I think I devalue Byram due to his concussions more than others.
This is probably a more interesting proposal. I could be wrong but I don’t think Buffalo is interested in Hoglander and futures.just for shits: what would you guys think about something around byram for demko
injury risk for injury risk
On the flipside though, Byram is 23 years old and won't be 24 until the summer. He's a player you can expect to continue to improve, and may actually improve significantly.Dahlin is having a Hughes-like effect on Buffalo though. Byram’s running a score adjusted 57% with Dahlin, but only 47% without him, while Dahlin is at 61% without Byram.
That said, Hoglander, a first and a second is not much to give up and value-wise is good enough that you probably pull the trigger. The biggest issue is the opportunity cost of using those assets for Byram instead of a player who is a more sure-fire bet to help this year’s team.
What are the chances that Willander develops in the same manner that Byram has developed thus far ? To put it another way, what are the chances that Willander, at 23, is as valuable as Byram currently is at 23? And what are the chances that Willander is more valuable than Byram when each are age 28 for example?He’s been fully healthy for a couple years now.
If we gave up Willander for him, sure. But Hoglander and picks? There’s not much risk there, to me.
What are the chances that Willander develops in the same manner that Byram has developed thus far ? To put it another way, what are the chances that Willander, at 23, is as valuable as Byram currently is at 23? And what are the chances that Willander is more valuable than Byram when each are age 28 for example?
I know people love Willander on here, and I haven't watched him in the NCAA so can't comment, but it needs to be recognized there is still a decent chance he busts or doesn't come anywhere close to providing the value everyone is anticipating.
that may be true, but picks will always have a certain appeal just due to their liquidity/reserve currency status. Alvin clearly wanted a RHD in the Horvat deal, but he took the best deal he could at the time and then waited for the best deal he could find on a young RHD.This is probably a more interesting proposal. I could be wrong but I don’t think Buffalo is interested in Hoglander and futures.
yeah i agree with dhali there. extending hoglander was a terrible mistake if coach and player weren't on the same page.
there's no such thing as a tanev type. there is no other defensemen in this mold.It’s really tough, because I see Willander closer to a Tanev type who is way u Der valued, but you need to win… so valued via trade, or contract probably not much, but valued to win…. More.
What are the chances that Willander develops in the same manner that Byram has developed thus far ? To put it another way, what are the chances that Willander, at 23, is as valuable as Byram currently is at 23? And what are the chances that Willander is more valuable than Byram when each are age 28 for example?
I know people love Willander on here, and I haven't watched him in the NCAA so can't comment, but it needs to be recognized there is still a decent chance he busts or doesn't come anywhere close to providing the value everyone is anticipating.
It depends on how we rate the impact of Rasmus Dahlin and (to a lesser extent) Owen Power and how much we buy into the with/without you data. I don’t know what to think.His 'pre-concussion' results were also in a 30-game sample size of the softest/fewest minutes he's received in his career.
I don't see the red flags. He's pulling positive goal differentials this year and a positive Corsi from 23 minutes/game of mid-leverage on that Buffalo tire fire with a PDO of 100.
Dylan Coghlan on waivers. Big right shot D from Duncan. I wanted him a few years ago but I don’t think he’s better than Juulsen
Doesn't really answer my question though, although I acknowledge both.The two issues would be losing the ELC years on Willander and the concussion risk on Byram.
Doing my best Vector impression
- Canucks aggressive, looking for a winger/defence, Dhali thinking the winger is interesting and could be a replacement for Boeser if things were to go south there. Sounds like either extension or trade at deadline with Boeser.
- Agent told Dhali: Good luck getting at top 4 D, teams aren't selling just yet. Teams want top prospects and high picks, so price is high.
- Provorov/Byram: Do Canucks acquire a UFA like Provorov, just like Lindholm/Zadorov, not likely, looking for guys with term or RFA like Byram.
- Boeser talk: Working at it, trying their hardest but tough contract. Are the Canucks willing to give 8/8 to him? End of contract is worrysome with foot speed when Boeser ages.
- Hoglander only 7 minutes against Colorado, Tocchet does not like him it seems. Don says a bizarre extension and Dhali says to move on from him. Dhali wonders why Alvin give him a 3 year deal, did he even talk to Tocc?
If he has top 4 impact, from a bottom pair deployment, he's going to be worth a ton to our game and likely won't generate the numbers he would need to get a big contract coming off his ELC.Doesn't really answer my question though, although I acknowledge both.
But the ELC years may or may not provide much value, and as you know and have stated in the past, ELCs rarely provide much value to contenders.
And in Willander's case, he's likely to burn one year this year and he may only be a depth defensemen. Next year he may be a bottom pairing defensemen? And perhaps a second pairing defensemenin the third year? So if all things going reasonably well and he's a second pairing defensemen in 2026-27, then we are really only getting cap savings of a few million dollars or whatever in 2026-27.
Tocchet elevated Hoglander to a top-6 role last season & the beginning of this one and praised him extensively during the pre-season. Canucks thought he was turning the corner.