[REPORT] Canucks make contract offer to Filip Hronek

[Gurn]

10 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

Easy Mr Negative, that kind of talk isn't allowed around here

 

Yep, 100% sunshine and lollipops or you are called a hater/troll.

 

Biggest issue on any fan forum-  folk trying to control what other posters say.

 

[RWJC]

10 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

they offered much closer to what he's really worth than the ridiculous overpayment that Lou threw his way. 

“All I can tell ya is it’s too long and it’s too much money.”

 

Lou Lam

[Coryberg]

15 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.

 

 

Yep, anyone assuming he is or isn't would be just taking a wild guess. I think that a RHD who can play all situations and log 24 plus minutes will be a great asset come playoff time but we will see.

[HKSR]

Stupidest argument is that Hronek wouldn't produce without Hughes.  REALITY is he was on pace to do it WITHOUT Hughes in Detroit, and he's doing it again this year.

 

The fact is, if he didn't play on a team with Hughes that takes ALL the primary offensive minutes for this team including playing 1.5 to 2min of every single PP, I'd reckon Hronek would have just as many points as he does now, perhaps even more. 

 

FACTS

 

Of the top 20 scorers among defencemen this year:

 

15 of them play an average of over 3:00min on the PP per game.

 

4 of them play an average of over 2:00min on the PP per game.

 

That accounts for 19 of the top scoring defencemen this season.

 

So that leaves 1 (ONE) single defenceman in the top 20 that plays on average 1:45min of PP time per game (and most of it on PP2).....  you guessed it geniuses... FILIP HRONEK.

 

LET THAT SINK IN then come back and tell me with a straight face that you don't think Hronek could produce without Hughes if he was given 3min+ of PP1 time per game.

[Coryberg]

2 minutes ago, RWJC said:

“All I can tell ya is it’s too long and it’s too much money.”

 

Lou Lam

 

[Chon derry]

4 minutes ago, Coryberg said:

Yep, anyone assuming he is or isn't would be just taking a wild guess. I think that a RHD who can play all situations and log 24 plus minutes will be a great asset come playoff time but we will see.

Because he apperantly turned down 6.5 he’s all of sudden redundant ?   Their not too far apart. 

Edited April 2 by Chon derry

[RWJC]

6 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Stupidest argument is that Hronek wouldn't produce without Hughes.  REALITY is he was on pace to do it WITHOUT Hughes in Detroit, and he's doing it again this year.

 

The fact is, if he didn't play on a team with Hughes that takes ALL the primary offensive minutes for this team including playing 1.5 to 2min of every single PP, I'd reckon Hronek would have just as many points as he does now, perhaps even more. 

 

FACTS

 

Of the top 20 scorers among defencemen this year:

 

15 of them play an average of over 3:00min on the PP per game.

 

4 of them play an average of over 2:00min on the PP per game.

 

That accounts for 19 of the top scoring defencemen this season.

 

So that leaves 1 (ONE) single defenceman in the top 20 that plays on average 1:45min of PP time per game (and most of it on PP2).....  you guessed it geniuses... FILIP HRONEK.

 

LET THAT SINK IN then come back and tell me with a straight face that you don't think Hronek could produce without Hughes if he was given 3min+ of PP1 time per game.

What is the contract you offer him as GM and what is your cut off point?

Edited April 2 by RWJC

[HKSR]

Just now, RWJC said:

What are you paying him as GM?

What would I pay him as GM?  Anything less than $8M and I think it's a fair deal.  Over $8M is too much, and under $7M is too little.

[Chon derry]

5 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Stupidest argument is that Hronek wouldn't produce without Hughes.  REALITY is he was on pace to do it WITHOUT Hughes in Detroit, and he's doing it again this year.

 

The fact is, if he didn't play on a team with Hughes that takes ALL the primary offensive minutes for this team including playing 1.5 to 2min of every single PP, I'd reckon Hronek would have just as many points as he does now, perhaps even more. 

 

FACTS

 

Of the top 20 scorers among defencemen this year:

 

15 of them play an average of over 3:00min on the PP per game.

 

4 of them play an average of over 2:00min on the PP per game.

 

That accounts for 19 of the top scoring defencemen this season.

 

So that leaves 1 (ONE) single defenceman in the top 20 that plays on average 1:45min of PP time per game (and most of it on PP2).....  you guessed it geniuses... FILIP HRONEK.

 

LET THAT SINK IN then come back and tell me with a straight face that you don't think Hronek could produce without Hughes if he was given 3min+ of PP1 time per game.

He turns down 6.5. And his ask is a little over 7 from what I’ve read. And all of sudden he’s not a playoff performer. And it’s too much?   So the first offer is just that a first offer so there’s a .6 or ,7 discrepancy. I would think there’s some middle ground there. Bargaining tactics nothing more. 

[stawns]

18 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Stupidest argument is that Hronek wouldn't produce without Hughes.  REALITY is he was on pace to do it WITHOUT Hughes in Detroit, and he's doing it again this year.

 

The fact is, if he didn't play on a team with Hughes that takes ALL the primary offensive minutes for this team including playing 1.5 to 2min of every single PP, I'd reckon Hronek would have just as many points as he does now, perhaps even more. 

 

FACTS

 

Of the top 20 scorers among defencemen this year:

 

15 of them play an average of over 3:00min on the PP per game.

 

4 of them play an average of over 2:00min on the PP per game.

 

That accounts for 19 of the top scoring defencemen this season.

 

So that leaves 1 (ONE) single defenceman in the top 20 that plays on average 1:45min of PP time per game (and most of it on PP2).....  you guessed it geniuses... FILIP HRONEK.

 

LET THAT SINK IN then come back and tell me with a straight face that you don't think Hronek could produce without Hughes if he was given 3min+ of PP1 time per game.

 

Youre portraying it like those who don't think he deserves the payday he's asking for, think he's only worth league minimum.  

 

What I see is pretty across the board agreement that Hronek is a great 2 way dman.  The difference as I see it, is a split between those who think is a very good dman and thinks he should be paid like one and those who think he is elite and should be paid like one.

 

No one thinks he isn't a great dman 

Edited April 2 by stawns

[Alflives]

9 minutes ago, HKSR said:

What would I pay him as GM?  Anything less than $8M and I think it's a fair deal.  Over $8M is too much, and under $7M is too little.

Yup. Likely the two sides settle on a contract very similar to Towes (50 mil +/-)

[RWJC]

17 minutes ago, HKSR said:

What would I pay him as GM?  Anything less than $8M and I think it's a fair deal.  Over $8M is too much, and under $7M is too little.

Agreed. Don’t think he will come in above QH’s 7.85 cap hit, but close to it. 
 

As much as I have enjoyed their brilliance together, I still believe if we resign Hronek, we balance out our D depth next season and split the QH/FH duo. If he’s as dominant as your argument suggests, then we essentially could have two 1st lines on our D, and by adding two lesser profile/cost efficient Dmen into the gaps created, we perhaps have a stronger balance. I don’t slot in any prospects in terms of any projection as to when they make the roster - just too unpredictable, but considering we are going to have to trim the fat a bit on this roster, I would expect to get full value out of FH he has to run his own show for the next few seasons, similar to his time in DET.

Edited April 2 by RWJC

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, RWJC said:

Agreed. Don’t think he will come in above QH’s 7.85 cap hit, but close to it. 
 

As much as I have enjoyed their brilliance together, I still believe if we resign Hronek, we balance out our D depth next season and split the QH/FH duo. If he’s as dominant as your argument suggests, then we essentially could have two 1st lines on our D, and by adding two lesser profile/cost efficient Dmen into the gaps created, we perhaps have a stronger balance. I don’t slot in any prospects in terms of any projection as to when they make the roster - just too unpredictable, but considering we are going to have to trim the fat a bit on this roster, I would expect to get full value out of FH he has to run his own show similar to his time in DET.

 

Truly, the best for both parties would be a two year bridge deal between $6.5-7m.  it gives him a chance to build his resume and show he's deserving of a massive deal and it gives the Canucks a better long term idea of who he is and some wiggle room to maintain depth.  

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, RWJC said:

Agreed. Don’t think he will come in above QH’s 7.85 cap hit, but close to it. 
 

As much as I have enjoyed their brilliance together, I still believe if we resign Hronek, we balance out our D depth next season and split the QH/FH duo. If he’s as dominant as your argument suggests, then we essentially could have two 1st lines on our D, and by adding two lesser profile/cost efficient Dmen into the gaps created, we perhaps have a stronger balance. I don’t slot in any prospects in terms of any projection as to when they make the roster - just too unpredictable, but considering we are going to have to trim the fat a bit on this roster, I would expect to get full value out of FH he has to run his own show similar to his time in DET.

I'd be ok if we split QH/FH.  I'd like to see FH with Soucy.  I think Soucy's defensive presence would benefit Hronek's offensive game.  QH is gonna be strong no matter who he plays with.  Juulsen would look fine in that spot, but I'd prefer we sign a solid RHD and have Zadorov/Juulsen as a pair.  I think the issue with whoever plays with QH is the amount of minutes that need to be logged. 

[Dr. Crossbar]

46 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 

 

The way I see this is that the value we get from Hughes and Hronek in the coming years exceeds the value we'd get from Hronek carrying his own line. I get the conventional thought of wanting Hronek to carry his own line but the real value is Hronek creating room for Hughes to be Hughes, which we've seen this year. I think we're better off focusing on the value of our top duo becoming even better together - freeing that up - rather than measuring this against whether Hronek can carry another pairing. That's also not factoring in value in the fact that Hronek's an RHD and fits within our current window.

 

On a certain level of paying and risking for value, it's kind of like how JR and Allvin approached the Miller extension, also against the argument of a potential decline, in that you're banking on getting more and most of the value in the first four years, as much as you can for as long as you can. So the real value is/was having Miller being most productive in the first half of his contract and taking a calculated risk on the second half, and that being all worth what you pay.

 

So in Hronek's case, the real value is locking in Hughes and Hronek (a known, proven top of the league entity now) and getting the most out of our contending caliber duo for Hughes's remaining contract on the cheap knowing how valuable they will be as they get even better. So, you're paying for the known of the duo and allowing them to increase their value knowing what that will be worth ... instead of breaking them up, forcing them to do more than they should, and rely on the unknown.

 

Like the Miller contract, though, this is all about making the team better.  So this Hronek contract needs to be fair so they can actually make the team better cap-wise.

 

 

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

 

Truly, the best for both parties would be a two year bridge deal between $6.5-7m.  it gives him a chance to build his resume and show he's deserving of a massive deal and it gives the Canucks a better long term idea of who he is and some wiggle room to maintain depth.  

I think that's best for the Canucks.  Not best for Hronek.  Why gamble on himself for 2 more years?  For that amount he's better off taking the QO and testing UFA status next year where he will get WAY more.

[Coconuts]

58 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

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.

 

He produced quite respectably his last season in Detroit, a team that's been trying get back to being competitive for a while, and one that hasn't featured Hughes. Put up 38 in 78 back in 21-22 and then greatly improved his pacing the following season, putting up 38 in 60 prior to being traded to the Canucks. The Canucks will argue he benefits from playing alongside Hughes and would be dumb not to argue that, but he was producing before he got here and that'll be part of the counterargument. Some of the counterargument will be that Hughes has benefitted from having a partner of Hronek's caliber as well. 

 

There'd be plenty of takers for his current RFA price, perhaps fewer for what he'll cost on an extension though, if only because it doesn't matter if teams are willing to pay Hronek if he doesn't want to be somewhere. The list of places Hronek would be willing to extend also limits the potential returns the Canucks could get. Hronek isn't negotiating from a position of weakness, his representation has quite a bit of sway regarding what he'll ultimately get or where he'd ultimately end up. 

 

The Canucks could absolutely say they aren't willing to give him what he wants, but if they legitimately want to chase cups sooner than later I'm not sure younger D (as part of a return package) is going to step in and replicate what Hronek's done this season sooner than later. Part of it depends on how the Canucks view their window, and how much they want to go for it sooner than later.

 

55 minutes ago, RWJC said:

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. 

 

I suppose to answer to this depends on whether the Canucks actually view that as being problematic or not. Having a guy who can help get the best out of your franchise D isn't necessarily a bad thing. Makar's had that in Toews, although Toews is undoubtedly superior to Hronek despite the age difference. The other caveat is that as the cap rises, so will what teams pay for 2-3D. 

 

That's a tough question that depends on something we can only largely speculate on, management's short, medium, and longer-term plans. The reality is that every team wants to manage their cap as effectively as possible, but the reality is that even top teams sometimes have to pay full value for upper tier players. And again, is Hronek not taking another step forward from where he's currently at a problem if he can continue to help Hughes reach the heights he has season in and season out? 

 

Perhaps, but then there's discussion to be had around realistic timelines and what management wants to achieve in terms of short, medium, and longer-term goals. Not every young D emerges like a Faber, Hughes, or countless other top young D we've seen over the past several seasons. That's not necessarily a problem if you're okay with that in the short-term, but it could be if you want a Hronek caliber player on the roster sooner than later. Does a potential trade that may or may not work out the way we want it to outweigh the benefit of being able to sign the devil you know?

 

Numbers fluctuate as the cap does, 7.5M this season or next likely won't be what it is in 3-4 seasons. I think folks are getting too hung up on what's probably a million dollars or less per season. And I get wanting to squeeze every last dollar out of negotiations and wanting team friendly deals, but every team features players with contracts that aren't sweetheart deals. Most teams around the league don't have players in the wings to step up and take over for #1's either, that almost always has to be done by committee. 

Edited April 2 by Coconuts

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, HKSR said:

I think that's best for the Canucks.  Not best for Hronek.  Why gamble on himself for 2 more years?  For that amount he's better off taking the QO and testing UFA status next year where he will get WAY more.

 

I would be wary of a guy who hasn't proven himself to be an elite player and wants to be paid like one, who won't bet on himself for two years 

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

He produced quite respectably his last season in Detroit, a team that's been trying get back to being competitive for a while, and one that hasn't featured Hughes. Put up 38 in 78 back in 21-22 and then greatly improved his pacing the following season, putting up 38 in 60 prior to being traded to the Canucks. The Canucks will argue he benefits from playing alongside Hughes and would be dumb not to argue that, but he was producing before he got here and that'll be part of the counterargument. Some of the counterargument will be that Hughes has benefitted from having a partner of Hronek's caliber as well. 

 

There'd be plenty of takers for his current RFA price, perhaps fewer for what he'll cost on an extension though, if only because it doesn't matter if teams are willing to pay Hronek if he doesn't want to be somewhere. The list of places Hronek would be willing to extend also limits the potential returns the Canucks could get. Hronek isn't negotiating from a position of weakness, his representation has quite a bit of sway regarding what he'll ultimately get or where he'd ultimately end up. 

 

The Canucks could absolutely say they aren't willing to give him what he wants, but if they legitimately want to chase cups sooner than later I'm not sure younger D (as part of a return package) is going to step in and replicate what Hronek's done this season sooner than later. Part of it depends on how the Canucks view their window, and how much they want to go for it sooner than later.

 

 

I suppose to answer to this depends on whether the Canucks actually view that as being problematic or not. Having a guy who can help get the best out of your franchise D isn't necessarily a bad thing. Makar's had that in Toews, although Toews is undoubtedly superior to Hronek despite the age difference. The other caveat is that as the cap rises, so will what teams pay for 2-3D. 

 

That's a tough question that depends on something we can only largely speculate on, management's short, medium, and longer-term plans. The reality is that every team wants to manage their cap as effectively as possible, but the reality is that even top teams sometimes have to pay full value for upper tier players. And again, is Hronek not taking another step forward from where he's currently at a problem if he can continue to help Hughes reach the heights he has season in and season out? 

 

Perhaps, but then there's discussion to be had around realistic timelines and what management wants to achieve in terms of short, medium, and longer-term goals. Not every young D emerges like a Faber, Hughes, or countless other top young D we've seen over the past several seasons. That's not necessarily a problem if you're okay with that in the short-term, but it could be if you want a Hronek caliber player on the roster sooner than later. Does a potential trade that may or may not work out the way we want it to outweigh the benefit of being able to sign the devil you know?

 

Numbers fluctuate as the cap does, 7.5M this season or next likely won't be what it is in 3-4 seasons. I think folks are getting too hung up on what's probably a million dollars or less per season. And I get wanting to squeeze every last dollar out of negotiations and wanting team friendly deals, but every team features players with contracts that aren't sweetheart deals. Most teams around the league don't have players in the wings to step up and take over for #1's either, that almost always has to be done by committee. 

 

Again, it doesn't matter what he might have done, it matters what he did do and until this season he never scored more than 38 points.  And now, in the second half of the season, after a great first half wherd Hughes was out of this world, he has 10 points.

 

Those are facts

[HKSR]

Just now, stawns said:

 

I would be wary of a guy who hasn't proven himself to be an elite player and wants to be paid like one, who won't bet on himself for two years 

Lol, that's one way to look at it.  The other is that Hronek is a human being that has shown he can play, and play very well in this league.  There's counterpoints from both sides, but bottomline, as of this moment, if Hronek was a UFA, he'd be paid massive dollars. That tells me what his true value is in this league.  If we don't pay it, someone will, and that team will get a 26 year old, RHD, that plays over 23min a night, hits, stands up for his teammates, and puts up 40 to 50+ points a season.  If you think you can replicate that by bargain bin shopping, you're out of your mind.

[Coconuts]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

 

Again, it doesn't matter what he might have done, it matters what he did do and until this season he never scored more than 38 points.  And now, in the second half of the season, after a great first half wherd Hughes was out of this world, he has 10 points.

 

Those are facts

 

Certainly, they just aren't the only facts, and whether they're the most important facts is anyone's guess. That's something the Canucks would be dumb not to argue, it's just not the only argument they'll make and there'll undoubtedly be counterarguments. 

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Lol, that's one way to look at it.  The other is that Hronek is a human being that has shown he can play, and play very well in this league.  There's counterpoints from both sides, but bottomline, as of this moment, if Hronek was a UFA, he'd be paid massive dollars. That tells me what his true value is in this league.  If we don't pay it, someone will, and that team will get a 26 year old, RHD, that plays ov

er 23min a night, hits, stands up for his teammates, and puts up 40 to 50+ points a season.  If you think you can replicate that by bargain bin shopping, you're out of your mind.

 

I think you'd find hronek would get between $6.5-7m.  I don't think anyone who looks at his stats sees anything better than that.

 

Perhaps a bottom feeder with lots of cap space, but not a playoff team, imo

[RWJC]

12 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

The way I see this is that the value we get from Hughes and Hronek in the coming years exceeds the value we'd get from Hronek carrying his own line. I get the conventional thought of wanting Hronek to carry his own line but the real value is Hronek creating room for Hughes to be Hughes, which we've seen this year. I think we're better off focusing on the value of our top duo becoming even better together - freeing that up - rather than measuring this against whether Hronek can carry another pairing. That's also not factoring in value in the fact that Hronek's an RHD and fits within our current window.

 

On a certain level of paying and risking for value, it's kind of like how JR and Allvin approached the Miller extension, also against the argument of a potential decline, in that you're banking on getting more and most of the value in the first four years, as much as you can for as long as you can. So the real value is/was having Miller being most productive in the first half of his contract and taking a calculated risk on the second half, and that being all worth what you pay.

 

So in Hronek's case, the real value is locking in Hughes and Hronek (a known, proven top of the league entity now) and getting the most out of our contending caliber duo for Hughes's remaining contract on the cheap knowing how valuable they will be as they get even better. So, you're paying for the known of the duo and allowing them to increase their value knowing what that will be worth ... instead of breaking them up, forcing them to do more than they should, and rely on the unknown.

 

Like the Miller contract, though, this is all about making the team better.  So this Hronek contract needs to be fair so they can actually make the team better cap-wise.

 

 

Agreed but the caveat is you’re talking value from past to now with more cap space and amenable options. We may have less in the future, especially as a contending team that is only so because it can keep its core group together under an internal cap structure while also squeezing everything it can out of what become value contracts. FH is a value contract right now…maybe not necessarily so after his extension. More like “on par” value.  When you lose quality depth in order to service the consumed cap space, you have to again create that value from somewhere. On D, the easiest and most realistic option is to perhaps spread the wealth going forward. OEL cap hit is substantial when trying to accommodate and repeat a successful formula. I have faith in mgmt, but I sure hope we can obtain a new QH partner that is efficient so that we can effectively double up on the overall quality of our D rather than hope players to continue to  play up or above their pay grade in order to facilitate continued success.

Regardless, an extended FH does provide flexibility with the pairings and I’d love to have him and QH drive the backend for the next few years together…just not sure it’s going to be feasibly achievable given cap restraints. Hope I’m wrong 

Edited April 2 by RWJC

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

Certainly, they just aren't the only facts, and whether they're the most important facts is anyone's guess. That's something the Canucks would be dumb not to argue, it's just not the only argument they'll make and there'll undoubtedly be counterarguments. 

 

Aside from a great half season where he has to frame it around Hughes, I'm not really sure his counter argument would be for an elite dman payday

[HKSR]

Just now, stawns said:

 

I think you'd find hronek would get between $6.5-7m.  I don't think anyone who looks at his stats sees anything better than that.

 

Perhaps a bottom feeder with lots of cap space, but not a playoff team, imo

We will never agree on this.  We've gone through this enough.  The only comparable you could find out of ALL the RHD in the entire league that produce at the rate that Hronek does that got under $7M is a 30 year old Weegar (FOUR years older than Hronek).  I have no idea how you could begin to argue that Hronek gets $6.xx AAV.  The amount of evidence that he WILL get over $7M is overwhelmingly in his favour.  Put it another way, if Hronek was a UFA this summer, you couldn't possibly believe in your mind that he would get $6.5M lmao.