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

Tanev for Barrie [PROPOSAL]


ABNuck

Recommended Posts

Just now, brownky said:

Its the same as the Edler bash-fest. When a guy plays 21+ minutes in the hardest situations, there are plenty of chances to make an error. When that happens its kind of a self-reinforcing circle - He always makes mistakes, so people key in on every mistake. Ignoring the time he (by 'he' I mean take your pick, I've seen both Edler and Myers do it this year) muscles the puck off two guys in the low slot and chips the puck off the glass and out because that's a "boring" play that doesn't directly lead to a goal for us.

 

 

I would rather have Meyers at a hit of $5 or so but that wasn't the market.   Otherwise, he has been a tremendous addition for the Canucks and played extremely well.   There isn't a Dman in the NHL that doesn't have rough nights/stretches but his have been relatively few and far between.   Because he moves the puck quite well and quickly, it took him some time to mesh with the Canuck coaching system and the forwards but that meshing process seems pretty complete now and that past dozen games or so he has been very good.   I don't think it a coincidence that the Canuck run they have been on corresponds to his improved play either.    Having three RHD of Meyers, Tanev and Stecher isn't the strongest set in the NHL but may be near the top as the most balanced and consistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Is this some sort of physical law(s) that would be broken?   The Tanev-Marky theorem that states that never these two shall be signed in same off-season by the same team?   Any by having "no way to" means an ink shortage or simply another force field effect from the Tanev-Marky event horizon?

Well it is actually called a hard salary cap, so not a law of physics, only a contractual agreement for participating in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Provost said:

Well it is actually called a hard salary cap, so not a law of physics, only a contractual agreement for participating in the league.

And signing two veteran players who want to be with the team and have said so publicly giving the GM an ability to work at ways to make that work within said CAP is somehow then "impossible" in your world?   There is not a shred of possibility that other moves don't happen?  The roster is static year to year?    

 

These are two solid players who will fit fine into the Canuck plans moving forward in the near term and their contracts will be an issue but one that is NOT impossible to solve if both sides want it to work.   These are not $10 million dollar player types here.     

 

Carry on with the angst....and your admirable passion for the Tanev-Marky theorem  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rob_Zepp said:

And signing two veteran players who want to be with the team and have said so publicly giving the GM an ability to work at ways to make that work within said CAP is somehow then "impossible" in your world?   There is not a shred of possibility that other moves don't happen?  The roster is static year to year?    

 

These are two solid players who will fit fine into the Canuck plans moving forward in the near term and their contracts will be an issue but one that is NOT impossible to solve if both sides want it to work.   These are not $10 million dollar player types here.     

 

Carry on with the angst....and your admirable passion for the Tanev-Marky theorem  :)

"there is currently no chance of re-signing both Tanev and Markstrom"

...indeed there are ways to make moves and afford it, but it is generally important to read the actual words written.

Neither player, nor their agents have said anything about giving the team a break in order to stay.  If you are conflating them saying they like the team with "I want to be on the team at all costs and for whatever they can afford"... then that is your own fevered imagination at play and not reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I would rather have Meyers at a hit of $5 or so but that wasn't the market.   Otherwise, he has been a tremendous addition for the Canucks and played extremely well.   There isn't a Dman in the NHL that doesn't have rough nights/stretches but his have been relatively few and far between.   Because he moves the puck quite well and quickly, it took him some time to mesh with the Canuck coaching system and the forwards but that meshing process seems pretty complete now and that past dozen games or so he has been very good.   I don't think it a coincidence that the Canuck run they have been on corresponds to his improved play either.    Having three RHD of Meyers, Tanev and Stecher isn't the strongest set in the NHL but may be near the top as the most balanced and consistent.

Indeed. And at 6 it's not heartbreaking either, we have the space right now, and over the next couple years the cap is probably going to go up quite a bit if the new NHL TV deal is as lucrative as it "could be". But I'm very happy with Myers' play right now, and he seems to have picked up the system and works well in it. He's certainly taking a ton of load off the others on that side.

 

In any case, if a team has 3 "second pairing" defencemen on each side, they'll probably be just dandy on that aspect. Any guy can slot up or down as needed or as the matchups dictate according to ability. I genuinely think that balanced approach is more of a strength than having 'the superstar' guy back there... the ability to rotate guys freely up and down means everybody takes less of a beating - less injuries over the course of a year and a deeper, healthier team come playoff time will always do more damage than a team with a tired out superstar that opposing teams just key in on for the first game or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Provost said:

"there is currently no chance of re-signing both Tanev and Markstrom"

...indeed there are ways to make moves and afford it, but it is generally important to read the actual words written.

Neither player, nor their agents have said anything about giving the team a break in order to stay.  If you are conflating them saying they like the team with "I want to be on the team at all costs and for whatever they can afford"... then that is your own fevered imagination at play and not reality.

You go with that.   Enjoy.   :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mll said:

He has struggled to produce under Babcock.  He has 18pts the last 20 games.  

Reilly has been out which gives the prime PP minutes to Barrie. He was rather ineffective on PP#2, a role which he likely would see here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Provost said:

"there is currently no chance of re-signing both Tanev and Markstrom"

...indeed there are ways to make moves and afford it, but it is generally important to read the actual words written.

Neither player, nor their agents have said anything about giving the team a break in order to stay.  If you are conflating them saying they like the team with "I want to be on the team at all costs and for whatever they can afford"... then that is your own fevered imagination at play and not reality.

Always be cautious with Agent Lawyer speak. Nobody aside from Mackinnon is coming out saying "I'll take a mil less just to stay here". That doesn't mean they won't take a mil less just to stay here, nor does it mean they will either. But whatever is reported to the media short of the signature on the contract is ALL fluff. On both sides. In this case, the sports media is a tool to be used, who encourages/allows it because it's good for ratings and ad money.

 

Right now the salary structure for the Canucks seems to be settling down. Nobody makes more than Loui. Bo's on a cheap deal. Even the Free Agent signings came "cheaper" than was reportedly expected.

 

I wouldn't be surprised to see the numbers make sense for both sides to keep the band together. And if it isn't... there are others who can do those jobs coming up the pipe who can, and for cheaper.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only way could see Barrie happening is if we lost Marky, Tanev and likely Stetcher.

Unless we somehow lose Louie or Baertschi there is likely only budget to get one of Markstrom or Tanev signed.  If Baertschi, may still only have the budget for one.

Roster space becomes an issue if Tryamkin is coming in as well.  Not sure what kind of cap numbers he can get, I think he still falls under the rookie contract rules. 

Rafferty is on a one way deal next year and looks like probably not a lot to gain from a second season in AHL.

I assume OJ will be pushing for a spot next couple of years as well.  

Don't see any more big UFA signings, just some finagling to try to get out of some of the previous big signings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my perspective:

 

Hughes is obviously our offensive blueliner. We all know what he can and does do. While we have other guys who can produce some as a collective, we don't really have a second guy who is a significant scoring threat. (Edler CAN be sometimes, but you never know which Edler is going to come to the rink every night).  So in this regard, I would really love to have Barrie and bringing him in to get a taste of the Canucks would probably help us sign him to his next contract. 2 true scoring threats on the blueline would really be a dream come true.

 

However, other posters have already pointed out that Tanev is our only premier shut-down guy, and our overall defense isn't that great as it is. Lose Tanev and we would get a lot more goals scored against us. This has been proven time and time again through Tanev's many injuries, and the team flounders. Posters have also pointed out that Barrie will want good money next year, and unless Benning works some magic we probably won't be able to afford him.

 

With Tanev actually having a healthy year AND on pace for his best PPG total ever, I feel we are better off just riding it out and seeing what happens. If Tanev doesn't end up re-signing with us, perhaps that will make it easier to bring Barrie in if Benning so desires. However, if we did that we really would need to figure out who will pick up the defensive slack.

 

But really, if Tanev is fair with his demands, I imagine Benning will do whatever he can to keep him. IF (and it is a big if) he can continue to stay healthy and continue to put up the points he has so far this season, he might actually be pretty good value for another couple of years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just imagine if somehow next years D......

 

 

Hughes Pieteangelo

Edler Myers 

Tryamkin Tanev

Juolevi Rafferty

 

I'd be willing to pay 1st for a team to take Eriksson to sign Tanev, Tryamkin and Pietrangelo!

 

Move out

 

Baertschi 3.6

Benn 2

Sutter 475

Stecher 2.3

Schaller 1.9

Leivo 1.5

Pearson 3.75

Eriksson 6

 

26ish?

 

Miller Pettersson Virtanen 

Hoglander Horvat Boeser

Ferland Gaudette Podkolzin 

Roussell Beagle Macewan 

Lind

 

Hughes Pietrangelo 

Edler Myers 

Tryamkin Tanev

Juolevi Rafferty 

 

Spppploooooooshhhhhhh:excl:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/31/2020 at 10:05 AM, Provost said:

"there is currently no chance of re-signing both Tanev and Markstrom"

...indeed there are ways to make moves and afford it, but it is generally important to read the actual words written.

Neither player, nor their agents have said anything about giving the team a break in order to stay.  If you are conflating them saying they like the team with "I want to be on the team at all costs and for whatever they can afford"... then that is your own fevered imagination at play and not reality.

There is absolutely chance that both guys are back. We have the cap space to do it. Markstrom I believe will definitely be back and probably signed before the deadline (just a hunch). Tanev, we will sign unless we feel there is someone else ready to step in. I think Taneve wants to stay here, and Benning likes depth and competition for positions. To me, that means he's likely back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, shazzam said:

Hopefully we can re-sign Tanev. Trade Stetcher and have an internal battle for.that 3rd pairing spot.

I think Stecher is the guy that the ream feels that they can replace from within. I could definitely see him get moved during summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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