wallstreetamigo Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Norris winning Subban also doubled his production last year while maintaining a hard hitting strong defensive style after signing that contract. I agree 2.5 is too high. 1.6 - 2.0 would be good. 1.6 being a discount and 2.0 being a slight over payment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plum Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Let's be real. how much did Norris winning PK Subban sign for as an RFA holding out last year? If Tanev gets 2.5 million Gillis should be fired. If he gets it for 3 years Gillis should be shot. The Canucks don't have to use up all their cap space you know. I mean, this team definitely needs upgrades especially if none of the kids are ready to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batmania Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Subban was >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before last season than Tanev is now though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versace Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Look at Subban and Alzner, he's not worth that money. I say he wants 2+ but he's going to settle for 1.4 or below Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksFanMike Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 3 yrs at $2 M per I think is fair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 We don't have to use up all of our cap, but we do need to sign Tanev. You're acting like he doesn't' deserve it, he has played extremely well. He is right handed, young. It is not like he is easy to find, we lack a right handed young defensemen. We have Corrado but then who else? We need to get him signed, you're also making a big deal of this it isn't a Pietrangelo contract we are talking about. 3 million per and 4 years is the max and Tanev knows. The parts we need to upgrade are the 3rd line center and depth defensemen. The 3rd line spot is for youth and depth can be 2 million max. But Weber already has that first depth spot. We aren't crunched in cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcrguy Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 So what would the compensation be if another team signed him to an offer sheet and the Canucks didn't match it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 I agree which is why I don't think Tanev should get that kind of money. Sure it is. you're just looking at the wrong RFAs to compare him to. Of course he's replaceable. There's very few players in the league that aren't. Gillis could trade him tomorrow for all I care but that doesn't change that as much as you complain about people over rating him you under rate him. 3rd pairing guy does not mean sub 1 mil guy. Players get what they are worth based on their play not some cookie cutter salary scheme based on where they play. Who? Ridiculous statement and you should flog yourself for it's ridiculousness. Better bet would be Tanev signed for 1.7 and Albers signed for 1.2 and Corrado playing in Utica with a couple of call ups this year. I bet it is plan B but it should be called plan only other option we have. There is a reason it's plan b though and that's because Tanev has shown he's much better than Corrado. That doesn't mean he is but Corrado hasn't really played much. Which makes it all the more interesting that you say he could take that role but you judge Tanev as not being worthy. Tanev at anything under 1.5 is a steal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batmania Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Why do you assume I am saying that Tanev is not worthy of a 3rd pairing spot on this team or that he sucks, etc. I have never said any such things. My argument is that if this team wants to be able to build the depth necessary to win a championship, not every depth role player can be paid a premium when there are cheaper comparable alternatives out there signing with our rivals. It comes down to getting the right players at the right price, something that makes sense no matter the contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THERETOOL Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 love the kid , but hes still gotta prove hes the real deal .. i would say 2 million for 2 years .. he's a 5th or 6th man right now , you cant pay him over 2 .. thats nuts .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 I don't assume that or anything. I make comments based on what you've actually said not what I think you're implying. Not going to get that for under 2 million and fill the role Tanev plays. That literally though has not a single thing to do with how much Tanev is worth. Also you keep bringing up the RFA thing as if it's the end all and be all. It's not. Of course they are. Just like you're under valuing him when you say he should get what Martinez got and under rating him when you say he could be replaced with Corrado. All of those are equally ridiculous to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter.S-Kerouac Posted July 28, 2013 Author Share Posted July 28, 2013 I for one am not too attached to Tanev. If we can sign him cheep I'm happy with that but I am not confident he could take the rigours of a full nhl season. He is consistently on the receiving end of highlight reel hits. He's not Gumby he's a person who is going to be injury prone very soon imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batmania Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Is it as ridiculous as you saying that there is zero chance that Corrado could replace him? There is ALWAYS a chance and who knows how Corrado could develop or where the Canucks believe he might be based on their own evaluation of him. If the Canucks feel like Corrado is or will be ready that could very well impact what they are willing to do with Tanev. If Tanev gets into the top 4 that changes the scenario but who is moving to allow that to happen? Because with the other 4 already there, good luck him getting into the top 4. I am actually really starting to wonder about his character considering he was pretty much a nobody until the Canucks gave him a chance. That alone should be worth a reasonable contract - sort of like Burrows did. The RFA market is what it is and the rules surrounding it are designed for the very reasons you suggest are ridiculous - namely to control the range of salaries within that class. You think RFA's with no arbitration rights have the same ability as a UFA or an RFA with arbitration rights to exert leverage? Of course they don't, and that is by design. Even with arbitration cases comparable salaries for the same class of players are admissible as supporting evidence on either side but salaries for UFA's are not. Again, that is by design. You are fooling yourself if you really believe that RFA's get what they are worth based solely on their play. The system says they get what they are worth within their comparable group of RFA's AND what can fit with the team's cap unless a GM is desperate and stupid. Smart GM's wait them out because at the end of the day they have little leverage in the process. Ask PK Subban about that or any of the other guys last year who accepted less than they were worth based on their play. Tanev does not deserve anywhere near what Subban gets paid in any world, even CDC homer land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Please show me where I've said there is zero chance. Also if the part in bold is a joke. A complete and total joke. Your arguments if we can even call these weak attempts at pushing your crazy opinion as facts gives me a head ache. Quickly come back with something witty and then something about how you don't care so we can end this and wait for Tanev to sign a contract higher than Martinez. I honestly cannot see Tanev signing a contract less than Ballard who got 1.5. Also Burrows went from a 500K a year contract to a 2 million per year contract so I agree he should do just like what Burrows did. And we've already been over the Subban thing. You can let your grasp go of the Subban argument. However if the RFA rules you profess to be the end all and be all were something real and not just in your head Wiercioch would have gotten about 1.5. unfortunately also a players play on the ice and importance to the team also have a little something to do with that. I cannot believe that I even have to argue that a players skill and role will play a role in their contract. Simply unbelievable how stupid that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batmania Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 You say it is ridiculous for me to even suggest that Corrado could take Tanev's spot. That pretty much comes across as saying it is impossible, doesn't it? Why is it ridiculous to suggest it if it is possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueLemming Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 So what would the compensation be if another team signed him to an offer sheet and the Canucks didn't match it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 No it doesn't come across like that at all. Not to any sane rational thinking person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 Tanev is not the kind of player that is likely to get a massively overvalued offer sheet. That tactic is generally reserved for top level specifically franchise type players. If they thought they could get him for reasonable value and not have Gillis match they would have already sent an offer sheet. Maybe they have and Tanev has not signed one yet, who knows. I think if he got offered anywhere above 2 million or so he would be guaranteed to sign it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batmania Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 By all means clarify what you are saying then. It makes no sense that something would be ridiculous to suggest if you yourself think there is a chance it could happen. You can;t really have that argument both ways I'm afraid. I didn't say it was likely or not, I just said it was a possibility if Tanev prices himself out of the plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.