[Disscussion] Is Tanev Now In Play?

[-Vintage Canuck-]

5 minutes ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said:

No. And it's "Discussion," not "Disscussion."

 

It's hard to take a poster seriously that couldn't pass a grade school spelling bee. 

Pretty sure he does it intentionally.

[Qwags]

3 hours ago, OptionalPants said:

Tanev is the only d-man they could move that would absolutely cripple the team. Edler is too inconsistent, Gudbranson has never played top 2 minutes and struggled just as a 4th defenceman on Florida, Hutton is still developing. There is absolutely no one on the team that could possibly replace Tanev if he was traded. However, if Benning actually wanted to do a rebuild, now would definitely be the ideal time to trade away Tanev in order to get a maximum return.

Did he struggle? Last I heard, he was playing top minutes in the playoffs. Doesn't sound like struggling to me.

[ChampStatus]

why would tanev be moved?

Our best d-man?

or our top two d-man?

 

[ItsMillerTime]

Tanev is better then Gubransson. Sbisa or Edler id say also hammer

[Phat Fingers]

Trading Tanev would be tough... But if we could get a kings ransom from a team desperate for his services, it could be worth it.  

 

Let's say Edmonton gives up the 4th OA and their second rounder.  Would this be enough? Or do we ask for more;) Then sign Demers and trade down the 5th to who ever wants PLD or MT more, think AZ, Carolina or Montreal.  

 

We could walk away from the draft with one if the big three D, our choice of PLD or MT and some other picks and prospects, with the 2017 d line up of Edler, Demers, Hutton, Guds, Sbisa and Trymakin.  

 

Not bad, and folks would be saying Jared who?  

[ChampStatus]

There is no reason why Chris would be in play.

[2011]

6 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

Trading Tanev would be tough... But if we could get a kings ransom from a team desperate for his services, it could be worth it.  

 

Let's say Edmonton gives up the 4th OA and their second rounder.  Would this be enough? Or do we ask for more;) Then sign Demers and trade down the 5th to who ever wants PLD or MT more, think AZ, Carolina or Montreal.  

 

We could walk away from the draft with one if the big three D, our choice of PLD or MT and some other picks and prospects, with the 2017 d line up of Edler, Demers, Hutton, Guds, Sbisa and Trymakin.  

 

Not bad, and folks would be saying Jared who?  

I would trade Tanev for Edmonton's 4th OA - Tkachuck and Dubois

I doubt that Tanev is even being considered for a trade.  Still has upside and locked into a good contract.  He and Edler made a great pair (when healthy).

 

Sbisa on the other hand looks to be in a crowded corner.  3.6 M cap hit is pretty high for a 3rd pairing dman.  When the expansion draft comes around Van can only protect 3 defenseman, and could lose Sbisa for nothing.   Not sure if he will be moved this year or next, but of the right handed dman, Sbisa is most likely to be dealt.

[dura_mater]

2 hours ago, 2011 said:

I would trade Tanev for Edmonton's 4th OA - Tkachuck and Dubois

I doubt that Tanev is even being considered for a trade.  Still has upside and locked into a good contract.  He and Edler made a great pair (when healthy).

 

Sbisa on the other hand looks to be in a crowded corner.  3.6 M cap hit is pretty high for a 3rd pairing dman.  When the expansion draft comes around Van can only protect 3 defenseman, and could lose Sbisa for nothing.   Not sure if he will be moved this year or next, but of the right handed dman, Sbisa is most likely to be dealt.

So would I but I doubt it happens.

[oldnews]

13 hours ago, tyhee said:

No, they didn't.  Other than starting most of the time in the defensive zone and not scoring much, there is next to no similarity between the games of Tanev and Gudbranson.  Perhaps it isn't a surprise that two players who contribute so little offensively start most of the time in the defensive zone. 

 

One plays a game that suppresses shots and goals by the opposition.  The other doesn't.  Gudbranson's stats for suppressing goals, shots and shot attempts are poor.   Tanev is a shutdown defenceman, Gudbrandson most decidedly is not.  Check some stats from stats.hockeyanalysis.com for 2015-16.

 

Gudbranson:  GA60 2.06, 7th on the defence of the Panthers, who were a good team.

                       Shots Against per 60 min 31.45, 9th among 10 d-men on the Panthers.

                       Fenwick Against per 60 (unblocked shot attempts) 43.61, 7th on the Panthers

                       Corsi (shot attempts) per 60 54.41, 9th on the Panthers defence.

 

Tanev:           GA60 2.18, worse than Gudbranson but 3rd on the Canucks as they were as a team allowing far more goals.

                      Tanev's GA60TelTM was a good -.22.

                      Shots against per 60 min 25.12, best on the Canucks.

                      Fenwick (unblocked shot attempts) against per 60:  35.13, best on the Canucks

                     Corsi (shot attempts) Against per 60: 50.81, best on the Canucks.

 

One of them is a shutdown defenceman.  The other isn't.

\

Sorry, but wadr, that is utter nonsense.

 

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_statistics.php?ds=30&s=13&f1=2015_s&f2=5v5&f4=D&f5=FLA&c=0+1+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67

 

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_statistics.php?ds=30&s=63&f1=2015_s&f2=5v5&f4=D&f5=FLA&f7=10-&c=0+1+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67

 

 

 

[Phat Fingers]

6 hours ago, dura_mater said:

So would I but I doubt it happens.

I dont think we are trading Tanev, and most likely not to Edmonton (because he is exactly what they need), but if we did, JB should hang up the phone until the 4th OA is offered.

 

Edmonton is desperate for what we have, Tanev and Guds.

 

They are not in a position of strength.  Added to that their 4th Oa problably means alot less to them as it would to almost any other team in the league.  Every GM and Agent is going to make Edmonton overpay.  The longer they take to right the ship, the higher the cost.  Why would JB be any different.  Ask for the moon, we dont want to move Tanev, nor do we need too. 

 

On a side note... Brillant Gmimg in grabbing Guds before Edmonton knew he was avaible! For all the hand ringing about Justin Shultz and Drake signings, we should be shouting from the roof tops about the Guds trade!! What would the reaction have been if Edmonton had gotten him for Yakupov and their 2nd! People would have been screaming for Jims head.

[captaincowbasher]

Tanev is not in play, Tanev is the most important player on the roster. At 26 years of age and he's signed for 4 more years at a cap hit of 4.5mil/yr, he's as valuable as Hamonic. Hamonic is more physical but also takes more penalties.

[PhillipBlunt]

Highly doubtful. Tanev possesses a cerebral take on the game that is required. He is dedicated and has proven himself on another level this last month. 

 

He is valuable, yes. When McDavid and Gallagher single him out as a difference maker in the dominant gold medal run, it makes a difference. 

 

Unless Benning is looking to parlay Tanev in a trade package for a clear number one (Shea Weber (a bit old now) or Alex Pietroangelo...), he's staying. 

[TheGuardian_]

Columbus;

The Blue Jackets are spending an enormous amount on players who are not productive. David Clarkson has a cap hit of $5.25 million and was not close to delivering on it. Jack Johnson has a cap hit over $4 million, but his offense fell off badly and Columbus is overpaying for performance at this point. Of all the teams in the NHL, the Blue Jackets may have the highest number of unproductive players making substantial money. Getting out of that situation will be difficult for management.

 

For Tanev , the 1rst round pick and Clarkson or Johnson.

[Freeridebc]

Only way I could see them doing this is if it brought back a young top tier prospect and a first round pick. 

[oldnews]

We have our new vcrguy.

[TheGuardian_]

From Vancouver - Tanev (maybe their 2nd back)

From Columbus - 3 rd overall pick and Clarkson or Johnson's contracts.

 

Essentially trading Tanev for the third pick overall at a high cost but it addresses one of the hardest positions to fill, a top 3 player and bumps the rebuild, retool, redo, re-re-re, ahead a bunch.

 

If there was a choice of Johnson or Clarkson, the better selection is Johnson's contract but Clarkson's is the more likely, huge signing bonuses and escalating, costing more each year, if he agrees (NTC).

 

The owner of the Nucks has already stated and demonstrated that money is no object, Ballard and his 4.25 mil sat the majority of his time here.

[BCNate]

I don`t feel that Tanev will be moved, but based on his showing at the WHC, his value is probably as high as it will ever be.  If Colorado isn't going to be able to sign Tyson Barrie to a contract that works for them, would a trade based around Tanev potentially work?  We don't have much offense coming from the back end, so a Defensive D for an Offensive D could work well for us.

 

From Van:  Tanev, 3rd Rnd pick, one of our many depth d prospects

From Col:  Barrie, 2nd Rnd pick

 

I do feel that Barrie is the better player, the COL add is based on the contract status of the 2.

 

[SaintPatrick33]

2 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

From Vancouver - Tanev (maybe their 2nd back)

From Columbus - 3 rd overall pick and Clarkson or Johnson's contracts.

 

Essentially trading Tanev for the third pick overall at a high cost but it addresses one of the hardest positions to fill, a top 3 player and bumps the rebuild, retool, redo, re-re-re, ahead a bunch.

 

If there was a choice of Johnson or Clarkson, the better selection is Johnson's contract but Clarkson's is the more likely, huge signing bonuses and escalating, costing more each year, if he agrees (NTC).

 

The owner of the Nucks has already stated and demonstrated that money is no object, Ballard and his 4.25 mil sat the majority of his time here.

 

Have you checked out the Jackets blue line depth recently? They are stacked with young d depth, they need scoring to replace Johansson

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, BCNate said:

I don`t feel that Tanev will be moved, but based on his showing at the WHC, his value is probably as high as it will ever be.  If Colorado isn't going to be able to sign Tyson Barrie to a contract that works for them, would a trade based around Tanev potentially work?  We don't have much offense coming from the back end, so a Defensive D for an Offensive D could work well for us.

 

From Van:  Tanev, 3rd Rnd pick, one of our many depth d prospects

From Col:  Barrie, 2nd Rnd pick

 

I do feel that Barrie is the better player, the COL add is based on the contract status of the 2.

 

If Tanev is traded (which I highly doubt) it will be for a number one centre, or potential number one centre (Duchene, RNH, Draisatl) type of player.  

[BCNate]

16 minutes ago, Alflives said:

If Tanev is traded (which I highly doubt) it will be for a number one centre, or potential number one centre (Duchene, RNH, Draisatl) type of player.  

I agree that Tanev won't be on the move.  I do think that a young, scoring PMD is just as big a need for us as a young #1 centre though.  These are the 2 toughest positions to fill, and will come with at price that would hurt to pay.