Nikita Tryamkin | D

[PhillipBlunt]

2 minutes ago, BCNate said:

Right now all we know about Tryamkin's ability at the NHL level is he is big.

His performance in the KHL is a solid indicator of what he can bring. He’s shown excellent poise and positioning, and above average skating and speed for a man of his size. His approach to the game has matured as well. 

2 minutes ago, BCNate said:

If you sign him to a 2.5-3 mill deal, you won't be able to bring back Edler and/or Hamonic,

This team has to start considering moving on from Edler. He’s been great but I don’t think he should be a priority to sign at all. With Myers and Schmidt, the Canucks have a lot of veteran presence on the back end. If Hamonic re-signs around $3M, there should be more than enough cap space, considering the players who’s contracts are expiring.  I don’t see where the issue is. I can’t see Hughes and Pettersson getting a ridiculous payday this off-season. 

2 minutes ago, BCNate said:

or jump at opportunities like grabbing Schmidt for dimes on the dollar if they come available near the Seattle draft. 

The opportunities should go to the likes of Juolevi and other younger players rather than banking on the hole that a player might shake loose. 

2 minutes ago, BCNate said:

I am 100% certain some teams will lose quality assets prior to the expansion draft for low returns as opposed to losing those assets for nothing to Seattle.

Maybe. Maybe not. Who knows. 

2 minutes ago, BCNate said:

I'd bring back Tryamkin, for all the reasons you stated under two circumstances 1) it is after the expansion draft and 2) it is a 1 year "prove it" deal.  We are so up against the cap that we really have no room for error.

 

I do think Tryamkin will be a decent bottom pair D.

 

[JM_]

22 minutes ago, BCNate said:

Right now all we know about Tryamkin's ability at the NHL level is he is big.  If you sign him to a 2.5-3 mill deal, you won't be able to bring back Edler and/or Hamonic, or jump at opportunities like grabbing Schmidt for dimes on the dollar if they come available near the Seattle draft.  I am 100% certain some teams will lose quality assets prior to the expansion draft for low returns as opposed to losing those assets for nothing to Seattle.

 

I'd bring back Tryamkin, for all the reasons you stated under two circumstances 1) it is after the expansion draft and 2) it is a 1 year "prove it" deal.  We are so up against the cap that we really have no room for error.

 

I do think Tryamkin will be a decent bottom pair D.

who says there will be opportunities like that available to the Canucks? we can't outbid the bottom 1/2 of the league on taking cap space. We already did our "Schmidt" type deal. 

 

Its never a bad time to lock up talent, assuming thats what they think Nik is. I do think he has some unique potential and there's a pretty big body of work to judge him by now. 

 

A 1 year deal is a mistake imo, that just takes him right to UFA and all we 'd be doing is getting him ready for a bidding war with another team. 

[BCNate]

9 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

His performance in the KHL is a solid indicator of what he can bring. He’s shown excellent poise and positioning, and above average skating and speed for a man of his size. His approach to the game has matured as well. 

This team has to start considering moving on from Edler. He’s been great but I don’t think he should be a priority to sign at all. With Myers and Schmidt, the Canucks have a lot of veteran presence on the back end. If Hamonic re-signs around $3M, there should be more than enough cap space, considering the players who’s contracts are expiring.  I don’t see where the issue is. I can’t see Hughes and Pettersson getting a ridiculous payday this off-season. 

The opportunities should go to the likes of Juolevi and other younger players rather than banking on the hole that a player might shake loose. 

Maybe. Maybe not. Who knows. 

 

All fair points, but again, we don't know what opportunities will be there, so why not be patient and explore them?  Nobody else owns his rights, noody else can sign him, so why not wait until you see what happens before the ED?  The cap will be tighter league wide than it was last year, and teams risk losing quality D for nothing to Seattle.  I'm not opposed to binging NK back at all, but net years camp opens in October, whether we sign him in May or July.

 

 

 

[BCNate]

22 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

who says there will be opportunities like that available to the Canucks? we can't outbid the bottom 1/2 of the league on taking cap space. We already did our "Schmidt" type deal. 

 

Its never a bad time to lock up talent, assuming thats what they think Nik is. I do think he has some unique potential and there's a pretty big body of work to judge him by now. 

 

A 1 year deal is a mistake imo, that just takes him right to UFA and all we 'd be doing is getting him ready for a bidding war with another team. 

Same as my last post, Next year starts on the same day whether we sign Tryamkin now or in the summer.  We we own his rights, so it's not like we can lose him to another NHL team.  Correct, no guarantees we can leverage the Expansion draft to get a cheap quality D, but signing Tryamkin early all but guarantees that cannot.

 

1 year is a risk, assuming he plays well.  If that's the case you work to lock him up long term before July 1.  2 years is also a risk if he comes over and is Aundrey Pedan v2 and we have 2 years at 2.5 tied up in him. 

 

I'm not against bringing him over, at all, I'm just very "for" giving it a bit of time.

 

[J.I.A.H.N]

3 hours ago, Petey_BOI said:

last contract before he signed he was a 3rd pairing guy in the khl, now he is a top pairing d in the KHL. he is one of the best defensive defenseman in the khl.

3rd in blocks 35th in hits  23rd in toi 57th overall in points(zero PP time) 

where he struggles is with his passing 77% passing percentage the average player is about 80-82%

 

he is a giant shutdown defenceman perfect for quinn hughes. the ying to his yang.

 

i think he's earned a raise, and probably wont come over for less than 2m, especially since he makes 1m in the KHL

Solid points Petey

 

I was just thinking that on his team they rotate Dmen, like eat potato chips, so his TOI could even be a little skewed.

 

Interesting point on his passing percentage

 

My guess on his contract will be in the 2.25 to 2.5 per year X 2. I also see Hamonic getting pretty much the same deal

 

Does anyone see Schmidt, Myers, or Hamonic as a true #2? I don't..........probably a #3 at best

 

I actually see all 3 being of similar value, all different but all much the same. 

 

Are we in a position to have 3 - #3's? with 2 costing $6,000,000? 

 

I see Hamonic, Myers, Tryamkin being a cheaper version of the same...........maybe a little less, but similar, but more aggressive, and with our left side shaping up to be so young and none agressive.........I think the RHD suggested fits better....................

[reyezone]

I’ve been a real blind supporter of GMJB since the beginning of his time helming the ship, but if the big man isn’t on our blueline come the first game of next season I may not be able to keep the faith...

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

Just now, reyezone said:

I’ve been a real blind supporter of GMJB since the beginning of his time helming the ship, but if the big man isn’t on our blueline come the first game of next season I may not be able to keep the faith...

I don’t know which surprises me more, a “blind supporter” admitting they are a blind supporter, or there being anything that would make a blind supporter lose their faith in GMJB.  

 

(I’m just playing, guys. Don’t @ me. )

[4petesake]

1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Who else could become available that offers the physical traits that Tryamkin has?

 

I can't see signing Nikita for a 2 year, $2.5 - 3M contract as a tying the hands of the team. There is no one in the NHL that is as large as he is that can skate as well as he can. As well, he uses his immense size extremely well in terms of positioning and boxing players out by overpowering them. 

 

The defense doesn't really need much from a player perspective. Hughes, Juolevi, Schmidt, Hamonic, and Myers are more than adequate. The real issue with the defense is behind the bench. 

 

Frankly Button didn't really provide anything more than anecdotes when asked. Certainly Tryamkin needs more experience at the NHL level, but to say that he's nothing more than a 6-7 defenseman is a poor read by Button.

Agreed, that does seem like a very poor read by Button. Didn’t he have Chatfield rated higher than that? Tryamkin has the potential to bring much more of what we need than does Chatfield. 

[4petesake]

50 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

who says there will be opportunities like that available to the Canucks? we can't outbid the bottom 1/2 of the league on taking cap space. We already did our "Schmidt" type deal. 

 

Its never a bad time to lock up talent, assuming thats what they think Nik is. I do think he has some unique potential and there's a pretty big body of work to judge him by now. 

 

A 1 year deal is a mistake imo, that just takes him right to UFA and all we 'd be doing is getting him ready for a bidding war with another team. 

I don’t see any way you only sign him for one year. If you don’t think he has more of a future here than that then we might as well trade his rights now. As you say why showcase him just to raise his FA value.

 

Also if we wait too late in the year to sign him maybe he gets ticked off and signs in the K for that final year before he’s a UFA. He has showed good faith letting it be known that he wants to be here so it’s time to sign him or trade him.

[Quantum]

There's no reason not to sign him.

 

Benn isn't here anymore. Canucks have a lack of depth when it comes to defensemen in general. With Podkolzin coming over this Fall, it makes sense for the Canucks to have a couple of Russians for him to make the transition easier. Tryamkin, worst case, can get flipped at next year's deadline if it's not working out. I think having Tryamkin on defense will not hurt this team and I don't see a downside with him being here. He's clearly done some growing up since he was last here. He got married, has a kid. I think it was a maturity thing.

 

Sign him for 2 years at 1.5 mill per and call it a day. He likely doesn't command more than 2. Basically give him the Benn deal.

Edited April 24, 2021 by Quantum

[aGENT]

I'm totally fine signing him now for the record but at a 2 year deal at $1.5-$2... Y'all wanting to play $2.5-$3+ for a guy we're not even sure is in our starting 6 next year... 

 

 

[Slegr]

I’m thinking $2.5M x 2. Get ‘er done Benning!

[SilentSam]

52 minutes ago, BCNate said:

Same as my last post, Next year starts on the same day whether we sign Tryamkin now or in the summer.  We we own his rights, so it's not like we can lose him to another NHL team.  Correct, no guarantees we can leverage the Expansion draft to get a cheap quality D, but signing Tryamkin early all but guarantees that cannot.

 

1 year is a risk, assuming he plays well.  If that's the case you work to lock him up long term before July 1.  2 years is also a risk if he comes over and is Aundrey Pedan v2 and we have 2 years at 2.5 tied up in him. 

 

I'm not against bringing him over, at all, I'm just very "for" giving it a bit of time.

 

Time ?

If we don’t sign him this year,.   We’ve lost him.

Tryamkin is all about integrity and fairness.

he was waiting to join us  this season.

 

He wants to play in the NHL,  and he proved that he can play in the NHL in his rookie season.

Do you think this player has gotten worse?

You obviously have not seen him play for the last 4 years.

 

[4petesake]

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I'm totally fine signing him now for the record but at a 2 year deal at $1.5-$2... Y'all wanting to play $2.5-$3+ for a guy we're not even sure is in our starting 6 next year... 

 

 

Two years at 3mil is too rich for my blood. My limit might be 2.25 to 2.5 but I could also see something like 2 the first year and 2.5 for the second. Unless he was terrible I think he would still be tradeable in the second year. 
 

Put another way, either pay what it’s going to take to sign him or trade his rights.

[SilentSam]

12 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I'm totally fine signing him now for the record but at a 2 year deal at $1.5-$2... Y'all wanting to play $2.5-$3+ for a guy we're not even sure is in our starting 6 next year... 

 

 

Look at our starting six right now, and tell me he isn’t an upgrade ?

[reyezone]

48 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

I don’t know which surprises me more, a “blind supporter” admitting they are a blind supporter, or there being anything that would make a blind supporter lose their faith in GMJB.  

 

(I’m just playing, guys. Don’t @ me. )

I am quite cognizant of my rose coloured glasses. It’s just more fun to leave them on quite frankly. 

[PhillipBlunt]

1 hour ago, 4petesake said:

Agreed, that does seem like a very poor read by Button. Didn’t he have Chatfield rated higher than that? Tryamkin has the potential to bring much more of what we need than does Chatfield. 

If Button rates Chatfield above Tryamkin, I have literally no faith in his scouting. 

[BCNate]

40 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Time ?

If we don’t sign him this year,.   We’ve lost him.

Tryamkin is all about integrity and fairness.

he was waiting to join us  this season.

 

He wants to play in the NHL,  and he proved that he can play in the NHL in his rookie season.

Do you think this player has gotten worse?

You obviously have not seen him play for the last 4 years.

 

I've followed him pretty closely over the past few years, and do feel he can come over next year and play in our bottom 6, with potential upside for more.  The time frame I am looking at is after the Expansion draft, my reasons for that are stated a few times in the posts above.  Unless Benning is absolutely 100% certain he can play in our top 4 next season, there is no reason to sign him before the Expansion draft.

[Slegr]

1 minute ago, BCNate said:

I've followed him pretty closely over the past few years, and do feel he can come over next year and play in our bottom 6, with potential upside for more.  The time frame I am looking at is after the Expansion draft, my reasons for that are stated a few times in the posts above.  Unless Benning is absolutely 100% certain he can play in our top 4 next season, there is no reason to sign him before the Expansion draft.

I think if they sign him before the expansion draft for next year, he’s not eligible to be picked by Seattle... I could be wrong on that.

Anyway, I think the reason to get it done now is so he doesn’t get anxious waiting around and decide to sign with KHL one more year , as it starts before NHL, and then he’d be a free agent the following year. It feels like now or never.

[JM_]

1 hour ago, BCNate said:

Same as my last post, Next year starts on the same day whether we sign Tryamkin now or in the summer.  We we own his rights, so it's not like we can lose him to another NHL team.  Correct, no guarantees we can leverage the Expansion draft to get a cheap quality D, but signing Tryamkin early all but guarantees that cannot.

 

1 year is a risk, assuming he plays well.  If that's the case you work to lock him up long term before July 1.  2 years is also a risk if he comes over and is Aundrey Pedan v2 and we have 2 years at 2.5 tied up in him. 

 

I'm not against bringing him over, at all, I'm just very "for" giving it a bit of time.

 

I get that, I felt the same way about Pearson, saw no reason not to wait a bit. 

 

In this case I'm much more pro term with Nik for a few reasons, one of which is also asset management. To get a 3rd pairing d with some unique qualities and upside out of the 3rd round is a pretty nice get. I think thats worth the risk of term. 

 

If Nik's deal is all cash, then worst case for a 3 year deal is a pretty good buyout. But I think he's got #5 upside. 

Edited April 24, 2021 by Jimmy McGill