Nikita Tryamkin | D

[Nucksownyou]

What's funny is reading all the pathetic Benning haters overrate Tryamkin like he is some star. Tryamkin doesn't deserve more than $2 million at best. Hell, he doesn't even deserve that. We have the cap to sign him for less than $2 million.

[Locke Lamora]

I feel for the Tram fans out there.

 

I never held out much hope he’d be back here. Not really blaming the Canucks too much on this one.. To me, it just looked as if “Big Nik” never had the burning desire to test himself in the best league in the world. Some people just prefer the comfortable and familiar.

 

Other than being big….I personally didn’t think he was all that much to write home about, very much in keeping with Craig Button’s assessment. 

[Gawdzukes]

Haha, what a loser. Called it all along. 

 

 

[thundernuts]

Glad this is over.  So much drama over a 5-6 dman.  

[Gawdzukes]

53 minutes ago, Locke Lamora said:

I feel for the Tram fans out there.

 

I never held out much hope he’d be back here. Not really blaming the Canucks too much on this one.. To me, it just looked as if “Big Nik” never had the burning desire to test himself in the best league in the world. Some people just prefer the comfortable and familiar.

 

Other than being big….I personally didn’t think he was all that much to write home about, very much in keeping with Craig Button’s assessment. 

I've got more desire in my left nut.

[stawns]

1 hour ago, Locke Lamora said:

I feel for the Tram fans out there.

 

I never held out much hope he’d be back here. Not really blaming the Canucks too much on this one.. To me, it just looked as if “Big Nik” never had the burning desire to test himself in the best league in the world. Some people just prefer the comfortable and familiar.

 

Other than being big….I personally didn’t think he was all that much to write home about, very much in keeping with Craig Button’s assessment. 

I'm not sure why people feel the need to run him down for not wanting to play in the NHL.  

[Chesster]

16 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

I've got more desire in my left nut.

Tram left because he had too much desire. He wanted the ice time he deserved. He didn't want to play, or didn't understand, the "wait your turn" game. Maybe Tram is not too swift, a bit weird, or super stubborn. Whatever, these are bad times canuckville.

Edited May 3, 2021 by Chesster

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Nucksownyou said:

What's funny is reading all the pathetic Benning haters overrate Tryamkin like he is some star. Tryamkin doesn't deserve more than $2 million at best. Hell, he doesn't even deserve that. We have the cap to sign him for less than $2 million.

The funniest part is that these are the same posters that claim Benning overpays on all his deals, and they post that without a hint of irony 

[wallstreetamigo]

8 hours ago, 4petesake said:

All Diamond had to do was tell Jim that Try was not signing in Vancouver under any circumstances. Trade him now and get an asset or else he would sign with Avto for one more year and the Canucks get squat.

 

I don’t believe for a minute that he had any real desire to be in the NHL hence the two year deal.

 

Several posters have said in this thread that he had every right to think of himself and his family, to live happily in his homeland. Wished him good luck and said that it’s time to turn the page. Yes, a few have bashed him for not coming. You already know that there are always those here who will take it personally when someone chooses anywhere else but here.

Judging by how things played out, Benning doesnt seem to have been too concerned about getting anything back for Tryamkin.

 

I think there are a lot of assumptions being made and most of them are designed with one purpose: to completely absolve Benning of any responsibility for it not working out. 

 

From everything I have read so far, the Canucks management mismanaging the cap is the main reason they couldnt get a deal done last year or this year. 

 

Players cant just wait indefinitdly to sign a contract. There are a lot of examples of ones who do that find themselves without one or taking far less money and term because everyone's dance card filled up. I dont blame Tryamkin at all for wanting to sign that deal.

 

Closely read what Benning said and what Diamond said about what happened. Benning said he agreed to what Tryamkin wanted. Diamond said the Canucks could only guarantee an offer of much less right now until they moved out some cap. Assuming both sides are being truthful the breakdown doesn't seem to come down to Tryamkin not wanting to play in the NHL, it comes down to him not wanting to wait to sign a contract on the hopes Benning will be able to move cap. Which he has shown 0 ability to do so far. That suggests to me Benning is more responsible for the outcome here.

Edited May 3, 2021 by wallstreetamigo

[4petesake]

5 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Judging by how things played out, Benning doesnt seem to have been too concerned about getting anything back for Tryamkin.

 

I think there are a lot of assumptions being made and most of them are designed with one purpose: to completely absolve Benning of any responsibility for it not working out. 

 

From everything I have read so far, the Canucks management mismanaging the cap is the main reason they couldnt get a deal done last year or this year. 

 

Players cant just wait indefinitdly to sign a contract. There are a lot of examples of ones who do that find themselves without one or taking far less money and term because everyone's dance card filled up. I dont blame Tryamkin at all for wanting to sign that deal.

Couldn’t disagree more about the purpose of the assumptions being made. You’re making the assumption that JB not being concerned about getting anything back for NT, which on the face of it is silly. You’re making the assumption that I’m trying to absolve Jim. 
 

I’m saying that NT signing a two year deal to stay in the K rather than come  in one year shows that he has no overwhelming desire to play in the NHL. He signed this deal in remarkably short time after the onset of negotiations and that tells me that he was never fully committed to coming here. And by here I don’t mean the Canucks, I mean the NHL. Of course that his right and I am fine with it. No grudges, this is a business.

 

My main point is that you are adding this to the failures column way too early. You may turn out to be right but at this point you correctly stated that people are making a lot of assumptions. You and me included.

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, 4petesake said:

Couldn’t disagree more about the purpose of the assumptions being made. You’re making the assumption that JB not being concerned about getting anything back for NT, which on the face of it is silly. You’re making the assumption that I’m trying to absolve Jim. 
 

I’m saying that NT signing a two year deal to stay in the K rather than come  in one year shows that he has no overwhelming desire to play in the NHL. He signed this deal in remarkably short time after the onset of negotiations and that tells me that he was never fully committed to coming here. And by here I don’t mean the Canucks, I mean the NHL. Of course that his right and I am fine with it. No grudges, this is a business.

 

My main point is that you are adding this to the failures column way too early. You may turn out to be right but at this point you correctly stated that people are making a lot of assumptions. You and me included.

Its not necessarily a failure to me. I wrote Tryamkin off as an option to ever play for the Canucks again when he left.

 

Tryamkin not wanting to wait to sign a contract is not any reason to slag the guy. What has Benning done to earn that trust from him? He dicked him around last year by all accounts and almost cost him a contract anywhere. Cant blame Tryamkin to not want to live the sequel this year.

 

I am not really making assumptions. I am just going by what both parties have said and not trying to attribute unknowns about either parties motivations. Like suggesting Tryamkin was asking for too much money or didnt want to play in the NHL or was stringing along the Canucks. None of those things are facts at this point. They are simply ways to lay blame on the player. And that is to make it seem, like so many times before, that Benning did his best but circumstances outside his control or someone else messed things up.

 

Based only on what has been said by both sides, the Canucks mangled cap situation - which is purely on Benning - is what got in the way.

[-Vintage Canuck-]

 

[wallstreetamigo]

Was Tryamkin a star? No. But he was the type of dman the team needs and has very little of either in the NHL or in the system.

 

My issue here is what should have been found money for the team at this point, namely a guy whose style you need that you dont have to overpay or give up assets to add, turned into yet another my way or the highway, our cap situation is garbage negotiation that cost us an asset that might have helped the team.

[wallstreetamigo]

2 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

This adds a wrinkle.

[JM_]

3 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

This adds a wrinkle.

sort of? not sure how it adds to the lack of getting a deal done. It was probably said in terms of Jim letting Diamond know we didn't want to trade him. 

[wallstreetamigo]

Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

sort of? not sure how it adds to the lack of getting a deal done. It was probably said in terms of Jim letting Diamond know we didn't want to trade him. 

I have seen people slagging on Tryamkin for stringing the Canucks along or not demanding a trade. This seems to show it was more the other way around and Benning was happy to lowball him and let him walk for nothing rather than trade him to get assets back.

 

Its another bad look for Jim's asset management imo.

[JM_]

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I have seen people slagging on Tryamkin for stringing the Canucks along or not demanding a trade. This seems to show it was more the other way around and Benning was happy to lowball him and let him walk for nothing rather than trade him to get assets back.

 

Its another bad look for Jim's asset management imo.

I'm not pleased about it, thats for sure, but lets wait a bit here and see whats what once all the info shakes out, it always does. 

[PhillipBlunt]

3 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I have seen people slagging on Tryamkin for stringing the Canucks along or not demanding a trade. This seems to show it was more the other way around and Benning was happy to lowball him and let him walk for nothing rather than trade him to get assets back.

 

Its another bad look for Jim's asset management imo.

It's funny how so many Canucks fans immediately took shots at Tryamkin once it came out that he was signing in the KHL again. Calling him a primadonna and selfish, and completely avoiding taking a objective look at the situation realizing that this is on both parties. 

[wallstreetamigo]

3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I'm not pleased about it, thats for sure, but lets wait a bit here and see whats what once all the info shakes out, it always does. 

I wish people would apply giving the benefit of the doubt to the players like Tryamkin, Gaudette, etc instead of just demanding it for Benning.

 

Look at the comments being made based on assumptions about Tryamkin. But if anyone uses actual info thats out there to say anything negative about Bennings role in it then its out of bounds? Come on lets at leadt be fair here.

[aGENT]

42 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

From everything I have read so far, the Canucks management mismanaging the cap is the main reason they couldnt get a deal done last year or this year. 

Funny, from what I read, the main reasons were that nobody knew at that point whether there was even going to be an NHL season when NT signed his KHL extension. He didn't want to risk not paying hockey (or getting a paycheque) for 1.5 years if the NHL season was nixed. Understandable. Benning also had bigger fish to take care of before worrying about a third pairing D and was also waiting on clarity regarding the season and what effect everything was having on budgets and cap. So yes it also played a part... But it wasn't remotely the 'main reason'.

 

11 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

My issue here is what should have been found money for the team at this point, namely a guy whose style you need that you dont have to overpay or give up assets to add, turned into yet another my way or the highway, our cap situation is garbage negotiation that cost us an asset that might have helped the team.

Yet you're advocating for overpaying him to get him here. We have plenty of cap to pay him what he's worth.