Nikita Tryamkin | D

[Fred65]

First of all the roster size chnages 

 

Quote

The 23-man roster limit is in place from the conclusion of the preseason until 12:01 am on the day of the NHL's Trade Deadline. After that teams are allowed to have an unlimited active roster at the NHL level, provided players are signed to one of their 50 contract slots.

So it is possible to insert Tryamkin onto the roster without loosing another player, except from what I see Tryamkin is not registered on our 50 man allowance ( by the way Rafferty is on the 50 man roster.) so should JB include him in the 50 man list it will be the first indication that they want him back. I have to say IMO Vcr defense is a tad under sized and those that are taller/bigger are not the likes of a Bortuzzo or a McNabb. It's going to be interesting to watch JB jump through hoops come 25th February  

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

First of all the roster size chnages 

 

So it is possible to insert Tryamkin onto the roster without loosing another player, except from what I see Tryamkin is not registered on our 50 man allowance ( by the way Rafferty is on the 50 man roster.) so should JB include him in the 50 man list it will be the first indication that they want him back. I have to say IMO Vcr defense is a tad under sized and those that are taller/bigger are not the likes of a Bortuzzo or a McNabb. It's going to be interesting to watch JB jump through hoops come 25th February  

Nik's on our reserve list: https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/canucks/reserve-list

 

which actually has some very exiting potential on it: Nik, Hoglander, Madden, Podz, Rathbone... maybe even Utanen if he keeps progressing. 

[SilentSam]

11 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Nik's on our reserve list: https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/canucks/reserve-list

 

which actually has some very exiting potential on it: Nik, Hoglander, Madden, Podz, Rathbone... maybe even Utanen if he keeps progressing. 

So does this allow Nik to get in the lineup in our playoffs without playing a regular season game? ( I think it does) .

[Elias Pettersson]

Just now, SilentSam said:

So does this allow Nik to get in the lineup in our playoffs without playing a regular season game? ( I think it does) .

Yes as long as he signs a contract and is one of our 50 contracts after the trade deadline he can come over and play anytime.  I believe his season ends before the playoffs begin unless Avto go all the way to the finals, so there is a good chance he will be on our roster this year.  I think both Tryamkin and Benning want to make that happen, I don't see any reason why Tryamkin would want to continue to play in Russia when he can make so much more money here in the NHL.  The issues have been resolved by now I think, CHL Willy is gone, we have room on defence to fit him in.  No reason they can't get a deal done to bring him back.  

[JM_]

1 minute ago, SilentSam said:

So does this allow Nik to get in the lineup in our playoffs without playing a regular season game? ( I think it does) .

I do believe you are correct, sir.

 

To play in the NHL playoffs, a player must be on the NHL roster by the deadline (to clarify, not the 23-man active roster, here, but the 50-man roster of players under NHL contract who are in the NHL or loaned elsewhere). The only exception to this is the case of players on the reserve list (mostly unsigned drafted players) who are playing in Europe or the NCAA. Occasionally they will sign an ELC and play on the NHL team in the playoffs after their season is over. 

 

Any pro player a team doesn’t have the rights to who has played in a league not in North America must pass through entry waivers if he is signed to an NHL deal. This keeps NHL teams from talent hunting in Europe at this time of the year. On rare occasions, it is done. There were some “character” players added to a few teams in 2018 after the Olympics and just before the deadline who have cleared waivers and played on their teams.

 

https://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2019/2/19/18226193/this-years-nhl-trade-deadline-the-times-dates-and-rules-toronto-maple-leafs

[Fred65]

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Nik's on our reserve list: https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/canucks/reserve-list

 

which actually has some very exiting potential on it: Nik, Hoglander, Madden, Podz, Rathbone... maybe even Utanen if he keeps progressing. 

Thank for that. I looked at just the front cover which seems to add up to the 50 man roster limit and the rules state that they must be part of the 50 man roster so the reserve list actually includes 90 players NOT 50 players which actually eliminates Tryamkin. Tryamkin is on the 90 man list but NOT included on the 50 man list. That's how I read it any way. I think the 90 man roster eliminates players who can't be signed by other teams?? 

[Noble 6]

9 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I don't think we are going to re-sign Tanev.  We don't have the cap space next year.  He will be a UFA and will want a long term deal at $5-6 million.  Don't think I'd want to re-sign Tanev to a 5-6 year deal at those numbers considering his injury history.  We already got burnt this year with Ferland who could be out the rest of the year or longer.  We can't afford to re-sign another player to a long term deal who hasn't played a full season in his entire career. 

 

I understand what he brings to the team but it is too risky.  We will have to compensate by bringing in the young guys.  Tryamkin could be an option, Juolevi, Brisebois, etc.  At some point the young guys have to play.  If we just keep re-signing our veterans to long term deals we will be in cap purgatory very soon.  Edler and Benn are in the same situation.  Once their contracts run out they will need to be replaced with the young guys. 

 

At some point Benning's draft picks have to play and we have to integrate them into the team.  Once Petey and Quinn sign their extensions the money will run dry.

 

I can agree with those reasons for not wanting to re-sign Tanev, but who replaces him next season? Remember, we could potentially be giving up an unprotected 1st rounder next year, so it's not a great time to take a step back. Do you think that any of Tryamkin, Brisebois, Rafferty, etc. can actually step into that role effectively? I don't. 

 

Benning hasn't been able to find a suitable replacement for Tanev in 5-ish years. If he did we would be much more comfortable letting him walk. 

[Junkyard Dog]

10 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I don't think we are going to re-sign Tanev.  We don't have the cap space next year.  He will be a UFA and will want a long term deal at $5-6 million.  Don't think I'd want to re-sign Tanev to a 5-6 year deal at those numbers considering his injury history.  We already got burnt this year with Ferland who could be out the rest of the year or longer.  We can't afford to re-sign another player to a long term deal who hasn't played a full season in his entire career. 

 

I understand what he brings to the team but it is too risky.  We will have to compensate by bringing in the young guys.  Tryamkin could be an option, Juolevi, Brisebois, etc.  At some point the young guys have to play.  If we just keep re-signing our veterans to long term deals we will be in cap purgatory very soon.  Edler and Benn are in the same situation.  Once their contracts run out they will need to be replaced with the young guys. 

 

At some point Benning's draft picks have to play and we have to integrate them into the team.  Once Petey and Quinn sign their extensions the money will run dry.

The following year we lose Edler who will be 35 and possibly retiring.  I can’t imagine being without both in 2 years and Tanev would be the much more viable option at that point. 
 

We have enough guys contracts gone to re-sign Petey and Hughes. Baer, Sutter, Edler, Benn, Pearson. 
 

Tanev would be a good stop gap veterans for the youth. 4/5 years to allow young guys to step much. Can’t expect any of the young guys to fill his spot and be as effective so quickly. That’s a risk and if it doesn’t pan out we’re stuck with having a sign a random UFA who would be probably more costly. 
 

If Tanev decides to walk that changes things obviously but it is up to Benning and co to see where his head is at before TD. 

[JM_]

1 hour ago, Fred65 said:

Thank for that. I looked at just the front cover which seems to add up to the 50 man roster limit and the rules state that they must be part of the 50 man roster so the reserve list actually includes 90 players NOT 50 players which actually eliminates Tryamkin. Tryamkin is on the 90 man list but NOT included on the 50 man list. That's how I read it any way. I think the 90 man roster eliminates players who can't be signed by other teams?? 

nope see my post a few above - you can bring guys in if they are on your reserve list and in the NCAA or KHL. McAvoy from Boston e.g., came in from college right into the playoffs for 6 games to begin his career. 

[Junkyard Dog]

11 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

nope see my post a few above - you can bring guys in if they are on your reserve list and in the NCAA or KHL. McAvoy from Boston e.g., came in from college right into the playoffs for 6 games to begin his career. 

Makar as well for the Avs I believe. 

[Slegr]

2 hours ago, SilentSam said:

So does this allow Nik to get in the lineup in our playoffs without playing a regular season game? ( I think it does) .

I would love to see this, but wouldnt it mean he becomes exposed in the expansion draft? If so, I'd rather wait to see him play next season.

[SilentSam]

21 minutes ago, Slegr said:

I would love to see this, but wouldnt it mean he becomes exposed in the expansion draft? If so, I'd rather wait to see him play next season.

Jeeesh...  it get complicated doesn’t it?

im not exactly sure,  but I thought I read he is protected because of the amount of games he played during his first full season with us (roughly 66)

.. but I’m with you, I would rather find a way to Make him ineligible, protect or hide him from the Extorsion draft.

 

[Herberts Vasiljevs]

48 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Makar as well for the Avs I believe. 

Yup. In the 2nd round.

[Fred65]

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

nope see my post a few above - you can bring guys in if they are on your reserve list and in the NCAA or KHL. McAvoy from Boston e.g.,  in from college right into the playoffs for 6 games to begin his career. 

Oh I understand that, but as I said that will be the first move JB will make and indicate he intendeds to add NT. Currently they have only 47 of their 50 total in use. When JB activates his option to move NT from the reserve list to the contract list. However correct  me if I'm wrong but apart from injuries are  they not limited to recall to the working roster  3 choices ??

[theo5789]

5 hours ago, Boudrias said:

Tanev is a steadying influence whether for Hughes or hopefully Tryamkin if he comes back on the LD. It is all about the TOI and the prospects. When Benning resigned Tanev he had little option. 

Tanev's game experience:

2012-13: 67 games split between the AHL & NHL

    13-14: 64

    14-15: 70

    15-16: 69

    16-17: 53

    17-18: 42

    18-19: 55

One could also make the argument that with a deeper roster Tanev might not experience the same down time. I am sure he played many games he should not have which could have impacted his recovery time. Your point earlier about potential o-zone upside is well taken. He has been wheeling up ice, with speed, more this year. If Tryamkin is really available this spring it means a contract and again dealing with the CAP issue.  

I think his offensive IQ is underrated, even before this season. He's responsible to be the defensive guy, but he has good instincts. I would like to keep him, but you're right about the cap issues. I was only arguing against the idea that we supposedly should have traded him 3 years ago unknowing of his injury issues to come and considering his skill set. He re-signed because there was little to replace him and he simply was a good player.

[Nuxfanabroad]

15 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

I think his offensive IQ is underrated, even before this season. He's responsible to be the defensive guy, but he has good instincts. I would like to keep him, but you're right about the cap issues. I was only arguing against the idea that we supposedly should have traded him 3 years ago unknowing of his injury issues to come and considering his skill set. He re-signed because there was little to replace him and he simply was a good player.

My feelings are pretty mixed about Tan-man. We're approaching 500 games with this fine citizen, & he's as brave a shot-blocker as you'll find. Him & Eagle have carried on the passion/compete from the glory yrs. But then...

 

When he starts rolling(& season is well-in) he gets hurt.

Or opponents running around in a mess. Puck pops out to the point(prime time for a booming blast)..& you see it's CT, & a waffling knuckler that dips in an air pocket.

So he has NO shot, & he'll never punish opponents. Two big deficiencies, to counterbalance his impressive attributes.

 

We Neeed cap space for this yr & next(rookie bonuses exacerbate the crunch). We signed Benn, who can handle(w/physicality) the right side too. Take a 2nd or 3rd(+ prospect) for CT, & call it a day.

 

Yeah..forget about the TBay/Miller shyte(worries about high 1st next yr..blah x3), & everything else. IF we can get a decent return..do it.

[Elias Pettersson]

3 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

I can agree with those reasons for not wanting to re-sign Tanev, but who replaces him next season? Remember, we could potentially be giving up an unprotected 1st rounder next year, so it's not a great time to take a step back. Do you think that any of Tryamkin, Brisebois, Rafferty, etc. can actually step into that role effectively? I don't. 

 

Benning hasn't been able to find a suitable replacement for Tanev in 5-ish years. If he did we would be much more comfortable letting him walk. 

I think collectively Tryamkin, Brisebois and Rafferty can replace both Tanev and Stecher.  We don't have the cap space to keep Tanev and Stecher, which would cost us upwards of $9 million next year.  Rafferty at $700k is already better than Stecher offensively, he just needs to work on his defensive game.  We also have the option to re-sign Fatenberg, so Rafferty could in essence be our 7th D and you play Benn on the right side with Fatenberg next year.  Rafferty comes in and out of the lineup to provide offence.  That can make up for losing Tanev.  And it would be a lot cheaper to re-sign Fatenberg than Tanev.  As a matter of fact, Fatenberg, Tryamkin, Rafferty and Brisbois combined would be less of a cap hit than keeping Tanev.

 

At the end of the day if we can turn Demko and Stecher + into a top 6 forward and integrate our younger D into the lineup to replace Tanev and Stecher and eventually Edler and Benn then that is the long term plan for Benning and the right one for future success as it would eliminate any cap issues and it would get all our young prospects into the lineup.

[Elias Pettersson]

3 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

The following year we lose Edler who will be 35 and possibly retiring.  I can’t imagine being without both in 2 years and Tanev would be the much more viable option at that point. 
 

We have enough guys contracts gone to re-sign Petey and Hughes. Baer, Sutter, Edler, Benn, Pearson. 
 

Tanev would be a good stop gap veterans for the youth. 4/5 years to allow young guys to step much. Can’t expect any of the young guys to fill his spot and be as effective so quickly. That’s a risk and if it doesn’t pan out we’re stuck with having a sign a random UFA who would be probably more costly. 
 

If Tanev decides to walk that changes things obviously but it is up to Benning and co to see where his head is at before TD. 

I went through Cap Friendly and I don't see any scenario where we can keep Tanev at $5-6 million for upwards of 5 years.  Unless we somehow get rid of Loui, Baertschi and Sutter next year, which isn't gonna happen.  Plus we need their cap space to re-sign Marky, Petey and Quinn.  The numbers just don't add up.  We need to replace Tanev and eventually Edler with our cheaper young prospects and integrate them into the roster.  It is the only way for us to be cap compliant and the only way for future success.  

[Junkyard Dog]

14 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I went through Cap Friendly and I don't see any scenario where we can keep Tanev at $5-6 million for upwards of 5 years.  Unless we somehow get rid of Loui, Baertschi and Sutter next year, which isn't gonna happen.  Plus we need their cap space to re-sign Marky, Petey and Quinn.  The numbers just don't add up.  We need to replace Tanev and eventually Edler with our cheaper young prospects and integrate them into the roster.  It is the only way for us to be cap compliant and the only way for future success.  

Petey and Hughes need to be re-signed the year after this one not this year. That year Pearson, Sutter, Edler, Spooner, Baer and Benn are all up. That's a lot of cap right there. More than enough to sign Petey and Hughes.

 

I doubt the defenseman we have are gonna step in and make an impact like Hughes, especially defensively. They would have to in order to let Tanev go, especially with Edler gone the following year. That takes time. If we are without Edler and Tanev in 2 years without any sort of veteran replacement/stop gap we are not gonna have success for a while till we go through the growing pains of a young D-core.

 

We need a stop gap top 4 defenseman. Someone to carry the load for the next little bit to allow the young guys we have(Juolevi, Rafferty, Rathbone, Woo, Tryamkin) to adjust to the game and take up that defensive responisbility. Are forwards are way ahead of our D. 

 

What we should do is re-sign Tanev because he'd be probably cheaper than any other top 4 D on the market and then let Edler go the following year who will be 35 and might even be looking at retirement at that point.

 

Edit: We should let Stech go as well since he is due for a raise we can't afford with his qualifying offer.

 

Edited December 23, 2019 by Junkyard Dog

[aliboy]

20 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I went through Cap Friendly and I don't see any scenario where we can keep Tanev at $5-6 million for upwards of 5 years.  Unless we somehow get rid of Loui, Baertschi and Sutter next year, which isn't gonna happen.  Plus we need their cap space to re-sign Marky, Petey and Quinn.  The numbers just don't add up.  We need to replace Tanev and eventually Edler with our cheaper young prospects and integrate them into the roster.  It is the only way for us to be cap compliant and the only way for future success.  

Petey and Quinn don't get re-signed until the 21-22 season and we will have quite a number of current contract off the books by then including Sutter, Baer and Spooner. It has also been rumored that LE will retire after he gets his bonus next summer, so that should also be clear. That being said, I don't see Edler being here beyond his current contract and Tanev, who knows. You are right though, we do need younger D-men to step up, hopefully Tram is one.