Player Discussion Bo Horvat | VII | 50 points! al gore celebration.gif

[Black Noise]

Those long term contracts come with significant risk, they only make sense when there is also a significant chance of the player outperforming the contract for multiple years. They should be reserved for players trending toward being elite.

This is a team that just locked up Sutter long term.

Horvat is 21 and performing well offensively, he has a lot of work to do defensively but it's worth it to lock him up long term.

 

[pahlsson]

wouldnt ROR be the most obvious comparison

he got a 2 year 10 mil deal after his breakout offensive season

 

[Scurr]

This is a team that just locked up Sutter long term.

Horvat is 21 and performing well offensively, he has a lot of work to do defensively but it's worth it to lock him up long term.

How is it worth it? Is he likely to produce more than he did this season by a significant margin?

What you're really doing with these contracts is paying for what the player is worth now and hoping for significant improvement that makes the risk associated with that kind of deal palatable. The risk is that through apathy or injury you're tied to a significantly worse player. Horvat does offer some character traits that reduce the risk of apathy -but I said the same thing about Cody Hodgson. I'm not sure how much weight to put on that.

If you see Horvat levelling out as a 50-60 point player, what's the financial risk of a bridge deal? What's that player worth in two or three years when they need to be signed? That's a really good player if they also come with a good to great defensive game. Horvat's a long way from that, though.

Horvat is probably the best asset on the team right now. Maybe the best in the organization. That doesn't automatically qualify him for this kind of deal, though, does it?

 

[Scurr]

wouldnt ROR be the most obvious comparison

he got a 2 year 10 mil deal after his breakout offensive season

ROR got a 2 year bridge contract worth 10m and then signed a 2 year contract for 12m that took him into free-agency. He already had 3 55 point seasons under his belt by the time he got that second 2 year deal and was renowned league wide for his defensive game. It was Colorado underestimating what they had after the bridge deal that cost them imo, not the bridge deal itself.

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/ryan-oreilly

 

[Bleach Clean]

This is a team that just locked up Sutter long term.

Horvat is 21 and performing well offensively, he has a lot of work to do defensively but it's worth it to lock him up long term.

Frankly, I'm surprised Horvat even got to 50 points on what will likely amount to be the lowest scoring team in Canucks history... It's about as bad a situation offensively as a young player could endure. That he kept scoring is definitely encouraging.

I get what you're saying with "work to do defensively", but let's be clear: To be merely pedestrian (read: Not Sub-Replacement Level...) on this terrible squad is a feat in of itself. He has to improve, yes. The impetus to lock him up long-term is to understand that his current level of Dzone play is the base level from which he will improve, hopefully.

All told, I give him a bridge deal. I'd like to see a greater body of work from him, and to judge that work alongside a better team. Right now, the context isn't stable enough to judge what he will do long-term, IMO.

 

[mathonwy]

Horvat to us is like Tavares to the Isles.

One good player and a whole lotta suck

 

[Britton]

How is it worth it? Is he likely to produce more than he did this season by a significant margin?

What you're really doing with these contracts is paying for what the player is worth now and hoping for significant improvement that makes the risk associated with that kind of deal palatable. The risk is that through apathy or injury you're tied to a significantly worse player. Horvat does offer some character traits that reduce the risk of apathy -but I said the same thing about Cody Hodgson. I'm not sure how much weight to put on that.

If you see Horvat levelling out as a 50-60 point player, what's the financial risk of a bridge deal? What's that player worth in two or three years when they need to be signed? That's a really good player if they also come with a good to great defensive game. Horvat's a long way from that, though.

Horvat is probably the best asset on the team right now. Maybe the best in the organization. That doesn't automatically qualify him for this kind of deal, though, does it?

It really depends on the direction the team takes in the next couple years. We are probably going to see his usage in offensive situations increase, and I doubt (or at least hope) that the team as a whole won't be as low scoring as it was this year. Given that, It's reasonable to think that his production will increase at least into the 60-70 point range which with scoring the way it is probably warrants a long term deal. That said I'd like to see a bridge deal as well, it's not like your going to get a huge discount locking him up for a max length deal right now anyway.

 

[Samzilla]

Give him the keys to the team, yo.

 

[Petrichor]

In his "prime" I can see him getting 80+

Consistently, he'll likely get 70 points a year for a long time, but I do see a few peak years if the Canucks are contenders where he'll rack up points like mad.

 

[JA]

I've noticed that he has been forcing the toedrag move to the inside lately when there are other options available off the rush. For example, with Boeser open on the left side eyeing a one-timer, Bo has elected to try beating the defender with his stick on more than a few occasions.

In the past, he might have dished it to the open man and crashed the net for the rebound. One hopes that he has not become overconfident about his one-on-one puck skills a la Ryan Kesler.

 

[Siludin]

With Pearson's signing today, how does that affect Horvat's next contract?

 

[Bad News Benning]

With Pearson's signing today, how does that affect Horvat's next contract?

Very little.

I'm sure bo's camp would love a 4 year deal but canucks should be looking to lock down ufa years even if it costs them more in the short term.

 

[BenningHurtsMySoul]

60-65 points would be a nice season for Bo.

I want to see him improve defensively though

 

[PG Canuck]

With Pearson's signing today, how does that affect Horvat's next contract?

Probably not at all.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Bo is likely going to get something north of $5M.

 

[Kryten]

Bo is likely going to get something north of $5M.

If he signs for 8 years anything under 6m per is a huge win

 

[Habitat]

im guessing 6x6

 

[mathonwy]

So....

What's it gonna be?

 

[DL44]

So....

What's it gonna be?

2 yr, $4.75mil per.

Think he gets a bridge. 17 goalless games to end the season doesn't scream he's ready for a long term commitment. Needs to prove himself still.. and develop consistency.

 

[F A N]

Give him Trocheck money and term and call it a day. Anything less is a bonus. Under $5M AAV is reasonable. Barkov type money and we're hoping and praying Horvat becomes a #1C and quickly.

 

[elitepete]

In 2012, the Avalanche made the biggest mistake of their existence by not locking up Ryan O'Reilly longterm. He wanted 5 mill per year on a long term contract, but they tried to lowball him and it ended blowing up in their faces.

5 mill for ROR would be a steal right now because he has gotten a lot better and the cap has gone up. If they still had ROR, they wouldn't be in the mess they currently are in.

I hope the same thing doesn't happen with Bo, a bridge contract could be disastrous.

 

[DL44]

In 2012, the Avalanche made the biggest mistake of their existence by not locking up Ryan O'Reilly longterm. He wanted 5 mill per year on a long term contract, but they tried to lowball him and it ended blowing up in their faces.

5 mill for ROR would be a steal right now because he has gotten a lot better and the cap has gone up. If they still had ROR, they wouldn't be in the mess they currently are in.

I hope the same thing doesn't happen with Bo, a bridge contract could be disastrous.

Their mistake wasn't not NOT locking him up.. it was letting him go...

 

[elitepete]

Their mistake wasn't not NOT locking him up.. it was letting him go...

If they locked him up at age 21, he wouldn't go anywhere... plus he would have. 5 mill cap hit compared to 7.5 mill.

 

[fancouver]

Horvat to us is like Tavares to the Isles.

One good player and a whole lotta suck

Boeser is pretty good.

 

[JuniorNelson]

I think the team wants to extend Sedins for a further two seasons. Seriously. They are afraid Horvat won't want to play behind them for three more years (and who could blame him?).

Canucks have zero upside if they lose Horvat. If you put it into those terms, they should be giving him Sedin money, no? Perhaps seven million US dollars is enough to watch the Sedins' decline?