Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Recommended Posts

Like you Boud’s,  I think Tanev is the one to move in February..  I can not see signing him at anything over 5mil per regardless.. i think  a player who can not give you consistent 70 game seasons should not make over 5.5mil per unless they are giving you 35-40 point seasons.

Perhaps Tanev returns a good prospect, and or, 3rd or 2nd rnd pick.

The latest Hall trade will push other teams to get creative as we move closer to the playoffs,  lots of teams like ours making the push,. And yes , we can survive without Tanev.

i have no doubt that Tryamkin will, after 1 more complete season in the NHL, be a legit 2nd pairing D man.. and probably given a lot of that opportunity in his next full season. 

He is a beast who’s game excels on the N/A ice.

 

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

That's a very good point.  We've played year after year for long stretches without Tanev but people want to al of a sudden sign him to a long term deal at age 30 because he is playing well this year.  Myers has a lot to do with Tanev playing better and not getting injured as Myers has taken up a lot of the big minutes that Tanev would normally have played this year.  So that is why it is safer to let go of Tanev next year versus in prior years as we have Myers now who can play big minutes on the right side.  

Time will tell if that is the route Benning takes. I simply cannot get over the idea of signing Tanev if any kind of term. There is so much talent waiting in the wings. I keep Edler because of his all around game and then re-sign him on 1 year deals. Edler and Myers are my vet transition d-men. Get a big Tryamkin in the line up and it changes the Van back end big time.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Like you Boud’s,  I think Tanev is the one to move in February..  I can not see signing him at anything over 5mil per regardless.. i think  a player who can not give you consistent 70 game seasons should not make over 5.5mil per unless they are giving you 35-40 point seasons.

Perhaps Tanev returns a good prospect, and or, 3rd or 2nd rnd pick.

The latest Hall trade will push other teams to get creative as we move closer to the playoffs,  lots of teams like ours making the push,. And yes , we can survive without Tanev.

i have no doubt that Tryamkin will, after 1 more complete season in the NHL, be a legit 2nd pairing D man.. and probably given a lot of that opportunity in his next full season. 

He is a beast who’s game excels on the N/A ice.

 

Now how would I have ever guessed that you would have a positive twist on Tryamkin? Sam you have been consistent on Tryamkin for over 2 years now. ::D I think it is the move to make as well. 3 years out we have a pretty solid d-core. Hughes can bump Edler's TOI down and the d-core depth can jocky for 5 & 6. Rafferty surprises and we will really be laughing. TOI is NHL currency and it has to be spent on a 3yr time frame.

Edited by Boudrias
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

If Tryamkin came back the best D-core next year would be.

 

Edler-Myers

Hughes Tanev

Tryamkin-Rafferty

Benn

 

The following year with Edler and Benn gone would be.

 

Hughes-Tanev

Tryamkin-Myers

Juolevi-Rafferty

Brisebois

 

I really don't get how people think some of these young defenseman can just come in and make up for the loss of Tanev and Edler moving forward when they'd be rookies, maybe sophomores(if they get some time this year) or haven't played in the NHL in a long time in Tryamkin's case. Way too much faith in the young guys too early. Defenseman have a harder adjusting period unless you're someone like Makar or Hughes who are used in more of a offensive role and are elite that way.

 

Cap won't be a problem moving forward. We could make moves. Sutter/Pearson/Benn/Baer will be on expiring years next year and I see a market for a few of them. Maybe Eriksson retires?

Why are you writing Edler off in a couple of years? He signed a 2 year deal to help us with the expansion and for dollars that were below expected. Worst case is he dips a bit in production into a top 4 dman rather than top pairing guy, that is still valuable. With Hughes and potentially Juolevi on the left side, we will need his experience and ability to take on the top PK duties. Juolevi is being groomed, but I don't think he's going to be ready to take over in a couple of years. We have Brisebois as LD "Tanev" should Edler get hit with an injury. IMO, we will be re-signing Edler on a year by year basis or give him a 3 year deal at hopefully reasonable dollars and then go year by year. The 7th/8th dmen will likely be the Fantenberg types, so if he's okay with that role, then he stays, but we also could give that role to someone like Sautner who I'm sure is willing to accept the paycheque to sit in the pressbox and be ready to go.

 

So how he will fit into your future lineup is that Tryamkin can play RD and I think prefers it, which pretty much bumps out Tanev (mostly for cap reasons). If we can open up cap space to allow us to also re-sign Tanev, that would be huge.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Fred65 said:

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 ??

sure you would have to remain compliant with the 50 man roster and cap space requirements as well. So someone would have to be moved and/or LTIR would have to be there to bring Nik in for the playoffs, or earlier. But maybe, it would be great to have the big guy back. 

 

I don't see the roster spot as a big deal, I don't think we're going to be making many moves anyway. Due to the lack of cap space any trades we make will require moving a player and salary out anyway. 

 

The most likely scenario I see is Jim moving Stecher to make room for Nik. The salary will likely be similar, the pairing and minutes at least initially with Benn makes some sense too until Nik learns the coaching expectations. But who knows, it could be Benn as well that gets moved. 

 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Now how would I have ever guessed that you would have a positive twist on Tryamkin? Sam you have been consistent on Tryamkin for over 2 years now. ::D I think it is the move to make as well. 3 years out we have a pretty solid d-core. Hughes can bump Edler's TOI down and the d-core depth can jocky for 5 & 6. Rafferty surprises and we will really be laughing. TOI is NHL currency and it has to be spent on a 3yr time frame.

YES.   I enjoy every aspect of his game.

but The 2nd clip just proves to me how much he has matured, and mentally prepared for the physical NHL..

 

 

 

Edited by SilentSam
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, as I see it, we have no #1 RHD, but at present we have various carnations of 3/4 RHD, the list is as follows...……….in order

 

1. Tanev

2. Myers

3. Tryamkin

4. Rafferty

5. Benn

6. Stectcher

7. Woo

 

Albeit, a speculative ranking, as Tryamkin, Rafferty, and Woo have not played in the NHL, I think safe to say, that if loosing Tanev happened, that 2 or 3 could replace Tanev.

 

I guess the question for me is, when considering cap issues, depth, and the other budget demands, and Tanev's injury history.

 

Is it prudent to re-sign Tanev long term, and  jam up our RHD natural progression, over moving him and recovering asset, and protecting other positional assets? 

 

It is certainly  with some risk, but to me there are others, that can step in and take Tanev's minutes (Stetcher has done it 2 years running), and this is no slight on Chris Tanev

 

as he has played very well this season, and stayed healthy, but can we really look other places in our lineup to shed cap and adequately replace the hole made.\ by moving

 

Tanev? 

 

Long term, my concern is getting a #1 or 2 RHD, which at this point and time, appears we do not have. What would you pay for one?

 

 

 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, dpn1 said:

I thought Nik is a lefty.  Green seems to like players to play on their strong side.  Merry Christmas to ya'll.

Tryamkin a LH player but played every game on the right side for Vcr and as I understand that is his preferred spot. Green is prefers left's on the left side etc and only switchs when injuries dictate or of course the PP

Edited by Fred65
  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Close your eyes.  Then imagine having a 6’7” 260 pound defenceman who can literally pick players up and throw them to the ice. Imagine if he could rag doll guys that are 240 pounds. Imagine if he could skate as well as most of our forwards. Imagine if he has a blazing shot from the point. Imagine if he plays better on the smaller ice surface because of his size. Imagine if he is a bigger and better version of Nikita Zadorov. 
 

Then open your eyes. And here he is. In a Vancouver uniform, playing with Quinn Hughes.  And his name is Nikita Tryamkin. 
 

:wub:
 

 

And does he have an ox called Blue?

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Close your eyes.  Then imagine having a 6’7” 260 pound defenceman who can literally pick players up and throw them to the ice. Imagine if he could rag doll guys that are 240 pounds. Imagine if he could skate as well as most of our forwards. Imagine if he has a blazing shot from the point. Imagine if he plays better on the smaller ice surface because of his size. Imagine if he is a bigger and better version of Nikita Zadorov. 
 

Then open your eyes. And here he is. In a Vancouver uniform, playing with Quinn Hughes.  And his name is Nikita Tryamkin. 
 

:wub:
 

 

Nice visual, but I think Zadorov is about the level we should hope to expect, not necessarily better. They were a pair in juniors and Zadorov was considered the "#1" at that time.

Edited by theo5789
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

Zadorov is a good comparable, especially when you consider that he's a bottom pairing guy.

Zadorov is averaging 19 minutes a game this season and 3rd on the defense in even strength time, so yeah.....

Edited by theo5789
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Why are you writing Edler off in a couple of years? He signed a 2 year deal to help us with the expansion and for dollars that were below expected. Worst case is he dips a bit in production into a top 4 dman rather than top pairing guy, that is still valuable. With Hughes and potentially Juolevi on the left side, we will need his experience and ability to take on the top PK duties. Juolevi is being groomed, but I don't think he's going to be ready to take over in a couple of years. We have Brisebois as LD "Tanev" should Edler get hit with an injury. IMO, we will be re-signing Edler on a year by year basis or give him a 3 year deal at hopefully reasonable dollars and then go year by year. The 7th/8th dmen will likely be the Fantenberg types, so if he's okay with that role, then he stays, but we also could give that role to someone like Sautner who I'm sure is willing to accept the paycheque to sit in the pressbox and be ready to go.

 

So how he will fit into your future lineup is that Tryamkin can play RD and I think prefers it, which pretty much bumps out Tanev (mostly for cap reasons). If we can open up cap space to allow us to also re-sign Tanev, that would be huge.

There is just way too much faith in the young guys making not only an immediate impact but a great one at that. You don’t make moves based on what could happen. You always make contingencies. Tanev would be that stop gap for the youth and the contingency. These guys won’t be impact players in 2 years it takes time. Defenseman take a while for a reason unless you’re a Hughes, Dahlin or Makar Elite level D. 

 

Edler is gonna be 35 when his contract is up. Retirement is not outside the realm of possibility there and regression is imminent. Tanev would be more valuable than Edler just due to the fact that we’re gonna get more good years out of Tanev. Also we have more depth on the left side with Brisebois and Juolevi possibly becoming regulars in 2 years. If Tryamkin comes back next year he’ll have a year to readjust to the NHL before taking Edlers responsibilities after he is gone if Tryamkin comes back. He’ll probably make an impact sooner than the rest. 
 

If we lose Tanev next year and replace him with younger players we are gonna be a worse team for it short term. If these guys really aren’t ready it’ll be rough. That isn’t a good idea. We’re trying to make the playoffs. I really don’t want to give up a lotto pick to TBL and want to get our young stars some playoff experience this early in their careers. 
 

Tanev is one of our more valuable players. What he brings can’t so easily be replaced. You can state names but no one really knows how these young guys will play and whether or not they can handle that sort of responsibility Tanev does on a daily basis. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

There is just way too much faith in the young guys making not only an immediate impact but a great one at that. You don’t make moves based on what could happen. You always make contingencies. Tanev would be that stop gap for the youth and the contingency. These guys won’t be impact players in 2 years it takes time. Defenseman take a while for a reason unless you’re a Hughes, Dahlin or Makar Elite level D. 

 

Edler is gonna be 35 when his contract is up. Retirement is not outside the realm of possibility there and regression is imminent. Tanev would be more valuable than Edler just due to the fact that we’re gonna get more good years out of Tanev. Also we have more depth on the left side with Brisebois and Juolevi possibly becoming regulars in 2 years. If Tryamkin comes back next year he’ll have a year to readjust to the NHL before taking Edlers responsibilities after he is gone if Tryamkin comes back. He’ll probably make an impact sooner than the rest. 
 

If we lose Tanev next year and replace him with younger players we are gonna be a worse team for it short term. If these guys really aren’t ready it’ll be rough. That isn’t a good idea. We’re trying to make the playoffs. I really don’t want to give up a lotto pick to TBL and want to get our young stars some playoff experience this early in their careers. 
 

Tanev is one of our more valuable players. What he brings can’t so easily be replaced. You can state names but no one really knows how these young guys will play and whether or not they can handle that sort of responsibility Tanev does on a daily basis. 

Some contradiction here. You've suggested that we have more depth on the left side, but that goes against what you're suggesting that there is too much faith in the young guys (or the unknown if you will). Just because Edler is 35 doesn't mean it's a sure thing he will regress to the point where he can't be impactful. In some instances, players (mostly dmen in fact) have gotten better with age or at least have remained consistent, so this is also an unknown. Of course everything is unknown until it is and it won't happen until you give your players a chance and see what happens.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to keep Tanev as well, but the cap space is going to make it hard. If we can make room, then great. If not, then we need to look for an alternative. Tryamkin is the closest thing to replacing a Tanev than anyone we have to replace Edler (Tryamkin may be left handed, but has play RD for pretty much his career including his short time with us). Tryamkin is 25 and turns 26 next year, so he's no spring chicken. Hopefully he can get here this season, so we can get a look and make a decision. It would also help with our attempt to make the playoffs this year and have a relatively deeper team to push that 1st into the 20s hopefully which would mitigate any concern for the following year and the minimal chance that we give up a "winning" lotto pick.

 

I just don't think it's that simple to write off someone like Edler who clearly wants to be a career Canuck and is willing to do what it takes for Vancouver. If he can still play at 35, there is no reason we don't bring him back on and we don't really have anyone that can take his duties either in the meantime. I predict Edler has at least 4 more years after this current contract of respectable play unless he gets forced off the team by better talent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

Some contradiction here. You've suggested that we have more depth on the left side, but that goes against what you're suggesting that there is too much faith in the young guys (or the unknown if you will). Just because Edler is 35 doesn't mean it's a sure thing he will regress to the point where he can't be impactful. In some instances, players (mostly dmen in fact) have gotten better with age or at least have remained consistent, so this is also an unknown. Of course everything is unknown until it is and it won't happen until you give your players a chance and see what happens.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to keep Tanev as well, but the cap space is going to make it hard. If we can make room, then great. If not, then we need to look for an alternative. Tryamkin is the closest thing to replacing a Tanev than anyone we have to replace Edler (Tryamkin may be left handed, but has play RD for pretty much his career including his short time with us). Tryamkin is 25 and turns 26 next year, so he's no spring chicken. Hopefully he can get here this season, so we can get a look and make a decision. It would also help with our attempt to make the playoffs this year and have a relatively deeper team to push that 1st into the 20s hopefully which would mitigate any concern for the following year and the minimal chance that we give up a "winning" lotto pick.

 

I just don't think it's that simple to write off someone like Edler who clearly wants to be a career Canuck and is willing to do what it takes for Vancouver. If he can still play at 35, there is no reason we don't bring him back on and we don't really have anyone that can take his duties either in the meantime. I predict Edler has at least 4 more years after this current contract of respectable play unless he gets forced off the team by better talent.

I am mostly presuming with Edler as are people with Tryamkin, Rafferty and others. Players tend to regress with age. It’s a fact. Some don’t as much but more do than don’t so you have to play it by the odds. As you say nobody knows that’s why I’d rather be safe than sorry. We could make room moving Benn, Pearson, and/or Sutter since it’ll be easier on expiring contracts. Baer will be a lot easier to move with 1 year left too. It’s really not impossible. 
 

Since these entire arguments are based off of presumption we could argue that Eriksson could retire. Would be a blessing if he did. 
 

In terms of my contradictions you’re not seeing what I was implying that would counter act it. Maybe I wasn’t as clear as I should of been. We got way more LH talent. If Tryamkin came back he’d be on the 3rd pair for a year which would allow him to adjust back into the NHL. With Edler gone the next year he could possibly step into a top 4 role and then we would have Juolevi/Brisebois/etc step into that top 6 role. It would be the perfect scenario. As Juolevi or someone steps up and can handle top 4 move Tanev(Unless his contract expires) or Myers(if you can) then slot Tryamkin on the right side. 
 

Point being. We ice the best d-core we can while injecting youth on a yearly basis while being able to allow them to adjust so that they can take over eventually. People just want to go night to day and think that these guys are gonna step in like Hughes just on the opposite side of the spectrum and be able to check the leagues best players without the thought of them not panning out or struggling to adjust and adapt to the NHL. 
 

It’s senseless not to have a contingency If things don’t pan out. Tanev should be that for us. Rather sign him cheaper than a random UFA that would be much more overpriced if things didn’t work out. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2019 at 1:24 AM, Junkyard Dog said:

Yeah. Stated that prior to finding that out about Leivo. 
 

Harder to predict Baer. People dont want him now but could take a flyer if circumstances changed for them like injuries. 

I agree, injuries change a team’s context and can open spots they didn’t anticipate - especially as the near the trade deadline and are looking at a battle for a playoff spot - they might want a proven vet in that instance over bringing up an untried prospect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I am mostly presuming with Edler as are people with Tryamkin, Rafferty and others. Players tend to regress with age. It’s a fact. Some don’t as much but more do than don’t so you have to play it by the odds. As you say nobody knows that’s why I’d rather be safe than sorry. We could make room moving Benn, Pearson, and/or Sutter since it’ll be easier on expiring contracts. Baer will be a lot easier to move with 1 year left too. It’s really not impossible. 
 

Since these entire arguments are based off of presumption we could argue that Eriksson could retire. Would be a blessing if he did. 
 

In terms of my contradictions you’re not seeing what I was implying that would counter act it. Maybe I wasn’t as clear as I should of been. We got way more LH talent. If Tryamkin came back he’d be on the 3rd pair for a year which would allow him to adjust back into the NHL. With Edler gone the next year he could possibly step into a top 4 role and then we would have Juolevi/Brisebois/etc step into that top 6 role. It would be the perfect scenario. As Juolevi or someone steps up and can handle top 4 move Tanev(Unless his contract expires) or Myers(if you can) then slot Tryamkin on the right side. 
 

Point being. We ice the best d-core we can while injecting youth on a yearly basis while being able to allow them to adjust so that they can take over eventually. People just want to go night to day and think that these guys are gonna step in like Hughes just on the opposite side of the spectrum and be able to check the leagues best players without the thought of them not panning out or struggling to adjust and adapt to the NHL. 
 

It’s senseless not to have a contingency If things don’t pan out. Tanev should be that for us. Rather sign him cheaper than a random UFA that would be much more overpriced if things didn’t work out. 

I would love to have Tanev sign a cheap contract to stay here, but if that's the contingency plan, then it's not much of one. We will see how loyal he is to the team, but I find it unlikely that he's going to low-ball himself to stay.

 

Tryamkin while left handed has always played on the right side. I don't expect that to change if/when he returns.

 

I think Edler stays longer than Tanev does, but we will see.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...