's 39. I like Millers deal better. Bo has a history of decent production, but not high, and is having a career year. I think his 8.5m until 36 is riskier than Millers 8m until 37.
  4. Did I say gauging? Nope. As a matter of fact I said "If Bo completes the season 50+ goals and over a ppg he would definitely have a market for 8.5m in free agency". But don't whine about a player leaving to get that top dollar. No employer is required to pay employees top dollar. That's their perogative. UFA contracts are often overpayments. If an employee truly wants to stay they'll take less to do so. If he wants the homerun he may well have to move on. Bo chose the latter. That's life. I've declined job offers (from former managers that moved on) for more money several times because I was quite happy where I was.
  5. I suspect "the mushy middle" is between peoples ears....
  6. Any player willing to just rollover and lose should be moved. If you're not trying to win, no matter what, you're not worth keeping.
  7. Teams don't care about players taxes. They only car about how much cap space they take up.
  8. If Bo completes the season 50+ goals and over a ppg he would definitely have a market for 8.5m in free agency. Free agency is all about overpaying good players because it's a bidding war. If he had a history of that kind of production he'd go for north of 8.5m. At 28 Tavares got 7 x11m after an 84 pt season and had never hit 40 goals in a season. But he had a history of production. By all reports TO was the one team he really wanted to sign with. He didn't do them any favors on his price tag though. As to Landeskog, and his team being good versus bad, I don't buy it. Short term you might have a point, but we're talking long term contracts. A player is either willing to leave money on the table, which can mean better depth for for the length of the deal, or he wants to cash in. Your notion of "the team isn't very good so I'll gouge them for the next 8 years" seems rather shortsighted.
  9. So you're saying he was offered no raise at all. Do you have a source for that?
  10. It wasn't a "fake Miller account" it was simply sports talk radio speculation combined with social media nonsense.... There were various suggestions on sports talk radio and among media types on Twitter that certain Vancouver Canucks might ask for trades after it became clear that the team wasn’t going to make any major changes in its front office. There was also a Tweet with a fake Miller quote about the Canucks struggles that gained some traction as well. NHL insider Elliotte Friedman talked about it during a Hockey Night in Canada segment on Saturday: “I reached out to the source today and here’s J.T. Miller’s exact comment: ‘No, he does not want to be traded. He does not want to leave. He wants to be a Vancouver Canuck. He has no intentions of leaving. We have a good team here and he wants to be a part of it.” Brian Bartlett, who’s Miller agent, reiterated those thoughts in a text message on Monday morning: “J.T. has loved Vancouver and we’ve never discussed him wanting out. It seems like someone just made up a meme with a totally fake quote then J.T. was able to quickly set the record straight. No fire at all for fake smoke!” — Brian Bartlett, J.T. Miller's agent Link: Canucks: J.T. Miller loves Vancouver, never asked for trade, says agent | The Province
  11. He earned the right and he got it. If a player really wants to stay he'll leave a little on the table to accomplish it. If a player wants full market value he may have to move on. That's business. You take that 1.25m you mentioned and multiply by 6 core players times 8 years and you have another 7.5m player on the team for those 8 years. That's the flipside. Had he signed at 7m x 8 years last summer, and retired at 36 when it's done, his career earnings would total 98.325m. I don't think I'd cry for him leaving a little on the table. But the truth is I was hoping he'd sign a little under 7m during the summer and leave a little on the table. Instead we got a 25 yr old with 3 pts in 4 games, a pretty decent prospect and a 1st rounder. I'm ok with that.
  12. Horvat only signed two contracts here and the first was the elc max plus bonuses. Not much choice there. I didn't see Horvats second contract as team friendly and he held out till September to get it. He signed 6 years at $5.5m after a 52 pt season. Given his age I'd call it fair with the team hoping he gets better to make it a decent or possibly even a good deal. But there's no guarantee of that happeneing. Many thought Boeser's last deal was good. I thought it depended heavily on improvement to be good. It didn't play oiut well. Neither deal in my view was really team friendly. Both were risk/reward.
  13. Sure sparky, Miller never hits in the D zone. Except that's simply not true. Unfortunately the stats don't show where a players hits occur. So lets address your giveaways/takeaways claim. This season.... Miller 1.90 GA per 60 minutes - 1.96 TA per 60 minutes Petey 1.92 GA per 60 minutes - 2.04 TA per 60 minutes Garland 2.07 GA per 60 minutes - 1.99 TA per 60 minutes Podkozlin 2.69 GA per 60 minutes (team worst) - 0.97 TA per 60 minutes Millers previous 3 seasons combined average here is: 2.07 GA per 60 and 1.96 TA per 60. Meaning his GA rate this season is actually a little lower and his TA rate the same. Miller has not had a single season here where his giveaways were double his takeaways nevermind triple. His worst season here he had 50% more giveaways than takeaways and his best season 50% more takeaways than giveaways. I suspect you're one of those that watches a player you don't like (Miller) looking for mistakes so you can go "See, he sucks!" while ignoring anything good he does. Then makes up claims like doesn't backcheck, no good defensively, doulbe to triple the giveaways compared to his takeaways. Blocked shots per 60 minutes played this season Miller 1.90 Horvat 1.76 Another weird stat considering Miller doesn't do anything defensively. You really do seem to clutch at any straw to pump Bo's his tires while clutching at straws to put Miller down. Nobody is saying Horvat is a bad player. He's not. But you seem hellbent that Horvat is god and Miller garbage. Neither is true. Both have strengths, both have weaknesses, and both are good players. My preference would have been keeping both. Having 3 top 6 C's is a real luxury should one get injured. But if only one of Miller/Horvat could be kept, my choice would be Miller. I simply think Miller brings more to the table.
  14. Why does it not surprise the me parallel went over your head. You're right, Kesler was never a 30 goal scorer yet he hit 40+ after spending a great deal of time shooting pucks in the offseason. Horvat has never been a 40 goal scorer, yet he is on pace for 50+ after spending a great deal of time shooting pucks in the offseason. See the parallel? Take out Millers "career season" and he's 0.97 pts per game his previous two seasons Take out Horvats "career season" and he's 0.72 pts per game his previous two seasons Possibly the weirdest stat is over the past 3 seasons combined Bo leads the Canucks in shots on goal with 646. The guy hampered offensively by being in a defensive role. Miller is 2nd at 615 and has played 10 more games than Bo. How exactly is Miller a liability if not scoring? He's more agressive, hits more, and has more takeaways. He must be doing something right when not scoring to have more takeaways than Bo. He even spends more time per game on the PK than Bo. We need more aggressive forwards not more nice guys. This season Bo has been hitting even less than usual. Garland and Petey have more hits per 60 minutes this season than Bo. He dropped down the the Boeser level of hitting this season.
  15. At 26 Kesler scored 41 goals (tied with Danny for team lead). He never hit 30 goals in a season before or after that season. On the upside that season came right after re-signing rather than in a contract year. One offs do happen. Bo may or may not be having a one off season. Nobody can say with any certainty that it is or isn't a one off. Only time will tell. But one thing of note is Kesler was asked about his increased goal scoring that season and he said he spent a lot of time shooting pucks in that offseason. Bo gave the same answer when asked earlier this season about his increased scoring. I'll add this, no one can predict when a players decline will come either. Martin St Louis was a late bloomer that stayed very productive through his 30's. He retired at 40 after a 50+ pt season. I doubt anybody would have predicted that 5' 8" St Louis would be well over a point per game at 37 (60 pts in 48 games). There's quite a few highly productive older players in the league right now. While others peak at 28 and are done before age 35.
  16. The Isles can't trade their 2024 1st as It's already tied up in the Horvat deal. They can't trade that pick until the 2023 draft order is set and know the 2024 1st doesn't belong to the Canucks.
  17. Um..... Actually it was towards the end of Pettersson's 2nd season when he asked to play C and they started having Miller take faceoffs and switch roles. Most of his rookie season Petey played RW. Still doesn't explain why a 3rd line sometimes C would get top spot with our top young guys rather than captain Bo. One would think Miller coming from more of a checking role would be the obvious choice that season to play 2C with Pearson and whoever in a checking role. You need to come up with a more logical reason for the move.
  18. Miller's first season here he took 718 faceoffs (2nd to Bo) winning 59% of them while Petey took only 141 faceoffs winning 41.8%. The season prior Petey played almost entirely wing in the SHL while that prior year while Miller took 524 faceoffs in Tampa mainly playing 3rd line. Saying he got top line because he played mainly wing in Tampa makes no sense as a reason for getting the role over Bo. Why would you a put a guy that played "mainly wing" with a rookie that played "almost entirely wing" the season prior along with an actual winger in just his second season together? Saying Miller was put with Petey and Boeser because played "mainly wing" the year before makes no sense at all. Btw, Petey never took more than his rookie 141 faceoffs untill his 3rd season and even then it was fewer than Miller took his last year in Tampa playing "mainly wing". So you need to come up with a better reason for Miller to be put with the rookie and sophmore over Bo than "he played mainly wing".
  19. Find a post where I said Horvat is chopped liver. I've always said he's a good player and very likeable. Saying I believe Miller is the better long term option doesn't mean Horvat is chopped liver. My only actual criticism of Horvat is he doesn't throw his weight around as much as he should. And this season he's been hitting even less than previous seasons. Petey is actually throwing more hits per 60 minutes this season than Horvat. The main reason Gillis was successful was the players he inheritted. It certainly had nothing to do with his awesome drafting. His real bonus was Hamhuis wanting to sign here and willing to sign well below market value to accomplish it. Hamhuis turned down two much higher offers because he wanted to come back to BC. That had nothing to do with Gillis really. You are right about one thing though - that was a fun team to watch.
×
×
  • Create New...