Nikita Tryamkin | D

[Hairy Kneel]

By my gues-timation Tryamkin made about 1 or 1.5 million per year at a huge hometown discount, this is according to a leaked source

listing the top 30 contracts in the KHL and Tryamkin didn't make the list.

If he signed a bridge deal for say 3 x 4 million he is  plus 8-10 million compared to his 3 year Avto contract.

If Anastasia wants to design clothes or whatever, or thinking about their family, signing here is a no brainer,

Plus the perks of working with AQ in terms of real estate and housing.

[Gator]

10 hours ago, Alflives said:

Demko + Bo + 10th OA to Jersey for 1st OA?  

Bo+10th should be enough. Demko should be off the table imo. I'd float DiPietro but I'd honestly like to hang onto him as well

[YungWee]

2 hours ago, Brock Botanen said:

Bo+10th should be enough. Demko should be off the table imo. I'd float DiPietro but I'd honestly like to hang onto him as well

Lol. Devils laugh at this offer. Smh

[PhillipBlunt]

16 hours ago, stawns said:

They have the pieces to do it (boes and Jake being the main pieces), but is the juice worth the squeeze on that one?  Using one of those as a chip just creates a hole that needs to be filled as a result.  The don't, yet, have the depth to lose a significant fwd, imo.

Brock Boeser and Jake Virtanen could return a much better defenseman than Cody Ceci.

[stawns]

4 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Brock Boeser and Jake Virtanen could return a much better defenseman than Cody Ceci.

Agreed, I'd want nothing to do with Ceci.

[PhillipBlunt]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

Agreed, I'd want nothing to do with Ceci.

I must have misunderstood your post.  I feel like Ray Ferraro walking down a hallway right now.

[stawns]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I must have misunderstood your post.  I feel like Ray Ferraro walking down a hallway right now.

I think @aGENT was talking about Ceci

[Alflives]

54 minutes ago, YungWee said:

Lol. Devils laugh at this offer. Smh

Devils would be stupid not to take that deal.  They need a number 2 center behind Heisher.  Heisher's numbers would go up a lot with Bo taking the heavier lifting. 

No way the Canucks do that though. Bo is WAY to valuable in his current role.  60 to 70 point and 30 goal scoring centers, who take big and heavy minutes (plus are great at the face off and PK, PP) are very valuable.  

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Brock Boeser and Jake Virtanen could return a much better defenseman than Cody Ceci.

Yes they could.

 

1 hour ago, stawns said:

I think @aGENT was talking about Ceci

@theo5789 and I had tossed his name around actually. The thinking would be that he'd be FAR cheaper to acquire than the likes of Ristolainen etc (AKA not Virtanen and CERTAINLY not Boeser).

 

Adding him and Tryamkin this summer and moving Tanev (likely recovering at least what Ceci cost) would be A-OK with me.

 

Edler, Stecher

Hutton, Ceci

Hughes, Tryamkin

 

UFA/Sautner/Brisebois, Biega,Schenn.

 

When OJ's ready, move Hutton.

 

Not sure why anyone wouldn't want anything to do with him. He's had sub 50% OZS basically his entire career short of his 1st year, relatively good Corsi (on a mostly sketchy OTT team) in that context and is younger, bigger and healthier than Tanev while being good for 20'ish points.

 

I'd add him for cheap in a heart beat.

 

Another name 650 has been tossing around is Subban. To some degree, he'd be viewed as a (high quality) cap dump but I doubt he still comes 'cheap'.

 

And then there's the matter of his personality and how he'd mesh with the rest of the team...

 

Edited April 12, 2019 by aGENT

[stawns]

28 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Yes they could.

 

@theo5789 and I had tossed his name around actually. The thinking would be that he'd be FAR cheaper to acquire than the likes of Ristolainen etc (AKA not Virtanen and CERTAINLY not Boeser).

 

Adding him and Tryamkin this summer and moving Tanev (likely recovering at least what Ceci cost) would be A-OK with me.

 

Edler, Stecher

Hutton, Ceci

Hughes, Tryamkin

 

UFA/Sautner/Brisebois, Biega,Schenn.

 

When OJ's ready, move Hutton.

 

Not sure why anyone wouldn't want anything to do with him. He's had sub 50% OZS basically his entire career short of his 1st year, relatively good Corsi (on a mostly sketchy OTT team) in that context and is younger, bigger and healthier than Tanev while being good for 20'ish points.

 

I'd add him for cheap in a heart beat.

 

I agree, he would be cheaper.......my biggest concern is that I think he's pretty soft, something the Canucks need to get away from and that he seems to have an inflated sense of value, though that is the agent I'm sure.  I feel his abitration case wasnt a positive affirmation of his character, holding out for $6m.......that said, he is capable of playing big mins and that's a big plus.  In the end, I just don't think he's the style of dman they need on the right side.  I'd rather go your direction with Stralman if it was a choice between the two.

Edited April 12, 2019 by stawns

[theo5789]

24 minutes ago, stawns said:

I agree, he would be cheaper.......my biggest concern is that I think he's pretty soft, something the Canucks need to get away from and that he seems to have an inflated sense of value, though that is the agent I'm sure.  I feel his abitration case wasnt a positive affirmation of his character, holding out for $6m.......that said, he is capable of playing big mins and that's a big plus.  In the end, I just don't think he's the style of dman they need on the right side.  I'd rather go your direction with Stralman if it was a choice between the two.

He wasn't holding out for 6 million. In arbitration, the player/agent always goes for a higher dollar amount and the team low balls and the arbitrator (conveniently) picks something right down the middle usually. I'm sure Ceci's side was looking for around 4.5 million a season which is well within reason for what he provides. Keep in mind that getting players to stay in Ottawa right now is likely a challenge so players are going to ask for more than they're worth if they are expected to stay there right now.

 

In terms of playing style, he's a solid defensive minded dman with some offense (20-25 points). He would be basically replacing Tanev as a younger player and hopefully less injury prone. He's not the most physical guy but he's a bigger body that can play against the bigger guys in the league. He had 1.6 hits per game this season (last year he was at 2 hits per game), so he won't be a Luke Schenn, but I wouldn't classify him as soft.

 

Stralman is fine too, but he's a stop gap option whereas Ceci would be more of a long term one. Stralman could be had for free (perhaps an inflated UFA contract if there are other bidders) which is the bonus, but Ceci may not cost as much as some would think and we should be getting more out of him.

[Kanukfanatic]

All of a sudden you all are trading Horvat, Boeser, etc?

 

Thank god none of you have a job with the Canucks lol.

[Nucker 67]

Edler - Stralman

Tryamkin - Hughes

Hutton - Stecher

Juolevi

 

Draft Day Deal: Tanev, Goldobin and a prospect (Brisebois) for an extra 1st

 

 

[aGENT]

16 minutes ago, Kanukfanatic said:

All of a sudden you all are trading Horvat, Boeser, etc?

Nope. 

 

1 hour ago, stawns said:

I agree, he would be cheaper.......my biggest concern is that I think he's pretty soft, something the Canucks need to get away from and that he seems to have an inflated sense of value, though that is the agent I'm sure.  I feel his abitration case wasnt a positive affirmation of his character, holding out for $6m.......that said, he is capable of playing big mins and that's a big plus.  In the end, I just don't think he's the style of dman they need on the right side.  I'd rather go your direction with Stralman if it was a choice between the two.

As @theo5789 already noted, IMO the $6m has far more to do with a negotiating tactic and that it was for a freaking train wreck in OTT. I'd be asking for extra to play there too. I don't share your 'concern' there 

[Kanukfanatic]

41 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Nope. 

 

 

Nope?

 

Go read the last page.

[aGENT]

20 minutes ago, Kanukfanatic said:

Nope?

 

Go read the last page.

Alf (who I have on ignore and whose comment would have been missed if you hadn't pointed it out/he hadn't been quoted) does not equate to 'you all' FWIW.

 

That sort of nonsense is also why he's on ignore FYI 

Edited April 12, 2019 by aGENT

[The Lock]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Alf (who I have on ignore and whose comment would have been missed if you hadn't pointed it out/he hadn't been quoted) does not equate to 'you all' FWIW.

 

That sort of nonsense is also why he's on ignore FYI 

Lol I don't even have anyone on ignore. I had one once (and believe me, he deserved it as I don't get mad in a discussion easily but he pulled it off), but I unignored after a while as I'd rather just see what people are saying. I'll just put up with whatever nonsense. At least those are the "easy pickings' I find as I could just keep proving them wrong and feel "smrt" because I'm a forum warrior!

 

Then again, I'm also not on this forum as much and really trying to be on less and less so I can focus on other things. (I'm tired of procrastinating at these places and want to set myself up coming out of university)

Edited April 12, 2019 by The Lock

[alt kilgore]

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

Lol I don't even have anyone on ignore. I had one once (and believe me, he deserved it as I don't get mad in a discussion easily but he pulled it off), but I unignored after a while as I'd rather just see what people are saying. I'll just put up with whatever nonsense. At least those are the "easy pickings' I find as I could just keep proving them wrong and feel "smrt" because I'm a forum warrior!

 

Then again, I'm also not on this forum as much and really trying to be on less and less so I can focus on other things. (I'm tired of procrastinating at these places and want to set myself up coming out of university)

I don't get why anyone would want to put anyone else on "ignore".   Cutting your nose off to spite your face.  Two reasons,

 

1. I believe in the most wide ranging views allowed, it makes for a more interesting discussion board if there is  more thoughts and ideas to discuss, even if some are more extreme.

 

2.  I would not want to be cut off from seeing what this hypothetical a....... is saying about me or my position. Twisting my posts to mean whatever they want and have a strawman to debate and win against, while I'm in the dark about any of it. No thanks. I'd want to see if what he or she wrote was even worth responding to, and have the choice of ignoring the post on my own.

[The Lock]

58 minutes ago, kilgore said:

I don't get why anyone would want to put anyone else on "ignore".   Cutting your nose off to spite your face.  Two reasons,

 

1. I believe in the most wide ranging views allowed, it makes for a more interesting discussion board if there is  more thoughts and ideas to discuss, even if some are more extreme.

 

2.  I would not want to be cut off from seeing what this hypothetical a....... is saying about me or my position. Twisting my posts to mean whatever they want and have a strawman to debate and win against, while I'm in the dark about any of it. No thanks. I'd want to see if what he or she wrote was even worth responding to, and have the choice of ignoring the post on my own.

In my case, the one guy I ignored was when I was having a bad day in general and I felt like I was being trolled. I didn't have him on ignore for long as it was more a reaction on my part than anything else. If some people need the ignore list as a "safety blanket" I say to each their own, but yeah, it's not for me. I stand by my opinions for the most part and if I'm wrong I'm wrong. I'm generally not going to go all drama queen and go "oh! you're wrong and you hwurt mah fweelings!"

[kloubek]

On 4/11/2019 at 9:48 AM, stawns said:

Myers has, at least, three years of his peak left, possibly even 4-5.  I think a 4 year term is reasonable and fits decently into the team cap structure.  

I agree with you in how much time he has before likely declines, but I jist don't see him wanting a 4 year contract.  I mean, the market will be willing to give him a maximum term so why would he not sign that at full pop now, instead of allowing a shorter term like 4 years then getting paid less because he will be a declining player?

 

As for whether 4 years works for us or not, I havent done the math but I figured by the time we have Boeser, Petey and Hughes signed long term that will be a lot of cap space eaten which is why I figured 2 years was safe. But there are a lot of contracts which could be moved out or end during that time, so we probably dont have to be as "safe" as I was originally basing my thoughts on.