Nikita Tryamkin | D

[D-Money]

14 hours ago, Kanukfanatic said:

Tanev played all 69 games this year.  

And yet, he got hurt in the last game, and would have missed a few weeks had the games been played. Right at the most critical time of the year (like always).

 

If we want to build a team that can compete in the playoffs, it’s a good idea to build around players who are dependable, and will be ready to go when they start. As much as I like Tanev‘s game, he has a long history that proves he is absolutely not one of those players. 

[D.B Cooper]

12 hours ago, canuckledraggin said:

Disagree. He has proven he's a giant. It's comical to think that he can't have learned anything in the KHL in 3 years. He played with Datsyuk this year ftr. If you put him on Hughes right he opens up a huge chunk of ice for quick transition. If has the possession game, he'll be unstoppable.

 

He is an inch shorter than Myers.  Haha. 
yes.  He is a very large guy and he can skate.   
sure.  He probably improved while in Russia.(a lesser league).  
He was alright the second half of his season here.   
In reality, he wasn’t half as amazing as some of the size queens here remember. 
 

1.5-2 mill.  1-2 years is more than fair.   
3.5 for 4 years?    Come on now. 

[aGENT]

2 hours ago, D-Money said:

And yet, he got hurt in the last game, and would have missed a few weeks had the games been played. Right at the most critical time of the year (like always).

 

If we want to build a team that can compete in the playoffs, it’s a good idea to build around players who are dependable, and will be ready to go when they start. As much as I like Tanev‘s game, he has a long history that proves he is absolutely not one of those players. 

It's not unfair.

 

That said, barring an upgrade (Pietrangelo), IMO we're best off retaining him (likely at a home town discount) and his huge leadership presence and continue (Myers) surrounding him with additional talent so that he's less relied on when healthy and we have better replacements when/if he goes down.

[SilentSam]

2 hours ago, drummerboy said:

He is an inch shorter than Myers.  Haha. 
yes.  He is a very large guy and he can skate.   
sure.  He probably improved while in Russia.(a lesser league).  
He was alright the second half of his season here.   
In reality, he wasn’t half as amazing as some of the size queens here remember. 
 

1.5-2 mill.  1-2 years is more than fair.   
3.5 for 4 years?    Come on now. 

You haven’t seen him play for 3 years,  don’t base your opinions like those of the beer and barbecue sport personality/ journalists of this city.

Your thinking with your “gut” DB,   only a U.S. president can do that.

 

He is a complete package.   It not only his size.   His potential has been untapped.

if you want to see his potential ,  watch this...

we do not have a defender who can break a cycle like he does, nor one who can keep a forward from standing alone in front of our net.

His point shot is always targeted to hit net or for a deflection or chaos.

He skates above average and uses that physically,  usually taking time and puck control from the opposing team

 

Lets not speculate on contract. His contract will pale in comparison to some of the bad, and expired players w3 carry.

It’s a player, we have rights to , with too many upsides to dismiss.

 

Edited June 12, 2020 by SilentSam

[RetroCanuck]

6 minutes ago, D-Money said:

And yet, he got hurt in the last game, and would have missed a few weeks had the games been played. Right at the most critical time of the year (like always).

 

If we want to build a team that can compete in the playoffs, it’s a good idea to build around players who are dependable, and will be ready to go when they start. As much as I like Tanev‘s game, he has a long history that proves he is absolutely not one of those players. 

This

 

Im fine with resigning Tanev but it cant be long term. If he does resign and Tryamkin signs then we have to trade Stecher and waive/trade Benn

 

Hughes-Tanev

Tryamkin-Myers

Edler-Rafferty

 

[theo5789]

8 hours ago, mll said:

The league's explanation was not about the pandemic but about how these guys are ringers.  Boeser, Makar, Hughes made impacts after signing.  I wouldn't be so confident that it's just for this season.

 

A few wins makes a difference in making the playoffs.  If teams don't have reliable backups they could end up overworking their starter - see Price and it increases the risk of injuries.

It's also financial.  Teams can't just lose a year.  Players get older, become UFAs.

 

Sorokin also turns 25 this summer. At 27 he can be UFA.  With the discussions about changing the season's calendar - he could be UFA after just 1 season.  Less time to evaluate him too.

With training camp date set at 10 July they need a resolution soon as these guys would also need to get their visas and fly over.  Hopefully they just honour the rule.

 

Looking more into this, the solution seems simple. If the league feels they are "ringers", then allow them to sign and burn a year, but make them ineligible for the playoffs (but allow them to play in any remaining regular season games left). The PA take care of the financial gain for the players and the league takes away the advantage gained. Teams will have to decide if they want to rely on players to get them to the playoffs that they cannot use in the playoffs.

 

I understand there are risks involved in not allowing their plan come to fruition. But the point is they aren't necessarily "losing" Sorokin, but rather delaying him a year before he arrives which isn't the biggest loss. He wants to join NYI, this isn't a move to take him to UFA. If he wanted to hit UFA then this has been in the works even before this decision. If his goal was to burn a year of his ELC this year, then it makes more sense for him to wait a couple extra months and get to the NHL sooner rather than head back to the KHL and delay it even further.

 

I still don't think this is the end of Tryamkin here because of this news, there are still alternatives where in the end it still makes most financial sense for him to come here and if his desire was to return, a few extra month wait isn't going to be the end of the world. There are some NHL teams that are eliminated already and will have to wait almost 10 months to play again, will those players bolt to the KHL?

[mll]

Just now, theo5789 said:

Looking more into this, the solution seems simple. If the league feels they are "ringers", then allow them to sign and burn a year, but make them ineligible for the playoffs (but allow them to play in any remaining regular season games left). The PA take care of the financial gain for the players and the league takes away the advantage gained. Teams will have to decide if they want to rely on players to get them to the playoffs that they cannot use in the playoffs.

 

I understand there are risks involved in not allowing their plan come to fruition. But the point is they aren't necessarily "losing" Sorokin, but rather delaying him a year before he arrives which isn't the biggest loss. He wants to join NYI, this isn't a move to take him to UFA. If he wanted to hit UFA then this has been in the works even before this decision. If his goal was to burn a year of his ELC this year, then it makes more sense for him to wait a couple extra months and get to the NHL sooner rather than head back to the KHL and delay it even further.

 

I still don't think this is the end of Tryamkin here because of this news, there are still alternatives where in the end it still makes most financial sense for him to come here and if his desire was to return, a few extra month wait isn't going to be the end of the world. There are some NHL teams that are eliminated already and will have to wait almost 10 months to play again, will those players bolt to the KHL?

 

Tryamkin is not impacted by this decision.  He is RFA and can't play regardless what the league decides with players like Sorokin.  

 

Sorokin wants to play in the NHL - the only team he can sign with is NYI as he was drafted by them.  Doesn't mean he wants to be an Islander for life.  If he stays in the KHL next season he will be 26 when he comes over.  At that age he can only sign a 1 year ELC which could possibly bring him straight to UFA given the discussions of adjusting the calendar year going forward.  It's not him looking to become a UFA.  It's more expensive to sign UFAs than it is RFAs as they can also decide to part and look for a contract elsewhere.  

I find so understandable that NYI are upset.  Losing a player for a year has financial consequences but it also impacts a team's window.  

 

 

[theo5789]

5 minutes ago, mll said:

 

Tryamkin is not impacted by this decision.  He is RFA and can't play regardless what the league decides with players like Sorokin.  

 

Sorokin wants to play in the NHL - the only team he can sign with is NYI as he was drafted by them.  Doesn't mean he wants to be an Islander for life.  If he stays in the KHL next season he will be 26 when he comes over.  At that age he can only sign a 1 year ELC which could possibly bring him straight to UFA given the discussions of adjusting the calendar year going forward.  It's not him looking to become a UFA.  It's more expensive to sign UFAs than it is RFAs as they can also decide to part and look for a contract elsewhere.  

I find so understandable that NYI are upset.  Losing a player for a year has financial consequences but it also impacts a team's window.  

 

 

Wasn't the original discussion that because the KHL is starting "on time" that this could be the end of Tryamkin here because he wouldn't want to wait 4 months for the NHL? Because this is what I'm referring to as to not really believe it's over and we are still in a holding pattern waiting on the NHL to have more concrete details.

 

We will see how it plays out as the NHLPA is still arguing against the ruling so perhaps this is all moot anyway. But as I said, if the NHL feels it's teams bringing in ringers, then an alternative is still to allow them to be signed to burn that year of ELC and just not have them eligible for the NHL playoffs. Seems like a reasonable compromise.

 

I understand why NYI would be mad because things cannot go according to plan. Sorokin's early talks of staying in the KHL for another year could simply be a tactic to get the NHL to change their ruling. If Sorokin really wants to get to the NHL, then what's a few more months wait? A brief time loss of income concern is very short sighted for potentially massive gains financially long term anyway (what if he gets hurt in the KHL?). So really it comes down to if Sorokin simply wants to waste away another year in the KHL if his goal is to be in the NHL already. Sorokin wasn't going to play this year barring injuries to Varlamov and Griess anyway.

[mll]

32 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Wasn't the original discussion that because the KHL is starting "on time" that this could be the end of Tryamkin here because he wouldn't want to wait 4 months for the NHL? Because this is what I'm referring to as to not really believe it's over and we are still in a holding pattern waiting on the NHL to have more concrete details.

 

We will see how it plays out as the NHLPA is still arguing against the ruling so perhaps this is all moot anyway. But as I said, if the NHL feels it's teams bringing in ringers, then an alternative is still to allow them to be signed to burn that year of ELC and just not have them eligible for the NHL playoffs. Seems like a reasonable compromise.

 

I understand why NYI would be mad because things cannot go according to plan. Sorokin's early talks of staying in the KHL for another year could simply be a tactic to get the NHL to change their ruling. If Sorokin really wants to get to the NHL, then what's a few more months wait? A brief time loss of income concern is very short sighted for potentially massive gains financially long term anyway (what if he gets hurt in the KHL?). So really it comes down to if Sorokin simply wants to waste away another year in the KHL if his goal is to be in the NHL already. Sorokin wasn't going to play this year barring injuries to Varlamov and Griess anyway.

Tryamkin is not impacted by that ruling.   He is RFA and not a new ELC player.  He had to be signed by 1 December to be allowed to play.   Benning doesn't want to negotiate a contract before he has a better idea of the cap.  It's more wondering how patient/confident he is that a contract will eventually get done.  He's likely not a priority or he would have already been signed so it leaves him wondering if he will even get the 2-3M he is asking for. 

 

It's NYI that are screwed by that rule not really Sorokin.  Sorokin wasn't going to play but he would have been in the fold and could start training with the team.  The KHL would likely pay him as much as his ELC - he's a top goalie there.  He's not losing money by delaying.  The issue is about NYI having him under team control for possibly only 1 year.  It affects their window, their cap as UFAs are more expensive and if he decides to leave as UFA they are left with an ageing Varlamov and possibly no future number 1. 

 

Edited June 12, 2020 by mll

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, mll said:

Tryamkin is not impacted by that ruling.   He is RFA and not a new ELC player.  He had to be signed by 1 December to be allowed to play.   Benning doesn't want to negotiate a contract before he has a better idea of the cap.  It's more wondering how patient/confident he is that a contract will eventually get done.  He's likely not a priority or he would have already been signed so it leaves him wondering if he will even get the 2-3M he is asking for. 

 

It's NYI that are screwed by that rule not really Sorokin.  Sorokin wasn't going to play but he would have been in the fold and could start training with the team.  The KHL would likely pay him as much as his ELC - he's a top goalie there.  He's not losing money by delaying.  The issue is about NYI having him under team control for possibly only 1 year.  It affects their window, their cap as UFAs are more expensive and if he decides to leave as UFA they are left with an ageing Varlamov and possibly no future number 1. 

 

I just looked back and the Tryamkin issue was with another poster, my apologies.

 

Like I said, I get why it's not ideal that they can't get him signed sooner than later. However IMO, I don't get why Sorokin doesn't just wait a few months and can sign for NYI for next season instead of signing with the KHL. He may get paid sooner, but he would get fast tracked to the NHL if he waits. And as beneficial as it is for NYI to have look at him now, it is also beneficial for Sorokin to prove himself at the NHL level sooner, so he can get to the bigger payout if he proves his value here. This is a matter of burning that year of ELC in which he would only be delaying further if he stays in the KHL another year. NYI would have to plan for his potential UFA budget anyway. If they are concerned about Sorokin going to UFA, he could easily do that regardless of this outcome and NYI shouldn't have been putting all their eggs in one basket (What if Sorokin decided he never wanted to come over suddenly? What if he suffers a major injury? Etc).

[SilentSam]

20 hours ago, mll said:

The league's explanation was not about the pandemic but about how these guys are ringers.  Boeser, Makar, Hughes made impacts after signing.  I wouldn't be so confident that it's just for this season.

 

A few wins makes a difference in making the playoffs.  If teams don't have reliable backups they could end up overworking their starter - see Price and it increases the risk of injuries.

It's also financial.  Teams can't just lose a year.  Players get older, become UFAs.

 

Sorokin also turns 25 this summer. At 27 he can be UFA.  With the discussions about changing the season's calendar - he could be UFA after just 1 season.  Less time to evaluate him too.

With training camp date set at 10 July they need a resolution soon as these guys would also need to get their visas and fly over.  Hopefully they just honour the rule.

 

 

11 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Looking more into this, the solution seems simple. If the league feels they are "ringers", then allow them to sign and burn a year, but make them ineligible for the playoffs (but allow them to play in any remaining regular season games left). The PA take care of the financial gain for the players and the league takes away the advantage gained. Teams will have to decide if they want to rely on players to get them to the playoffs that they cannot use in the playoffs.

 

I understand there are risks involved in not allowing their plan come to fruition. But the point is they aren't necessarily "losing" Sorokin, but rather delaying him a year before he arrives which isn't the biggest loss. He wants to join NYI, this isn't a move to take him to UFA. If he wanted to hit UFA then this has been in the works even before this decision. If his goal was to burn a year of his ELC this year, then it makes more sense for him to wait a couple extra months and get to the NHL sooner rather than head back to the KHL and delay it even further.

 

I still don't think this is the end of Tryamkin here because of this news, there are still alternatives where in the end it still makes most financial sense for him to come here and if his desire was to return, a few extra month wait isn't going to be the end of the world. There are some NHL teams that are eliminated already and will have to wait almost 10 months to play again, will those players bolt to the KHL?

“ Ringers “ is not a fair way to look at a player that you drafted 2 or 3 seasons before and let develop in College Hockey for all the right reasons, and patiently waited for his arrival?..

  How would it be different than having them on your farm team for 2 - 3 years and then bring them up for playoff games?

 

A ringer is an unsigned, unprotected player you hire to play.

A UFA, One unaffiliated , and not rostered or on any protection list to the NHL or farm franchise.

 

we’re talking emergency goalies,.   True Ringers.  

 

 

 

i

Edited June 13, 2020 by SilentSam

[Hairy Kneel]

How can a former 3rd rounder be a "ringer"?

 

[mll]

2 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

How can a former 3rd rounder be a "ringer"?

 

Doesn't apply to Tryamkin.  He's not signing a new ELC.   He is a RFA and cannot sign for this season regardless of what happens with these new ELC players.  

 

[Fan since 82]

On 6/12/2020 at 1:55 AM, qwijibo said:

They need to factor in whether or not the league will be able to get the playoffs in (and avoid massive penalties from the tv networks).  That revenue (or lack there of) will impact the cap.  They’re not waiting on it to make things difficult for GM’s.  They simply can’t calculate it until they know if the return to play plan will actually work 

Do you really think they'll be penalized by the networks? It's not like they just decided to cancel the season, the pandemic did that for them. I think if the networks pushed the NHL could take them to court. Not a good situation either way but I just don't think the networks have a legal leg to stand on. Although I am not a lawyer so am possibly speaking out of my @$$.

[WeneedLumme]

3 hours ago, Fan since 82 said:

Do you really think they'll be penalized by the networks? It's not like they just decided to cancel the season, the pandemic did that for them. I think if the networks pushed the NHL could take them to court. Not a good situation either way but I just don't think the networks have a legal leg to stand on. Although I am not a lawyer so am possibly speaking out of my @$$.

Yes, you are speaking out of your butt. If somebody had contracted with you to provide you with some good or service, and was unable to do so because of the pandemic, you would be fine with paying them for something you did not receive? You must be very generous. Few people are that generous.

[theo5789]

4 hours ago, Fan since 82 said:

Do you really think they'll be penalized by the networks? It's not like they just decided to cancel the season, the pandemic did that for them. I think if the networks pushed the NHL could take them to court. Not a good situation either way but I just don't think the networks have a legal leg to stand on. Although I am not a lawyer so am possibly speaking out of my @$$.

[captaincowbasher]

On 5/24/2020 at 6:19 PM, SilentSam said:

Then the argument should be that 6 mil is too much for Edler,  and the thought of paying Tanev 5+ m per in UFA is eye rolling..
.. and don’t get me started on Dead head Eriksson.

The truth is we are arguing over a million dollars because of the above players and the Luongo Shtick.

So Tryamkin takes the heat over a difference of a million dollars because of other mis givings.

Lets scrutinize what is truly disproportionate,

the top end and the lack of attrition,

not the bottom end and the real future.

 

.. 2m for one season would put NT into UFA.

by then he will have proved himself to be worth 4+ per..

3 mil is close to appropriate for anything around to a 2-4 year deal.

I think the beginning of next season it’s without Tanev, signing him to anything long term is going to bite.. so is anything over what he already makes.. he is over rated.

This team is long over due to be bringing its D prospects in to play.

Rafferty as a 25 year old will do fine.

Rathbone might be another sweet surprise like Hughes.

Breisboise is chomping at the bit.

 

again, I’m sure Tryamkin just wants to play, and what ever amount he signs for is probably more concerning for us than what it needs to be.

There are bigger fish to fry.

Tryamkin is the bottom of the pile, in regards to things to do list for JB. Please don't forget this player up'ed and left the Canucks high and dry because he wanted to play on a certain side of the ice, and he considered himself better then he was. We should have zero loyalty to him as he has us. Preferably we could deal his rights to get a pick. There is no room for a player who is a fair skater, is a fair outlet passer, and for his size plays as passive as he does.

[theo5789]

3 minutes ago, captaincowbasher said:

Tryamkin is the bottom of the pile, in regards to things to do list for JB. Please don't forget this player up'ed and left the Canucks high and dry because he wanted to play on a certain side of the ice, and he considered himself better then he was. We should have zero loyalty to him as he has us. Preferably we could deal his rights to get a pick. There is no room for a player who is a fair skater, is a fair outlet passer, and for his size plays as passive as he does.

You mean the guy that led our team in hits in only 66 games? The guy that can skate around defenders while being 6'7 250+lbs? A fair outlet passer is better than the Pouliot grenades that we had seen in the past. Don't forget he was ragdolling guys like Benn and Getzlaf who were thorns in our side because we couldn't contain them.

 

He isn't perfect, but there's certainly room for a player like him on our roster.

[Fan since 82]

7 hours ago, WeneedLumme said:

Yes, you are speaking out of your butt. If somebody had contracted with you to provide you with some good or service, and was unable to do so because of the pandemic, you would be fine with paying them for something you did not receive? You must be very generous. Few people are that generous.

I don't know how the TV deals are structured do you? Do the networks pay one lump sum payment at the beginning of the season? If yes then of course the NHL would either have to pay them back or complete the season. If it's paid quarterly then perhaps the networks withhold the last payment. I personally doubt that they would have it structured to pay it all up front as that's a lot of cash and businesses like to hang onto their money as long as possible. 

[WeneedLumme]

1 hour ago, Fan since 82 said:

I don't know how the TV deals are structured do you? Do the networks pay one lump sum payment at the beginning of the season? If yes then of course the NHL would either have to pay them back or complete the season. If it's paid quarterly then perhaps the networks withhold the last payment. I personally doubt that they would have it structured to pay it all up front as that's a lot of cash and businesses like to hang onto their money as long as possible. 

Whether they have paid it up front or not is irrelevant. The fact is, I can't see the network lawyers agreeing to a contract that requires the network to pay for programming they don't receive. So if the league does not provide hockey (and of course the playoffs are the highest rated/most valuable games to broadcast) for them to broadcast, a massive amount of money does not get paid to, or will need to be repaid by, the league.

Edited June 13, 2020 by WeneedLumme