[Rumour] Bo Horvat Trade/Contract Talks

[Nave]

I find all the talk of Horvat having a bad season--and losing leadership duties to Miller--kind of ridiculous. 
He's having just a good season as always. Winning 55% of his draws, while scoring 20+ goals (he's already at 18).

At this point, we shouldn't expect Horvat to be a Selke candidate. He's a good two way forward who plays meaningful minutes.

What's wrong with having 3 good centers? A lot of teams would kill to have our center depth.

Maybe Miller gets the C at the end of the season. I don't think Horvat would be too hurt by that. He's a big part of our leadership group, and will remain so.

[Provost]

10 minutes ago, Nave said:

I find all the talk of Horvat having a bad season--and losing leadership duties to Miller--kind of ridiculous. 
He's having just a good season as always. Winning 55% of his draws, while scoring 20+ goals (he's already at 18).

At this point, we shouldn't expect Horvat to be a Selke candidate. He's a good two way forward who plays meaningful minutes.

What's wrong with having 3 good centers? A lot of teams would kill to have our center depth.

Maybe Miller gets the C at the end of the season. I don't think Horvat would be too hurt by that. He's a big part of our leadership group, and will remain so.

Cap space is the issue.  

We currently only have a few contracts where the players are providing surplus value.  Demko, Miller, Horvat, Hoglander, Podkolzin, Motte, and Lammikko.

Almost all of those contracts are the ones coming up for renewal so we will be paying them market rates and losing those efficiencies.  It will come at a cost of losing other depth.

If we keep Miller, then one or both of Boeser or Horvat will almost certainly move out just to make the cap space work... and that is without actually improving the team and just to keep most of the roster together and cover the raises.

[Me_]

16 minutes ago, Provost said:

Cap space is the issue.  

We currently only have a few contracts where the players are providing surplus value.  Demko, Miller, Horvat, Hoglander, Podkolzin, Motte, and Lammikko.

Almost all of those contracts are the ones coming up for renewal so we will be paying them market rates and losing those efficiencies.  It will come at a cost of losing other depth.

If we keep Miller, then one or both of Boeser or Horvat will almost certainly move out just to make the cap space work... and that is without actually improving the team and just to keep most of the roster together and cover the raises.

If it’s between Miller and Horvat, Horvat’s gotta go.

 

If it’s between Miller and Boeser, Boeser’s gotta go.

 

If it’s between Horvat and Boeser, Boeser’s gotta go.

 

Edited March 10, 2022 by Me_

[EternalCanuckFan]

7 minutes ago, Provost said:

Cap space is the issue.  

We currently only have a few contracts where the players are providing surplus value.  Demko, Miller, Horvat, Hoglander, Podkolzin, Motte, and Lammikko.

Almost all of those contracts are the ones coming up for renewal so we will be paying them market rates and losing those efficiencies.  It will come at a cost of losing other depth.

If we keep Miller, then one or both of Boeser or Horvat will almost certainly move out just to make the cap space work... and that is without actually improving the team and just to keep most of the roster together and cover the raises.

I agree that these are the constraints.

 

Until the Canucks can have a good sense of whether they can strike a reasonable extension deal with Horvat and Miller that would allow them both to fit with the team long term, I think the assumption has to be that money has to be subtracted elsewhere.

 

The "phenomenon" of having 3 strong Cs is a pretty new one for this Canucks roster.  It wasn't until last season with Pettersson out for so long that Miller began to be used basically full-time at C.  Miller had still taken faceoffs for the Lotto Line, but Pettersson was the de facto C on that line.  Obviously having Miller play so well at C this season has been a huge boon for the Canucks, and maybe it's something management wants to build around moving forward.  I agree that running Miller, Pettersson and Horvat at C could be an amazing outcome for the Canucks, but not one they can likely afford without subtracting elsewhere.

 

It wasn't that long ago that most projected line ups for the Canucks had Miller on default at Pettersson's wing and the discussion was more about how Horvat might have more offensive zone time with Dickinson taking on the heavier 3C responsibilities.  Green rightfully gets a lot of grief for things done wrong but it was him and his coaching staff that started playing Miller at C and started keeping him at C this season.  Clearly Green failed to push the right buttons to get the most of out the line-up, but the revelation of Miller as a top flight C is very new.

[Provost]

11 minutes ago, Me_ said:

If it’s between Miller and Horvat, Horvat’s gotta go.

 

If it’s between Miller and Boeser, Boeser has to go.

 

If it’s between Horvat and Boeser, Boeser had to go.

Accurate if you take relative contracts out of the mix.  It is the variable that we just don't know, and not even management can know before July 1st and kind of have to fly blind on making calls about.

Miller at a $9.5 million 8 year deal to me has to go before Horvat at a $6.5x7 year deal.

Miller at an $8 million x 6 year contract stays and Horvat goes pretty much whatever his contract is

Boeser at a $6 million x 6 year contract stays before a Horvat at a $7.5 million x 8 year deal.

 

Edited March 10, 2022 by Provost

[filthycanuck]

11 minutes ago, Provost said:

Cap space is the issue.  

We currently only have a few contracts where the players are providing surplus value.  Demko, Miller, Horvat, Hoglander, Podkolzin, Motte, and Lammikko.

Almost all of those contracts are the ones coming up for renewal so we will be paying them market rates and losing those efficiencies.  It will come at a cost of losing other depth.

If we keep Miller, then one or both of Boeser or Horvat will almost certainly move out just to make the cap space work... and that is without actually improving the team and just to keep most of the roster together and cover the raises.

Thats what happens with you have a dolt of a GM signing garbage players to contracts. Poolman and Dickensons cap hit is a combined almost 6 million. Thats Boeser and Miller's raises right there

[Provost]

Just now, filthycanuck said:

Thats what happens with you have a dolt of a GM signing garbage players to contracts. Poolman and Dickensons cap hit is a combined almost 6 million. Thats Boeser and Miller's raises right there

Yep... pretty much.  Go back to my immediate response to the Poolman signing.  Why give term and money to a guy with the thin resume and it was even likely that he gets pushed off the roster by Schenn who brings that veteran toughness element that we need.  Looks like that is what has happened already.

The really tough part is that there are ALWAYS decent older veterans looking for homes in late July that can be had for cheap short term deals (Vrbata, Marleau types).  You can fill out your 3rd lines and bottom pairs with these undervalued guys.  You can't find new Miller or even Boeser players on the market without paying what we will have to pay to keep them.  You should also be leaving a roster spot or two open for kids to come in and take at training camp.  You can waive a cheap veteran that you signed for a 1 year $1.1 million contract to make way for a dark horse prospect making the team.  You can't get rid of a Dickenson or Poolman very easily as they already have negative trade value.

[48MPHSlapShot]

It's about cap space, but also about allocation of resources. Our blueline needs a ton of work, and It's going to be pretty difficult to legitimately compete until we patch those holes. If Miller and Petey are locked in as our top 2 centers, that pushes Bo down to the third line, playing largely in a defensive role. Obviously we don't want to be paying a 3C 6 million, especially when that 3C is (sorry) pretty poor defensively, and especially when our actual blueline needs a ton of work.

 

We should be able to move a player like Horvat, that has a ton of value around the league, for help on the blueline, and bring in a true defensive 3C for quite a bit less money than we'll have to pay Bo.

[J-23]

Miller, Petey, Bo, Lammiko perfect 4 centres to build around.

 

None should be traded. 
 

We should be looking into finding more Garland type wingers. We need guys with speed and skill. Unfortunately it may be time to move a Boeser out.

[Jester13]

4 minutes ago, J-23 said:

Miller, Petey, Bo, Lammiko perfect 4 centres to build around.

 

None should be traded. 
 

We should be looking into finding more Garland type wingers. We need guys with speed and skill. Unfortunately it may be time to move a Boeser out.

I think Garland and Poolman for Marino would be a solid move for us. I don't know if that would make it happen, but it's much better than giving up Brock, Bo, or Miller. 

[Rackdawg]

12 minutes ago, Provost said:

Accurate if you take relative contracts out of the mix.  It is the variable that we just don't know, and not even management can know before July 1st and kind of have to fly blind on making calls about.

Miller at a $9.5 million 8 year deal to me has to go before Horvat at a $6.5x7 year deal.

Miller at an $8 million x 6 year contract stays and Horvat goes pretty much whatever his contract is

Boeser at a $6 million x 6 year contract stays before a Horvat at a $7.5 million x 8 year deal.

 

I gotta believe horvats looks at getting 7.5.x 7 yrs next deal .

He would get it elsewhere im sure

[J-23]

1 minute ago, Jester13 said:

I think Garland and Poolman for Marino would be a solid move for us. I don't know if that would make it happen, but it's much better than giving up Brock, Bo, or Miller. 

I’m keeping Garland over BB. Faster, more skill, can carry his line. BB is too slow and his QO is going to be tough.

 

Imo keep them all. Sell high on Pearson and Motte. Move out Myers. Try and move out Dickinson amd Hamonic.

[Rackdawg]

44 minutes ago, Nave said:

I find all the talk of Horvat having a bad season--and losing leadership duties to Miller--kind of ridiculous. 
He's having just a good season as always. Winning 55% of his draws, while scoring 20+ goals (he's already at 18).

At this point, we shouldn't expect Horvat to be a Selke candidate. He's a good two way forward who plays meaningful minutes.

What's wrong with having 3 good centers? A lot of teams would kill to have our center depth.

Maybe Miller gets the C at the end of the season. I don't think Horvat would be too hurt by that. He's a big part of our leadership group, and will remain so.

Believe me if they took the captaincy away from bo ..he would bolt town asap...

[Provost]

Just now, Rackdawg said:

I gotta believe horvats looks at getting 7.5.x 7 yrs next deal .

He would get it elsewhere im sure

Probably, and that is why it is really tough to handicap who should stay and who should go.  There are also relative trade values at play that alter the math.

As a UFA Miller can probably get a $9.5-10 million deal (he may not agree to sign with us even at that).  Horvat can probably get a $7.5 deal (he may not agree to sign with us even at that).  Unless Boeser signs a discounted extension he will be at $7.5 million and we will have him at that for two years before he is a UFA.

If you could get Byram, Newhook, and a high pick for Miller, and then can use his cap hit to sign a high end guy like Forsberg are you better or worse?

What is Horvat's trade value in the summer?  A high prospect and a 1st?  A young top 4 RHD?  Probably something like that.  Not near what Miller's is.

[Jester13]

3 minutes ago, J-23 said:

I’m keeping Garland over BB. Faster, more skill, can carry his line. BB is too slow and his QO is going to be tough.

 

Imo keep them all. Sell high on Pearson and Motte. Move out Myers. Try and move out Dickinson amd Hamonic.

Brock is a goal scoring sniper who is playing great since Boudreau came along. I see getting rid of Brock as a major risk, as his skating has hindered him this year after an early season injury. Even so, he has since revamped his game quite a lot this year and is now getting greasy goals around the net. Of course, the cap hit is what matters most right now, but trading Brock has the greatest potential of biting us in the arse when he goes elsewhere and continues to produce at the pace he is right now. A good offseason of getting back to 100% could do wonders for him, and I really think locking him up could leave us with a goal scorer producing above his pay grade for many years. 

 

I think getting something for Motte is a must. I'd like to try and get rid of Poolman before Myers and Hamonic. 

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, Provost said:

Probably, and that is why it is really tough to handicap who should stay and who should go.  There are also relative trade values at play that alter the math.

As a UFA Miller can probably get a $9.5-10 million deal (he may not agree to sign with us even at that).  Horvat can probably get a $7.5 deal (he may not agree to sign with us even at that).  Unless Boeser signs a discounted extension he will be at $7.5 million and we will have him at that for two years before he is a UFA.

If you could get Byram, Newhook, and a high pick for Miller, and then can use his cap hit to sign a high end guy like Forsberg are you better or worse?

What is Horvat's trade value in the summer?  A high prospect and a 1st?  A young top 4 RHD?  Probably something like that.  Not near what Miller's is.

Which team is paying Miller 10 million?  He will get a contract total of 60 to 65 million.  With us that will be 8x8.  I think we will end up signing Miller for 8.5x8.  Grand total of 68 million.  That's more than 9.5 per over a seven year deal.  So we are getting Miller for between 8 and 8.5 times 8 years.  

Trading him will cost the aquiring team a fortune in assets.  But if the Rags couph up three top young players and their first, I can see still see us saying no.

[Nave]

44 minutes ago, Provost said:

Cap space is the issue.  

We currently only have a few contracts where the players are providing surplus value.  Demko, Miller, Horvat, Hoglander, Podkolzin, Motte, and Lammikko.

Almost all of those contracts are the ones coming up for renewal so we will be paying them market rates and losing those efficiencies.  It will come at a cost of losing other depth.

If we keep Miller, then one or both of Boeser or Horvat will almost certainly move out just to make the cap space work... and that is without actually improving the team and just to keep most of the roster together and cover the raises.

I'm well aware of that. Would rather trade Boeser than Horvat... and I love Boeser. 

[48MPHSlapShot]

9 minutes ago, Provost said:

Probably, and that is why it is really tough to handicap who should stay and who should go.  There are also relative trade values at play that alter the math.

As a UFA Miller can probably get a $9.5-10 million deal (he may not agree to sign with us even at that).  Horvat can probably get a $7.5 deal (he may not agree to sign with us even at that).  Unless Boeser signs a discounted extension he will be at $7.5 million and we will have him at that for two years before he is a UFA.

If you could get Byram, Newhook, and a high pick for Miller, and then can use his cap hit to sign a high end guy like Forsberg are you better or worse?

What is Horvat's trade value in the summer?  A high prospect and a 1st?  A young top 4 RHD?  Probably something like that.  Not near what Miller's is.

In a flat cap era young players like Newhook, that are going to be contributing in a big way while still on their ELCs, are more valuable than ever before. If a team expects one of their prospects to be able to fill a top 6 or top 4 role while still on their ELC, they're not going to move them. Covid has turned the economics of the game on their head, thus making this the worst possible time to be trying to ship out a big ticket item like Miller. We're never going to get the type of return to make it worth our while.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

1 minute ago, J-23 said:

Miller, Petey, Bo, Lammiko perfect 4 centres to build around.

 

None should be traded. 
 

We should be looking into finding more Garland type wingers. We need guys with speed and skill. Unfortunately it may be time to move a Boeser out.

To keep that centre depth, we’re going to need most of them to sign at discounts, if we hope to have the cap space available to surround that “spine” with the players we need, and (especially) upgrade the back end.

 

It’s not impossible, but it’s certainly been a while since Vancouver was a spot where players left significant money on the table, to help build toward contending.

 

I hope the new management is working hard behind the scenes. I was impressed by Emilie Castonguay and her comments regarding the value of communication and support between management and the players. Hopefully her experience as an agent is translating to her new role, and she’s already laying the groundwork for negotiations.
 

And the Sedins should be tasked with some outreach and “hearts and minds” work, with the players, selling them on a longterm vision. Somebody in the media recently suggested the twins should be wining and dining JT Miller right now, and trying to win him over to the idea of re-signing, and leaving money on the table, like many of the core players did in the Sedin era.
 

Millsy strikes me as a guy who wouldn’t necessarily chase max dollars, if he really gets his heart set on a team and a city, and we all know that Vancouver can be the best place in the world to play hockey, when things are going well (but not so much when we’re losing ). Maybe the twins can convince him (and Bo and Petey down the road) to focus on the larger picture, and how if everyone gives a little (on the contract demands), the whole team gets a lot (in terms of the overall competitiveness possible under the cap).

 

It’s going to be a tough sell. I’m certainly not expecting it. But if Miller re-signed at a discount, I could see Horvat and Pettersson following suit. Millsy has a lot of influence in that room and he could really set the tone for years to come.

 

But if he gets his mind set on max dollars and testing the market, there’s really no way to keep the group together, and afford the other additions that are needed. Re-signing Miller at market value just kicks off a chain of dominoes that ends in cap hell. But if he goes the other way, and leaves money on the table, it would likely set off a similar chain reaction of other guys taking discounted deals, when their extensions come due.

[RWJC]

21 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

I think Garland and Poolman for Marino would be a solid move for us. I don't know if that would make it happen, but it's much better than giving up Brock, Bo, or Miller. 

You mean Marino + + + right?

people already complaining about Poolman’s cap hit, Marino would be no different

Edited March 10, 2022 by RWJC