Oscar Fantenberg | #5 | D

[-Vintage Canuck-]

Oscar Fantenberg | #5

D | 6' 0" | 206 lb | Vancouver Canucks

Born: October 7, 1991

Birthplace: Ljunby, SWE

Shoots: Left

 

[Mrwipeout]

A new face on the roster, instead of biega whom i thought would have been the reserve. Fantenberg is that good already? must have been doing something right during training camp, so this is an interesting addition. 

[kloubek]

I think he only played in 2 preseason games and was he concussed in the 2nd?

 

I know very little about the guy, but also agree that Biega is a perfectly suitable 7th d.

 

I figure most of us know little about the dude, actually, but regardles it is weird to me nobody has said anything in here about our newest Canuck... if not at least to express interest in his concussion last week. (Boeser had plenty).

 

Welcome, Mr. Berg. And may your backup role serve you well.

Edited October 2, 2019 by kloubek

[aGENT]

16 hours ago, Mrwipeout said:

A new face on the roster, instead of biega whom i thought would have been the reserve. Fantenberg is that good already? must have been doing something right during training camp, so this is an interesting addition. 

I'd wager once Benning has a chance to clear out a forward or two that we'll see Biega recalled and run with Fanta/Biega as our spare D.

[aGENT]

10 hours ago, kloubek said:

I think he only played in 2 preseason games and was he concussed in the 2nd?

 

I know very little about the guy, but also agree that Biega is a perfectly suitable 7th d.

 

I figure most of us know little about the dude, actually, but regardles it is weird to me nobody has said anything in here about our newest Canuck... if not at least to express interest in his concussion last week. (Boeser had plenty).

 

Welcome, Mr. Berg. And may your backup role serve you well.

IMO, he's good enough to be a #6 D full time. That we've got him as a spare is a nice luxury (and perhaps a hint of further moves to come at some point this season).

[JM_]

Just now, aGENT said:

I'd wager once Benning has a chance to clear out a forward or two that we'll see Biega recalled and run with Fanta/Biega as our spare D.

sounds like a drink you'd order in Italy. I'll have another Fanta Biega please. 

[Mrwipeout]

21 minutes ago, aGENT said:

IMO, he's good enough to be a #6 D full time. That we've got him as a spare is a nice luxury (and perhaps a hint of further moves to come at some point this season).

Myers-Edler

QH-Tanev

Benn-Stecher

Fantenberg

Well...if anyone gets injured *coughtanevcough* he will definetly get to prove his worth. D is actually looking pretty decent this year. Thank god. Hope it improves the opening passes from D to Forwards that are moving in speed. I still have nightmares about that after watching some of the games last year 

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, Mrwipeout said:

Myers-Edler

QH-Tanev

Benn-Stecher

Fantenberg

Well...if anyone gets injured *coughtanevcough* he will definetly get to prove his worth. D is actually looking pretty decent this year. Thank god. Hope it improves the opening passes from D to Forwards that are moving in speed. I still have nightmares about that after watching some of the games last year 

Can also see us trading expiring Tanev at some point as well. Particularly if Tryamkin may be back for playoffs and Juolevi gets his feet under him well.

 

Post Tanev:

 

Edler, Myers

Hughes, Benn

Fanta/Juolevi, Stecher

 

*Tryamkin?

[Bobby James]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Can also see us trading expiring Tanev at some point as well. Particularly if Tryamkin may be back for playoffs and Juolevi gets his feet under him well.

 

Post Tanev:

 

Edler, Myers

Hughes, Benn

Fanta/Juolevi, Stecher

 

*Tryamkin?

Early in the off-season I was also thinking we'll trade Tanev this year around the deadline for a pick/prospect. 

 

If we are in the playoff race though do you still see Tanev getting traded? I'm not as sure anymore. I feel like his value is at the lowest it has been in a few years, but healthy I think the guy is a great Dman still. Maybe there is more value in us keeping him and pushing for playoffs (if we look to be that kinda team come Jan) then trading him for decent compensation.

[aGENT]

35 minutes ago, Bobby James said:

Early in the off-season I was also thinking we'll trade Tanev this year around the deadline for a pick/prospect. 

 

If we are in the playoff race though do you still see Tanev getting traded? I'm not as sure anymore. I feel like his value is at the lowest it has been in a few years, but healthy I think the guy is a great Dman still. Maybe there is more value in us keeping him and pushing for playoffs (if we look to be that kinda team come Jan) then trading him for decent compensation.

50/50 IMO. And likely highly dependent on what the return is (ie: we're not moving him for a late 3rd).

 

I think management has accepted we'll only get Tanev for 50-60 games a season. If it's due to trade or injury, matters not. So if we can add a solid future piece by moving an expiring Tanev (who I don't think we're bringing back anyway) while back filling the D with the likes of Tryamkin, Juolevi, Brisebois and soon to add Rathbone and Woo to that list...I'd look long and hard at it if my last name was Benning.

 

And yes, when healthy, he's a damn good D.

Edited October 2, 2019 by aGENT

[theo5789]

41 minutes ago, aGENT said:

50/50 IMO. And likely highly dependent on what the return is (ie: we're not moving him for a late 3rd).

 

I think management has accepted we'll only get Tanev for 50-60 games a season. If it's due to trade or injury, matters not. So if we can add a solid future piece by moving an expiring Tanev (who I don't think we're bringing back anyway) while back filling the D with the likes of Tryamkin, Juolevi, Brisebois and soon to add Rathbone and Woo to that list...I'd look long and hard at it if my last name was Benning.

 

And yes, when healthy, he's a damn good D.

IMO, if we are trading Tanev, do it around Christmas. If he's still with the team by the TDL and we are in a playoff spot (assuming he's no injured at this point), just keep him. It will suck to let a Tanev walk for free, but these situations are going to happen on occasion and it just means we are having a successful season that Is good enough to warrant keeping your top performers for a playoff run. Just have to have the mentality that he's basically like a rental, but without giving up and asset to do so.

[aGENT]

7 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

IMO, if we are trading Tanev, do it around Christmas. If he's still with the team by the TDL and we are in a playoff spot (assuming he's no injured at this point), just keep him. It will suck to let a Tanev walk for free, but these situations are going to happen on occasion and it just means we are having a successful season that Is good enough to warrant keeping your top performers for a playoff run. Just have to have the mentality that he's basically like a rental, but without giving up and asset to do so.

So long as OJ or Brisebois look ready to fill in on the bottom pair, sure (though I'm fine with later too).

 

And again, any Tanev move will HEAVILY depend on any potential return. We're not moving him for a late third or an iffy 'B' prospect. Under that scenario, it COMPLETELY makes far more sense to view him as an 'own-rental' as you stated. 

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

So long as OJ or Brisebois look ready to fill in on the bottom pair, sure (though I'm fine with later too).

 

And again, any Tanev move will HEAVILY depend on any potential return. We're not moving him for a late third or an iffy 'B' prospect. Under that scenario, it COMPLETELY makes far more sense to view him as an 'own-rental' as you stated. 

IMO if we are even trading Tanev, it's because we have an upgrade to our top 4. I think we need to give ourselves the best chance in the playoffs and moving Tanev to simply bump up our rotation is not really improving the team in the short term. I know long term success is also important, but having the best chance in the playoffs helps with the development of the current guys and also see which cream rises to the top for future decisions. If we are out of the playoffs by the deadline, then by all means, get the best deal you can, but my expectations this year is that we are fighting for a spot if not making it. And thus the "rental" option is perfectly fine with me and I know we will hear endlessly about not gaining assets, but there are other positives than just acquiring picks and prospects for the future as well.

 

Of course this all barring some surging incredible play from our young guys that makes him outright expendable, but I just don't see that at this point.

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

IMO if we are even trading Tanev, it's because we have an upgrade to our top 4. I think we need to give ourselves the best chance in the playoffs and moving Tanev to simply bump up our rotation is not really improving the team in the short term. I know long term success is also important, but having the best chance in the playoffs helps with the development of the current guys and also see which cream rises to the top for future decisions. If we are out of the playoffs by the deadline, then by all means, get the best deal you can, but my expectations this year is that we are fighting for a spot if not making it. And thus the "rental" option is perfectly fine with me and I know we will hear endlessly about not gaining assets, but there are other positives than just acquiring picks and prospects for the future as well.

 

Of course this all barring some surging incredible play from our young guys that makes him outright expendable, but I just don't see that at this point.

I don't necessarily agree that we only move him for an 'upgrade' but that could very well be the potential return. Particularly as we also can't keep on long term with all of Leivo/Virtanen/Gaudette seemingly needing a 3rd line spot. Perhaps Benning's able to package a few pieces (Tanev + one of those forwards + maybe a prospect) for a better D who's a pending free agent their current team won't be able to afford to sign...

[theo5789]

8 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I don't necessarily agree that we only move him for an 'upgrade' but that could very well be the potential return. Particularly as we also can't keep on long term with all of Leivo/Virtanen/Gaudette seemingly needing a 3rd line spot. Perhaps Benning's able to package a few pieces (Tanev + one of those forwards + maybe a prospect) for a better D who's a pending free agent their current team won't be able to afford to sign...

Yeah exactly. Just don't see the need to move him for picks or prospects if it downgrades the team. It's enticing if we are offered a 1st, but I get the feeling not many teams have offered a 1st before and much less likely now.

 

I'm still holding hope we somehow get Risto.

[aGENT]

8 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Yeah exactly. Just don't see the need to move him for picks or prospects if it downgrades the team. It's enticing if we are offered a 1st, but I get the feeling not many teams have offered a 1st before and much less likely now.

 

I'm still holding hope we somehow get Risto.

I don't know...I mean at this point it's all assumptions but assuming Tryamkin comes back around March and assuming either/both of Juolevi/Brisebois look legit and assuming we can get a legit return from Tanev...I'm not sure I particularly view it as much/any of a downgrade. We might lose a touch of immediate ceiling but our depth will actually improve and I have a pretty solid amount of faith in the guys we already have here not named Tanev. Never mind that, ESPECIALLY with Tanev, there's zero guarantee he'd be healthy for us anyway down the stretch and in the playoffs.

 

There's no downgrading from injured, press box Tanev.

Edited October 2, 2019 by aGENT

[theo5789]

3 hours ago, aGENT said:

I don't know...I mean at this point it's all assumptions but assuming Tryamkin comes back around March and assuming either/both of Juolevi/Brisebois look legit and assuming we can get a legit return from Tanev...I'm not sure I particularly view it as much/any of a downgrade. We might lose a touch of immediate ceiling but our depth will actually improve and I have a pretty solid amount of faith in the guys we already have here not named Tanev. Never mind that, ESPECIALLY with Tanev, there's zero guarantee he'd be healthy for us anyway down the stretch and in the playoffs.

 

There's no downgrading from injured, press box Tanev.

There's also no trading an injured, press box Tanev. All the more reason to trade by Christmas rather than risk injury. If he can stay healthy, then he will be a valuable asset down the stretch.

 

I like that we may add to our depth, but I'm not expecting Tryamkin to step into a top 4 role here replacing what Tanev provides. The immediate future is just as important as the long term future in that we are at a stage where we need to push our own prospects to the next level and that means icing the best team available. The addition of Tryamkin and progress of players like Brisebois and Juolevi will help our long term success with or without whatever asset we may get from Tanev except we would negate the positive effect of having a Tanev (someone who Hughes has praised).

 

There are certainly way too many assumptions that need to be made though for a decision to be made either way, so just have to see how the season plays out for the team and Tanev.

[SynysterGates]

What's going on with Fantenberg? Got put on IR to go back to Europe?

[JM_]

9 hours ago, SynysterGates said:

What's going on with Fantenberg? Got put on IR to go back to Europe?

no Sautner was sent back down and OF is off the IR as of yesterday i think. The d group has been playing so well I don't see him getting in until there's an injury or someone really needs a maintenance day. 

[SynysterGates]

11 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

no Sautner was sent back down and OF is off the IR as of yesterday i think. The d group has been playing so well I don't see him getting in until there's an injury or someone really needs a maintenance day. 

I see. Just have seen photos of him in Sweden and UK the last week.