"Blow the Zone" Horvat Strikes Back

[MarkMM]

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.

It's not just Beauvillier for RHD, because in this scenario we also have to factor in not having Raty and whatever lost asset to make room for that cap space, which I don't think would be insignificant.

It's not like having Horvat at $6.5M plus Miller is a bad outcome, but I get nervous having both those contracts for that term and in the end am okay with how things unfolded.

 

[Bleach Clean]

It's not just Beauvillier for RHD, because in this scenario we also have to factor in not having Raty and whatever lost asset to make room for that cap space, which I don't think would be insignificant.

Fair point. I think it would just be trading the 2nd retained from not doing the Hronek deal that equates to Raty's value, and then that 2nd is traded to get Myers/Boeser off of the roster.

 

[VanJack]

It's always funny how perceptions of trades change the further you get out from them.

At the time, the decision to extend Miller over Hovat was a head-scratcher. I mean Horvat was three years younger, and the team captain. He was also a natural center and one of the best faceoff guys in the league.

But with the benefit of hindsight, clearly the Canucks front office made the right choice in extending Miller first. He's simply the better player. And $8.5m a season is far too much for Horvat.

Of course if the Canucks weren't carrying around anvil contracts for the likes of OEL, Myers, Boeser etc.....they'd have had enough money to bring back BOTH Horvat and Miller.

But with the Canucks cap woes, only one them could be retained. Too bad in a way. I think history will show that Horvat was far better in a Canuck uniform than he'll ever be with the Islanders.

 

[Bleach Clean]

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).

Those are fine as possibilities, but we are trying to isolate the most likely scenario. To me, it's clear: They wanted to sign both. The attempts in the summer and in January prove this. Miller was already signed in summer and another attempt (or 2, IIRC) happened after that.

If the trade was the likeliest scenario, they don't attempt to re-sign him.

If we go only by what happened, then we ignore all intel from legitimate 3rd party sources.

We don't need to know the details of every signing attempt to know that they were attempted, and it is the attempt that signals the plan. Hope that clarifies things.

 

[racerjoe]

Those are fine as possibilities, but we are trying to isolate the most likely scenario. To me, it's clear: They wanted to sign both. The attempts in the summer and in January prove this. Miller was already signed in summer and another attempt (or 2, IIRC) happened after that.

If the trade was the likeliest scenario, they don't attempt to re-sign him.

If we go only by what happened, then we ignore all intel from legitimate 3rd party sources.

We don't need to know the details of every signing attempt to know that they were attempted, and it is the attempt that signals the plan. Hope that clarifies things.

You are wrong already. JT Miller signed in September. I think it was the 2nd.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Man, of all the people to really take issue with Horvat’s “for free” comment about Vancouver, Shane O’Brien wouldn’t have even cracked my top ten list of guesses. But he took aim at Horvat again.

 

[RobertKron]

Man, of all the people to really take issue with Horvat’s “for free” comment about Vancouver, Shane O’Brien wouldn’t have even cracked my top ten list of guesses. But he took aim at Horvat again.

First one got some buzz so he's going to run it into the ground.

 

[iceburg]

Those are fine as possibilities, but we are trying to isolate the most likely scenario. To me, it's clear: They wanted to sign both. The attempts in the summer and in January prove this. Miller was already signed in summer and another attempt (or 2, IIRC) happened after that.

If the trade was the likeliest scenario, they don't attempt to re-sign him.

If we go only by what happened, then we ignore all intel from legitimate 3rd party sources.

We don't need to know the details of every signing attempt to know that they were attempted, and it is the attempt that signals the plan. Hope that clarifies things.

I get what you're saying. I just don't agree that trying to sign him = they didn't intend on trading him. Of course they're going to see what it would cost to re-sign. That's just good business. But that doesn't mean that their preference was to sign him. As in any business, I see it as just assessing the value of the options.
I guess we just disagree.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I get what you're saying. I just don't agree that trying to sign him = they didn't intend on trading him. Of course they're going to see what it would cost to re-sign. That's just good business. But that doesn't mean that their preference was to sign him. As in any business, I see it as just assessing the value of the options.
I guess we just disagree.

I think it was pretty clear that the Canucks had no intention of signing Horvat despite the ‘were trying’ sound bites from management (they wanted to sign him based on his 2021-22 season).

Was a win for Allvin who sat back this season while Horvat drove up his trade value…and a win for Horvat who got his retirement contract.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I get what you're saying. I just don't agree that trying to sign him = they didn't intend on trading him. Of course they're going to see what it would cost to re-sign. That's just good business. But that doesn't mean that their preference was to sign him. As in any business, I see it as just assessing the value of the options.
I guess we just disagree.

The way I see it.

They played hard ball on his contract talks and him getting red hot to start the season made that back fire.

They were forced to trade him, and the return was pretty lack luster.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I get what you're saying. I just don't agree that trying to sign him = they didn't intend on trading him. Of course they're going to see what it would cost to re-sign. That's just good business. But that doesn't mean that their preference was to sign him. As in any business, I see it as just assessing the value of the options.
I guess we just disagree.

That may be, but I think the disagreement runs counter to evidence, not with it. It's adding supposition to the equation by asserting that an attempt is not genuine, rather than it being genuine (more of a stretch). I'm taking it for what it is, while you're thinking it's something else (non-standard).

Edit: But again, you’re free to disagree. Good chatting with you.

 

[VanJack]

It's a moot point now, but if the Canucks weren't carrying around so many cap-killing contracts for the likes of OEL, Myers and even Boeser, would they have re-upped Horvat?

There's no real debate is there? Although Horvat probably isn't worth the $8.5m a season he's being paid by the Islanders, the sad reality that in Vancouver he was 'a cap casualty'.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

It's a moot point now, but if the Canucks weren't carrying around so many cap-killing contracts for the likes of OEL, Myers and even Boeser, would they have re-upped Horvat?

There's no real debate is there? Although Horvat probably isn't worth the $8.5m a season he's being paid by the Islanders, the sad reality that in Vancouver he was 'a cap casualty'.

Probably would not have been wise having 3 centers gobbling up a massive chunk of your cap.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

It's a moot point now, but if the Canucks weren't carrying around so many cap-killing contracts for the likes of OEL, Myers and even Boeser, would they have re-upped Horvat?

There's no real debate is there? Although Horvat probably isn't worth the $8.5m a season he's being paid by the Islanders, the sad reality that in Vancouver he was 'a cap casualty'.

Yes.

And they could have got it done ~7 per last summer if they chose to do so.

 

[racerjoe]

Yes.

And they could have got it done ~7 per last summer if they chose to do so.

This is wrong... and can't be proven right in anyway...

 

[PuckMunchkin]

This is wrong... and can't be proven right in anyway...

We disagree on what would have got it done. But you have no way to prove your opinion as fact any more than I.

Last time you tried you derailed the conversation and then tapped out.

 

[CherryToke]

It's a moot point now, but if the Canucks weren't carrying around so many cap-killing contracts for the likes of OEL, Myers and even Boeser, would they have re-upped Horvat?

There's no real debate is there? Although Horvat probably isn't worth the $8.5m a season he's being paid by the Islanders, the sad reality that in Vancouver he was 'a cap casualty'.

I personally would rather not have a soft, defensive liability with tunnel vision as a 3rd line center for any price. Maybe if he converted to wing.

 

[racerjoe]

We disagree on what would have got it done. But you have no way to prove your opinion as fact any more than I.

Last time you tried you derailed the conversation and then tapped out.

Because you didn't know what a comparable was.

 

[sting101]

The way I see it.

They played hard ball on his contract talks and him getting red hot to start the season made that back fire.

They were forced to trade him, and the return was pretty lack luster.

I have a rebuttal for your posts.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Because you didn't know what a comparable was.

So dishonest with your arguments.

But I dont blame you. Retoolers are forced in to these situations over and over.


edit @racerjoe

Lets do the actual comparison:

Sean Couturier

2011-12 19 PHI NHL 77gp 13g 14a 27p
2012-13 20 PHI NHL 46gp 4g 11a 15p
2013-14 21 PHI NHL 82gp 13g 26a 39p
2014-15 22 PHI NHL 82gp 15g 22a 37p
2015-16 23 PHI NHL 63gp 11g 28a 39p - 2nd in Selke votes
2017-18 25 PHI NHL 82gp 31g 45a 76p
2018-19 26 PHI NHL 80gp 33g 43a 76p - Selke season
2020-21 28 PHI NHL 45gp 18g 23a 41p

Last 3 seasons before contract: 193 points in 207 games

Bo Horvat

2014-15 19 VAN NHL 68gp 13g 12a 25p
2015-16 20 VAN NHL 82gp 16g 24a 40p
2016-17 21 VAN NHL 81gp 20g 32a 52p
2017-18 22 VAN NHL 64gp 22g 22a 44p
2018-19 23 VAN NHL 82gp 27g 34a 61p
2019-20 24 VAN NHL 69gp 22g 31a 53p
2020-21 25 VAN NHL 56gp 19g 20a 39p
2021-22 26 VAN NHL 70gp 31g 21a 52p Selke-34

Last 3 seasons before contract: 144 points in 195 games


- 1 year between when the contracts are to be signed, but with the flat cap and the very similar ages it shouldn't make a significant difference.
- Last 3 seasons before contract: 0.93 points per game vs 0.73.
- Consistent Selke nominee with 1 win under his belt.
- Two +30 goal and near point per game campaigns vs 1 31 goal no where near point per game season.

One might draw from this comparison that Sean Couturier should earn more money than Bo Horvat.

Now with the cap hit of Couturier's contract being $7,750,000 x 8. We should arrive at the conclusion that, when using Couturier as a comparable, Horvat's cap hit should be more than ~$7,000,000.

If we are to believe Servalli:



The Canucks offered an absurd $5,125,000 x 8 during the summer.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

@racerjoe Are you dodging this one again?

If you are.

At least stop using the flawed argument in the future.

 

[racerjoe]

@racerjoe Are you dodging this one again?

If you are.

At least stop using the flawed argument in the future.

Holly crap... you still don't understand.

I don't have to find it correct... you don't have to find it correct. However that is what they are using to compare Bo to.

There was a big conversation about it at the time.

Like good job on putting everything together, but it really doesn't matter. I am not saying he is as good as... I am saying it is reported that Bo's agent was using that as a comparable.

 

[tantalum]

I mean it's safe to say that in the first round of negotiations the Horvat camp came in at way above what they'd expect to actually sign for and the canucks would come in way lower than what they'd expect to sign for.

Then Horvat took had a hot beginning to the year and his ask likely became more solid in the 8-8.5 mil range and in the end everything I heard had the canucks coming up tp $7+ a year. There was just no agreement to come to in this case at any point in time IMO.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Holly crap... you still don't understand.

I don't have to find it correct... you don't have to find it correct. However that is what they are using to compare Bo to.

There was a big conversation about it at the time.

Like good job on putting everything together, but it really doesn't matter. I am not saying he is as good as... I am saying it is reported that Bo's agent was using that as a comparable.

You are insane.

 

[racerjoe]

You are insane.

Go back and read the threads. I think it was @4Twenty who made the case of why it should be there at least. I disagreed at the time... but it doesn't matter if that is what the side was using.

@tantalum is right about it.