[Rumour] Bo Horvat Trade/Contract Talks

[Coconuts]

3 minutes ago, spook007 said:

Agree about there being no problem with having both players on the roster down the middle...

All the talk has come partly because of the obvious need to improve the D and Horvats prolonged contract discussions...

 

As for beating it to death, absolutely..... It's typical for off season, where we are starved of any on ice product.

And because on some level we all want to debate 

 

This is the fanbase during both the season and offseason in a nutshell

 

 

1 minute ago, spook007 said:

[EdgarM]

11 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

I dunno about that, I've broken it down on a game to game basis and Bo was actually quite a force for Vancouver in December. He was pretty close to point per game for the month, only behind Miller if I remember correctly. I think context matters when you consider the first half of last season because it seemed like most of the team struggled offensively. His turnaround seemed to coincide with Boudreau arriving and he wasn't alone on that front. You are correct that Miller was consistent offensively from start to finish but he was an outlier in comparison to the rest of the team. Hughes is the only other player who really jumps out in my memory as a player who maintained point production from start to finish. 

 

Last season was very much a tale of two seasons for not just the team, but many of the players as well and I think it's important to look at the season through that lens as it provides proper context. 

 

But no, I don't believe having both players on the roster or down the middle is the issue some folks would present it to be. I feel the leadership debate in Vancouver is overblown in part because of how rabid the Canucks fanbase is. We beat literally every topic to death and as a market we're starved for every scrap of seemingly legitimate information we can get. The fanbase has been that way for as long as I can remember. 

 

Sometimes it's not the players or the guys in the room, sometimes it's us as a fanbase in combination with our consuming hockey media. And the media trying to provide information, regardless of how sparse of speculative.

I agree with Ibatch with his comment"  And well he was a complete no show the first half of last season.  Miller wasn't. "

When the team is losing , I look to see who steps up or tries to do their part in turning the ship around. I first look at leadership. Miller was the only top 9 forward who was obviously still producing when the ship was going down. I had hoped Bo would be able to influence the team into at least putting in hard fought battles, even if they did still lose. It looked like the team had given up and it didn't change until BB came into the picture. 

Whatever gets the wins I am interested in, if you are not a part of that, then maybe its time for change.

[spook007]

5 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

And because on some level we all want to debate 

 

This is the fanbase during both the season and offseason in a nutshell

 

 

[Coconuts]

19 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Miller scored at a 120 point pace the second half.   27 points over 13 games.   

 

Horvat didn't light it up until down the stretch really.   Bruce bump muddies things somewhat for sure.  Best goal

i saw all year was just before Green got fired and Miller went through four guys.  Only Miller and Garland did anytime before the coaching change.   Im

happy for Horvat too.  But it's two

completely different things.  

I wasn't arguing that Bo had been "lighting it up" and I was taking issue with the "no show bit". Bo was on pace for less than he usually gets in the first half of the season but I wouldn't equate that to "no show". I'd already mentioned Miller as being an outlier. Garland was on and off from what I remember, but was certainly one of the better forwards on the team right off the hop. It's almost as if he hadn't been playing in Vancouver, which I absolutely phrase as a damning indication of where we were as a team and franchise prior to, and during, chunks of last season. 

 

 

16 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

I agree with Ibatch with his comment"  And well he was a complete no show the first half of last season.  Miller wasn't. "

When the team is losing , I look to see who steps up or tries to do their part in turning the ship around. I first look at leadership. Miller was the only top 9 forward who was obviously still producing when the ship was going down. I had hoped Bo would be able to influence the team into at least putting in hard fought battles, even if they did still lose. It looked like the team had given up and it didn't change until BB came into the picture. 

Whatever gets the wins I am interested in, if you are not a part of that, then maybe its time for change.

Yes it did. But like I pointed out earlier, I don't agree with Bo being a "no show" and I'm not interested in singling him out as a player who struggled when the reality is that players who produced anything close to point per game were few and far between as a whole prior Bruce taking over.

 

I remember this exact forum jumping on Pettersson and Boeser as well, to the point where there were ongoing discussions as to whether Pettersson should be traded or not. Like I said, it was a tale of two seasons for much of the team and I'm not interested in singling players out when the reality is most of the team struggled. JT and a few others players thriving were outliers. 

 

We'll see what happens this coming season. 

Edited September 26, 2022 by Coconuts

[AnthonyG]

51 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Well the D does need help.   Brock or Horvat are reasonable solutions in different ways to that issue. 

Why not a guy like Garland? I would say Garland is a much easier forward to replace within our system. Hoglander is quite a comparable player and on a much better deal. Boeser’s g/pg pace would be harder to replace and be a bit of a hole in the top 6. Mind you we have yet to see Kuzmenko’s potential. I wouldnt want to move Bo just because the deeper we are at C, we are going to start with the puck on our stick more often than not. Which if we have possession more frequently, we dont have to worry about liabilities as much. Gives the D less responsibility in their own zone. If you are going to move a F for a D or vice versa, you’d want to make sure that you have someone in your system that can offer as close to what you had in that player. Otherwise you are boosting your blue at the cost of offence which is lateral imo. You might not get scored on as much, but you also wont be scoring as frequently either.

 

There is no one in our system that can offer close to what Bo or Boeser can on an ELC. Thats the key to making big trades is ensuring that the guy you are moving is replaceable within the system on a very cheap deal. 

Garland may not have the same value as Boeser or Horvat, but you could certainly build a very nice package around him to acquire a RHD that we desperately need.

I feel like Garland is kind of the odd man out and right now we can afford to move a 1st because we have such a young roster that we dont depend on 1st’s right now to fix our roster.

[AnthonyG]

45 minutes ago, Sophomore Jinx said:

Bzzzzzzz, go away little gnat, your momma's calling, PBJ with the crusts cut off....

 

Hahahahaha you know you’ve got them upset when they’re pulling out mom comments hahahahahahah. Shouldnt you be in class? Dont forget when you add to carry the 1 over.

[EdgarM]

19 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

I wasn't arguing that Bo had been "lighting it up" and I was taking issue with the "no show bit". Bo was on pace for less than he usually gets in the first half of the season but I wouldn't equate that to "no show". I'd already mentioned Miller as being an outlier. Garland was on and off from what I remember, but was certainly one of the better forwards on the team right off the hop. It's almost as if he hadn't been playing in Vancouver, which I absolutely phrase as a damning indication of where we were as a team and franchise prior to, and during, chunks of last season. 

 

 

Yes it did. But like I pointed out earlier, I don't agree with Bo being a "no show" and I'm not interested in singling him out as a player who struggled when the reality is that players who produced anything close to point per game were few and far between as a whole prior Bruce taking over.

 

I remember this exact forum jumping on Pettersson and Boeser as well, to the point where there were ongoing discussions as to whether Pettersson should be traded or not. Like I said, it was a tale of two seasons for much of the team and I'm not interested in singling players out when the reality is most of the team struggled. JT and a few others players thriving were outliers. 

 

We'll see what happens this coming season. 

I guess as a leader, I expected something like a "players only" meeting being requested or for him to go that extra mile on the ice to lead the team out of the funk. A big hit, a fight, an end to end attempt. Something that says, I am tired of losing and I want to lead us out of this. 

Maybe it is a bit of unrealistic expectations on my part , I guess.

[Sophomore Jinx]

15 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

 

Hahahahaha you know you’ve got them upset when they’re pulling out mom comments hahahahahahah. Shouldnt you be in class? Dont forget when you add to carry the 1 over.

You make so many assumptions, don't you little man, yet you know nothing about me, but judging by your posts, they say a lot about you. Grow up kid.

[AnthonyG]

9 minutes ago, Sophomore Jinx said:

You make so many assumptions, don't you little man, yet you know nothing about me, but judging by your posts, they say a lot about you. Grow up kid.

 

Lmfao look at all of your posts from the very beginning there Huffle Puff. You’ve been name calling from the very start. If anything this says everything about you. I am grown up, I can do simple math. Can you? Sounds like you’re still in middle school bustin out mom jokes. You’re bitter AF and wont leave me alone. Starting to feel like you’re hopin I might sell my jock, the way you cant stop coming at me, feels like you have a crush.

[Sophomore Jinx]

17 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

 

Lmfao look at all of your posts from the very beginning there Huffle Puff. You’ve been name calling from the very start. If anything this says everything about you. I am grown up, I can do simple math. Can you? Sounds like you’re still in middle school bustin out mom jokes. You’re bitter AF and wont leave me alone. Starting to feel like you’re hopin I might sell my jock, the way you cant stop coming at me, feels like you have a crush.

Nice GIF, go get some help, little man.

[AnthonyG]

4 minutes ago, Sophomore Jinx said:

Nice GIF, go get some help, little man.

[cripplereh]

To me it is simple the team and Bo want to be here.Get it done.See what we have,then make a decision on whom stays and goes.We all know we need some cap room and like said a player we all like might get traded.That will shake up the team but if it is a fair deal then we should be as good if not better.

 

We also have two promising young rhd that may take 2 to 3 years.So till then get one till Myers contract is done and we should have our D set.

 

Many have stayed a few players they want dealt and management will trade some more likely at tdl or off season.So give it 3 years and we should have a winning team.

 

I am a bit bias as I do like Bo but if he has to be dealt so be it.

Edited September 26, 2022 by cripplereh

[EdgarM]

8 minutes ago, cripplereh said:

To me it is simple the team and Bo want to be here.Get it done.See what we have,then make a decision on whom stays and goes.We all know we need some cap room and like said a player we all like might get traded.That will shake up the team but if it is a fair deal then we should be as good if not better.

 

We also have two promising young rhd that may take 2 to 3 years.So till then get one till Myers contract is done and we should have our D set.

 

Many have stayed a few players they want dealt and management will trade some more likely at tdl or off season.So give it 3 years and we should have a winning team.

 

I am a bit bias as I do like Bo but if he has to be dealt so be it.

This makes sense, by the time the TDL rolls around, we should know who is probably going to fit and who would fall in the expendable category. With the new additions, there needs to be some time where we see where all the pieces fit, or not.

[cripplereh]

1 hour ago, AnthonyG said:

Why not a guy like Garland? I would say Garland is a much easier forward to replace within our system. Hoglander is quite a comparable player and on a much better deal. Boeser’s g/pg pace would be harder to replace and be a bit of a hole in the top 6. Mind you we have yet to see Kuzmenko’s potential. I wouldnt want to move Bo just because the deeper we are at C, we are going to start with the puck on our stick more often than not. Which if we have possession more frequently, we dont have to worry about liabilities as much. Gives the D less responsibility in their own zone. If you are going to move a F for a D or vice versa, you’d want to make sure that you have someone in your system that can offer as close to what you had in that player. Otherwise you are boosting your blue at the cost of offence which is lateral imo. You might not get scored on as much, but you also wont be scoring as frequently either.

 

There is no one in our system that can offer close to what Bo or Boeser can on an ELC. Thats the key to making big trades is ensuring that the guy you are moving is replaceable within the system on a very cheap deal. 

Garland may not have the same value as Boeser or Horvat, but you could certainly build a very nice package around him to acquire a RHD that we desperately need.

I feel like Garland is kind of the odd man out and right now we can afford to move a 1st because we have such a young roster that we dont depend on 1st’s right now to fix our roster.

We do not want to move any 1st at all.This is why we have new management here to stay away from giving up so many picks.We need one good rhd but the asking price is high and wouldn't be a fair trade unless it's for a BB or Bo plus young player which would be more reasonable.Or stay as is and wait till next summer which makes more sense.

[cripplereh]

Just now, EdgarM said:

This makes sense, by the time the TDL rolls around, we should know who is probably going to fit and who would fall in the expendable category. With the new additions, there needs to be some time where we see where all the pieces fit, or not.

Me I would try to set the bar and trade just after Xmas so we do not miss out.

[Jayinblack]

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

Let's re-set this thread! 

 

Miller is done.  Why and who cares who is the better leader.   It's just a letter.  We don't know what happens behind closed doors, only what they say in the media, and what they do on the ice ... plus what we they might get validated for doing in their communities.  

 

This thread is about Horvats contract.   So i'm going to put my money where my mouth is and say it's going to happen, and it's coming in at around 52 million.  Total. 

Argh !....  53 is right there   

[250Integra]

7 years x 7.3 million

 

Get it done!!

[Coconuts]

1 hour ago, EdgarM said:

I guess as a leader, I expected something like a "players only" meeting being requested or for him to go that extra mile on the ice to lead the team out of the funk. A big hit, a fight, an end to end attempt. Something that says, I am tired of losing and I want to lead us out of this. 

Maybe it is a bit of unrealistic expectations on my part , I guess.

I'm not going to touch on your expectations as only you can really gauge where those were at. But I will argue that things like players only meetings, while valuable, are mythologized by fanbases and sensationalized by the media. The bits we actually catch wind of, whether they be attempts at building team cohesion, at facilitating group discussion, or any other number of things are microcosms of a team dynamic and aren't reflective of how a team actually operates and interacts with each other. 

 

We as a fanbase don't actually get a whole lot of insight into the day to day bits, and as a result can't actually build an accurate picture. But what does often happen is we as a fanbase latch on to the bits we can and try to fill in the blanks. Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's normal, but it's also worth acknowledging our role in how we perceive the team.

 

All of this is part of why I think the whole Miller vs Horvat thing is overblown, we really don't know a whole lot about the day to day and game to game leadership dynamics and while a game to game analysis can contribute to group knowledge it still doesn't paint the whole picture. We as fans can only know what we perceive or are told by the team, players, or media, but even all of those contributors combined don't give us anything resembling the whole picture.  

Edited September 26, 2022 by Coconuts

[Devron]

Should be anywhere between 6.5 and 7 million for 7 or 8 years for Horvat. That’s a fair price for the Cap. Based on his age and what he brings to the team. 

[Devron]

4 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

All of this is part of why I think the whole Miller vs Horvat thing is overblown, we really don't know a whole lot about the day to day and game to game leadership dynamics and while a game to game analysis can contribute to group knowledge it still doesn't paint the whole picture. We as fans can only know what we perceive or are told by the team, players, or media, but even all of those contributors combined don't give us anything resembling the whole picture.  

I can’t figure out the fans obsession with a letter on a jersey.