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

[Report] Canucks sign GM Jim Benning to contract extension

Rate this topic


-Vintage Canuck-

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, theo5789 said:

I wonder who would we trade to recoup that 1st if we are in a playoff position.

pretty much only two candidates, Sutter or Tanev. Which means a kid is going to have to a very good year to make one expendable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

pretty much only two candidates, Sutter or Tanev. Which means a kid is going to have to a very good year to make one expendable. 

Plus means both will be healthy and contributing to garner a 1st. If we are making a playoff push or are in a playoff position, it'll be curious if they do make this move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, theo5789 said:

Plus means both will be healthy and contributing to garner a 1st. If we are making a playoff push or are in a playoff position, it'll be curious if they do make this move.

yeah it would be ballsy to be in a playoff spot (or close to) and shed a player like that.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There could be a multi player trade as well to bring back a first round pick. Could see a Goldy or Bear being involved not to mention Tanev. All depends on who is stepping up and how. 

Edited by spur1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

Plus means both will be healthy and contributing to garner a 1st. If we are making a playoff push or are in a playoff position, it'll be curious if they do make this move.

I don't think Jim would hesitate, particularly with an expiring contract like Tanev. Playoffs or not. The eye is very much on the long term of the club IMO.

 

A not expiring Sutter with only Gaudette really likely pushing for that spot (and thus far inferior defensively and on faceoffs) is probably less likely (though not impossible).

 

But if Juolevi looks ready for NHL games later this year and we look like we have Tryamkin returning as well as the better depth we've added this summer with Myers/Benn/Fantenburg (as well as Sautner, Brisebois, Teves etc in Utica)... We can afford to move Tanev.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, theo5789 said:

I wonder who would we trade to recoup that 1st if we are in a playoff position.

He didn’t say he’d make a trade if we were in a playoff spot. So I’m assuming if we are not then a guy like Tanev could fetch a first round pick as a rental if he’s fully healthy. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

He didn’t say he’d make a trade if we were in a playoff spot. So I’m assuming if we are not then a guy like Tanev could fetch a first round pick as a rental if he’s fully healthy. 

If we don't make the playoffs, we keep our 1st for this year. Thus not recouping it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I don't think Jim would hesitate, particularly with an expiring contract like Tanev. Playoffs or not. The eye is very much on the long term of the club IMO.

 

A not expiring Sutter with only Gaudette really likely pushing for that spot (and thus far inferior defensively and on faceoffs) is probably less likely (though not impossible).

 

But if Juolevi looks ready for NHL games later this year and we look like we have Tryamkin returning as well as the better depth we've added this summer with Myers/Benn/Fantenburg (as well as Sautner, Brisebois, Teves etc in Utica)... We can afford to move Tanev.

Benning also mentioned about how important having playoff experience is. Taking away your depth at a critical time (assuming Tanev has been healthy to garner a 1st and has played an important role in getting us to where we are) may not be the rightful move now (will need to reshuffle all the pairings and have guys come in and get up to speed late into the regular season) and in the future (if we could go further than the 1st round, it's only going to be more beneficial to our guys).

 

Having an expiring contract is basically a free rental for a playoff push in a sense. Not saying you're wrong, but I don't know if getting that 1st is all that important when playoffs are in mind, so I imagine there would be some hesitation on Benning's part should it come to that. Plus what if it was the year and you just bolstered another team's lineup that you may face in the same playoffs at some point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

If we don't make the playoffs, we keep our 1st for this year. Thus not recouping it.

 

It would still be great to add another pick. If we miss the playoffs next years pick is gone no matter where it is in the round.

 

2 picks this year in what should be a good draft class would be a huge add to our young core, and help offset the pick for the following year. 

 

Hypothetically, if we were to give up a 15th overall pick in 2020 or 2021 I'd rather give up the 2021 pick. Granted its still very early to evaluate that class, but I like this years class alot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Benning also mentioned about how important having playoff experience is. Taking away your depth at a critical time (assuming Tanev has been healthy to garner a 1st and has played an important role in getting us to where we are) may not be the rightful move now (will need to reshuffle all the pairings and have guys come in and get up to speed late into the regular season) and in the future (if we could go further than the 1st round, it's only going to be more beneficial to our guys).

 

Having an expiring contract is basically a free rental for a playoff push in a sense. Not saying you're wrong, but I don't know if getting that 1st is all that important when playoffs are in mind, so I imagine there would be some hesitation on Benning's part should it come to that. Plus what if it was the year and you just bolstered another team's lineup that you may face in the same playoffs at some point?

Still don't think he'd hesitate.  Given how much time we traditionally spend filling in for Tanev being out anyway, I don't think they think twice about moving him for a solid return. Especially if they don't view him as part of the team after this year (which I don't think they do, despite both sides saying the 'right' things so far).

 

If they truly think Juolevi is ready, they have Tryamkin coming in, Benn able to play both sides, Fantenburg as perfectly capable 3rd pair depth plus the guys already in Utica... Playoffs or not, that doesn't need to include Tanev.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I was referring to Benning picking up another first. If we don’t make the playoffs we will lose the first in 2021 so we could always trade Tanev for a 2021 first. 

I remember Wisebrod saying, after this last draft, they felt getting Hoglander was like having two first round picks.  

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

It would still be great to add another pick. If we miss the playoffs next years pick is gone no matter where it is in the round.

 

2 picks this year in what should be a good draft class would be a huge add to our young core, and help offset the pick for the following year. 

 

Hypothetically, if we were to give up a 15th overall pick in 2020 or 2021 I'd rather give up the 2021 pick. Granted its still very early to evaluate that class, but I like this years class alot. 

Fair enough, but every year is the best year. It's always hyped. It's still going to be tough if Tanev is playing at a 1st round pick level to decide to move him rather than focus on the playoff push. If we moved Tanev in like December, then that would be a different story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I was referring to Benning picking up another first. If we don’t make the playoffs we will lose the first in 2021 so we could always trade Tanev for a 2021 first. 

Fair enough, hopefully Tanev is playing at a level worthy of a 1st. I don't think he quite is, but he would need to be healthy all year to even be considered.

 

14 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I remember Wisebrod saying, after this last draft, they felt getting Hoglander was like having two first round picks.  

Then maybe adding a high 2nd would just as fruitful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Fair enough, but every year is the best year. It's always hyped. It's still going to be tough if Tanev is playing at a 1st round pick level to decide to move him rather than focus on the playoff push. If we moved Tanev in like December, then that would be a different story.

I always find people tend to say its a weaker year rather than a good year.

 

I don't think they'll move Tanev if we're in a playoff spot, but if we are out of it hopefully we can make that move. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Still don't think he'd hesitate.  Given how much time we traditionally spend filling in for Tanev being out anyway, I don't think they think twice about moving him for a solid return. Especially if they don't view him as part of the team after this year (which I don't think they do, despite both sides saying the 'right' things so far).

 

If they truly think Juolevi is ready, they have Tryamkin coming in, Benn able to play both sides, Fantenburg as perfectly capable 3rd pair depth plus the guys already in Utica... Playoffs or not, that doesn't need to include Tanev.

But that's the thing, if Tanev is healthy this year (only way he would fetch a 1st), then we won't be filling in for him this season. He would be a key reason as to why we would be in the position we would be at the time of the deal. Every time you make the playoffs, you never know what could happen. Why weaken the roster? It's nice that we have players coming in, but at the same time depth is always key come playoffs.

 

It's like Colorado letting Stastny hit UFA, but kept him because they were going to the playoffs. Maybe they would've been better off trading him in hindsight, but you're not going to take a key member off the team that has been successful to that point. I think the deal would have to be made by December or January for there to be no hesitation. If it gets to the TDL, he's going to have to weigh his options.

 

I'm not even sure Tanev would fetch a 1st TBH when looking at the same history that we are potentially okay with letting him go. If we were able to nab a 1st in prior years, we may have moved him already. Can't see his stock suddenly increasing unless he's healthy and playing top pairing minutes, in which case leads back to if we should even trade him at that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Smashian Kassian said:

I always find people tend to say its a weaker year rather than a good year.

 

I don't think they'll move Tanev if we're in a playoff spot, but if we are out of it hopefully we can make that move. 

Definitely if we are out, then it's a no brainer, but I don't think Tanev will fetch a 1st barring a very respectable and healthy season and maybe a Tampa (or other serious contender) is looking to add some depth to push them over the top.

 

But when the draft rolls around, there always seems to be a good 10-15 players that everyone is hyped up on whether it's a "good" year or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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