[REPORT] Canucks make contract offer to Filip Hronek

[Coconuts]

3 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Dangerous game to lowball a player too much. I think they did that with Horvat and we all know how that went.

 

A realistic offer has to start with a 7 and then how much term will decide whether it’s closer to 8 or even 8+.

 

Yup, if they'd offered Horvat more during the offseason, but prior to the season, he'd probably be a Canuck. It's probably better for all parties that it played out how it did, but lowballing important players isn't a smart way to try and keep them. 

 

Them being a top team this season doesn't necessarily mean they're going to get every player at a discount or on a bargain deal, even top teams have to pay market value for players sometimes. Having to pay market value instead of getting a discount shouldn't be perceived as a negative, it's a norm across the league. 

 

2 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

That's a question for people beyond our paygrade. Hronek is maybe worth $7M, maybe, and that's because he's right handed and offensively inclined. If he didn't have Hughes to play with, he wouldn't look anywhere near as good as he does. 

Hronek is very good at generating offense (mainly with Hughes) and is more of an adventure in his own end than he is reliable. I'm sure Alvin and Rutherford are considering all these points and more, which is why they made the initial offer, which was rejected quickly. The trade that brought Hronek here also factors in, due to the cost, but I don't see management letting themselves getting backed into a corner with Filip. 

 

Thing is, that probably goes both ways. I don't think it's a coincidence that Hughes appears to be playing at a higher level this season alongside Hronek. He was already a great player, but he really does look that much better. Some of that is Hughes himself, but some of it likely isn't. I think folks are too quick to write off Hronek's impact as largely being tethered to playing with Hughes when in fact it appears their playing together is synergistic and benefitting both players, and the team as a whole as a result.

 

Does Hronek benefit from playing with a player like Hughes? Absolutely. Does that mean he isn't a quality player in his own right? Of course not. Does Hughes benefit from playing with a 2-3D in Hronek? I reckon he does, and Hronek's side will probably argue as much. 

 

How many times have we discussed trying to find Hughes an RD partner over the years? We finally have one and they work very well together, more than likely he'll end up getting something towards the mid to high 7's because of it. Maybe as high as 8M, although I reckon that's the highest the Canucks would probably go. 

[Metal Face Doom]

It's good Horvat isn't on this squad.  

[PhillipBlunt]

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Thing is, that probably goes both ways. I don't think it's a coincidence that Hughes appears to be playing at a higher level this season alongside Hronek. He was already a great player, but he really does look that much better.

I think Hughes has hit a new level based on the fact that he's an exceptional and elite player. Having a complimentary player does help, yes.

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Some of that is Hughes himself, but some of it likely isn't. I think folks are too quick to write off Hronek's impact as largely being tethered to playing with Hughes when in fact it appears their playing together is synergistic and benefitting both players, and the team as a whole as a result.

People aren't necessarily "writing Hronek off". That's a bit of hyperbole. It's clear that Hronek has talent. Good skater, blistering shot, and high hockey IQ. His play in his own end is probably his biggest weakness. Is it absolute? Of course not. He can work on making it tighter, and the coaching staff the Canucks have give him a better chance than almost any in the league.

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Does Hronek benefit from playing with a player like Hughes? Absolutely.

Every player benefits from playing with Quinn. 

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Does that mean he isn't a quality player in his own right? Of course not.

It's reductive to think that metered criticism of a player is indicative of said player not being a quality player. 

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Does Hughes benefit from playing with a 2-3D in Hronek? I reckon he does, and Hronek's side will probably argue as much. 

He's benefitted from Hronek for sure. They do have chemistry. That doesn't negate the fact that Hronek can be an adventure in his own end. 

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

How many times have we discussed trying to find Hughes an RD partner over the years? We finally have one and they work very well together, more than likely he'll end up getting something towards the mid to high 7's because of it. Maybe as high as 8M, although I reckon that's the highest the Canucks would probably go. 

I see Alvin being shrewd with Hronek, but not paying him higher than Hughes. 

[PhillipBlunt]

8 minutes ago, Metal Face Doom said:

It's good Horvat isn't on this squad.  

[Coconuts]

7 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I think Hughes has hit a new level based on the fact that he's an exceptional and elite player. Having a complimentary player does help, yes.

People aren't necessarily "writing Hronek off". That's a bit of hyperbole. It's clear that Hronek has talent. Good skater, blistering shot, and high hockey IQ. His play in his own end is probably his biggest weakness. Is it absolute? Of course not. He can work on making it tighter, and the coaching staff the Canucks have give him a better chance than almost any in the league.

Every player benefits from playing with Quinn. 

It's reductive to think that metered criticism of a player is indicative of said player not being a quality player. 

He's benefitted from Hronek for sure. They do have chemistry. That doesn't negate the fact that Hronek can be an adventure in his own end. 

I see Alvin being shrewd with Hronek, but not paying him higher than Hughes. 

 

That's probably where we diverge, I probably think Hronek's impact on Hughes's game is greater, which is fine. 

 

Perhaps it is a hyperbole, but I think it's strange how there have been so many posts and threads about needing a partner for Hughes, and now that we have one folks don't want to pay him more than 7-.7.25M. I'd much rather pay important players such as top pairing D more and cut costs in the bottom six by integrating players on ELC's and cost effective UFA's. 

 

Most players have weaknesses, but that doesn't typically stop the high end guys from getting paid. Hronek isn't a young RFA, the Canucks will be buying UFA years and that'll probably drive the price up. 

 

I don't view Hughes's current cap hit as some sort of soft or hard cap for D the way some others seem to. Hughes signed his current deal going on three years ago, it isn't necessarily indicative of current cap realities, it's indicative of what the cap was then and the cap space we had available. 

[Dr. Crossbar]

33 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Thing is, that probably goes both ways. I don't think it's a coincidence that Hughes appears to be playing at a higher level this season alongside Hronek. He was already a great player, but he really does look that much better. Some of that is Hughes himself, but some of it likely isn't. I think folks are too quick to write off Hronek's impact as largely being tethered to playing with Hughes when in fact it appears their playing together is synergistic and benefitting both players, and the team as a whole as a result.

 

It absolutely goes both ways and by no means is it a coincidence. Hughes is playing at a higher level but so is Hronek in a more multi-dimensional role than in Detroit. Playing with Hughes has brought out that dimension because it requires different aspects of Hronek game and skill than what he showed in Detroit.

 

His mobility and intuition are creating more space for Hughes to be Hughes.

 

33 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Does Hronek benefit from playing with a player like Hughes? Absolutely. Does that mean he isn't a quality player in his own right? Of course not. Does Hughes benefit from playing with a 2-3D in Hronek? I reckon he does, and Hronek's side will probably argue as much. 

 

They are both benefitting from each other. Hronek was a top D-man in Detroit for a reason. We were lucky to

get him and was absolutely worth the trade. He's playing a different game with us and will only get better given his chemistry with Hughes. We have not seen the best of this duo yet.

 

33 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

How many times have we discussed trying to find Hughes an RD partner over the years? We finally have one and they work very well together, more than likely he'll end up getting something towards the mid to high 7's because of it. Maybe as high as 8M, although I reckon that's the highest the Canucks would probably go. 

 

We finally have exactly what we wanted and were begging for in Hronek. We finally have the contending caliber duo we need. That's not cheap and we're going to pay Hronek what he's worth and what's fair. Hughes's next contract will be huge but Hronek will likely be mid to high 7's. I'd like to see no more than what Hughes is making. Hughes is making 7.8 until 2026-27. Doesn't make sense for Hronek to be making more than Hughes for the next three years. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 20 by Dr. Crossbar

[wai_lai416]

2 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Hughes elevates anyone who plays with him. He's clearly the dominant force on the pairing. To suggest that Hronek is the key to that pairing is laughable. 

So can you show me how he elevated hronek because he’s literally performing at the exact same rate as he was in Detroit? And when did I say hronek is the key to that pairing? I said hronek “compliments” Hughes and unlock him to the next level? Because Hughes is so good therefore anyone that plays with Hughes must suck? Like they are not allowed to make each other better and it’s only allowed to be 1 way? So toews in Colorado is trash and not allowed to make makar even better than he was by giving him even more freedom to create on offence? 

[Coconuts]

8 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

It absolutely goes both ways and by no means is it a coincidence. Hughes is playing at a higher level but so is Hronek in a more multi-dimensional role than in Detroit. Playing with Hughes has brought out that dimensions because it requires different aspects of Hronek game and skill than what he showed in Detroit.

 

His mobility and intuition is creating more space for Hughes to be Hughes.

 

 

They are both benefitting from each other. Hronek was a top D-man in Detroit for a reason. We were lucky to het him and absolutely worth the trade. He's playing a different game with us and will only get better given his chemistry with Hughes. We have not seen the best of this duo yet.

 

 

We finally have exactly what we wanted and were begging for in Hronek. We finally have the contending caliber duo we need. That's not cheap and we're going to pay Hronek what he's worth and what's fair. Hughes's next contract will be huge but Hronek will likely be mid to high 7's. I'd like to sew no more than what Hughes is making. Hughes is making 7.8 until 2026-27. Doesn't make sense for Hronek to be making more than Hughes for the next three years. 

 

Agreed, I think they both elevate each other in different ways, having to pay such a D is a good problem to have. And yeah, it could be a top of the league pairing going forward, or at least in that bracket. 

 

The only area I disagree is paying him more than Hughes, I wouldn't have an issue with that and I don't reckon Hughes or any other Canuck player would either. I don't see the deal Hughes signed going on three years ago setting a cap for Canucks D, I don't think a nearly three year old contract is indicative of current cap realities. 

 

If Hronek were 22 or 23 that'd be one thing, but he's not, he'll be 27 in November. The Canucks will be buying one more RFA year. It won't happen, but in the event Hronek simply took his qualifying offer it'd walk him right to UFA. The Canucks will be buying UFA years. I don't think quibbling over an extra 500-750k is worth it for the Canucks, it'll probably be negligible as the cap raises and the asking prices for top 3D rise alongside the cap. Hughes will likely get 12M+ as a clear cut #1, I don't think paying 7.5-8M is outrageous for Hronek if the Canucks view him as a top pairing guy. I think folks are getting too hung up on Hughes being a sort of cap, and probably less than 1M in cap space. 

 

 

Edited March 20 by Coconuts

[Dr. Crossbar]

4 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

So can you show me how he elevated hronek because he’s literally performing at the exact same rate as he was in Detroit? And when did I say hronek is the key to that pairing? I said hronek “compliments” Hughes and unlock him to the next level? Because Hughes is so good therefore anyone that plays with Hughes must suck? Like they are not allowed to make each other better and it’s only allowed to be 1 way? So toews in Colorado is trash and not allowed to make makar even better than he was by giving him even more freedom to create on offence? 

 

Yeah, I'm not going to argue with you on any of that. I was actually agreeing with you. You're misunderstanding me somewhere.

 

Watch the video I posted. It explains everything. I also explained it in my previous post.

[PhillipBlunt]

7 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

So can you show me how he elevated hronek because he’s literally performing at the exact same rate as he was in Detroit? And when did I say hronek is the key to that pairing? I said hronek “compliments” Hughes and unlock him to the next level? Because Hughes is so good therefore anyone that plays with Hughes must suck? Like they are not allowed to make each other better and it’s only allowed to be 1 way? So toews in Colorado is trash and not allowed to make makar even better than he was by giving him even more freedom to create on offence? 

 

1 minute ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

Yeah, I'm not going to argue with you on any of that. I was actually agreeing with you. You're misunderstanding me somewhere.

 

Watch the video I posted. It explains everything. I also explained it in my previous post.

They're whining about what I said. Not what you said. 

[Dr. Crossbar]

7 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

Agreed, I think they both elevate each other in different ways, having to pay such a D is a good problem to have. And yeah, it could be a top of the league pairing going forward, or at least in that bracket. 

 

The only area I disagree is paying him more than Hughes, I wouldn't have an issue with that and I don't reckon Hughes or any other Canuck player would either. I don't see the deal Hughes signed going on three years ago setting a cap for Canucks D, I don't think a nearly three year old contract is indicative of current cap realities. 

 

If Hronek were 22 or 23 that'd be one thing, but he's not, he'll be 27 in November. The Canucks will be buying one more RFA year. It won't happen, but in the event Hronek simply took his qualifying offer it'd walk him right to UFA. The Canucks will be buying UFA years. I don't think quibbling over an extra 500-750k is worth it for the Canucks, it'll probably be negligible as the cap raises and the asking prices for top 3D rise alongside the cap. Hughes will likely get 12M+ as a clear cut #1, I don't think paying 7.5-8M is outrageous for Hronek if the Canucks view him as a top pairing guy. I think folks are getting too hung up on Hughes being a sort of cap, and probably less than 1M in cap space. 

 

 

 

We're on the same page. It is a good problem to have. Locking down Hronek is important to this window, which is now. 

 

I know what your saying about the cap realities. It's that Hronek getting 7.8 actually actually makes sense logistically, financially, and conceptually. I mean, if he makes more than 8 with the cap going up, UFA years, and appreciation, so be it. I'd just like to see him make no more than Hughes. 

 

But yeah, it's obvious Hughes and Hronek compliment each other. It's not a coincidence at all how good this duo has been together. 

[wai_lai416]

18 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

Yeah, I'm not going to argue with you on any of that. I was actually agreeing with you. You're misunderstanding me somewhere.

 

Watch the video I posted. It explains everything. I also explained it in my previous post.

?? I didn’t quote u in the post or did I? I’m only quoting Philip here coz he clearly thinks anyone that plays with Hughes must be inferior and benefiting from Hughes only and Hughes is doing it all by himself while others are not allow to compliment him 

[Dr. Crossbar]

1 minute ago, wai_lai416 said:

?? I didn’t quote u in the post or did I? I’m only quoting Philip here coz he clearly thinks anyone that plays with Hughes must be inferior and benefiting from Hughes only and Hughes is doing it all by himself while others are not allow to compliment him 

 

My bad ... apologies. Thought you quoted me. You didn't. Too many notifications. 

 

Carry on!

 

Happy Hronek Day, everyone! 

[Hammertime]

1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

 

Yup, if they'd offered Horvat more during the offseason, but prior to the season, he'd probably be a Canuck. It's probably better for all parties that it played out how it did, but lowballing important players isn't a smart way to try and keep them. 

 

Them being a top team this season doesn't necessarily mean they're going to get every player at a discount or on a bargain deal, even top teams have to pay market value for players sometimes. Having to pay market value instead of getting a discount shouldn't be perceived as a negative, it's a norm across the league. 

 

 

Thing is, that probably goes both ways. I don't think it's a coincidence that Hughes appears to be playing at a higher level this season alongside Hronek. He was already a great player, but he really does look that much better. Some of that is Hughes himself, but some of it likely isn't. I think folks are too quick to write off Hronek's impact as largely being tethered to playing with Hughes when in fact it appears their playing together is synergistic and benefitting both players, and the team as a whole as a result.

 

Does Hronek benefit from playing with a player like Hughes? Absolutely. Does that mean he isn't a quality player in his own right? Of course not. Does Hughes benefit from playing with a 2-3D in Hronek? I reckon he does, and Hronek's side will probably argue as much. 

 

How many times have we discussed trying to find Hughes an RD partner over the years? We finally have one and they work very well together, more than likely he'll end up getting something towards the mid to high 7's because of it. Maybe as high as 8M, although I reckon that's the highest the Canucks would probably go. 

Yes and no. We're talking about a kid who hasn't peaked yet. Every year he's been improving. It's not like he's drastically over shooting his development arc with Hronek.

 

 

He's on pace to put up 10-15 more points than he did with the likes of Schenn. 

 

I would love to see if we could use Juul's like Schenn next to Hugs, and bump Hronek down with one of Zad/Soucy/Cole if that would give us a more potent top 4 5v5 and help reduce the work load on Quinn a bit. 

 

While I do think Hronek has been very good especially having a shooting threat from the blueline is so important. I have a hard time justifying paying Hronek in the 8m range if he isn't able to produce results away from Quinn. Hroneks underlying fancy stats are not particularly spectacular.

Edited March 20 by Hammertime

[Coconuts]

12 minutes ago, Hammertime said:

Yes and no. We're talking about a kid who hasn't peaked yet. Every year he's been improving. It's not like he's drastically over shooting his development arc with Hronek.

 

 

He's on pace to put up 10-15 more points than he did with the likes of Schenn. 

 

I would love to see if we could use Juul's like Schenn next to Hugs, and bump Hronek down with one of Zad/Soucy/Cole if that would give us a more potent top 4 5v5 and help reduce the work load on Quinn a bit. 

 

While I do think Hronek has been very good especially having a shooting threat from the blueline is so important. I have a hard time justifying paying Hronek in the 8m range if he isn't able to produce results away from Quinn. Hroneks underlying fancy stats are not particularly spectacular.blue line 

 

It's not just his production though, his other metrics have been off the charts this season as @Miss Korea frequently posts and I have a hard time not believing that Hronek contributes to that, I think their chemistry is something special 

 

Some of it is Hughes being a special player, absolutely, but I believe some of it is having a legitimate top 3D (who's also an RD) to play with 

 

Schenn and Hronek are very different players, it's not farfetched to believe that what Schenn and Hughes got out of each other vs what Hronek and Hughes get out of each other would be different as well 

Edited March 20 by Coconuts

[canucks curse]

Canucks have 25.5 in cap space come July 1 and yes playoffs can change value/decisions to re-sign or not

 

Milky Petey Hogz

Podz Miller Brock

Joshua Bluegger Garland

Bains Suter Aman

PDG

 

Hughes Hronek

Soucy Tanev

Cole Juulsen

 

 

 

Hronek 7.5 x 8 yrs

Joshua 3.25 x 5 yrs

Bluegger 2.5 x 3 yrs 

Zads 4.25 x 4 yrs 

Tanev 3.25 x 3 years

Cole 2 x 2 yrs

 

Demko

Silovs

 

= 2.75  space 

 

I bet we can move garland to CHI for a 2nd no retention...

Then the next year I think you are looking at Lekkeremaki, Wallander and DPetey making the roster 

 

 

 

Edited March 20 by canucks curse

[AlexanderM]

1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

 

Yup, if they'd offered Horvat more during the offseason, but prior to the season, he'd probably be a Canuck. It's probably better for all parties that it played out how it did, but lowballing important players isn't a smart way to try and keep them. 

 

I'm also not a fan of how PA lowballs the more important players, he's done it with Miller, Horvat and Hronek. It definitely pissed off Horvat, although I'm fine with how it turned out, but still isn't the best approach. 

[Coryberg]

23 minutes ago, Hammertime said:

I have a hard time justifying paying Hronek in the 8m range if he isn't able to produce results away from Quinn.

Last year he had 38 points in 60 games playing away from Hughes (0.633 points per game)

 

This year he has 45 points in 69 games playing with Quinn (0.652  points per game)

[Coconuts]

10 minutes ago, canucks curse said:

Canucks have 25.5 in cap space come July 1 and yes playoffs can change value/decisions to re-sign or not

 

Hronek 7.5 x 8 yrs

Joshua 3.25 x 5 yrs

Bluegger 2.5 x 3 yrs 

Zads 4.25 x 4 yrs 

Tanev 3.25 x 3 years

 

= 4.75  space 

 

I bet we can move garland to CHI for a 2nd no retention...

 

 

 

 

It's doubtful they get Tanev for 3.25, Dallas would probably offer him more than that to stay in a tax friendly state and he'd definitely get more than that via UFA 

 

Ottawa, who was heavily rumoured to be interested in Tanev leading up to the deadline, would probably offer him something like 5M, they'd bled goals this season he's exactly the sort of D who could help them stem the bleeding 

 

Toronto was also rumoured to be very interested in him and would probably take a run at him via UFA, Tanev's from Toronto so it's not farfetched to see him wearing a Leafs jersey 

 

Maybe I'll be wrong, but I have a hard time seeing him taking a 1.25M pay cut to come back to Vancouver when he could get the same or more to stay on a contender in Dallas 

 

 

Edited March 20 by Coconuts

[canucks curse]

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

 

It's doubtful they get Tanev for 3.25, Dallas would probably offer him more than that to stay in a tax friendly state and he'd definitely get more than that via UFA 

 

Ottawa, who was heavily rumoured to be interested in Tanev leading up to the deadline, would probably offer him something like 5M, they'd bled goals this season he's exactly the sort of D who could help them stem the bleeding 

 

Toronto was also rumoured to be very interested in him and would probably take a run at him via UFA, Tanev's from Toronto so it's not farfetched to see him wearing a Leafs jersey 

 

Maybe I'll be wrong, but I have a hard time seeing him taking a 1M pay cut to come back to Vancouver when he could get the same or more to stay on a contender in Dallas 

 

 

I think the idea of retiring in Van and playing with Hughes would appeal - plus look at total money - 9.75 and this is in USD, low tax states things balance out by paying for everything in van in CDN (>25% cheaper)

[Coconuts]

4 minutes ago, canucks curse said:

I think the idea of retiring in Van and playing with Hughes would appeal - plus look at total money - 9.75 and this is in USD, low tax states things balance out by paying for everything in van in CDN (>25% cheaper)

 

Maybe, but I just don't see him taking a 1.25M pay cut to do so, he could likely at least get his current 4.5M in Dallas or Toronto, and if he hits UFA the pool would definitely be larger than that 

 

Defensive D of his ilk are highly sought after, he's one of the best at what he does and it'll probably get him paid again 

 

 

 

[RWMc1]

20 minutes ago, canucks curse said:

Canucks have 25.5 in cap space come July 1 and yes playoffs can change value/decisions to re-sign or not

 

 

 

Poolman's LTIR counts on the cap. We'll probably trade his contract in the off season. Either way we actually have 28 million in cap next season.

[Hammertime]

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

It's not just his production though, his other metrics have been off the charts this season as @Miss Korea frequently posts and I have a hard time not believing that Hronek contributes to that, I think their chemistry is something special 

 

Some of it is Hughes being a special player, absolutely, but I believe some of it is having a legitimate top 3D (who's also an RD) to play with 

 

Schenn and Hronek are very different players, it's not farfetched to believe that what Schenn and Hughes got out of each other vs what Hronek and Hughes get out of each other would be different as well 

To me its more about balancing the lineup and extracting as much value as possible from each line. Schenn Hughes for example produced at a 110point pace last year. Hronek and Hughes are producing at a 146 point pace this year. In terms of cost per point Schenn Hughes was better value. That doesn't mean Hronek is chopped liver. Absolutely play Hronek w Hughes situationally. All I'm saying is the game is 60 mins it would be wise to have 2 top duo's. Same go's for the Loto line it's IMO a terrible strat if it's your go to. Situationally, of course there are times you need to load up the top line. I feel like if we are paying Hronek in the 8m range it would be more advantageous to separate him from Hughes and use them together situationlly.  

[Hammertime]

1 hour ago, Coryberg said:

Last year he had 38 points in 60 games playing away from Hughes (0.633 points per game)

 

This year he has 45 points in 69 games playing with Quinn (0.652  points per game)

Great thank you for exacerbating my point. There is far more value if hronek can produce 0.633ppg away from Hughes vs putting up 2 more points per 82 with Hughes. 

 

 

Edited March 20 by Hammertime

[Coconuts]

8 minutes ago, Hammertime said:

To me its more about balancing the lineup and extracting as much value as possible from each line. Schenn Hughes for example produced at a 110point pace last year. Hronek and Hughes are producing at a 146 point pace this year. In terms of cost per point Schenn Hughes was better value. That doesn't mean Hronek is chopped liver. Absolutely play Hronek w Hughes situationally. All I'm saying is the game is 60 mins it would be wise to have 2 top duo's. Same go's for the Loto line it's IMO a terrible strat if it's your go to. Situationally, of course there are times you need to load up the top line. I feel like if we are paying Hronek in the 8m range it would be more advantageous to separate him from Hughes and use them together situationlly.  

 

Depends on how many minutes x pairing is averaging 

 

Hughes averages nearly 24:44 minutes a night playing in all situations, Hronek is averaging 23:40 

 

I get the argument for splitting them up, but I'd stick with what's clearly working and look to address the second pairing independent of that 

 

We're going to see turnover anyway, even if Myers or Cole are retained they'll be gone sooner than later, Zadorov may price himself out of Vancouver, and Soucy will have two years remaining on his deal after this season 

 

Hughes and Hronek are the two most likely to be here long term