Player Discussion Bo Horvat

[vancityluongo]

I've accepted it's never going to happen at this point. The guy is built like Jarome Iginla and has a similar toolset (minus maybe the elite shot) and should be an absolute horse down low and a nightmare to opposing defenders, but it just isn't in him. He wants to be a skill transition guy and at this point 6 years into his career that's never going to change.

I think he's nervous about playing along the wall because he knows there's no defensive acumen on his line. That, and he's getting hammered with the toughest defensive assignments possible, so he naturally plays it very conservative.

Would love to see Horvat with a reasonable center (Gaudette being the best option on the team right now, but not an ideal fit), playing regular second line minutes as a winger himself. Have always thought he could have a Taylor Hall like effect as a dominant, play driving north south LW.

But if Horvat stays as a center, I don't think his wingers are the main problem. This is the Mason Raymond thing all over again - people drastically over estimate what a reasonable second line winger should look like. He just needs a real third line center behind him capable of playing top matchups (or Pettersson taking harder minutes). If he had that, along with Pearson and Boeser/Toffoli as his wingers, that's pretty solid.

 

[canuckking1]

Exactly, that should show you how good he is. Maybe we should actually get him a couple of top 6 wingers for a change.

We should but doesn't excuse the effort he's displayed over the last stretch of games.

 

[CanuckleBerry]

Horvat needs some Max Domi on his wing.

 

[F A N]

I think he's nervous about playing along the wall because he knows there's no defensive acumen on his line. That, and he's getting hammered with the toughest defensive assignments possible, so he naturally plays it very conservative.

This doesn't make much sense to me in the context that one "reason" being given for Horvat's improved play after Eriksson was placed on his line was Eriksson's steadying presence and defensive acumen.

Would love to see Horvat with a reasonable center (Gaudette being the best option on the team right now, but not an ideal fit), playing regular second line minutes as a winger himself. Have always thought he could have a Taylor Hall like effect as a dominant, play driving north south LW.

But if Horvat stays as a center, I don't think his wingers are the main problem. This is the Mason Raymond thing all over again - people drastically over estimate what a reasonable second line winger should look like. He just needs a real third line center behind him capable of playing top matchups (or Pettersson taking harder minutes). If he had that, along with Pearson and Boeser/Toffoli as his wingers, that's pretty solid.

I've said this before, we need to figure out whether our core is good enough to lead this team to a Cup win. With Horvat, he's been criticized for his defensive play in previous seasons because he's not Kesler. He entered the league with a defensive reputation but it was his offense that has developed. Granted I think Horvat has improved defensively.

But let's not try to turn Horvat into a winger. He's scored 20+ goals in his last 4 seasons and it looks like he may put up another 60 point season or close to it. Combined with his faceoff prowess Horvat brings a ton of value as a 2nd line C. If we an additional stud #1 C then moving Horvat to the wing is not an issue but we don't. But you are right in that if he's not capable of being that matchup C then we might need to have a 3rd line that is capable of playing those though matchups or like Kesler maybe Horvat needs a playmaker on his line or a scorer like Boeser.

 

[bossram]

I think he's nervous about playing along the wall because he knows there's no defensive acumen on his line. That, and he's getting hammered with the toughest defensive assignments possible, so he naturally plays it very conservative.

Would love to see Horvat with a reasonable center (Gaudette being the best option on the team right now, but not an ideal fit), playing regular second line minutes as a winger himself. Have always thought he could have a Taylor Hall like effect as a dominant, play driving north south LW.

But if Horvat stays as a center, I don't think his wingers are the main problem. This is the Mason Raymond thing all over again - people drastically over estimate what a reasonable second line winger should look like. He just needs a real third line center behind him capable of playing top matchups (or Pettersson taking harder minutes). If he had that, along with Pearson and Boeser/Toffoli as his wingers, that's pretty solid.

Agreed. If we want to really unleash Bo, he needs some actual support. You can't saddle him with brutal minutes, and a revolving door of mediocre right-wingers and expect him to dominate. If he had another legitimate two-way presence on his line, I think we'd see a vast difference.

Alternatively, he could use a Malhotra-like presence to actually take the burden off of him. Benning has gone out and acquired Sutter/Beagle to do this, but both have been abject failures at this.

 

[Blue and Green]

This doesn't make much sense to me in the context that one "reason" being given for Horvat's improved play after Eriksson was placed on his line was Eriksson's steadying presence and defensive acumen.

There's an article today in The Athletic by Harman Dayal (best sports writer that I know of), showing how much better Horvat & Pearson have done with Eriksson on their line compared to Virtanen in terms of shots-for and expected goals-for percentages. The article is available only to subscribers but I'll pass along the numbers:

Shot attempts for Horvat-Pearson:
w/ Eriksson 51.6%
w/ Virtanen 47.4%

Expected goals for Horvat-Pearson:
w/ Eriksson 53.4%
w/ Virtanen 48.3%

Toffoli might be the best guy to play with Horvat and Pearson when Boeser returns.

 

[vancityluongo]

This doesn't make much sense to me in the context that one "reason" being given for Horvat's improved play after Eriksson was placed on his line was Eriksson's steadying presence and defensive acumen.

Doesn't that exactly align with what I'm saying? I don't know if it bears out in the numbers or not, but that aligns exactly with my (anecdotal) perception; when with wingers like Virtanen or Pearson or whoever else, Bo's so worried about his defensive responsibilities that he doesn't look to play a mean, possession heavy offensive game. Eriksson, rightfully or not, "enables" this a little bit more because he bears some of that defensive burden.

I've said this before, we need to figure out whether our core is good enough to lead this team to a Cup win. With Horvat, he's been criticized for his defensive play in previous seasons because he's not Kesler. He entered the league with a defensive reputation but it was his offense that has developed. Granted I think Horvat has improved defensively.

Isn't Horvat just getting caved in defensively, regardless of the Kesler comparison? I agree that the Kesler perception is unfair - Horvat is a very good offensive center, and it'd be nice if we could play him that way. He's not Patrice Bergeron.

But let's not try to turn Horvat into a winger. He's scored 20+ goals in his last 4 seasons and it looks like he may put up another 60 point season or close to it. Combined with his faceoff prowess Horvat brings a ton of value as a 2nd line C. If we an additional stud #1 C then moving Horvat to the wing is not an issue but we don't. But you are right in that if he's not capable of being that matchup C then we might need to have a 3rd line that is capable of playing those though matchups or like Kesler maybe Horvat needs a playmaker on his line or a scorer like Boeser.

Horvat seems quite capable of carrying a second line that gets traditional offensive minutes in a #1 scoring line - #2 scoring line - #3 shutdown line - #4 energy line scheme, where lines 1 and 3 take on the hardest matchups. I don't think he's capable (yet, if not ever) of taking on the toughest assignments, while still delivering positive results offensively. Moving Bo to the wing and putting him with a Turris/RNH-level center is just one way to make that happen, if we can't find a more traditional "Malhotra-like" center to take on the defensive burden from the third line. Another alternative would be to find a Burrows-like winger that's both capable offensively and near Selke-level defensively. Of the three potential solutions, I think that's the hardest player to find.

 

[I am toxic]

There's an article today in The Athletic by Harman Dayal (best sports writer that I know of), showing how much better Horvat & Pearson have done with Eriksson on their line compared to Virtanen in terms of shots-for and expected goals-for percentages. The article is available only to subscribers but I'll pass along the numbers:

Shot attempts for Horvat-Pearson:
w/ Eriksson 51.6%
w/ Virtanen 47.4%

Expected goals for Horvat-Pearson:
w/ Eriksson 53.4%
w/ Virtanen 48.3%

Toffoli might be the best guy to play with Horvat and Pearson when Boeser returns.

Does the expected goals factor out the ENs?

 

[Blue and Green]

Does the expected goals factor out the ENs?

It's a basic tenet of expected goals models to exclude any situations where one of the goalies is pulled.

 

[bossram]

Does the expected goals factor out the ENs?

Yes. Generally you're looking 5 on 5 only when using xGoals.

From that data, it's clear that the Horvat line is actually doing a pretty good job in shutdown utilization when Eriksson is attached to him.

 

[orcatown]

Horvat short coming has always been his first couple of steps. He is heavy footed and needs a couple of strides to get up to speed. Once he gets going he can make a little burst.

Seems to me, he is labouring more this year and that suggests an injury. You can see that most when he over pivots and loses balance when turning. Often ends up losing speed on his turns rather than picking up speed as most players do.

One result is that he is having trouble getting on players quickly enough in the defensive end. Thus he plays off of players and just tries to stay in a central defensive position. But this doesn't allow him to get pressure on the puck and causes him to move late to a person he is checking. Good example was the first Columbus goal yesterday. His check went behind the net for the puck while Horvat was in the slot. When layer picked up puck he had all kinds of room to make a play and Horvat was forced to make a belated effort to get on the player. So he leaves the slot leaving Bemstrom wide open and tries to rush the player with the puck down in the corner. But he ends up in no man land - half way between the man he is trying to get on in the corner and the player wide open in the slot. Columbus player simply moves the puck past Horvat to Bemstrom who has open shot and, in the end, a goal.

And this scenario has been played out more and more as the season has gone on. Horvat is suppose to cover back for a pinching defense man and just can't get there. If commits to the a board battle can't keep with his check if player spins off him to the net. Doesn't commit to the boards and he is not keeping pressure on the puck. And so it goes. This has been an increasing problem and really would have been more obvious if Markstrom hadn't been around to repeatedly bail out Horvat (and Gaudette as well).

For a while Beagle was getting the difficult match ups but with him out, Horvat is back to doing that and you can see how that has effected the team in the standings.

On the offensive side, Horvat's poor skating as shown up in repeated turnover on the PP and poorer distribution because he can't get separation to make a play.

Canucks need to seriously assess the situation and determine is this a short term issue or whether Horvat's limitations are long term concern. If the latter, a trade, while this premature at the minute, might be considered. Per usual management has been put in a tough position.

 

[I am toxic]

Yes. Generally you're looking 5 on 5 only when using xGoals.

From that data, it's clear that the Horvat line is actually doing a pretty good job in shutdown utilization when Eriksson is attached to him.

Thanks.

Doesn't match my eye-test. Either the sample size is too small, or my eyes need to be checked.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Horvat short coming has always been his first couple of steps. He is heavy footed and needs a couple of strides to get up to speed. Once he gets going he can make a little burst.

Seems to me, he is labouring more this year and that suggests an injury. You can see that most when he over pivots and loses balance when turning. Often ends up losing speed on his turns rather than picking up speed as most players do.

One result is that he is having trouble getting on players quickly enough in the defensive end. Thus he plays off of players and just tries to stay in a central defensive position. But this doesn't allow him to get pressure on the puck and causes him to move late to a person he is checking. Good example was the first Columbus goal yesterday. His check went behind the net for the puck while Horvat was in the slot. When layer picked up puck he had all kinds of room to make a play and Horvat was forced to make a belated effort to get on the player. So he leaves the slot leaving Bemstrom wide open and tries to rush the player with the puck down in the corner. But he ends up in no man land - half way between the man he is trying to get on in the corner and the player wide open in the slot. Columbus player simply moves the puck past Horvat to Bemstrom who has open shot and, in the end, a goal.

And this scenario has been played out more and more as the season has gone on. Horvat is suppose to cover back for a pinching defense man and just can't get there. If commits to the a board battle can't keep with his check if player spins off him to the net. Doesn't commit to the boards and he is not keeping pressure on the puck. And so it goes. This has been an increasing problem and really would have been more obvious if Markstrom hadn't been around to repeatedly bail out Horvat (and Gaudette as well).

For a while Beagle was getting the difficult match ups but with him out, Horvat is back to doing that and you can see how that has effected the team in the standings.

On the offensive side, Horvat's poor skating as shown up in repeated turnover on the PP and poorer distribution because he can't get separation to make a play.

Canucks need to seriously assess the situation and determine is this a short term issue or whether Horvat's limitations are long term concern. If the latter, a trade, while this premature at the minute, might be considered. Per usual management has been put in a tough position.

Nice post. As to the bolded, absolutely premature but no harm in exploring the option and what such a trade could potentially return.

 

[Green Blank Stare]

There's an article today in The Athletic by Harman Dayal (best sports writer that I know of), showing how much better Horvat & Pearson have done with Eriksson on their line compared to Virtanen in terms of shots-for and expected goals-for percentages. The article is available only to subscribers but I'll pass along the numbers:

Shot attempts for Horvat-Pearson:
w/ Eriksson 51.6%
w/ Virtanen 47.4%

Expected goals for Horvat-Pearson:
w/ Eriksson 53.4%
w/ Virtanen 48.3%

Toffoli might be the best guy to play with Horvat and Pearson when Boeser returns.

Those stats are so cherry picked, which is typical of a Dayal column when he's shilling for that bozo Green.

First, Loui has 277 TOI with Bo and Tanner compared to 118 for Jake.

Second, while the CF% is higher with Loui, the actual shots for/against and Fenwick% is higher with Jake. What good is expected goals for when Loui can't finish shit?

I'm not saying Jake doesn't have things he can improve upon but to act like Loui is some rock for the line is garbage. He's not laying any hits and he isn't finishing anything in the offensive zone. Jake can be a roller coaster but I'll take the lows when his highs are so much better. There is a very low ceiling with Loui; Jake's is much higher. Jake also isn't the sole reason the team is giving up 35+ shots a game and seemingly dozens of high danger chances per game.

I'm sure someone could put together a highlight package of Loui and just about anyone else on the team making poor decisions.

Here's the full line numbers:

w/Jake: Line Stats - Natural Stat Trick

w/Loui: Line Stats - Natural Stat Trick

Mind you, this team is in the middle of a meltdown and could use a spark.

 

[Blue and Green]

Those stats are so cherry picked, which is typical of a Dayal column when he's shilling for that bozo Green.

First, Loui has 277 TOI with Bo and Tanner compared to 118 for Jake.

Second, while the CF% is higher with Loui, the actual shots for/against and Fenwick% is higher with Jake. What good is expected goals for when Loui can't finish shit?

I'm not saying Jake doesn't have things he can improve upon but to act like Loui is some rock for the line is garbage. He's not laying any hits and he isn't finishing anything in the offensive zone. Jake can be a roller coaster but I'll take the lows when his highs are so much better. There is a very low ceiling with Loui; Jake's is much higher. Jake also isn't the sole reason the team is giving up 35+ shots a game and seemingly dozens of high danger chances per game.

I'm sure someone could put together a highlight package of Loui and just about anyone else on the team making poor decisions.

Here's the full line numbers:

w/Jake: Line Stats - Natural Stat Trick

w/Loui: Line Stats - Natural Stat Trick

Mind you, this team is in the middle of a meltdown and could use a spark.

Okay, another stat which hasn't been mentioned is scoring chances. With Loui, Horvat-Pearson are 53%, with Virtanen 40%.

Obviously it doesn't mean that Loui is a good player or that he should be in the lineup ahead of Virtanen. Just means that with this particular pair and their deployment there was some justification to use Loui on their line instead of Virtanen.

 

[Green Blank Stare]

Okay, another stat which hasn't been mentioned is scoring chances. With Loui, Horvat-Pearson are 53%, with Virtanen 40%.

Obviously it doesn't mean that Loui is a good player or that he should be in the lineup ahead of Virtanen. Just means that with this particular pair and their deployment there was some justification to use Loui on their line instead of Virtanen.

Far fewer minutes. We don't know the matchups each guy was playing against and again, what difference do scoring chances mean when Loui can't actually score when a goalie is between the pipes?

 

[Icebreakers]

Horvat is one of the streakiest players in the league. When he's on he's on. When he's slumping everything goes wrong.

 

[vanuck]

The thing about the stats that Dayal brought up is that so far Pearson-Horvat-Eriksson have only played just over 277 mins together this season. Using Horvat's average 5v5 mins/game as a proxy for that 2nd line (14:12), that's roughly equal to about 20 games' worth of data so the sample size isn't particularly great.

Likewise, Pearson-Horvat-Virtanen has only played just over 118 mins together, which is the equivalent of about 8 games so... yeah...

Just to be clear, Green's not exactly wrong when he says that Eriksson is good defensively - there have even been articles written about him being able to help Horvat in terms of possession regardless of what metric you look at. However the concern has never been about his ability to defend, it's his declining ability to keep up offensively when playing such a prominent role.

Compare:

	5v5 P/60
Virtanen	1.93​
Eriksson	0.81​

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

When you play in the top 6 you're expected to put up numbers commensurate to that ice time, and as we all know, that hasn't happened here. Since the start of 2017-18 when the league expanded to 31 teams, Eriksson's 1.29 P/60 at 5v5 ranks 233rd among all forwards who've played over 2000 minutes in that span (his TOI being 2045:12). That's solidly in 3rd line territory.

Virtanen's been producing at over twice the rate of Eriksson this year. It should be obvious to anyone that JV is the better offensive player, yet possession-wise he's actually fairly decent himself! He's warranted a bigger look with his play and there's no reason not to put him alongside Horvat at this point.

 

[I am toxic]

The thing about the stats that Dayal brought up is that so far Pearson-Horvat-Eriksson have only played just over 277 mins together this season. Using Horvat's average 5v5 mins/game as a proxy for that 2nd line (14:12), that's roughly equal to about 20 games' worth of data so the sample size isn't particularly great.

Likewise, Pearson-Horvat-Virtanen has only played just over 118 mins together, which is the equivalent of about 8 games so... yeah...

Just to be clear, Green's not exactly wrong when he says that Eriksson is good defensively - there have even been articles written about him being able to help Horvat in terms of possession regardless of what metric you look at. However the concern has never been about his ability to defend, it's his declining ability to keep up offensively when playing such a prominent role.

Compare:

	5v5 P/60
Virtanen	1.93​
Eriksson	0.81​

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

When you play in the top 6 you're expected to put up numbers commensurate to that ice time, and as we all know, that hasn't happened here. Since the start of 2017-18 when the league expanded to 31 teams, Eriksson's 1.29 P/60 at 5v5 ranks 233rd among all forwards who've played over 2000 minutes in that span (his TOI being 2045:12). That's solidly in 3rd line territory.

Virtanen's been producing at over twice the rate of Eriksson this year. It should be obvious to anyone that JV is the better offensive player, yet possession-wise he's actually fairly decent himself! He's warranted a bigger look with his play and there's no reason not to put him alongside Horvat at this point.

And this is what the eye test shows

Not impressed with Dayal

 

[Love]

Lmao that article from Dayal is so bad

 

[F A N]

Doesn't that exactly align with what I'm saying? I don't know if it bears out in the numbers or not, but that aligns exactly with my (anecdotal) perception; when with wingers like Virtanen or Pearson or whoever else, Bo's so worried about his defensive responsibilities that he doesn't look to play a mean, possession heavy offensive game. Eriksson, rightfully or not, "enables" this a little bit more because he bears some of that defensive burden.

Yes but your comments are made in the context that Bo has been playing with Eriksson. So he has been playing with wingers with some defensive acumen.

Isn't Horvat just getting caved in defensively, regardless of the Kesler comparison? I agree that the Kesler perception is unfair - Horvat is a very good offensive center, and it'd be nice if we could play him that way. He's not Patrice Bergeron.

Agreed. I'm just saying if perceptions were different Bo would be considered solid defensively and the offense he brings is fine production for a 2nd line C.

Horvat seems quite capable of carrying a second line that gets traditional offensive minutes in a #1 scoring line - #2 scoring line - #3 shutdown line - #4 energy line scheme, where lines 1 and 3 take on the hardest matchups. I don't think he's capable (yet, if not ever) of taking on the toughest assignments, while still delivering positive results offensively. Moving Bo to the wing and putting him with a Turris/RNH-level center is just one way to make that happen, if we can't find a more traditional "Malhotra-like" center to take on the defensive burden from the third line. Another alternative would be to find a Burrows-like winger that's both capable offensively and near Selke-level defensively. Of the three potential solutions, I think that's the hardest player to find.

I think it's very hard to have a Bergeron or Datsyuk type C who can produce offensively while shutting down the other team's top lines. Ferraro talked about this on 1040 the other day basically his point is that say even if Petey can handle those tough assignments, his offensive production would likely drop a bit. Is that what you want? And if you're not having one of your top 6 lines handle those tough assignments then do you want your 3rd or 4th line playing the type of minutes that other team's first lines typically play 5 v 5? If the latter is the case and the Canucks take a few penalties then you'll have like Sutter/Beagle types playing most of the period.

 

[CherryToke]

Lmao that article from Dayal is so bad

He is pure cringe.

 

[Green Blank Stare]

And this is what the eye test shows

Not impressed with Dayal

Lmao that article from Dayal is so bad

He is pure cringe.

It bugs the shit out of me how many people endlessly praise him on The Athletic.

"Boy genius; wow, you're so smart; why haven't the Canucks hired you yet; etc." Just a bunch of fanboys on there and it's nauseating. No one's actually taking a critical look at the garbage he's posting.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Another 50s pts 20s goals season in the bag with tons of defensive draw and Eriksson on his wing for the majority season

 

[vanuck]

It bugs the shit out of me how many people endlessly praise him on The Athletic.

"Boy genius; wow, you're so smart; why haven't the Canucks hired you yet; etc." Just a bunch of fanboys on there and it's nauseating. No one's actually taking a critical look at the garbage he's posting.

For the record I don't doubt that he's a smart guy... this just reminded me a little of what Drance was trying to do earlier in the year with the Schaller-Beagle-Motte line using a very small data sample. I don't think his intention was as disingenuous as Drance's was but it's definitely a little too surface-level.

Still, I'd rather see what he has to say than the likes of someone like iMac for instance.