From.The.Point Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 As much as I'd like to keep Tanev on the Canucks for the near future, is it all but set that he will be traded. The Canucks have Edler(5) Bieksa/Garrison(4.6) and Hamhuis(4.5) and Tanev is easily worth 2mil+ a year for me thats way too much tied up on defence. Doesn't seem like they will ask any of the mentioned guys to waive their NTC, so in the end do we use him to move up a couple spots or trade for another RFA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 IMO Tanev is going nowhere. He has been nothing but great, young, RH and continually improving. I could be wrong, but he definitely has to be in the long term picture for the Canucks D. Seriously doubt he is moved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 One of the four NTC defensemen will be moved before Tanev. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdatb Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 One of the four NTC defensemen will be moved before Tanev. how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksSayEh Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 how?By any means necessary. Moving Tanev would be such a royal mistake. Our D is such trash without him, and no one we have can replace what he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 By any means necessary. Moving Tanev would be such a royal mistake. Our D is such trash without him, and no one we have can replace what he does. ???...He doesn't do anything that Hamhuis can't...and better. That said, at this point in time, trading our youngest core defender is not the direction we should be going. Garrison and Edler get talked about a lot, but they're also under 30. Trading one of Hamhuis (31) or Bieksa (32) will make us younger. Those are the two guys who will bring the biggest returns in a trade as well. I love Hamhuis (even have his jersey), but he's probably the ideal trade chip if he'll waive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhela88 Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 By any means necessary. Moving Tanev would be such a royal mistake. Our D is such trash without him, and no one we have can replace what he does. What exactly is Tanev doing that someone from our top 4 cant do? Tanev is young and good, but as of right now he is expendable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksSayEh Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 ???...He doesn't do anything that Hamhuis can't...and better.That said, at this point in time, trading our youngest core defender is not the direction we should be going. Garrison and Edler get talked about a lot, but they're also under 30.Trading one of Hamhuis (31) or Bieksa (32) will make us younger. Those are the two guys who will bring the biggest returns in a trade as well. I love Hamhuis (even have his jersey), but he's probably the ideal trade chip if he'll waive.Well Hamhuis plays on the other side, ideally they play together. Though Hammer hasn't looked all that great lately. Tanev was noticeably better defensively last season, and they scored at the same rate, despite the difference in PP time and such.I would argue Tanev is our least expendable player. 24 and already a stud, we have little coming up behind him. Corrado has hardly shown to be any kind of replacement. If Tanev peaks out at a Vlasic/Hamhuis/J-bo or even H-jar type (30ish points, lock down d) which is hardly a stretch, damn near already does that, thats worth more than probably any other young player/prospect we have.Really hope Edler is the odd man out, but doesn't look like management is agreeing with that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
From.The.Point Posted June 12, 2014 Author Share Posted June 12, 2014 Really hope Edler is the odd man out, but doesn't look like management is agreeing with that... I have to disagree I hope Garrison is the odd man out, I think it was just a real bad one off for Edler and most of the Canucks under Torts. If Tanev shows that hes only going to get better then why not put him with Edler. If Hamhuis/Bieksa can be reunited to what they were a couple seasons ago then we have our top 4 there? Side question, what would it take for a Tanev/Yakupov trade to work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Tanev is smooth & smart, but we need bigger bodies on the blueline. Hope the guy can put on some muscle/weight, if he stays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadcanucks Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Well Hamhuis plays on the other side, ideally they play together. Though Hammer hasn't looked all that great lately. Tanev was noticeably better defensively last season, and they scored at the same rate, despite the difference in PP time and such. I would argue Tanev is our least expendable player. 24 and already a stud, we have little coming up behind him. Corrado has hardly shown to be any kind of replacement. If Tanev peaks out at a Vlasic/Hamhuis/J-bo or even H-jar type (30ish points, lock down d) which is hardly a stretch, damn near already does that, thats worth more than probably any other young player/prospect we have. Really hope Edler is the odd man out, but doesn't look like management is agreeing with that... Will have to respectfully disagree on those two comments... Tanev is a very good defenceman...good on the pivot, good first pass out of the zone, seldom gets beaten one-on-one, keeps the game simple, hardly ever panics, doesn't get himself or partner or forwards in any kind of danger, is gumby-like in the way he bounces off hits, and is awfully good defending with his hockey stick... BUT... Tanev is a flyweight at 185 lbs. (which limits his ability to shut down power forwards and does get pushed around in front of the net), has a slap shot that would barely qualify for Women's Olympic Hockey, limited offensive upside (though he showed progress this past season), and has yet to be durable enough to play a full season of pro hockey (realizing full well that his injuries are broken bones and the like because he's blocking shots). If you're suggesting that Tanev is "damn-near" an Olympian (present or past) in the likes of Hamhuis, Vlasic and Bouwmeester, I would suggest that you are severely over-rating him (who's H-jar that you reference, CanucksSayEh?) For me, the kid needs another 20 pounds of muscle and needs to add another 30 MPH on his slapshot, to show he's worthy of such lofty accolades. Tanev to me, is one of the best complementary d-men in the NHL...it would worry me if he was our go-to guy on the back end at this point in his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roland Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 What exactly is Tanev doing that someone from our top 4 cant do? Tanev is young and good, but as of right now he is expendable. To answer your question, there's a lot that Tanev does that our top 4 can't do. Pass, consistently defend, be calm and smart with the puck just to name a few. he was our best guy all season and I hate seeing all these Tanev proposals pop up. This team is trying to get better and younger and Tanev fits the criteria. How many games did you watch a game and by the end you think, "it was all Tanev's fault!". For me, its about zero. Wish I could say the same for players like, Edler or Garrison. Bieksa even had his moments, but imo it's because of his edgy play style, and I won't fault him for that. Hamhuis was okay, slightly under preformed, but nothing to really complain about. Tanev, still trending uphill since he first played here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William_Clarkson Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 It's not like the Canucks need the cap space (unless they plan on going crazy in free agency). Besides, I could see a D-Man being moved out (Benning said he's open to requesting players to waive their NTCs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksSayEh Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Will have to respectfully disagree on those two comments... Tanev is a very good defenceman...good on the pivot, good first pass out of the zone, seldom gets beaten one-on-one, keeps the game simple, hardly ever panics, doesn't get himself or partner or forwards in any kind of danger, is gumby-like in the way he bounces off hits, and is awfully good defending with his hockey stick... BUT... Tanev is a flyweight at 185 lbs. (which limits his ability to shut down power forwards and does get pushed around in front of the net), has a slap shot that would barely qualify for Women's Olympic Hockey, limited offensive upside (though he showed progress this past season), and has yet to be durable enough to play a full season of pro hockey (realizing full well that his injuries are broken bones and the like because he's blocking shots). If you're suggesting that Tanev is "damn-near" an Olympian (present or past) in the likes of Hamhuis, Vlasic and Bouwmeester, I would suggest that you are severely over-rating him (who's H-jar that you reference, CanucksSayEh?) For me, the kid needs another 20 pounds of muscle and needs to add another 30 MPH on his slapshot, to show he's worthy of such lofty accolades. Tanev to me, is one of the best complementary d-men in the NHL...it would worry me if he was our go-to guy on the back end at this point in his career.H-jar = Hjarmalsson. I really don't see much of a difference between those guys mentioned and Tanev. Yes he's on the slim side, but he was a late bloomer. Now he's at the age that he should start to put on some more pounds. He is noticeably bigger now than he was as a rookie. I wouldn't say he gets pushed around at all. He may take some hits, but he wins battles as well as any other Dman we have, and more importantly, makes the right play afterwards.His shot is a bit weak, sure, but he can get it through traffic. He did score 6 goals, in only 64 games, 2nd on the team among defenseman by only 1 (Garrison, 82 games) 2nd only behind Edler in pace.Those names I mentioned as comparables, none of them scored no 6 goals last season, and most of them average in the mid-low 20's points wise (minus J-bo, 30 point range past few years). Compare that to Tanev's 21-22 point pace.... Hardly a difference, especially when considering all those guys played on some of the top scoring teams int the league, Chi/STL/SJ, while we were among the worst.Hamhuis is widely considered a hair below the likes of Vlasic/Hjarmlsson/Jbo ect defensively. Well Tanev too showed to be the better player in that regard this past season, literally alongside him. It may take more of a track record before it's set in stone, but he has the skills. That, and he's 3-7 years younger than all those guys. Stats wise the offense really isn't much of a difference, if at all, and eye wise, the defense is there.While it wasn't ideal, we did build a D with Hamhuis as our #1, don't see why we can't do the same with Tanev. If we get a big name guy somewhere down the line, then great, now we get one of the best complimentary guys as you say to back him up, just as Hjar does with Keith, and Jbo now with Petro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksSayEh Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 I have to disagree I hope Garrison is the odd man out, I think it was just a real bad one off for Edler and most of the Canucks under Torts. If Tanev shows that hes only going to get better then why not put him with Edler. If Hamhuis/Bieksa can be reunited to what they were a couple seasons ago then we have our top 4 there?Side question, what would it take for a Tanev/Yakupov trade to work?I think Edmonton accepts our 6th and Tanev for Yak. Not a trade I would do, as im so high on Tanev. Though I would welcome Yak with open arms. I often suggest our 6th+ for him, before it's too late and we have to watch him rip us for the next decade. he was a big Bure/Nucks fan too, get our new rafter inductee to set him on the right path... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted June 13, 2014 Share Posted June 13, 2014 What exactly is Tanev doing that someone from our top 4 cant do? Tanev is young and good, but as of right now he is expendable. Your point is fair, until you mention expendable? Hamhuis and Bieksa are only contracted for 2 years. And our prospect cupboard in D is lean, and full of questions. Corrado is the only guy available who could be considered NHL ready. And nobody else is close to ready. Corrado himself is not a high ceiling guy, and bigger than Tanev, but JUST. Cedarholme is the only other guy I see as fairly likely to have a NHL career. But 3 years fron now for debut? Hutton and Subban are exciting, but big question marks. With the cupboard so lean, we should be drafting D hand over fist the next 2 years. And the last thing we should do is trade our best young defender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted June 13, 2014 Share Posted June 13, 2014 H-jar = Hjarmalsson. I really don't see much of a difference between those guys mentioned and Tanev. Yes he's on the slim side, but he was a late bloomer. Now he's at the age that he should start to put on some more pounds. He is noticeably bigger now than he was as a rookie. I wouldn't say he gets pushed around at all. He may take some hits, but he wins battles as well as any other Dman we have, and more importantly, makes the right play afterwards. His shot is a bit weak, sure, but he can get it through traffic. He did score 6 goals, in only 64 games, 2nd on the team among defenseman by only 1 (Garrison, 82 games) 2nd only behind Edler in pace. Those names I mentioned as comparables, none of them scored no 6 goals last season, and most of them average in the mid-low 20's points wise (minus J-bo, 30 point range past few years). Compare that to Tanev's 21-22 point pace.... Hardly a difference, especially when considering all those guys played on some of the top scoring teams int the league, Chi/STL/SJ, while we were among the worst. Hamhuis is widely considered a hair below the likes of Vlasic/Hjarmlsson/Jbo ect defensively. Well Tanev too showed to be the better player in that regard this past season, literally alongside him. It may take more of a track record before it's set in stone, but he has the skills. That, and he's 3-7 years younger than all those guys. Stats wise the offense really isn't much of a difference, if at all, and eye wise, the defense is there. While it wasn't ideal, we did build a D with Hamhuis as our #1, don't see why we can't do the same with Tanev. If we get a big name guy somewhere down the line, then great, now we get one of the best complimentary guys as you say to back him up, just as Hjar does with Keith, and Jbo now with Petro. The difference is Hardy Hjar Hjar can handle the puck and has a bigger shot. He's also 6'3" and 207 lbs. He can play a 3/4 D man role at either the offensive or defensive ends. As much as some don't admit it, Tanev is just a good spot player. Look, its well documented he's clever. He gets to pucks (his greatest strength) and makes good decisions with it. But he's never been a puck handler. Get it, move it (to the right player)! That he makes great passes, and shoots the puck towards the net should not confuse him with a guy who rushes the puck, makes forays into the offensive zone where he undresses and breaks down opposing defences. He poses almost no threat that has to be guarded, which opens up lanes and creates opportunities for teammates. Hjalmarsson, Jbo, Hamhuis, even Vlassic all jump into plays and have greater capacity with the puck than Tanev. Plus have anywhere fromm 20 (Hjalmarsson) to 35 (Bouwmeester) lbs more weight. No way Tanev is stopping Lucic or even Patrick Maroon from camping out in front of the net. Tanev has too many limits. We should be happy / grateful for what he is. A great role player! But by no means should we be getting carried away with how great he is either. Remember when everyone here on CDC was calling on Edler as the next Lidstrom? Counting the upcoming Norris trophies in his trophy case... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted June 13, 2014 Share Posted June 13, 2014 Tanev is only 24 years old. He still has a lot of time to mature physically. Plus he has so much upside. Not something you want to trade! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whale Tail Posted June 13, 2014 Share Posted June 13, 2014 Tanev keeps improving every year. I would not be calling his current condition his limit just yet. Defense normally peak at a much later age. I would be interested to see what a coach like Stevens could potentially do with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckFanForever1123 Posted June 13, 2014 Share Posted June 13, 2014 Tanev has become one of my favorite players. It would take an elite Ryan Getzlaf type player to make me ok with moving him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.