Hank Moody Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 Was discussed on the radio this morning and I completely agree - You have to trade this guy now while his value is highest. I know this has been a common sentiment amongst Canucks fans, but I think it's time we seriously start to think about why this isn't happening this offseason. All inclinations are that Management aren't willing to move him. I don't see why not. Rebuilding team, would rather give the spot to a guy who can be here when we're good enough for a long period of time, and you don't want to waste Tanev's prime on a team sitting in the basement for the next 3-4 years. For example: Trade Tanev for a top 15 pick if Liljegren/Foote fall like Chychrun last draft. Next season: Stecher - Edler Sbisa - Juolevi Hutton - Gudbranson Then in 3-4 years when we're ready to compete for a playoff spot, we're looking at: Player (Age) Stecher (26) - Juolevi (22) Hutton (27) - Liljegren/Foote (21) Gudbranson (28) - Filler Dman/J. Subban This is of course assuming no player movements or extra D-men are drafted in that time period which is probably not reasonable. I think that's a lot more solid than a 32-33 year old Tanev moving forward who could be in the tail end of his prime. Bring in a guy who can play an important role while we rebuild, and would be ready to put in a solid 8-9 seasons while we're a contending team than Tanev who could only service us for say, 2-3 more seasons while we're competitive. Plus, this is also assuming Tryamkin never comes back, which is also a possibility. In my eyes, moving Tanev for a D prospect or 1st round pick this season is the right move long-term. Besides, if we are going to be losing for the next 3-4 seasons, do we not want to bring in a Veteran d-man when we ARE ready to compete to play the Tanev-like role from a winning organization? Not a guy who's gotten so used to losing? What are your guys' thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIC_CITY Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 I think his NTC kicks in this summer too. I doubt it happens though, especially with the loss of Tryankin. But it's definitely something that management needs to consider. I believe Biega would qualify as our dman to expose if we were to trade Tanev and protect Sbisa. Realistically, this team is going nowhere in the next 2 years and those are probably Tanev's peak years. But we still need a veteran presence for our young dmen. Given that Juolevi is a thinking man's defenseman, Tanev would be a great mentor for him. Obviously it would be nice to cash in for guys like Edler and Tanev but I just don't see it happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darius Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 If Tryamkin did not bail trading Tanev would probably be a good possibility - and he can probably get a great return. My concern is that Juolevi is not ready in terms of his ability to handle big NHL forwards. I would hate to see them rush the kid into the lineup. Losing Tryamkin created a domino affect that really hinders this rebuild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Moody Posted April 24, 2017 Author Share Posted April 24, 2017 Just now, Darius71 said: If Tryamkin did not bail trading Tanev was probably a good possibility - and he can probably get a great return. My concern is that Juolevi is not ready in terms of his ability to handle big NHL forwards. I would hate to see them rush the kid into the lineup. Losing Tryamkin created a domino affect that really hinders this rebuild. Sure and I agree with you here but hear me out... Tanev is on a 3 million dollar salary. Affordable for any team who would want to give up a first rounder/prospect for him. That 3 mill opens up 3 million in cap space. Could you not go out and get a veteran D-man for 2.5-3 that could act as a great mentor for 3-4 seasons? Tanev has FAR more value than just being a "mentor". He's a guy who can be a key piece in a cup run. Get that value for him, instead of underselling him in a "mentorship" role, and go out and sign a guy for 2.5-3 who can be the mentor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIC_CITY Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 Just now, Darius71 said: If Tryamkin did not bail trading Tanev was probably a good possibility - and he can probably get a great return. My concern is that Juolevi is not ready in terms of his ability to handle big NHL forwards. I would hate to see them rush the kid into the lineup. Losing Tryamkin created a domino affect that really hinders this rebuild. I agree. Let's not rush Juolevi. I want him playing at least 1 full season in Utica. There's really no reason to rush him, even if he shows he can handle the jump at training camp. Leave him down in the AHL. We're going to lose a lot of games next year. There's really no benefit to having him up with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darius Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 8 minutes ago, Hank Moody said: Sure and I agree with you here but hear me out... Tanev is on a 3 million dollar salary. Affordable for any team who would want to give up a first rounder/prospect for him. That 3 mill opens up 3 million in cap space. Could you not go out and get a veteran D-man for 2.5-3 that could act as a great mentor for 3-4 seasons? Tanev has FAR more value than just being a "mentor". He's a guy who can be a key piece in a cup run. Get that value for him, instead of underselling him in a "mentorship" role, and go out and sign a guy for 2.5-3 who can be the mentor. Sure, it could be possible. Calgary picked up a solid defender like Stone for a third rounder. I think whoever they could get will probably be a step down from Tanev, but at the same time the return they get for Tanev could prove to be huge in the future. It will be interesting to see what happens here in the next months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Moody Posted April 24, 2017 Author Share Posted April 24, 2017 4 minutes ago, Darius71 said: Sure, it could be possible. Calgary picked up a solid defender like Stone for a third rounder. I think whoever they could get will probably be a step down from Tanev, but at the same time the return they get for Tanev could prove to be huge in the future. It will be interesting to see what happens here in the next months. I think between Sbisa, Edler and to an extent Gudbranson, there's enough presence there for now even if we don't pick anyone else up to teach some of these young guys a thing or two. Could pick up a veteran guy to teach them a little more if needed. I just don't think it's worthwhile keeping a very valuable trade piece around because he can be a mentor and nothing more than that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darius Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 11 minutes ago, Hank Moody said: I think between Sbisa, Edler and to an extent Gudbranson, there's enough presence there for now even if we don't pick anyone else up to teach some of these young guys a thing or two. Could pick up a veteran guy to teach them a little more if needed. I just don't think it's worthwhile keeping a very valuable trade piece around because he can be a mentor and nothing more than that Agree, only thing is that I can see the D being a tire fire without Tanev back there. hes their best defensive d man, and probably one of the better defensive d men in the league. But as you mentioned above, they aint going nowhere for a couple years, might as well trade one of your best older assets for a good return. This might also help guide the team towards a very good pick next year. I think it could be a wise move, not sure if management can stomach it in light of losing Tryamkin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silver Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 Absolutely bang on. Teams in the 12 -18 range that are in win now modes that could use a dman like tanev are the leafs, lightning and jets. By all acounts Foote is going to be a very solid dman. But even if he isn't there, someone like Peterson , glass etc could be. If this is done before the expansion draft, we may even be able to keep sbisa. Regardless, our D will be horrible but in 3 years could be pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niknuk85 Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 28 minutes ago, Hank Moody said: Was discussed on the radio this morning and I completely agree - You have to trade this guy now while his value is highest. I know this has been a common sentiment amongst Canucks fans, but I think it's time we seriously start to think about why this isn't happening this offseason. All inclinations are that Management aren't willing to move him. I don't see why not. Rebuilding team, would rather give the spot to a guy who can be here when we're good enough for a long period of time, and you don't want to waste Tanev's prime on a team sitting in the basement for the next 3-4 years. For example: Trade Tanev for a top 15 pick if Liljegren/Foote fall like Chychrun last draft. Next season: Stecher - Edler Sbisa - Juolevi Hutton - Gudbranson Then in 3-4 years when we're ready to compete for a playoff spot, we're looking at: Player (Age) Stecher (26) - Juolevi (22) Hutton (27) - Liljegren/Foote (21) Gudbranson (28) - Filler Dman/J. Subban This is of course assuming no player movements or extra D-men are drafted in that time period which is probably not reasonable. I think that's a lot more solid than a 32-33 year old Tanev moving forward who could be in the tail end of his prime. Bring in a guy who can play an important role while we rebuild, and would be ready to put in a solid 8-9 seasons while we're a contending team than Tanev who could only service us for say, 2-3 more seasons while we're competitive. Plus, this is also assuming Tryamkin never comes back, which is also a possibility. In my eyes, moving Tanev for a D prospect or 1st round pick this season is the right move long-term. Besides, if we are going to be losing for the next 3-4 seasons, do we not want to bring in a Veteran d-man when we ARE ready to compete to play the Tanev-like role from a winning organization? Not a guy who's gotten so used to losing? What are your guys' thoughts? Any thread keeping edler in the lineup and moving tanev is just all wrong in so many ways Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silver Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 Elder moving doesn't seem realistic since we've all clamoured for that for years. The time to do it was before his ntc kicked in in 2014. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DSVII Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 10 minutes ago, niknuk85 said: Any thread keeping edler in the lineup and moving tanev is just all wrong in so many ways Which will garner you more value in a trade and is easier to trade? It's not as wrong as you think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solinar Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 Unless you want to shelter Juolevi with Tanev as his defense partner, which puts Edler and Stecher back together, which was real gud. And that leaves Sbisa playing with Subban. Each line has a puck mover and a defensive partner. Oh, and that's without Gudbranson in the mix. Or Hutton.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freaky Freak Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 3 minutes ago, silver said: Elder moving doesn't seem realistic since we've all clamoured for that for years. The time to do it was before his ntc kicked in in 2014. ????????????? Why does management not go to elder and say to him give us a list of 10-15 teams and we will trade you so you have say "OTHERWISE YOU WILL BE EXPOSED FOR VEGAS" He is sure to give a list of teams so that he has his say and then we will get an A list prostpect and high draft pick As Edler still has value in the league for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 Trading Tanev makes a lot of sense for many reasons. - maximum return as compared to any other d-man - Benning has to move one of Tanev, Edler, Guddy or Sbisa - Tanev;s NTC kicks in this summer - Canuck depth and breath of prospects is still in sad shape. - Trading Tanev does not mean Stecher has to be kept in the NHL. Absolutely wrong decision making. - Canucks rebuild has to be recognized for what that actually means. - Tanev's injury history. He has not played a injury free season, ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 16 minutes ago, niknuk85 said: Any thread keeping edler in the lineup and moving tanev is just all wrong in so many ways The problem is no one is going to give you much for an often injured with a horribly inaccurate shot dman that has an NTC and is way way way past his prime and doenst want to go anywhere else anyway. Now I dont think Tanev will get you as much as most people think (he is not going to get you a Domi, SR or young player of that caliber) but he is probably the most valuable trade piece we have at the moment (not including picks or young prospects or Horvat). That said I think with Tree gone we will see Tanev with the nucks for the foreseeable future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Moody Posted April 24, 2017 Author Share Posted April 24, 2017 4 minutes ago, Freaky Freak said: ????????????? Why does management not go to elder and say to him give us a list of 10-15 teams and we will trade you so you have say "OTHERWISE YOU WILL BE EXPOSED FOR VEGAS" He is sure to give a list of teams so that he has his say and then we will get an A list prostpect and high draft pick As Edler still has value in the league for sure 1) Edler cannot be exposed in expansion draft 2) he is not getting you an A list prospect let alone a high draft pick as well 3) I would venture to say Edler doesn't have much value anywhere. Sorry to break it to you, but he's not the 23 year old Edler with "Lidstrom Lite" potential anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 15 minutes ago, Boudrias said: Trading Tanev makes a lot of sense for many reasons. - maximum return as compared to any other d-man - Benning has to move one of Tanev, Edler, Guddy or Sbisa - Tanev;s NTC kicks in this summer - Canuck depth and breath of prospects is still in sad shape. - Trading Tanev does not mean Stecher has to be kept in the NHL. Absolutely wrong decision making. - Canucks rebuild has to be recognized for what that actually means. - Tanev's injury history. He has not played a injury free season, ever. I'm fine with it in principle depending on the return, but man we'd better buckle up for some 50 shots against nights next season if it happens, and we don't fill the gap with a temporary veteran D guy. I'd prefer Jim moves Edler even if its for a 2nd rounder vs a 1st Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted April 24, 2017 Share Posted April 24, 2017 11 minutes ago, Hank Moody said: 1) Edler cannot be exposed in expansion draft 2) he is not getting you an A list prospect let alone a high draft pick as well 3) I would venture to say Edler doesn't have much value anywhere. Sorry to break it to you, but he's not the 23 year old Edler with "Lidstrom Lite" potential anymore. Edler only has a NTC not a NMC so he can be exposed to Vegas. The only Canucks who cannot be exposed is the Twins and Eriksson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Moody Posted April 24, 2017 Author Share Posted April 24, 2017 Just now, Boudrias said: Edler only has a NTC not a NMC so he can be exposed to Vegas. The only Canucks who cannot be exposed is the Twins and Eriksson. Ah, right. My apologies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.