[REPORT] Canucks make contract offer to Filip Hronek

[HKSR]

Just now, MeanSeanBean said:

Now is that due to Hughes, or Hronek? Correct me if I'm wrong, but both those stats look much better on Hughes individually then Hronek. The eye test on Hronek also subjectively tells me Hronek is quite average defensively while Hughes has improved drastically, yet again. 

 

I'm not convinced that Hronek makes Hughes all that much better. Yes, Hronek is objectively the best player Hughes has played with, but he still entirely carries the pair. I sure hope we don't give Hronek more then Hughes just for being fortunate enough to play with an elite player.

Posted above what Hughes and Schenn looked like when they played together.  Hronek has made a significant difference.  

[MeanSeanBean]

3 minutes ago, HKSR said:

No, they should pay Hronek market value because he helps to create a legit elite level defensive pair for this franchise. 

 

How do you even come up with these conclusions?  In one sentence, market value = overpaying to you, and somehow the Hronek-Hughes pairing is one of the best in the league, but it's nothing to do with Hronek, all to do with Hughes?  Totally because Hughes pairs were at this level in the past with Schenn/Juulsen right?

 

Did the homework for you...

 

With Schenn:

23rd in CF%

28th in FF%

 

But facts don't matter to you.  Somehow I'm the one that is not objective.  

 

Is this taking into consideration that the team was absolutely terrible defensively the majority of last year, and exceedingly good this year? I think the better stat is looking at the direct comparison of Hughes vs Hronek this year.

[MeanSeanBean]

Just now, HKSR said:

Posted above what Hughes and Schenn looked like when they played together.  Hronek has made a significant difference.  

Sure, and I don't think that's a very good argument personally. It's also a good defensive team vs a bad one. I just find is strange you claim to be 100% objective and based off numbers, but very frequently your argument seems to ignore tons of factors that lead to true objectiveness.

Edited March 24 by MeanSeanBean

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

 

Market value and what's best for the team aren't always the same thing.  It's not really a difficult concept to grasp.  Lots of teams walk away from a player they don't think fits their salary scheme

What salary scheme are you worried about?  Having these as our top paid players for the next 4 years?

 

Petey - 11.6M

Miller - 8M

Hughes - 7.85M

Hronek - 7.5 to 8M

 

That's overpaying our core?  I don't know why I argue with you sometimes.  Facts just elude you and then you come up with personal opinions and state they are objective.

 

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, MeanSeanBean said:

Sure, and I don't think that's a very good argument personally. It's also a good defensive team vs a bad one. I just find is strange you claim to be 100% objective and based off numbers, but very frequently your argument seems to ignore tons of factors that lead to true objectiveness.

I'm going off numbers.  If I start bringing in other factors that are not measured, it's my opinion coming into play.  

[HKSR]

2 minutes ago, MeanSeanBean said:

Is this taking into consideration that the team was absolutely terrible defensively the majority of last year, and exceedingly good this year? I think the better stat is looking at the direct comparison of Hughes vs Hronek this year.

And Hughes-Hronek this year is better than almost all other pairs in the entire league this year.  Apples to apples they are dominant and elite.

[MeanSeanBean]

Just now, HKSR said:

And Hughes-Hronek this year is better than almost all other pairs in the entire league this year.  Apples to apples they are dominant and elite.

The pairing is, yes. Hughes is, yes. Hronek is not. I don't think Hronek is the player making this pairing what it is. That's just my opinion. I don't think he's an 8 million dollar plus defensemen, which is the rumored ask.

[Hammertime]

15 minutes ago, HKSR said:

I'm as objective as they come.  I work off of numbers and facts.  If you can prove to me somehow that Hughes isn't having the best season of his career next to Hronek, then I'm all ears.

Quinn is developing he's actually right on his natural arc. He's been improving points% wise about 10pts per year. He's on pace to put up 92 points roughly 14 more than last year playing with Schenn and other bottom pairing D. We can attribute about a 5 point bump to playing with Hronek. 

 

[canucks curse]

pooooooooooooooooooooopy

poopy

poopy 

poopy

caca

excrement

poo

poopoo

poop pee 

super duper pooper pee

[canucks curse]

turd!!!

[Hammertime]

16 minutes ago, HKSR said:

And Hughes-Hronek this year is better than almost all other pairs in the entire league this year.  Apples to apples they are dominant and elite.

Hmm If I toggle D pairings who have played over 300mins together in terms of goals% which to me is the most important stat in terms of actually winning games.

 

 

 

Side note Cole Juulsen have a very good G% in a smaller sample 290mins together.

 

I think you're far too laser focused on points production when it comes to D pairings goals against are just as important as goals for while on the ice. In terms of pairings that have played over 300mins they are 48th in goals against all be it among good company.

 

 

 

[Hammertime]

1 hour ago, HKSR said:

Hronek's last 3 years (including this one) look like this:

38 points in 78 games 

39 points in 64 games  

45 points in 71 games

 

That's pretty consistent when you look at it objectively.  Not sure why he's being touted as a 1 year trend.

He also leads the team (not in the good way) in giveaways 48, D zone giveaways 38, high danger shots against per 60 4.29, and on ice goals against per 60 3.33.

Edited March 24 by Hammertime

[Gurn]

1 hour ago, HKSR said:

With Schenn:

23rd in CF%

28th in FF%

Schenn was paid less than Hronek is making now, and Hronek is looking for a raise.

If the team can sign Tanev, and a player like Schenn was, for less than Hronek is wanting, it is likely a better way to spend the money.

 

 

[Dizzle]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

 

He's not getting distedpect at all, I love hronek.  What is it with you people that posters can't be objective without you thinking it's based on disrespect or not liking a player?

 

1 hour ago, HKSR said:

I'm as objective as they come.  I work off of numbers and facts.  If you can prove to me somehow that Hughes isn't having the best season of his career next to Hronek, then I'm all ears.

Is it bad that any time someone claims to be objective I laugh? 
 

[Provost]

1 hour ago, HKSR said:

No, they should pay Hronek market value because he helps to create a legit elite level defensive pair for this franchise. 

 

How do you even come up with these conclusions?  In one sentence, market value = overpaying to you, and somehow the Hronek-Hughes pairing is one of the best in the league, but it's nothing to do with Hronek, all to do with Hughes?  Totally because Hughes pairs were at this level in the past with Schenn/Juulsen right?

 

Did the homework for you...

 

With Schenn:

23rd in CF%

28th in FF%

 

But facts don't matter to you.  Somehow I'm the one that is not objective.  

 

That doesn't say what you seem to say it does.  Hughes is not the same player he was when he played primarily with Schenn, he is significantly better.  As a pairing with Hronek they aren't in the top ten pairings for goal% in the league.  Hughes is going to either win the Norris or be a finalist this year and he wasn't at that level when Schenn was here.

You are being silly when you say "has nothing to do with Hronek", no one is saying that.  Obviously Hronek is better than Schenn.  Schenn was a cast off who had been waived and at best a depth guy not in your top six.  Hronek is a legit top 4D on virtually every team.

That doesn't mean he is worth being paid as one of the best at his position in the league.  Vince Dunn is a good comparable, same age when he signed, he has better numbers for the last few years on a team with much less offence and with a partner who is nowhere near the calibre of Hughes.  He just signed last year in the low $7's after coming off a 64 point season which is far better than any year Hronek has ever had.  He didn't even get a max deal at that price and had to settle for four years which means his contract isn't going to be overpaying him into his mid 30's.

Add in a bit of cap inflation for next year and that equates to a $7.5 million dollar deal for Hronek in my books.  I bet virtually any GM takes Vince Dunn over Hronek any day of the week in a straight across trade.

You don't need to resort to silly "I guess he is useless if you don't think he is worth top dollar" arguments.

[MeanSeanBean]

55 minutes ago, canucks curse said:

pooooooooooooooooooooopy

poopy

poopy 

poopy

caca

excrement

poo

poopoo

poop pee 

super duper pooper pee

I'm glad the internet wasn't available to me when I was a kid and spent my days outside instead. Go build a bike ramp or something.

[RWMc1]

$7,000,000.oo  or less for 8 years. I think being Hughes partner has to factor in but portraying him as a bad defender is a stretch.

 

When the f lames dirtbag took a run at Hughes, Hronek immediately responded by pasting one of their guys. Message sent.

 

 

[Dr. Crossbar]

2 hours ago, HKSR said:

His value to the team is top pairing RHD.  Those are extremely rare as evidenced above.  We've been screaming to the GM of the Canucks to find Hughes his top pairing RHD.  We finally find him, and now he's not worth keeping because he might get market value???  Where's the logic in that?

 

The people that were wrong about him want him to fail so they can be right. Just think about how long people were crying on here for exactly what Hronek is ... as evidenced by his impact and the caliber of top D duo we have now.

 

You pay for top D. That's what contenders are doing. 

 

 

[Tower102]

2 hours ago, MeanSeanBean said:

Is this taking into consideration that the team was absolutely terrible defensively the majority of last year, and exceedingly good this year? I think the better stat is looking at the direct comparison of Hughes vs Hronek this year.

What does the improvement of the defense when Hughes isn't on the ice to do with this? If Hughes is off the ice and the team allows 0 goals vs 10 goals has no bearing on what happens when Hughes is on the ice. Hughes is much better this year than any previous year. Sure we can give him some benefit of being a year older, but playing with Hronek has been the biggest reason for it.

 

You have also used one of the arguments the most basic of fans use...doesn't deserve more than Hughes....as if cap inflation, ufa years bought and term of contract aren't integral to determining contract value. No one here will argue Hronek is a more valuable player than Hughes, but I also wouldn't argue there are 15 guys more valuable than Crosby (15 off the top of my head for at least how many guys are paid more than him).

[MeanSeanBean]

43 minutes ago, Tower102 said:

What does the improvement of the defense when Hughes isn't on the ice to do with this? If Hughes is off the ice and the team allows 0 goals vs 10 goals has no bearing on what happens when Hughes is on the ice. Hughes is much better this year than any previous year. Sure we can give him some benefit of being a year older, but playing with Hronek has been the biggest reason for it.

 

You have also used one of the arguments the most basic of fans use...doesn't deserve more than Hughes....as if cap inflation, ufa years bought and term of contract aren't integral to determining contract value. No one here will argue Hronek is a more valuable player than Hughes, but I also wouldn't argue there are 15 guys more valuable than Crosby (15 off the top of my head for at least how many guys are paid more than him).

Please explain how my argument doesn't make sense.

 

I never once said anything about Hughes not being on the ice. I said the team was much better defensively. Which is factually true and easy to prove both objectively and subjectively. A better team defense and defensive structure makes a world of difference when the D pairing is on the ice, and when they aren't.

 

Also, did I? Show me where. I don't give a flying ratass about inflation or Ufa years. Hughes makes under 8 million, and I don't think Hronek is worth 8 million dollars. Someone may pay him that out of desperation, but that doesn't make it a good deal. If Hughes was making 10 I still wouldn't think Hronek is worth 8 million.

 

I don't think I understand the points you're trying to make with this reply. None of it seems relevant to me.

Edited March 24 by MeanSeanBean

[spook007]

1 hour ago, RWMc1 said:

$7,000,000.oo  or less for 8 years. I think being Hughes partner has to factor in but portraying him as a bad defender is a stretch.

 

When the f lames dirtbag took a run at Hughes, Hronek immediately responded by pasting one of their guys. Message sent.

 

 

Cheers...

Forgot to mention that in PGT.... Very pleased to see Hronek, send a message 'if you screw with out stars, we are ready to fight fire with fire'... so refreshing to see...

[HKSR]

1 hour ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

The people that were wrong about him want him to fail so they can be right. Just think about how long people were crying on here for exactly what Hronek is ... as evidenced by his impact and the caliber of top D duo we have now.

 

You pay for top D. That's what contenders are doing. 

 

 

Couldn't have said it better myself.  We have literally been clamoring for a RHD like this for years, and now that we have one, it's time to be cheap about it and find reasons not to pay him market value.  Instead let's find a cheaper RHD that is more of a defensive defenceman and then we can complain that we aren't getting enough offence from the back end.  It's all so stupid sometimes.

[N4ZZY]

15 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Couldn't have said it better myself.  We have literally been clamoring for a RHD like this for years, and now that we have one, it's time to be cheap about it and find reasons not to pay him market value.  Instead let's find a cheaper RHD that is more of a defensive defenceman and then we can complain that we aren't getting enough offence from the back end.  It's all so stupid sometimes.

Yeah. The cost needs to be reasonable, and that's where they're at right now in negotiations. Canucks are going to say this number is reasonable and fair, but Hronek's camp will have another idea of terms of what's fair. This is all par for the course in negotiations. Hopefully it gets done sooner rather than later. The Summer's going to be crazy busy, if Allvin can get some of those signings done earlier, it would help with the Summer load. 

 

[Hammertime]

3 hours ago, HKSR said:

Would be curious to see points per PP TOI.  

Using minimum 225mins played 5v4. We have 3 dudes in the top 15 and we are 13th in terms of points per minute as a team on the PP. I know it feels worse but those are the numbers. I have a feeing that it has been a feast and famine where we likely feasted earlier in the year and our numbers are coming down. All I can say is don't take penalties against tampa. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[HKSR]

2 minutes ago, Hammertime said:

Using minimum 225mins played 5v4. We have 3 dudes in the top 15 and we are 13th in terms of points per minute as a team on the PP. I know it feels worse but those are the numbers. I have a feeing that it has been a feast and famine where we likely feasted earlier in the year and our numbers are coming down. All I can say is don't take penalties against tampa. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting data.  Thanks for presenting it.