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

Nikita Tryamkin | D


Recommended Posts

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. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by Quantum
  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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... 

 

SQv.gif

 

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
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... 

 

SQv.gif

 

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.

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

 

SQv.gif

 

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

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. :lol:)

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

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by Jimmy McGill
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
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 post
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. 

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
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....................

 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
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 .

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
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.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
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 post
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 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...