Christopher Tanev | #8 | D

[-AJ-]

47 minutes ago, Slegr said:

I'd love to see Tanev re-signed, if the price is right. There's no question he gives it 100% and plays amazing defense. But the last 7 seasons he has played an average of 55 games / season. This season, he got injured in the last game, meaning he was going to be once again unavailable at a key time down the stretch. Not since Sami Salo have I seen a player get consistently injured in inconsistent ways. It's a shame, but it's a reality with him, for whatever reason. 

If the price is right, I hope we can keep him. But at the same time, if he moves on, I'll be a bit relieved in some ways, knowing our defense will be a little less injury prone. 

I think the only concern with letting Tanev go is we need to fill the void letting him go would create. Would that be cheaper than the $4.5 - $5M it would take to re-sign Tanev? Maybe, but it's not like we have another Hughes waiting in the ranks to eat up 20 minutes right away and even then, it's always a risk to count on young kid to jump in and take heavy minutes--we got lucky with Hughes.

 

I think there are some who think Tryamkin (not necessarily you, I'm not sure on your stance) can take some of those minutes and to some degree they're right. He can take some, but to assume Tryamkin can play the defensive role Tanev does I think vastly underrates how strong Tanev is defensively. Tryamkin is probably a 5/6 guy at best right now and maybe not even at that level. If we do sign Tryamkin, I will be very interested to see how he handles minimal ice time or even an AHL assignment should that come his way. He didn't handle it well last time.

[Dannydog]

3 hours ago, knucklehead91 said:

Thats a huge stretch to say he has cost the Canucks several seasons.

If losing one d-man costs you an entire season’s worth or work. You have to ask yourself how an entire season was lost with one absence.

Pittsburgh lost Crosby, Malkin and Guentzel all at separate times of the season and for very long periods of time. Scoring didnt just come to a complete halt.

St. Louis hasnt had their top winger Tarasenko all season. They didnt fall a part.

Good teams win without key players.

Poor teams fall a part.

The past 5 seasons the team has relied far too heavily on one line up front and 3 guys on the back end. The Sedin line, then the Horvat line. On the backend we relied upon Edler, Tanev and then who ever was between the pipes. 
You lose a Sedin, you lost a line. You lose a Horvat you lose possession, you lose Tanev more shots get through, you lose Edler you lose a puck battle, you lose R. Miller or Marky, you lost a game.

One loss was too glaring of a hole to fill.
 

We now have two good lines upfront, a competitive 3rd line and a decent 4th line. Our top 4 d are legit, Marky is playing at a Vezina level, which he was projected to be when he was drafted.

Prior seasons we had subpar rosters and poor performance.

Marky and Nilsson couldnt stop a beachball a few years ago. Marky has done a 1080 yes a 1080 not a 180 and become an elite level goaltender that gives us a chance to win regardless of who’s not in the lineup.  We have been missing 2 top 6 players, Ferland and Boeser for a large chunk of the season.

 

And like I’ve said a handful of times now, relying on two dmen all season, playing all situations i.e PK, protecting leads or dzone draws puts them at higher risk for injury due to wear and tear, shot blocking and fatigue. Injecting players like Meyers, Benn, Fantenberg allows you to distribute some of the 82 game season punishment and reduce the chance of injury. THIS is why Tanev has remained healthy virtually all season. 

To me Tanev is a priority to re-sign. He keeps our backend stabilized and provides a ton of experience and is elite at shot suppression. Highly valuable at even strength and especially on the PK. 

I’d rather have a guy who gives us the edge at stopping a goal on the PK, than needing a guy who helps on the PP. 

You need more help than you can get on the PK. On the PP you have the edge and should be able to score. 
Canucks #1 PP lost to Bostons #1 PK. Mind you there was a lot more to it than just that as to how we lost the series. But in the finals it happened to be the top of the special teams going head to head. Which we had far more power plays and couldnt get the job done.

Well said, thank you.

[knucklehead91]

1 hour ago, Slegr said:

I'd love to see Tanev re-signed, if the price is right. There's no question he gives it 100% and plays amazing defense. But the last 7 seasons he has played an average of 55 games / season. This season, he got injured in the last game, meaning he was going to be once again unavailable at a key time down the stretch. Not since Sami Salo have I seen a player get consistently injured in inconsistent ways. It's a shame, but it's a reality with him, for whatever reason. 

If the price is right, I hope we can keep him. But at the same time, if he moves on, I'll be a bit relieved in some ways, knowing our defense will be a little less injury prone. 

Salo had freak injuries, ruptured testicle from a slapshot, ruptured his achilles playing floor hockey.

Being injury prone is also attributed to being over played and results from fatigue, on ice duties and sacrificing the body i.e. blocking shots and taking the hit to make the play countless times over an 82 game season. With more of those duties being distributed among guys like Meyers, Benn and Fantenberg, it increases durability, reduces fatigue, chance of injury blocking shots on the PK, Defensive zone starts or protecting the lead late in the game. 
Previous seasons, Edler and Tanev were heavily relied upon in all situations with little to no relief and that resulted in injuries.

If they can continue to distribute that punishment all season long, Tanev will become even more valuable to the team as his presence in the lineup will be better than a 55 game average. I’d say 70-80 games is what he will be capable of, which is 15-25 more games a year.

 Now normally in a 15 game stretch without Tanev, the team would win 5 and lose 10. Now add Tanev into those extra 10 games we would lose. Out of those remaining 10 games that we would normally lose in that 15 game stretch we’ll say he helps us win 50% of those 10 we’d lose. That 5 wins totaling 10 points we gain. Those 10 points last year would have put us in the final wildcard spot and put Colorado outside of a playoff spot and that was last year without guys like Meyers, Hughes, JT Miller and Petey missing 11 games as well. Of course this is all hypothetical.

  But now you add Hughes, Miller, Meyers. This team is playoff-bound each year.
Tanev, with better supporting cast is one hell of a steal at a 4.5-5m re-signing here’s why.

 

Sure the +/- stat is somewhat flawed. Over the course of his career in Vancouver, he has been a minus player ONCE and that was in 15-16 at -8. There have been some awful rosters in the past 5 years and he’s been a plus player at the end of every season aside from ‘15-16 being one of the more heavily relied upon players in crucial situations. There is a point where plus minus does indicate truth and thats the consistency of that stat over the course of the past 5 years, on some weak Canuck teams and him being out against top opposition.

The Canucks goal differential the past 5 seasons along with Tanevs +/- are as follows:         

  Goal differential.             +/-   DZoneS%
15-16 Canucks -52 Tanev -8     56.3%

16-17 Canucks -61 Tanev +3    55.3%

17-18 Canucks -46 Tanev +7    58.3%

18-19 Canucks -29 Tanev +3    62.5%

19-20 Canucks +11 Tanev +4   54.8%

His career dZone starting %, is 56.1%
Career On ice save% is 91.7

Compare him to last years Norris winner Mark Giordano from Gio’s Norris winning year.

        Giordano                    Tanev

5v5 GA:   60                          37

dZs%:  48.3%                   62.5%

oiSV%: 90.6%                   91.9%

GA/60:  .77                          .67

 

YES Gio put up 74 points and Tanev only put up 12 points. But Giordano was also on the 2nd place team and had a much better group of players to play with. Tanev started in his own zone far more than Giordano and allowed less GA, Marky averaged almost 92%ssv. 
By no means is Tanev an offensive threat. However defensively he is one of the best in the league.

in 16-17 there were only 2 players to play 20+ games and be a plus player. That was Jannik Hansen at 28gp +2 and Tanev 55gp +3. Every other single player was deep on the minus stat.

This is why when he would go down due to injury, seasons would begin to unravel. Tanev has lots of value in my eyes. Even with injuries

 

 

 

[wildcam]

On May 3, 2020 at 5:36 PM, knucklehead91 said:

Salo had freak injuries, ruptured testicle from a slapshot, ruptured his achilles playing floor hockey.

Being injury prone is also attributed to being over played and results from fatigue, on ice duties and sacrificing the body i.e. blocking shots and taking the hit to make the play countless times over an 82 game season. With more of those duties being distributed among guys like Meyers, Benn and Fantenberg, it increases durability, reduces fatigue, chance of injury blocking shots on the PK, Defensive zone starts or protecting the lead late in the game. 
Previous seasons, Edler and Tanev were heavily relied upon in all situations with little to no relief and that resulted in injuries.

If they can continue to distribute that punishment all season long, Tanev will become even more valuable to the team as his presence in the lineup will be better than a 55 game average. I’d say 70-80 games is what he will be capable of, which is 15-25 more games a year.

 Now normally in a 15 game stretch without Tanev, the team would win 5 and lose 10. Now add Tanev into those extra 10 games we would lose. Out of those remaining 10 games that we would normally lose in that 15 game stretch we’ll say he helps us win 50% of those 10 we’d lose. That 5 wins totaling 10 points we gain. Those 10 points last year would have put us in the final wildcard spot and put Colorado outside of a playoff spot and that was last year without guys like Meyers, Hughes, JT Miller and Petey missing 11 games as well. Of course this is all hypothetical.

  But now you add Hughes, Miller, Meyers. This team is playoff-bound each year.
Tanev, with better supporting cast is one hell of a steal at a 4.5-5m re-signing here’s why.

 

Sure the +/- stat is somewhat flawed. Over the course of his career in Vancouver, he has been a minus player ONCE and that was in 15-16 at -8. There have been some awful rosters in the past 5 years and he’s been a plus player at the end of every season aside from ‘15-16 being one of the more heavily relied upon players in crucial situations. There is a point where plus minus does indicate truth and thats the consistency of that stat over the course of the past 5 years, on some weak Canuck teams and him being out against top opposition.

The Canucks goal differential the past 5 seasons along with Tanevs +/- are as follows:         

  Goal differential.             +/-   DZoneS%
15-16 Canucks -52 Tanev -8     56.3%

16-17 Canucks -61 Tanev +3    55.3%

17-18 Canucks -46 Tanev +7    58.3%

18-19 Canucks -29 Tanev +3    62.5%

19-20 Canucks +11 Tanev +4   54.8%

His career dZone starting %, is 56.1%
Career On ice save% is 91.7

Compare him to last years Norris winner Mark Giordano from Gio’s Norris winning year.

        Giordano                    Tanev

5v5 GA:   60                          37

dZs%:  48.3%                   62.5%

oiSV%: 90.6%                   91.9%

GA/60:  .77                          .67

 

YES Gio put up 74 points and Tanev only put up 12 points. But Giordano was also on the 2nd place team and had a much better group of players to play with. Tanev started in his own zone far more than Giordano and allowed less GA, Marky averaged almost 92%ssv. 
By no means is Tanev an offensive threat. However defensively he is one of the best in the league.

in 16-17 there were only 2 players to play 20+ games and be a plus player. That was Jannik Hansen at 28gp +2 and Tanev 55gp +3. Every other single player was deep on the minus stat.

This is why when he would go down due to injury, seasons would begin to unravel. Tanev has lots of value in my eyes. Even with injuries

 

 

 

At some point Benning and group will have to add a solid veteran under 27? No prospects in Utica are ready to Fill top 3 D position..

I would say Vancouvers defence is there weak spot now....

Lots of good forwards = B...1.petey 2. Horvat 3. Miller 4. Taffoli UFA 5. Boser 6. Pearson 7. Virtanen RFA  8. Gaudette RFA 9. Ferland 10. Leivo RFA  11. MacEwen RFA 12. Sutter 13. Motte RFA 14. Beagle... Prospects  top future 1. Podkoizon 19 - top 6 guy --Hoglander 19  - Lind 21  - Lockwood 21 - Jasek 22 - Gadjovich 21

D men = Ct

1. Edler 34 ---

2. Hughes 20

3. Tanev 30- UFA

4. Myers 30

5. Stetcher 26- RFA

6. Fantenberg 28 - UFA

7. Benn 32

Rafferty 25 - Rathbone 22 - Juolevi 22 - Briesbois 22 -  Woo 20 - Tryamkin 27

 

Goaltenders  = Bt

Markstrom - 30 - UFA

Demko - 24

Dipietro - 20

Kielly - 24

 

Have to trade for top 3 D man at some soon... Can't keep everyone and to get a top end D you have to trade a good asset..

Forward position is the strongest depth... Will have to be a top 5 guy? Boser will land the best return..

Will not be trading a centre as we all know there very hard to find like D men?? Winger will be the trade chip....

Edited May 5, 2020 by wildcam

[aGENT]

41 minutes ago, wildcam said:

At some point Benning and group will have to add a solid veteran under 27? No prospects in Utica are ready to Fill top 3 D position..

I would say Vancouvers defence is there weak spot now....

Lots of good forwards = B...1.petey 2. Horvat 3. Miller 4. Taffoli UFA 5. Boser 6. Pearson 7. Virtanen RFA  8. Gaudette RFA 9. Ferland 10. Leivo RFA  11. MacEwen RFA 12. Sutter 13. Motte RFA 14. Beagle... Prospects  top future 1. Podkoizon 19 - top 6 guy --Hoglander 19  - Lind 21  - Lockwood 21 - Jasek 22 - Gadjovich 21

D men = Ct

1. Edler 34 ---

2. Hughes 20

3. Tanev 30- UFA

4. Myers 30

5. Stetcher 26- RFA

6. Fantenberg 28 - UFA

7. Benn 32

Rafferty 25 - Rathbone 22 - Juolevi 22 - Briesbois 22 -  Woo 20 - Tryamkin 27

 

Goaltenders  = Bt

Markstrom - 30 - UFA

Demko - 24

Dipietro - 20

Kielly - 24

 

Have to trade for top 3 D man at some soon... Can't keep everyone and to get a top end D you have to trade a good asset..

Forward position is the strongest depth... Will have to be a top 5 guy? Boser will land the best return..

Will not be trading a centre as we all know there very hard to find like D men?? Winger will be the trade chip....

The answer is Virtanen (perhaps packaged with a prospect) when Podkolzin arrives.

[Canuck Surfer]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

The answer is Virtanen (perhaps packaged with a prospect) when Podkolzin arrives.

Or a top prospect.

 

For similar top D prospect. Hoglander for?

[Canuck Surfer]

On 5/4/2020 at 2:34 AM, wildcam said:

I don;t think any team will sign Tanev to a big contract with his injury history...I predict  4 yrs x 4.5 million is top end for Tanev...

If your counting on a healthy Tanev 30 and playing talented 34 year old Edler for 23-25 mins per game it could lead Vancouver into troubles with injuries..

Need another younger guy to take mins away from Edler and Tanev besides  Hughes...

Hughes is the offensive machine 22-25 mins will be fine..

Not excited about signing Tanev 30, to a 4 yr x 4.5 million Dollar deal.... Scary

Not easy to draft top D men? We got lucky with Hughes he should of been gone in top 5 in his draft year...

Only D man drafted in last 6 years playing regular is Quinn Hughes?
So waiting for draft might not work?  Replacing Edler 34, in next 2 years is just common knowledge never mind injury prone Tanev?????????

 

 

3 years x $5.2 to $5.4 may be a fair offer by Van, protect in expansion?  

 

We dont have to protect Edler or Hughes. Say protect Myers, Juolevi & Tanev in expansion. 

 

4 years or $6 mill, or more, starts to sound similar to Eriksson being signed at too high a value and term...

 

 

I'd prefer to pay Tanev $5.5 than Toffoli $6.5 or $7. 

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Or a top prospect.

 

For similar top D prospect. Hoglander for?

Given the way the cap works, guys like Hoglander, Podkolzin, Lind etc will be required to step in on ELC's and replace guys who are pricing themselves off of the team and or aging out.

 

It's just how this works. We won't be able to afford to keep all of Miller, Pettersson, Boeser, Pearson, Horvat, Toffoli, Gaudette and Virtanen in the top 9 past the next couple years.

 

Guys like Virtanen will start requiring top 6 dollars. Podkolzin can come in and replace his role and then eventually displace an extended Toffoli as he ages out. Hoglander can come in on the third and eventually swap spots with Pearson (if we extend him).

 

It's the circle of life Elton

[Junkyard Dog]

8 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Given the way the cap works, guys like Hoglander, Podkolzin, Lind etc will be required to step in on ELC's and replace guys who are pricing themselves off of the team and or aging out.

 

It's just how this works. We won't be able to afford to keep all of Miller, Pettersson, Boeser, Pearson, Horvat, Toffoli, Gaudette and Virtanen in the top 9 past the next couple years.

 

Guys like Virtanen will start requiring top 6 dollars. Podkolzin can come in and replace his role and then eventually displace an extended Toffoli as he ages out. Hoglander can come in on the third and eventually swap spots with Pearson (if we extend him).

 

It's the circle of life Elton

Pretty much. Also have to consider the FA variable. As the guys we plan on not re-signing are rid of(via not re-signing, trading, buyouts) cap opens up to be used on areas of the roster that need bolstering. As young ELC players start to get incorporated more cap opens up.

 

Forward wise we probably won't need to sign anyone significant besides in the bottom 6 after this FA but I can see us signing a solid D 2-4 years dafter this year. Really depends on how Edler performs and whether we are able to re-sign Tanev. 4 years after this season would be when Myers is gone and he's gonna need a replacement while 2 years we are gonna have to see where Edler's at. Hopefully in the meantime 1-2 young D step up making it less of a concern. 

 

Also the trade factor we both previously talked about with Boeser/Virtanen. If Lind/Pod/Hog step up and prove they can play at or better than Boeser/Virtanen's level than we have a surplus. D market is always changing and who knows who'll be available moving forward, could be a real nice add.

 

Essentially we have a lot of potential options and have no need to make rushed decisions besides maybe with the goaltending in regards to Seattle, which is unrelated. We're a year away from that at least and I think a side deal can be done to keep both.

 

We're in a good position as an organization. We may hit a few bumps in the road but we're trending upwards.

[Canuck Surfer]

13 hours ago, aGENT said:

It's the circle of life Elton

I'll leave the artificial insemination to you, if that's ok?

 

13 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Also the trade factor we both previously talked about with Boeser/Virtanen.

I've been pretty keen on keeping both these guys. Never really overindulged in trying to asset manage the team. By signing Toffoli and trading young players.  

 

> Boeser because I believe in his potential.

> Jake partly because part of his value gets smeared in a bad rap? 

>> Jake really because I believe his type of athleticism an underlying catalyst for the team.

>>> Truth be known I don't really want to trade Hogz either! For the exact same reason. Even if he never becomes a top scorer.

 

But the counter to your otherwise valid point? A D prospect on an ELC's contribution will be just as valid as a FWD prospect/

 

I agree we will be losing some vets.  My own view is I'd prefer to keep Tanev & walk Toffoli & Leivo. Let Hogz grab one spot. Markstrom I would also like to keep. That would require more salary. Buying out Baer? Winning the lotto with Loui retiring?

 

But if Tanev leaves. And I suspect he might? Then maybe you keep Toffili. And trade a that rookie fwd for a rookie RHD. 

 

It sorta boils down to how the pins fall.

[Junkyard Dog]

9 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

I'll leave the artificial insemination to you, if that's ok?

 

I've been pretty keen on keeping both these guys. Never really overindulged in trying to asset manage the team. By signing Toffoli and trading young players.  

 

> Boeser because I believe in his potential.

> Jake partly because part of his value gets smeared in a bad rap? 

>> Jake really because I believe his type of athleticism an underlying catalyst for the team.

>>> Truth be known I don't really want to trade Hogz either! For the exact same reason. Even if he never becomes a top scorer.

 

But the counter to your otherwise valid point? A D prospect on an ELC's contribution will be just as valid as a FWD prospect/

 

I agree we will be losing some vets.  My own view is I'd prefer to keep Tanev & walk Toffoli & Leivo. Let Hogz grab one spot. Markstrom I would also like to keep. That would require more salary. Buying out Baer? Winning the lotto with Loui retiring?

 

But if Tanev leaves. And I suspect he might? Then maybe you keep Toffili. And trade a that rookie fwd for a rookie RHD. 

 

It sorta boils down to how the pins fall.

Kind of a trickle up effect. If any young player proves capable of playing at or better than Virtanen/Boeser's level we have ourselves a good problem. We would have a surplus of forwards and if defense is still an issue by the time Pod/Hog/Lind prove capable, which could take 2-3 years, then we have a means of addressing it.

 

We have the patience to wait for that sort of move. See which guys fit what we have moving forward and make deals based off that. Reason why Pod/Hog/Lind have an advantage to stay if they step up is because they'd be on relatively cheap contracts for the next 4-6 years. Boeser's is gonna make 7.5 at least after 2 more seasons and Jake could ask for a lot in the next 3 seasons.

 

Trading a rookie forward for a rookie D is a bad idea. Nobody would trade a top prospect defenseman for any prospect forward. They have a lot more value than a top prospect forward so in any deal we'd more than likely be giving up the best player. You're gonna get more value when you trade a Boeser or a Virtanen, more so Boeser IMO. Also eliminates a ELC at forward for one at D whereas a better deal would be to get rid of cap while adding an ELC. Like a Boeser for Byram+.

[Canuck Surfer]

2 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Trading a rookie forward for a rookie D is a bad idea. Nobody would trade a top prospect defenseman for any prospect forward.

Chicago traded Jokiharju, a very promising prospect. A RHD, even more rare at that. For Alex Nylander. Whom seemed pretty stalled in his development.

 

Reason?

 

They had great depth in prospect D. Chicago still have both A class & blue chip right handed prospects left. Several lefties as well, less our need.

 

I do agree, the D holds better value in most circumstances. But at the the end of the day? You cannot hold guys back forever if you don't have room for them.  How long can Carolina bury Jake Bean? LA could trade one of Bjornfot, Clague or Brickley.

 

Trades? It happens...

[Junkyard Dog]

2 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Chicago traded Jokiharju, a very promising prospect. A RHD, even more rare at that. For Alex Nylander. Whom seemed pretty stalled in his development.

 

Reason?

 

They had great depth in prospect D. Chicago still have both A class & blue chip right handed prospects left. Several lefties as well, less our need.

 

I do agree, the D holds better value in most circumstances. But at the the end of the day? You cannot hold guys back forever if you don't have room for them.  How long can Carolina bury Jake Bean? LA could trade one of Bjornfot, Clague or Brickley.

 

Trades? It happens...

I am not keen to make a bet like that. Especially when the returns and cap relief are far greater when we trade out a Boeser or a Virtanen. Instead of getting just a D prospect it could be a top one or more likely a top 4 D around the same age back. Those are the types of guys I would want back. 

 

I don't really want to mess with the forward prospect group because it is perfect the way it is and it is set up in a way that could potentially allow for a Boeser/Virtanen trade. 

 

We have the patience though to wait and see. That's what I want to do with Pod/Lind/Hog with the next 2-3 years. We have guys in the meantime we should really focus on seeing where they're at. Brisebois, Tryamkin, Rathbone, Rafferty, OJ, Woo. It would give us an idea of where to go next.

[theo5789]

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/pending-ufa-chris-tanev-feels-home-canucks-hopes-stay/sn-amp/

 

Just read this article. A mentor on and off the ice. He wants to retire as a Canuck. How can you not want to keep this guy around?

 

Yes the biggest elephant are his injuries and what his next contract might command. Based on the article, he's well aware of the situation and it even mentions there's a possibility of a 1 year deal in hopes of more financial security in the league later on. This makes me believe that we could probably get him locked at 4-4.5 for one year which would go a long way towards getting all of our high profile UFAs locked.

 

As for the injuries, say we re-sign Tryamkin, that alone should help with his health. Tryamkin was a top PKer for his team, so while Tanev would still be the primary PKer, Tryamkin could ease some of those minutes. And worst case is I'm comfortable with Tryamkin taking on bigger minutes should Tanev get hurt.

[ruilin96]

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/pending-ufa-chris-tanev-feels-home-canucks-hopes-stay/sn-amp/

 

Just read this article. A mentor on and off the ice. He wants to retire as a Canuck. How can you not want to keep this guy around?

 

Yes the biggest elephant are his injuries and what his next contract might command. Based on the article, he's well aware of the situation and it even mentions there's a possibility of a 1 year deal in hopes of more financial security in the league later on. This makes me believe that we could probably get him locked at 4-4.5 for one year which would go a long way towards getting all of our high profile UFAs locked.

 

As for the injuries, say we re-sign Tryamkin, that alone should help with his health. Tryamkin was a top PKer for his team, so while Tanev would still be the primary PKer, Tryamkin could ease some of those minutes. And worst case is I'm comfortable with Tryamkin taking on bigger minutes should Tanev get hurt.

I read the article as well. To me, sounds like Tanev will stay. With the uncertainty of this year, I think he would much rather stay with an organization he is comfortable with. Likely signs a 1 year deal to remain with this team.

[Mackcanuck]

 

[flat land fish]

One year deal would be an interesting play with expansion draft looming

[Mackcanuck]

 

 

Vancouver Canucks pending unrestricted free-agent defenseman Chris Tanev is hopeful he can iron out a new contract with the only NHL team he's ever suited up for.

"I've been here now for 10 years and I've loved every minute of it," Tanev told Sportsnet's Iain MacIntyre. "There's definitely a trust between me and management and the ownership group, which has been awesome to me.

"Whether it's one year or many years (on the next contract), I'd love to play my whole career here. Who knows what's going to happen? But I love it here, I want to stay here, I think the team is going in the right direction, and if we come back to play this year, I think we're going to have a real good shot at competing and going far. I'd like to be part of that in the future."

 

Due to this season's lengthy layoff and the uncertainty surrounding next year's salary cap, Tanev admitted there's a possibility that UFAs around the league take less term on new deals this offseason.

"I definitely could see a lot of guys signing a one-year deal and then hoping the league gets financially better next summer," he said.

Tanev, 30, has played 514 games for the Canucks since joining ahead of the 2010-11 season. He's developed into a veteran presence on a young, up-and-coming team, which is something general manager Jim Benning sees plenty of value in.

"There are guys who really help other players along, and I would say Chris Tanev is one of those guys," Benning said. "I'd like to try to figure out a way to bring Chris back because I think he's a good leader and our younger players look up to him."

The Canucks have just over $20 million in projected cap space with 14 players signed to the roster. Tanev's current deal pays him $4.45 million per season.

 

https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/1976249

[aGENT]

4 hours ago, Mackcanuck said:

Due to this season's lengthy layoff and the uncertainty surrounding next year's salary cap, Tanev admitted there's a possibility that UFAs around the league take less term on new deals this offseason.

"I definitely could see a lot of guys signing a one-year deal and then hoping the league gets financially better next summer," he said.

 

This would be pretty awesome if it happens with him AND Markstrom...

 

Not expecting it but I'd take that covid silver lining if it happens!

[DeNiro]

29 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

This would be pretty awesome if it happens with him AND Markstrom...

 

Not expecting it but I'd take that covid silver lining if it happens!

Would be awesome to see a buy in from all the upcoming UFAs.

 

That would give Benning a little more flexibility to move some contracts out and then he can offer them bigger contracts next offseason.

 

Small increases on one year deals and we may be able to re-sign Tanev, Markstrom, and Toffoli.