Christopher Tanev | #8 | D

[Canuck Surfer]

48 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Hmmm, not really.   Good question actually.   Perhaps DionP?    

Might illustrate my point?  Nah, much of the poor returns on the 2knd two deals below related to negative contract value.

 

> Although it appeared blockbuster at the time?  I can only recall Stajan standing out from the Calgary / Toronto trade. Some serviceable but unspectacular other veteran parts, Ian White probably being next best?  But really less spectacular than it seemed.

 

> A 2knd was the most significant return Toronto got unloading him (his contract, he's not horrible). The Ottawa deal was all about money. I don't think the veterans TO received amounted to much. Were just part of juggling the money?

 

> LA paid Gaborik, a shell of his former self & Nick Shore.  Whom Ottawa flipped to Calgary for a 7th. 

 

But I don't see Phaneuf as a great comparable regardless. First, I don't think he's actually all that good at defence?  Not now certainly, without the vigor and athleticism of youth. He's actually big bodied D, known for a bruising style & hits, a cannon of a shot. Those are items that often attract trade value. And distant memories big offensive numbers for the Flames. I think he does block shots. But he does not have the close out speed to retrieve pucks, or rushing forwards, suppress shots. And to a degree he's sloppy, not thrifty at getting the puck out of his own zone? Chris's calling cards. Very different than Tanev IMO.

 

Its too bad. The NHL should have a defensive D award like they have the Selke for defensive forward. It might help the value of good players like Tanev?  

[Canuck Surfer]

36 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Oduya maybe? His Thrashers and Hawks trades were probably most analogous to Tanev's current age etc. I'd argue Tanev has slightly more value but not tonnes.

 

Edit:

 

Hamonic is probably another but he's arguably worth a touch more. So something in the middle 

Oduya is not bad? Pretty good comparison actually. 

 

He was a piece in the deal that netted Jersey Kovalchuck?   Drools, unfortunately not the primary value.

[Rob_Zepp]

10 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Might illustrate my point?  Nah, much of the poor returns on the 2knd two deals below related to negative contract value.

 

> Although it appeared blockbuster at the time?  I can only recall Stajan standing out from the Calgary / Toronto trade. Some serviceable but unspectacular other veteran parts, Ian White probably being next best?  But really less spectacular than it seemed.

 

> A 2knd was the most significant return Toronto got unloading him (his contract, he's not horrible). The Ottawa deal was all about money. I don't think the veterans TO received amounted to much. Were just part of juggling the money?

 

> LA paid Gaborik, a shell of his former self & Nick Shore.  Whom Ottawa flipped to Calgary for a 7th. 

 

But I don't see Phaneuf as a great comparable regardless. First, I don't think he's actually all that good at defence?  Not now certainly, without the vigor and athleticism of youth. He's actually big bodied D, known for a bruising style & hits, a cannon of a shot. Those are items that often attract trade value. And distant memories big offensive numbers for the Flames. I think he does block shots. But he does not have the close out speed to retrieve pucks, or rushing forwards, suppress shots. And to a degree he's sloppy, not thrifty at getting the puck out of his own zone? Chris's calling cards. Very different than Tanev IMO.

 

Its too bad. The NHL should have a defensive D award like they have the Selke for defensive forward. It might help the value of good players like Tanev?  

I think Tanev could fetch a late first but with offense, even better.   EVERY team in NHL could have him in their top 4 and benefit for it.

[Rob_Zepp]

43 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Oduya maybe? His Thrashers and Hawks trades were probably most analogous to Tanev's current age etc. I'd argue Tanev has slightly more value but not tonnes.

 

Edit:

 

Hamonic is probably another but he's arguably worth a touch more. So something in the middle 

Probably not after this past season...yikes.

[aGENT]

5 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Oduya is not bad? Pretty good comparison actually. 

 

He was a piece in the deal that netted Jersey Kovalchuck?   Drools, unfortunately not the primary value.

Also netted a 2nd and a 3rd on his own. Hamonic netted a 1st and two 2nds. Like I said, Tanev's value is likely somewhere in the middle. 

 

Retain on his salary/take salary back/add other pieces and that value increases. 

 

1 minute ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Probably not after this past season...yikes.

*At time of trade. (I also feel he'll recover and play much better in the future).

[Canuck Surfer]

1 minute ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I think Tanev could fetch a late first but with offense, even better.   EVERY team in NHL could have him in their top 4 and benefit for it.

That's pretty reasonable. I agree with that. Particularly the part where he would help most teams.  But I would keep him for that return. He also helps us.

 

I also believe the suggested returns of others (a mid first, and a second asset or pick) should be possible?  If we're patient. Let him get a run of 50 or 70 games where Tanev is healthy & playing as he can. Maybe scores 20, 25 points. He's done it before.    

[Canuck Surfer]

2 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Also netted a 2nd and a 3rd on his own. Hamonic netted a 1st and two 2nds. Like I said, Tanev's value is likely somewhere in the middle. 

 

Retain on his salary/take salary back/add other pieces and that value increases

Your like the Biega version of guys who debate here on CDC...  

 

Never stop, and keep hitting.  

 

You have not convinced me that we can get an impact return for Tanev in the current circumstance. And because of that, that we should trade him?

 

But keep your motor running!

[aGENT]

PHI sure could use his talents (and a legit starter) in these playoffs @Rob_Zepp 

[Fakename70]

9 hours ago, kloubek said:

While I agree that CDC'rs usually overrate our players, there is little denying that Tanev is one of the premier shutdown guys in the league.  The issue with this is that not all GMs value such metrics as much as they do guys who can produce more points.  Add to that the fact he is often injured (largely due to his playing style) and the issue isn't so much of whether he is worth a high price, rather than trying to find a GM who is willing to pay the price we want to get for him.

 

Personally, I think there is a possibility he's had an abnormally long string of bad luck and his injury woes may not be quite as bad moving forward.  Yes, he puts himself in difficult positions due to his tenacity on the puck and not particularly big size, but perhaps he is just working against the percentages lately.  He will never be an ironman - of that I am certain - but looking back to prior seasons, I think expecting him to play 65-70 games a season is quite reasonable.  And let's face it - many players (most?) get injured at some point in the season anyway.

 

If one can forget the last two years of injuries, he remains a very, very strong defender with a high value to the right GM.  If he can stay in the 65-70 game range he can also put up around 18-20 points which isn't quite as brutally horrible as the impression most of us have of him.

 

In my opinion, if we don't get a real good return including defensive prospect(s) I don't want to move him.  If we do manage to get a scoring defenseman any time soon, Tanev gives that guy the ability to pinch in and play his fullest offensive game.  That's worth something too.

I think that all depends on one's personal definition of "premier shutdown guy". I m thinking he's instead much closer to your other description of "very, very strong defender". And, it's because of the injuries that I believe CDC'rs need to adjust their definition of "a real good return" for the guy if defensive prospects are expected the other way. No GM is going to give up meaningful/highly valuable "defensive prospects" for Chris Tanev alone. I just don't see it. Maybe you can "forget the last two years of injuries", but I'm doubtful that many actual NHL GM's can. If injuries are amongst the first things that come to mind regarding Mike Green and Kris Letang - guys with actual offensive talent - what makes you think Tanev escapes the microscope in that regard? 

The longer Benning waits for, as you said, "defensive prospects", the closer Tanev gets to 30, and the more opportunities for him to watch from the press box whilst on IR like he's done the past two years as you mentioned. 

Correct me if my memory is failing, but weren't CDC'rs bitterly complaining about the defensive style of play we're seeing from Tanev - specifically, the shot blocking - when emphasised by the supposedly out-of-step John Tortorella?

[Rob_Zepp]

3 hours ago, aGENT said:

PHI sure could use his talents (and a legit starter) in these playoffs @Rob_Zepp 

Yup

[Rob_Zepp]

2 hours ago, Fakename70 said:

I

Correct me if my memory is failing, but weren't CDC'rs bitterly complaining about the defensive style of play we're seeing from Tanev - specifically, the shot blocking - when emphasised by the supposedly out-of-step John Tortorella?

Can’t correct you as not a shock you can find some odd narrative on CDC.  Some CDC’rs claimed Virtanen was a bust, that Boeser was better suited to AHL for his rookie year and that Baer wasn’t worth a second round pick - only proves you can find many, many opinions that make zero hockey sense on CDC....and that apparently includes some on Chris Tanev who will be 28 into the meat of the season and is just hitting his prime.   Unless you get a king’s ransom back, you may regret trading him minutes after the deal is completed.

[J.I.A.H.N]

My apologies for jumping into a perfectly good conversation

 

I have been thinking about Tanev's value, which is near a 1st + 2nd round pick......give or take

 

One of the reasons I think we think of Tanev's value being less, is we live his injuries, meaning we see what the results are with and without Tanev......

 

The fact is that anyone loosing a key defenseman feels that loss, but the truth is, it is very hard to see his full impact these last few years as we had such a poor teams, the reason is immaterial, but if you look at this year, with all the injuries.....having Tanev back by himself hasn't made a whole lot of difference. 

 

What I am saying is that his value may be higher, and as some have said, he puts 110% out each shift. I think GM's with a deeper, more mature team, will see Tanev as a gem today, and would think that with less daily game pressure playing a solid #3, would most likely be much more durable, and effective.

 

There are plenty of teams that would like his cap, as it is very reasonable. Teams that would look seriously at him......Edmonton, Phili, NYI, NJD, and Toronto to name a few..........If there is a cap problem, then retaining cap is not a problem....the point is he has good value, and we have excess cap, short term.

 

My question is the value of the first....where does it fall....Edm at 9th, NYI at 10th or 12th, Phili at 14th or 19th, NJD at 19 or Toronto at 25th OA, of course all different values, with different additions needed. Who has the greater need, and would pay more?

 

Personally, I think Edmonton would go for Tanev retained 50% for 2018 9th OA, as would The Islander with one of their pick.......do we ask more?

 for the Phili's, Devils and Leafs, a 1st and 2 nd rounder are enough?

 

I think there is value in "time", as it allows the picks to develop within our prospect group time line and I think we have the cap to go after a Carlson or Green or another cap dump, which might work.

 

In any case, if were to keep Tanev we re-sign him in 2 years anyways at 5.5 to 6 million.....not that far off of a Green or Carlson

 

I want him moved,,,,,,,,with love!

[Fakename70]

19 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

100%

 

There is also not going to be as much injury concern as people think there is in terms of his market.   Sure he has had some injuries but some of them, like pucks to face, are not due to a style of play and he has had some freak injuries and luck tends to average out over a career.   While he is not going to win any ironman awards for consecutive games, it is interesting to note that a random selection of some top D in nhl who are similar vintage and played full-time inclusive of 2012-13 season (Tanev's real first year) have the following games played totals:

 

- Ellis 364

- Tanev 346

- Hedman 412

- Letang 332

- Shattenkirk 383

 

Do people view the other names beyond Tanev "damaged" and not worth pursuing in a trade?

The glaring difference though is that they're all also known for their offensive prowess...except for Tanev. Sorry, but I don't think he rates at the same level as the other 4. 

[Fakename70]

10 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Can’t correct you as not a shock you can find some odd narrative on CDC.  Some CDC’rs claimed Virtanen was a bust, that Boeser was better suited to AHL for his rookie year and that Baer wasn’t worth a second round pick - only proves you can find many, many opinions that make zero hockey sense on CDC....and that apparently includes some on Chris Tanev who will be 28 into the meat of the season and is just hitting his prime.   Unless you get a king’s ransom back, you may regret trading him minutes after the deal is completed.

Or, as with Kassian, you might regret keeping him. The difference in opinion is that I don't believe Chris Tanev would command "a king's ransom" in return. I just don't think he's at that level.  And, outside of this market, I doubt anyone thinks he is. 

[Boudrias]

18 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

No question he is not an offensive Dman but he is also a plus player on a hugely negative team and pure D has value.   The players that get points need someone like Tanev to take care of their mistakes.   

 

While I was not trying to imply his value was the same as those other names, I do think his value is quite high among the NHL GMs who know the value of pure D.

I have thought Tanev should be moved over the past 2 years primarily because of his injury history and lack of offense. To me the wear and tear on Tanev will likely shorten his career. His value will likely bring back significant assets which will allow Benning to make that value judgement. "In Benning we will trust"! IMHO a Tanev deal is realized and Benning signs a UFA to transition his loss.  

[Boudrias]

10 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

My apologies for jumping into a perfectly good conversation

 

I have been thinking about Tanev's value, which is near a 1st + 2nd round pick......give or take

 

One of the reasons I think we think of Tanev's value being less, is we live his injuries, meaning we see what the results are with and without Tanev......

 

The fact is that anyone loosing a key defenseman feels that loss, but the truth is, it is very hard to see his full impact these last few years as we had such a poor teams, the reason is immaterial, but if you look at this year, with all the injuries.....having Tanev back by himself hasn't made a whole lot of difference. 

 

What I am saying is that his value may be higher, and as some have said, he puts 110% out each shift. I think GM's with a deeper, more mature team, will see Tanev as a gem today, and would think that with less daily game pressure playing a solid #3, would most likely be much more durable, and effective.

 

There are plenty of teams that would like his cap, as it is very reasonable. Teams that would look seriously at him......Edmonton, Phili, NYI, NJD, and Toronto to name a few..........If there is a cap problem, then retaining cap is not a problem....the point is he has good value, and we have excess cap, short term.

 

My question is the value of the first....where does it fall....Edm at 9th, NYI at 10th or 12th, Phili at 14th or 19th, NJD at 19 or Toronto at 25th OA, of course all different values, with different additions needed. Who has the greater need, and would pay more?

 

Personally, I think Edmonton would go for Tanev retained 50% for 2018 9th OA, as would The Islander with one of their pick.......do we ask more?

 for the Phili's, Devils and Leafs, a 1st and 2 nd rounder are enough?

 

I think there is value in "time", as it allows the picks to develop within our prospect group time line and I think we have the cap to go after a Carlson or Green or another cap dump, which might work.

 

In any case, if were to keep Tanev we re-sign him in 2 years anyways at 5.5 to 6 million.....not that far off of a Green or Carlson

 

I want him moved,,,,,,,,with love!

It is such a deep draft. Benning would be weighing the possible draft position vs his 'target list'. IMHO Tanev cannot go for a #18 to #32 without another piece. Even a higher pick might require a prospect depending on the bidding. In the end Benning might not move and wait to next spring's TDL. 

[J.I.A.H.N]

57 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

It is such a deep draft. Benning would be weighing the possible draft position vs his 'target list'. IMHO Tanev cannot go for a #18 to #32 without another piece. Even a higher pick might require a prospect depending on the bidding. In the end Benning might not move and wait to next spring's TDL. 

I don't disagree

I don't think Tanev goes only that I think it's time......hey it's my opinion....right or wrong

But what you say about the draft interest me, and I will look forwards to what actually happens

It interests me, but for Canucks and league wide.........

Thanks for the dialogue

Cheers!

 

PS............I will be home watching the draft so that Benning can phone.......I do not expect it to ring! LOL

[aGENT]

Tanev 'plus' to PHI for MacDonald, Sanheim and their 14 OA.

 

Option to retain on Tanev and/or take back Elliott and his cap as part of the 'plus'.

[Rob_Zepp]

10 hours ago, Fakename70 said:

The glaring difference though is that they're all also known for their offensive prowess...except for Tanev. Sorry, but I don't think he rates at the same level as the other 4. 

I didn't say he did...my point was in terms of games played.    He plays a different style than they do.   In some ways, a more important style.   So, you are right he is not the same level...some GMs may see him higher as he is the type that allows those types mistakes to get covered up.   

[Rob_Zepp]

10 hours ago, Fakename70 said:

Or, as with Kassian, you might regret keeping him. The difference in opinion is that I don't believe Chris Tanev would command "a king's ransom" in return. I just don't think he's at that level.  And, outside of this market, I doubt anyone thinks he is. 

Outside of "this market" is something I know better than "this market" and he is thought of extremely highly "outside of this market".   In fact, he seems vastly underappreciated by fanbase in Vancouver if you are a barometer for such.   He is spoken of in Ontario hockey circles with considerable reverence as old school hockey people love his game.