Nikita Tryamkin | D

[wildcam]

4 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Some D UFA's:

Brodie 6'2" 4.6m, Kulikov 6'1",4.5m,

(Det)Ericsson 6'4" 4.2m,

Scandella 6'3", 4.0m, Braun 6'2"  3.8m,

Dillon 6'4", 3.2m,

Edmunson 6'4",3.1m,  Forbert  6'4"2.5m,

K. Miller 6'2", 2.5m

Polak6'1" 230lbs,1.7m,  Stone 6'3",1.2m,  Petrovic 6'4" .7m 

These are d man that we can consider.

 

Pieterangelo/Parayko will probably resign.

Vatanen is too small we already have Huggy.

Hope Jim Benning moves away from Tanev, like him as a player but poor guy is always injured...He is 30 yrs old UFA asking 4 yrs x 4.8 mil ??

We could also not resign and save his 4.6 million toward other player to resign off this roaster..

Resign Taffoli 4 yrs x 4.9 mil ---- Then move Boser for top # 2 D guy...

Resign Markstrom 4 yrs x 5.7 million - with 10 team trade list in his contract...

Resign Virtanen 3 yrs x 3.2 million  -- He will demand raise after this season..Future 20-24 goals - 44 - 50 points regular, real power forward..

Resign Leivo 2x 1.8 million - show me more deal..Solid top 9 forward - Future 18-23 goals - 40 point - solid gritty plays 200 foot game...

Resign Motte 1 yr x 900,000,=-- Might have to move from Motte-- Big MacEwen 6'3 , 4th line ready

Resign MacEwen 2 yrs x 900,000 -- one way deal, NHL ready and we need his gritty style along with speed..Exciting

Maybe with Covid -19 NHL will give every team a one player buy out? Erickson @ 6 million...Yes fingers crossed..

 

[theo5789]

3 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

If we got a couple compliance buyouts I wouldn't mind an Edmundson/Dillon in the top 6 with Tryamkin. Would be a killer pairing that could eat up minutes defensively/PK. I trust Edmundson/Dillon to step up into the top 4 if injuries hit. I'd also re-sign Tanev as well and have a strong D-core.

The problem is if every team got a couple of compliance buyouts, there will certainly be more room for teams to pick up those players anyway. We are lucky if we do get one compliance buyout, but that would be because the cap is going down, so there is no way we could afford to re-sign Tanev (assuming also Toffoli and Marky and RFAs) and add a pricier bottom pair LD (especially with Benn in the fold already). Ideally it would be nice to add one of those guys, but I can't see it happening.

[Junkyard Dog]

5 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

The problem is if every team got a couple of compliance buyouts, there will certainly be more room for teams to pick up those players anyway. We are lucky if we do get one compliance buyout, but that would be because the cap is going down, so there is no way we could afford to re-sign Tanev (assuming also Toffoli and Marky and RFAs) and add a pricier bottom pair LD (especially with Benn in the fold already). Ideally it would be nice to add one of those guys, but I can't see it happening.

Perhaps. It'll have to be a wait and see approach. We could move Benn/Sutter and that's 6.4M right there. My idea was to use the buyouts on Roussel/Eriksson and trade away at least 2 of Baer/Benn/Sutter. We could re-sign Tanev as well as sign a D if that all happened. 

 

But yeah it would take more than just a couple buyouts to get Tanev and a top 6 D.

[theo5789]

3 hours ago, wildcam said:

Hope Jim Benning moves away from Tanev, like him as a player but poor guy is always injured...He is 30 yrs old UFA asking 4 yrs x 4.8 mil ??

We could also not resign and save his 4.6 million toward other player to resign off this roaster..

Resign Taffoli 4 yrs x 4.9 mil ---- Then move Boser for top # 2 D guy...

Resign Markstrom 4 yrs x 5.7 million - with 10 team trade list in his contract...

Resign Virtanen 3 yrs x 3.2 million  -- He will demand raise after this season..Future 20-24 goals - 44 - 50 points regular, real power forward..

Resign Leivo 2x 1.8 million - show me more deal..Solid top 9 forward - Future 18-23 goals - 40 point - solid gritty plays 200 foot game...

Resign Motte 1 yr x 900,000,=-- Might have to move from Motte-- Big MacEwen 6'3 , 4th line ready

Resign MacEwen 2 yrs x 900,000 -- one way deal, NHL ready and we need his gritty style along with speed..Exciting

Maybe with Covid -19 NHL will give every team a one player buy out? Erickson @ 6 million...Yes fingers crossed..

 

Who do we replace Tanev with? Is there a market for Boeser for a #2 dman?

 

Toffoli is not getting less than 5.5-6 million and I imagine he will want reasonable term. He would surely get that in the UFA market (if the cap is lowered to affect the UFA market, players may go for shorter term and hope the market bounces back). Markstrom may sign for about what you have said, but I think he will want assurances that he will stay a Canuck, meaning trade protection and more importantly expansion draft protection.

 

I would keep Motte over Leivo especially if Motte could come in at that price compared to Leivo. As it stands right now, our lineup would be (with LE compliance buyout hopefully):

Miller - EP - Toffoli (re-signed hopefully)

Pearson - Bo - Boeser

Roussel - Gaudette - Virtanen

Sutter - Beagle - Motte

MacEwen

 

We could trade Boeser for help on D, but is Virtanen/MacEwen/Leivo ready for a top 6 role full time? If not, then Boeser stays and there's no room for Leivo. Now we could possibly try to move Sutter/Roussel and that's where Leivo would fit back in, but until then, he's an odd man out for me. I also expect Lind to be battling for a spot and who knows what other young player will step up this off season. Benning has said he expects like 7 young players to crack the roster in the next couple of seasons, so that also will need to be taken into account.

[theo5789]

12 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Perhaps. It'll have to be a wait and see approach. We could move Benn/Sutter and that's 6.4M right there. My idea was to use the buyouts on Roussel/Eriksson and trade away at least 2 of Baer/Benn/Sutter. We could re-sign Tanev as well as sign a D if that all happened. 

 

But yeah it would take more than just a couple buyouts to get Tanev and a top 6 D.

I think we would be lucky to get one buyout. It'll depend how much the cap drops. However if we even get one compliance buyout, that does mean the cap has dropped or best case stagnated, therefore not many teams will be taking on cap dumps, at least not without a heavy add to it as cap becomes even more of a premium. I doubt we would be able to move the full cap of any of those players.

 

IMO, if we do get two buyouts, I'd be buying out the obvious in LE, but use the other on Baer, who is dead cap. Roussel IMO is still a moveable asset (perhaps with slight retention). Sutter may also be moveable if the right situation came about, but I think we would have to retain this not getting his full cap back. Benn probably is at best a waiver candidate to save us a million if we are truly done with him as I doubt there's a trade market here for a position that could be filled by a lot of budget options.

[aGENT]

11 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Perhaps. It'll have to be a wait and see approach. We could move Benn/Sutter and that's 6.4M right there. My idea was to use the buyouts on Roussel/Eriksson and trade away at least 2 of Baer/Benn/Sutter. We could re-sign Tanev as well as sign a D if that all happened. 

 

But yeah it would take more than just a couple buyouts to get Tanev and a top 6 D.

 

You've got those two backwards FWIW. One's a tradeable NHL player, the other is dead cap playing in the AHL that nobody has wanted on waivers, for free, more than once.

 

You might be able to trade him with 50% retention given he's only got a year left but a regular buyout also cuts his cap roughly in half as well failing that. If there's a second compliance buyout, dead cap like his is the FAR likelier scenario.

Edited April 14, 2020 by aGENT

[Hairy Kneel]

16 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

If we got a couple compliance buyouts I wouldn't mind an Edmundson/Dillon in the top 6 with Tryamkin. Would be a killer pairing that could eat up minutes defensively/PK. I trust Edmundson/Dillon to step up into the top 4 if injuries hit. I'd also re-sign Tanev as well and have a strong D-core.

I'd like 6'4" Dillon from Surrey, 30 NHL fights.Throws his weight around. 3.2 M. I think he may like the idea of playing for his hometown.

Edited April 14, 2020 by Hairy Kneel

[86Viking]

10 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

I'd like Dillon from Surrey, 30 NHL fights.Throws his weight around. 3.2 M. I think he may like the idea of playing for his hometown.

he will be 30 in the fall, how  will his foot speed hold up with age? Likely going to want a fairly long term deal I would think, last time for a payday. It is too bad he is a lefty, because he would be a healthy, reliable partner for Hughes otherwise.

 

Be interesting to know if Benning has had any discussions with his rfa and ufa player reps to test the waters on if a new deal could be made with them. He has all the time in the world, just the big uncertainty of the cap...but maybe that could play into his advantage in signing a couple of them before they risk seeing the cap stay the same and have lower offers due to cap restrictions?

 

Also, really hope we are trying to bring back Tryamkin, could start out on the bottom pair but might be able to jump up an play with Hughes some of the time as well

[SilentSam]

17 hours ago, wildcam said:

Hope Jim Benning moves away from Tanev, like him as a player but poor guy is always injured...He is 30 yrs old UFA asking 4 yrs x 4.8 mil ??

We could also not resign and save his 4.6 million toward other player to resign off this roaster..

Resign Taffoli 4 yrs x 4.9 mil ---- Then move Boser for top # 2 D guy...

Resign Markstrom 4 yrs x 5.7 million - with 10 team trade list in his contract...

Resign Virtanen 3 yrs x 3.2 million  -- He will demand raise after this season..Future 20-24 goals - 44 - 50 points regular, real power forward..

Resign Leivo 2x 1.8 million - show me more deal..Solid top 9 forward - Future 18-23 goals - 40 point - solid gritty plays 200 foot game...

Resign Motte 1 yr x 900,000,=-- Might have to move from Motte-- Big MacEwen 6'3 , 4th line ready

Resign MacEwen 2 yrs x 900,000 -- one way deal, NHL ready and we need his gritty style along with speed..Exciting

Maybe with Covid -19 NHL will give every team a one player buy out? Erickson @ 6 million...Yes fingers crossed..

 

If Toffoli resigns I consider trading Boeser or Demko for Ristolinen and a 1st ( in 2020 -21 or 22)

lets not forget, regarding Demko, 

there is a possibility that Seattle will pick up A decent UFA goaltender and be looking to take a great backup goalie in the Extorsion draft..

I think we protect Marky before Demko.. 

ps. Realize Buffalo might not need a Demko, but he could been an asset to “lever” what their needs might be..  (possible 3 way).

.. but does Botterhill even know what he needs?

 

Edited April 14, 2020 by SilentSam

[SilentSam]

1 hour ago, Hairy Kneel said:

I'd like 6'4" Dillon from Surrey, 30 NHL fights.Throws his weight around. 3.2 M. I think he may like the idea of playing for his hometown.

I like this.   his shutdown isn’t too bad, his crease presence is great..  

tough as nails..  decent shot.

.. I’ve only seen him get caught out of position if he plays in a lower case pairing.

 

 

[Hairy Kneel]

18 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

I like this.   his shutdown isn’t too bad, his crease presence is great..  

tough as nails..  decent shot.

.. I’ve only seen him get caught out of position if he plays in a lower case pairing.

 

 

He can lead our Scott Road celly's!

[SilentSam]

33 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

He can lead our Scott Road celly's!

All the way to Newton Arena !

[Junkyard Dog]

6 hours ago, aGENT said:

 

You've got those two backwards FWIW. One's a tradeable NHL player, the other is dead cap playing in the AHL that nobody has wanted on waivers, for free, more than once.

 

You might be able to trade him with 50% retention given he's only got a year left but a regular buyout also cuts his cap roughly in half as well failing that. If there's a second compliance buyout, dead cap like his is the FAR likelier scenario.

I don't think so personally.

 

I'd rather get rid of the guy with the extra year and get an extra million in cap than the guy who's only costing just over 2M after he is sent down and expires the same time we need to sign Petey/Hughes. I also don't know how tradeable a guy like Roussel is when he plays no roles(PK/PP) effectively and when the cap is probably going down and he's signed for a year longer. He really doesn't seem enticing to any team whatsoever.

 

So it's dead cap for a year vs more cap/more term. I'd pick the more cap more term to get rid of. We can survive a year of Baer at 2.2M if we can't move him.

[Junkyard Dog]

18 hours ago, theo5789 said:

I think we would be lucky to get one buyout. It'll depend how much the cap drops. However if we even get one compliance buyout, that does mean the cap has dropped or best case stagnated, therefore not many teams will be taking on cap dumps, at least not without a heavy add to it as cap becomes even more of a premium. I doubt we would be able to move the full cap of any of those players.

 

IMO, if we do get two buyouts, I'd be buying out the obvious in LE, but use the other on Baer, who is dead cap. Roussel IMO is still a moveable asset (perhaps with slight retention). Sutter may also be moveable if the right situation came about, but I think we would have to retain this not getting his full cap back. Benn probably is at best a waiver candidate to save us a million if we are truly done with him as I doubt there's a trade market here for a position that could be filled by a lot of budget options.

read post above for most of the response regarding Roussel/Baer.

 

Only teams that would take cap dumps are rebuilding ones for assets. I don't think that would change. Deals could still be done to rid us of these expiring expendable players.

[aGENT]

6 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I don't think so personally.

 

I'd rather get rid of the guy with the extra year and get an extra million in cap than the guy who's only costing just over 2M after he is sent down and expires the same time we need to sign Petey/Hughes. I also don't know how tradeable a guy like Roussel is when he plays no roles(PK/PP) effectively and when the cap is probably going down and he's signed for a year longer. He really doesn't seem enticing to any team whatsoever.

 

So it's dead cap for a year vs more cap/more term. I'd pick the more cap more term to get rid of. We can survive a year of Baer at 2.2M if we can't move him.

You don't buyout useful NHL players. You do buyout guys that are costing you $2.3m to not play in the NHL. And next year is our only real cap crunch.

 

Plenty of teams would have loads of interests in Roussel. Might take some retention but we'd have zero issue moving him IMO. And I'd have zero issue with us moving him on top of buying out Baer to clear even more cap (assuming we'd already compliance buyout Eriksson as well).

 

 

[Junkyard Dog]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

You don't buyout useful NHL players. You do buyout guys that are costing you $2.3m to not play in the NHL. And next year is our only real cap crunch.

 

Plenty of teams would have loads of interests in Roussel. Might take some retention but we'd have zero issue moving him IMO. And I'd have zero issue with us moving him on top of buying out Baer to clear even more cap (assuming we'd already compliance buyout Eriksson as well).

 

 

We're at odds on his usefulness. I think he's useless and plays no roles. I don't find that enticing and I don't see why teams would. Doesn't PK, Shouldn't PP, Isn't as offensive or physical enough to make up for the either. Leadership? There's a lot of leaders out there who bring more to the table. Throw the fact he is signed for another year it at 3M it amplifies his lack of enticement.

 

We can't move him he's a 3M extra for us and he'd be around after we sign Petey/Hughes. If Ferland's back or we re-sign Leivo his spot is then guaranteed taken. I'd rather have my hands clean with Both Roussel and Baer without any retention for a following year than what you're suggesting personally.

 

In your scenario we gain the most cap early, if we somehow move Roussel, and have to probably retain lets say a third of Roussel's cap 1ish M for 2 seasons compared to having 2.2(1.2M more cap roughly) for just a single season with the off-chance of being able to trade Baer(with assets). If the difference between the cap retained on Roussel(1M estimate) in your scenario and the 2.2M from Baer staying sent down in my scenario was an actual problem next year(rough estimate 1.2M in cap) then that would be extremely astonishing.

 

Either way we come out with more cap in my scenario 1 year from now and I'd rather have that. If our opinions only differ on Roussel's usefulness then agree to disagree. My mind's not gonna change on him and I am not gonna try to change yours.

[theo5789]

2 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

read post above for most of the response regarding Roussel/Baer.

 

Only teams that would take cap dumps are rebuilding ones for assets. I don't think that would change. Deals could still be done to rid us of these expiring expendable players.

In this scenario, the cap has dropped or stagnated and thus cap becomes more of a premium. If we want to sell off cap, the price will have risen. Deals could be done, but it'll be pricey.

 

In this scenario, we are talking about a 2nd compliance buyout. Roussel is more tradable than Sven (we tried to give him away for free last year with no takers). Roussel is at least still an NHLer and can provide a role for us in the meantime with his skating and agitation (sparks of offense). In his 1st season with us, he had career offensive numbers and was on the PK. He came in this season injured and for whatever reason didn't get the PK time, nor the offensive chances, but he can play a bottom 6 role. So we move the unmoveable and look into moving the potentially moveable if we need more cap (and if we can't, at least he is playing for us and trying to contribute to our success, rather than hanging onto dead cap). Roussel would be one of the first guys picked up if he's bought out IMO.

[filthycanuck]

On 4/13/2020 at 1:28 PM, Hairy Kneel said:

Some D UFA's:

Brodie 6'2" 4.6m, Kulikov 6'1",4.5m,

(Det)Ericsson 6'4" 4.2m,

Scandella 6'3", 4.0m, Braun 6'2"  3.8m,

Dillon 6'4", 3.2m, Dillon w 30 NHL fights

Edmunson 6'4",3.1m,  Forbert  6'4"2.5m,

K. Miller 6'2", 2.5m

Polak6'1" 230lbs,1.7m,  Stone 6'3",1.2m,  Petrovic 6'4" .7m 

These are d man that we can consider.

 

Pieterangelo/Parayko will probably resign.

Vatanen is too small we already have Huggy.

Vatanen really reminds me of Erhoff, just a fabulous skater, that if you put him with good players in the right system, he could be very deadly. I've always been a big fan of his in Anaheim. If you guys remember, Erhoff was just a middling mobile d-man in the sharks but you surround him with the right personnel like he was here, just absolutely phenomenal. If you can get Vatanen for the the right price, I think he'd be a massive upgrade on PP2 especially if Tanev or Stetcher were to leave

[Hairy Kneel]

12 hours ago, filthycanuck said:

Vatanen really reminds me of Erhoff, just a fabulous skater, that if you put him with good players in the right system, he could be very deadly. I've always been a big fan of his in Anaheim. If you guys remember, Erhoff was just a middling mobile d-man in the sharks but you surround him with the right personnel like he was here, just absolutely phenomenal. If you can get Vatanen for the the right price, I think he'd be a massive upgrade on PP2 especially if Tanev or Stetcher were to leave

Vatanen is good for what he does. But we already have Huggy. Vatanen will be a @5.5 M signing, plus protection in exp draft. And he's still on IR for his leg? Is he a 5'10" Stecher sized replacement? I think the chemistry and timing is a bit off for V. Getting the puck out of our crease and out of our D zone is a primary concern. So I think a bigger tougher D like Dillon would help our mix. We have a great mix of skill in our top 6 and Huggy. I think a younger D like Rathbone could help our pp2. And at a cheaper price than Vatanan. If we didn't have Huggy then yeah sure. But our needs are elsewhere.

Edited April 15, 2020 by Hairy Kneel

[aGENT]

16 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

We're at odds on his usefulness. I think he's useless and plays no roles. I don't find that enticing and I don't see why teams would. Doesn't PK, Shouldn't PP, Isn't as offensive or physical enough to make up for the either. Leadership? There's a lot of leaders out there who bring more to the table. Throw the fact he is signed for another year it at 3M it amplifies his lack of enticement.

 

We can't move him he's a 3M extra for us and he'd be around after we sign Petey/Hughes. If Ferland's back or we re-sign Leivo his spot is then guaranteed taken. I'd rather have my hands clean with Both Roussel and Baer without any retention for a following year than what you're suggesting personally.

 

In your scenario we gain the most cap early, if we somehow move Roussel, and have to probably retain lets say a third of Roussel's cap 1ish M for 2 seasons compared to having 2.2(1.2M more cap roughly) for just a single season with the off-chance of being able to trade Baer(with assets). If the difference between the cap retained on Roussel(1M estimate) in your scenario and the 2.2M from Baer staying sent down in my scenario was an actual problem next year(rough estimate 1.2M in cap) then that would be extremely astonishing.

 

Either way we come out with more cap in my scenario 1 year from now and I'd rather have that. If our opinions only differ on Roussel's usefulness then agree to disagree. My mind's not gonna change on him and I am not gonna try to change yours.

He's a 2 way, 3rd line pest. Arguably one of the better ones in the league in fact. The reason we're paying him that $3m is because there was a lot of competition for his services when he was UFA. You're out to lunch if you think other teams wouldn't still have interest. You can agree to disagree all you like but reality disagrees with you.

 

So yes, we can move him. Making most of your post moot.

 

And again, next year is our only real cap pinch until our second waive of kids start needing major raises. We don't particularly need to clear cap the following year with expiring contracts and the ED already clearing plenty of it.