"Blow the Zone" Horvat Strikes Back

[Bleach Clean]

Did you miss the point that the same fact pattern supports a keep one trade one strategy? No, I don't agree with your conclusion but way to try to put words in my mouth. I think it's one of a few possibilities and one that is indeed less likely.

What facts (legit 3rd party rumours) are you referencing to assert that it is less likely?

And no, the fact pattern does not support a keep one trade one strategy: They increased their offer to Horvat in January after having signed Miller in the summer.

I took your statement that your argument isn't with my conclusion as seeing it as a viable deduction. You've admitted that here by stating that it's one of the few possibilities. Where have I put words in your mouth? (Not my intention at all)

 

[iceburg]

What facts (legit 3rd party rumours) are you referencing to assert that it is less likely?

And no, the fact pattern does not support a keep one trade one strategy: They increased their offer to Horvat in January after having signed Miller in the summer.

I took your statement that your argument isn't with my conclusion as seeing it as a viable deduction. You've admitted that here by stating that it's one of the few possibilities. Where have I put words in your mouth? (Not my intention at all)

If I'm correct, you are saying "this is what happened" and I'm saying "it's one of the possibilities". Those are different conclusions.
The reports on the negotiations, including the reported last offer, to me describe a team that would keep the player for a certain bargain amount or trade him if they couldn't get him signed. But again we don't know some details that are really, really, important. For example, do we know if the first/low ball offer carried a full NMC? Do we know whether or not that last offer had full trade flexibility for the club? To my knowledge there are no reports with that level of detail. If they up their offer but removed the NMC, that would be a massive change in value for the club. If they didn't want to keep both Miller and Horvat long term, they could sign both with one having trade flexibility for the club. This could also be a reason for the Horvat camp not to accept the offer knowing he could be traded at any point. Clearly, this is just pure speculation but speculation because we don't have the details. It makes a huge difference. And even then, we are not in the heads of management. We can only go by what tangibly happened (Miller was signed and Horvat was traded). To me, the most logical conclusion is that the club felt they had two options: 1. sign both if they could get a bargain, or 2. sign one and trade the other from a position of strength, knowing that they would retain two high end centres, to fill a position of weakness (RHD).

 

[PuckMunchkin]

If Miller was horrific for 50 games what does that make Kane who the Rangers traded for?

Old and injured?

 

[CherryToke]

Bo probably needs to reinvent his game to be successful on Long Island but he seems to be afraid of contact and hates putting in effort on defence. Blowing the zone is all Bo knows

 

[Tables of Stats]

Old and injured?

He's a worse player than Miller and there was interest in trading for his services. If a defensive disaster like Kane can be brought in for a playoff run, there's a market for Miller. My guess is that, aside from a bidding war breaking out, Miller would be worth around $8 million per season on the UFA market. Warts aside, he's a proven 30-goal scorer who can be PPG or above if played on your top line.

 

[RobertKron]

He's a worse player than Miller and there was interest in trading for his services. If a defensive disaster like Kane can be brought in for a playoff run, there's a market for Miller. My guess is that, aside from a bidding war breaking out, Miller would be worth around $8 million per season on the UFA market. Warts aside, he's a proven 30-goal scorer who can be PPG or above if played on your top line.

I mean he's also a 3-time Cup Champion, future Hall of Famer with a Hart and a Conn Smythe on an expiring contract. I don't expect the Rangers were acquiring him as a long-term piece.

 

[Tables of Stats]

I mean he's also a 3-time Cup Champion, future Hall of Famer with a Hart and a Conn Smythe on an expiring contract. I don't expect the Rangers were acquiring him as a long-term piece.

Yes, but he's also a complete disaster in his own zone in a way that makes Miller look like he should be in the running for a Selke. If Miller's first half of this season was a disaster, then Kane's last few have been even worse.

 

[RobertKron]

Yes, but he's also a complete disaster in his own zone in a way that makes Miller look like he should be in the running for a Selke. If Miller's first half of this season was a disaster, then Kane's last few have been even worse.

Okay. But Kane isn't really expected to have his shit together at this point. He's in the last year of an 8 year deal, winding down his career.

Miller's deal hasn't even started yet. Like I'm not even necessarily agreeing with OP, but don't you think the bar should be a little bit higher than that?

 

[Tables of Stats]

Okay. But Kane isn't really expected to have his shit together at this point. He's in the last year of an 8 year deal, winding down his career.

Miller's deal hasn't even started yet. Like I'm not even necessarily agreeing with OP, but don't you think the bar should be a little bit higher than that?

It is and Miller shouldn't be excused for his poor play under Boudreau, but there's 100% a market for a player of his talents at the price he's signed for. It should also be noted that under Tocchet he turned that poor play around and played within the new structure the team has been trying to achieve.

 

[DonnyNucker]

Last summer after his 99p season yes.

This year... being horrific for 50 games... maybe there is a team desperate enough...? What team would that be?


Mission accomplished for you then I guess.

Managed to derail the discussion far enough to not have to acknowledge your faulty logic eariler.


I dont know what your shot at my retool views has to do with anything here.

I would honestly be VERY squeamish adding JT Miller to my team for 7 years and 8mil. Wouldn't you?


From what team would do well to add him? Is there a team that can fit him under the cap, is trying to win RIGHT NOW and has a strong enough leadership group to reasonably take the risk of his character in the locker room?

Has Miller been kicking puppies in the locker room again? What a dick!

 

[strattonius]

The hell you guys complaining about Miller's contract for? He's a good player.

The problem contracts are OEL, Myers, Pearson, Poolman, and to a lesser extent Boeser. Complain about those players.

I would choose Miller over Horvat even if Miller was making more AAV. The fact that Horvat makes more is pretty astonishing really. It's not even debatable who the better player is and I don't see that changing over the next 4 years.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

He's a worse player than Miller and there was interest in trading for his services. If a defensive disaster like Kane can be brought in for a playoff run, there's a market for Miller. My guess is that, aside from a bidding war breaking out, Miller would be worth around $8 million per season on the UFA market. Warts aside, he's a proven 30-goal scorer who can be PPG or above if played on your top line.

I dont get the comparison. Kane is a pending ufa. The return is ridiciliously low, even for Kane being able to control where he lands.

Blackhawks received AHL defenceman Andy Welinski, a conditional 2023 second-round pick and a 2025 fourth-round pick.


Your name is Table of Stats. What statistical window age wise is Miller entering?

He was unplayable this year for the first half of the season and was one of the most visibly truculent (towards his own team) players in recent history.


Again. There are not many teams this summer who checks all the boxes: Has the cap space. Has the leadership and does not care how Miller will play in 4-5 years.

 

[Orr4Norris]

The thing with Bo is I think he’s been miscast his whole career. His best version of himself is a scoring winger but because he’s good on face offs, he’s been held up as a 2 way C.

The problem with him at C is he doesn’t really have above average Hockey IQ. In fact, his hockey IQ is probably below average. He doesn’t read the play defensively particularly well. He doesn’t distribute the puck all that well. But I never thought it was a lack of try.

 

[82Ninety42011]

The thing with Bo is I think he’s been miscast his whole career. His best version of himself is a scoring winger but because he’s good on face offs, he’s been held up as a 2 way C.

The problem with him at C is he doesn’t really have above average Hockey IQ. In fact, his hockey IQ is probably below average. He doesn’t read the play defensively particularly well. He doesn’t distribute the puck all that well. But I never thought it was a lack of try.

Never really thought of this but you might be on to something. Besides the face off did he really do anything good at centre? He definitely wasn't a play maker but could finish. I wonder how well he would have done on EP's wing taking the draw at centre only then shifting over. Something else to ponder over summer I guess.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Holy crap the narrative on Horvat has changed after he was traded.

This is pretty remarkable...

 

[sandwichbird2023]

The thing with Bo is I think he’s been miscast his whole career. His best version of himself is a scoring winger but because he’s good on face offs, he’s been held up as a 2 way C.

The problem with him at C is he doesn’t really have above average Hockey IQ. In fact, his hockey IQ is probably below average. He doesn’t read the play defensively particularly well. He doesn’t distribute the puck all that well. But I never thought it was a lack of try.

Maybe NYI should play Barzal at C next season with Horvat on the wing, but Bo takes all the faceoff? An elite skater and playmaker like Barzal should be playing center, IMO. Put a defensively responsible guy on the other wing and, on paper, that looks like a pretty good line.

The problem with Horvat's hot streak last year was that he was scoring a lot of goals off deflections. Unless you are Joe Pavelski, that is not a sustainable way to produce goals. I don't remember Horvat being particularly good at it prior to the season, and out of nowhere he had like 8-10 deflection goals to bump up his stats, but it is very hard to maintain that year in-year out.

 

[MarkMM]

Why wouldn't you spend the money on both if the team could afford it?

What about Miller + Horvat signed, plus assets used to sweeten a contract removal, then pay for a RHD? Is the team stronger or weaker in a net sense then?

In the scenario where we keep Horvat as you point out we'll have to pay assets to move out bad cap and then pay to bring in a RHD.

Trading Horvat out brought in a RHD without having to send out assets to make cap space and then on top of that we got assets in Beauvillier and Raty, the former compensates for some of Horvat's lost production with the latter giving us someone with potential high future upside.

We end up better balanced in terms of cap allocation and if we need to make additional cap room we have the options of moving out assets that you wanted to do with Horvat except we have more assets to do so with one less hole on the RHD side.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Holy crap the narrative on Horvat has changed after he was traded.

This is pretty remarkable...

Mostly due to his careless comment...that brought his shoddy point totals more under the microscope.

 

[DonnyNucker]

Mostly due to his careless comment...that brought his shoddy point totals more under the microscope.

To each their own. I’ve disliked Bo for years and blamed the team’s culture problems largely on him. Can’t have a disengaged mouse running your locker room

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

To each their own. I’ve disliked Bo for years and blamed the team’s culture problems largely on him. Can’t have a disengaged mouse running your locker room

Ive never disliked him (I still like him)..I think that he captained the team to best of his ability.

Having said that..the trade was a win for the team (and for Bo getting his retirement contract)..Allvin played his hand well..(despite my initial reaction to the trade).

 

[tradervik]

Holy crap the narrative on Horvat has changed after he was traded.

This is pretty remarkable...

The criticism has always been there but no one paid much attention.

EDIT: I'd also say it's natural to gloss over a player's flaws when he's "your guy" and to emphasize the flaws when he moves to another team.

 

[VanJack]

Holy crap the narrative on Horvat has changed after he was traded.

This is pretty remarkable...

I don't think the narrative changed because of Horvat's off-the-cuff comments about playing for the Canucks--which he later walked back.

It was the contract. Fans know in their heart of hearts that $8.5m a season is far too much money for what Horvat has brought to the table throughout his career. And his fade out down the stretch basically proves it.

The feeling is the Canucks dodged a huge bullet.....and collected some valuable assets in the bargain.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I don't think the narrative changed because of Horvat's off-the-cuff comments about playing for the Canucks--which he later walked back.

It was the contract. Fans know in their heart of hearts that $8.5m a season is far too much money for what Horvat has brought to the table throughout his career. And his fade out down the stretch basically proves it.

The feeling is the Canucks dodged a huge bullet.....and collected some valuable assets in the bargain.

No but people are saying stuff like: "Besides the face off did he really do anything good at centre?"

 

[Bleach Clean]

In the scenario where we keep Horvat as you point out we'll have to pay assets to move out bad cap and then pay to bring in a RHD.

Trading Miller out brought in a RHD without having to send out assets to make cap space and then on top of that we got assets in Beauvillier and Raty, the former compensates for some of Horvat's lost production with the latter giving us someone with potential high future upside.

We end up better balanced in terms of cap allocation and if we need to make additional cap room we have the options of moving out assets that you wanted to do with Horvat except we have more assets to do so with one less hole on the RHD side.

Value is the goal of cap allocation, not balance. Meaning, a better but lopsided roster is still better. Besides, getting the RHD via further moves still allocates money to that side, in terms of balance.

The difference would have been the value of the FA RHD vs Beauvillier, who I think has marginal value. So as long as the RHD was above marginal value, it's a net win for the team.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Value is the goal of cap allocation, not balance. Meaning, a better but lopsided roster is still better. Besides, getting the RHD via further moves still allocates money to that side, in terms of balance.

The difference would have been the value of the FA RHD vs Beauvillier, who I think has marginal value. So as long as the RHD was above marginal value, it's a net win for the team.

Yeah.

Taking back Beauvillier in that trade was a much bigger negative than most people realised.