Grub's Canucks & NHL News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | Trade Winds Coming Early

[Vector]

yeah.

... teams like that????????

I said as much the day they re-signed him. Not entirely sure why but this crop of GMs LOVE cost control.

 

[Blue and Green]

Including playoffs, Hoglander has scored 51 ES goals in 255 NHL games, an average of exactly 1 per 5. That's not bad at all. He has his defensive lapses, we all know that, but he's reasonably effective at keeping the play slanted in the right direction and he has some goal scoring touch.

 

[beachcomber]

I just can't figure out this Willander love.
He is tied with 13 dmen for 42nd in college dmen scoring with many teams having games in hand, 2nd on his own team. This is a good year for him compared to last year?
Tied with 17 players for 54th in blocked shots.
There is nothing in his game stats showing superiority in anything. If anything it shows a few years in the AHL.

Anyway Jiricek was stolen by Brackett and Minny.

Who is next that the Canucks can afford and fit in under the cap?

Definitely looks like Hronek is the next Euro purged from the team so that might open up a bit more cap space.

Will the curious Miller issue be resolved tomorrow as the team has stated?

Will Swifty news overshadow other news?

I don't think you watch much hockey. Willy is going to fill a top four position for years on this team. He is twice the skater that Jiricek is and will jump out of the gate once he arrives here. Hronek is the next euro purged? Once again, what in the hell are you talking about? You don't make a team better by subtracting your top players.

 

[VanillaCoke]

I've never said he would clear waivers.

The comparison to Garland is instructive. He is (and was) a vastly superior player to Hoglander. But given that he is small, and was perceived as a one-way soft-skilled player (thought not true), he held very little trade value.

I didn't say you did but there's many many posts on how trash Hogs value is including some about waivers, which was always ridiculous.

I'm not going back years to brock and Garland rn..

The Garland comparison is not instructive, it's irrelevant for many reasons clearly, they're vastly different situations aside from both being small & skilled.

I think absent the extension, this argument would be more valid. I think the $3M AAV extension weighs down his value. You can find guys to play bottom-six, sheltered offensive minutes off the scrap heap every offseason.

He wouldn't be getting $3M after this season.

I think this is part of the problem, you and others seem to think this extension is a (big) negative.

It is not, in todays nhl climate three million isn't much, and less every year. Organizations value cost certainty to young players with proven nhl skills to atleast some degree.

There's tons of older junk in the league making ~3M, kampf, jarnkrok, connor brown, etc etc.

Maybe hog doesn't get three mil after this year, maybe he does, we don't know. Maybe he gets 3x2.5M, close enough.
Only takes one gm to give him domi or trenin contract (not directly comparing players).

Point being Hoglander is and always has been valuable, a relatively small struggle this year doesn't change anything, he will return a valuable asset, atleast late first equivalent imo, we'll see who's right in a few weeks.

 

[theguardianII]

About Tom Willander.

So I guess that makes Pettersson a trade asset then. Or one of the other RHD prospects.

Pick out the one's that are tradable.

 

[bossram]

I just don't think some of these GMs are thinking through this logically.

Haha well, this is very true.

 

[SeawaterOnIce]

I said as much the day they re-signed him. Not entirely sure why but this crop of GMs LOVE cost control.

You have three choices:
1) Draft your complementary pieces and wait a few years for them to potentially break into the lineup.
2) Target a guy who has upside while paying futures. Sometimes they work (Hagel) and sometimes they bust (Jeannot).
3) Overpay for older guys in UFA (Palat, Killorn).

You can see why option 2 is the most sensible option for teams that are looking for immediate improvements. 3 mil x 3 years is not the worst risk for another team to take.

The contract just looks bad for us because of the amount of dead cap next year.

 

[Wisp]

I said this, in defiance of a certain respected hater of the player and his extension.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

One thing with Hoglander is he has a super cheap buyout due to his age. There's very little downside risk with him.

 

[theguardianII]

Hoglander plays like he is afraid to make a mistake.
Any error of his results in benching and being slayed by the coach and team supporting media helping grease the skids for his way out.
IMO once out of this doghouse on another team he will excel as a tenacious forecheker and score a few goals as well.

 

[Wisp]

I said as much the day they re-signed him. Not entirely sure why but this crop of GMs LOVE cost control.

there's probably a lot of budget stuff behind the scenes that compounds GM concerns beyond simple cap management. GMs are terrified of their young players having a career contract year.

 

[wonton15]

Doesn’t surprise me at all that this crop of GMs see positive value in Hoglander having extension and cost certainty, and that Allvin recognized this as well. Young tenacious forward with solid even strength scoring potential locked up at a reasonable cap hit with a rising cap. This is all you need to know about GMs and how they think. It’s not always 100% logical.

 

[bossram]

I didn't say you did but there's many many posts on how trash Hogs value is including some about waivers, which was always ridiculous.

I'm not going back years to brock and Garland rn..

The Garland comparison is not instructive, it's irrelevant for many reasons clearly, they're vastly different situations aside from both being small & skilled.

I mean, if you're not going back to discuss Brock/Garland, why did you bring up Boeser? You're using them as examples of people being "wrong" on stuff, and you are replying directly to me, thus implying I was wrong on them. I am simply rebutting you, that my opinions on those players were proven correct.

The Garland comparison is instructive. Smallish, (perceived) middle-six offense-only wingers don't hold much value. Look what just happened to Sprong. Look at what just happened with Tomasino. We see this time and again.

I think this is part of the problem, you and others seem to think this extension is a (big) negative.

It is not, in todays nhl climate three million isn't much, and less every year. Organizations value cost certainty to young players with proven nhl skills to atleast some degree.

There's tons of older junk in the league making ~3M, kampf, jarnkrok, connor brown, etc etc.

Maybe hog doesn't get three mil after this year, maybe he does, we don't know. Maybe he gets 3x2.5M, close enough.
Only takes one gm to give him domi or trenin contract (not directly comparing players).

Point being Hoglander is and always has been valuable, a relatively small struggle this year doesn't change anything, he will return a valuable asset, atleast late first equivalent imo, we'll see who's right in a few weeks.

I do think the extension is a net negative to his value. For what Hoglander is (perceived) to bring, GMs can find that on the scrap heap every offseason for $1M. $3M is overkill.

Yeah, there are a lot of bad contracts in the NHL. They are bad. Everyone knows they are bad. What do disimilar players on bad contracts have to do with Hoglander? The guys you mentioned have no trade value and everyone knows it.

There's no world where Hoglander is returning a 1st. I see his value as closer to the Tomasino deal (but not as low).

The most persuasive argument about Hoglander returning something decent is from @Vector: some GMs just aren't rational or smart.

 

[Vector]

The most persuasive argument about Hoglander returning something decent is from @Vector: some GMs just aren't rational or smart.

To further my point; the three GMs we are talking about is 1) the original GM of the Thrashers that left the Hurricanes because he wasn't allowed to make actual decision 2) A wunderkind who's done perplexing after perplexing move for the Penguins and viewed Michael Bunting as positive value and 3) the living embodiment of hockey nepotism (although his limited track record this off-season has yielded great results so far).

 

[Peter Griffin]

Lol at Dhaliwhal suggesting Sillinger for Hoglander.

 

[arttk]

I mean, if you're not going back to discuss Brock/Garland, why did you bring up Boeser? You're using them as examples of people being "wrong" on stuff, and you are replying directly to me, thus implying I was wrong on them. I am simply rebutting you, that my opinions on those players were proven correct.

The Garland comparison is instructive. Smallish, (perceived) middle-six offense-only wingers don't hold much value. Look what just happened to Sprong. Look at what just happened with Tomasino. We see this time and again.

I do think the extension is a net negative to his value. For what Hoglander is (perceived) to bring, GMs can find that on the scrap heap every offseason for $1M. $3M is overkill.

Yeah, there are a lot of bad contracts in the NHL. They are bad. Everyone knows they are bad. What do disimilar players on bad contracts have to do with Hoglander? The guys you mentioned have no trade value and everyone knows it.

There's no world where Hoglander is returning a 1st. I see his value as closer to the Tomasino deal (but not as low).

The most persuasive argument about Hoglander returning something decent is from @Vector: some GMs just aren't rational or smart.

3M in a flat cap world is bad.
3M in a rising cap world where the cap will be 97M next season and 100+ the year after is nothing.

 

[Vector]

Lol at Dhaliwhal suggesting Sillinger for Hoglander.

No joke. I paused and checked the roster to make sure he wasn't getting him confused with Owen Sillinger, who's also in the organization.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

I didn't say you did but there's many many posts on how trash Hogs value is including some about waivers, which was always ridiculous.

I'm not going back years to brock and Garland rn..

The Garland comparison is not instructive, it's irrelevant for many reasons clearly, they're vastly different situations aside from both being small & skilled.


I think this is part of the problem, you and others seem to think this extension is a (big) negative.

It is not, in todays nhl climate three million isn't much, and less every year. Organizations value cost certainty to young players with proven nhl skills to atleast some degree.

There's tons of older junk in the league making ~3M, kampf, jarnkrok, connor brown, etc etc.

Maybe hog doesn't get three mil after this year, maybe he does, we don't know. Maybe he gets 3x2.5M, close enough.
Only takes one gm to give him domi or trenin contract (not directly comparing players).

Point being Hoglander is and always has been valuable, a relatively small struggle this year doesn't change anything, he will return a valuable asset, atleast late first equivalent imo, we'll see who's right in a few weeks.

He also struggled mightily in the playoff last season (although it is his first taste of playoff) and was fading down the stretch last season (but maybe you can excuse it for being dragged down by Petey). However you explain it, he has been struggling for awhile now and it isn't a small sample size anymore.

I don't think he has no value, NHL GMs are always looking for goals and a young player that can score 20+ with no PP time will always be worth a gamble. However, I don't think he carries a lot of value, he might return a depth player, mid range pick, be part of a bigger deal, or a combo of the above, but I really don't think he is worth "at least a late first equivalent", but I'll be happy to be wrong.

 

[Wisp]

Cole Sillenger for Hoglander would be incredible lol.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Cole Sillenger for Hoglander would be incredible lol.

I love Hog but I will fly him to Columbus myself eventhough I have no license and no ideas how to fly a plane

Love Waddell is basically getting rid off all the players and prospects from previous regime

 

[Bobby9]

Hog will be our next Chatfield

 

[MS]

So I guess that makes Pettersson a trade asset then. Or one of the other RHD prospects.

Pick out the one's that are tradable.

EP2 is a LHD. Pettersson and Willander have nothing to do with getting in each other's developmental way.

 

[LemonSauceD]

I kind of find it hilarious that a song about Cole Sillinger cheating on them is in the billboards top 40.

 

[MS]

I said as much the day they re-signed him. Not entirely sure why but this crop of GMs LOVE cost control.

It's great when you have cheap term but I do not understand how a $3 million contract is an asset for an underperforming player who has never been more than a 10-12 minute guy his whole career.

If Hoglander was a UFA at the end of the season he isn't getting more than $2 million even with a decent bump in production the rest of the way to finish with 30 points or so.

 

[StreetHawk]

I love Hog but I will fly him to Columbus myself eventhough I have no license and no ideas how to fly a plane

Love Waddell is basically getting rid off all the players and prospects from previous regime

Any new GM in any sport will look objectively at prospects. No personal attachment. Benning was tied to Virtanen til his legal issues. Another GM probably cuts bait earlier.

But, I'd be shocked to see CBJ move Sillinger out. Big C for a skilled non 1st line winger? Not the value he should be looking for.