Confirmed Signing with Link: [VAN] D Filip Hronek signs extension with the Canucks (8 years, $7.25M AAV)

Tralfamadore

Don't Panic.
Sep 25, 2011
8,866
7,706
I expect better from a fan of a team with a Makar- Toews pairing considering the chemistry they have mutually benefits both of them.
As good as Makar is he looks a lot better with Toews than without and vice - versa.

Okay?

What I said applies to them as well.

Toews should be grateful he got to play with Makar because it got him paid.
 

japhi

Registered User
Jul 7, 2014
3,773
3,125
That's about $1 million too much, but I guess it's better to have Hronek at $7.25 million over not having him at all.

I thought the fair deal with him was the same deal Weegar got in October 2022. Not terrible considering it's only $1 million a year more, but it's still a bit too much.
Same deal Weeger signed doesn't exist for this type of player. Macro has changed fairly dramatically.
 

TS Quint

GET THESE ADS OUT OF MY WAY!
Sep 8, 2012
8,119
5,520
7.25/5*88=127.6

I will be really surprised if the cap is as high as $127.6 million within three years.
The vast majority of people here have no idea what the impact of the cap going up actually is.
 

Goptor

Registered User
Jun 30, 2016
2,492
2,988
NHL is based off USD and there has been a lot of inflation during the time the cap has been intentionally kept constant.

Seattle expansion fee and extra revenue from another team is pretty large. Atleast the cap went up quite a bit when the Knights were brought in.

They got a new TV/Streaming deal signed that should provide a bump in revenue.

Bettman always fudges numbers so maybe he is hiding a decline in the league that counteracts those additions.
 

tyhee

Registered User
Feb 5, 2015
2,588
2,697
We see very different views of whether this is a good or bad deal for the Canucks and there is good reason for those divergent views.

All those people who point out that Hronek isn't physical, didn't have a good run in the playoffs, had better numbers and looked better than he would have playing with a normally good d-man instead of Hughes, that he's really only got one season as successful as this contract season and that he fell off as the season progressed are making reasonable points. His scoring had gotten pretty good in Detroit as well but his pairing this season was often dominant, resulting in really excellent numbers-his team's share of goals and shots this season while he was on the ice was elite, whatever the reason for those numbers was.

On the other hand, those that are saying it is a fair deal or maybe good for the Canucks have reason to say what they do as well. Hronek was eligible for arbitration. Teams are limited under the Collective Bargaining Agreement as to what they can raise in arbitration and it is mostly numbers, those numbers that were so incredibly good for Hronek this season. In arbitration he would have gotten one year and it would have been for more than $7.25 million. Seravalli wasn't crazy in saying it would start with an 8-his numbers made for an excellent arbitration case for Hronek and I think he'd have easily gotten over that in arbitration. I'm saying that as a Vancouver fan who was dreading the arbitration award as my view of Hronek's level of play is that it is lower than what he's about to be paid.

One other point is that while we can pretty much guess what would have happened in arbitration, we really have no idea what Hronek could have gotten as an unrestricted free agent a year from now. If his 2024-25 season turned out as good as his 2023-24 season he'd get more than he just signed for. If he has a somewhat down season-say scoring 35 pts, not far off even in +/-, CF% or FF%, then he'd get less. We can guess at the future but if we could actually predict it than all those Canuck fans who were excited about the Canucks' big signing in the summer of 2016 wouldn't have been so bitterly disappointed when Ericksson failed to look anything like the player he'd been in 2015-16. Those who are high on Hronek will expect continued success, those who are less high will expect something similar to his numbers as a Red Wing.

We'll know in eight years how this signing worked out for the Canucks and probably have a pretty good idea in five. The only thing I know for certain is that if hfb still exists and the NHL plays a season this coming year, there will be people in the early portion of the first of the eight year deal pointing out how good or bad it was based on a few good or bad games.
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
27,064
10,239

I'm not even saying it's a bad deal, just a bit more than I was expecting him to sign for.
Kind of important to factor in age. Weeger began that contract at 29. Hronek, by all intents and purposes is going to be 27 early in the 24/25 season. Hanifin is 27. You would place a higher value for someone at age 27 and 28 than someone at 35 and 36 at the start of those respective seasons.
 

tyhee

Registered User
Feb 5, 2015
2,588
2,697
If that were true, he wouldn't have been trade for just a couple second rounders.
That may have been the case before the salary cap era, but in this case the return for Toews didn't reflect his true value as the Isles felt pressed to move him. They were tight against the cap, needed space to sign Barzal to an extension and faced the possibility of an arbitration hearing that might have given Toews more than the Isles had room to fit under the cap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkusNaslund19

StickShift

In a pickle 🥒
Feb 29, 2004
7,250
6,011
New York
Full NMC in years 2-3-4 (through 2027-28)

I am very interested in seeing how NMCs are handed out going forward with the likelihood of the NHL expanding again to 34 teams in years to come.

Teams will be angling to have as few NMCs on their books in the seasons they think expansion will occur, whereas agents will be angling to get that protection so their player doesn’t have to move unexpectedly.
 

TommyDangles

Registered User
Jun 18, 2021
877
905
The comparable is the Toews deal, but Toews is still great away from Makar. That's not the case for Hronek though. His numbers are abysmal away from Hughes. Don't see this one aging well. If you're paying a guy that much should be able to carry his own pairing. Not be completely dependent on another player.
 

Esq

in terrorem
Sponsor
Feb 5, 2009
7,936
3,932
Village in the City
The comparable is the Toews deal, but Toews is still great away from Makar. That's not the case for Hronek though. His numbers are abysmal away from Hughes. Don't see this one aging well. If you're paying a guy that much should be able to carry his own pairing. Not be completely dependent on another player.
agreed
 

BlueOil

"well-informed"
Apr 28, 2010
7,170
4,187
seems rich for hronek but vancouver likes him so i guess keeping people in canada still has an inflated cost
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Fraser28

The Zetterberg Era

Ball Hockey Sucks
Nov 8, 2011
41,053
11,742
Ft. Myers, FL
Now that it has happened I am completely okay with Yzerman walking away. I hope Hronek continues to play well with Vancouver. This contract was far more than I was comfortable with. The cap going up helps, but a streaky offensive d-man that always seemed to be worn out in the second half (honestly a mark of how hard he plays but if your body cannot withstand it...) worried me a lot. I do like how hard he plays and I really do wish him well, but this was the exact contact I was hopeful to avoid as a Detroit fan.
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
27,064
10,239
Full NMC in years 2-3-4 (through 2027-28)

I am very interested in seeing how NMCs are handed out going forward with the likelihood of the NHL expanding again to 34 teams in years to come.

Teams will be angling to have as few NMCs on their books in the seasons they think expansion will occur, whereas agents will be angling to get that protection so their player doesn’t have to move unexpectedly.
Atl which is likely the next one, the teams will have time and those nmc can exclude ED protection.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad