Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, SilentSam said:

The only reason Guadette is wearing 88 is because Tanev is wearing Guadettes’ number..

Tanev won’t be back next season..   things will be what there supposed to be.

 

10 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Who was the last number tributed back to a incoming player, I remember we had one before?and what was the price paid? A gold watch? A car? Or whatever?

It’s possible that Tanev won’t be back, but depending on how the NHL sets up its cap, he might be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, NHL'er said:

Round up twice and wear 69?

And the square root of that is eight something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

 

It’s possible that Tanev won’t be back, but depending on how the NHL sets up its cap, he might be.

What size contract would he sign for? NMC? NTC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hairy Kneel said:

What size contract would he sign for? NMC? NTC?

Tanev has certainly earned a NTC. This reminds me a lot of the decision to move on from Hamhuis, its a tough one. Tanev still has a ton of value but can we afford to keep him long term? I still think it might be Stecher thats on the bubble and is a casualty of the cap which is a shame since he plays with everything he's got. 

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

 

It’s possible that Tanev won’t be back, but depending on how the NHL sets up its cap, he might be.

If they don’t do something to alleviate the problems, almost every UFA is going to be signing for $1 million or less because there isn’t enough money in the system to pay them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, BarnBurner said:

More than likely, yes. But I was both surprised and impressed how he handled, and beat Connor Murphy, who was 3 inches taller and 40 lbs heavier. 

 

Gaudette's got a lot of fight in him, which bodes well for our team, as does adding Tryamkin!

Absolutely love the way AG has been getting better with us..  that was/ is a fantastic season for him..  inspires trust in a Coach to utilize him in other areas and assignments, and to trust other young men ( eg.MacEwan) in their growth.  I was pleasantly surprised with his “go” moment with Murphy. really hope all of our Utica/ Canuck Team members take their training to a new level on this unfortunate hiatus from “the game”..

it is training that defines your career in sports ask a player like Z Chara, or S Doan.. 

and it’s that physical discipline that create the mental edge to look straight ahead to your goals.

If, and or when Tryamkin arrives I hope he becomes the best that he possibly can here..

there is so much potential in him.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Tanev has certainly earned a NTC. This reminds me a lot of the decision to move on frrom Hamhuis, its a tough one. Tanev still has a ton of value but can we afford to keep him long term? I still think it might be Stecher thats on the bubble and is a casualty of the cap which is a shame since he plays with everything he's got. 

Yes I agree i is a very tough decision between resigning Tanev and/or Stech.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

If we weren’t in cap hell (I think we’re currently in about the 3rd Circle of Benning’s Inferno ;)), I’d be all for re-signing Tanev. Unfortunately, we’re probably gonna need to save some money somewhere, and the right side D might be the place.
 

Stecher should be at least a couple million bucks cheaper than Tanev, and he can hold down a top-4 role. Myers, of course, isn’t going anywhere. Rafferty and Tryamkin (assuming he’s back and on a reasonable contract) can rotate in on the right side of the third pairing.

 

Certainly, that right side would look a lot better with Tanev on it, but I’m just not sure we can afford him.

If Stecher is "holding down" a top 4 role I am not very confident in the Canucks top 4 - especially if they have serious playoff aspirations.  He is at best a bottom pairing D on a good D corp.  I like Stecher but Stecher in the top 4 is not good for the Canucks prospects of being a serious playoff contender in my opinion.

Edited by Borvat
  • Like 1
  • Hydration 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're getting so close to Tryamkin being free of his KHL contract. Exciting times. It does feel like now that the next Canucks' game played will have him in the line-up. 

There are so many exciting pieces to this team, and so much potential. Whenever things do get going again, this is such a fun team to watch now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tryamkin checks the right boxes for our D. √√ Thus shortening the shopping list for JB. And more importantly, shortening the adjustments needed for the coaching staff. All the big forwards who give us trouble, St Louis, Draistle, or the Jets, throw Tryamkin out there to stimey them. (With Myers or Rathbone or a hometown discount Stecher? maybe). He'll clear them out of the crease. Maybe spend the Tanev money on another big good skating D man. UFA or trade. I feel the chemistry of our make up will be getting better balanced ie size and skill, snarl and skill :canucks: Overall its one less thing to worry about.

  • Hydration 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Tryamkin checks the right boxes for our D. √√ Thus shortening the shopping list for JB. And more importantly, shortening the adjustments needed for the coaching staff. All the big forwards who give us trouble, St Louis, Draistle, or the Jets, throw Tryamkin out there to stimey them. (With Myers or Rathbone or a hometown discount Stecher? maybe). He'll clear them out of the crease. Maybe spend the Tanev money on another big good skating D man. UFA or trade. I feel the chemistry of our make up will be getting better balanced ie size and skill, snarl and skill :canucks: Overall its one less thing to worry about.

If St.Louis resigns Pietrangelo. I want us to go after Parayko. We compliance buyout Eriksson. Let Tanev walk. Find a suitor at with maybe 50% retention on Baertschi. Find a Suitor for Sutts. Re-sign Marky, Toffoli. Trade for Parayko. Use Stech in a package for Parayko. 

 

Miller - Pete - Toffoli/Boeser 

Pearson - Bo - Boeser/Toffoli

Ferland - Gauds - Virtanen 

Roussel - Beagle - MacEwen

ex. Motte, ? 

 

Hughes - Parayko 

Edler - Rafferty 

Tryamkin - Myers

 

Marky 

Demko

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, KKnight said:

If St.Louis resigns Pietrangelo. I want us to go after Parayko. We compliance buyout Eriksson. Let Tanev walk. Find a suitor at with maybe 50% retention on Baertschi. Find a Suitor for Sutts. Re-sign Marky, Toffoli. Trade for Parayko. Use Stech in a package for Parayko. 

 

Miller - Pete - Toffoli/Boeser 

Pearson - Bo - Boeser/Toffoli

Ferland - Gauds - Virtanen 

Roussel - Beagle - MacEwen

ex. Motte, ? 

 

Hughes - Parayko 

Edler - Rafferty 

Tryamkin - Myers

 

Marky 

Demko

 Demko wins 25 games as a back up and gets us a 1st  and  2nd plus prospect, Ferland , gets  maybe 30-40 games and then back on LITR. $ saves some cap.

Gone are: Tanev, Stech,LE, Baer, and Sutter. (and release/demote Schaller) and Lievo kept as our extra forward.

Fantenburgh as a low cost 7th Dman

 

*It's going to be impossible to get Pieterangelo, and tough to get Parayko, but I'd like the Surrey boy Dillon. He's tough. And probably would sign to be close to home.

 

 

Edited by Hairy Kneel
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Tanev has certainly earned a NTC. This reminds me a lot of the decision to move on from Hamhuis, its a tough one. Tanev still has a ton of value but can we afford to keep him long term? I still think it might be Stecher thats on the bubble and is a casualty of the cap which is a shame since he plays with everything he's got. 

Why did we not sign Hamhuis, or did he decide to leave because we attempted to trade him and failed? He surely would have been better then some of the defenders we had in the following years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AV's Coin said:

Why did we not sign Hamhuis, or did he decide to leave because we attempted to trade him and failed? He surely would have been better then some of the defenders we had in the following years.

He's been around for awhile now. Hasn't he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AV's Coin said:

Why did we not sign Hamhuis, or did he decide to leave because we attempted to trade him and failed? He surely would have been better then some of the defenders we had in the following years.

I believe it was a shift of mentality to start re-tooling. We obviously had told Hamhuis we were ready to move on from him in trying to trade him rather than simply extending him. This was demonstrated as we started moving on from other vets like Hansen and Burrows the following year as well. Also, at the time Hutton looked like he was an up and coming young dman ready for a bigger role after leading the defense in scoring (with Edler out for a lengthy period of the season also).

 

We were also tight against the cap, so with Hamhuis getting a 3.75 million offer from Dallas, it wasn't like we could afford him to potentially be a bottom pairing dman with Edler and Hutton in the top 2 LD on paper. Hamhuis was a shell of his former self much of his time after he left the Canucks and didn't really do much for Dallas or Nashville in taking them to another level.

  • Hydration 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, theo5789 said:

GM of the year right here everyone.

george costanza good job GIF

Thanks man. I appreciate your trust in my guidance of the franchise. 

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Tryamkin checks the right boxes for our D. √√ Thus shortening the shopping list for JB. And more importantly, shortening the adjustments needed for the coaching staff. All the big forwards who give us trouble, St Louis, Draistle, or the Jets, throw Tryamkin out there to stimey them. (With Myers or Rathbone or a hometown discount Stecher? maybe). He'll clear them out of the crease. Maybe spend the Tanev money on another big good skating D man. UFA or trade. I feel the chemistry of our make up will be getting better balanced ie size and skill, snarl and skill :canucks: Overall its one less thing to worry about.

Other than Pietrangelo, there aren't really any upgrades on Tanev in free agency.

 

If we're making an improvement there, it's almost certainly trade IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Other than Pietrangelo, there aren't really any upgrades on Tanev in free agency.

 

If we're making an improvement there, it's almost certainly trade IMO.

Ya, it is hard to remember that Tanev and Stecher represent two of the better options available.

 

It is going to be hard to upgrade our defence next year even if we had the money.  It may be adding Rafferty and Tryamkin and hoping for the best.

Edited by Provost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Provost said:

Ya, it is hard to remember that Tanev and Stecher represent two of the better options available.

 

It is going to be hard to upgrade our defence next year even if we had the money.  It may be adding Rafferty and Tryamkin and hoping for the best.

Yeah there's pretty much Vatanen and he'd be largely a lateral move from Tanev, is injured just as much, likely cost more and be a hit in the leadership department.

 

So that's a non starter IMO :lol:

 

Adding Tryamkin and some of Rafferty, Brisebois, Juolevi, Sautner etc should offer some level of change/improvement. I also think Myers continues to get more comfortable. But yes any meaningful/big change will have to come from a trade. Something like Virtanen, Stecher and a prospect for...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...