Confirmed with Link: [VAN/NYI] Canucks acquire F Anthony Beauvillier, F Aatu Raty, Conditional 1st in ‘23 or ‘24 for F Bo Horvat (25% Retention) - Part II

[racerjoe]

@4Twenty I didn't hardline 32 centres number one centres... you seem to. I used the numbers you were providing to show this, despite your insistence he was more. But lets not get the truth out there.

You keep saying answer your questions... I answered more questions than you have answered of mine, so yeah I am not going to keep bothering. Even on that post you last quoted its clear you aren't here to have discourse back and forth.

I said this to @MS a while ago. If you think you are in a position to win you probably find the money to sign Horvat... it becomes a terrible contract right away. I am not against paying your teams stars more, but you still need to draw a line somewhere.

 

[m9]

Beau and Raty are people too...

To be fair there are separate threads for Beau, Raty.. and even one for the draft pick!

 

[arttk]

Why not answer any of the questions?

“Shouldn’t be 10%” - give us more insight pal. What’s a 10% C. How high would you go?

The real dumb thing about this weird hardline is the cap moves. What’s 10% on year one shrinks every subsequent season.

Any who let’s wait and see like you did for this retool on the fly that’s ending in a tank.

Follow along art it’s your buddy joe with the hard line top 32 thing. I agree it’s a red herring. Listing players like that is dumb. Especially by points. I couldn’t give two shits whether he fits into a weird top 32 thing at all. I actually avoided responding to his claim numerous times because I knew someone like you would come at me for the response.

He ranks players l by position then by ppg. I think it’s simplistic and dismisses too much.

The dumbest part of it all is only Horvat gets his best season docked because of shooting%. But none of the list racer wanted came even close to the same level of scrutiny. It’s called stacking the deck.

Joe won’t even identify what a 10% of the cap centre is. He won’t mention if he also ranks defensman by ppg.

It’s just bad faith.

My thoughts are here.

Agree to disagree. Peace bros.

Wow so much anger, chill out it’s a forum where people talk about hockey.

Only Bo gets “docked”? Miller had a 99pt season and nobody thinks he’s a 99 pt player. Nobody really think Nuge, Hyman are 90pt players. People project based on past history and we look at elements where we can say oh yeah that’s definitely repeatable. If Bo’s numbers are juiced by a higher shot count with less crazy shooting % then I think it’s more reasonable to say ok he can do this again.

The cap to a contract is like 20% and the highest %cap forward is like McD at 15.5 or 16% when he signed and his contract is essentially the most any player can get.
if we look at the contracts signed in the past few years, 1st line ppg forwards gets 8M min so that’s like 10% now and 100 pt forwards get like 10M+ so around 12%not the cap.
Not sure what’s so hard to get.

Dman also are graded differently because there are only a handful of guys who scores a lot and the ability to play defense is not represented by points. Like last year there are 3 guys who scored ppg+ and then 2 guys in the 70s and 3 guys in the 60s. The guys who puts up ppg+ gets absolutely paid but so do guys who put up moderate amount of points but are really good defensively like McAvoy.

Points for dman only really matters when they score a ton or when they don’t score a lot. Like if you are a ppg+ dman, they will get paid regardless of the defensive side of things. If you are scoring 20pts or less, it doesn’t matter how good you are defensively you are not getting paid.

 

[4Twenty]

@4Twenty I didn't hardline 32 centres number one centres... you seem to. I used the numbers you were providing to show this, despite your insistence he was more. But lets not get the truth out there.

You keep saying answer your questions... I answered more questions than you have answered of mine, so yeah I am not going to keep bothering. Even on that post you last quoted its clear you aren't here to have discourse back and forth.

I said this to @MS a while ago. If you think you are in a position to win you probably find the money to sign Horvat... it becomes a terrible contract right away. I am not against paying your teams stars more, but you still need to draw a line somewhere.

This is nonsense. Your the one who brought up top 32 and also the label “first line centres”.

Completely disagree I’m avoiding any questions considering I actually posted stats and ranks here.

You won’t declare what a 10% player needs to do.

So enough of the “get the truth out there”. Your truth is to diminish and discount his shooting % but only his. Nice truth.

 

[racerjoe]

This is nonsense. Your the one who brought up top 32 and also the label “first line centres”.

Completely disagree I’m avoiding any questions considering I actually posted stats and ranks here.

You won’t declare what a 10% player needs to do.

So enough of the “get the truth out there”. Your truth is to diminish and discount his shooting % but only his. Nice truth.

Just twising more and more.

Tables was the only person to bring reasonable stats, and I praised his stats, and my disagreement was putting that much emphasis on goals vs points.

Do you think Bo will be 25% shooter the rest of his career or even a large part of it? Its diminishing the very clear outlier... Just like I have always said JT Miller is a PPG player and not a 99 pt player.

 

[4Twenty]

Wow so much anger, chill out it’s a forum where people talk about hockey.

Only Bo gets “docked”? Miller had a 99pt season and nobody thinks he’s a 99 pt player. Nobody really think Nuge, Hyman are 90pt players. People project based on past history and we look at elements where we can say oh yeah that’s definitely repeatable. If Bo’s numbers are juiced by a higher shot count with less crazy shooting % then I think it’s more reasonable to say ok he can do this again.

The cap to a contract is like 20% and the highest %cap forward is like McD at 15.5 or 16% when he signed and his contract is essentially the most any player can get.
if we look at the contracts signed in the past few years, 1st line ppg forwards gets 8M min so that’s like 10% now and 100 pt forwards get like 10M+ so around 12%not the cap.
Not sure what’s so hard to get.

Dman also are graded differently because there are only a handful of guys who scores a lot and the ability to play defense is not represented by points. Like last year there are 3 guys who scored ppg+ and then 2 guys in the 70s and 3 guys in the 60s. The guys who puts up ppg+ gets absolutely paid but so do guys who put up moderate amount of points but are really good defensively like McAvoy.

Points for dman only really matters when they score a ton or when they don’t score a lot. Like if you are a ppg+ dman, they will get paid regardless of the defensive side of things. If you are scoring 20pts or less, it doesn’t matter how good you are defensively you are not getting paid.

Wow so much anger, chill out it’s a forum where people talk about hockey.

Only Bo gets “docked”? Miller had a 99pt season and nobody thinks he’s a 99 pt player. Nobody really think Nuge, Hyman are 90pt players. People project based on past history and we look at elements where we can say oh yeah that’s definitely repeatable. If Bo’s numbers are juiced by a higher shot count with less crazy shooting % then I think it’s more reasonable to say ok he can do this again.

The cap to a contract is like 20% and the highest %cap forward is like McD at 15.5 or 16% when he signed and his contract is essentially the most any player can get.
if we look at the contracts signed in the past few years, 1st line ppg forwards gets 8M min so that’s like 10% now and 100 pt forwards get like 10M+ so around 12%not the cap.
Not sure what’s so hard to get.

Dman also are graded differently because there are only a handful of guys who scores a lot and the ability to play defense is not represented by points. Like last year there are 3 guys who scored ppg+ and then 2 guys in the 70s and 3 guys in the 60s. The guys who puts up ppg+ gets absolutely paid but so do guys who put up moderate amount of points but are really good defensively like McAvoy.

Points for dman only really matters when they score a ton or when they don’t score a lot. Like if you are a ppg+ dman, they will get paid regardless of the defensive side of things. If you are scoring 20pts or less, it doesn’t matter how good you are defensively you are not getting paid.

I personally find the ppg rate being what defines a players worth absolutely silly. Thanks for responding. I disagree with your methodology. I also disagree that comparing wingers with centres is reasonable. A 65 point C vs a 65 point wing is a big difference to me.

Just twising more and more.

Tables was the only person to bring reasonable stats, and I praised his stats, and my disagreement was putting that much emphasis on goals vs points.

Do you think Bo will be 25% shooter the rest of his career or even a large part of it? Its diminishing the very clear outlier... Just like I have always said JT Miller is a PPG player and not a 99 pt player.

This question is dumb. But I will answer your dumb question.

No I don’t think Horvat will shoot 25% for the rest of his career.

Bo Horvat is a career 14% shooter. The spike here accounts for 10 goals this season. If he had 21 and not 31 goals he’d still be what he is.

Not a single person thinks he’s a 25% shooter but acting like 10 goals this season is outrageous is weird.

 

[4Twenty]

well this thread has sure become a waste of time. tiresome.

Maybe go back to your Canucks are going to be a powerhouse team thread and revel

 

[arttk]

I personally find the ppg rate being what defines a players worth absolutely silly. Thanks for responding. I disagree with your methodology. I also disagree that comparing wingers with centres is reasonable. A 65 point C vs a 65 point wing is a big difference to me.


This question is dumb. But I will answer your dumb question.

No I don’t think Horvat will shoot 25% for the rest of his career.

Bo Horvat is a career 14% shooter. The spike here accounts for 10 goals this season. If he had 21 and not 31 goals he’d still be what he is.

Not a single person thinks he’s a 25% shooter but acting like 10 goals this season is outrageous is weird.

Well I mean I am kinda explaining how it actually works today. Like the 2nd highest player right now is Panarin and he’s a winger. Also I said 8M is a min on purpose because price differs based on UFA/RFA/ 1st contract after ELC status.
Also it seems like 10M+ is for like franchise players and you are right, I think GMs think of centers more highly than wingers when it comes to franchise level players.

So if we look at all the players between 8-10M, there are more wingers signed at that range than centers.
So I am picking out players who are signed around UFA age and are not on “bet you will get better” type of contract. Also I am picking out guys who are signed around the same time period with similar contract status. There are a surprising amount of players signed to “bet you will get better” contract.

Zibanejad vs Forsberg
Both hovers around PPG. Zibanejad 8.5M and Forsberg 8.5M.

Duchene vs Johansen, very similar production and the same cap hit at 8M.

Wheeler vs Couture
Very similar production, Wheeler at 8.25M and Couture at 8M.

Benn vs Seguin
Were similar in production when they signed, Seguin slightly paid more at 9.75 vs Benn at 9.5M.


So at the ppg pay level, it doesn’t seem like there is anything that points to centers carrying a premium over wingers.

I would say that there are more centers being considered as franchise level (10M+) than wingers.

 

[mriswith]

How many pro-extending Horvat posters are willing to state how many of the years 3-8 of his new contract he'll be worth the money? We'll give the first two by default to be generous, which isn't guaranteed.

Of the last 6 years of his contract, years 3-8, ages 30-36 - how many of those years do you think he'll be worth 8.5M or more?

 

[4Twenty]

How many pro-extending Horvat posters are willing to state how many of the years 3-8 of his new contract he'll be worth the money? We'll give the first two by default to be generous, which isn't guaranteed.

Of the last 6 years of his contract, years 3-8, ages 30-36 - how many of those years do you think he'll be worth 8.5M or more?

Im discussing the assets market value. Not pro-extending the player to the Canucks. The Canucks are a mess. Signing or trading doesn’t make the next 5 years any less messy imo.

That said this is a weird question. We don’t know what $8.5m looks like on the cap landscape in years 3-8 look like.

Almost none of these 8 year extensions look good during the players final years. It is interesting though that a 32 year old Kadri just got $7m through age 39.

This is that the market yields. Especially at premium positions (c and d).

Well I mean I am kinda explaining how it actually works today. Like the 2nd highest player right now is Panarin and he’s a winger. Also I said 8M is a min on purpose because price differs based on UFA/RFA/ 1st contract after ELC status.
Also it seems like 10M+ is for like franchise players and you are right, I think GMs think of centers more highly than wingers when it comes to franchise level players.

So if we look at all the players between 8-10M, there are more wingers signed at that range than centers.
So I am picking out players who are signed around UFA age and are not on “bet you will get better” type of contract.

Zibanejad vs Forsberg
Both hovers around PPG. Zibanejad 8.5M and Forsberg 8.5M.

Duchene vs Johansen, very similar production and the same cap hit at 8M.

Wheeler vs Couture
Very similar production, Wheeler at 8.25M and Couture at 8M.

Benn vs Seguin
Were similar in production when they signed, Seguin slightly paid more at 9.75 vs Benn at 9.5M.

So at the ppg pay level, it doesn’t seem like there is anything that points to centers carrying a premium over wingers.

I would say that there are more centers being considered as franchise level (10M+) than wingers.

This is a good post. Theres room for discussion here.

I’ll apologize to those who couldn’t get enough of the trade discussion in version 1 of the trade thread or in the previous 800+ posts in this one. But this is the only thread where discussing Horvat isn’t off topic. Sorry I’m going on about it but it’s the only Canucks related discussion that interests me currently.


I especially like that you listed Benn and Seguin (12.5-13% of the cap) and also Panarin (14%+).

I agree McDavid is the leagues best player but him signing an 8 year deal that gave a huge discount to his actual value shouldn’t be capping the entire league at his %.

Matthews’ deal is less % but gives the team way less control. I don’t see Matthews capping himself at $12.5m because McDavid is still on his idiotic 8 year deal.


I don’t think ppg is an adequate way of valuing players or ranking them. Position matters. Goals matter. Ice time matters. Linemates matter. Role matters.

 

[Tables of Stats]

Just twising more and more.

Tables was the only person to bring reasonable stats, and I praised his stats, and my disagreement was putting that much emphasis on goals vs points.

Do you think Bo will be 25% shooter the rest of his career or even a large part of it? Its diminishing the very clear outlier... Just like I have always said JT Miller is a PPG player and not a 99 pt player.

Having taken a step back I think we both likely see Horvat the same way. I might call what I see a 1B and you might call it an elite 2 but the player and what he brings remains the same.

 

[arttk]

Im discussing the assets market value. Not pro-extending the player to the Canucks. The Canucks are a mess. Signing or trading doesn’t make the next 5 years any less messy imo.

That said this is a weird question. We don’t know what $8.5m looks like on the cap landscape in years 3-8 look like.

Almost none of these 8 year extensions look good during the players final years. It is interesting though that a 32 year old Kadri just got $7m through age 39.

This is that the market yields. Especially at premium positions (c and d).

This is a good post. Theres room for discussion here.

I’ll apologize to those who couldn’t get enough of the trade discussion in version 1 of the trade thread or in the previous 800+ posts in this one. But this is the only thread where discussing Horvat isn’t off topic. Sorry I’m going on about it but it’s the only Canucks related discussion that interests me currently.


I especially like that you listed Benn and Seguin (12.5-13% of the cap) and also Panarin (14%+).

I agree McDavid is the leagues best player but him signing an 8 year deal that gave a huge discount to his actual value shouldn’t be capping the entire league at his %.

Matthews’ deal is less % but gives the team way less control. I don’t see Matthews capping himself at $12.5m because McDavid is still on his idiotic 8 year deal.


I don’t think ppg is an adequate way of valuing players or ranking them. Position matters. Goals matter. Ice time matters. Linemates matter. Role matters.

Well I think McDavid gave a discount probably because they told him if he gets the max then there is zero ways for them to ever compete. Can you imagine one player taking up 20%? This is not the NBA.

I think Matthews and McD, MacKinnon and maybe a handful of guys are on such a different level they can ask for anything and the team would probably need to give it. That’s not even franchise tier, that’s f*** you give me whatever the f*** I want tier. Ovi, Malkin and Sid was in that tier previously.

I think logically yes, other attributes matter but I think the only manifestation of that is at the upper upper tier. Like there has to be a reason why there are more centers above 10M than wingers. But until you hit that level of stardom, players seems to be still paid based on points.
Here is an example, here are a list of players who got the “bet on you” contract. Can you guess correctly who get paid the most and least?

Hirscher, Svechnikov, Robertson, Jack Hughes, Keller, Suzuki, Norris, Brady Tkachuk.

 

[4Twenty]

Well I think McDavid gave a discount probably because they told him if he gets the max then there is zero ways for them to ever compete. Can you imagine one player taking up 20%? This is not the NBA.

I think Matthews and McD, MacKinnon and maybe a handful of guys are on such a different level they can ask for anything and the team would probably need to give it. That’s not even franchise tier, that’s f*** you give me whatever the f*** I want tier. Ovi, Malkin and Sid was in that tier previously.

I think logically yes, other attributes matter but I think the only manifestation of that is at the upper upper tier. Like there has to be a reason why there are more centers above 10M than wingers. But until you hit that level of stardom, players seems to be still paid based on points.
Here is an example, here are a list of players who got the “bet on you” contract. Can you guess correctly who get paid the most and least?

Hirscher, Svechnikov, Robertson, Jack Hughes, Keller, Suzuki, Norris, Brady Tkachuk.

8 years was the cardinal sin by McDavid not so much the cap%.

Every single player you posted at the bottom are RFA contracts to players coming off their ELC’s. I’m not sure what your point is. Brady Tkachuk is a perfect example of why ppg rankings should not be the be all end all. His $8m extension came with a 45 point career high.

 

[racerjoe]

I personally find the ppg rate being what defines a players worth absolutely silly. Thanks for responding. I disagree with your methodology. I also disagree that comparing wingers with centres is reasonable. A 65 point C vs a 65 point wing is a big difference to me.


This question is dumb. But I will answer your dumb question.

No I don’t think Horvat will shoot 25% for the rest of his career.

Bo Horvat is a career 14% shooter. The spike here accounts for 10 goals this season. If he had 21 and not 31 goals he’d still be what he is.

Not a single person thinks he’s a 25% shooter but acting like 10 goals this season is outrageous is weird.

Yes 10 goals... over half a season or 20 goals for an entire season. That is the point. I didn't discount his last season, when he went on a huge heater. It is just looking at the stats and saying well he is going to come back down to earth... much like I tried to explain with my Miller example. He was a PPG player not a 99 Pt Player.

 

[gringo]

I didn’t realize we had Bo’s cousin posting on HF boards dot com

 

[m9]

Im discussing the assets market value. Not pro-extending the player to the Canucks. The Canucks are a mess. Signing or trading doesn’t make the next 5 years any less messy imo.

That said this is a weird question. We don’t know what $8.5m looks like on the cap landscape in years 3-8 look like.

Almost none of these 8 year extensions look good during the players final years. It is interesting though that a 32 year old Kadri just got $7m through age 39.

This is that the market yields. Especially at premium positions (c and d).

So your position is basically that this contract is fair/market rate for Horvat but that you have no opinion on whether this was a good signing either for the Canucks or Islanders?

Of course we don't know the landscape 3-8 years down the line - but neither do the teams signing these players. Projecting these players is basically what it's all about, so it seems kind of odd to just completely disregard that part of the discussion thinking it's some sort of weird question.

People who don't like the contract are generally stating that because they are projecting it out and don't think it will age well. If you are just saying "it's a good contract because it's fair compared to other players" then that's fine but relatively meaningless.

 

[4Twenty]

So your position is basically that this contract is fair/market rate for Horvat but that you have no opinion on whether this was a good signing either for the Canucks or Islanders?

Of course we don't know the landscape 3-8 years down the line - but neither do the teams signing these players. Projecting these players is basically what it's all about, so it seems kind of odd to just completely disregard that part of the discussion thinking it's some sort of weird question.

People who don't like the contract are generally stating that because they are projecting it out and don't think it will age well. If you are just saying "it's a good contract because it's fair compared to other players" then that's fine but relatively meaningless.

Yes that’s how I see it. I don’t see it as a bad contract. I would expect similar career numbers over the first 5 years for sure.

I don’t care to discuss it in terms of the Canucks because this organization has a poor set up. If Myers expired this season and Boeser was only on his QO (this expiring after this season) it would be a reasonable bet to take given the organization’s stated targets in the near term. But that’s not reality. Therefore it’s a waste to discuss.


I don’t see it as meaningless at all. To each their own. This is the going rate. I think it means that.

Kadri is a bit of an outlier but his production before his breakout last season at 31/32 was nearly identical to Bo’s. The idea Bo’s going to turn into a pumpkin soon is not something I agree with.

 

[Tables of Stats]

In terms of value, I think Horvat is getting market average and brings a lot of short-term upside to a team looking at a deep playoff run. However, that value should be expected to start expiring after 3 to 5 years. Sometime within that span, I expect that value to dip until it crosses into the negatives to where the Islanders look at attaching a pick to move him or hope to see him LTIRetire. That's the general case for these kinds of deals around the entire league which is part of what makes building a team that gets multiple shots at a cup within the same window so difficult.

 

[Nucker101]

I didn’t realize we had Bo’s cousin posting on HF boards dot com

You’d think Travis Konecny wouldn’t find the time of day

 

[arttk]

8 years was the cardinal sin by McDavid not so much the cap%.

Every single player you posted at the bottom are RFA contracts to players coming off their ELC’s. I’m not sure what your point is. Brady Tkachuk is a perfect example of why ppg rankings should not be the be all end all. His $8m extension came with a 45 point career high.

Well I listed them because they were all bet on player contracts.
So in the absence of point total, if it is true that centers are more valuable than wingers, then they should get higher number in these type of contracts but that’s not what’s happening.

 

[arttk]

I didn’t realize we had Bo’s cousin posting on HF boards dot com

We do?

 

[mriswith]

Im discussing the assets market value. Not pro-extending the player to the Canucks. The Canucks are a mess. Signing or trading doesn’t make the next 5 years any less messy imo.

That said this is a weird question. We don’t know what $8.5m looks like on the cap landscape in years 3-8 look like.

Almost none of these 8 year extensions look good during the players final years. It is interesting though that a 32 year old Kadri just got $7m through age 39.

This is that the market yields. Especially at premium positions (c and d).

It wasn't directed only at you, I'd also be interested in hearing from anyone in this thread who was upset we let Horvat go.

I think everyone knows it won't age well and no one will commit to a number of how many years he'll have where he's worth it.

If you're just arguing what market value is and you don't think it'll age well either, that's fine. That's a good argument for the Carolina model of never signing big money UFA's although they'll really be put to the test in the next couple years when Aho, Slavin and Pesce hit UFA age.

 

[4Twenty]

It wasn't directed only at you, I'd also be interested in hearing from anyone in this thread who was upset we let Horvat go.

I think everyone knows it won't age well and no one will commit to a number of how many years he'll have where he's worth it.

If you're just arguing what market value is and you don't think it'll age well either, that's fine. That's a good argument for the Carolina model of never signing big money UFA's although they'll really be put to the test in the next couple years when Aho, Slavin and Pesce hit UFA age.

Well we can’t even define his value now at the time of signing of course its going to be impossible to argue how it will age.

People are seemingly only willing to use ppg…..what would an 8 year ppg need to be to age well? Would the upper limit of the cap in year 8 matter?

Intersting you bring up Carolina model. They’ve been a top team for quite awhile now with a player in Jordan Staal who signed a contract for 10% of the cap 10 years ago. He hasn’t really hurt their ability to ice contending rosters and he’s far less prolific than Horvat has been.

Staal’s deal expires this season (his 34 year old season). Bo’s current deal expires during his 35 year old season.


The ppg thing is funny too. Barzal is 0.03 higher then Horvat over the last 5 seasons. But he’s a defacto 1C while Bo isn’t.


There’s value beyond ppg and it’s why a player like Jordan Staal at 10% when signed has been a valued player on a very good team.

Cant see Carolina not extending AHo either. He’s going to be very young as a UFA.

Edit* and to all the trolls bringing nothing but suggesting im related or what have you……posted this yesterday…..try to imagine all the comments by me are about his numbers not specially #53 on your favourite team. Just in general. A lot of the naysaying imo comes from his 10 years of baggage here.

 

[rypper]

It wasn't directed only at you, I'd also be interested in hearing from anyone in this thread who was upset we let Horvat go.

I don't know if I exactly fall in that camp, because it really depends on whatever the plan is going forward (still isn't 100% clear.)

Signing Miller and then trading Horvat makes no sense. You sign the former because you think the team is good enough and want to try to make the playoffs, but then you turn around and butcher your center depth by trading the latter.

You either trade both (which they clearly should have done, if a rebuild was the direction. )

Or if you believe the team can be turned around quickly with some short term pain for long term gain moves (which admittedly was the camp I fell in) you commit to Horvat early and for much cheaper. Spend the next season or two turning over the defense and trimming dead weight, then trying to compete with Pettersson/Horvat as your 1-2.

I think a long term Horvat deal doesn't hurt you, if you have Pettersson ahead of him and a strong 3C behind him. And he's making in the area of 7m as a early 30 year old as opposed to 8.5.

I'll add I don't think this season is a one off, I believe he's leveled up. I think you'll get 2-3 seasons of Horvat at this level and then he'll taper off to being a 60 point player, and then 40-50 as the contract ages.

 

[ChilliBilly]

Maybe go back to your Canucks are going to be a powerhouse team thread and revel

Just note that my comment got a number of likes .... and none of yours seem to ... take it for what u will.