Nikita Tryamkin | D

[Junkyard Dog]

He'd start on the 3rd pairing but it would probably not be a 15 minute pairing, more of a 18 minute pairing if Tryamkin's partner proves more capable than Stech/Benn/Fanta.

 

That would be an extreme improvement if we're able to have a more reliable 3rd pairing next year. It creates a trickle up effect where our top 4 doesn't have to be relied on more, see how Tanev's health and game improved with Myers acquisition.

[SilentSam]

3 hours ago, Fred65 said:

Not all together sure about training aspect. He has played for a season in the NHL ie he understands what to expect Although the KHL is no where near the NHL it's still likely better than the AHL. The part that concerns me is the NHL style has chnaged in the last  years, it's a younger and faster league. JB seems to think his skating is not a concern so who am I or us to question that. The plus is obvious he adds a missing component to the blue line. His age is right (25) not to late to learn but enough years left to grow with the team plus of course maybe his wife values the salary now … in US$ no less   and who knows maybe she's already tired on her mother-in-law

Too bad you didn’t watch him play over the last 3 years..  might have helped with those insecurities.

[SilentSam]

1 hour ago, NexusRift said:

Agreed! 

I'm not totally sold as some in CDC. I liked what I saw when he played for us. But him leaving for Mother Russia left a sour taste in my mouth. 

Unofficially, my understanding is his return is conditional in that he doesn't play for Utica.

 

Now I realize CDC'ers generally want this kid playing for us. But do we really want to nurse him through the big leagues without maturing in the farm? Is this cause for concern? Does the forum peanut gallery have that much confidence that he'll make that much of an impact on his 2nd go round?

 

I don't. And I think it's obtuse to think otherwise.....Mind you. I'm hopeful.

If he can be as affective as a certain big Swede we had two decades ago, that also spent time in a Euro men's league. Well .........................

I take it you haven’t watch him play over the last 3 years either?

[SilentSam]

3 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

He'd start on the 3rd pairing but it would probably not be a 15 minute pairing, more of a 18 minute pairing if Tryamkin's partner proves more capable than Stech/Benn/Fanta.

 

That would be an extreme improvement if we're able to have a more reliable 3rd pairing next year. It creates a trickle up effect where our top 4 doesn't have to be relied on more, see how Tanev's health and game improved with Myers acquisition.

Perhaps Tanevs injury prowess was better because of Myers and Hughes..  QH buys so much ice time and can move the puck laterally quick.  You get Tanev in a corner, and the trainers grab their gauze bags. 

Thats not to say Hughes can’t make anyone look stellar back there.

Its sounded like JB is eager to have Rathbone available, who is cut from the same cloth as Hughes.

 

i personally want to see Tanev move on,  at possibly 5m per,.   that money could be Tryamkin and either Rathbone or Rafferty on that 3rd line..  with better games played numbers that don’t affect the line up.

[Junkyard Dog]

1 minute ago, SilentSam said:

Perhaps Tanevs injury prowess was better because of Myers and Hughes..  QH buys so much ice time and can move the puck laterally quick.  You get Tanev in a corner, and the trainers grab their gauze bags. 

Thats not to say Hughes can’t make anyone look stellar back there.

Its sounded like JB is eager to have Rathbone available, who is cut from the same cloth as Hughes.

 

i personally want to see Tanev move on,  at possibly 5m per,.   that money could be Tryamkin and either Rathbone or Rafferty on that 3rd line..  with better games played numbers that don’t affect the line up.

It kind of plays into what I was saying that having an overall better D-core lessens the minutes/responsibility making it easier for everybody. Throw in a better top 6 that can be relied upon more than you're gonna have more of that effect. Lets say Rafferty steps up and can handle 2nd unit PP duties, lessening the load for a Myers. A Tryamkin can be a key PKer allowing us to rely more on others 5v5. I do think I make a solid point here.

 

I want Tanev back because I feel we need an upgrade on D better than last year. Losing Tanev would make us worse or close to on par at best which wasn't good enough in front of Marky/Demko this year. If we want to take a step forward we gotta improve and losing Tanev wouldn't help us in that regard. Also Tanev was pretty healthy all year, hard to use his past injuries as a reason to move on when in the past it was him and Edler eating up a majority of major responsibilities and this year with better circumstances we got a better result, I don't expect that to change for the worst but in fact improve with a better top 6 like I mentioned.

 

That said I understand a lot needs to happen with the cap, whether that be compliance buyouts and/or making trades(Benn/Sutter/Baer/Eriksson/etc) so time can change my opinion due to the necessity of the circumstances given.

[NexusRift]

16 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

I take it you haven’t watch him play over the last 3 years either?

Sorry. no I haven't. the occasional highlights and such that's posted in CDC, but otherwise, no.

Don't get me wrong. I'm hopeful about all of the prospects most talked about in here. 

The past few years since Tree bailed, he has been a subject in this thread since then. Obviously he's made an impression. tTruth be told, on me too.

 

I like following our prospects and make a point of viewing any games on TV involving our own; College, CHL, WJC, etc.

I rely on CDC of other prospects not viewable via TV. Much appreciated for sure.

 

The highlights I see are as such....."HIGH" lights. Seriously. Most highlights are of good/great plays. And though I don't see how he plays in game situations, other than when he was playing for us, I have no other reference. 

 

If we can afford, (not financially) to put him on the team without seriously jeopardizing the team's performance, then I say let's go for it.

Where do we fit him? Who do we let go? 

 

 

[Dannydog]

22 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

He'd start on the 3rd pairing but it would probably not be a 15 minute pairing, more of a 18 minute pairing if Tryamkin's partner proves more capable than Stech/Benn/Fanta.

 

That would be an extreme improvement if we're able to have a more reliable 3rd pairing next year. It creates a trickle up effect where our top 4 doesn't have to be relied on more, see how Tanev's health and game improved with Myers acquisition.

I believe Tanevs health and game improved more so do to huggybears  play making than what Myers brought to the team. From what i saw last year was a perfect pairing of Tanev and Hughes. Tanev could work with a competent d partner (for once)that has enough sense to play the puck out or skate it out over the blue line. Not trying to make foolish passes back while offensive forwards are deep in on the fore check,while hes under pressure.He is also benefitting from forwards blocking shots up high negating him having to block them down low. He also gives Quinn the perfect partner because Quinn knows Tanev is always in position defensively allowing him  to take chances or feel more comfortable in taking chances. Adding tryamkin is a definite need but not to giving up a true specialist in Tanev over stetcher,benn or fanta. There will be a deal worked out, that works for both parties . Remember all the insanity during Edlers contract or possible contract? it worked out well.

[J.I.A.H.N]

As I said in another thread.....

 

I think Benning has said, he would want Tryamkin back

So, Benning and co, must think that Tryamkin can contribute

 

So for this reason, I say bite the bullet and offer the guy a 5 year @ 3.5 million

That is a huge raise for him and really is a good deal for us, if he plays 2nd pairing minutes

 

Yes, it is gutsy but, at some point you have to decide if he is or isn't a NHL regular

and since you are cutting ties with either Stecher or Tanev, if you think he can play

He had better be a lot better than Stecher to replace him

 

If that is the case, then, maybe he is good enough to step in and play Tanev's minutes

 

Now, if you bring him in for 1year @ 2.5 million (he was offered 2 million per 3 years ago)

And he plays well, then you are going to pay through the nose...…5+million as a 2nd pairing,the year after.

 

 

So, IMHO, it is safer to pay him 3.5 per over 5 years, than 5+ over the same 5 years if he plays better

I mean you are paying Benn 2 million to sit, and you are paying Myers 6 Million as a 2nd pairing, which I am not sure he is

so, if you sign him Long term right away and risk it, you are probably only over paying a tad (1/2 Million per)

and you can always give him an OUT, so he can go back if mutually agreed upon....

 

No different than what Hoglander just got in his contract

[Junkyard Dog]

1 minute ago, Dannydog said:

I believe Tanevs health and game improved more so do to huggybears  play making than what Myers brought to the team. From what i saw last year was a perfect pairing of Tanev and Hughes. Tanev could work with a competent d partner (for once)that has enough sense to play the puck out or skate it out over the blue line. Not trying to make foolish passes back while offensive forwards are deep in on the fore check,while hes under pressure.He is also benefitting from forwards blocking shots up high negating him having to block them down low. He also gives Quinn the perfect partner because Quinn knows Tanev is always in position defensively allowing him  to take chances or feel more comfortable in taking chances. Adding tryamkin is a definite need but not to giving up a true specialist in Tanev over stetcher,benn or fanta. There will be a deal worked out, that works for both parties . Remember all the insanity during Edlers contract or possible contract? it worked out well.

In regards to Edler he's a lot older and could perhaps start regressing before Tanev as well. It would work out well because Rath/OJ can start to take up that responsibility as that happens. I do think we re-sign Edler short term in 2021 but I feel his next contract may be his last, he'd be 35 by the time he needs one. Still having Tanev after Edler's gone will help since most of the guys we have in the system play the left side.

 

By the time Tanev's new contract is close to expiring Myers will be as well, if we sign him to 4ish years which I want. Both are essentially stop gaps until we are able to trade or draft another solid RD.

[WeneedLumme]

1 hour ago, janisahockeynut said:

As I said in another thread.....

 

I think Benning has said, he would want Tryamkin back

So, Benning and co, must think that Tryamkin can contribute

 

So for this reason, I say bite the bullet and offer the guy a 5 year @ 3.5 million

That is a huge raise for him and really is a good deal for us, if he plays 2nd pairing minutes

 

Yes, it is gutsy but, at some point you have to decide if he is or isn't a NHL regular

and since you are cutting ties with either Stecher or Tanev, if you think he can play

He had better be a lot better than Stecher to replace him

 

If that is the case, then, maybe he is good enough to step in and play Tanev's minutes

 

Now, if you bring him in for 1year @ 2.5 million (he was offered 2 million per 3 years ago)

And he plays well, then you are going to pay through the nose...…5+million as a 2nd pairing,the year after.

 

 

So, IMHO, it is safer to pay him 3.5 per over 5 years, than 5+ over the same 5 years if he plays better

I mean you are paying Benn 2 million to sit, and you are paying Myers 6 Million as a 2nd pairing, which I am not sure he is

so, if you sign him Long term right away and risk it, you are probably only over paying a tad (1/2 Million per)

and you can always give him an OUT, so he can go back if mutually agreed upon....

 

No different than what Hoglander just got in his contract

Sounds great. I would love to see him signed for 3.5M x 5 years. But it takes two to tango. If he is confident in his abilities, he is likely to expect to be able to do significantly better than that after a short "show me" contract. You really think he is not aware of the bolded, or that he maybe shares your desire to have him sell the best earning years of his career for a price that "really is a good deal for us"?

[J.I.A.H.N]

16 minutes ago, WeneedLumme said:

Sounds great. I would love to see him signed for 3.5M x 5 years. But it takes two to tango. If he is confident in his abilities, he is likely to expect to be able to do significantly better than that after a short "show me" contract. You really think he is not aware of the bolded, or that he maybe shares your desire to have him sell the best earning years of his career for a price that "really is a good deal for us"?

Well, that is a good point, but just like there is some risk in the Canucks there is also risk for Tryamkin

 

But in saying that, I suggest that Tryamkin could find him self over paid, if he only manages to be a 3rd pairing Dman

 

In either case, my money is on him, and my puzzlement is really with Benning's wait and see attitude.....

 

I mean, is he or is he not an NHL defenseman? Benning should know that by now.

 

 

[SilentSam]

2 hours ago, NexusRift said:

Sorry. no I haven't. the occasional highlights and such that's posted in CDC, but otherwise, no.

Don't get me wrong. I'm hopeful about all of the prospects most talked about in here. 

The past few years since Tree bailed, he has been a subject in this thread since then. Obviously he's made an impression. tTruth be told, on me too.

 

I like following our prospects and make a point of viewing any games on TV involving our own; College, CHL, WJC, etc.

I rely on CDC of other prospects not viewable via TV. Much appreciated for sure.

 

The highlights I see are as such....."HIGH" lights. Seriously. Most highlights are of good/great plays. And though I don't see how he plays in game situations, other than when he was playing for us, I have no other reference. 

 

If we can afford, (not financially) to put him on the team without seriously jeopardizing the team's performance, then I say let's go for it.

Where do we fit him? Who do we let go? 

 

 

That’s up to Benning,  who openly said 2 days ago that he wants him back.

im sure Tryamkin can wait for the opening,

let’s not forget,  there is hockey to play in the NHL,.  at least until free agency on July 1st.

The KHL season was over April 30th as it was probably everywhere else in the World.

...and I don’t think NT is interested in going back to Avtomobilist, rumour was they treated him like S#/# trying to get him to re-up before he reached Free Agency.

 

[J.I.A.H.N]

9 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

That’s up to Benning,  who openly said 2 days ago that he wants him back.

im sure Tryamkin can wait for the opening,

let’s not forget,  there is hockey to play in the NHL,.  at least until free agency on July 1st.

The KHL season was over April 30th as it was probably everywhere else in the World.

...and I don’t think NT is interested in going back to Avtomobilist, rumour was they treated him like S#/# trying to get him to re-up before he reached Free Agency.

 

I actually question of the health of the KHL after this Covid-19 pandemic......

 

If it's affecting the NHL....it is killing the lesser leagues, and the stability of the NHL will look pretty good right now

 

I imagine Tryamkin can't wait...…..he could end up bankrolling his whole family for a couple of years.....

 

It is up to Benning....no one else

 

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by janisahockeynut

[King Heffy]

3 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

I actually question of the health of the KHL after this Covid-19 pandemic......

 

If it's affecting the NHL....it is killing the lesser leagues, and the stability of the NHL will look pretty good right now

 

I imagine Tryamkin can't wait...…..he could end up bankrolling his whole family for a couple of years.....

 

It is up to Benning....no one else

 

 

Hard to make any kind of tangible offer until we find out the salary cap implications of the virus.

[J.I.A.H.N]

6 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Hard to make any kind of tangible offer until we find out the salary cap implications of the virus.

Well not really, if Stecher is gone there will be money and a need for another Dman

 

But yeah, there is a domino effect...…..especially if there are trades involved...but there will be some low ball offers for players that need to be traded.

 

Maybe even some negative costs, for players that ordinarily would get a plus asset, even if it was a forth or such...….

 

Hopefully Benning doesn't hold out for better and it ending up costing us more...……….

Edited May 3, 2020 by janisahockeynut

[SilentSam]

2 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

I actually question of the health of the KHL after this Covid-19 pandemic......

 

If it's affecting the NHL....it is killing the lesser leagues, and the stability of the NHL will look pretty good right now

 

I imagine Tryamkin can't wait...…..he could end up bankrolling his whole family for a couple of years.....

 

It is up to Benning....no one else

 

 

Your right about the KHL,  this season played was the first ever the teams tried to work together and adopted the Team cap spending limits.

And It’s nothing to compare to the NHL..

I beleive it converted to 13m usd per team.

( please correct me if I’m wrong).

They cut 3 teams last season from the KHL because of poor revenues, and were going to cut another 3 I beleive.

Good for them to convert 12 rinks (including Avtomobilist’s) to smaller surfaces..

but gate attendance is usually averaging 

7000 seats per game.

Yes, the KHL is going to be hurt greatly..

just as they were extending an olive branch with the NHL to honour contracts between the 2 leagues.

Perhaps the only thing that might save them is to become in Europe, what the AHL is to NHL teams.  Players there could be farmed with the ability to play in the NHL and go back freely.

 Less pressure for ice time availability for the abundance of talent throughout the World.
 

[SilentSam]

7 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Well not really, if Stecher is gone there will be money and a need for another Dman

 

But yeah, there is a domino effect...…..especially if there are trades involved...but there will be some low ball offers for players that need to be traded.

 

Maybe even some negative costs, for players that ordinarily would get a plus asset, even if it was a forth or such...….

 

Hopefully Benning doesn't hold out for better and it ending up costing us more...……….

I think Stetcher would be looking for the same type of money that would sign Tryamkin,. Good point.

[SilentSam]

10 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Well not really, if Stecher is gone there will be money and a need for another Dman

 

But yeah, there is a domino effect...…..especially if there are trades involved...but there will be some low ball offers for players that need to be traded.

 

Maybe even some negative costs, for players that ordinarily would get a plus asset, even if it was a forth or such...….

 

Hopefully Benning doesn't hold out for better and it ending up costing us more...……….

The other thing to think of is, do we trade a top forward for a pick to create the room for a better Defence.

 

[Gawdzukes]

11 points in a plush role in a weak-sauce league. And he's the world's biggest baby.

 

Hard pass. I hope Benning uses discretion.

[WeneedLumme]

31 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

11 points in a plush role in a weak-sauce league. And he's the world's biggest baby.

 

Hard pass. I hope Benning uses discretion.

I see that you don't understand the role of a defensive Dman. The "plush role" he played, in the second best league in the world, was number one shutdown Dman. When he has a more offensive role, his production is of course higher.