Curmudgeon Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 I've said this before, and I'll say it again: Vancouver cannot get to July 1st without some kind of resolution concerning Hronek's status. There are possible outcomes: 1. Hronek signs a multi-year deal for less than he wants and more than the Canucks want to pay. Probability? Extremely low. 2. Hronek signs his qualifying offer, plays one more lame-duck year, then walks as a UFA. Probability? Probably low. 3. Hronek files for arbitration and is awarded more than the Canucks can afford, forcing them to keep Hronek for one year, after which he walks as a UFA. Probability: More likely to happen, unless: 4. Vancouver, knowing they can't sign Hronek, trade his rights for one or two draft picks before July 1st. Probability: Gets higher every passing day. I believe we should all prepare for the departure of Hronek. And whatever happens, I am hopeful if he does sign, that it won't be for any more than five years. Those long contracts (7-8 years) tend not to work out over time. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 49 minutes ago, Provost said: Crouse hasn’t cracked more than 45 points for a season in his career. He plays 2nd/3rd line minutes. He isn’t a prospect anymore and will be 27 as the season starts. Hronek outproduced him this year and Hronek is a defenceman, not a forward. Garland outproduced him. Hoglander got more goals than him, but didn’t have PP time like Crouse did. How anyone could possibly think that is a straight one for one swap is beyond me. If it wasn’t for contract status it wouldn’t even be a conceivable trade. The ONLY reason we would consider it is for cap purposes and sending out Mikheyev is the value in thar deal. Mikheyev isn’t even an anchor… he is maybe overpaid by a million at most even if he doesn’t bounce back next season after a full summer to rehab. This and I love Crouse 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ngoway Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 1 minute ago, Junkyard Dog said: They wouldn't trade Durzi. He had a good year and led their D in ice-time and scoring. Everyone has a price . I agree it's a long shot, but if it's possible, that would be oh so sweet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 Just now, ngoway said: Everyone has a price . I agree it's a long shot, but if it's possible, that would be oh so sweet. He is almost a similar level player as Hronek, they are very close in terms of level of play. Utah would probably want both and build around Moser, Hronek, Durzi and eventually Simashev(their high end D prospect). That's a balance of 2 LD and 2 RD in your top 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 49 minutes ago, Provost said: Crouse hasn’t cracked more than 45 points for a season in his career. He plays 2nd/3rd line minutes. He isn’t a prospect anymore and will be 27 as the season starts. Hronek outproduced him this year and Hronek is a defenceman, not a forward. Garland outproduced him. Hoglander got more goals than him, but didn’t have PP time like Crouse did. How anyone could possibly think that is a straight one for one swap is beyond me. If it wasn’t for contract status it wouldn’t even be a conceivable trade. The ONLY reason we would consider it is for cap purposes and sending out Mikheyev is the value in thar deal. Mikheyev isn’t even an anchor… he is maybe overpaid by a million at most even if he doesn’t bounce back next season after a full summer to rehab. I like Crouse and that deal that sheds Mikheyev. Canucks would have to be aggressive on D though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 7 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said: I like Crouse and that deal that sheds Mikheyev. Canucks would have to be aggressive on D though. Nah still a dumb deal when Crouse could be had for considerably less 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 1 minute ago, canuck73_3 said: Nah still a dumb deal when Crouse could be had for considerably less Shedding Mik would be costly and attaching him with Hronek lowers the value of what we're sending. What do you think Crouse is worth? What else would you attach to this deal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 32 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said: This and I love Crouse I like the player, not meaning to trash him at all, and think the trade would be good for both teams... he just fits a specific need for us and Utah needs more of everything, especially defencemen and cap space isn't their issue. If you could create the cap space to add Crouse and Guentzel to our top six... that is worth a downgrade to whoever we get to partner with Hughes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 27 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said: I like Crouse and that deal that sheds Mikheyev. Canucks would have to be aggressive on D though. We have Hoglander and Silovs potentially as trade bait for a cost controlled D on the trade market, then you go after a couple targets in free agency. No perfect answer, but there are names out there and some "outs" for the Canucks to fix their cap situation and not downgrade the roster significantly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 (edited) I agree with those saying this is going to have to be resolved sooner than later, ideally by the draft. The best scenario is obviously Hronek signs for something reasonable (say 6.5-7.25 long term), and this is put to rest. In a trade I do wonder what kind of pick you could get in this year's draft. Carter Yakemchuk is a Dman I really like alot; he's big, physical, right hand-shot, competes hard, moves well, and great offensive skill - basically a full package. I have him as a top 10 guy but alot of rankings will have him in the teens. If you could get a 1st to take him and maybe a secondary asset like a 2nd/3rd/prospect/lesser roster player, then you have chips to play & the money to bring in Tanev or someone like that. Might not be a bad way to go. Edited June 12 by Smashian Kassian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 1 minute ago, Provost said: We have Hoglander and Silovs potentially as trade bait for a cost controlled D on the trade market, then you go after a couple targets in free agency. No perfect answer, but there are names out there and some "outs" for the Canucks to fix their cap situation and not downgrade the roster significantly. After these hypothetical Utah trade and Guentzel signing how much cap do we have to work with? You'd have to find 4 regular D(three top 4 and one top 6), a backup G and 3rd/4th C at the very least. We got a lot of prospects in the AHL on the cusp who can battle for wing spots in the bottom 6 but it would be ideal to add a veteran or two there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-23 Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 17 minutes ago, Provost said: We have Hoglander and Silovs potentially as trade bait for a cost controlled D on the trade market, then you go after a couple targets in free agency. No perfect answer, but there are names out there and some "outs" for the Canucks to fix their cap situation and not downgrade the roster significantly. Hoglander will not be traded, 1.1 million, 24 goals. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronning4center Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 (edited) 46 minutes ago, J-23 said: Hoglander will not be traded, 1.1 million, 24 goals. Haha yeah considering 14 goals gets you 9 million. I am absolutely flabbergasted that Lindholm would refuse a 50 million dollar deal with his 3rd line production. I don't care how good a pk guy he is. What the actually f@ck is happening Edited June 12 by ronning4center Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 So Laine wants out. Hronek, Hogs, Mik plus a 5th and 6th Laine,Boqvist ,Sillinger and a 4th. Just saying if Laine can get back to a 30 plus goal pace might be worth it. Blue Jackets want to be a playoff team and this trade will help both teams. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrammaInTheTub Posted June 12 Share Posted June 12 3 hours ago, Provost said: Crouse hasn’t cracked more than 45 points for a season in his career. He plays 2nd/3rd line minutes. He isn’t a prospect anymore and will be 27 as the season starts. Hronek outproduced him this year and Hronek is a defenceman, not a forward. Garland outproduced him. Hoglander got more goals than him, but didn’t have PP time like Crouse did. How anyone could possibly think that is a straight one for one swap is beyond me. If it wasn’t for contract status it wouldn’t even be a conceivable trade. The ONLY reason we would consider it is for cap purposes and sending out Mikheyev is the value in thar deal. Mikheyev isn’t even an anchor… he is maybe overpaid by a million at most even if he doesn’t bounce back next season after a full summer to rehab. I should have been more clear and I apologize. I was not proposing Hronek one for one. Obviously Hronek has more value than Crouse. We’d be getting fleeced in a one for one. I simply don’t think Utah is willing to take on Mik even if Hronek is the prize. Cap is a new premium and Utah is planning on being a competitive team - (not the leagues newest dumping grounds like PHX/ARZ). In any event, the deal you proposed absolutely stinks for us. If we’re trying to lump Mik into a Hronek deal I sure as shit hope we get way more than just Crouse - who as you point out isn’t all that special. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RU SERIOUS Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 On 6/9/2024 at 11:57 AM, MeanSeanBean said: @RU SERIOUSsounds like this was a swing and a miss We'll just have to wait and see. As I mentioned, I won't be surprised a bit to see him let go. In fact I'm almost expecting it if he sticks to his ridiculous current contract asking price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonkers Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 7 hours ago, cripplereh said: So Laine wants out. Hronek, Hogs, Mik plus a 5th and 6th Laine,Boqvist ,Sillinger and a 4th. Just saying if Laine can get back to a 30 plus goal pace might be worth it. Blue Jackets want to be a playoff team and this trade will help both teams. Laine hasn't played a full season since 2018/19 and the trend has been going down since. I would bet Lekkerimäki have more games and goals in the NHL the coming 4 seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWJC Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 8 hours ago, ronning4center said: Haha yeah considering 14 goals gets you 9 million. I am absolutely flabbergasted that Lindholm would refuse a 50 million dollar deal with his 3rd line production. I don't care how good a pk guy he is. What the actually f@ck is happening Perhaps he just wants to play elsewhere and knows he can get the $ he wants there too. He doesn’t owe our club anything. Who knows, maybe even the rumours that we were going to send him to BOS to recoup for Geuntzel were enough for him to have his mind somewhat set should we not have gone further in the playoffs. That’s a stretch but maybe he just prefers Eastern conference as well. Who knows. But in terms of $, put it this way, if you had a chance to potentially earn an extra 6-8mill over the course of likely your last NHL contract you’d take that route too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 16 hours ago, Curmudgeon said: I've said this before, and I'll say it again: Vancouver cannot get to July 1st without some kind of resolution concerning Hronek's status. There are possible outcomes: 1. Hronek signs a multi-year deal for less than he wants and more than the Canucks want to pay. Probability? Extremely low. 2. Hronek signs his qualifying offer, plays one more lame-duck year, then walks as a UFA. Probability? Probably low. 3. Hronek files for arbitration and is awarded more than the Canucks can afford, forcing them to keep Hronek for one year, after which he walks as a UFA. Probability: More likely to happen, unless: 4. Vancouver, knowing they can't sign Hronek, trade his rights for one or two draft picks before July 1st. Probability: Gets higher every passing day. I believe we should all prepare for the departure of Hronek. And whatever happens, I am hopeful if he does sign, that it won't be for any more than five years. Those long contracts (7-8 years) tend not to work out over time. Why would they trade him for a couple of draft picks? Hes not a ufa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 1 hour ago, stawns said: Why would they trade him for a couple of draft picks? Hes not a ufa Cap space and draft capital is never bad to have. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 4 minutes ago, Bob Long said: Cap space and draft capital is never bad to have. A pick added on, sure, bug they'd need a player back, imo. I'd assume any deal with hronek involved would have an extension already worked in 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post DeNiro Posted June 13 Popular Post Share Posted June 13 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Bob Long said: Cap space and draft capital is never bad to have. I would almost guarantee that if Hronek was traded they would have another trade lined up to flip those returns. Similar to the Horvat trade. Edited June 13 by DeNiro 1 1 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester13 Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 18 hours ago, J-23 said: Hoglander will not be traded, 1.1 million, 24 goals. He might get traded while his value is sky high, as it'll be very difficult for us to afford his coming raise when his contract is up after next season. 17 hours ago, cripplereh said: So Laine wants out. Hronek, Hogs, Mik plus a 5th and 6th Laine,Boqvist ,Sillinger and a 4th. Just saying if Laine can get back to a 30 plus goal pace might be worth it. Blue Jackets want to be a playoff team and this trade will help both teams. Doesn't Laine have substance abuse issues? At least that's the rumour that would explain a lot. Hard pass on him as a reclamation project. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olli Juolevi Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 7 minutes ago, Jester13 said: He might get traded while his value is sky high, as it'll be very difficult for us to afford his coming raise when his contract is up after next season. Doesn't Laine have substance abuse issues? At least that's the rumour that would explain a lot. Hard pass on him as a reclamation project. Depression Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern_Nuck Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 3 hours ago, stawns said: Why would they trade him for a couple of draft picks? Hes not a ufa If he files for arbitration and it goes to an arbitrator, you’re no longer able to trade him for the following year. Losing him for everything 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.