The Case for Trading Chris Tanev

[Hank Moody]

11 minutes ago, Freaky Freak said:

 

 

And to think the Canucks (RUMOURED) turned down Mantha Dekeyser Nyquist a 1st and a 2nd from the Wings for Edler

You're kidding, right?! 

 

You can't believe that's anywhere near true lol.

[theminister]

Just now, Freaky Freak said:

All i know is that apparently if you want to keep an exposed player and have them pick another player 

You are able to add a pick or another player to entice them

 

At least that's what BM said on TSN

That's true but how does that jive with also trading a D beforehand?

[Hank Moody]

2 minutes ago, Freaky Freak said:

All i know is that apparently if you want to keep an exposed player and have them pick another player 

You are able to add a pick or another player to entice them

 

At least that's what BM said on TSN

Why would LV take a 6th round pick to pick Biega and not sbisa? 

 

Would you trade Biega and a 6th for Sbisa? Cmon now. 

[CeeBee51]

Just now, Hank Moody said:

You're kidding, right?! 

 

You can't believe that's anywhere near true lol.

Made up trade rumours on the internet are real, aren't they? 

[Where'd Luongo?]

3 minutes ago, theminister said:

Was talking about this recently with a certain someone... I am not convinced the team sees Hutton as the guy they want to build around. 

 

But again, that deal would likely come after the ED.

 

Long and short of it, I think it's highly unlikely to find a fit for a D trade until the draft at the earliest.

I could see that. I still think buffalo might want Hutton.

[Ronaldoescobar]

11 minutes ago, Freaky Freak said:

Yes he can be exposed and that is GMJB vise he has to get EDLER to waive 

He has more value than you are crediting him to have 

 

 

But i would think he is still worth a mid to late 1st as well as a top 5 prospect (in system) like we got for BURR & HB (Goldie & Dollie)

 

 

And to think the Canucks (RUMOURED) turned down Mantha Dekeyser Nyquist a 1st and a 2nd from the Wings for Edler

Wow if the nucks turned that down then they deserve to be saddled with Edler until he is 50.... 

 

Although I disagree that he would net you anywhere close to a mid to late 1st and a top 5 prospect. Im thinking the nucks are lucky if they can get a second round pick for again, a player way past his prime who is somewhat injury riddled now and couldnt hit the broad side of a barn from 20 feet out nvm a 6x4 cage. 

 

No disrespect to Edler and he was a valuable member of the nucks for a long long time but now not so much. 

[IBacon Strips]

The canucks should trade one of Edler or Tanev, Edler cuz he needs to go and Tanev for the value. Both will get a 1st back, but Tanev most likely nets you a low a or high b prospect as well. 

 

Tanev to

Toronto for 2017 1st and Kapanen

Tampa Bay for 2017 1st + 2nd

Ottawa for 2017 1st/White and Wideman 

 

Edler to

Montreal for 2017 1st and Benn

St Louis for 2017 1st and Edmunson

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, theminister said:

Was talking about this recently with a certain someone... I am not convinced the team sees Hutton as the guy they want to build around. 

 

But again, that deal would likely come after the ED.

 

Long and short of it, I think it's highly unlikely to find a fit for a D trade until the draft at the earliest.

Me either. And that left side is going to be crowded.

 

I suppose Hutton could go before or after. His value should be high either way. Exempt for the ED or good, young replacement #4 guy for teams after they lose someone.

 

Him packaged with say Baer could go a long way towards a forward upgrade IMO...

[theminister]

1 minute ago, Where'd Luongo? said:

Not to mention the canucks don't need a rw nearly as bad as they need a centre or offensive dman. Would like to see some goals this year.

I mean, it was your suggestion.

 

What I'm saying is that adding a D requiring protection doesn't make sense for the Isles.

 

In fact, they are likely one of the teams also looking move one themselves. As I said, buyers market.

[Nuxfanabroad]

7 minutes ago, theminister said:

That still wouldn't solve the issue of protection spots for D. NAS is likely to go the 8-1 rather than 7-3-1 route but they might be the only one.

 

Columbus themselves are likely to need to move a D unless they are ok exposing Jack Johnson.

 

If you're taking back a D from another team then the added piece will also need to be lessened from the other team's point of view, and even then the Canucks risk losing or exposing another player.

You're probably right there, I haven't seen enough of CBJ either, to propose precisely what we should go after. Another question is what they'll do with their NMC's?.. Would any of them waive? They seem to have an impressive cast of youth, ready to move up.

 

So for a couple reasons, still think they're kind of an interesting match. Torts pretty much loved Tans, didn't he? Guy would be so effective vs many of them speedy, skilled eastern rivals.

 

So I'll spitball an example anywhoo: Tanev & Granny(very cheap pkg, about 5.5 mill for 2 guys)

We'd get: Dubi or Hartnell(if one would waive)

Savard

Jenner

 

Something like this CBJ possibly considers, as they'd open a tonne of space?

[Where'd Luongo?]

Just now, theminister said:

I mean, it was your suggestion.

 

What I'm saying is that adding a D requiring protection doesn't make sense for the Isles.

 

In fact, they are likely one of the teams also looking move one themselves. As I said, buyers market.

I know I suggested it, but I didn't really mean it lol. Just throwing it out there to see what others think.

[theminister]

Just now, J.R. said:

Me either. And that left side is going to be crowded.

 

I suppose Hutton could go before or after. His value should be high either way. Exempt for the ED or good, young replacement #4 guy for teams after they lose someone.

 

Him packaged with say Baer could go a long way towards a forward upgrade IMO...

I know you've been banging that combo drum for months now...

 

But, again, unless they are moving Hutton for another ED eligible player (for which there is no rush to get done now anyway) then it's a matter of ED eligible spots for FWDs being swapped for each other.

 

So the deal you propose would have zero impact on the ED.

[Freaky Freak]

3 minutes ago, theminister said:

That's true but how does that jive with also trading a D beforehand?

The point is to trade Edler and protect Sbisa

You are loosing Sbisa otherwise and IMO I would rather have Sbisa and Edlers return from a trade

Than have Edler on the Canucks 

 

And you said then you would lose Gaunce 

So I just said add a sweetener that will never play for us anyhow 

So vegas takes the player we are okay losing 

[aGENT]

Just now, theminister said:

I know you've been banging that combo drum for months now...

 

But, again, unless they are moving Hutton for another ED eligible player (for which there is no rush to get done now anyway) then it's a matter of ED eligible spots for FWDs being swapped for each other.

 

So the deal you propose would have zero impact on the ED.

Yeah, this wouldn't have to do with the ED necessarily. 

[theminister]

2 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

You're probably right there, I haven't seen enough of CBJ either, to propose precisely what we should go after. Another question is what they'll do with their NMC's?.. Would any of them waive? They seem to have an impressive cast of youth, ready to move up.

 

So for a couple reasons, still think they're kind of an interesting match. Torts pretty much loved Tans, didn't he? Guy would be so effective vs many of them speedy, skilled eastern rivals.

 

So I'll spitball an example anywhoo: Tanev & Granny(very cheap pkg, about 5.5 mill for 2 guys)

We'd get: Dubi or Hartnell(if one would waive)

Savard

Jenner

 

Something like this CBJ possibly considers, as they'd open a tonne of space?

No offense, but Jarmo isn't moving out any centre depth.

[Dannydog]

The loss of tryamkin will hurt our back end next year unless guddy proves himself a work horse.I think Hutton is just going to get better . Sbisa will be Sbisa , inconsistantly proving he has what it takes then maybe not.Tony will regress a bit, i think he'll suffer from the sophmore curse but never quit or slow down. If trading tanev gets us a 1st and a descent prospect id i agree with most and say pull the trigger, but you better pick up an nhl ready replacement . I dont mind so much losing 1 goal games as long as they are competitive but having edler playing MORE toi, i don't see that happening. Edler leading our D will prove to be a huge mistake more so then not trading tanev before his NTC kicks in.   Id be ok with keeping Tanev on our roster if a great trade isn't there , a competitive  atmosphere goes a long way while bringing in youth and having him  taking more minutes away from Eddy make this a possibility. 

[theminister]

Just now, Freaky Freak said:

The point is to trade Edler and protect Sbisa

You are loosing Sbisa otherwise and IMO I would rather have Sbisa and Edlers return from a trade

Than have Edler on the Canucks 

 

And you said then you would lose Gaunce 

So I just said add a sweetener that will never play for us anyhow 

So vegas takes the player we are okay losing 

Your math still isn't adding up. 

 

Assuming you could get Edler to waive his NTC before the ED, you'd have very few teams to trade him to and for a return that the other team thinks is worth exposing another D for....so it will be a poor return.

 

[IBatch]

3 hours ago, niknuk85 said:

Any thread keeping edler in the lineup and moving tanev is just all wrong in so many ways 

It is.  Unfortunately Edler doesn't seem all that interested in going anywhere and Tanev will probably follow suit once his NTC kicks in so threads on moving Edler are unrealistic.  Benning does have the option of exposing Edler though and of course he could be a dick tell him he's getting traded and ask for a list but that sends a bad message to potential future contracts with other players and UFAs.  

So Tanev to COL for Duchene or Landeskog or McKinnon and our second continues to rear it's ugly head.

[theminister]

IMO, the media guys suggesting the Canucks should move a D before the expansion draft really haven't thought it through at all...terrible analysis.

 

I'm not shocked by that though.

[Freaky Freak]

6 minutes ago, Ronaldoescobar said:

Wow if the nucks turned that down then they deserve to be saddled with Edler until he is 50.... 

 

Although I disagree that he would net you anywhere close to a mid to late 1st and a top 5 prospect. Im thinking the nucks are lucky if they can get a second round pick for again, a player way past his prime who is somewhat injury riddled now and couldnt hit the broad side of a barn from 20 feet out nvm a 6x4 cage. 

 

No disrespect to Edler and he was a valuable member of the nucks for a long long time but now not so much. 

I have no clue as to what he is worth now 

I just think he is worth more than what you all think up there

I know that all my buddies down here (So Cal) still think he is good and say he is a top 3 at worst 

 

And when i lived in White Rock before moving i remember the trade was on TSN / Stortsnet ETC  so not the internet 

At the time tho Edler just had a great season and no one knew how the 3 (now good) players would turn out 

 

And at the time no one up there wanted to trade Edler 

 

But that was the reported offer at the time

 

And ya it looks crazy stupid now