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

[Rumour] Bo Horvat Trade/Contract Talks


HOFsedins

Recommended Posts

Just now, DeNiro said:

He was in Florida as far as I know.

 

Played the second most minutes behind Ekblad.

I think thats where I'd draw a distinction between top pair (Ekbland) and top 4 (Weegie).

 

Would we be satisfied trading Bo for Weegar straight up? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JM_ said:

I think thats where I'd draw a distinction between top pair (Ekbland) and top 4 (Weegie).

 

Would we be satisfied trading Bo for Weegar straight up? 

I’d rather trade Garland/Boeser before trading Bo.  BUT I’d accept that trade if Bo is not willing to re-sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BPA said:

I’d rather trade Garland/Boeser before trading Bo.  BUT I’d accept that trade if Bo is not willing to re-sign.

I guess thats the don't lose him for nothing scenario.

 

I think its all moot and we'll see a signing soon, really can't see this falling apart. Who would we replace him with? an even more expensive and older RoR?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, JM_ said:

I think thats where I'd draw a distinction between top pair (Ekbland) and top 4 (Weegie).

 

Would we be satisfied trading Bo for Weegar straight up? 

I wouldn’t trade Bo for him no, but that doesn’t change the fact that he played a top pair role.

 

I don’t consider Tanev a true top pair guy, but that’s the role he plays and something this team could desperately use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

I wouldn’t trade Bo for him no, but that doesn’t change the fact that he played a top pair role.

 

I don’t consider Tanev a true top pair guy, but that’s the role he plays and something this team could desperately use.

fair enough. I was thinking more of the Weber in his prime type of moves, vs. guys that can step in and fill parts of a role. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all in at 6.5 over 8 years. I've seen enough to know he's worth that. He's durable and a faceoff king. But doesn't really drive the play and create chances like Miller. Bo also isn't some star defensive guy either. Fair to say he's about a mill and a half less valuable than Miller.

 

I'm open to possible returns on him though but obviously the value needs to be more than what Bo is for us right now 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Miller himself said he signed for less than market.  Also, how do you know he has reached his peak?  Can you predict the future?  30 year old players who are top 15 players in the NHL have signed for more than $8 million.  $8 million isn't market value for Miller.  If you can't understand that then there really is no point to go any further with this.

How do I know he reached his peaked? Because he’s 29 years old, already in his prime. He’s not in his mid 20’s. If he continues to put up 95+ points for the next few seasons, great. I’ll gladly eat my own words, but that’s likely not going to happen. Just look at the guys who signed 8m+ contracts in their early 30’s, that had year careers when they signed their contract. All of their numbers came back down to earth the following season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JM_ said:

fair enough. I was thinking more of the Weber in his prime type of moves, vs. guys that can step in and fill parts of a role. 

I think you're thinking more of a #1 D, not a top pairing guy. The way I see it, there are 64 top pairing D in the NHL (32x2). Weegar ranked 31st in TOI/game last year, so by that metric, there could even be an argument he's a fringe #1 or high end #2 guy.

 

Personally, it looks to me like Weegar has incredible underlying numbers and I'm fairly confident that he's a solid #1 guy. His underlying metrics along with his offensive output put him very much in the same mold as Jaccob Slavin.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

I think you're thinking more of a #1 D, not a top pairing guy. The way I see it, there are 64 top pairing D in the NHL (32x2). Weegar ranked 31st in TOI/game last year, so by that metric, there could even be an argument he's a fringe #1 or high end #2 guy.

 

Personally, it looks to me like Weegar has incredible underlying numbers and I'm fairly confident that he's a solid #1 guy. His underlying metrics along with his offensive output put him very much in the same mold as Jaccob Slavin.

thats an interesting way to look at it, although each of those 64 spots are not created equal. 

 

I guess for me I'd be upset at Bo being traded for Weegar, but Shea Theodore? thats a different animal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, JM_ said:

thats an interesting way to look at it, although each of those 64 spots are not created equal. 

 

I guess for me I'd be upset at Bo being traded for Weegar, but Shea Theodore? thats a different animal. 

I personally think Weegar is better than Theodore, but age differences are very relevant. I would be a bit upset, but I actually think the value would be there in the deal. That said, I'm very aware that I rate Weegar much higher than most people do. I think most people consider him an average #2 D-man, whereas I consider him an average #1 D man, considerably higher. That said, he finished 14th in Norris voting in 2021 and 8th in Norris voting this past year, so by those vote rankings, you can see that I'm not totally alone in my thinking.

 

I'm interested to see if he can keep up the job in Calgary.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cant see any world in which we trade Bo Horvat. It would make 0 sense, even if we got a top RHD prospect. 
We have some depth up the middle for the first time in a LONG time, and an upgraded RHD would best case scenario just wash out that benefit. 

Horvat plays shutdown minutes for us while being able to put up 30 goals. You don't trade that kind of player away, because you'll never get one back unless you draft him again. Not to mention he's the captain. 

If you want a top pairing RHD, you part with Garland + a 1st, not Bo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...