[Proposal] Trade Tanev for pick bring up Rafferty?

[theo5789]

32 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Pageau is playing great this season.  He's going to get paid this summer.  

Whoever does will likely instantly regret it IMO.

[theo5789]

3 hours ago, Throckmorton said:

Well Rafferty did play a couple of preseason games so not 0 but close , had an assist -1, had several teams interested in him and he chose to come to Vancouver. I never saw Chris Tanev play before his first game in the nhl either. But he played down in Manitoba for a couple of seasons and didn't have as good a numbers as Rafferty. Sooooo

The problem is trying to look at points alone. Could Rafferty be a better offensive option over Tanev? Maybe. Could Rafferty play defensively like Tanev? I don't think he can hold his jockstrap here.

 

Tanev is our top PK guy and go to shut down dman. He's capable of this because he's actually quite a decent skater with decent size and has hockey IQ out the wazoo. Rafferty could maybe become like a Hutton or Stecher who are dependable guys, but neither would be upgrades over Tanev if we are seriously wanting to be a contender. His only knock is that he's injured far too often, but he's putting his body on the line every night. There's no one currently that I see that can fill his shoes which makes it all that harder to move him IMO.

 

With all this said, I'd like to see Rafferty get a look in some games this season, but not at the expense of trading Tanev.

[DefCon1]

6 hours ago, Throckmorton said:

Is it time to get value for Tanev  ...say to Winnipeg who need Dmen for a pick and bring up Brogan Rafferty who has 16 points and plus 9 in Utica or wait till the trade deadline? Chris is healthy now but may not be at that time, both Right shot.

How does that help us make the playoffs? Pretty stupid to trade Tanev for a pick when Benning already traded picks to get Miller in hopes of making the playoffs this year.

[Throckmorton]

2 hours ago, timberz21 said:

No anger, just no patience for ridiculous proposal.  This isn't playstation, can't just toss aside an experienced vet like Tanev and bring up a kid with 0 NHL experience and think the transition will be seemless, especially when were not even guaranteed a playoff spot.

 

You're concerned we won't receive anything in return if Tanev gets injured.    But have you considered the consequences if we do trade Tanev and one of Rafferty, Myers or Stecher gets injured?  What next....who fills that void.  At least if Tanev get Tanev we know we have Rafferty who could potentially replace him.    Like I said I'd rather have depth over getting back some trivial draft picks.....because no you won't get a 1st rounder for Tanev, not even sure you get a 2nd.

Wow get a girlfriend buddy or at least some hand cream...blow off some of that anger its a blog not real life...

 

[-AJ-]

Note: Tags are mandatory only in the Trades, Rumours, Signings forum and in the Proposals and Armchair GM'ing forum.

[6string]

                                                    

[86Viking]

I don't mind tanev, its his contract year, the year he might stay healthy...and then want a pay raise with nmc or ntc protection? Not a fan of giving that to him personally, Hughes can play with any D partner imo so keeping Tanev just for that role is not the right move in my opinion. But my view on certain decisions will vary from most on here and I think JB is going to keep Marky, Tanev past this year so...only time will tell how long and what cap hit these pending UFA's that we end up keeping will cost us going forward

[Canucklehead73]

Not a fan of Tanev's utter lack of skill in the offensive zone... I would be happy to trade him for someone a bit more rounded as a player but that's me.

 

But the record needs to be set straight on his injury record. The keyboard warriors around here need to be realistic.

 

No organization feels a player is injury prone for laying down in front of NHL shooters and getting a broken bone.

 

Like they are sitting there "Well he blocked that shot with his face and shattered his jaw, what a wuss let's trade him NOW!"

 

Elder and Tanev are league leaders in blocked shots so the odds are stacked against them.

 

With better faster forwards they should see less shots and less injuries imho.

[khay]

If we are not in the playoff race come TDL, it's a no brainer. Trade him. If we are, then it's gonna be a dilemma but I think we should trade Tanev if the return is a 1st (assuming that it's a to a playoff bound team).

 

Case 1. We trade him away for a 1st then, subsequently lose out on the playoff race. But, we end up with 2 first rounders in 2020. This softens the blow of missing the playoffs since our first will be a top 16 pick. We build a stronger team for the future.

 

Case 2. We trade him away for a 1st but somehow make the playoffs. Then, we lose our 2020 1st to TBL but gain another team's first rounder. On top of that, we made the playoffs.

 

As a team that is not yet contending, I think we can afford to trade away an injury prone roster player. The upside of 2 first rounders is quite appealing I think.

 

[khay]

7 minutes ago, Canucklehead73 said:

Not a fan of Tanev's utter lack of skill in the offensive zone... I would be happy to trade him for someone a bit more rounded as a player but that's me.

 

But the record needs to be set straight on his injury record. The keyboard warriors around here need to be realistic.

 

No organization feels a player is injury prone for laying down in front of NHL shooters and getting a broken bone.

 

Like they are sitting there "Well he blocked that shot with his face and shattered his jaw, what a wuss let's trade him NOW!"

 

Elder and Tanev are league leaders in blocked shots so the odds are stacked against them.

 

With better faster forwards they should see less shots and less injuries imho.

Good point. He sacrifices his body like no others... and as a result, he is injury prone.

[RetroCanuck]

8 hours ago, -AJ- said:

Rafferty looks great in Utica, but now is not the time to be trading away good pieces to let kids play more. We're not a bottom-feeding team anymore and we need to keep good pieces if we want to have a shot at the playoffs.

I agree with you, but Tanev isn't a guy that we will resign this offseason. To many injuries with us and we need more longterm security with regards to our RD.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean we trade Tanev now, but as the deadline draws closer we'd be silly not to listen to offers on Tanev when Rafferty or Tryamkin can fill his spot.

[Junkyard Dog]

8 minutes ago, khay said:

If we are not in the playoff race come TDL, it's a no brainer. Trade him. If we are, then it's gonna be a dilemma but I think we should trade Tanev if the return is a 1st (assuming that it's a to a playoff bound team).

 

Case 1. We trade him away for a 1st then, subsequently lose out on the playoff race. But, we end up with 2 first rounders in 2020. This softens the blow of missing the playoffs since our first will be a top 16 pick. We build a stronger team for the future.

 

Case 2. We trade him away for a 1st but somehow make the playoffs. Then, we lose our 2020 1st to TBL but gain another team's first rounder. On top of that, we made the playoffs.

 

As a team that is not yet contending, I think we can afford to trade away an injury prone roster player. The upside of 2 first rounders is quite appealing I think.

 

There's also the possibility of us re-signing him.

 

If we're able to sign him cheap it would be better than relying on a huge question mark and big risk in Rafferty or signing another D for more money. 

 

I personally really don't want to risk losing a lotto pick by making our lineup worse for the next couple seasons. Gotta aim for the playoffs and we can't really afford to lose anyone on D the next 2 years. We don't have a deep D-core, we're pretty average. We make up for our average D by having great defensive forwards and a good top 6(Bo's line could be better). Losing anyone would bring us back to the mediocrity we've seen the past few seasons.

 

Realistically we would see a forward traded since we have an abundance of top 9 guys eating up cap for the next couple seasons. Pearson/Leivo. We wouldn't get much

[DefCon1]

47 minutes ago, RetroCanuck said:

I agree with you, but Tanev isn't a guy that we will resign this offseason. To many injuries with us and we need more longterm security with regards to our RD.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean we trade Tanev now, but as the deadline draws closer we'd be silly not to listen to offers on Tanev when Rafferty or Tryamkin can fill his spot.

I doubt Rafferty or Tryamkin can fill his role. We would need another defenseman of similar ilk like Hamonic. Benning would need to get another defenseman via UFA because Joulevi is probably not an NHLer at this point with all his injuries and the other defenseman that has potential to make the NHL is Woo. 

[48MPHSlapShot]

It's a tough call at this point. Tanev is having himself a nice season, and has (somehow) managed to stay healthy so far. God knows that most likely won't keep all year, but if it somehow does, it should help increase his trade value a bit. If he manages to stay healthy until the trade deadline, I don't think his value will ever be higher again, so it makes sense to move him before the inevitable injury bug bites him yet again.

 

That said, Tanev has been pretty crucial for the development of Hughes, and with him being healthy, I'm reminded of why he's such an integral part of our lineup. If we trade Tanev, it pretty much kills our already sketchy defense, and as much as I'd love to see Rafferty, he's not the type of guy that can take on Tanev's workload. Different player with a different skillset. 

 

As much as I like Stetcher, If we were to move on from him, I could see Rafferty slotting in alongside Benn on the 3rd pairing. 

[-AJ-]

1 hour ago, RetroCanuck said:

I agree with you, but Tanev isn't a guy that we will resign this offseason. To many injuries with us and we need more longterm security with regards to our RD.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean we trade Tanev now, but as the deadline draws closer we'd be silly not to listen to offers on Tanev when Rafferty or Tryamkin can fill his spot.

Possibly, but if we don't re-sign him, who replaces him? No one we have right now is even remotely close to filling his role as well as he does.

[RetroCanuck]

31 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

Possibly, but if we don't re-sign him, who replaces him? No one we have right now is even remotely close to filling his role as well as he does.

No one is as good as Tanev defensively when he's healthy. Hard guy to replace, but if he consistently misses about half the season then whats the difference? Someone fills his role then out of necessity anyways. 

 

 

[-AJ-]

1 minute ago, RetroCanuck said:

No one is as good as Tanev defensively when he's healthy. Hard guy to replace, but if he consistently misses about half the season then whats the difference? Someone fills his role then out of necessity anyways. 

 

 

Still, our record when Tanev is out is noticeably worse, and I'd rather have that record for 30 games a year than 82 games a year.

[RetroCanuck]

2 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

Still, our record when Tanev is out is noticeably worse, and I'd rather have that record for 30 games a year than 82 games a year.

Dont disagree, but if you can get a 1st... wouldn't you do it? Get another piece towards a cup contender?

[-AJ-]

1 minute ago, RetroCanuck said:

Dont disagree, but if you can get a 1st... wouldn't you do it? Get another piece towards a cup contender?

Sure I would, but even Tanev with 2 years left on his deal doesn't get you a 1st anymore. Even more, Tanev is a pending UFA, which means he's only a rental, dramatically lowering his value. At the TDL, I'd argue he's worth a late 2nd at best.

[Guest]

59 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

Possibly, but if we don't re-sign him, who replaces him? No one we have right now is even remotely close to filling his role as well as he does.

this. 

 

If we lose Tanev, we lose our best shutdown defensemen. There is no one in the system like him right now. We need him more than people want to admit we do. Just because he is injury prone doesn't mean he's useless.