Horvat was taken for granted here

[wai_lai416]

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

Horvat was overpaid himself for a couple years of his last deal ... and underpaid for 2.5 seasons, it was a fair deal.     Last year he earned 6.5 based on what he scored and his intangibles according to the stat wizard computer - and that a UFA year.    The debate was is he a first or is he a second line center all season long on the panel(s).   JR's final deal 7.5 x 7 wasn't enough, and warned the fans 3 separate times Horvat would be traded but they are working on signing him.   

 

As for his goals scoring.   It started when Bruce took over.   Last year he was having an underwhelming, less then 20 goal 50 point pace until Bruce took over, got hot and that hasn't stopped yet.   So the sample size is big enough to believe that should continue for a couple seasons - but if I had to bet, his shooting percentage won't keep up, the East will adjust etc and this is his career season.    Too long too much term, 7.5 x 7 was maybe low because some team might have offered 8.5 x 7.   Guess they wanted him to leave a little on the table.   But not much really.      In the end both Millers and Horvats deals will become typical UFA anchors.    At that price 80-85 points this year...next 78-83 and once cap goes up start going down further, I doubt either earns it.   And the Islanders will be rebuilding before half his deal is over.  
 

Edit: Millers current deal is an example of excellent value.    I wish our D was better and it made sense to re-sign him.   But our cap structure is flawed.   And we needed change.   I'm sure we draft a C with our first pick, and a lot of D's. 

i don't agree with your take on bo was overpaid first couple years of his deal and underpaid on his last 2.5.. his first 3.5 years he's pretty much on the exact same pace as he was as the latter 2 minus the current year.. and i stand by what i thought at the time. if management didn't leave him second fiddle hanging in wind all summer and started the contract negotiation at the same they were negotiating Miller's and started with something reasonable say 6mil and work their way up im sure they would had a deal done in between the 6.5-7mil range. roughly in the 100k/point range + all the other thing he brings which was fair to both side. but seeing the preferential treatment miller received and the lowball offer he gotten i don't blame him one bit for not giving the management a single penny discount.

 

both their new deal i believe will be an anchor over time totally agree, but i still think Horvat will get more value out of than Miller's contract. let's just say they are both productive till 32. that means we got a productive miller for 2 out of the 7 years of his contract. meanwhile bo would have gotten 4 out of 8 years of his contract. 50% is way better than barely over a quarter. the argument on this board is bo will be a 60 point guy therefore he's not worth it.. i don't get that argument because Miller have been a 50 point guy his entire career and then started to be good when he hit 26-28.. i don't understand why that only applies to miller and when it comes to horvat they are hellbent on no that can not happen because he was a 60 point guy prior.

 

if the islanders are rebuilding before half his deal is over i think that's fine.. at least they would have gotten use out of horvat during his prime.. vs vancouver where we will take 0 advantage of Miller during his prime.  Miller is 30 in a month.. i doubt this team is able to take any advantage of his new contract within the next 2 even 3 seasons.

 

at their new cap hit 8.5 and 8mil i dont think i want neither player on the canucks and gladly trade both for picks, but if it was back in the beginning of summer and it was between horvat at 7mil x 8 years maybe or miller at 8mil x 7 years.. 100% i would have taken horvat as he's way better suited at a 2c role than Miller will ever be as a 2c even before this years debacle defensively. i've always ripped Miller for years now about his lack of commitment to defence.. if he's already in the zone he will block and stuff.. if he's not there.. he makes 0 efforts in getting there and rather get off the ice for a line change even if it's odd man rush. if their goal was EP as the 1C in a year or 2.. it makes way more sense to have horvat as a 2c.. then it is to have Miller as a 2c.

[garthsbutcher]

Islander have lost to Montreal, Ottawa and Vancouver since BOHO got there, enjoy 8 years of 8.5

[shiznak]

On 2/16/2023 at 2:40 PM, Baggins said:

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.

O’Reilly deal was on good deal. 50-60 points Selke candidate centermen. That’s pretty much what Bo is minus the Selke nominations.
 

Hayes was an overpayment in hindsight, but he was producing at a near .9 PPG rate, prior to being traded to Winnipeg. Philly paid him for his potential. No one knew he was going to drop off this badly. Bo has been a consistent 40-50 guy, 20+ goals centermen for most of his career. You knew what you’re getting from him each year. Signing him at 7-7.5m, is pretty much 2nd line value, which puts him around in the mid 20s amongst centermen in the league.
 

34 is usually where players drop off in production. That would be Horvat’s 6th year into his contract (assuming we signed him in the 7x8 range). Whereas, Miller would only be into half his contract. I much rather have 2 bad years of Horvat scoring 30 points, than 4 more years of Miller scoring 30-40 points. 

 

[Baggins]

On 2/16/2023 at 3:35 PM, higgyfan said:

Remains to be seen.

 

Bo is not just any player to Canuck fans.  We've watched him as a 19yr old kid, who grew up to become

the team's captain and spokesperson.  He was very well-loved by the fans who considered him a 'character

guy'.

 

I'm not talking about his contract; more about the fact that he chose to leave Vancouver and appears to

be very happy in so doing. 

I'm a Canuck fan and he is just another player that moved on, whether by choice or circumstance. Players, even ones we like, get moved. I was use to that decades ago.

 

Every player signing an new deal is a remains to be seen. Even if they have a production track record you never truly know if the player will live up to the new deal or not. A track record impoves the odds though. But loving a player doesn't mean overpaying him is a good idea. I don't care if we draft a player, trade for him, or sign him in free agency. If his contract demand is too high you move on. I've never been in the "I like him so pay him whatever it takes" camp. But I don't complain about a fair deal for any player, and do appreciate those rare guys that are willing to take less because they truly want to be here.

 

To my knowledge he didn't ask to be traded. Meaning he didn't actually choose it. You could say he had the choice of sign a reasonable deal or risk being moved. But he didn't ask for it. Horvat has always been pure vanilla in interviews saying the right things. So what he said about the trade should be taken with a grain of vanilla salt. Although I'm fairly certain he is very happy his new team gave him the money he wanted.

[Baggins]

23 hours ago, shiznak said:

O’Reilly deal was on good deal. 50-60 points Selke candidate centermen. That’s pretty much what Bo is minus the Selke nominations.
 

Hayes was an overpayment in hindsight, but he was producing at a near .9 PPG rate, prior to being traded to Winnipeg. Philly paid him for his potential. No one knew he was going to drop off this badly. Bo has been a consistent 40-50 guy, 20+ goals centermen for most of his career. You knew what you’re getting from him each year. Signing him at 7-7.5m, is pretty much 2nd line value, which puts him around in the mid 20s amongst centermen in the league.
 

34 is usually where players drop off in production. That would be Horvat’s 6th year into his contract (assuming we signed him in the 7x8 range). Whereas, Miller would only be into half his contract. I much rather have 2 bad years of Horvat scoring 30 points, than 4 more years of Miller scoring 30-40 points. 

 

Millers deal ends at 37, Horvat's at 36. So your math is off. But, and I've said it many times, goal scoring tends to drop off quicker in a players 30's than playmaking ablility. Miller is a good playmaker. I still believe Miller will be the better player into those mid 30's and now he costs less. There is actually no way to accurately predict a players decline. There are highly productive players right now that are 34+ in the league. Only time will tell. 

[IBatch]

On 2/17/2023 at 9:47 AM, wai_lai416 said:

i don't agree with your take on bo was overpaid first couple years of his deal and underpaid on his last 2.5.. his first 3.5 years he's pretty much on the exact same pace as he was as the latter 2 minus the current year.. and i stand by what i thought at the time. if management didn't leave him second fiddle hanging in wind all summer and started the contract negotiation at the same they were negotiating Miller's and started with something reasonable say 6mil and work their way up im sure they would had a deal done in between the 6.5-7mil range. roughly in the 100k/point range + all the other thing he brings which was fair to both side. but seeing the preferential treatment miller received and the lowball offer he gotten i don't blame him one bit for not giving the management a single penny discount.

 

both their new deal i believe will be an anchor over time totally agree, but i still think Horvat will get more value out of than Miller's contract. let's just say they are both productive till 32. that means we got a productive miller for 2 out of the 7 years of his contract. meanwhile bo would have gotten 4 out of 8 years of his contract. 50% is way better than barely over a quarter. the argument on this board is bo will be a 60 point guy therefore he's not worth it.. i don't get that argument because Miller have been a 50 point guy his entire career and then started to be good when he hit 26-28.. i don't understand why that only applies to miller and when it comes to horvat they are hellbent on no that can not happen because he was a 60 point guy prior.

 

if the islanders are rebuilding before half his deal is over i think that's fine.. at least they would have gotten use out of horvat during his prime.. vs vancouver where we will take 0 advantage of Miller during his prime.  Miller is 30 in a month.. i doubt this team is able to take any advantage of his new contract within the next 2 even 3 seasons.

 

at their new cap hit 8.5 and 8mil i dont think i want neither player on the canucks and gladly trade both for picks, but if it was back in the beginning of summer and it was between horvat at 7mil x 8 years maybe or miller at 8mil x 7 years.. 100% i would have taken horvat as he's way better suited at a 2c role than Miller will ever be as a 2c even before this years debacle defensively. i've always ripped Miller for years now about his lack of commitment to defence.. if he's already in the zone he will block and stuff.. if he's not there.. he makes 0 efforts in getting there and rather get off the ice for a line change even if it's odd man rush. if their goal was EP as the 1C in a year or 2.. it makes way more sense to have horvat as a 2c.. then it is to have Miller as a 2c.

Horvats game seems to translate better into the middle six as the deals age.   That said they made their choice.   And well Miller is a lot of things, but last night i'd bet Horvat would have just skated back to the bench after the late cheap shot on EP, seen it often enough while he was here, and that's not leadership in my books anyways.   As for how to determine the par line - it's subjective but there is also a site that determines that.   Last year Bo started finding the back of the net during the Bruce bump at a higher clip.   RFA deals are also weighted differently.  Your supposed to get your best years from your guys ... JB gave out a lot of money to his RFAs.   6.5 was Horvats value according to these experts last season.    Had another good season with Bear and Brock.   It wasn't like we got great value .. or that he was way off either.    But the facts are he was well paid his last deal too, he wasn't great value - a little less at the start, fair then underpaid a little.  

 

Miller - 2 years RFA 2 years UFA his current deal, is an example of great ROI.   Why some were saying maybe he'd end up with a monster deal and that he "left money on the table".  

 

 

Team sucked with Horvat, for sure didn't make a lot of sense to keep him, maybe they kept the wrong guy time will tell.  But for sure we needed a change and this was major surgery. 

 

Horvat wont earn his next deal, never seen Lou make a statement like that before ...  and neither will Miller - the pro's for me is I don't want automaton nice guy anymore.   It's also why i'd have preferred they gave Jovo the C during the WCE era.  

[wai_lai416]

15 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Horvats game seems to translate better into the middle six as the deals age.   That said they made their choice.   And well Miller is a lot of things, but last night i'd bet Horvat would have just skated back to the bench after the late cheap shot on EP, seen it often enough while he was here, and that's not leadership in my books anyways.   As for how to determine the par line - it's subjective but there is also a site that determines that.   Last year Bo started finding the back of the net during the Bruce bump at a higher clip.   RFA deals are also weighted differently.  Your supposed to get your best years from your guys ... JB gave out a lot of money to his RFAs.   6.5 was Horvats value according to these experts last season.    Had another good season with Bear and Brock.   It wasn't like we got great value .. or that he was way off either.    But the facts are he was well paid his last deal too, he wasn't great value - a little less at the start, fair then underpaid a little.  

 

Miller - 2 years RFA 2 years UFA his current deal, is an example of great ROI.   Why some were saying maybe he'd end up with a monster deal and that he "left money on the table".  

 

 

Team sucked with Horvat, for sure didn't make a lot of sense to keep him, maybe they kept the wrong guy time will tell.  But for sure we needed a change and this was major surgery. 

 

Horvat wont earn his next deal, never seen Lou make a statement like that before ...  and neither will Miller - the pro's for me is I don't want automaton nice guy anymore.   It's also why i'd have preferred they gave Jovo the C during the WCE era.  

the only reason Miller is a better ROI right now because his contract covers part of his UFA years. but the only reason his contract covered part of his UFA years was he wasn't good when he started in the NHL and had to sign a 1 year minimum after his elc ended.. if horvat signed a 8 year contract instead? we would be talking about how great of a ROI horvat was.. 

 

again i don't disagree with moving horvat.. but moving horvat should have mean they moved Miller as well.. this team ain't competing anytime soon without horvat and keeping a miller.. we are going to have a miller past his prime before we even sniff the playoff.. sure horvat is not a great captain he's doesn't get into altercation with other teams.. but jumping into altercation being emotional etc doesn't = you ar ea great captain either.. if that's the case then a lot of the enforcers out there love to jump into altercation rough stuff and go after anyone that hits their star players i guess they are all great captain? Lucic would be captain material? C is just a letter on the jersey.. so you are telling me unless you have a C on your jersey no one on the team will listen to you? and i love your statement the team sucked with horvat.. so all the blame is on him? the team sucked with demko, the team sucked with EP, the team sucked with Hughes, the team sucked with miller. 

 

[spook007]

On 2/16/2023 at 10:59 PM, Baggins said:

The red flag on that for me is when asked about his increased goal scoring he gave the exact same answer as Kesler in the 10/11 season - I spent a lot of time shooting pucks in the offseason. Kesler said he was shooting hundreds and hundreds of pucks daily to iumprove his accuracy. That season at 26 Kesler scored 41 goals and tied Daniel for the team lead. He never scored 30 prior to that and never hit 30 after that season. So was Kesler's high scoring a one off purely as a result of heavy offseason shooting that he didn't continue in the offseasons afterwards? The upside was Kesler's high goal season came right after signing an extension rather than in a contract year. Will Bo continue to put in that amount shot practice into his offseasons now that he has his retirement deal? If not will his goal production fall back to his previous typical level? 

 

I'm not sold many, if anybody, has a "hate on" for Bo. Not viewing a player as worth the money he's seeking has little to do with hating. It's just the business side of life. Players come and go. 

Spot on....

 

And to be honest, if all it took what shooting a lot of puck in the offseason, why wait until its coming up for a contract year?

 

Bo many continue to score for fun, but I have my doubts too....

In the end its a business decision...

[Alflives]

8 minutes ago, spook007 said:

Spot on....

 

And to be honest, if all it took what shooting a lot of puck in the offseason, why wait until its coming up for a contract year?

 

Bo many continue to score for fun, but I have my doubts too....

In the end its a business decision...

Yup. Loved Bo while he was here. Now he’s the elephant in another team’s room. 

And it looks like we got the better Beau out of the deal. And Raty and the Islanders’ first. We win! 

[spook007]

Just now, Alflives said:

Yup. Loved Bo while he was here. Now he’s the elephant in another team’s room. 

And it looks like we got the better Beau out of the deal. And Raty and the Islanders’ first. We win! 

Remains to be seen, but he fits perfectly on that line with Kuz and Petey. 

[IBatch]

4 hours ago, wai_lai416 said:

the only reason Miller is a better ROI right now because his contract covers part of his UFA years. but the only reason his contract covered part of his UFA years was he wasn't good when he started in the NHL and had to sign a 1 year minimum after his elc ended.. if horvat signed a 8 year contract instead? we would be talking about how great of a ROI horvat was.. 

 

again i don't disagree with moving horvat.. but moving horvat should have mean they moved Miller as well.. this team ain't competing anytime soon without horvat and keeping a miller.. we are going to have a miller past his prime before we even sniff the playoff.. sure horvat is not a great captain he's doesn't get into altercation with other teams.. but jumping into altercation being emotional etc doesn't = you ar ea great captain either.. if that's the case then a lot of the enforcers out there love to jump into altercation rough stuff and go after anyone that hits their star players i guess they are all great captain? Lucic would be captain material? C is just a letter on the jersey.. so you are telling me unless you have a C on your jersey no one on the team will listen to you? and i love your statement the team sucked with horvat.. so all the blame is on him? the team sucked with demko, the team sucked with EP, the team sucked with Hughes, the team sucked with miller. 

 

Feel like we should wait and give them this draft and next year before getting to worked up.   It's not so simple as trade and or sign x,y,z.   Kuzmenko was a good move.   Bear too.   Horvat is looking decent so far as well.   It's EPs team now, time to build behind him for sure.    And agree if it was between the two I'd have picked Horvat but not at that price for sure.   Summer prices ... we're also high.   Thanks in part to Kadri and Huberdeau.     Miller seemed pretty reasonable.    Time will tell.    OEL is our lone massive anchor for now. 

[wai_lai416]

1 minute ago, IBatch said:

Feel like we should wait and give them this draft and next year before getting to worked up.   It's not so simple as trade and or sign x,y,z.   Kuzmenko was a good move.   Bear too.   Horvat is looking decent so far as well.   It's EPs team now, time to build behind him for sure.    And agree if it was between the two I'd have picked Horvat but not at that price for sure.   Summer prices ... we're also high.   Thanks in part to Kadri and Huberdeau.     Miller seemed pretty reasonable.    Time will tell.    OEL is our lone massive anchor for now. 

Miller is here to stay so nothing will change that I just hope he doesn’t follow the path of ROR in terms of production decline. Hit his peak at 29 and declining pretty fast but still a great defensive forward. If miller declines to ROR in year 2 of his new deal it could get ugly coz he’s not a great defensive forward. 

[spook007]

5 hours ago, IBatch said:

Horvats game seems to translate better into the middle six as the deals age.   That said they made their choice.   And well Miller is a lot of things, but last night i'd bet Horvat would have just skated back to the bench after the late cheap shot on EP, seen it often enough while he was here, and that's not leadership in my books anyways.   As for how to determine the par line - it's subjective but there is also a site that determines that.   Last year Bo started finding the back of the net during the Bruce bump at a higher clip.   RFA deals are also weighted differently.  Your supposed to get your best years from your guys ... JB gave out a lot of money to his RFAs.   6.5 was Horvats value according to these experts last season.    Had another good season with Bear and Brock.   It wasn't like we got great value .. or that he was way off either.    But the facts are he was well paid his last deal too, he wasn't great value - a little less at the start, fair then underpaid a little.  

 

Miller - 2 years RFA 2 years UFA his current deal, is an example of great ROI.   Why some were saying maybe he'd end up with a monster deal and that he "left money on the table".  

 

 

Team sucked with Horvat, for sure didn't make a lot of sense to keep him, maybe they kept the wrong guy time will tell.  But for sure we needed a change and this was major surgery. 

 

Horvat wont earn his next deal, never seen Lou make a statement like that before ...  and neither will Miller - the pro's for me is I don't want automaton nice guy anymore.   It's also why i'd have preferred they gave Jovo the C during the WCE era.  

this.... 

[IBatch]

1 minute ago, wai_lai416 said:

Miller is here to stay so nothing will change that I just hope he doesn’t follow the path of ROR in terms of production decline. Hit his peak at 29 and declining pretty fast but still a great defensive forward. If miller declines to ROR in year 2 of his new deal it could get ugly coz he’s not a great defensive forward. 

For sure.   Just like every other UFA.   Some certainty comes at a cost.   Let's hope he's able to keep it going until 33, and then declines.   Think he's smart enough to adjust his role.   The timing is off yes.   But have to start with some bones and can't send out all the young guys.   That's an absolute in this league. We have worse problems than Miller.  

[Hairy Kneel]

Anyone read the Islanders fan  page? 

See what they're saying

 

 

Edited February 19, 2023 by Hairy Kneel

[Fred65]

1 hour ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Anyone read the Islanders fan  page? 

See what they're saying

 

 

???? don't keep it to yourself 

[Boudrias]

19 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

???? don't keep it to yourself 

All I saw on their post Boston game was that they needed Trotz back. Not happy about the lack of physical play from their roster. Oh, a couple of comments about how many points Beau was putting up in Vancouver. Not much on Horvat. Down because Barzal could be out for a while.  

[Hairy Kneel]

16 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

All I saw on their post Boston game was that they needed Trotz back. Not happy about the lack of physical play from their roster. Oh, a couple of comments about how many points Beau was putting up in Vancouver. Not much on Horvat. Down because Barzal could be out for a while.  

It's a new league that's for sure. No more fighting. Less physical players. More cheap stuff instigated by the no instigator. 

More floaters than I can remember seeing. 

[Ballisticsports.]

5 hours ago, Alflives said:

Yup. Loved Bo while he was here. Now he’s the elephant in another team’s room. 

And it looks like we got the better Beau out of the deal. And Raty and the Islanders’ first. We win! 

Not only did we get those 3 assets

We also gave up paying $8+ million a year

All for losing Bo for 2 months (and more)

[Alflives]

24 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

All I saw on their post Boston game was that they needed Trotz back. Not happy about the lack of physical play from their roster. Oh, a couple of comments about how many points Beau was putting up in Vancouver. Not much on Horvat. Down because Barzal could be out for a while.  

What happened to Barzal?