Nikita Tryamkin | D

[aGENT]

17 minutes ago, nzan said:

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.

Wasting him how? He's a great 2B/3 D I think they'd be an excellent shutdown pair (both have good skating, Tanev brings the brains, Sbisa, the physicality) and open the Edler pair up for more offensive/secondary shutdown minutes. Also keeps the young guys on the third pair with less pressure with occasional top 4 time with injuries.

 

14 minutes ago, thejazz97 said:

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.

On a short, say 4 year term, why not Goligoski?

 

And no, if we don't sign any not-Hamhuis, I'd say it's:

 

Edler, Tanev

Hamhuis, Sbisa

Hutton, Tryamkin

 

Pedan, Larsen

 

That's ok...but it's not particularly great (just like it wasn't last year) and does little to move the D core forward (or interest fans).

 

Subban, Stetcher and Brisebois (and Biega IMO) will be in Utica barring one of them absolutely annihilating the competition.

[Putgolzin]

50 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Wasting him how? He's a great 2B/3 D I think they'd be an excellent shutdown pair (both have good skating, Tanev brings the brains, Sbisa, the physicality) and open the Edler pair up for more offensive/secondary shutdown minutes. Also keeps the young guys on the third pair with less pressure with occasional top 4 time with injuries.

 

On a short, say 4 year term, why not Goligoski?

 

And no, if we don't sign any not-Hamhuis, I'd say it's:

 

Edler, Tanev

Hamhuis, Sbisa

Hutton, Tryamkin

 

Pedan, Larsen

 

That's ok...but it's not particularly great (just like it wasn't last year) and does little to move the D core forward (or interest fans).

 

Subban, Stetcher and Brisebois (and Biega IMO) will be in Utica barring one of them absolutely annihilating the competition.

i'm with jazz, i think our top 4 are:

 

edler tanev

hutton tryamkin

 

that's why i'd switch it up and relieve edler of some of his offensive duty by putting tryamkin together with him - making them the go-to defensive pairing.

in my mind, that would allow hutton-tanev to play together, which would allow hutton to continue to develop his offense because tanev would bring his steady d. yeah, i guess they'd be smallish, but neither of them are tiny...

[aGENT]

10 minutes ago, nzan said:

i'm with jazz, i think our top 4 are:

 

edler tanev

hutton tryamkin

 

that's why i'd switch it up and relieve edler of some of his offensive duty by putting tryamkin together with him - making them the go-to defensive pairing.

in my mind, that would allow hutton-tanev to play together, which would allow hutton to continue to develop his offense because tanev would bring his steady d. yeah, i guess they'd be smallish, but neither of them are tiny...

Maybe in a couple years, but not next year IMO (injuries excepted).

 

That's two pairs with too similar of players on them IMO. The first is is bigger but lacks a puck moving/cerebral guy the second is smaller, not remotely physical and is two cerebral guys. It's a bad mix IMO.

[elvis15]

3 hours 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.

I'm not saying it's all over for Tryamkin to ever hope to reach that point, but he hasn't shown anything to date that would make me think he'll get near that top tier offensively. I still think he'll be a top four, and probably have some offence to contribute, but I'm not holding high hopes for anything beyond 20-30 points a year - certainly nothing like the 40-50 of the players mentioned earlier.

 

2 hours ago, J.R. said:

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.

Exactly, not being a #1 isn't the end of the world for him, and in fact turns out pretty excellently for us being he was a 3rd rounder. They don't all have to turn out to be Keith, Weber or Subban if they aren't a high first rounder.

 

2 hours ago, nzan said:

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.

I say keep him with Hutton! While we have Edler here maybe he and Tryamkin get some time together, but Hutton has really tried to reach out to Tryamkin and develop a camaraderie off the ice. I think that'll translate positively to a pairing. They can both be trusted in tougher situations but they can have their ice time managed a bit (with Hutton skewing to PP time and Tryamkin to PK) as well.

 

Edler and Tanev will still get the bulk of minutes and they pair well together, so I see no reason to mess with that (short of signing a UFA - or soon enough if we draft Sergachev perhaps!?).

 

 

[SilentSam]

14 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.

Hairy,.  Have you ever seen a hockey city and its fan base so hard on 19-20-21 year olds?

Kids like Hutton, Tryamkin, and Pedan (104mph slap shot) won't be fully developed until they are 25-26 yrs old,. as in the case of Z.Chara,.  Or even our own Tanev.   Anything we get now, while they come into their prime, is a bonus.

Tryamkin will be a monster for us at 25.. But the ride with him to that point is proving to be an exciting one already.

 

Like you Hairy,.  I really dislike the pessimism generated towards young growing, talented athletes here on CDC,.  It's like telling your 12 year old son that he going to amount nothing more than a garbage man in life.

If Talent is recognized,. And it gets to develop and generate,.  there is no ceiling, and no expectations with every opportunity granted.. Just the chance to succeed and exceed.

 

That was one of the coolest things about a young player who came to Vancouver,  the fact we knew nothing about Pavel Bure,. We had no expectations.  .  .  We knew very little about that young man, and he knew nothing of hockey in North America.   

There is an element to surprise,  that will bring anyone to their feet,.  and it begins without expectation.

 

Hopefully all our young talent on the Canucks get every opportunity to surprise us.

Maybe giving full opportunity, should be the only expectation.

[aGENT]

30 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Hairy,.  Have you ever seen a hockey city and its fan base so hard on 19-20-21 year olds?

Kids like Hutton, Tryamkin, and Pedan (104mph slap shot) won't be fully developed until they are 25-26 yrs old,. as in the case of Z.Chara,.  Or even our own Tanev.   Anything we get now, while they come into their prime, is a bonus.

So much that ^^^

[Gaudette Celly]

Despite the Willie comments, unless the Canucks grab 2-3 players from UFA or make some significant trades for more developed players, this will be the second year of transition and player development.  As such, Hutton and Tryamkin seeing 2nd pairing minutes is no problem  Hutton has already shown he can handle it, Sbisa has done so as well, and Tryamkin has shown that potential isn't far off and he should be there this season.  Pedan, Larsen, and Stecher are the question marks and will fill out the bottom pairing, and injuries will give them plenty of opportunity throughout the year.

 

Nothing to lose really by giving them lots of PT and experience, as expectations for the team will still be tempered.

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, Hutton Wink said:

Pedan, Larsen, and Stecher are the question marks and will fill out the 7-8 spots/AHL, and injuries will give them plenty of opportunity throughout the year.

FTFY

[Gaudette Celly]

5 minutes ago, J.R. said:

FTFY

Sorry boss, but Pedan and Larsen won't be Utica-bound.  The "asset management" crowd would blow the roof off.

 

At least one or two of them will be playing 3rd pairing, unless Hammer is brought back or other FAs signed.

[aGENT]

Just now, Hutton Wink said:

Sorry boss, but Pedan and Larsen won't be Utica-bound.  The "asset management" crowd would blow the roof off.

 

At least one or two of them will be playing 3rd pairing, unless Hammer is brought back or other FAs signed.

Yeah, they'd be the 7/8.

[Alflives]

8 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

Sorry boss, but Pedan and Larsen won't be Utica-bound.  The "asset management" crowd would blow the roof off.

 

At least one or two of them will be playing 3rd pairing, unless Hammer is brought back or other FAs signed.

Pedan is playing wing on the fourth line, I think. That creates more space on the back end, right?

[aGENT]

31 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Pedan is playing wing on the fourth line, I think. That creates more space on the back end, right?

Doubtful. We have even less space at forward FYI.

Edited May 20, 2016 by J.R.

[Boudrias]

22 hours ago, SilentSam said:

Hairy,.  Have you ever seen a hockey city and its fan base so hard on 19-20-21 year olds?

Kids like Hutton, Tryamkin, and Pedan (104mph slap shot) won't be fully developed until they are 25-26 yrs old,. as in the case of Z.Chara,.  Or even our own Tanev.   Anything we get now, while they come into their prime, is a bonus.

Tryamkin will be a monster for us at 25.. But the ride with him to that point is proving to be an exciting one already.

 

Like you Hairy,.  I really dislike the pessimism generated towards young growing, talented athletes here on CDC,.  It's like telling your 12 year old son that he going to amount nothing more than a garbage man in life.

If Talent is recognized,. And it gets to develop and generate,.  there is no ceiling, and no expectations with every opportunity granted.. Just the chance to succeed and exceed.

 

That was one of the coolest things about a young player who came to Vancouver,  the fact we knew nothing about Pavel Bure,. We had no expectations.  .  .  We knew very little about that young man, and he knew nothing of hockey in North America.   

There is an element to surprise,  that will bring anyone to their feet,.  and it begins without expectation.

 

Hopefully all our young talent on the Canucks get every opportunity to surprise us.

Maybe giving full opportunity, should be the only expectation.

An indication of how hockey informed many fans are. Many do not have a lot of knowledge.  

[Bob Long]

On May 20, 2016 at 0:32 PM, SilentSam said:

Hairy,.  Have you ever seen a hockey city and its fan base so hard on 19-20-21 year olds?

Kids like Hutton, Tryamkin, and Pedan (104mph slap shot) won't be fully developed until they are 25-26 yrs old,. as in the case of Z.Chara,.  Or even our own Tanev.   Anything we get now, while they come into their prime, is a bonus.

Tryamkin will be a monster for us at 25.. But the ride with him to that point is proving to be an exciting one already.

 

Like you Hairy,.  I really dislike the pessimism generated towards young growing, talented athletes here on CDC,.  It's like telling your 12 year old son that he going to amount nothing more than a garbage man in life.

If Talent is recognized,. And it gets to develop and generate,.  there is no ceiling, and no expectations with every opportunity granted.. Just the chance to succeed and exceed.

 

That was one of the coolest things about a young player who came to Vancouver,  the fact we knew nothing about Pavel Bure,. We had no expectations.  .  .  We knew very little about that young man, and he knew nothing of hockey in North America.   

There is an element to surprise,  that will bring anyone to their feet,.  and it begins without expectation.

 

Hopefully all our young talent on the Canucks get every opportunity to surprise us.

Maybe giving full opportunity, should be the only expectation.

I think some of this comes from the hockey system where decisions are sometimes being made at the peewee level about a kids future. Theres too much pressure too early on. 

 

 

[SilentSam]

57 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

I think some of this comes from the hockey system where decisions are sometimes being made at the peewee level about a kids future. Theres too much pressure too early on. 

 

 

Totally agree with you Bob,  I think that Junior Hockey in Canada should raise its age grouping, and become semi-pro, or affiliate with Canadian Universities, sort of like the NCAA  template. Hockey in this Country would be Stronger for it,.  And at the Pro Level, the benefits of drafting a almost fully developed 22-23 year old almost guarantees a player that can instantly help an organization, rather than crossing fingers on a developing younger one.

[Fred65]

This is not about development it was all about the right to become a Pro ie human rights. Kenny Linesman took the NHL ( successfully ) to court and demand the right to turn Pro at 18. The court found in his favour. No one likes the 18 year old draft ( it used to be a 20 year old draft) because too often it's a spin of the wheel.

 

CAHA are and too their credit have upgraded the development of youth in the game. One of the prime problems is it has become an expensive sport. It's no shock that the Reinharts and Reillys of the world are now coming out of West Vancouver/Hollyburn for an example. Who can afford rents and mortgages  in Vcr especially and still have the thousands left over to enroll and equip their youngster year after year. Canada's strength in the past was volume. Fewer and fewer kids play the sport. Kids today don't want second hand equipment ( my kids never got new skates or equipment until their late teens ) they have to have the $200 stick or the $700 skates with Nike plastered down the side. Never mind goalies  it's a wonder Canada has produced ANY goalies when you consider the cost of their equipment.  Solve these problems and  will will be a good start.

 

It's a good start to make athletics for kids expenses tax deductible but you have to earn and pay taxes for that to be a benefit, and as usual the ones making the most benefit the most. A pool of equipment would help, such as they do for some high school sports. As us usual it becomes who wants to pay for it. The Government ( who certainly benefit through the less demand on health care) should see the healthy life style as an investment rather than a expense. Rant over

Edited May 25, 2016 by Fred65

[Bob Long]

58 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Totally agree with you Bob,  I think that Junior Hockey in Canada should raise its age grouping, and become semi-pro, or affiliate with Canadian Universities, sort of like the NCAA  template. Hockey in this Country would be Stronger for it,.  And at the Pro Level, the benefits of drafting a almost fully developed 22-23 year old almost guarantees a player that can instantly help an organization, rather than crossing fingers on a developing younger one.

Definitely. If the CFL can do it there's no reason hockey can't. 

[Goal:thecup]

1 hour ago, Fred65 said:

This is not about development it was all about the right to become a Pro ie human rights. Kenny Linesman took the NHL ( successfully ) to court and demand the right to turn Pro at 18. The court found in his favour. No one likes the 18 year old draft ( it used to be a 20 year old draft) because too often it's a spin of the wheel.

 

CAHA are and too their credit have upgraded the development of youth in the game. One of the prime problems is it has become an expensive sport. It's no shock that the Reinharts and Reillys of the world are now coming out of West Vancouver/Hollyburn for an example. Who can afford rents and mortgages  in Vcr especially and still have the thousands left over to enroll and equip their youngster year after year. Canada's strength in the past was volume. Fewer and fewer kids play the sport. Kids today don't want second hand equipment ( my kids never got new skates or equipment until their late teens ) they have to have the $200 stick or the $700 skates with Nike plastered down the side. Never mind goalies  it's a wonder Canada has produced ANY goalies when you consider the cost of their equipment.  Solve these problems and  will will be a good start.

 

It's a good start to make athletics for kids expenses tax deductible but you have to earn and pay taxes for that to be a benefit, and as usual the ones making the most benefit the most. A pool of equipment would help, such as they do for some high school sports. As us usual it becomes who wants to pay for it. The Government ( who certainly benefit through the less demand on health care) should see the healthy life style as an investment rather than a expense. Rant over

Not much to do with Tryamkin, sorry, but you are right about the high expenses (both time and money) of keeping kids in hockey; only the relatively rich can afford years of these high costs.  Another thing which I heard from a hockey coach with his own kids in hockey is that all the top prospects are coming out of hockey academies which can cost about $50,000 per year.  No wonder all the high draft picks have NHL players' last names!  On top of all the equipment costs, ice time costs, travel and accommodation costs, if your kid is really, really good, you're pretty well obligated to put them through summer programs and hockey academies.

 

(As far as the government goes, I believe social programs should not be delivered through the Income Tax Act, but rather based on individual needs, and therefore hockey training would fall a long way down a list of what governments should spend money on, like food, clothing, medical, dental, optical, education, home environment, etc.  Perhaps an organization like Hockey Canada could receive their funding from tournament advertising, etc., not the government, and dedicate funds to support talented kids who cannot afford it, I don't know.)

 

But the way it is now, rich people like NHL families, definitely have the advantage; it is not all genetics that so many high draft picks are sons of NHL-ers.

I have 2 nephews still in hockey, their parents work at average jobs and have mortgage payments and all that.  Now that the boys are getting recognition (MVP at an international tournament, for example), the parents are becoming desperate to come up with the money necessary for the boys to stay in the running; even their grandparents are getting tapped-out.  Virtually all Canadian draft prospects have come through the academies.  (Pulled that stat out of my bum.)

 

As for Tryamkin, I am a huge fan and hope he can become the next big Russian in Vancouver.  He looked good getting his feet wet this spring and his interviews show a man well-balanced, thoughtful, and personable.  With his natural size and abilities, maturity and willingness to learn, and goal-oriented behaviour, he could become a cornerstone on our defense for years to come.  This year, I think he will establish himself top 4, and after that, who knows?

 

[SilentSam]

4 hours ago, Bob Long said:

Definitely. If the CFL can do it there's no reason hockey can't. 

Yes, .. It's what makes the NBA and NFL Draft Days much more exciting,. less emphasis on a young players potential and possibilities.. More emphasis on a players proof of talent as an adult .

sorry, we kinda went off topic,.  Tryamkin does look like a beauty though,. took charge of his own path and made some money before getting here too   

Edited May 25, 2016 by SilentSam

[ItsMillerTime]

On June 28, 2014 at 8:05 AM, rawkdrummer said:

He's under contract for 2 more years in the KHL.

So he's 20 years old and we won't seem him till he's 22.

Liar!