Thomas Horvat feels like it would work as a 1-2 for about 3-4 years. Full future center depth of Thomas, Horvat, Schenn/Dvorsky, Sunny/Dean/etc. obv evolves over time. If you’re penciling in Dvorsky as a top 6 center I think Robert Thomas’ path was about as fast as it gets and that took a few years.
I agree with a lot of your analysis on the lack of centers medium and long term. But I don't agree on the bolded.
Dvorsky was a higher caliber prospect than Thomas was on their respective draft days. He was drafted 10 spots higher in a draft considered better/deeper and neither was drafted way out of line from their pre-draft ranking/projections. Dvorsky was bigger than Thomas on draft day, they have very different skillsets, and they have taken very different development paths.
Both put up great point totals in their D+1 season in the OHL. Thomas had 75 points in 49 games while Dvorsky had 88 points in 52 games. Dvorsky's games were limited because he started the year with a disastrous pro stint before coming to a new junior team. Thomas' games were limited due to injury.
For his D+2 season, Thomas played the full year in the NHL in a depth/support role for a team with Cup aspirations. His deployment was limited because the team couldn't afford to put him in a position to learn from mistakes that ended in the back of our net. Dvorsky is playing as the top line center in the AHL. The competition isn't as good, but he is a crucial player getting way more minutes/responsibilities than Thomas got. This path wasn't available to Thomas.
Thomas took a nice step forward in his D+3 season, but was still largely at wing because we returned our top 3 centers from a Cup team. There will no doubt be more opportunity next year for Dvorsky to start developing
as an NHL center in his D+3 season than Thomas got.
COVID hit during Thomas' D+3 season. The league shut down, gyms closed, team facilities closed, and everyone spent what would normally be their offseason wondering if the season was going to resume again. Then it did resume, we were briefly in the bubble, and then there was another weird offseason where most training facilities in Canada were closed. And then we played a strange 56 game season with limited/modified practice rules and a schedule against 7 total teams. On top of all those external factors impacting a young player's routine and ability to work on improvement in the off season, Thomas also suffered an injury 12 games into the season, missed 6 weeks and played 33 total games.
All in all, the end of his D+3 season through his D+4 season was an absolute nightmare of a year developmentally speaking and there is no reason to expect that Dvorsky will have so many external factors working against his development in his D+4 season.
Then Thomas rapidly and emphatically broke out in his D+5 season with 77 points in 72 games. He played 2nd line minutes and I think it is fair to describe him as our 2C given the heavy lifting we made ROR perform, but he led our centers in scoring and his 87 point pace was more than just "2C" caliber.
All together, I don't think that the Thomas development trajectory is about as fast as it gets for a prospect situated like Dvorsky. He was drafted later, had a less pro-ready body, his development trajectory was secondary to the NHL team winning games in the moment, he missed time with injury in 2 post-draft seasons, and his D+4 season was heavily disrupted by COVID.
Dylan Larkin was drafted 15th overall and had a 63 point season in his D+4 year. Barzal was drafted 16th overall and had an 85 point D+3 season. Suzuki was drafted 13th overall and had 41 points in 56 games in his D+4 season (60 point pace).
The D+5 season is when a lot of non-top-5 pick centers come into their own as a 2C+ caliber player and I'm really weary to judge prospects who 'haven't lived up to expectations' prior to that. I think that target year is a good benchmark to set and I'm not proclaiming that Dvorsky is a lock to beat that timeline. No one can say with confidence that Dvorsky is going to be a Larkin or Barzal caliber player and he likely does fall short of that. But his draft pedigree and his performance in the last year has been good enough that those types of outcomes are wholly out of reach for him.
I'm getting more and more comfortable penciling him in as a middle 6 center from day 1 in 2025/26. Don't know how well he will perform in that role and I don't know if/when he exceed that role. I would not bet that he will develop into the caliber player Thomas is. But I would be more willing to bet that he actualizes into a 2C (a role Thomas almost completely skipped over) faster than Thomas actualized into a 2C++.
The Isles are trying to compete now but I wonder what can be pried loose if the team stays in the bottom tenth of the standings.
Horvat’s contract is kinda ugly. Very ugly really. Perhaps you could get in and out of the deal without spending too much. The islanders will transition to pretty much being stuck with him if they aren’t willing to move him while he has some quality years remaining. IMO Horvat will flip from positive to negative trade value as soon as 24 months, (32 with 4 years left, 40-50 pt 3C at 8.5aav…) so if the isles decide that last place isn’t a good spot for an old team maybe some old guys get turned into young guys while value still exists.
I don’t see a center that is cheaper that could cover 3-4 years while the 19-20 year olds turn into 23-24 year olds. I’m abstaining from making specific trade proposals cause I legit do not want to trade anybody, but I think the two things at the start of this ramble show volatility is coming. I do think if Horvat were a trade target that you stomp on the gas. The entire premise of the deal for all parties is Father Time. Get it done and move on or reject it and never revisit cause it only gets worse.
The downside of this that you get the boat anchor that is the last 2 years of Horvat’s deal.
I have no interest in acquiring an aging 2C for the short term at the expense of the long term. I want a short-to-medium term middle 6 caliber center who won't be $4M+ of dead cap when we are extending what is hopefully a bright young core. I'd rather leave a development path for Dvorsky and be crappy at center in the short term than creating a future problem.
