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

Nikita Tryamkin | D


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

I get the concern, but 3 million a season isn't far off of bottom pairing money (on a more balanced defense group) and I think that's his floor. His skating (for a guy his size) already puts him ahead of Gudbranson/Reinhart, which is key to the current NHL. I don't think I'd go more than 3 million on this next contract, so it's about how many years would he take at 3 million (minimum 4 years at this price tag IMO). We offered 2 years at 2 million before he left, but I'm comfortable with 2.5 million for 2 years as an offer now if he wants less term to prove himself). I'm not a fan of a one year deal given his potential and I believe takes him right to UFA (correct me if I'm wrong).

 

Why I'm not concerned about the term, especially at 3 million, is that he would still be very tradable. We were still able to trade Gudbranson despite not the best outlook during his time here (and got a decent player in return) and he was traded again. This is with an even higher cap hit than the proposed Tryamkin number. GMs covet dmen with size still and that doesn't take into account of Tryamkin's skating. Someone like Zaitsev was able to be traded despite his cap hit (although I think Zaitsev is a bit better than he gets credit for). This tradability minimizes the risk of him not panning out for whatever reason (only one I can think of is if he's unhappy here and wants out because in terms of his play, it's doubtful that he can't be at worst a bottom pairing dman).

I hear you. And I’m not really all that scared. Even a bad contract is manageable, and guys Tryamkin’s size, even if they play like dog**** (not saying he will) seem to tradable commodities, at least for a while (there’s always a GM who covets size that will believe a change of scenario will somehow redeem a hulking pylon).

 

Again, not saying Tryamkin’s gonna suck, but if he does, we can probably get out of it.

 

I guess mostly I’d just like to see him come back as a “bargain,” especially after him leaving for three years, and everything that’s happened in the interim. We already have enough overpaid boat anchors on this roster, so I’d hate to see another one added (even if it’s not necessarily going to hurt us too bad). My feeling is that Tryamkin can play NHL hockey, at least at a third pairing level. I’d like to see him paid as a third pairing guy, and then hopefully he outperforms his deal. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

I hear you. And I’m not really all that scared. Even a bad contract is manageable, and guys Tryamkin’s size, even if they play like dog**** (not saying he will) seem to tradable commodities, at least for a while (there’s always a GM who covets size that will believe a change of scenario will somehow redeem a hulking pylon).

 

Again, not saying Tryamkin’s gonna suck, but if he does, we can probably get out of it.

 

I guess mostly I’d just like to see him come back as a “bargain,” especially after him leaving for three years, and everything that’s happened in the interim. We already have enough overpaid boat anchors on this roster, so I’d hate to see another one added (even if it’s not necessarily going to hurt us too bad). My feeling is that Tryamkin can play NHL hockey, at least at a third pairing level. I’d like to see him paid as a third pairing guy, and then hopefully he outperforms his deal. 

If would be much harder on our cap if he does outperform his cap on a one year deal. I guess I feel like 3 million for say 4 years would already be a bargain (assuming we can fit this number under the cap). A comparable for me is Zadorov who recently signed a one year deal for 3.2 million. Of course he's more proven at the NHL level, but if Tryamkin can play at his level after one season, then we are looking at paying comparatively (I expect he will get around 4 million on his next contract) and that's not factoring in potential UFA status. So we can save now or save over a duration of a contract? With the risk minimized by the trade factor, I'd rather gamble and save over the duration of the contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

The current % of players of that suggested age group will get pushed out soon enough as their contracts expire and the younger, more developed players step in. We had signed some vets in the meantime to allow for the development of our young players which is just as important as drafting/acquiring them. With that said, we currently have one of the younger teams in the league and our current vets will expire when this young core gets to that mid-20s level to become the vets and start the next wave/cycle.

Yeah, it's a fair argument. Also a shame that JB has to take heat for that controversial 3 mill, Lu-fiasco.

 

Can only speak for myself. As a fan, I'm more comfortable with Tree at 3 yrs/9 mill, than perhaps 4 or 5 of our vet contracts(when they were initiated, that is). I simply really like this kid, & think he's precisely what the lineup calls for.

 

Lastly, hated how WD handled him..amongst many other gaffes I'd lay at WillieD's feet. To give this kid a good shot/fair deal seems right, after all that unexplainable mayhem.

  • Hydration 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

I’d be really scared of a 4+ year term at 3+ million per. It could be the deal of the century, if Tryamkin becomes the next Chara. It would even be a great deal if he hits a more realistic ceiling of an NHL level 2nd pair/shutdown Dman. But Tryamkin could also easily be the next Erik Gudbranson, or even the next Griffin Reinhart. Getting locked into a lengthy term with that kind of player would arguably be a worse fate for our overall cap health than the Luongo recapture penalty.
 

I’m hoping for a one year “show me” deal that’s fair, even generous IMO, at somewhere around the $2 million mark.

Griffin Rhienhart had barely 30 NHL games and is a perennial AHL player.

Gudbranson has half the speed and half the defensive coverage of Tryamkin.  Hutton got 2.8 M out of the gate. I think Tryamkin did enough in his 79 games here to be worth at least that.

I think 3 x 3 would be fair because the upside is better than anything we have on the farm. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

I’m curious what everyone’s “walk away” number is for Tryamkin?
 

Like what’s the max AAV you’d find acceptable?

 

For me, I’m thinking $2.25 million max (and would prefer under $2 million).

On a short deal, absolutely. $2.5m is pushing it IMO.

 

3 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

I’d probably play hardball with his agent if they’re pushing for $3 million.

I'd definitely want a few years at that rate.

 

3 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

 

I just feel like his time away from the NHL shouldn’t have increased his value. The rumoured extension offer when he left was $2 million, and I’d say his value today should be flat or reduced, compared to when he was still here (maybe a slight increase in dollar amount due to cap%).

Need to factor in covid revenue drop as well. That should more than cancel the previous inflation.

 

3 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, theo5789 said:

I get the concern, but 3 million a season isn't far off of bottom pairing money (on a more balanced defense group) and I think that's his floor. His skating (for a guy his size) already puts him ahead of Gudbranson/Reinhart, which is key to the current NHL. I don't think I'd go more than 3 million on this next contract, so it's about how many years would he take at 3 million (minimum 4 years at this price tag IMO). We offered 2 years at 2 million before he left, but I'm comfortable with 2.5 million for 2 years as an offer now if he wants less term to prove himself). I'm not a fan of a one year deal given his potential and I believe takes him right to UFA (correct me if I'm wrong).

 

Why I'm not concerned about the term, especially at 3 million, is that he would still be very tradable. We were still able to trade Gudbranson despite not the best outlook during his time here (and got a decent player in return) and he was traded again. This is with an even higher cap hit than the proposed Tryamkin number. GMs covet dmen with size still and that doesn't take into account of Tryamkin's skating. Someone like Zaitsev was able to be traded despite his cap hit (although I think Zaitsev is a bit better than he gets credit for). This tradability minimizes the risk of him not panning out for whatever reason (only one I can think of is if he's unhappy here and wants out because in terms of his play, it's doubtful that he can't be at worst a bottom pairing dman).

JB has timed it pretty well I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Griffin Rhienhart had barely 30 NHL games and is a perennial AHL player.

Gudbranson has half the speed and half the defensive coverage of Tryamkin.  Hutton got 2.8 M out of the gate. I think Tryamkin did enough in his 79 games here to be worth at least that.

I think 3 x 3 would be fair because the upside is better than anything we have on the farm. 

Tryamkin has proven absolutely nothing yet, other than he can be a decent bottom pairing dman.  That might be his floor, but no one knows because he decided to bolt.  I've said it from the beginning, I will be surprised if he signs in Van.  I hope, however, that he does.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No interest from me in paying 3 million for an unproven NHL player like Tryamkin.

 

I would not mind him back on the Canucks in the 6 spot on D, but paying him more than 2.3 or so for a couple years would be a mistake. He needs to prove he can actually play in the NHL. All he has shown so far is he can play in the KHL which is a league way lower in skill.

 

Hopefully the nucks get him at a reasonable cost...otherwise....jettison him lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As an aside, if Stecher isn't resigned, I wonder what Edler and Tryamkin would be like as a pairing.  I can't remember if they were ever together in Tree's first stint with us.

  • Burr 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, stawns said:

Tryamkin has proven absolutely nothing yet, other than he can be a decent bottom pairing dman.  That might be his floor, but no one knows because he decided to bolt.  I've said it from the beginning, I will be surprised if he signs in Van.  I hope, however, that he does.

I'm pretty sure Tryamkin knows he has to prove himself again,  whole new team, new coach, but he will square up fine on the bottom  pairing to start. At least this time he won't be benched behind a ineffectual Philip Larsen. Which no one, especially Tryamkin could understand. His job will be to clear the crease and I think he knows that.

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we need to stop comparing him to the same player we last saw.  He has worked on developing his skills and is a better player today, having played on the larger ice surfaces against speedy forwards.  Better stick work, better positioning and better thinking the game.  If you are giving up 80 pounds as a small forward and go in the corner with him, you may hesitate.  Especially when you see video of Tryamkin separating forwards from the puck and shoving them to the ground.  But how much is that worth? For how many years are you willing to pay?  This is not baseball where Aaron Judge and Jose Altuve compete on the same level.  Size will always outweigh mobility in the NHL, always has and always will and especially in the defence corps.  Chara was able to succeed for many years because the smaller European contingency played afraid going up against him.  

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Colt 45s said:

I think we need to stop comparing him to the same player we last saw.  He has worked on developing his skills and is a better player today, having played on the larger ice surfaces against speedy forwards.  Better stick work, better positioning and better thinking the game.  If you are giving up 80 pounds as a small forward and go in the corner with him, you may hesitate.  Especially when you see video of Tryamkin separating forwards from the puck and shoving them to the ground.  But how much is that worth? For how many years are you willing to pay?  This is not baseball where Aaron Judge and Jose Altuve compete on the same level.  Size will always outweigh mobility in the NHL, always has and always will and especially in the defence corps.  Chara was able to succeed for many years because the smaller European contingency played afraid going up against him.  

This season, they reduced their home ice much closer to NHL sized rinks (along with a few other teams) and I'd argue it was probably his best defensive season in the KHL. Whether that's from the ice surface change or more maturity towards the game, it bodes well for his transition back here.

  • Hydration 3
  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Kanukfanatic said:

No interest from me in paying 3 million for an unproven NHL player like Tryamkin.

 

I would not mind him back on the Canucks in the 6 spot on D, but paying him more than 2.3 or so for a couple years would be a mistake. He needs to prove he can actually play in the NHL. All he has shown so far is he can play in the KHL which is a league way lower in skill.

 

Hopefully the nucks get him at a reasonable cost...otherwise....jettison him lol.

He has played a solid 79 games in the NHL.  Was offered a contract  3 years ago to stay.

The amount was rumoured to be 2m +/- per. 3 years ago.

 

Benning wants him.  That’s all that matters.

 

Say goodbye, so long,  to Tin-ev..   Not paying 4 -5 mil per for a guy who should have come into the league with a personal medical stretcher,  and leaving a half season gap in the line up every season.

Tryamkin will fill that nicely.

Will be a shame we didn’t ship Tanev this season for a pick.

Edited by SilentSam
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

He has played a solid 79 games in the NHL.  Was offered a contract  3 years ago to stay.

The amount was rumoured to be 2m +/- per. 3 years ago.

 

Benning wants him.  That’s all that matters.

 

Say goodbye, so long,  to Tin-ev..   Not paying 4 -5 mil per for a guy who should have come into the league with a personal medical stretcher,  and leaving a half season gap in the line up every season.

Tryamkin will fill that nicely.

Will be a shame we didn’t ship Tanev this season for a pick.

Unfortunately, we weren't really in a position to move Tanev out and have the defensive depth to still be competing for a playoff spot. He's been great with Hughes all year, and stayed relatively healthy, aside from that minor injury around the time of the shutdown. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Chickenspear said:

Unfortunately, we weren't really in a position to move Tanev out and have the defensive depth to still be competing for a playoff spot. He's been great with Hughes all year, and stayed relatively healthy, aside from that minor injury around the time of the shutdown. 

CS, I didn’t see this season as a strong push to win a Cup, I did see playoffs,.  But even with our D the way it is, it doesn’t seem to have the physical resistance to survive 2 strong series. Personally I thought it probably more an opportunity to bring a rookie or 2 up .

With Rafferty, Joulevi, Breisbois , Sautner , available to help for a round or 2..  and be able possibly pick up a 2nd rnd pick this draft or next, just helps, and speeds up the way this is probably going to play out.

Hughes is going to make all of his partners look great,.  It will be interesting to see how much better he gets with the right partner.

One that can shut cycles down physically and almost instantly for QH to pick up on the puck separation, without losing speed.

 

  • Hydration 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

even with our D the way it is, it doesn’t seem to have the physical resistance to survive 2 strong series.

Correct... this is exactly why we need Tryamkin, stat. We're a few weeks away from playing the Wild, with guys like Jordan Greenway coming down hard on our defense. 

Edler is one back spasm away from the press box, Tanev's career of taking hits-to-make-plays often leaves him injured, which forces guys like 5'10 Stecher to play top 4 minutes against power forwards like 6'6 Greenway.  I'm still very perplexed why we haven't signed this guy yet. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SilentSam said:

He has played a solid 79 games in the NHL.  Was offered a contract  3 years ago to stay.

The amount was rumoured to be 2m +/- per. 3 years ago.

 

Benning wants him.  That’s all that matters.

 

Say goodbye, so long,  to Tin-ev..   Not paying 4 -5 mil per for a guy who should have come into the league with a personal medical stretcher,  and leaving a half season gap in the line up every season.

Tryamkin will fill that nicely.

Will be a shame we didn’t ship Tanev this season for a pick.

if he stays healthy, Tanev is currently a better dman than Try will likely ever be.  That's a big "if" though

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

Correct... this is exactly why we need Tryamkin, stat. We're a few weeks away from playing the Wild, with guys like Jordan Greenway coming down hard on our defense. 

Edler is one back spasm away from the press box, Tanev's career of taking hits-to-make-plays often leaves him injured, which forces guys like 5'10 Stecher to play top 4 minutes against power forwards like 6'6 Greenway.  I'm still very perplexed why we haven't signed this guy yet. 

 

He's not allowed to play this season.  RFAs had to be signed by 1 December.

 

The league also told teams that given the Covid situation new contracts can only start next season.  In the past teams were allowed to sign their 1st time ELC players (see Boeser, Makar, Hughes) but this year they apparently do not want to allow it.  The league is arguing that rosters are set and it wouldn't be fair to add those players.  If they don't want new ELCs to begin this year although it was allowed in other years, it's highly unlikely that they make an exception for RFAs like Tryamkin who are not even allowed to join in normal circumstances.

 

  • Thanks 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...