Confirmed with Link: Canucks Re-Sign W Nils Hoglander to 3y/3m AAV Contract

[LemonSauceD]

Where are people seeing the Canucks not having the cap space for boeser next year? With the rumour being a 92.5 mill cap, using puckpedia, the canucks could sign boeser at 8.5 mill and still have money left. Unless puckpedia isn't taking something into account?

there would be about 3-4 roster spots that need to be filled which would put us over.

Boeser over $8M just isn’t feasible now unless several moves happen. And I’m one of Boeser’s biggest supporters on this board, even I think anything that starts with $8Mx8 is a bit nerve wracking.

We’ll see how this season plays out but anything less than a PPG/40 goals and that dollar figure should not start with $8.

 

[MS]

In that case the entire team is due for regression, and we should be sellers. OUr team wide shooting percentage was 11.9 on 28.4 shots per game last season compared to 11.1 on 29.7 shots per game the season before. We could well have missed the playoffs last season if we were short 21 goals in games decided by a goal or two.

So, do you think last season was a mirage for the entire team or just certain players?

I think our SH% will go down this season, although we'll still be top-10 in the NHL. I think certain players are extremely low-volume/high-percentage shooters and less likely to regress and certain players are high volume shooters and more likely to regress. Not all players are equal and regress to the same league average SH%.

 

[logan5]

Purely from a numbers perspective, Hoglander is 7th in goals from his draft class of 2019. Looking at the contracts of players close to him in that draft, they are getting contracts in the range of 3 million and higher.

 

[dKs89]

Getting healthy scratched in the playoffs in your 4th NHL season is about as big of a black mark as a player can possibly have.

He's about the 15th most important player on this team. He plays 12 minutes/game and with the extra depth this year that isn't likely to go up much. This is not a player you rush to hand $9 million to a year before you need to. Vegas or TB would not be handing out this contact, and that should be the measuring stick people use.

Getting scratched in a young players first playoffs is a completely normal thing but ok. This point you keep reinforcing literally means nothing unless you base it as some kind of objective metric as reasoning for why this player can't possibly improve upon that. In which case that is just a completely insane thing to hold over a 23 year old 2nd round pick who just had a great season.

15th most important player is a completely wild take not based in reality based upon the facts of his production in MORE than just goals, but also based upon the faith the club has in him with his extension. TB would also be rushing to trade 5 draft picks for Hog. Let's not act like these teams are free of silly mistakes.

 

[Peter Griffin]

and that isn't going to happen for a guy who looks to be starting the year on the 4th line and doesn't get much PP time.

He’ll be starting alongside Garland, no? Also, there’s so much flux with the forward core there’s a very good chance he’ll get significant time alongside Miller/Boeser and DeBrusk/Pettersson.

 

[Kryten]

Its safe to say Hoglander wont match his shooting % with limited minutes. Its obvious hes come to camp with something to prove. Its fair to think that he could excel and succeed with higher minutes and better linemates and a normal shooting percentage. In Hog we trust

 

[Peen]

there would be about 3-4 roster spots that need to be filled which would put us over.

Boeser over $8M just isn’t feasible now unless several moves happen. And I’m one of Boeser’s biggest supporters on this board, even I think anything that starts with $8Mx8 is a bit nerve wracking.

We’ll see how this season plays out but anything less than a PPG/40 goals and that dollar figure should not start with $8.

@CanadianPirate is absolutely right. i previously (incorrectly) calculated based on the previous cap ceiling and not 92.5

They wouldn't need to move anyone out to bring back essentially the same roster.

For ex: ^

 

[Vector]

It’s an interesting bet. If he regresses a bit in goal scoring but makes improves in other areas of the game he remains valuable as either a trade chip (now cost controlled) or for this team. He’s still a bit of a mystery box but there must be a lot of confidence in him given the timing of this extension.

I do think it’s a bit silly to immediate assume he won’t approve at all. I also think the same assuming all young player improve. Hoglander has a lot of areas of his game that needs to smoothed out, that’s for certain, but when he puts things together he’s an excellent player.

 

[MS]

Getting scratched in a young players first playoffs is a completely normal thing but ok. This point you keep reinforcing literally means nothing unless you base it as some kind of objective metric as reasoning for why this player can't possibly improve upon that. In which case that is just a completely insane thing to hold over a 23 year old 2nd round pick who just had a great season.

Getting scratched in the playoffs isn't a normal thing when you're in your 4th NHL season and about to sign a $9 million contract.

15th most important player is a completely wild take not based in reality based upon the facts of his production in MORE than just goals, but also based upon the faith the club has in him with his extension. TB would also be rushing to trade 5 draft picks for Hog. Let's not act like these teams are free of silly mistakes.

Hughes
Miller
Pettersson
Demko
Boeser
Hronek
Debrusk
Myers
Garland
Joshua
Blueger
Soucy
Heinen

... puts him at 14th pretty easily. I suspect Sherwood will also quickly be playing bigger minutes than Hoglander, and Desharnais a more relatively important player to the team as well.

It’s an interesting bet. If he regresses a bit in goal scoring but makes improves in other areas of the game he remains valuable as either a trade chip (now cost controlled) or for this team. He’s still a bit of a mystery box but there must be a lot of confidence in him given the timing of this extension.

I do think it’s a bit silly to immediate assume he won’t approve at all. I also think the same assuming all young player improve. Hoglander has a lot of areas of his game that needs to smoothed out, that’s for certain, but when he puts things together he’s an excellent player.

To be clear, I think he could improve while his production also goes down. There's a ton of room for improvement in what he does off the puck and I'm sure he will improve as a three-zone player.

I think long-term he's probably a 15-15-30 guy in an average season.

It will be INCREDIBLY difficult to improve on 24 goals when you don't get PP1 time, and he won't be getting PP1 time.

 

[Tables of Stats]

I think our SH% will go down this season, although we'll still be top-10 in the NHL. I think certain players are extremely low-volume/high-percentage shooters and less likely to regress and certain players are high volume shooters and more likely to regress. Not all players are equal and regress to the same league average SH%.

Fair enough.

Do you think it's possible for Hoglander, still a developing player, to have added enough to his game this offseason to bridge that gap by some combination of playing more minutes, shooting more, or providing value in other ways that don't involve scoring goals?

Edit: This is me playing devil's advocate. My own model's prediction is that he'll be a 15 - 10 - 25 player this season. My hope is that his new fitness level and his seeming coachability add enough value to his game to my a 3x3 contract fair value for what he'll bring.

 

[RandV]

This aforementioned group is roughly 50M in CAP. We are expecting the CAP to continue to climb over the next few years to roughly 85+M.

There isn't much concern to a 3M hit for a young player capable of scoring 20+ goals. I think people get fixated on segregating your star players earning heaps to ELC players and min level contracts. The reality is that as the CAP climbs over the next few years these depth players will become more and more valuable.

It's not so much a concern about an individual cap hit as it is you have to look at what you have already committed, who needs raises, who's on their way out, and what the cap is expected to be. And keep in mind that anyone leaving still has to be replaced with at least a minimum wage player.

With the current makeup of the Canucks we're mostly locked in with the same team. OEL buyout is +2.4M, Hoglander raise is +2M, Boeser raise I'm going to assume will be about +2M, so you're looking at about $6-7M in expected raises. On the way out it's basically just Suter and Forbot, at $1.6M and $1.5M, but with the need to fill their spot you're only saving about $1.2M.

Now this is just me speaking from the couch. As an arm chair GM I tend to play it safe and would assume you pay Boeser, replace Hoglander/Suter/Forbot with promotions, and the math more or less checks out to be cap compliant with the expected cap raise. But this is the kind of math the Benning regime repeatedly failed at, and obviously Allvin wouldn't sign this deal if they weren't confident they will be able to work things out next summer.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I guess the management feel that Hog has finally arrived as an NHL player..It seemed like he went through tough love with every coach on the team (including the current one)...He certainly seemed to always be in trade discussion.

Anyway, I'm happy for him, and glad the organization got a player out of the 2019 draft.

 

[sting101]

And 'healthy scratch in playoffs' trumps regular season production.

Hoglander has literally the easiest skillset in the NHL to replace at good value and is a depth player here projected to start on our 4th line. These are the guys you squeeze every dime out of and flip on as currency if you can't keep their contract cheap.


Getting healthy scratched in the playoffs in your 4th NHL season is about as big of a black mark as a player can possibly have.

He's about the 15th most important player on this team. He plays 12 minutes/game and with the extra depth this year that isn't likely to go up much. This is not a player you rush to hand $9 million to a year before you need to. Vegas or TB would not be handing out this contact, and that should be the measuring stick people use.

Really? I've literally argued the playoff performer/clutch thing with you and now your saying it's different and you can expect and conclude different things from playoffs.

4th season but 23 and first time playoffs with 2 players in the worst slumps of their pro careers? Not really a super fair assessment. Not just that he had scored a goal and was increasing his ice time/trust with each game after getting scratched. Where do you stand on Hronek and Pettersson now?

Anyway i get the concerns but i really think your overreacting to a young player who has earned a decent pay day. It's entirely probable he is better than both Sprong and Heinen in our top6 and produces more points than ever that would necessitate a bigger contract number.

Literally the hardest thing to do is score goals and especially 5v5. Either this management team see's him as a top6 mainstay or at minimum on a 3rd line or they wouldn't have signed this deal

 

[Vector]

To be clear, I think he could improve while his production also goes down. There's a ton of room for improvement in what he does off the puck and I'm sure he will improve as a three-zone player.

I think long-term he's probably a 15-15-30 guy in an average season.

It will be INCREDIBLY difficult to improve on 24 goals when you don't get PP1 time, and he won't be getting PP1 time.

Right and with the cap going up, the Canucks are making a bet that 3m will be a bargain contract for a young 30-40 point 3rd liner that has shown the ability to surpass 20 goals. I'm guessing they look at this contract as something that provides cost certainty and this will either increase or hold his value. Not sure why they are doing this now but I suspect they think he's more valuable with a contract for next season than without.

 

[Jyrki]

Tbh I hate it. Feisty wingers who can score at a decent clip are worth that much but I feel like Hogs has way too many moments where he's a net negative off the puck. After Kuzmenko got traded he's easily the forward who you notice the most chasing the play or not positioned according to what his teammates are doing.

Not that he can't improve as he's still plenty young, but there's a reason why he occasionally lands in Tocc's doghouse and was struggling to log 10 minutes/night in the Oilers series. Total opposite of someone like Garland, who doesn't score as much as you think he should but is a tremendous presence around the ice and creates tons of space for his linemates.

I don't think Allvin would've offered this contract without being aligned with Tocchet, so maybe the offseason did wonders for Hogs. But IMO it's a pretty big risk even though it's not a huge contract, without seeing that he can actually handle some big boy minutes while keeping up his scoring.

 

[strattonius]

He scored 24 goals because he shot double what he ever had before in his career.

He was a healthy scratch in the playoffs. This was a fringe player on last year's team when the games mattered.

The takes here sound like when Markus Granlund scored 19 goals in 69 games and people defended the signing because ON PACE FOR 23 GOALS even though he was an obviously shit hockey player. Hoglander is obviously better than Granlund but just blindly repeating '24 goals' doesn't make it a good signing.

This isnt 29 yr old Danton Heinen. It's a 23 year old with plenty of room to grow and expand his game.

These donkey takes are talking like he's maxed out as a player and won't continue to develop. All he's done up to this point is improve. His sophomore year I truly didn't think he would ever be an NHL'er but his work ethic keeps bumping him up.

Glad our management has the same vision.

 

[ephmrl]

I don't understand the narrative of Hoglander as a soft, skilled player. His primary attributes are his ability to battle in the corners and his incredible lower body strength that allows him to hold onto the puck in a way you don't usually see for players of his size.

He's one of the best forwards we have at working the cycle, and is one of the best pests on the team. He's skilled yes, but I think its disingenuous to his overall game to reduce him to being a player comparable to Sprong or Granlund. Hoglander generates significantly more positively for the team when he's not scoring with his puck possession and edge than Sprong or other similar small, skilled forwards do.

 

[sting101]

For the record it is a gamble that the player improves and solidifies a bigger role so i share some concerns that maybe he is what he is but it does say something if Tocchet gave his approval and the brass see a player who took his fitness to new levels and think he's gonna play bigger minutes with better players which will spike his production and are getting out front of that to save.

If he repeats 20 plus and actually gets some assists because he's not passing to Lafferty and Nils Amen im not sure how you squeeze much less given what his market value is at that stage.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

I would have been planning to flip Hoglander either at the deadline or before 25-26. I don't think his skillset is worth investing significant $ in.

We're a looooooooong way away from a 2025 arbitration hearing. If he comes out and scores 13 goals in the first 41 games of next season ... sure, sign this contract.

Right now we're signing him off a SH% bender when he's been poor for most of the last 3 years and reverted to being poor in the playoffs. I do not think that this is a good bet.

Like. we're paying him $200k less than Dakota Joshua got as a UFA, for Hoglander's RFA years. When you look at their respective performances over the last two years, that's insane.

I honestly think you need to keep an open mind with Hoglander

He is a 23 years old homegrown talent, he's feisty, lowkey a pest and just finished top 10 in even strength goals last season with very inconsistent usage and low PP time.

At the moment, the upside of this contract is bigger than the downside

 

[Regress2TheMeme]

Hoglander's tendency to make poor plays with the puck makes me nervous about this deal. He needs to clean that up and become a bit of a play driver to make this a good deal.

The case i see for this deal is that on top of goal scoring Hoglander also forechecks very well. He's also a culture carrier in the gym. Having players come up in the system and earn bigger roles and contracts are important for building and maintaining a team culture.

I think he's going to get ample time in the top 6 and 2nd PP unit this season. When he struggles there's going to be someone else to take his place, but probably not for long. With a bigger role and more minutes I'd bet he's going to crack 20 goals this year.

 

[1440]

JFresh charts aren't fit to use as toilet paper.

It isn't 'disliking him'. It's understanding where he fits in the roster and what he brings.

He isn't one of the 8 or 10 most important players on the team. He's a small soft-minute skill winger who is bad defensively and offers basically nothing in the way of PK, physical play (a bit of an agitator but nothing of real value) or C utility. Never hit 40 points in his career. This is literally the lowest-value, easiest-to-replace sort of asset in the NHL. We just signed Sprong who brings much the same skillset for $900k.

This is the mushy-middle of your roster where you have to be ruthless.

And again, this was a player who was a healthy scratch in the playoffs. The last time we saw him play, he was absolutely awful.

This contract basically just turned one of our best trade chips into verging-into-negative value asset. And saying there is no risk is nuts. It's like saying the Jason Dickinson contract was 'no risk'.



Dude was a healthy scratch in the playoffs.

People quoting 'he scored 24 goals so he'll get goals' sound like Jim Benning. He is *extremely* unlikely to duplicate that production or his SH% which was like double what he ever put up at any level before.

And it's also the timing. We had another year to sign him. The only way this deal saves us money over next year is if he scores 30 goals or something ... and that isn't going to happen for a guy who looks to be starting the year on the 4th line and doesn't get much PP time.

While it is fair to say he will probably see a shooting % regression, the resulting decrease in goals will likely be mostly offset by increased assist numbers and increased ice-time. Last season his assist rate dropped by about 0.45/60 from 2023-24, which resulted in ~7 fewer assists in his ~900 minutes.
No one is expecting him to score 24 again (unless he gets lots of PP time), but 15 goals and 20 assists would be reasonable and represent similar offensive output to last season (24+12).

That said, his value isn't in the goal-scoring. His underlying numbers are really good at even strength (not good on special teams), and he is very effective on the forecheck, on the boards, and in forcing turnovers with his speed. He may be short, but is stocky and hard to play against. He is a strong defensive player not necessarily because of his defensive zone play, but because the puck isn't in the defensive zone much when he is on the ice.

Given how he has looked so far on the PP, I don't believe that is the situation where he is most effective, which may limit his overall upside.

I would suspect the timing signifies that they are going to start the season with him in the top 6 and PP2, and are therefore expecting a bump in scoring in-line with the increased opportunity. This contract is already below market value (~$3.5M) for what he brings, and could be a steal if he continues his goal scoring from last year while increasing his assist totals.

He is the Canucks' best trade chip, but I don't see how a low-cost (3.4% of cap), low-term contract on a 23 year-old player would be a detriment.

In terms of comparables, he is a slightly better player than Eeli Tolvanen, who got 2 years at $3.475M. He is also slightly better than Alex Kerfoot was when he got 4 years at $3.5M in 2019 (age 25, 4.3% of the cap).