Who here is actually happy with the Hronek trade?

[Gurn]

4 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

Now on that very same note… who has had more opportunities for offence? The guy with near 50/50 ozone start at 5v5 or the guy with 60/40 split?

Hronek has been given mainly 50% ozone distribution and Toews has had roughly 60% ozone deployment, so its really not that impressive in comparison. 

perhaps that might be because Toews is believed to be a better offensive player, thus he gets the ozone time? 

 

Anyhow- that also has little, to nothing, to do with my original point

Toews has 3, 50 point seasons and Hronek has none.

making the post,

"Toews has never had the numbers of Hronek. Hronek had way better numbers this year."

 

false.

 

 

[Dr. Crossbar]

18 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

Now on that very same note… who has had more opportunities for offence? The guy with near 50/50 ozone start at 5v5 or the guy with 60/40 split?

Hronek has been given mainly 50% ozone distribution and Toews has had roughly 60% ozone deployment, so its really not that impressive in comparison. 

 

Nice contrast! And Hronek is four years younger, too. Will only get better into his prime.

[Sharpshooter]

I’m still happy with Hronek if it lets Hughes be Hughes. 

[Dr. Crossbar]

1 hour ago, Sharpshooter said:

I’m still happy with Hronek if it lets Hughes be Hughes. 

 

Exactly this! On point. 

[Junkyard Dog]

I am happy if he comes back and re-signs for a reasonable deal. 

 

Or if we get something good for him if we have to trade him. 

[Alflives]

5 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I am happy if he comes back and re-signs for a reasonable deal. 

 

Or if we get something good for him if we have to trade him. 

Yup. Hronek takes the Toews deal (yes he’s better than Toews but he gets to play with the phenom Hughes) or we trade him for a huge haul. 

[Junkyard Dog]

Just now, Alflives said:

Yup. Hronek takes the Toews deal (yes he’s better than Toews but he gets to play with the phenom Hughes) or we trade him for a huge haul. 

 

Toews is better. He elevated his play in the playoffs, in multiple different playoffs, whereas Hronek took a step back in his 1st playoffs ever.

 

Hronek should be cheaper than Toews if we want to keep him. The bad 2nd half of the year and step back in the playoffs have put a damper on what he'll make.

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

 

Toews is better. He elevated his play in the playoffs, in multiple different playoffs, whereas Hronek took a step back in his 1st playoffs ever.

 

Hronek should be cheaper than Toews if we want to keep him. The bad 2nd half of the year and step back in the playoffs have put a damper on what he'll make.

Hronek is clearly better than Toews. The facts show this. More points. Better plus/minus. Way harder to play against. It’s not even close really.,

[Dr. Crossbar]

27 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Hronek is clearly better than Toews. The facts show this. More points. Better plus/minus. Way harder to play against. It’s not even close really.,

 

Better beard, too!

 

All other beards should be on holidays!

[CanuckMan]

Trade Mikheyev & Garland. Basically selling high on Garland and adding a sweetener to move Mikheyev. 
 

Hronek 7.5M

Joshua 3M

Lindholm 6.5M 

 

I would be happy with those numbers or close

[kettlevalley]

3 hours ago, CanuckMan said:

Trade Mikheyev & Garland. Basically selling high on Garland and adding a sweetener to move Mikheyev. 
 

Hronek 7.5M

Joshua 3M

Lindholm 6.5M 

 

I would be happy with those numbers or close

Can you spend that when that leaves you short of top 6 wingers and top 4 d? 

[IBatch]

13 hours ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

Well, the thing is, people are treating this more black and white, one or the other, going to extremes with the first half and second half, as if he sucks now because of the second half. That's not the case. It's not that extreme.

 

Hronek came back down to earth in the second half. That's a good thing for the club in negotiations. Still, what he did with Hughes in the first half can't be ignored and is part of his value along with being a top pairing RHD on a contending team who had an early record breaking season. So you look at the open market and think, well, a team could give him $8 if that's his hard line. There is a case to be made that he can command that. 

 

The guy established himself in Detroit, took his game to new heights here in Vancouver to became one of the league's top defensemen.  Even if the stats don't bear all of that out, there's still a perception of what he is now based on his performance this past season. Especially in the first half. It was record breaking. That counts to a certain degree of pedigree and certainly value. 

 

The reality is, and unfortunately for Hronek, is that he still has more to prove after coming down to earth in the second half. Had he kept that pace throughout the second half, this would be a completely different discussion. 

 

I don't believe we should be offering max term and massive max dollars. His second half brought that back down to earth. But I do believe we need to lock him up as our top pairing RHD at a fair price to player and team. 

 

In saying that, though, we're a top team now and we're going to have to pay for top Dmen. It's just where we're at now.

 

 

RHD.   Let's only look at those.   Ryan Ellis for example, similar sized guy,  perrenial 40 point pace guy, who had a penchant for scoring goals.   He's 33 now.   Signed his deal at 27/28.   For 7.86%  of the cap, on a full term UFA deal.    That's 6.25 back then.   

 

Justin Faulk.   Another RHD who scored 49 points at 22.   Similar height, heftier and plays with an edge (we saw this directly in the bubble!).   Also scored a lot of goals from the blue line.    Produced 49, 37, 37 points up to the same age as Hronek, on terrible CAR teams, scoring 15, 16, 17 goals consecutively.     Since then not as producer until the last 3 seasons (covid too), back to 47, 50 and 30 points this year in 60 games.    Plus 41 in St. Louis once during that span as well.    Got his money deal at UFA 7 years at 7.98% of the cap.

 

These are decent recent comps.   Both guys signed bridge deals until they were 27/28 and got their money.   

 

IF we sign him to a term deal.   It shouldn't be more than either of these guys IMO.    It puts his MAX cap for a full term deal, at 7.    Give him a little bit more for taxes,  7.25-7.4 and that's it.    Personably feel he should be bridged given our cap situation, and also because we haven't seen him be the top dog on his own pairing yet.    For that sort of money, your getting paid to be a poor man's first unit guy or to anchor a second pairing. 

 

Hronek was 21st in scoring, one point away from being 28th in scoring.   Thomas Harley was right below him.  Also scored the fewest goals, if anyone in the top 33.    By a considerable margin.   Weegar was 16th, and scored 20 goals.   

 

Seen too many hockey players have one or two good seasons and after their paycheque float.   There is zero carrot if he's got a max term deal.   We need the best Hronek we possibly can have over the next 3 years, after that we could be re-tooling.    Cap is king.   Bridge him at 6.1 or so x 3 years.    Max deal, from where i'm sitting anyways, shouldn't be 8 years unless they can get him for under 7 which seems unlikely.    These are just two example's of RHD's I can find others. 

 

Edit:  Both scenarios have their plus's and minus, positives and negative's.     Would be happy with either, just need Hronek to sign at an amount that isn't cost prohibitive.    The nice thing is we don't need to rush with him.   He's for sure part of the puzzle.     

 

Edited May 30 by IBatch

[IBatch]

3 hours ago, kettlevalley said:

Can you spend that when that leaves you short of top 6 wingers and top 4 d? 

In this scenario, Lindholm anchors our second line center spot, because that's exactly what he is, and EP moves to the wing.    So essentially EP is our top six winger and we have two pairs.    Don't like the idea of trading Garland, at all.    In this scenario, Joshua also moves up into the top six maybe.     Do not see an effective 3rd line with Bluegar and Joshua alone.  

 

So it comes with some big risks.    

 

If we trade both Garland and Mikheyev, we could take a stab at Geuntzal instead. 

[IBatch]

13 hours ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

Nice contrast! And Hronek is four years younger, too. Will only get better into his prime.

That's the hope for sure. 

[Alflives]

8 hours ago, CanuckMan said:

Trade Mikheyev & Garland. Basically selling high on Garland and adding a sweetener to move Mikheyev. 
 

Hronek 7.5M

Joshua 3M

Lindholm 6.5M 

 

I would be happy with those numbers or close

Yup. These are fair cap allocations for each player. It will come down to total dollars though. Fifty mil for Hronek and Lindy. Joshua likely 15 mil.

Garland definitely needs to go. He is a tiny top. He is useless on the pp and even more than useless on the pk. He’s too slow to drive play through the neutral zone. He’s easy to play against. If we can dumparoo his whole contract that would be great. 

[AnthonyG]

18 hours ago, Gurn said:

perhaps that might be because Toews is believed to be a better offensive player, thus he gets the ozone time? 

 

Anyhow- that also has little, to nothing, to do with my original point

Toews has 3, 50 point seasons and Hronek has none.

making the post,

"Toews has never had the numbers of Hronek. Hronek had way better numbers this year."

 

false.

 

 

Well actually more ozone time does actually have to do with your statement about Toews having 3 50 point seasons whereas Hronek has none. I can divulge even further. I’ll break down the last 3 seasons of 50+ point seasons and the line combinations adding up to 75%+ because after that its a lot of little shit mixes.

 

2021-22

Makar 62%/ Girard 10.8%/Johnson 8.5%

2022-23

Makar 48.2%/Girard 21.9%/Johnson 9.6%

2023-24

Makar 67.7%/Manson 8.4%

 

 

Hronek

2021-22
37.7%Leddy/31.1%Staal/8.3%Dekeyser

2022-23
40.5%Maatta/31.4%Chiarot/10.4%Walman

2023-24 76.4% Hughes

 

To brag about about Toews 3 50pt seasons as if they were some unachievable accomplishment, is out of sorts. Especially when he is playing the large majority of his time with one or the best dmen in the world those 3 seasons. Hronek had less talent to work with outside of this season, less consistency in his dpartner and less opportunities with zone distribution. 

[Dr. Crossbar]

7 hours ago, IBatch said:

RHD.   Let's only look at those.   Ryan Ellis for example, similar sized guy,  perrenial 40 point pace guy, who had a penchant for scoring goals.   He's 33 now.   Signed his deal at 27/28.   For 7.86%  of the cap, on a full term UFA deal.    That's 6.25 back then.   

 

Justin Faulk.   Another RHD who scored 49 points at 22.   Similar height, heftier and plays with an edge (we saw this directly in the bubble!).   Also scored a lot of goals from the blue line.    Produced 49, 37, 37 points up to the same age as Hronek, on terrible CAR teams, scoring 15, 16, 17 goals consecutively.     Since then not as producer until the last 3 seasons (covid too), back to 47, 50 and 30 points this year in 60 games.    Plus 41 in St. Louis once during that span as well.    Got his money deal at UFA 7 years at 7.98% of the cap.

 

These are decent recent comps.   Both guys signed bridge deals until they were 27/28 and got their money.   

 

IF we sign him to a term deal.   It shouldn't be more than either of these guys IMO.    It puts his MAX cap for a full term deal, at 7.    Give him a little bit more for taxes,  7.25-7.4 and that's it.    Personably feel he should be bridged given our cap situation, and also because we haven't seen him be the top dog on his own pairing yet.    For that sort of money, your getting paid to be a poor man's first unit guy or to anchor a second pairing. 

 

Hronek was 21st in scoring, one point away from being 28th in scoring.   Thomas Harley was right below him.  Also scored the fewest goals, if anyone in the top 33.    By a considerable margin.   Weegar was 16th, and scored 20 goals.   

 

Seen too many hockey players have one or two good seasons and after their paycheque float.   There is zero carrot if he's got a max term deal.   We need the best Hronek we possibly can have over the next 3 years, after that we could be re-tooling.    Cap is king.   Bridge him at 6.1 or so x 3 years.    Max deal, from where i'm sitting anyways, shouldn't be 8 years unless they can get him for under 7 which seems unlikely.    These are just two example's of RHD's I can find others. 

 

Edit:  Both scenarios have their plus's and minus, positives and negative's.     Would be happy with either, just need Hronek to sign at an amount that isn't cost prohibitive.    The nice thing is we don't need to rush with him.   He's for sure part of the puzzle.     

 

 

That's fine. I understand where you're coming from. I see all of the angles on this.  

 

To me, he's just not coming in under $7 despite the team's offer being a fair starting point. Especially with the taxes.

 

I like the Faulk comparable. That's sound. I just think that projects to be in the $7.25-$7.5 range in today's dollars and with the tax issue as well. And I also think Hronek comes in closer to Toews and Hanifin since they're also D comparables that set a more recent bar. I'm not a fan of 8-year deals unless they can be moved/modified in the back half but I can see Hronek getting longer term in seven years if they're investing in our window now.

 

The thing is, Hronek is an established known entity now despite struggling in the second half of last season. Imo, he's proven himself and his value both in Detroit and Van. He's a top pairing Dman who hasn't hit his ceiling yet. It's interesting and telling that he finished directly behind Devon Toews in total points for defensemen. Another year into his prime and a more consistent season and he finishes  significantly higher.

 

Also, where I think we may differ is in this ... "Seen too many hockey players have one or two good seasons and after their paycheque float.   There is zero carrot if he's got a max term deal."

 

To me, fair points, but those are two separate issues. And I'm not saying you're wrong, there are just other ways to look at from a different mindset.

 

First, we're a good team now, Hronek is worth investing in from his known success with Hughes, and having confidence in the fact that our top pairing is set for our window. We have our Makar/Toews. Check. No need to "what if" that anymore. 

 

Second, if you're going all in on your top pairing, you're investing in your window so there doesn't need to be a carrot. You're paying to get the job done. You're banking on him being naturally better, with his prime just starting (also Hughes too). That could equate to a great value contract at $7.25 at seven (just saying) with those two hitting their prime and going to another level.

 

The real X factor and magic in all of this is Hughes at $7.8 for the next three years. I think the real focus should be getting Zad and Myers at reasonably cost efficient contracts rather than everyone getting all twisted up about Hronek. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 30 by Dr. Crossbar

[Gurn]

2 hours ago, AnthonyG said:

To brag about about Toews 3 50pt seasons as if they were some unachievable accomplishment, is out of sorts.

Perhaps you can show me where I, or anyone  bragged about Toews 3, 50 point seasons?

Because iirc I was just pointing out the fact that Toews has done it 3 times and Hronek has done it zero times.

This was in direct response to someone saying Hronek had more points.

 

All other info provided, while interesting, does not negate the error of the post I responded to.

Sadly- you are about the 3rd or 4th poster to keep missing what I said.

[AnthonyG]

18 minutes ago, Gurn said:

Perhaps you can show me where I, or anyone  bragged about Toews 3, 50 point seasons?

Because iirc I was just pointing out the fact that Toews has done it 3 times and Hronek has done it zero times.

This was in direct response to someone saying Hronek had more points.

 

All other info provided, while interesting, does not negate the error of the post I responded to.

Sadly- you are about the 3rd or 4th poster to keep missing what I said.

What is the point of stating Toews 3 50 point seasons to Hroneks none?

I’m literally breaking down for you major factors. Partners and zone distribution/responsibilities.

 

Anson Carter hit 30 goals. Cool story, it wasnt all him. Ever heard of guys like Mackinnon? Nichushkin? Rantanen? Drouin? Landeskog? Its no secret why Toews numbers spiked once joining COL. Is he good? Yes hes fuckin fantastic, but by no means necessary is it all him. He has a lot more talent to work with and had a few seasons to adjust and settle into systems/style of play/player tendencies and build chemsitry. You are making a statement more than anything. You arent fully understanding the 3 50pt seasons. Team/linemates/distribution/systems/QoC vs Teams level of play.

 

saying he has 3 50pt seasons is basically meaningless. Water is wet. So what? WHY does he have 3 50pt seasons. Comparing a guys success on a cup contender vs a rebuilding/learning Red Wings team and one Season in Van…. Not really fair comparison imho

[GrammaInTheTub]

8 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

What is the point of stating Toews 3 50 point seasons to Hroneks none?

I’m literally breaking down for you major factors. Partners and zone distribution/responsibilities.

 

Anson Carter hit 30 goals. Cool story, it wasnt all him. Ever heard of guys like Mackinnon? Nichushkin? Rantanen? Drouin? Landeskog? Its no secret why Toews numbers spiked once joining COL. Is he good? Yes hes fuckin fantastic, but by no means necessary is it all him. He has a lot more talent to work with and had a few seasons to adjust and settle into systems/style of play/player tendencies and build chemsitry. You are making a statement more than anything. You arent fully understanding the 3 50pt seasons. Team/linemates/distribution/systems/QoC vs Teams level of play.

 

saying he has 3 50pt seasons is basically meaningless. Water is wet. So what? WHY does he have 3 50pt seasons. Comparing a guys success on a cup contender vs a rebuilding/learning Red Wings team and one Season in Van…. Not really fair comparison imho

Because @Gurn was providing a simple objective statistic in response to @Alflives directly above who stated inaccurate information as between Hronek and Toews stats. There was no value judgement provided. Others began to debate factors, but the original response was just a factual one.

[Dr. Crossbar]

 

[kettlevalley]

8 hours ago, IBatch said:

In this scenario, Lindholm anchors our second line center spot, because that's exactly what he is, and EP moves to the wing.    So essentially EP is our top six winger and we have two pairs.    Don't like the idea of trading Garland, at all.    In this scenario, Joshua also moves up into the top six maybe.     Do not see an effective 3rd line with Bluegar and Joshua alone.  

 

So it comes with some big risks.    

 

If we trade both Garland and Mikheyev, we could take a stab at Geuntzal instead. 

Still don't have a top 4 RHD in that scenario.  

 

And Lindholm won't sign for 6.5 unless free agency flops for him and Boston will offer him 8 I think and Lindholm turned 8 down in CGY.  

[Gurn]

34 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

What is the point of stating Toews 3 50 point seasons to Hroneks none?

The point is- and stick with me here:

 

a poster said Hronek had more points than Toews, and I provided proof that he did not.

 

that is all.

like this is the 5- or 6th time now, granted to a few  different posters but yeesh.

 

Edited May 30 by Gurn

[Gurn]

18 hours ago, Sharpshooter said:

I’m still happy with Hronek if it lets Hughes be Hughes. 

At the right price point, sure.

course same is true of all the players-  if they're at the right price point

[Gurn]

21 minutes ago, GrammaInTheTub said:

Because @Gurn was providing a simple objective statistic in response to @Alflives directly above who stated inaccurate information as between Hronek and Toews stats. There was no value judgement provided. Others began to debate factors, but the original response was just a factual one.

Thank you