[Speculation] Chris Tanev's future as a Canuck, and Adam Gaudette

[Gaudette Celly]

2 minutes ago, wildcam said:

Like your idea but that would be a heavy price tag.. Us Canuck fans always think are players are worth more..

Though don't think anyone foresaw the returns for Burrows and Hansen last year.

[TheHitman]

Tanev for Heiskanen or Makar would make a lot of sense atm. Would rather not see Tanev get traded but if it’s a hefty return might as well move him and Gudbranson.

[peaches5]

2 minutes ago, TheHitman said:

Tanev for Heiskanen or Makar would make a lot of sense atm.

I'd be floored if we could get Heiskanen

[TheHitman]

4 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

I'd be floored if we could get Heiskanen

It would be a fair trade, not sure Dallas is the best trading partner though.

[rekker]

10 minutes ago, TheHitman said:

Tanev for Heiskanen or Makar would make a lot of sense atm. Would rather not see Tanev get traded but if it’s a hefty return might as well move him and Gudbranson.

I like Tanev a lot. But with his injury history I don't think there is any chance he could land either of those two. Not even close. 

[MJDDawg]

I find it funny when a thread is labeled as "speculation" when Friedman himself said on the radio today that there's no talk or rumours or any discussions with teams at all. It was simply Elliotte in his 31 thoughts thinking out loud as to when in the future the Canucks would consider trading Tanman given he's not getting any younger, he's spending more time being injured and he's under contract for 2 more seasons and we all know a players value decreases closer to free agency.

 

But "speculation"?  Nah.

[Slegr]

If we lose Tanev, we will not get great value for him, but our defensiven play will drop big time and we will lose tons of more games for several more seasons. 

You don't trade a player like Tanev no matter where your team is in standings or its building cycle. His injuries are being grossly exagerated. In the past five seasons, he has played 53, 69, 70, and 64 game seasons. With all the top line minutes he eats, that is plenty of games. Im guessing he is the only plus player on the team this season and last season. He doesnt get scored on. We need to keep that guy.

[KKnight]

24 minutes ago, TheHitman said:

It would be a fair trade, not sure Dallas is the best trading partner though.

Dallas is going to need a Left D baddddd. 

[captainhorvat]

37 minutes ago, TheHitman said:

Tanev for Heiskanen or Makar would make a lot of sense atm. Would rather not see Tanev get traded but if it’s a hefty return might as well move him and Gudbranson.

Tanev for Makar? Really? never in a million years would colorado do that deal.

[TNucks1]

didnt adam gaudette say he's already going to sign with the canucks ina interveiw.

[KKnight]

The logical teams of interest would be Toronto, Islanders (my choice), Philly, Pittsburgh, Hurricanes. 

 

Islanders would HAVE to include Pulock and a 1st. 

 

Im not sure what everybody else could offer. 

[kenhodgejr]

Chris Tanev would fit in well on the Dallas Stars. He makes very few mistakes and his personality would gel well with Jamie Benn and the group they have. Tanev is a high quality professional hockey player with a good cap hit and at his peak age. 

 

If we trade him to Dallas the price would be Miro Heiskanen coming back. I would even add a forward to seal the deal. 

 

If we draft Boqvist we could have a future top 4 D line up of

 

Heiskanen Boqvist

Juolevi Stetcher 

 

[86Viking]

Canucks are not getting Makar or Heiskanen back for Tanev. You are dillusional if you think that will happen. They were recent top 5 picks, both will be contributing to their nhl teams in 2 years max.

 

Tanev for a 1st and prospect D on a deep team. COL & DAL need their only good young D not trade them for a 28yr old injured d man. 

[Zfetch]

3 hours ago, Warhippy said:

For Tampa yes.

 

For us it's awesome

One unproven middle of the line prospect and one 2nd rounder is not an adequate return for Tanev.

[Rush17]

1 hour ago, Yotes said:

Canucks are not getting Makar or Heiskanen back for Tanev. You are dillusional if you think that will happen. They were recent top 5 picks, both will be contributing to their nhl teams in 2 years max.

 

Tanev for a 1st and prospect D on a deep team. COL & DAL need their only good young D not trade them for a 28yr old injured d man. 

So a late 1st and a Dermott type?  Think you might be the delusional one.

 

That's Gudbransons value on a good day.  High end defensive prospect for an top 3 ready defender isn't that far off.  You pay for a player ready now.  He would help them immediately and fit in their group well being a similar age.

 

A high quality forward prospect seems more likely imo as there are many more of them then high quality D. Adding with Tanev would be fine too if we got a promising dman. 

 

Toss in a Granlund type or goldobin if you don't see him a long term fit. (If they are hesitant) if u really covet the asset.  I'm fine with overpayment if the chance has a good chance of being a key piece. Top 3 defenders are just that.

[TheHitman]

4 minutes ago, Rush17 said:

So a late 1st and a Dermott type?  Think you might be the delusional one.

 

That's Gudbransons value on a good day.  High end defensive prospect for an top 3 ready defender isn't that far off.  You pay for a player ready now.  He would help them immediately and fit in their group well being a similar age.

 

A high quality forward prospect seems more likely imo as there are many more of them then high quality D. Adding with Tanev would be fine too if we got a promising dman. 

 

Toss in a Granlund type or goldobin if you don't see him a long term fit. (If they are hesitant) if u really covet the asset.  I'm fine with overpayment if the chance has a good chance of being a key piece. Top 3 defenders are just that.

I don't buy the idea that teams would be scared away from Tanev due to him being injury prone. He's never gone long and his play doesn't decline upon return. There's plenty of examples of lesser defensemen getting traded for great hauls from teams looking to make a long playoff run.

[Nave]

I don't want to get lowballed for Tanev. He's injured at the worst time, but when he's healthy he's our best defenseman.  
I'd hold onto him until the draft, when he might have more value. Unless a team like Tampa "blows our socks off," as Benning would say.

However, it might be best to keep him, and pair him with Juolevi next year. 

 

 

[teepain]

Vanek + tanev for heiskanen

[Nave]

12 minutes ago, teepain said:

Vanek + tanev for heiskanen

If the Stars actually did that, that would be amazing. 

Never going to happen though. 

[JeremyCuddles]

4 hours ago, Slegr said:

If we lose Tanev, we will not get great value for him, but our defensiven play will drop big time and we will lose tons of more games for several more seasons. 

You don't trade a player like Tanev no matter where your team is in standings or its building cycle. His injuries are being grossly exagerated. In the past five seasons, he has played 53, 69, 70, and 64 game seasons. With all the top line minutes he eats, that is plenty of games. Im guessing he is the only plus player on the team this season and last season. He doesnt get scored on. We need to keep that guy.

Tanev averages less than 20 minutes a game this season. MDZ is averaging more minutes than him. Hell Pouliot and Hutton almost average more minutes than Tanev and they cycle in and out of the lineup. Edler and MDZ are eating more minutes than Tanev. Everyone else on the blueline averages close to the same amount as Tanev except Biega. Tanev isn't eating minutes for us and I'd argue he is being pretty well protected here. He's far from 23-25 minutes most true minute munching d-men are getting. I love Tanev but if someone offered a top prospect and a 2nd/1st rounder I'd take it easy.