Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Christopher Tanev | #8 | D


-SN-

Recommended Posts

this is probably his first real significant injury of his career. being a good defenseman is one thing, but i recall don cherry saying something years ago about tanev blocking all these shots, and he said that the canucks can't rely on that stat alone. you can say what you want about the guy, but cherry still understands the game

Edited by Twilight Sparkle
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

So Tanev with Tryamkin when he gets back?

Normally I'd like him with Sbisa and that may very well happen too but Edler also being out could screw that up. 

 

Sbisa, Tanev

Hutton, Gudbranson

Tryamkin, Stetcher

 

...is a possibility as well. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, J.R. said:

Normally I'd like him with Sbisa and that may very well happen too but Edler also being out could screw that up. 

 

Sbisa, Tanev

Hutton, Gudbranson

Tryamkin, Stetcher

 

...is a possibility as well. 

Very possible that is what happens. Because of Edler's NTC I would start that trade in January since it might take that long to get a waive. Tanev does not have a NTC right now so his movement could be done much easier. The left side is weaker IMHO. Move Tanev and;

Edler-Stecher

Hutton-Gudbranson

Sbisa-Tryamkin

Either way I see both Edler and Tanev as transition players. Neither will be there in 4 - 5 years for various reasons. I prefer moving Tanev because of perceived value which would give a better return. Edler at 20 TOI is serviceable even to the end of his contract but maybe moveable in 2 years as well.

 

Bottom line I want to see one of them moved by the TDL for a prospect and a 1st Rounder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

Very possible that is what happens. Because of Edler's NTC I would start that trade in January since it might take that long to get a waive. Tanev does not have a NTC right now so his movement could be done much easier. The left side is weaker IMHO. Move Tanev and;

Edler-Stecher

Hutton-Gudbranson

Sbisa-Tryamkin

Either way I see both Edler and Tanev as transition players. Neither will be there in 4 - 5 years for various reasons. I prefer moving Tanev because of perceived value which would give a better return. Edler at 20 TOI is serviceable even to the end of his contract but maybe moveable in 2 years as well.

 

Bottom line I want to see one of them moved by the TDL for a prospect and a 1st Rounder.

JB will not trade either.  Sure we fans want to see Tanev traded for a top six forward, but it's all really moot talk.  JB doesn't trade veterans for younger prospect type players.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Boudrias said:

Very possible that is what happens. Because of Edler's NTC I would start that trade in January since it might take that long to get a waive. Tanev does not have a NTC right now so his movement could be done much easier. The left side is weaker IMHO. Move Tanev and;

Edler-Stecher

Hutton-Gudbranson

Sbisa-Tryamkin

Either way I see both Edler and Tanev as transition players. Neither will be there in 4 - 5 years for various reasons. I prefer moving Tanev because of perceived value which would give a better return. Edler at 20 TOI is serviceable even to the end of his contract but maybe moveable in 2 years as well.

 

Bottom line I want to see one of them moved by the TDL for a prospect and a 1st Rounder.

Tanev is only 26. Already labelled an elite shutdown defenceman.(not talking offensive). Yes we need  offensive forwards but why trade a guy that will be very hard to replace. Look what JB did for the D ... Guddy tram,stetch a huge upgrade and traded what away for it? Mccann for guddy . The story line is" Build from our net out" JB's off to a great start. let see what he can do for our forward group without trading pieces that are needed to keep going forward. Tanev's 26 not a grizzald old vet. I don't see a decline in his play, actually pretty consistant. Avgs.17-18 min a game doesn't produce alot of points but makes up for it by taking very few penalty minutes (8mins last year) by playing smart. Unless its a complete lopsided deal , were it's impossible to turn down  I say we keep the guy .

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Dannydog said:

Tanev is only 26. Already labelled an elite shutdown defenceman.(not talking offensive). Yes we need  offensive forwards but why trade a guy that will be very hard to replace. Look what JB did for the D ... Guddy tram,stetch a huge upgrade and traded what away for it? Mccann for guddy . The story line is" Build from our net out" JB's off to a great start. let see what he can do for our forward group without trading pieces that are needed to keep going forward. Tanev's 26 not a grizzald old vet. I don't see a decline in his play, actually pretty consistant. Avgs.17-18 min a game doesn't produce alot of points but makes up for it by taking very few penalty minutes (8mins last year) by playing smart. Unless its a complete lopsided deal , were it's impossible to turn down  I say we keep the guy .

I won't argue hard against your thinking as it is as valid as mine. My thought was they trade Edler or Tanev simply because they would bring the biggest return. Such a deal would be a true hockey deal. They are the only real depth in the org that would bring a major return. I lean towards moving Tanev because his NTC does not kick in until summer so he can be moved easily. My other concern with Tanev is his ability to play a heavy playoff style game.

 

Will Benning make a trade using a d-man? He said as much. It likely depends on how well the bottom 4 d-man do going into the TDL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I swear people want to trade him because he doesn't fit the mold. He's not huge. 6'2" 195 lbs. He isn't a punishing bodychecker, he's positionally sound, and does his job well.

Yet, people constantly want to trade him? In the past 3 years he's averaged over 18 points a season. Got 3 assists in 6 games last time the team was in the playoffs. 

 

He could play anywhere from top pairing to bottom pairing. Just because he's not flashy. You need different styles of d-men in the 6 guys you have. 

 

If he gets outplayed by the other 5 guys, then consider trading him. Not before. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

I swear people want to trade him because he doesn't fit the mold. He's not huge. 6'2" 195 lbs. He isn't a punishing bodychecker, he's positionally sound, and does his job well.

Yet, people constantly want to trade him? In the past 3 years he's averaged over 18 points a season. Got 3 assists in 6 games last time the team was in the playoffs. 

 

He could play anywhere from top pairing to bottom pairing. Just because he's not flashy. You need different styles of d-men in the 6 guys you have. 

 

If he gets outplayed by the other 5 guys, then consider trading him. Not before. 

In order to get quality you have to give quality.  People don't want to trade him because he sucks.  He's a good hockey players on a really good contract.  That's why he's our best NTC trading asset.  Right now his value is at an all time high and could net a young top 6 forward.  An area we have a need to fill.  More so than young top 4 D.   

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

In order to get quality you have to give quality.  People don't want to trade him because he sucks.  He's a good hockey players on a really good contract.  That's why he's our best NTC trading asset.  Right now his value is at an all time high and could net a young top 6 forward.  An area we have a need to fill.  More so than young top 4 D.   

Young Top 6 NHL forward?

or

Prospect with top 6 Potential?

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

I swear people want to trade him because he doesn't fit the mold. He's not huge. 6'2" 195 lbs. He isn't a punishing bodychecker, he's positionally sound, and does his job well.

Yet, people constantly want to trade him? In the past 3 years he's averaged over 18 points a season. Got 3 assists in 6 games last time the team was in the playoffs. 

 

He could play anywhere from top pairing to bottom pairing. Just because he's not flashy. You need different styles of d-men in the 6 guys you have. 

 

If he gets outplayed by the other 5 guys, then consider trading him. Not before. 

 

This:

 

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

In order to get quality you have to give quality.  People don't want to trade him because he sucks.  He's a good hockey players on a really good contract.  That's why he's our best NTC trading asset.  Right now his value is at an all time high and could net a young top 6 forward.  An area we have a need to fill.  More so than young top 4 D.   

 

...and this:

 

My view on Tanev is that in around 4+ years when we're hopefully contending again, he'll be exiting his prime. He also gets rag-dolled too hard and too often for my liking and I'm concerned that starts catching up to him sooner than later (perhaps it already is). Then there's his NTC that kicks in this summer and that he currently is valued pretty high by the analytics community and off his performance at the world's. If we're going to maximize return on him, it's this year before July 1 IMO.

 

That and we're going to have to start moving him and yes, eventually Edler in the next couple years as the Hutton's, Stetcher's, Juolevi's, Brisebois etc start pushing for roles and minutes. There's simply not enough room for all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, J.R. said:

 

This:

 

 

...and this:

 

I view it a little differently. Tanev is just about to turn 27, which means he'd be 31 in your challenge for the Cup narrative. Technically, he could be on the downswing, but we've known defenceman to play successfully well into their 30's. I think that's the reason he's the most valuable trade chip, in addition to there being no restrictions to the club moving him, unlike Edler, who is also 30 and a little less likely to be as effective in 4 years. 

 

I know I almost contradicted myself a bit there, but if we're planning on having at least 1 of these guys here for the long haul then that's one additional way I'd try to look at it. I don't know how other teams value both players, but if we can project that their values would be similar then why wouldn't we keep the younger player?

 

The greatest hindrance to that plan is Edler refusing to to certain places, or anywhere at all, and limiting the pool of players we'd be picking from that potentially fit the teams needs in the top 6. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Green Building said:

I view it a little differently. Tanev is just about to turn 27, which means he'd be 31 in your challenge for the Cup narrative. Technically, he could be on the downswing, but we've known defenceman to play successfully well into their 30's. I think that's the reason he's the most valuable trade chip, in addition to there being no restrictions to the club moving him, unlike Edler, who is also 30 and a little less likely to be as effective in 4 years. 

 

I know I almost contradicted myself a bit there, but if we're planning on having at least 1 of these guys here for the long haul then that's one additional way I'd try to look at it. I don't know how other teams value both players, but if we can project that their values would be similar then why wouldn't we keep the younger player?

 

The greatest hindrance to that plan is Edler refusing to to certain places, or anywhere at all, and limiting the pool of players we'd be picking from that potentially fit the teams needs in the top 6. 

 

Edler isn't here long term either. At the latest, he's gone as a UFA in 2 more seasons (if we don't trade him/he agrees to a trade first). That's pretty short term really.

 

So IMO, neither are in the long term plans. We would be keeping the younger players Gudbranson, Hutton, Stetcher, Tryamkin, Juolevi, Brisebois...Sbisa for now etc.

 

Move Tanev for say Domi (as per Forsy's wish list) that also allows us to protect Sbisa (and ideally get more value from him next TDL when there's a better market do to no expansion draft). Draft around top 5 this year and pick up a potential top 6 forward (Hischier?).

 

Next year:

 

Domi, Horvat, Eriksson

Sedin, Sedin, Hansen

Granlund, Sutter, Boeser

????, Gaunce, Dorsett

 

Edler, Stetcher

Hutton, Gudbranson

Sbisa, Tryamkin

 

Move Sbisa at the TDL, call up Brisebois?

 

The following year:

 

Domi, Horvat, Eriksson

Virtanen, Hischier, Boeser

Granlund, Sutter, Lockwood?

???, Gaunce, Dorsett

 

Edler, Stetcher

Hutton, Gudbranson

Brisebois, Tryamkin

 

Move Edler at the TDL and call up Juolevi?

 

 

 

 

Edited by J.R.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

Edler isn't here long term either. At the latest, he's gone as a UFA in 2 more seasons (if we don't trade him/he agrees to a trade first). That's pretty short term really.

 

So IMO, neither are in the long term plans. We would be keeping the younger players Gudbranson, Hutton, Stetcher, Tryamkin, Juolevi, Brisebois...Sbisa for now etc.

 

Move Tanev for say Domi (as per Forsy's wish list) that also allows us to protect Sbisa (and ideally get more value from him next TDL when there's a better market do to no expansion draft). Draft around top 5 this year and pick up a potential top 6 forward (Hischier?).

I can't argue with neither of them being here long term, I re-read your post and realized you weren't advocating that either.

 

 



J.R. said:

That and we're going to have to start moving him and yes, eventually Edler in the next couple years

 

Domi is a firecracker. We need someone with that level of tenacity in their play to compliment Horvat whether they are on the same lines or not. He's like an Iginla-in-his-prime "lite" right now. Having said that, I haven't seen Forsy's wishlist, but it certainly involves adding something to sweeten the deal for Arizona right? They're an awful team, and they love that kid there. I would infer they would loathe to give up, even for Tanev. He's tied with Vrbata for points on the Yotes at the moment, which basically means it would be the near equivalent of us moving Horvat for a Tanev type player. I don't see the long term benefit for Arizona, only for us.

 

It remains to be seen how the expansion draft affects the market, mainly buyers hoping to shore up for a run, but it would certainly be an ongoing coincidence if the market burped on us in another year that we were poised to be sellers.

 

I said this to Elvis in another thread, and it's probably a pipe dream, but I would just LOVE to get 2 top 6 or top 7 picks this year. Lots of centers trending up at the moment, and another decent looking defenceman. Plenty of options to speed up the prospect replenish process even if the draft isn't supposed to be that good overall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Green Building said:

I can't argue with neither of them being here long term, I re-read your post and realized you weren't advocating that either.

 

 

 

 

Domi is a firecracker. We need someone with that level of tenacity in their play to compliment Horvat whether they are on the same lines or not. He's like an Iginla-in-his-prime "lite" right now. Having said that, I haven't seen Forsy's wishlist, but it certainly involves adding something to sweeten the deal for Arizona right? They're an awful team, and they love that kid there. I would infer they would loathe to give up, even for Tanev. He's tied with Vrbata for points on the Yotes at the moment, which basically means it would be the near equivalent of us moving Horvat for a Tanev type player. I don't see the long term benefit for Arizona, only for us.

 

It remains to be seen how the expansion draft affects the market, mainly buyers hoping to shore up for a run, but it would certainly be an ongoing coincidence if the market burped on us in another year that we were poised to be sellers.

 

I said this to Elvis in another thread, and it's probably a pipe dream, but I would just LOVE to get 2 top 6 or top 7 picks this year. Lots of centers trending up at the moment, and another decent looking defenceman. Plenty of options to speed up the prospect replenish process even if the draft isn't supposed to be that good overall. 

 

Tanev + one of Baer/Granlund/Rodin for Domi and a pick (3rd?) say...? They get a warm body winger with upside, the D they need and they'll have another top 5 lotto pick to supplement their forward group.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

Tanev + one of Baer/Granlund/Rodin for Domi and a pick (3rd?) say...? They get a warm body winger with upside, the D they need and they'll have another top 5 lotto pick to supplement their forward group.

 

Marginally better. You can't use their lotto pick as a sweetener to our trade deal though :lol:. I know we have an abundance of defence and a lack of scoring but the fact remains that Arizona is as bad as us when it comes to many things this year, including scoring goals. I don't know how Chayka's calculator works down there, but if I were an Arizona fan I'd be pissed at him for moving a sophomore scorer for Tanev. That's not a knock on Tanev as much as it's an observation on how their needs and our needs are similar enough to make us unlikely trade partners.

 

They need defence and scoring, but in order to get defence they give up one of their leading scorers? It doesn't add up for them and neither Baer's off season or Granlund's work ethic should be enough to make them buy. If they did? Good for JB.

 

I would hesitate to throw Rodin into any deals before we know what we have in him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...