Implications of a Boeser Hold Out

[JamesB]

Boeser in now an official "holdout" in the sense that training camp is underway and not being in camp probably hurts both Boeser and the team. I am not blaming Boeser, just noting the obvious fact that he is holding out.

 

Based on a poll on the CDC website, the vast majority of CDC readers believe that he will sign before the season starts. And I think he probably will, but the vast majority of CDC readers thought he would sign before the start of camp, even as recently as about ten days ago.

 

The primary question I am raising in this thread is "what would be the consequences of lengthy hold-out"? How much would it hurt the team, and in what way.

 

I Background

Bofore turning to that --just a brief reminder of where the negotiations seem to be. Neither side has confirmed anything and both say they want to negotiate in private, not in the media. However, a lot of people have some knowledge of what is going on and leaks do occur. One plausible claim is that the Canucks have offered 6 years at an AAV of 7 million per year. Earlier there was a claim that the Boeser camp had suggested 4 years at an AAV of 7 million per year. Both these claims are plausible and neither side has actually denied them. But obviously we do not really know. And term and AAV are not the only things that matter. The distribution of signing bonus vs. salary matters and the time pattern of the payments matter. (Players cannot get NTC and NMCs in their RFA years.)

 

Just looking at the recent evolution of the cap and Boeser's likely trajectory, I would project that Boeser would be about 9 in AAV after a 4-year deal ends, so I think the difference between the reported offer is about 4 million -- Boeser gets 7 million a year in years 5 and 6 instead of 9 million under the alleged Canuck offer. But there is a lot of uncertainty.

 

II. What do the Canucks do without Boeser.

 

PK. Boeser does not play on the PK, so the PK is unaffected by Boeser's absence.

 

PP. Boeser is regarded as a key part of the PP. But here is where things get interesting. I think PP performance is one of the easiest things to assess with numbers. You don't need to worry (much) about defensive play or physical play on the PP.  And quality of competition and quality of teammates vary a lot less than in 5-on-5 play. The only real objective is just to score. Players who get more opportunities will score more so I think  points per 60 minutes is a good measure. Here are the numbers from last year for the forwards currently under consideration for the PP.

 

1. JT Miller: 6.41

2. Ferland: 5.84

3. Baertschi: 5.79

4. Pettersson: 5.08

5. Horvat: 3.91

6. Boeser: 3.76

7. Goldobin: 3.46

8. Pearson: 3.14

9. Leivo 2.1

 

It was often discussed last year that Baer has excellent PP numbers, but it is striking that both Miller and Ferland had better numbers than any Canuck. And it was not second assists, either. Their lead would be even bigger if we look at primary points (goals and first assists).

 

Of course, a lot of factors go into designing PP units -- the players must be complementary, you need a couple of shooters, a PP QB, a net front presence. And we have to expect that younger guys (like EP) will improve.

 

I would add that Edler had excellent PP numbers last year, as he always does (5.64 PP60). It is arguable that the Canucks should go with two Ds -- Edler and Hughes on the first unit (and having two left shots is no problem on the PP.) With EP as the playmaker/QB and Horvat as the net-front presence, I think Baer, Miller, Ferland, and Boeser would all be contenders for the other spot if Boeser were available. I admit that the Canucks would probably go with Boeser on the first unit, but it is not obvious that the Canucks would lose much from the first unit PP if Boeser was not on it.

 

5-on-5

At 5-on-5 things are harder to read and it looks like the loss of Boeser would be more serious. In terms of 5-on-5 scoring per 60 here is what we have from last year:

 

1. EP: 2.47

2. Boeser: 2.28

3. Roussel: 1.98

4. Ferland: 1.67

5. Miller: 1.64

6. Horvat: 1.59

7. Baertschi: 1.43

8. Schaller: 1.4

9. Eriksson: 1.38

10. Goldy: 1.37

11. Virtanen: 1.26

12. Leivo: 1.17 (includes full year)

13. Pearson: 1.17 (includes full year;he was much better in Vancouver)

14. Gaudette: 1.15

15. Motte: 0.91

16. Sutter: 0.72

17. Beagle: 0.70

 

Based on scoring, there appears to be no one to replace Boeser on the first line. With Roussel injured, there is a big drop-off from Boeser to Ferland and the rest. If the effect of not having Boeser is to give Goldy or Leivo or even Baertschi a shot with EP, it looks like a big step back from Boeser. Possibly playing with EP gave Boeser a boost and whoever plays with him this year would also get a boost, but it looks from the data that the Canucks do not really have an alternative legitimate 1RW. (And, no, it won't be Virtanen.)

 

One possibility would be EP with Ferland and Miller -- that probably gives the strongest first line. Then Horvat could play with Pearson (assuming that he plays as did late last year with Vancouver) and maybe Baertschi.

 

Effect on other Players

 

If the Canucks are serious about wanting a "top 9" (three scoring lines) instead of a top six. it does not make sense to have Sutter or Beagle at 3C. (Yes, Sutter's numbers last year were likely depressed by playing hurt, but he has never been a good playmaker.) Maybe a Boeser hold-out makes room on the roster for Gaudette, who could play 3C.

 

Maybe a Boeser hold-out makes it possible keep Loui Eriksson in the line-up. The Eriksson contract is a terrible contract, but Eriksson is still a good player. He would be a great deal at $2 million instead of $6 million. In the numbers, he looks like the Canucks BEST PK foward and his secondary scoring is actually a lot better than Beagle or Sutter (or Leivo or Motte).

 

Conclusion

Obviously Boeser helps the team a lot and missing him is a big loss. He is very popular with the fans (and for good reason). He seems like a very high-character guy. But his value to the team may be somewhat over-rated. He has the most important skill in hockey --putting the puck in the net. But he is not a complete player -- not fast, not great defensively, not physical, and does not drive play. He is not in the same league as EP.

 

I would love to have him sign but if I were JB I would hold firm on the offer. If JB has offered 6 years at an AAV of 7 million, I think that is a very reasonable offer -- toward the high end of how I see the comparables.

 

In any case, if Boeser does hold out for a while it raises a lot interesting story lines and might provide opportunities for other guys who can help the team in the long run, so the team will be even stronger when Boeser does eventually come on board.

 

Thanks for reading.

[Odd.]

4 minutes ago, JamesB said:

 

Just looking at the recent evolution of the cap and Boeser's likely trajectory, I would project that Boeser would be about 9 in AAV after a 4-year deal ends, so I think the difference

 

Maybe a Boeser hold-out makes it possible keep Loui Eriksson in the line-up. The Eriksson contract is a terrible contract, but Eriksson is still a good player. He would be a great deal at $2 million instead of $6 million. In the numbers, he looks like the Canucks BEST PK foward and his secondary scoring is actually a lot better than Beagle or Sutter (or Leivo or Motte).

 

 

IMO, the day Boeser signs is the day Loui's time in Vancouver ends.

[stawns]

1 minute ago, Odd. said:

IMO, the day Boeser signs is the day Loui's time in Vancouver ends.

What does one have to do with the other?

[JRSJ]

7 minutes ago, stawns said:

What does one have to do with the other?

Concenus is to bury Loui's and Shallers contracts in the minors to move money. Albeit a very small amount.

[Nuxfanabroad]

We're all eager as Hell to get back at it..summer's long, & we want Van to come racing out of the blocks.

 

1. Teams that storm out, & fade in the 2nd half

2. Teams that start slow, & come on as the season goes deeper.

(every yr, there are plenty examples of both), a large factor being relative-health

 

The past few yrs it seems the latter approach(?..for some contenders, one almost wonders if a slack start is deliberate?) pays bigger dividends. Many LT fans have claimed it's better to treat the season as a marathon, & I subscribe to this theory. We're likely even more wound up, due to the Miller trade(wanting to be a PO-certainty, etc...)

 

IF this team is gonna burst through & be a PO-reality, they'll need about 8-10 components to come together. It'll have to be based on a multi-faceted, (truly) team-breakthrough.

 

If Brock really wants to be a Canuck, he should be in the lineup pretty soon. But I don't think he'll make-or-break this season's fate. Therefore, we should approach the two separately..not acting as if a strong season is dependent upon one RFA winger-talent.

Edited September 15, 2019 by Nuxfanabroad

[stawns]

9 minutes ago, JRSJ said:

Concenus is to bury Loui's and Shallers contracts in the minors to move money. Albeit a very small amount.

There's no need to it.  I'm not saying LE won't be in Utica (though I believe he won't), but it's not related to the Boeser hold out in any way 

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

We're all eager as Hell to get back at it..summer's long, & we want Van to come racing out of the blocks.

 

1. Teams that storm out, & fade in the 2nd half

2. Teams that start slow, & come on as the season goes deeper.

(every yr, there are plenty examples of both), a large factor being relative-health

 

The past few yrs it seems the latter approach(?..for some contenders, one almost wonders if a slack start is deliberate?) pays bigger dividends. Many LT fans have claimed it's better to treat the season as a marathon, & I subscribe to this theory. We're likely even more wound up, due to the Miller trade(wanting to be a PO-certainty, etc...)

 

IF this team is gonna burst through & be a PO-reality, they'll need about 8-10 components to come together. It'll have to be based on a multi-faceted, (truly) team-breakthrough.

 

If Brock really wants to be a Canuck, he should be in the lineup pretty soon. But I don't think he'll make-or-break this season's fate. Therefore, we should approach the two separately..not acting as if a strong season is dependent upon one RFA winger-talent.

As usual with franchise, injuries will be the single biggest factor.  

[iceman64]

26 minutes ago, JamesB said:

Boeser in now an official "holdout" in the sense that training camp is underway and not being in camp probably hurts both Boeser and the team. I am not blaming Boeser, just noting the obvious fact that he is holding out.

 

Based on a poll on the CDC website, the vast majority of CDC readers believe that he will sign before the season starts. And I think he probably will, but the vast majority of CDC readers thought he would sign before the start of camp, even as recently as about ten days ago.

 

The primary question I am raising in this thread is "what would be the consequences of lengthy hold-out"? How much would it hurt the team, and in what way.

 

I Background

Bofore turning to that --just a brief reminder of where the negotiations seem to be. Neither side has confirmed anything and both say they want to negotiate in private, not in the media. However, a lot of people have some knowledge of what is going on and leaks do occur. One plausible claim is that the Canucks have offered 6 years at an AAV of 7 million per year. Earlier there was a claim that the Boeser camp had suggested 4 years at an AAV of 7 million per year. Both these claims are plausible and neither side has actually denied them. But obviously we do not really know. And term and AAV are not the only things that matter. The distribution of signing bonus vs. salary matters and the time pattern of the payments matter. (Players cannot get NTC and NMCs in their RFA years.)

 

Just looking at the recent evolution of the cap and Boeser's likely trajectory, I would project that Boeser would be about 9 in AAV after a 4-year deal ends, so I think the difference between the reported offer is about 4 million -- Boeser gets 7 million a year in years 5 and 6 instead of 9 million under the alleged Canuck offer. But there is a lot of uncertainty.

 

II. What do the Canucks do without Boeser.

 

PK. Boeser does not play on the PK, so the PK is unaffected by Boeser's absence.

 

PP. Boeser is regarded as a key part of the PP. But here is where things get interesting. I think PP performance is one of the easiest things to assess with numbers. You don't need to worry (much) about defensive play or physical play on the PP.  And quality of competition and quality of teammates vary a lot less than in 5-on-5 play. The only real objective is just to score. Players who get more opportunities will score more so I think  points per 60 minutes is a good measure. Here are the numbers from last year for the forwards currently under consideration for the PP.

 

1. JT Miller: 6.41

2. Ferland: 5.84

3. Baertschi: 5.79

4. Pettersson: 5.08

5. Horvat: 3.91

6. Boeser: 3.76

7. Goldobin: 3.46

8. Pearson: 3.14

9. Leivo 2.1

 

It was often discussed last year that Baer has excellent PP numbers, but it is striking that both Miller and Ferland had better numbers than any Canuck. And it was not second assists, either. Their lead would be even bigger if we look at primary points (goals and first assists).

 

Of course, a lot of factors go into designing PP units -- the players must be complementary, you need a couple of shooters, a PP QB, a net front presence. And we have to expect that younger guys (like EP) will improve.

 

I would add that Edler had excellent PP numbers last year, as he always does (5.64 PP60). It is arguable that the Canucks should go with two Ds -- Edler and Hughes on the first unit (and having two left shots is no problem on the PP.) With EP as the playmaker/QB and Horvat as the net-front presence, I think Baer, Miller, Ferland, and Boeser would all be contenders for the other spot if Boeser were available. I admit that the Canucks would probably go with Boeser on the first unit, but it is not obvious that the Canucks would lose much from the first unit PP if Boeser was not on it.

 

5-on-5

At 5-on-5 things are harder to read and it looks like the loss of Boeser would be more serious. In terms of 5-on-5 scoring per 60 here is what we have from last year:

 

1. EP: 2.47

2. Boeser: 2.28

3. Roussel: 1.98

4. Ferland: 1.67

5. Miller: 1.64

6. Horvat: 1.59

7. Baertschi: 1.43

8. Schaller: 1.4

9. Eriksson: 1.38

10. Goldy: 1.37

11. Virtanen: 1.26

12. Leivo: 1.17 (includes full year)

13. Pearson: 1.17 (includes full year;he was much better in Vancouver)

14. Gaudette: 1.15

15. Motte: 0.91

16. Sutter: 0.72

17. Beagle: 0.70

 

Based on scoring, there appears to be no one to replace Boeser on the first line. With Roussel injured, there is a big drop-off from Boeser to Ferland and the rest. If the effect of not having Boeser is to give Goldy or Leivo or even Baertschi a shot with EP, it looks like a big step back from Boeser. Possibly playing with EP gave Boeser a boost and whoever plays with him this year would also get a boost, but it looks from the data that the Canucks do not really have an alternative legitimate 1RW. (And, no, it won't be Virtanen.)

 

One possibility would be EP with Ferland and Miller -- that probably gives the strongest first line. Then Horvat could play with Pearson (assuming that he plays as did late last year with Vancouver) and maybe Baertschi.

 

Effect on other Players

 

If the Canucks are serious about wanting a "top 9" (three scoring lines) instead of a top six. it does not make sense to have Sutter or Beagle at 3C. (Yes, Sutter's numbers last year were likely depressed by playing hurt, but he has never been a good playmaker.) Maybe a Boeser hold-out makes room on the roster for Gaudette, who could play 3C.

 

Maybe a Boeser hold-out makes it possible keep Loui Eriksson in the line-up. The Eriksson contract is a terrible contract, but Eriksson is still a good player. He would be a great deal at $2 million instead of $6 million. In the numbers, he looks like the Canucks BEST PK foward and his secondary scoring is actually a lot better than Beagle or Sutter (or Leivo or Motte).

 

Conclusion

Obviously Boeser helps the team a lot and missing him is a big loss. He is very popular with the fans (and for good reason). He seems like a very high-character guy. But his value to the team may be somewhat over-rated. He has the most important skill in hockey --putting the puck in the net. But he is not a complete player -- not fast, not great defensively, not physical, and does not drive play. He is not in the same league as EP.

 

I would love to have him sign but if I were JB I would hold firm on the offer. If JB has offered 6 years at an AAV of 7 million, I think that is a very reasonable offer -- toward the high end of how I see the comparables.

 

In any case, if Boeser does hold out for a while it raises a lot interesting story lines and might provide opportunities for other guys who can help the team in the long run, so the team will be even stronger when Boeser does eventually come on board.

 

Thanks for reading.

JT and Ferland on first line with Petey. Pearson, Bo, and Sven

2nd line

solved...Or Goldy with Ferland, Petey

 

 

 

 

[Fanuck]

28 minutes ago, JamesB said:

Based on a poll on the CDC website, the vast majority of CDC readers believe that he will sign before the season starts. And I think he probably will, but the vast majority of CDC readers thought he would sign before the start of camp, even as recently as about ten days ago.

Conclusion: the vast majority of CDC readers don't know anything about when he'll sign.

[Nuxfanabroad]

5 minutes ago, stawns said:

As usual with franchise, injuries will be the single biggest factor.  

Agreed, & I really like how they've prepared with more size/depth, to try & nip this in the bud.

 

So I almost prefer to(reverse the narrative) & see a possibly sitting  Boeser, if that were to happen, as a sleeved-ace for when injuries come calling.

[BrockBoester]

Bo-lieve in Boeser because he's the Boester! If he becomes Petey's bonafide top line winger, then why wouldn't he be worth north of 7 million? Why are people so stuck on this number?

 

GMJB get it done! XD

Edited September 15, 2019 by BrockBoester

[JM_]

@JamesB solid job on the assessment. 

 

In the short term if this actually spilled over into the season the team is deep enough to deal with, but the problem is the cap. As the season wears on the ability to deal with Brocks cap hit declines (as it did with Nylander). So this really can't go on much longer and certainly not well into the season.

 

I think as more and more reasonable deals like McAvoy's roll in we'll see Boesers agent relent, I do think agreeing on comparables is one of the main issues here and as these get done the correct number will present itself. 

['NucK™]

22 minutes ago, BrockBoester said:

Bo-lieve in Boeser because he's the Boester! If he becomes Petey's bonafide top line winger, then why wouldn't he be worth north of 7 million? Why are people so stuck on this number?

 

GMJB get it done! XD

Because that's already more than he deserves based on past performance?  

You're asking a bunch of what if questions that can't even be answered until he does sign..

[rawkdrummer]

I like the blame game on Loui E, it's humorous.

Here's one for you though. 

It's been suggested by some the big problem is our cap.

Lu's retirement (as opposed to LTIR) is costing us cap wise big time.

 

blame Lu not Lou imho and don't be starting threads about Lu's number retirement, #1 fkn ass.

 

Edited September 15, 2019 by rawkdrummer

['NucK™]

2 minutes ago, rawkdrummer said:

I like the blame game on Loui E, it's humorous.

Here's one for you though. 

It's been suggested by some the big problem is our cap.

Lu's retirement (as opposed to LTIR) is costing us cap wise big time.

 

blame Lu not Lou imho and don't be starting threads about Lu's number retirement, #1 fkn ass.

 

Maybe if Torts hadn't treated him like s***, he'd still have some loyalty towards the Canucks. 

[rawkdrummer]

Florida didn't pay him those BIG $ and neither did Torts for that matter.

 

Many a player has had to suck it up with coaches BTW, weak argument.

You're right about loyalty thing to the Canucks though!

and some want to retire his number, it burns my cheese

Edited September 15, 2019 by rawkdrummer

[Baer.]

I can't wait until boeser signs so everybody can stop talking about it

['NucK™]

3 minutes ago, rawkdrummer said:

Florida didn't pay him those BIG $ and neither did Torts for that matter.

 

Many a player has had to suck it up with coaches BTW, weak argument.

 

How is it a weak argument?? If he hadn't been treated like s*** he would have some loyalty and maybe actually consider the organization when he decided to retire. Since he doesn't, I don't see why he would put the Canucks over his own personal decision or his current team. 

[Knucklehd]

I believe he will sign, character and little leverage being the two key factors.  That said, his absence will have a significant impact on the team, no 2 ways about it.

[48MPHSlapShot]

Considering that we're a bubble team, a lengthy Boeser holdout could wind up being the difference between making the playoffs and falling short. For anyone trying to peddle the idea that he has no leverage, that's his leverage. 

 

edit: According to Dhaliwal's Twitter, contract talk hasn't gone anywhere since the Marner signing.

Edited September 15, 2019 by 48MPHSlapShot