-
Posts
1,246 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by Fakename70
-
No, there YOU go. Along with the rest of the "pro-Tanev analytics geeks" I referred to earlier. Apparently you're under the assumption that this is the first season I've ever watched him play. If my mind is made up, I can assure you it goes far beyond whatever data you're capable of spewing out to make your case about the guy. I'm a firm believer that that sort of thing is more for those who don't pass the eyeball test. I'm not convinced Tanev does. Certainly not with regards to him being one of the league's "premiere shutdown defencemen" (CDC'r quote) who'll command "a king's ransom" (another CDC'r quote) in return trade value. We agree on one thing: I don't think he's worth (that) much. We disagree on whether or not the rest (or, "most", as you put it) of the NHL agrees.
-
Couldn't be that. At no point in their respective careers has Chris Tanev ever rated higher nor outperformed John Carlson. I'll never believe that.
-
I try to avoid talking about what the rest of the league is doing. My main focus point is the Canucks and how much better they were with guys on the blue line who could chip in. I don't think there's anything wrong with that expectation, as it's a 200ft game, not 100. Otherwise, offensive stats wouldn't be under consideration for the Norris and there wouldn't be a Selke award for the best two-way forward. For those who swear Tanev is in his prime and/or his best days are in front of him, my question is: how many of those days will be spent on IR? Two things you can pretty much count on from the Canucks defencemen: Edler and Tanev getting hurt. And neither one of them impressing anyone when the Canucks have the puck. I'm not as fixated on offence as you might think, but I just fail to see how a guy who's so invisible in that aspect supposedly rates so highly compared to other players around the league who do chip in AND are every bit as impressive on defence (if not more) than Tanev. Trying to give the guy the benefit-of-the-doubt, but, I just can't.
-
I'm not so sure about that. And, if he's "spoken of in Ontario hockey circles with considerable reverence" my guess it's likely because he's from there. It's the same in VAN regarding "BC boys" in the NHL. Came across yet another RHD yesterday that he's making more money than: John Carlson. For the life of me, I can't figure out any reason at all why Chris Tanev should be getting paid more money per season than him. I hate to dwell on the paycheques these guys get - I rarely do - but exactly what are the Canucks getting by comparison for what they're paying? Seriously, I just don't see it. I suppose that this is a question for the pro-Tanev analytics geeks, but, I'm more a fan of the old-fashioned eyeball test. And, for what he's getting paid, I'm not 100% convinced he passes it.
-
Or, as with Kassian, you might regret keeping him. The difference in opinion is that I don't believe Chris Tanev would command "a king's ransom" in return. I just don't think he's at that level. And, outside of this market, I doubt anyone thinks he is.
-
The glaring difference though is that they're all also known for their offensive prowess...except for Tanev. Sorry, but I don't think he rates at the same level as the other 4.
-
I think that all depends on one's personal definition of "premier shutdown guy". I m thinking he's instead much closer to your other description of "very, very strong defender". And, it's because of the injuries that I believe CDC'rs need to adjust their definition of "a real good return" for the guy if defensive prospects are expected the other way. No GM is going to give up meaningful/highly valuable "defensive prospects" for Chris Tanev alone. I just don't see it. Maybe you can "forget the last two years of injuries", but I'm doubtful that many actual NHL GM's can. If injuries are amongst the first things that come to mind regarding Mike Green and Kris Letang - guys with actual offensive talent - what makes you think Tanev escapes the microscope in that regard? The longer Benning waits for, as you said, "defensive prospects", the closer Tanev gets to 30, and the more opportunities for him to watch from the press box whilst on IR like he's done the past two years as you mentioned. Correct me if my memory is failing, but weren't CDC'rs bitterly complaining about the defensive style of play we're seeing from Tanev - specifically, the shot blocking - when emphasised by the supposedly out-of-step John Tortorella?
-
As unimpressed as I am and as overrated I believe he is, I would never advocate dumping him for the proverbial bag-o-pucks. That's just not smart. But, as usual, CDC'rs largely seem to think he'd fetch just as much in the real world as he apparently would in the fake one. I think GMJB missed the train on getting a REALLY good and favourable deal for Tanev by hanging onto him after the Worlds, when his trade value was as high as it's ever going to be. He made the same mistake with Kassian, remember? Held onto him too long, and it was downhill from there. I feel we'll see the same regarding Tanev. And, as for those CDC'rs who Long to see him retained as a mentor for the younger cats behind him on the depth chart, to me that just sounds like another way of saying that the team won't be any good nor competitive any time soon. Teams that stink usually have far more time for "mentoring" than those that are competing for a playoff spot. And teams that have young players who can contribute to a successful NHL club don't need them to be "mentored" at the NHL level. If they did, they likely wouldn't have gotten called up from the minors. Unfortunately, in the Canucks case, they have young players at the NHL level who might be better served by still playing in the AHL or whichever league they were in before they got here. Even some CDC favourites, in my opinion. But, back to Tanev. I'm still of the mind that it's incredibly disappointing (as is the overvaluing by CDC'rs of certain fan favourites on this team) that Benning apparently wanted no part of any trade talks with Montreal regarding Subban in 2016 if Tanev was involved. If true, it was crazy then, and it's still crazy now. If Tanev was ever going to be moved for anything substantial in return, THAT was GMJB's one shot. Again, I'm not of the mind that Benning should just "get rid of" Tanev, but, each year forward of holding onto him is another year further from when his value was at its peak. Id love to see him flip the switch and prove me wrong over the next 4 years, but I don't see that happening. And, a lot of CDC'rs are so in love with the guy that they've set the bar low enough so that when he meets it it gives them the opportunity to crow about him being one of the best defencemen in the game or whatever it is they say about him, and that Benning should hold onto him so he can mentor the kids if he doesn't receive any offers approaching the level of real world "fair value" Tanev repeatedly gets in fantasy. Not gonna happen.
-
I believe CDC'rs have a tendency to think with the heart first rather than the brain. Which would explain the constant overvaluing of certain players who are really really really well-liked, but really aren't anywhere near as good or essential as the faithful think they are.
-
He's always injured, though. I get WHY he's that, but, surely nothing good can come from having the guy still on the roster the closer he gets to 30 if he's missing a substantial amount of games because he's physically unable to play. We've seen what he can do but ultimately his game leaves me wanting to see someone else who can chip in on offence as well. Isn't that what the best teams in the league have? Isn't that what the Canucks had when they were among the leagues' elite at the beginning of the decade? Chris Tanev has reached his ceiling. Do CDC'rs really have the stomach to spend the next half decade waiting for him - at age 31 - to FINALLY maximise his potential and put it all together? Haven't you had enough of that with Edler?
-
Congrats to Lu - moving up in all time wins - Luuuu
Fakename70 replied to gizmo2337's topic in General Hockey Discussion
I'm pretty sure neither Naslund, Bure nor Linden played in Vancouver for their entire careers. But take a look up at the rafters next time you're at the Rog. I actually wouldn't vote the twins into the HHoF either, as I'm under the apparently mistaken impression that H'soF should be reserved for the absolute best players of any given era the league in question has ever seen. All-time greats. I'm not so sure 22 and 33 fit the bill there from a league wide perspective. But, as Canucks? Absolutely. To the rafters when they're finished. However, I can only shake my head in disbelief that anyone can say with a straight face that Luongo doesn't qualify as a franchise great. If you can name me anyone else at that position that the franchise has had who was better than he was, I'll jump to your side of the fence. But I don't think you nor any of his detractors can do it. And, as for the HHoF, I think he's far more deserving than either of the twins are, but, I do believe there's a bit of an unfair stigma attached to his name that will always lead certain people who follow the game to wonder aloud "really?" whenever he's a legitimate candidate for any type of honour or award for stellar performance. Same goes for Subban, for example. -
Congrats to Lu - moving up in all time wins - Luuuu
Fakename70 replied to gizmo2337's topic in General Hockey Discussion
That can be said of the twins as well. And don't get me started on their "leadership". But, I don't hear anyone saying that should disqualify them from the rafters after they've retired. And as for the G position, whose name is atop the list amongst all-time franchise leaders in just about all the pertinent categories? Why is he continually held to a different standard? -
Congrats to Lu - moving up in all time wins - Luuuu
Fakename70 replied to gizmo2337's topic in General Hockey Discussion
If you're going to point fingers at anyone regarding 2011, let's start with the forwards. Luongo plays only 1 end of the ice. He had an uneven series against Boston, sure, but, please don't overlook the lack of offensive punch from the forwards. They were just as up-and-down as Lu was. 8 goals in 7 games. That's Lu's fault too? -
Congrats to Lu - moving up in all time wins - Luuuu
Fakename70 replied to gizmo2337's topic in General Hockey Discussion
For some reason you keep equating retired numbers with championships. To that end, should only Cup winners be elected to the HHoF? We do agree on the purpose of the RoH, although, I'd love to see that eliminated altogether, as I believe it's primarily for players who weren't quite good enough to reach franchise legend status. "Celebrating mediocrity", as you put it. But, to deny Luongo, the Sedins, The Rocket, Nazzy, and "The Captain" rafter status because none of them ever took a victory lap around the ice while hoisting the Cup is just myopic in theory. These are amongst the absolute best this franchise has ever had, and they should be recognised as such. No where in competitive sport is it required that individual players can't be honoured due to lack of team success. -
Congrats to Lu - moving up in all time wins - Luuuu
Fakename70 replied to gizmo2337's topic in General Hockey Discussion
Didn't I just say that? So, you don't think 22 nor 33 belong up there? The question is moot since that's exactly where they're both headed within the next couple years. And rightly so. Personally, it's the ROH that I can't stand. I think THAT rewards players might or even might not have been really good during their time in the game/with the franchise, but who ultimately were just fan favourites/loyal soldiers more than anything. I think you're all wet on the raised-to-the-rafters issue, but, in your defence, I threw up my hands in disgust when the desperate and pathetic Colorado Avalanche retired Ray Bourque's jersey number after he retired. What'd he play there for, a full season and a playoff run before that? -
Congrats to Lu - moving up in all time wins - Luuuu
Fakename70 replied to gizmo2337's topic in General Hockey Discussion
Blake Price, for one. 1040 debated this very subject one afternoon a couple seasons ago. ROH, not the rafters was the consensus on Lu that day. One of the main issues against him in their view is that he wasn't a Canuck long enough to warrant rafters status. I was too busy shaking my head in disbelief to bother to phone-in with my rebuttal that his supposedly short tenure in Vancouver actually makes his personal accomplishments even more impressive. But they had him level with McLean at best. -
Congrats to Lu - moving up in all time wins - Luuuu
Fakename70 replied to gizmo2337's topic in General Hockey Discussion
Ok, grandpa, but the reality is that retired jerseys and numbers are commonplace in amateur and professional sport. And, like it or not, your Vancouver Canucks have chosen to participate in that ritual for certain players without giving any thought whatsoever to the number of Cups they won as an individual. And rightly so: one should have absolutely nothing to do with the other. -
Congrats to Lu - moving up in all time wins - Luuuu
Fakename70 replied to gizmo2337's topic in General Hockey Discussion
Absolutely insane that certain people in this market still don't think his name and number belong in the rafters at the Rog after he hangs 'em up. -
But you are? I'm not the one who dug up a comment from 6 months ago and trolled the person who gave an opinion that so far has been wrong. That's what you and 1-2 others have done. Just be sure to be man enough to come find me again in another 6 months since you apparently don't have much else going on if/when Boeser hits the wall and his stats nosedive. If you're going to call someone out online, don't act surprised and/or scold them for not "accepting it and moving on" when you get a response.
-
You wouldn't have bothered to comment on WHAT I SAID IN MAY, genius. You really needed me to clarify that for you? You know what's worse than me being wrong? You patting yourself on the back over Boeser's performance as if you had something to do with it. You didn't.
-
You probably feel pretty clever right now, but I don't think you should. We both know you wouldn't have bothered to comment had I been right or if he tails off.
-
If it's Gaunce he's expected to jump, DA lapped him at LW4 a year or 2 ago. BG had better show out when he returns, is all I'm saying. I just haven't seen exactly what it is the organisation sees in the guy when compared to Archibald.
-
I'm really pulling for the kid to become that top-6 RW power forward that GMMG said he'd acquired in Kassian. Wouldn't that really be something if JV turned out to be that! I like what I'm seeing so far this campaign...but, I just hope it isn't a mirage and he falls down to earth in 3 months.
-
Not good enough? If the Canucks were truly interested only in players who are "good enough", they'd have parted with Hutton this summer. It just seems that no matter how well certain players perform in the AHL, they're continually having to jump through hoops to land a spot with the big club, while languishing behind an inferior/less impressive player on the depth chart in the NHL.