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

Nikita Tryamkin | D


Drouin

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Slegr said:

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.

Again, my reasoning for waiting until then is to see the opportunities that present themselves from teams who cannot protect all of their D, not to d with our own exposure list.  Take a look at Carolina, Tampa, Minnesota etc... They stand to lose very solid D for nothing.  If they can get an asset back, they would likely prefer that than walk away empty handed.   Assume you bring back Hamonic, want to give Rathbone/Joulevi a real shot, and sign Tryamkin, you lose the flexibility to take advantage of that market if it resents itself.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 4petesake said:

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.

yup. He would have been here this year if not for covid. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes 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 see where you are heading on this Nate (I hope I am not putting words in your mouth)

If I am understanding you correctly

You are suggesting we may be able to get someone before the Expansion draft

that a team can't protect and loose at the Expansion Draft?

I will say this.....if that is what you are thinking he had better be better than the 4 we already have (including Hamonic)

and he had better be cheaper............

Tryamkin comes with intangibles and those intangibles are valuable

I say............sign him, and trade him, if you don't want him, after the fact..............I think that would be a mistake, but at least you have some control

you don't if he does not signed....................

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

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. 

Honestly, My frustration with signing Pearson so early, and not waiting to see what is in the market is a real reason why I am looking at the Tryamkin situation the way I am .

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, janisahockeynut said:

I see where you are heading on this Nate (I hope I am not putting words in your mouth)

If I am understanding you correctly

You are suggesting we may be able to get someone before the Expansion draft

that a team can't protect and loose at the Expansion Draft?

I will say this.....if that is what you are thinking he had better be better than the 4 we already have (including Hamonic)

and he had better be cheaper............

Tryamkin comes with intangibles and those intangibles are valuable

I say............sign him, and trade him, if you don't want him, after the fact..............I think that would be a mistake, but at least you have some control

you don't if he does not signed....................

 

We can not really afford to sign anyone other than Tryamkin before the EDraft..  the fact remains if signed he is ours and he dosent need protecting.

If we sign Hamonic or Edler before ED they would need protection.

 

As of right now I think we are protecting Schmidt and Myers..   some one correct me or my line of thinking on this? 
As UFAs. Both Edler and Hamonic can hear offers from Seattle, but they don’t have to take them and could wait to sign after the ED at their own discression.

I would rather sign Tryamkin now,  and get him here for mid June, settled and training for a new season ramping up in Sept /Oct.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

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. 

Pretty sure the Big Man is a top 4 pairing before the 2022 playoffs.

Injuries are certain to give Nik every opportunity to prove himself.

He is already above Joulevi, Rathbone could potentially push someone out for good asset.

Crazy to think, but I don’t think Tryamkin has had a serious injury in his career to date..

@Stierlitz or @Hairy Kneel might know better?

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, BCNate said:

Honestly, My frustration with signing Pearson so early, and not waiting to see what is in the market is a real reason why I am looking at the Tryamkin situation the way I am .

The Pearson signing is a good one for the Team actually..  he gives us another solid year of stability,  the 22-23 season he submits a 7 team no trade list..

and the 3rd is open to move.

I doubt Pearson becomes a player not worth a good asset down the line..  or we have a vet at good value who funnels to the net consistently..  try and get that out of Jake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SilentSam said:

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

Right now with Edler suspended...Only guy he'd maybe slot in ahead of would be Juolevi and that's debatable.

 

He's not better than any of Hughes, Schmidt, Hamonic, Edler or Myers.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

He is better than Joulevi,.

and debatably better than Schmidt..

His shutdown D end game is easily better than both,. As is his PK .

He  m o v e s  players out of the screen lane with ease.

 

I know I sound “keen” on him..  but he moves so quickly with 2 steps and that stick gets into  a players “bail” move before he takes the body..  it’s seriously 12 feet or more from his body.

His intimidation, of the half stride to take a hit, stops plays from developing.

 

There are no stats for how is pressence effects a puck carting player taking it into his zone man o man.

He's not better than Schmidt! :lol:

 

How long is he better than Juolevi?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're all turning a blind eye to the decline of Edler.  If it was up to me we would pull the same thing that Whitecaps did with the Korean superstar player in his twilight years, where he would only play the home games and not travel with the team on the road.  

 

Anyways, if Tryamkin shows a tiny bit of improvement over the way he played when he left here, he would slot in as #5 D on the Canucks IMO. 

 

1. Myers 

2. Schmidt 

3. Hughes 

4. Hamonic 

5. Tryamkin 

6. Edler 

7. Juolevi 

8. Chatfield 

 

That would be my ranking of their effectiveness right now.  Hughes really gave me a scare this entire season up until the two games against Toronto.  He's objectively been one of our worst d-men but I saw shades of rookie Hughes again after the break.  

 

So yeah, Tryamkin would definitely have a place on my Canucks lineup.  2 mil/season would be a fair deal and one that we could give out without being in too much trouble. 

 

I have one more unpopular opinion about the cap, but I think I'll leave it here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

He's not better than Schmidt! :lol:

 

How long is he better than Juolevi?

I think he will always be better than Joulevi .

 

right now I can not see Joulevi being in the top 4..  maybe in 2 years 

  Tryamkin I can see in top 4 after 1 full season or less.

possible partners,  yes.

 

Scmidtts offence is greater than Tryamkins,  but not his D fence...  and we are talking D men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

I think he will always be better than Joulevi .

 

right now I can not see Joulevi being in the top 4..  maybe in 2 years 

  Tryamkin I can see in top 4 after 1 full season or less.

possible partners,  yes.

Juolevi has a higher likely ceiling.

 

3 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

 

Scmidtts offence is greater than Tryamkins,  but not his D fence...  and we are talking D men.

Nonsense

  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is 3 narratives that "could happen if he signs...............

 

#1. He shows up and just can't keep up, and is beaten on every shift. Gets limited minutes, and really just does not elevate.

 

#2. He comes in and hold his own as a low 4, mid 5, who can play up for limited time.

 

#3. He comes in and plays Penalty kill, solid 4, and is able to keep opponents to the outside.

 

I think #3 has good value, as he would be the physically strongest guy on the ice, and will be able to clear the front of the net with ease, in addition, I believe we will see players skate away from Tryamkin much the same way they did when he was here last time. People seem to have a hard time remembering that, but players have to first get past his stick, which is farther out than most Dmans, this gives Tryamkin time to adjust his positioning, before they get close enough to beat him. Further to that, Tryamkin skates well, and this will further complicate their attack down his side. In addition, his physicality will convince a certain amount of the players coming down his side to change their attack.

 

For those convinced that the players are faster than before..........this is not true......players have not noticeably become faster over a shorter time (4 years) that is a foolish premise. What has happened is there is no mid ice interference anymore, which allows for a quicker transition, but Tryamkin is a defensive defenseman and is mostly in position, and for this reason, his stick and size, negate that tactic. In short he has excellent gap control, because of his reach and skating. If you are expecting huge offensive numbers.....you will be disappointed, but if you would like to see him play against Marchand and Tom Wilson, so would I.

 

People are forgetting Tryamkin's last half of the season, where offenses stop attacking his side of the ice when entering our defensive zone. These same people are also dismissing any development over the last 4 years.

 

Tryamkin is a unique individual with a unique skill set that very few NHL players possess. My only question would be, would you bet against Tryamkin being more than you think he is? Would you trade him to Edmonton? I would never do that! Not with out first having him play a year here.

Edited by janisahockeynut
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SilentSam said:

He is better than Joulevi,.

and debatably better than Schmidt..

His shutdown D end game is easily better than both,. As is his PK .

He  m o v e s  players out of the screen lane with ease.

 

I know I sound “keen” on him..  but he moves so quickly with 2 steps and that stick gets into  a players “bail” move before he takes the body..  it’s seriously 12 feet or more from his body.

His intimidation, of the half stride to take a hit, stops plays from developing.

 

There are no stats for how is pressence effects a puck carting player taking it into his zone man o man.

Where does your matter of fact claims originate from?

 

Your an NHL scout in Russia and have watched every game of Try in the past 4 years?

 

Or you pulled your opinion from yer arse?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, VancouverHabitant said:

 

1. Myers 

2. Schmidt 

3. Hughes 

4. Hamonic 

5. Tryamkin 

6. Edler 

7. Juolevi 

8. Chatfield 

 

I think you have to look at this 2 ways, to be accurate...........

 

Offensively.................................................Defensively...................................Physically

 

Hughes......................................................Tryamkin......................................Tryamkin

Rathbone (Potentially)...............................Myers...........................................Myers

Myers.........................................................Hamonic......................................Hamonic

Schmidt......................................................Rathbone....................................Edler

Edler...........................................................Schmidt.......................................Schmidt

Rafferty (Potentially)...................................Edler............................................Rathbone

Juolevi........................................................Juolevi.........................................Chatfield

Hamonic.....................................................Chatfield......................................Juolevi

Tryamkin.................................................... Hughes........................................Rafferty

Chatfield.....................................................Rafferty........................................Hughes................Note* I actually think Hughes did quite well in last years playoffs

 

Now, yes there is some extrapolation here, but I think there is some general truth to this. Also the reason I have put in Physically, is that that is what the playoffs are, and even though Quinn Hughes got through 3 playoff rounds............he was looking pretty beaten by the time Vegas got through with him and it just gets tougher to lace the skates up the further you get into the playoffs. I don't think Tryamkin will have a problem with that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...