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

[Signing] Tryamkin goes to the KHL


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

... the same way we handled Kassian.

We take the Coaches word on a player,. and not read into the frustration of a player not being able to understand his Coach? 

 

There is more to a picture than the frame it is put in.

Kassian needed to hit bottom and wasn't quite there yet.   An accident was likely the turning point, not anything related to what we didn't do.  It's sad that we gave up on him, but if he hadn't crashed that truck he may still be all over the map.  I am happy he's turned it around, but don't feel him playing more minutes was the key to that.

 

There is more to a picture and I feel that's the case here.  The day we act on what players demand is the day we will have 30 of them all wanting the same things.  Coaches are in place for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HomeBrew said:

WD was fired for his mishandling of our roster. Tryamkin comes out to say his icetime was not communicated. There is more "evidence" to prove that is the case, than against it - which there is zero. 

So you take the word of Tramkin and his translators at face value, and to be the complete truth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Baggins said:

You don't think ice time would depend on in game circumstances? Or who is in the line-up and who's injured?  What's the score? How about the number of PP's versus the number of PK's in a game? All of these thing will cause fluctuations in ice time from game to game. Top pair typically gets the most consistent ice time. You ask me he sounds kind of stupid if he expected 20 minutes every game. Or maybe we're just back to self entitled.

"In game circumstances" and "what the score is" would not fluctuate your ice time that greatly on a consistently inconsistent basis throughout the entire year. Tryamkin was playing better than most of our defensemen throughout the year, but good ol' Willie "bench 'em because they score" Desjardins clearly knew how to handle the situation...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

Thing is, how is that fair?  If a team builds chemistry, works hard and "gets competitive", and he wants to waltz back in.  Seems to me he should start all over again and prove that he deserves to be there if that is the case.

 

I don't like making "a" player into a big deal, one who demands or expects things.  I like the team to be comprised of players who do work hard and earn it.  He is big and showed some promise but, beyond that, he hasn't really done that yet.

Couple of years ago there was some complaining we didn't have any Russians on the team. This is why I'm not fond of drafting Russians. They're too often all about the money, have a sense of entitlement, or both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Maybe. But for an organization that claims it honours contracts signed (and has given us the distinct advantage of being stuck with Edler for years as a result) it seems a bit hollow to villainize Tryamkin for simply demanding the team honor a contract they signed with him. 

 

I look at the AHL thing differently. Had he agreed to go it is very likely that would have been used against him should they want to permanently send him down. If he had gone to the AHL he very likely would have gotten stuck there until injuries forced them to use him. And would have given the Canucks the flexibility to call up others over him. 

 

I dont agree with the entitlement issue. But I strongly suspect some of that was rooted in promises made to get him to North America to begin with and then stay when he wasn't being played.

The clause put into Tryamkin's contract and agreed to by the Cannots, shows how much he wanted to play in the NHL.

 

The "employees" posting here can parrot family, but every player will say family had some part of a decision.

 

Like you pointed out, right off the bat the media the media somehow found out about internal mis-management information and "leaked" it to their tame media. They put the spin on it putting Tryamkin on the "not a good puppet" list and then had their "employee henchmen" ostracize him in the forums and radio shows. This was internal information that was toxic to the player.

 

So, there could be credibility issues here;

 

1. They sign, then try to violate the terms of the contract, publicize the information and don't support the player's decision and their own contract terms.

 

2. He gets benched, then as low as 12 minutes a game while other players are not as effective.

 

3. He gets next to no PP time.

 

4. He get thrown under the bus by the coach of the day, a coach that is supported by mis-management.

 

5. He signs to go back to Russia somewhere around 24 hours after the Canucks contract offer.

 

What offer did the Canucks make? One equal to what they will offer Gudbranson? Hutton? Or did they feel they had him over a barrel and tried to treat him like most RFA's get treated and low ball him? In his post season comments he said he wanted to stay. Does the coach matter if mis-management tries to undermine the player? It doesn't matter that other players go to the minors, it is the contract that matters. Everyone knows what WD's ideal players come from, the AHL. Even with him gone mis-management probably wanted to take that clause away, just because they wanted to not because he needed to be in the AHL.

 

Toronto used to be the Maple Laffs, Edmonton, the Coilers now Vancouver the Cannots. They cannot even keep their top defense prospects, a position that is coveted by just about all teams in the NHL. Cannot draft players equivalent to other team's draft picks, cannot see that players under 6' and under 180 lbs aren't very successful in the playoffs, cannot seem to admit that the teams needs to be rebuilt, cannot manage to make decisions quickly enough to make a difference.

 

Every Canuck dman that started right off the bat after being drafted went on to lengthy careers in the NHL, indeed most dmen that start that way do but some how it escaped this mis-management group and they totally let this get away from them.

 

One other quick thought, they kept Larsen on the team why not Pedan, he spoke Russian and would have helped him and couldn't have been worse than Larsen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

We were assessing this over the past year.   There was too small a sample size to determine if mistakes were made or not..the process is an ongoing one, of trying different things.  Willie got fired because the team dropped out the bottom..that's what happens.  We brought in new guys and it was his job to see what we had (or didn't have).  Perhaps he gave others more of an opportunity, but we don't know how they were responding in the room, on the bench, etc.  It matters in a big picture way.

 

But don't let that stop everyone from hanging every single thing on him.

 

The fact that, from the start, Tram had "issues" says something to me.  This is a golden opportunity, not something to storm through demanding this or that.  Ask Coho about that.

Keep in mind, management probably had to promise the kid the moon to coerce him into coming over after he had JUST gotten married a month prior.

 

I don't blame him for having issues with the way he was handled. The guy barely spoke the language. He probably felt (and rightfully so) that he had been sold a bill of goods. 

 

This mess reeks of a failure to communicate between the branches of authority that govern this team. They fired Willie a season too late. Doesn't matter that they extricated the tumour when the cancerous stench of his minor league mediocrity has already spread through the organization too to bottom. Expect more of this sort of thing to come as long as we have incompetence at the helm.

 

Make no mistake. The Canucks just lost their best defenseman. Expansion exempt 22 year old 6'8" bears don't grow on trees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Baggins said:

Being sat out wasn't a violation of his his contract nor a condition that allowed him to go back to the KHL. He was collecting his NHL salary. They weren't asking him to play in the AHL as a demotion nor a long term gig. He showed up in poor shape and they asked him to go on a conditioning stint. Which would have gotten him playing sooner. Yes, he was a big baby for not doing it if he really wanted to play. A self entitled baby. NHL veterans go on AHL conditioning stints.

 

I'll say it again, just under 17 minutes per game is pretty good for a first year d-man that showed up to camp in poor shape.

I disagree. He made it clear what his expectations were from the beginning and stuck to his word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WD in 2015

“If you look at a guy like Sven Baertschi, if our total focus is just on (winning) and he’s struggling, he probably doesn’t get to play and we lose him. We lose him. I truthfully think, in a strange sense, we had a good year for getting where we need to be. The ice time Tryamkin got at the end of the year, Horvat having to go against all the big guys, Baertschi getting to play, Hutton making the team, Jake (Virtanen) staying with the team, Markstrom getting to play down the stretch. There’s no part of me that thinks losing is good, but we got some things done that we needed to last year.

 

2016 roles around, WD doesn't play Trymakin and guess what....We lose him. 

 

Good job WD, and good residence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Baggins said:

Couple of years ago there was some complaining we didn't have any Russians on the team. This is why I'm not fond of drafting Russians. They're too often all about the money, have a sense of entitlement, or both.

I think the entitlement aspect is more of a generational youth thing than a Russian thing. Willie didn't work well with it. People make such a big deal about how easy going the Sedins are - they're a coaches dream. Bottom line for me, I'd like a winning team. Do I really care if some players are harder to manage? Just show me some wins please, I couldn't really care if the hard working Biega's get their deserved ice time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HomeBrew said:

"In circumstances" and "what the score is" would not fluctuate your ice time that greatly on a consistently inconsistent basis throughout the entire year. Tryamkin was playing better than most of our defensemen throughout the year, but good ol' Willie "bench 'em because they score" Desjardins clearly knew how to handle the situation...

Well Tryamkin certainly got more ice time when Tanev was out injured. Ice time can also be affected by performance. There were certainly games I didn't think he was better than Stecher or Tanev. You know, the two guys he was competing with for ice time on the right side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JB offered him two years. He didn't take it, and so it is.

at least he cant go to any other NHL team. If he still dreams of playing in the NHL, then nux are it unless they trade away his rights.

 

perhaps when he develops to a point where he will be fit and good enough to play 20mijs for the entire season, he will coke back and play.  The team should be more competitive in a couple of years. He didn't sign long term in khl, did he? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, gurn said:

So you take the word of Tramkin and his translators at face value, and to be the complete truth?

Well you know I watch Willie all year and when Tram came along I watch even closer.

I believe Tram when he said he was not happy playing here under Willie. That I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jack Fig said:

Makes no difference. It's his life (and his wife's) and he's going to live it on his terms. Why spend time being somewhere you don't want to be if you have good alternatives to consider? He's beholden to nobody. Nor should he be.

Sure, he has the right to take his ball and go home. I just find his complaining annoying. For every whiny primadonna there's a dozen prospects dying to get the ice time Tryamkin had

 

Willie's gone, he would have a fresh start. But hey, I would rather he leave now than have the new coach deal with changing this kid's diaper when he doesn't get his ice time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's obvious that he just wanted to go back home and live in his home area with his family. If he wanted to stay in North America and played in the NHL, he would have. 

 

How come now we are arguing about his ice time and "conditioning stint"? But during the season we didn't? We all thought it was a good idea for Tryamkin to do some conditioning work when he showed up out of shape. We didn't argue about his ice time during the season, and the media definitely didn't let it be known.

 

People arguing are just grasping for straws and trying to pinpoint management. It's not Tryamkin fault, but also not management's. The guy simply just wanted to go home. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Toews said:

I disagree. He made it clear what his expectations were from the beginning and stuck to his word.

What do you disagree with? That sitting him out wasn't a violation of the terms of his contract or the not sending him to the AHL part? They asked him to go on a conditioning stint. Nothing more. He declined. So they didn't send him. So management lived up to it's end of the contract. Don't see how you can disagree with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he comes back.

Quote me if you want. 

I think he has a killer year in the KHL, we extend him for a ridiculous contract (compared to what he's worth) and he's back. Itd be worth it.

Only thing that would block us from negotiating would be a killer year from either Juolevi, Subban (unlikely as hell be call up most likely), or Pedan. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, soshified said:

It's obvious that he just wanted to go back home and live in his home area with his family. If he wanted to stay in North America and played in the NHL, he would have. 

 

How come now we are arguing about his ice time and "conditioning stint"? But during the season we didn't? We all thought it was a good idea for Tryamkin to do some conditioning work when he showed up out of shape. We didn't argue about his ice time during the season, and the media definitely didn't let it be known.

 

People arguing are just grasping for straws and trying to pinpoint management. It's not Tryamkin fault, but also not management's. The guy simply just wanted to go home. 

It's the typical blame game that goes on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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