Confirmed with Link: Canucks Re-Sign Filip Hronek to 8y/7.25m Contract

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,639
3,520
Vancouver
I'm sorry but they've jumped the shark lol. This is ridiculous. I'd be embarrassed to have even tweeted that out.

Just imagine if all of our 3rd pairing defenders produced 40+ points next season. We probably wouldn't even need a goalie to win the Cup.

Edit: in fairness to Micah, all models have their limitations. He provides a lot of information and analysis for free. I can simultaneously appreciate that and not get freaked out when his model appears to denigrate a player on my fave team.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sexy Necksy Garland

Cancuks

Former Exalted Ruler
Jan 13, 2014
4,048
3,460
At the EI office
I guess this means Mikheyev is getting bought out. $17 million in cap space isn't enough to get a top line winger for Pettersson and have a decent defense.
Guentzel 9.0
Dillon 3.0
Myers 3.0
Blueger 2.0
That's $17 million right there.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
29,520
17,611
i don’t love hronek and tbh he was our best trade chip and would have allowed us to keep guys i wanted to keep more but this AAV is practically not an iverpay at all, and given the term and his age won’t be for much of the life of the deal.

so i can’t hate this

curious what kind of trade protection he got though. hronek on a fair deal is a pretty good asset.
 

Lat

Registered User
Oct 12, 2005
624
772
I was thinking Hanafin's 7.35Mx8 as an AAV ceiling comparable, so this is in line with my expectations. Would have been nice for it to be in the high 6M range, but it really is difficult to find top pairing RHD.
 

RobertKron

Registered User
Sep 1, 2007
15,854
9,369
i don’t love hronek and tbh he was our best trade chip and would have allowed us to keep guys i wanted to keep more but this AAV is practically not an iverpay at all, and given the term and his age won’t be for much of the life of the deal.

so i can’t hate this

curious what kind of trade protection he got though. hronek on a fair deal is a pretty good asset.
Apparently it's NMC through 2028 and then 15 team NTC the rest of the way. Nothing next year as he isn't eligible yet.
 

Luck 6

\\_______
Oct 17, 2008
10,300
1,999
Vancouver
I don’t see why some people say it’s risky… Defensemen usually get better as they get close to 30, they don’t get worse. In my opinion this is a pretty safe contract. So what if he had some inconsistent play at times? Overall he played like a top pairing RHD, those don’t grow on trees. 7.25mil for a top pair RHD, through his entire prime, for 8 years. Sounds okay to me.
 

Grumbler

Registered User
Oct 25, 2012
3,109
877
What? What has he done in the playoffs to deserve this. A bit much after his performance in the playoffs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David71

iceburg

Don't ask why
Aug 31, 2003
7,757
4,151
This will average out to be around 7.5% of the cap over the course of 8 years. If he plays as a #2 for at least 5 of the 8 years it will be worth it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am toxic

SeawaterOnIce

Bald is back in style.
Sponsor
Aug 28, 2011
17,554
22,005
Mixed emotions with this signing. He was an utter train wreck at times the 2nd half of the season and I am convinced he's going to top our as a 2nd pairing D at best with injury issues.

Though you are forced to pay up for this guy due to the scarcity of RHD in the market. There was literally no other option and I suspect this forced managements hand in just paying up for this guy.

Despite there being no RHD out there, I suspect there were no real trades to be made to bring an equally decent player back. The alternative was potentially seeing him walk away in a years time which is shit asset management.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bleach Clean

thecupismine

Registered User
Apr 1, 2007
2,459
1,478
Really happy this got done. Hronek was key in unlocking the best parts of Hughes, and having them together for the foreseeable future gives the Canucks stability at the top of their defensive core.

If he plays like he did in the first half of the season, and the cap continues to rise, this is going to look great in a year from now. Obviously, there's the risk that he's the second half of the season player and the deal looks horrible, but my intuition is he's more the former even if the scoring doesn't stay that high.

Now that this is done, management can properly work through the rest of their FAs and priorities. Excited to see how things shape up!
 

Bonham

Registered User
Nov 24, 2008
1,875
1,829
Victoria, BC
Okay with this deal -- though definitely no discount.

13 games doesn't undo two seasons of 0.6 PPG while averaging 23 minutes a night.

His position is at a premium and he signed for essentially the remainder of his prime (7 UFA seasons with an increasing cap). Losing him would leave a gaping hole on the right-side in the short term. Just wasn't an option.

Solid work by Management. Hopefully this is the start of an eventful offseason for the team.
 

mriswith

Registered User
Oct 12, 2011
4,411
8,023
Negatives:

Overpayment. His stats are a mirage from riding a PDO bender and Norris Hughes. He's a #3 at best and I hesitate even with that because we haven't seen any indication that he can carry a second pairing but he got paid like a borderline #1 and he's nowhere near that. He is not a stylistic fit next to Hughes, we still need to be looking for a better partner for Hughes despite this signing; however, he might not even be able to carry his own pairing without Hughes and we still paid him.

Everyone acknowledges he was bad the second half of the season but the dropoff started long before the second half of the season. I will not criticize his playoffs or the end of the season because he looked obviously injured but the concerns started long before that..

And what was the injury? Did he get taken out by December from the exact same injury two years in a row and are we going to see a yearly trend where he's great for the first two months of the season and then falls off a cliff? That's not a useful player.

I also dislike the chemistry argument that gets brought up. Hughes has worked fantastically well with every single legitimate top 4 dman he's been tried with. It just so happens that he's only played with two players who meet that description in his entire career. He's also made crap look like gold. And Hronek sucked by this contracts standards for more than half the season. There is no indication that Hughes wouldn't mesh well with any legitimate top 4 dman he gets and no need at all to pay for "chemistry".

Positives:

1. We needed someone as good or better than him to play with Hughes. It was completely unacceptable to go into next season without Hronek or someone equal/better. I'm going to cope by assuming that the other ufa rd deals this summer look a lot worse or we didn't have a chance on whichever deals look better.

2. Maybe the injury this year wasn't the shoulder and so there's no chronic shoulder issue to worry about here, and when healthy he'll look like PDO bender, Norris coattail riding Hronek consistently. I'm not going to hold my breath.

3. I think the deal should have been 50M and would have been fine with 6.25 - 6.5. At the end of the day overpaying by 1 mil/yr for a rare top 4 RD isn't the end of the world.

Other:

With two small dmen locked into the top 4 long term we pretty much need every other dman to be a behemoth to compensate.
 
Last edited:

tradervik

Hear no evil, see no evil, complain about it
Sponsor
Jun 25, 2007
2,497
2,708
Interesting that the Canucks were rumoured to have offered $6.5 million while it was also rumoured Walsh was asking for $8 million and the final number was exactly in the middle at $7.25
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad