StealthNuck

Christopher Tanev | #8 | D

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said:

We need Tanev. our D isn't very good and  he is the best we have. 

Considering Edler and Tanev would be a better 2 pairing than 1 pairing, it wouldn't hurt to have a really strong 3 pairing which we don't really have today. If Stecher steps it up and is a #3 calibre defender our D core looks decent but still not spectacular - certainly not good enough to justify moving Tanev. 
 

As it stands, our D is mediocre-average defensively and awful offensively. A huge part of why we had the worst goal differential last season. 

If Edler Tanev are only a two pair on most teams, then what the heck would the Leaf's D be classified as?  AHL only?  :lol::lol::lol:

 

Edler Tanev are a number one pair, and a good one.  The great thing about the CANUCKS d now is Guddy/Hutton is also a number one pair.  Top shut down guy, with a super talented offence guy, who also is good on D.  I know I'm picking on the Laughs (God they are such a joke of a franchise) but I see only one guy from their D even cracking the Canuck's top 6 - Reilly.  

Share this post


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

If Edler Tanev are only a two pair on most teams, then what the heck would the Leaf's D be classified as?  AHL only?  :lol::lol::lol:

 

Edler Tanev are a number one pair, and a good one.  The great thing about the CANUCKS d now is Guddy/Hutton is also a number one pair.  Top shut down guy, with a super talented offence guy, who also is good on D.  I know I'm picking on the Laughs (God they are such a joke of a franchise) but I see only one guy from their D even cracking the Canuck's top 6 - Reilly.  

 

Alf, hate to break it to you, but Gudbranson - Hutton is not a #1 pair, and they are far from it. They are both good players, and Gudbranson is a bonafide #4. 

Share this post


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

 

Alf, hate to break it to you, but Gudbranson - Hutton is not a #1 pair, and they are far from it. They are both good players, and Gudbranson is a bonafide #4. 

Hutton is becoming a one and Gudbranson is already a proven two.  Remember, Guddy averaged 26+ minutes during the Panther's playoffs last season - more than (so called number one) Ekblad.  They are a number one pair, as are Edler and Tanev.  We have two number one pairs.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Hutton is becoming a one and Gudbranson is already a proven two.  Remember, Guddy averaged 26+ minutes during the Panther's playoffs last season - more than (so called number one) Ekblad.  They are a number one pair, as are Edler and Tanev.  We have two number one pairs.  

Edler has gotten stronger each game along with Tanev. Guddy plays well in front of the net but not overly physical. Hutton looks great and is obviously heavier and stronger.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Edler has gotten stronger each game along with Tanev. Guddy plays well in front of the net but not overly physical. Hutton looks great and is obviously heavier and stronger.

Agreed.  Too many posters here recently running down our top players.  Could these be Leaf's fans sneaking onto our boards, trying to pester us super nice and wonderfully amazing Canuck's fans?  

 

Go Canucks Go!!!:towel:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Hutton is becoming a one and Gudbranson is already a proven two.  Remember, Guddy averaged 26+ minutes during the Panther's playoffs last season - more than (so called number one) Ekblad.  They are a number one pair, as are Edler and Tanev.  We have two number one pairs.  

 

If we have two #1 pairs, one is pretty average for a #1 pairing as far as I'm concerned. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't know if i could agree that Guddy and Hutton are number 1 defensive pairing. i think they have the ability to get there. but they're clearly number 2 as of this moment. is Guddy better than Tanev defensively? Is Hutton better offensively as Edler? perhaps they'll get there. but not quite there yet. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Agreed.  Too many posters here recently running down our top players.  Could these be Leaf's fans sneaking onto our boards, trying to pester us super nice and wonderfully amazing Canuck's fans?  

 

Go Canucks Go!!!:towel:

I'd agree that the Edler hate is too much, though it does seem to be dropping off a bit as Edler has had a pretty strong pre-season. I look forward to having two competitive defense pairings. I'm also excited to hear that Tanev is still working on developing his game. It's good to see a guy who's willing to learn like Tanev is.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ajhockey said:

I'd agree that the Edler hate is too much, though it does seem to be dropping off a bit as Edler has had a pretty strong pre-season. I look forward to having two competitive defense pairings. I'm also excited to hear that Tanev is still working on developing his game. It's good to see a guy who's willing to learn like Tanev is.

I accept Canuck's fans get frustrated.  Heck, I'm really bad for losing hope, and get put back in line by some smart posters.  There are some posts where there is intended derision of our top guys, while saying guys on other teams are better.  We have a really solid top four D.  Plus, we have Stecher now, who is looking like another Hutton!  It's our Canuck's board, and our D is certainly to be "defended" here.  Go Canucks Go!!!  Leafs, Oilers, Flames, and other teams's fans go to your own boards; stop coming here and bad mouthing our players - especially our D, who are CLEARLY A LOT BETTERTHAN YOURS.  HA HA HA.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I accept Canuck's fans get frustrated.  Heck, I'm really bad for losing hope, and get put back in line by some smart posters.  There are some posts where there is intended derision of our top guys, while saying guys on other teams are better.  We have a really solid top four D.  Plus, we have Stecher now, who is looking like another Hutton!  It's our Canuck's board, and our D is certainly to be "defended" here.  Go Canucks Go!!!  Leafs, Oilers, Flames, and other teams's fans go to your own boards; stop coming here and bad mouthing our players - especially our D, who are CLEARLY A LOT BETTERTHAN YOURS.  HA HA HA.  

 

 

Damn it Alf you forgot to take your pill again. 

 

Just because this is a Canuck board it doesn't mean we can't admit that other teams/players are better than ours.  If you go over-board with the homerism it just makes you look like a troll. 

Edited by The 5th Line
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

 

Damn it Alf you forgot to take your pill again. 

 

Just because this is a Canuck board it doesn't mean we can't admit that other teams/plays are better than ours.  If you go over-board with the homerism it just makes you look like a troll. 

You're right 5th Line.  :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Alflives said:

If Edler Tanev are only a two pair on most teams, then what the heck would the Leaf's D be classified as?  AHL only?  :lol::lol::lol:

 

Edler Tanev are a number one pair, and a good one.  The great thing about the CANUCKS d now is Guddy/Hutton is also a number one pair.  Top shut down guy, with a super talented offence guy, who also is good on D.  I know I'm picking on the Laughs (God they are such a joke of a franchise) but I see only one guy from their D even cracking the Canuck's top 6 - Reilly.  


I don't even know if I should respond to this as I can't tell if you are joking or not. Why even bring up the Leafs? Our D is better defensively but I can guarantee Toronto's puts up more points. Both are bad. 


Either Tanev or Edler are fine in the top pairing playing with a top 15 defender. Together they are just alright, but as Edler has proven over the years he isn't great as the workhorse #1 guy. 

The 2010-2011 team had:

1. Ehrhoff - average #1

2. Bieksa - above average #2
3. Edler - average # 2
4. Hamhuis - above average #3
5. Salo - above average #5
6. Ballard/Rome - average #6

Effective D by committee. While far from any sort of correct science or ranking system, based on what I've watched, the success of the team, and analytics this is where I would put the 2010-2011 D core that had the lowest GA (but we had great goaltending as well) and scored a good number of points (we had forward who were contributing too). 

 

Based on a point system, where playing a position above or below would be worth two points, and average/below average 1 point, this d core would be at +7. 

We finished 24th in GA last and our goaltending was certainly not the reason. On top of that our D generated a sad amount of offence. I hope it is better this year, but Gudbranson isn't going to be a huge upgrade over Hamhuis. Removing Tanev from that group takes it from mediocre/bad to downright awful. Without Tanev our D is worse than the Leafs'. 

2015-2016 going into this year

1. Tanev - average #2
2. Edler - below average #2

3. Gudbranson - average #4

4. Hutton - average #4

5. Sbisa - average #6
6. Larsen? - average #6


Based on the same ranking above, this D would be -7. 

I really thought we would be bringing back Hamhuis who is at this stage also an average #4 (Gudbranson/Hutton/Hamhuis are all very different but very equal in regards to quality) instead of throwing a Larsen, Biega, or Tryamkin in the #6 spot. That would have brought our D up to a -3 which is respectable. While it seems like one player sways things too much, a Hamhuis - Sbisa pairing would have been a pretty good 3rd pairing. Sbisa - Larsen is going to be a garbage fire, and completely unreliable causing a lot more stress on our top four. Also when you consider injuries, Hamhuis could slide into a top 4 role perfectly - something you couldn't trust Sbisa or Larsen to do. 

 

Edited by canucklehead44

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, canucklehead44 said:


I don't even know if I should respond to this as I can't tell if you are joking or not. Why even bring up the Leafs? Our D is better defensively but I can guarantee Toronto's puts up more points. Both are bad. 


Either Tanev or Edler are fine in the top pairing playing with a top 15 defender. Together they are just alright, but as Edler has proven over the years he isn't great as the workhorse #1 guy. 

The 2010-2011 team had:

1. Ehrhoff - average #1

2. Bieksa - above average #2
3. Edler - average # 2
4. Hamhuis - above average #3
5. Salo - above average #5
6. Ballard/Rome - average #6

Effective D by committee. While far from any sort of correct science or ranking system, based on what I've watched, the success of the team, and analytics this is where I would put the 2010-2011 D core that had the lowest GA (but we had great goaltending as well) and scored a good number of points (we had forward who were contributing too). 

 

Based on a point system, where playing a position above or below would be worth two points, and average/below average 1 point, this d core would be at +7. 

We finished 24th in GA last and our goaltending was certainly not the reason. On top of that our D generated a sad amount of offence. I hope it is better this year, but Gudbranson isn't going to be a huge upgrade over Hamhuis. Removing Tanev from that group takes it from mediocre/bad to downright awful. Without Tanev our D is worse than the Leafs'. 

2015-2016 going into this year

1. Tanev - average #2
2. Edler - below average #2

3. Gudbranson - average #4

4. Hutton - average #4

5. Sbisa - average #6
6. Larsen? - average #6


Based on the same ranking above, this D would be -7. 

I really thought we would be bringing back Hamhuis who is at this stage also an average #4 (Gudbranson/Hutton/Hamhuis are all very different but very equal in regards to quality) instead of throwing a Larsen, Biega, or Tryamkin in the #6 spot. That would have brought our D up to a -3 which is respectable. While it seems like one player sways things too much, a Hamhuis - Sbisa pairing would have been a pretty good 3rd pairing. Sbisa - Larsen is going to be a garbage fire, and completely unreliable causing a lot more stress on our top four. Also when you consider injuries, Hamhuis could slide into a top 4 role perfectly - something you couldn't trust Sbisa or Larsen to do. 

 

One thing worth noting in regards to our defense is the depth we have. I would argue that our depth surpasses the depth of many teams so that in case of injuries (which will inevitably happen), our #7 and #8 guys will surpass ones of other teams. 

 

Another thing to note is the potential for improvement. Hutton in particular seems like he could become a solid #3 or maybe even #2 guy by the end of this season if he continues on what appears to be his current trajectory. Gudbranson as well is young and I believe he has the potential to be a #3 guy. Aside from that we have dark horses in guys like Larsen and especially Stecher. Currently Stecher isn't ranking on your list, which is fine given his lack of NHL experience; however, I think he has the potential to mimic the potential that Hutton has, making him a #4 guy this year if he continues to surprise.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, ajhockey said:

One thing worth noting in regards to our defense is the depth we have. I would argue that our depth surpasses the depth of many teams so that in case of injuries (which will inevitably happen), our #7 and #8 guys will surpass ones of other teams. 

 

Another thing to note is the potential for improvement. Hutton in particular seems like he could become a solid #3 or maybe even #2 guy by the end of this season if he continues on what appears to be his current trajectory. Gudbranson as well is young and I believe he has the potential to be a #3 guy. Aside from that we have dark horses in guys like Larsen and especially Stecher. Currently Stecher isn't ranking on your list, which is fine given his lack of NHL experience; however, I think he has the potential to mimic the potential that Hutton has, making him a #4 guy this year if he continues to surprise.

Hard to comment on Stecher, but I agree with you. If Gudbranson and Hutton can trend up and take the pressure off Edler and Tanev our top four will be solid. If we can get a surprise from Stecher or Larsen and Sbisa takes another step forward from last year our D could be average, maybe even slightly above. 

Edited by canucklehead44

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, ajhockey said:

One thing worth noting in regards to our defense is the depth we have. I would argue that our depth surpasses the depth of many teams so that in case of injuries (which will inevitably happen), our #7 and #8 guys will surpass ones of other teams. 

 

Another thing to note is the potential for improvement. Hutton in particular seems like he could become a solid #3 or maybe even #2 guy by the end of this season if he continues on what appears to be his current trajectory. Gudbranson as well is young and I believe he has the potential to be a #3 guy. Aside from that we have dark horses in guys like Larsen and especially Stecher. Currently Stecher isn't ranking on your list, which is fine given his lack of NHL experience; however, I think he has the potential to mimic the potential that Hutton has, making him a #4 guy this year if he continues to surprise.

Things have to go well for your evaluation to hold. Lots of potential but then most teams have that. I do think Edler is a #2 and Tanev a #3. No comment on the others.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, canucklehead44 said:


I don't even know if I should respond to this as I can't tell if you are joking or not. Why even bring up the Leafs? Our D is better defensively but I can guarantee Toronto's puts up more points. Both are bad. 


Either Tanev or Edler are fine in the top pairing playing with a top 15 defender. Together they are just alright, but as Edler has proven over the years he isn't great as the workhorse #1 guy. 

The 2010-2011 team had:

1. Ehrhoff - average #1

2. Bieksa - above average #2
3. Edler - average # 2
4. Hamhuis - above average #3
5. Salo - above average #5
6. Ballard/Rome - average #6

Effective D by committee. While far from any sort of correct science or ranking system, based on what I've watched, the success of the team, and analytics this is where I would put the 2010-2011 D core that had the lowest GA (but we had great goaltending as well) and scored a good number of points (we had forward who were contributing too). 

 

Based on a point system, where playing a position above or below would be worth two points, and average/below average 1 point, this d core would be at +7. 

We finished 24th in GA last and our goaltending was certainly not the reason. On top of that our D generated a sad amount of offence. I hope it is better this year, but Gudbranson isn't going to be a huge upgrade over Hamhuis. Removing Tanev from that group takes it from mediocre/bad to downright awful. Without Tanev our D is worse than the Leafs'. 

2015-2016 going into this year

1. Tanev - average #2
2. Edler - below average #2

3. Gudbranson - average #4

4. Hutton - average #4

5. Sbisa - average #6
6. Larsen? - average #6


Based on the same ranking above, this D would be -7. 

I really thought we would be bringing back Hamhuis who is at this stage also an average #4 (Gudbranson/Hutton/Hamhuis are all very different but very equal in regards to quality) instead of throwing a Larsen, Biega, or Tryamkin in the #6 spot. That would have brought our D up to a -3 which is respectable. While it seems like one player sways things too much, a Hamhuis - Sbisa pairing would have been a pretty good 3rd pairing. Sbisa - Larsen is going to be a garbage fire, and completely unreliable causing a lot more stress on our top four. Also when you consider injuries, Hamhuis could slide into a top 4 role perfectly - something you couldn't trust Sbisa or Larsen to do. 

 

I very rarely use my minus.  I disagree with your valuation of our D.  That's the ranking for Toronto's D.  Ours is one of the best in the league.  Are you a Canuck's fan or a Leaf's fan?  

Share this post


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

I very rarely use my minus.  I disagree with your valuation of our D.  That's the ranking for Toronto's D.  Ours is one of the best in the league.  Are you a Canuck's fan or a Leaf's fan?  

Minus back at you. Canucks fan of course - and I am kind of doubting you are one of you seriously think our D is one of the best in the league.

 

Lack of offense from the D was the biggest issue with the team last year outside of injuries. Swapping out Hamhuis for Guddy won't help. Really hope Hutton takes a big step forward and either Larsen or Stecher can chip in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said:

Minus back at you. Canucks fan of course - and I am kind of doubting you are one of you seriously think our D is one of the best in the league.

 

Lack of offense from the D was the biggest issue with the team last year outside of injuries. Swapping out Hamhuis for Guddy won't help. Really hope Hutton takes a big step forward and either Larsen or Stecher can chip in.

If you are a Canuck's fan, why so much hate for our D?  Edler is a proven # one, who can put up top points, and play in all situations, and big minutes.  Gudbranson is so great at what he does (shut down) that he played more playoff minutes Ekblad, and when traded we heard - from 5000 miles away - wtfs from his teammates.  Tanev is a fabulous complimentary two.  Does he not have one of the best shot suppression stats in the league?  And Hutton is clearly a top pair guy, showing skills we haven't seen here since Paul Reinhart.  So, you are wrong.  Accept your wrongness.  If you were here right now, I would drive over your Leaf's jersey with my scooter - twice!  :lol:   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Alflives said:

If you are a Canuck's fan, why so much hate for our D?  Edler is a proven # one, who can put up top points, and play in all situations, and big minutes.  Gudbranson is so great at what he does (shut down) that he played more playoff minutes Ekblad, and when traded we heard - from 5000 miles away - wtfs from his teammates.  Tanev is a fabulous complimentary two.  Does he not have one of the best shot suppression stats in the league?  And Hutton is clearly a top pair guy, showing skills we haven't seen here since Paul Reinhart.  So, you are wrong.  Accept your wrongness.  If you were here right now, I would drive over your Leaf's jersey with my scooter - twice!  :lol:   

Why do you keep saying I am a Leafs fan !?!? Lol. I don't hate our D. This whole argument came about defending Tanev and how we can't trade him - he is awesome. His defensive ability is elite. His lack of offensive ability and physicality drops him down a bit but nothing wrong with being a solid #2.

 

Vancouver finished 24th in GA with two solid goalies in Miller and Markstrom and 29th in GF, with our top scoring Dman with a measley 25 points. 

 

I am probably far too optimistic. I don't hate our defense while objectively, based on the numbers, I should.

 

Losing Tanev from that group would be detrimental. 

 

I've also been making tonnes of bets that Vancouver will finish ahead of the Leafs in the standings, as everyone here thinks Vancouver will finish dead last (including Red Wings, Penguins, Sabres, Canadians, Leafs and other Canucks fans).

 

Wearing my Canucks jersey proudly through tens of thousands of Blue Jays fans (Toronto is a baseball city, nobody cares about  the Leafs except for people in Vancouver) then being questioned whether I am a Canucks fan is insulting.

Edited by canucklehead44
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said:

Why do you keep saying I am a Leafs fan !?!? Lol. I don't hate our D. This whole argument came about defending Tanev and how we can't trade him - he is awesome. His defensive ability is elite. His lack of offensive ability and physicality drops him down a bit but nothing wrong with being a solid #2.

 

Vancouver finished 24th in GA with two solid goalies in Miller and Markstrom and 29th in GF, with our top scoring Dman with a measley 25 points. 

 

I am probably far too optimistic. I don't hate our defense while objectively, based on the numbers, I should.

 

Losing Tanev from that group would be detrimental. 

 

I've also been making tonnes of bets that Vancouver will finish ahead of the Leafs in the standings, as everyone here thinks Vancouver will finish dead last (including Red Wings, Penguins, Sabres, Canadians, Leafs and other Canucks fans).

 

Wearing my Canucks jersey proudly through tens of thousands of Blue Jays fans (Toronto is a baseball city, nobody cares about  the Leafs except for people in Vancouver) then being questioned whether I am a Canucks fan is insulting.

I hope you can forgive Alf for the most heinous of crimes - accusations of your being a Leaf's fan.  Alf is humbly apologetic.   :)

  • Upvote 2

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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.