Canuck You Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 Hronek to me seems like a playoff type of guy so i will reserve judgement until after the p/o to see is actual worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rekker Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 10 minutes ago, Canuck You said: Hronek to me seems like a playoff type of guy so i will reserve judgement until after the p/o to see is actual worth. This. He doesn't back down physically and has a bit of a temper. I hope he's re-signed, but it has to be a fair number. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 15 minutes ago, Canuck You said: Hronek to me seems like a playoff type of guy so i will reserve judgement until after the p/o to see is actual worth. What about him leads you to believe that? I'm a big fan of hronek, but I don't know if he seems anymore "playoff type" than anyone else Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck You Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 5 minutes ago, stawns said: What about him leads you to believe that? I'm a big fan of hronek, but I don't know if he seems anymore "playoff type" than anyone else Physical, Stay at home, Doesn't take many chances and the playoffs are like a chess game, It's tightly checked, less room for error and dangerous plays. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Crossbar Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 54 minutes ago, Rekker said: This. He doesn't back down physically and has a bit of a temper. I hope he's re-signed, but it has to be a fair number. Exactly this. All of this. We haven't even seen the best of Hronek yet. There's more to his game. This has been an in interesting and different season for him. Huge part of our blueline going forward. His time is now along with our window. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 52 minutes ago, Canuck You said: Physical, Stay at home, Doesn't take many chances and the playoffs are like a chess game, It's tightly checked, less room for error and dangerous plays. No argument here, but that sounds like a $6-7m dman to me 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chon derry Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 1 hour ago, stawns said: What about him leads you to believe that? I'm a big fan of hronek, but I don't know if he seems anymore "playoff type" than anyone else The counter question obviously would be what leads you to think he isn’t? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 Just now, Chon derry said: The counter question obviously would be what leads you to think he isn’t? Who said I didn't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coryberg Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 (edited) 1 hour ago, Diamonds said: Bo's first offer was an insult. It was reportedly less than his previous contract. Hopefully management learned a lesson and even if low-balling didn't insult Hronek. I believe the rumour was Nugent-Hopkins contract(5.125x8). This was of course before his career season, he was averaging around 50 points a season with a career high of 61. Once the season started and he got off to that crazy start the gap became too big. Edited April 2 by Coryberg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chon derry Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 1 minute ago, stawns said: Who said I didn't? As usual there’s a positive element missing from your post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWJC Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 Maybe his value will reach the 7.5+ range as salaries and cap increase, but what we’re looking at right now is paying for his age and term. His overall play has been pretty consistent regardless of when he gets his points, but the next long term contract with him is to buy his prime. That’s why his agent may be earmarking his value above Nux mgmt last offer. The big question - for 7.5mill (for shits and giggles sake) can we find someone else to support QH for 8 years in a relative similar capacity but for cheaper? Answer is definitely. i think someone to fit that role could/should come in at around 5-6mill per, but then it begs the question what is cost of acquisition for that piece if not available through UFA. Regardless, if that’s possibly attainable then what value does Hronek have as a 2nd line Dman at that price point over term and is that then replaceable by, again, someone cheaper. We don’t have resoundingly strong data on how Hronek can handle his own line, let alone a less complimentary player whom he may have to command as a linemate over a few games. There’s a happy medium and I hope we hit it, but unless you know you have a guy who can run his own line and make everyone better, you shouldn’t pay full value and term for that until it’s proven. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 2 minutes ago, RWJC said: Maybe his value will reach the 7.5+ range as salaries and cap increase, but what we’re looking at right now is paying for his age and term. His overall play has been pretty consistent regardless of when he gets his points, but the next long term contract with him is to buy his prime. That’s why his agent may be earmarking his value above Nux mgmt last offer. The big question - for 7.5mill (for shits and giggles sake) can we find someone else to support QH for 8 years in a relative similar capacity but for cheaper? Answer is definitely. i think someone to fit that role could/should come in at around 5-6mill per, but then it begs the question what is cost of acquisition for that piece if not available through UFA. Regardless, if that’s possibly attainable then what value does Hronek have as a 2nd line Dman at that price point over term and is that then replaceable by, again, someone cheaper. We don’t have resoundingly strong data on how Hronek can handle his own line, let alone a less complimentary player whom he may have to command as a linemate over a few games. There’s a happy medium and I hope we hit it, but unless you know you have a guy who can run his own line and make everyone better, you shouldn’t pay full value and term for that until it’s proven. The tricky thing is figuring out how to do so when the years the Canucks would be paying Hronek for going forward will almost entirely be UFA years 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker67 Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 My guess: $7.5 x 4 No way Hronek should make more than Hughes makes or will make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 10 minutes ago, Chon derry said: As usual there’s a positive element missing from your post. Awwwww, did my post offend you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 6 minutes ago, Coconuts said: The tricky thing is figuring out how to do so when the years the Canucks would be paying Hronek for going forward will almost entirely be UFA years As a previous poster pointed out, the 10 points in his last 32 games should concern everyone thinking he deserves a massive, long term deal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chon derry Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 2 minutes ago, stawns said: Awwwww, did my post offend you? Not at all. I expect your posts to be negative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 1 minute ago, Chon derry said: Not at all. I expect your posts to be negative. I'm sure you'll survive such an affront to your senses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 5 minutes ago, stawns said: As a previous poster pointed out, the 10 points in his last 32 games should concern everyone thinking he deserves a massive, long term deal Sure, but the Hronek scenario is a bit different than that of a younger RFA, he has one RFA season remaining and that'll likely up the cost of extending him imo. It likely won't happen, but he could ultimately just take his qualifying offer and walk if he's not happy with what's offered. That'd likely result in a trade, which Hronek would have a degree of control over. Lot of teams aren't going to give up a haul for a player they aren't going to be able to retain. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chon derry Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 4 minutes ago, stawns said: I'm sure you'll survive such an affront to your senses. I questioned you about your opinion of hronek not being a playoff performer it wasn’t impolite. It was valid But you turned it into a snarky response. Cheers mr. negative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 8 minutes ago, Coconuts said: Sure, but the Hronek scenario is a bit different than that of a younger RFA, he has one RFA season remaining and that'll likely up the cost of extending him imo. It likely won't happen, but he could ultimately just take his qualifying offer and walk if he's not happy with what's offered. That'd likely result in a trade, which Hronek would have a degree of control over. Lot of teams aren't going to give up a haul for a player they aren't going to be able to retain. It's better than a $64+ contract who is only getting that because of who he plays with. Work with his agent to find a deal with a team who is likely to re-sign him. Truthfully, I think Hronek would find many, if any, takers at his price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Vanderhoek Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 (edited) On 3/27/2024 at 11:29 AM, Coryberg said: I believe that almost all of pur players have had a decrease in production in the past 20 games or so. We are playing a lot more 3-1, 2-1 games these days than we were in the first half. The games do change as the season goes on and things tend to tighten up. I don't know if it is a matter of the opposition closing their gaps on the likes of Hronek and Hughes for example but they both don't seem to be able to get that extra open ice. Hronek has less time to get positioned and take a slapper so ends up frequently dumping the puck or wristing it towards the net. He has a powerful accurate shot and needs to be able to get it off. Hughes does not have that explosiveness he did earlier on when he could fake one way and jet up ice out of his zone with the puck, he has guys on him and speed matching regularly. He also is overhandling the puck and skating circles sometimes into danger zones or low percentage plays rather than the smart play or easier direct pass. It is getting a little frustrating or cringeworthy as a fan to see but awesome when it works out haha. But back to Hronek, the Canucks invested a lot into bringing him here and as much as some are saying don't pay him and instead trade him it is almost comical as before he arrived what was the number one need for this club ? thats right a righty, top four, productive defenseman. Well Vancouver got Hronek and I would argue one of the better trades or examples of asset management by this group thus far. I truly don't think some people watch his game or appreciate what he can bring, I mean there is a lot of assumption that he is not a great defender, is soft or one dimensional. I really believe that is not accurate at all. He shows to play with an edge, he doesn't back down and he can really move the puck. I believe the Canucks identified him as a trade target early on and pushed the idea when the player was otherwise not a realistic trade option on the market. When you see the cap potential to rise year after year again here, yes he could be paid a number close to Hughes let's say 7.5m per on a lengthy deal. That is very fair considering any years he is under contract after say the next two ? like Miller that number looks better every year later. Edited April 2 by Mike Vanderhoek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWJC Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 10 minutes ago, Coconuts said: The tricky thing is figuring out how to do so when the years the Canucks would be paying Hronek for going forward will almost entirely be UFA years That’s the gamble, which could be more of an educated guess had we placed him in a position to run the 2nd line and see how he responds in that role. All signs point to him likely continuing his progression and hovering around the same point totals, provided he’s playing a 1st line role/TOI. Problem for me is while that may be the standard value going forward for a player of his caliber, can we afford that or do we need to mitigate upcoming raises/extensions and ensure we can extract the value we’re going to need to remain a contender. I don’t want a Hronek extension costing us longterm balance and depth simply because he’s a good (great?) player currently situated in a sweet spot when it comes to his contract status right now. Playing with QH at minimum has upped FH’s qualifying offer…is that accurate to what he can achieve going forward, meaning are we going to see him improve much more than his current capacity? I’m still unsure about that. If he asks too much, deal FH out with a return that involves a younger emerging Dman. Eg. Obtain a player who just signed his RFA deal like Hronek did in 2021 with DET and have that player play alongside QH and I would hedge a bet that over time (provided the chemistry works) they can attain similar stats to FH, imho. You don’t pay 7.5 and term for chemistry. You pay that for someone who realistically can play as the #1 Dman should QH ever go down to injury. Hronek has not yet proven capable of that nor that he can even command his own line. I believe it’s possible but until even remotely witnessed, its a gamble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 Play off performer? Hehe Hronek has been in 12 play off games, scoring 4 points---- in the AHL No other play off experience. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 4 minutes ago, Gurn said: Play off performer? Hehe Hronek has been in 12 play off games, scoring 4 points---- in the AHL No other play off experience. Easy Mr Negative, that kind of talk isn't allowed around here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 2 hours ago, Diamonds said: Bo's first offer was an insult. It was reportedly less than his previous contract. Hopefully management learned a lesson and even if low-balling didn't insult Hronek. they offered much closer to what he's really worth than the ridiculous overpayment that Lou threw his way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.