Bissurnette Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 1 hour ago, elvis15 said: Pretty much, I don't see enough of an offensive ability to ever get him to a true #1. He played all of 13 games in a new league in a different country in a different part of the world on a team that was one of the worst this franchise has ever seen. How can you tell that he doesn't have the offensive ability to be a #1? I'm not saying he will be, and I'm not expecting him to be a #1 but sky's the limit with this kid. As long as he is reliable defensively he is a monster and you can bet he will get 20+ mins a night due to his shutdown ability. From the highlights he looks like he has some decent offensive upside with a booming shot, so I'm not ruling out #1 so quick. I'm just excited to watch him play, no expectations no limitations. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 He seems like such a solid dude and level headed kid, even though he is gigantic haha. Stoked to see him play again soon. P.S JB with another solid 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 On 4/12/2016 at 8:30 PM, 87Crosby said: Does anyone feel he needs a bigger helmet? sometimes he reminds me of old dudes or young kids who wear their bike helmets backwards haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 32 minutes ago, meh_wassup said: He played all of 13 games in a new league in a different country in a different part of the world on a team that was one of the worst this franchise has ever seen. How can you tell that he doesn't have the offensive ability to be a #1? I'm not saying he will be, and I'm not expecting him to be a #1 but sky's the limit with this kid. As long as he is reliable defensively he is a monster and you can bet he will get 20+ mins a night due to his shutdown ability. From the highlights he looks like he has some decent offensive upside with a booming shot, so I'm not ruling out #1 so quick. I'm just excited to watch him play, no expectations no limitations. He's played in more games than just those 13, you know. I'm not saying he'll have no offence, just that I think he won't have so much that it'd put him in the same category as Karlsson, Doughty, Subban, etc. Anything could happen, but there's a long way from that to a likely ceiling for Tryamkin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckledraggin Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 5 hours ago, elvis15 said: Pretty much, I don't see enough of an offensive ability to ever get him to a true #1. The fact that people are identifying his potential ceiling as a top pairing D-man is such a bonus for the team. The real test for #88 will be, can he slow the game down and get his decision making ability to the level of a top pairing guy. His skating is great, his physicality is great, his range at defending is great, his shot is hard and accurate but he needs to shoot more. His passing will need to improve. It's the one thing that will elevate his game once he gets used to the speed of the NHL. He made lots of excellent plays last year in clearing the zone, but there were lots of times when simply whacking the puck out of the zone wasn't the best play. I can understand not wanting to get caught in his own zone, but there were lots of times where the puck hit his stick and there was no thought of making a play, just making the quick play to get it out of the zone. If and hopefully when the game slows down for him to make that quick outlet pass, he has that top pairing potential. I watched enough Avto games last year to see his potential as a powerplay specialist as well. Not from the point but in front of the net. He simply can't be moved when he decides to camp out in the crease. His ceiling is Byfuglien if you ask me and that's as close to a #1 as you can get. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 6 hours ago, elvis15 said: Pretty much, I don't see enough of an offensive ability to ever get him to a true #1. He hasn't been given that much of an opportunity yet from they coach..who prefers guys like Weber or Bart over blue chip defenders like Try or Hutty. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bissurnette Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 4 hours ago, elvis15 said: He's played in more games than just those 13, you know. I'm not saying he'll have no offence, just that I think he won't have so much that it'd put him in the same category as Karlsson, Doughty, Subban, etc. Anything could happen, but there's a long way from that to a likely ceiling for Tryamkin. Sure but to be a #1 you don't need to be as big of an offensive juggernaut as those guys. Weber, Suter, Chara etc. are all #1 dmen (or were in the case of Chara) but none of them have that offensive output. I think your definition of what a true #1 looks like is limited. Also, what do you mean he played more than just those 13? Those are the 13 that "count" and I say that very loosely because they don't count for much other than to give the Tryamkin (and the fans) a taste of what is yet to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 2 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said: He hasn't been given that much of an opportunity yet from they coach..who prefers guys like Weber or Bart over blue chip defenders like Try or Hutty. From this coach he's actually had some opportunity, mostly 5v5, but he's played pro games ... you know what, I'll answer below. 1 hour ago, meh_wassup said: Sure but to be a #1 you don't need to be as big of an offensive juggernaut as those guys. Weber, Suter, Chara etc. are all #1 dmen (or were in the case of Chara) but none of them have that offensive output. I think your definition of what a true #1 looks like is limited. Also, what do you mean he played more than just those 13? Those are the 13 that "count" and I say that very loosely because they don't count for much other than to give the Tryamkin (and the fans) a taste of what is yet to come. I don't know about you, but those defencemen you mentioned have had pretty consistent point totals of at least high 30's (if not 40's to 50's). They might not be Karlsson getting 60/70/80+ points, but that is still fairly high end offence. Even Edler for us as a #1 (and that's taking into account he's a #1 by default since we don't really have another big minute D man who can contribute offensively enough to be called a #1) has put up 30+ a year to even 40 points in his best years. I don't see that being a consistent production level that Tryamkin will reach. Oh, and the 13 games. He's played more than a few pro games in another league called the KHL. Not sure if you're familiar with it, or his level of production in it. If you aren't, then as an example you may want to look at the production of a player who should be joining us next year who's played in the NHL previously and has the KHL comparison as well. And before you say it, no, not every player is the same and Larsen's offensive output isn't a direct predictor to Tryamkin's future, but it's very reasonable to suggest Tryamkin won't ever light the NHL on fire with his offence to be considered a #1 defenceman. It does appear Tryamkin will be fairly dominant defensively (which is great for a defenceman!) but someone like Hutton is more likely to be classified as a #1 for us in a similar way to Edler because of his offence even if he doesn't do as much defensively. There are a number of great shut down guys in the league, but they aren't considered #1's by pretty much any definition without providing a certain level of offence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NameFaker Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 10 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said: He hasn't been given that much of an opportunity yet from they coach..who prefers guys like Weber or Bart over blue chip defenders like Try or Hutty. C'mon man, that's totally misrepresenting reality. The coach played Hutton on the top pairing at parts of the year. Tryamkin was getting top-4 once time soon after he arrived. That shows definite preference of rookies in those situations, which were often enough to be considered taxing heavily their abilities. It showed them what it takes, and what they need. Start thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 14 hours ago, elvis15 said: He's played in more games than just those 13, you know. I'm not saying he'll have no offence, just that I think he won't have so much that it'd put him in the same category as Karlsson, Doughty, Subban, etc. Anything could happen, but there's a long way from that to a likely ceiling for Tryamkin. To early to tell Elvis. Easy to overstate where he will top out but I want to watch until X-Mass next year. Vancouver is so undersized that if he ends up being a stay at home d-man I will be very happy. If he can claw up into the top 4 it is a absolute home run and will give Benning options in moving a vet d-man at the TDL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 19 minutes ago, NameFaker said: C'mon man, that's totally misrepresenting reality. The coach played Hutton on the top pairing at parts of the year. Tryamkin was getting top-4 once time soon after he arrived. That shows definite preference of rookies in those situations, which were often enough to be considered taxing heavily their abilities. It showed them what it takes, and what they need. Start thinking. But wouldn't it have been nice to see a few games with Tryamkin's slap shot on the power play? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 24 minutes ago, Boudrias said: To early to tell Elvis. Easy to overstate where he will top out but I want to watch until X-Mass next year. Vancouver is so undersized that if he ends up being a stay at home d-man I will be very happy. If he can claw up into the top 4 it is a absolute home run and will give Benning options in moving a vet d-man at the TDL. Sure, it's too early to state anything as a matter of fact. But I'm with Elvis, if I'm gazing in to my crystal ball, I see anything from a #2-#4 D ceiling depending on how he develops/adjusts. I'll be more than happy to be wrong and have him emerge as a #1 though! I just see it as not especially likely and there's nothing AT ALL wrong with him being a quality #2-#4 D. That's found money. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NameFaker Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 15 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said: But wouldn't it have been nice to see a few games with Tryamkin's slap shot on the power play? Yeah, but we don't have the information available to the coaching staff. I think that we've all forgotten why Willie was hired in the first place. He's good with people. He got a masters in social work. Dude is completely suited to coaching the best out of players, but he knows their limits. He understands when they've stretched too far, and pushes them to excel within their limits. It's exactly like Vancouver, too, everyone coaching themselves to be the best they can be. But none of us are really athletes. Runners, maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 6 minutes ago, NameFaker said: Yeah, but we don't have the information available to the coaching staff. I think that we've all forgotten why Willie was hired in the first place. He's good with people. He got a masters in social work. Dude is completely suited to coaching the best out of players, but he knows their limits. He understands when they've stretched too far, and pushes them to excel within their limits. It's exactly like Vancouver, too, everyone coaching themselves to be the best they can be. But none of us are really athletes. Runners, maybe. Well maybe WD just didn't read the memo attached to one of Tryamkin's howitzers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 (edited) I see him as a Bryan Allen type, maybe a bit better. #4 in his prime, but mostly a good #5. Big, tough, stay at home defender with maybe 30 point upside (Allen had 25 one season). Edited May 20, 2016 by canucklehead44 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 23 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said: Well maybe WD just didn't read the memo attached to one of Tryamkin's howitzers. Problem with his 'howitzers' is that they take about a week to get off 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putgolzin Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 17 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said: I see him as a Bryan Allen type, maybe a bit better. #4 in his prime, but mostly a good #5. Big, tough, stay at home defender with maybe 30 point upside (Allen had 25 one season). I always wished we got Allen back...he was great for what he was. As for Tryamkin, I don't see any reason he can't be a solid number 2. The trick is just having a legitimate #1 for him to play with. If there was a GREAT defenceman that played solid d with good offense and allowed Try to just keep it real quiet from the blueline in, that could be perhaps the best top pair in hockey in a few years. Even this coming year, I'd be putting him with Edler and allowing Hutton and Tanev to play together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 9 minutes ago, nzan said: Even this coming year, I'd be putting him with Edler and allowing Hutton and Tanev to play together. I'd prefer to keep Hutton/Try as our 3rd pair for next year. I also don't like Hutton/Tanev together. They're too small and Hutton deserves a guy with a better shot to pass to. Further on I could see Try pairing well with either Hutton or Tanev as a 2nd pair though. Edler needs a more dynamic partner, not to be Try's dynamic partner IMO. It's not his game and it's why people keep crapping on him for not being a #1 or an offensive D (neither of which he's ever been). I'd be thrilled if we could sign either of Demers/Goligoski this summer and move Tanev to 2nd pair. This year: Edler, Demers/Goligoski Sbisa, Tanev Hutton, Tryamkin Pedan, Larsen 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putgolzin Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 doesn't that seem to be wasting tanev though? i love that sbisa has gotten better, but i still don't like him in the top 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 6 minutes ago, J.R. said: I'd prefer to keep Hutton/Try as our 3rd pair for next year. I also don't like Hutton/Tanev together. They're too small and Hutton deserves a guy with a better shot to pass to. Further on I could see Try pairing well with either Hutton or Tanev as a 2nd pair though. Edler needs a more dynamic partner, not to be Try's dynamic partner IMO. It's not his game and it's why people keep crapping on him for not being a #1 or an offensive D (neither of which he's ever been). I'd be thrilled if we could sign either of Demers/Goligoski this summer and move Tanev to 2nd pair. This year: Edler, Demers/Goligoski Sbisa, Tanev Hutton, Tryamkin Pedan, Larsen Demers, okay, I guess. Goligoski? No. Right now, it's: Edler - Tanev Hutton - Tryamkin Hamhuis/Larsen/Pedan/Sbisa Maybe a Subban or a Stecher or a Brisebois sneaks through the ranks. Or Chychrun, if JB changes his mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now