[REPORT] Canucks make contract offer to Filip Hronek

[MeanSeanBean]

5 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Well with the way these arguments are going, technically Weegar isn't a 50 point defenceman either lol

Neither in Hronek. I already addressed Weeger is nearly 50, but better defensively. He's also not playing with the best defensemen in the NHL this year, and only has 5 points less, while being more reliable defensively.

 

 

He's significantly cheaper then the 7 million you layed out, which is still significantly under the rumoured 8 million+ ask of Hronek. It just seems insincere for you to make an argument saying there's no one that accomplishes something just because you have decided to rule out the players that are currently achieving, or nearly achieving, the thing you are talking about.

[HKSR]

6 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

Nope, but he's only 5 points less than hronek and it was you who said it's only 5 points, right?

Let's face reality.  One example does not make a trend.  What about ALL the other RHD that produce at the level of Hronek does?  

 

 

[stawns]

5 minutes ago, HKSR said:

And I'm saying it'd be stupid to do so because he would just be getting what he's worth.  One guy in weegar who is also 2 years older doesn't define the value of a RHD with his level of production.  It's that simple.

 

And I'm saying, sell high and let another team over pay him.  

[MeanSeanBean]

11 minutes ago, Hammertime said:

That's just to whip the fan's into a lather then when he signs for 7.7 it will be a "discount" and @HSKR can make a thread.

If he signs for less then Hughes, then fine, that's the cost of signing him. But if he's asking for 8 million I'm moving him on. Hughes makes his partner, not the other way around. Hronek can decide if he wants to be playing with a top 3 defensemen in the league, or if he wants bank. I don't care either way, I just don't think he's worth the rumoured 8 million ask.

[Dizzle]

Just now, stawns said:

 

Only because of this season and I agree people can say he's a 30 goal scorer now.  I'm not sure why you think I've said differently 

What are you even responding to here? The fact that I said he was never an officially a 30 goal scorer until this season? Or the fact I said his numbers always said he would be in that ball park if he stayed healthy? 
 

either way your response doesn’t make sense…. 

[HKSR]

Just now, MeanSeanBean said:

Neither in Hronek. I already addressed Weeger is nearly 50, but better defensively. He's also not playing with the best defensemen in the NHL this year, and only has 5 points less, while being more reliable defensively.

 

 

He's significantly cheaper then the 7 million you layed out, which is still significantly under the rumoured 8 million+ ask of Hronek. It just seems insincere for you to make an argument saying there's no one that accomplishes something just because you have decided to rule out the players that are currently achieving, or nearly achieving, the thing you are talking about.

If you're hung up on the fact I said "none", then I'm fine with conceding that there is ONE guy that scored 44 points that got $6.25M until he's 36 yo.  I also mentioned above, ONE guy doesn't constitute the trend. 

 

Here are the defencemen that I can think of that are around Hronek's age (mid 20s) that produce at a 45+ point clip.

Fox

McAvoy

Makar

 

These guys are much younger:

Bouchard

Dobson

Faber

 

These guys are much older:

Karlsson

Doughty

Carlson

Letang

Weegar

 

And that's about it.  That's pretty much all the RHD I can think of that produce at the level Hronek does.  You can pretty much count them on 2 hands.  Why else do you think RHD are worth so much?

[stawns]

3 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Let's face reality.  One example does not make a trend.  What about ALL the other RHD that produce at the level of Hronek does?  

 

 

One example does not make a trend, yet you want to see the team commit $8m a year over 8 years to a player who had never hit 40 points before this year, based on one good year playing with the best offensive dman in the world.

 

Then you say one year is not a trend 

[HKSR]

4 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

And I'm saying, sell high and let another team over pay him.  

It's not an overpayment if it's under $8M.  It's fair value.  Look above.  There's like 10, maybe 11 RHD in the ENTIRE NHL that can produce like Hronek.  If that's not a rare commodity, I don't know what is.  DEMAND = $$$$$

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

One example does not make a trend, yet you want to see the team commit $8m a year over 8 years to a player who had never hit 40 points before this year, based on one good year playing with the best offensive dman in the world.

 

Then you say one year is not a trend 

He has been on pace for 2 years in a row.  More than than 1.  The "ONE" Weegar you keep going back to.

[Hammertime]

1 minute ago, HKSR said:

If he was on pace for 50 and he played more than 3/4 of a season, I think it's fair to assume he would have either hit the mark or got very, very close to it.  Close enough that for arguments sake, it still wouldn't put Hronek in the $6m AAV range.

You'll get no argument from me the number will be in the high 7's I'm ok with that. Youre arguing with someone else there. Wasn't Brock on pace for like 50g at the 50 game mark pretty safe to say he'll fall short. I don't care as long as he doesn't fall on his face again in the playoffs. 

 

There's definately some Eirhoff effect going on in Hroneks favor though which is fine as long as we are also aware of it. 

[stawns]

1 minute ago, HKSR said:

He has been on pace for 2 years in a row.  More than than 1.  The "ONE" Weegar you keep going back to.

 

Hrs never hit 40 points before this year and you want the Canucks to tie their boat to an $8mx8 year anchor based on one year.  If that's what he wants, let someone else be dum enough to do it.  Hes replaceable

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, Hammertime said:

You'll get no argument from me the number will be in the high 7's I'm ok with that. Youre arguing with someone else there. Wasn't Brock on pace for like 50g at the 50 game mark pretty safe to say he'll fall short. I don't care as long as he doesn't fall on his face again in the playoffs. 

 

There's definately some Eirhoff effect going on in Hroneks favor though which is fine as long as we are also aware of it. 

Wasn't Ehrhoff 29 or 30 though when he hit his numbers with Vancouver?  Hronek is 26.  He's likely gonna have several more years of high production.  I don't even think this year will be his career year either.  

[HKSR]

Just now, stawns said:

 

Hrs never hit 40 points before this year and you want the Canucks to tie their boat to an $8mx8 year anchor based on one year.  If that's what he wants, let someone else be dum enough to do it.  Hes replaceable

That's entirely your opinion.  He's 26 years old.  Not 29 or 30.  He is very likely to replicate this year for at least 2 or 3 more years.

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, Hammertime said:

You'll get no argument from me the number will be in the high 7's I'm ok with that. Youre arguing with someone else there. Wasn't Brock on pace for like 50g at the 50 game mark pretty safe to say he'll fall short. I don't care as long as he doesn't fall on his face again in the playoffs. 

 

There's definately some Eirhoff effect going on in Hroneks favor though which is fine as long as we are also aware of it. 

If he wants over $7m, let him sign a 2 year deal at $7m to prove he deserves a long term, huge money deal and that this year isn't the outlier 

[stawns]

Just now, HKSR said:

That's entirely your opinion.  He's 26 years old.  Not 29 or 30.  He is very likely to replicate this year for at least 2 or 3 more years.

 

Of course it's my opinion, same as it's just your opinion.

 

What isn't an opinion is that this is is first big year.  To me, one year doesn't warrant a big money, long term contract

[HKSR]

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.

[HKSR]

2 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

Of course it's my opinion, same as it's just your opinion.

 

What isn't an opinion is that this is is first big year.  To me, one year doesn't warrant a big money, long term contract

Pretty certain that was your same argument about JT Miller.  Enough said.  

[Hammertime]

3 minutes ago, HKSR said:

It's not an overpayment if it's under $8M.  It's fair value.  Look above.  There's like 10, maybe 11 RHD in the ENTIRE NHL that can produce like Hronek.  If that's not a rare commodity, I don't know what is.  DEMAND = $$$$$

Absolutely "fair value" lets not act like he's taking some big "discount" when the number comes in a few 100k shy of 8m though. Or we'll have to start comparing him to Heiskainen. 

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, Hammertime said:

Absolutely "fair value" lets not act like he's taking some big "discount" when the number comes in a few 100k shy of 8m though. Or we'll have to start comparing him to Heiskainen. 

I don't think it'll be a discount unless it's low $7M range.  Anything $7.5M or higher is FAIR value IMO.  You can quote me on that so you know I didn't go back against more word lol

[Hammertime]

5 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Wasn't Ehrhoff 29 or 30 though when he hit his numbers with Vancouver?  Hronek is 26.  He's likely gonna have several more years of high production.  I don't even think this year will be his career year either.  

depends on if he stays of goes. I think Eirhoff would have continued to produce if he'd stay'd. If he goes this could very well be his career year. 

[HKSR]

These are the RHD this year likely to finish in the high 30pt range or more.  Other than Weegar (who seems to be the only guy that people are using as a comparable here), who else would come in under $7M AAV? lol

 

[stawns]

5 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Pretty certain that was your same argument about JT Miller.  Enough said.  

 

Actually, I said Miller was a great player and would be a good contract for a few years, it was later in the deal that it would be an anchor.

 

I also advocates moving miller because he was a great player and would bring a big haul that would make the team better in the long run.  I haven't changed on that

[HKSR]

4 minutes ago, Hammertime said:

depends on if he stays of goes. I think Eirhoff would have continued to produce if he'd stay'd. If he goes this could very well be his career year. 

I'd be surprised by that.  If he goes, he'll likely get into a situation where he could potentially get PP1 time.  His offence is limited here to EV or PP2.  

[HKSR]

Just now, stawns said:

 

Actually, I said Miller was a great player and would be a good contract for a few years, it was later in the deal that it would be an anchor.

 

I also advocates moving miller because he was a great player and would bring a big haul that would make the team better in the long run.  I haven't changed on that

I'm pretty certain you mentioned how the 99 point campaign was likely his career year.  Not gonna go dig to find out, but if you say you didn't, then I'll take your word for it.

[stawns]

3 minutes ago, HKSR said:

These are the RHD this year likely to finish in the high 30pt range or more.  Other than Weegar (who seems to be the only guy that people are using as a comparable here), who else would come in under $7M AAV? lol

 

 

Again, you're stuck on what they'll get, no one is arguing that.  If teams want to overpay for long term deals and hancuff themselves down the road and more power to them.  I hope Van doesn't