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

Christopher Tanev | #8 | D


-SN-

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Provost said:

TSN is talking about how agents around the league and contacts are saying Tanev isn’t going to command the dollars his camp thinks.

 

Apparently on the open market they are looking at a $30 million over 5-6 years... but the market is more like $4.5 x4.  At the lower price, we could offer that and keep him.... or even a few less dollars and the same term for him to stay where he wants to.

I've been saying this for a while now. I'd be surprised if Tanev gets much over $4.5 given covid, his age/injuries etc. I think he could probably do +/- $4.5x4 on the market, he might need to to $4.5x3 to stay here (or around his current hit if he wants 4 years). 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mackcanuck said:

I call  3yrs@$5.6 AAV

I 100% agree with Burkie, but you might be the first person I think has his value a bit high. I'm hoping he signs for about $5M, but I know a lot of fans feel he's earned a pay cut for some reason.

 

When Tanev signed his current 4.45M deal, the cap was at $71.4M. Scale that up to the current cap of $81.5M and inflation alone would put Tanev's equivalent salary in today's money at $5.08M. Even the $5M I suggested is technically a pay cut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

Tanev is not durable enough so even if you might not be able to find his replacement you will find someone who will actual play.

Tanev played every regular season game(69) and every playoff game this year(17) logging huge minutes against opponents top lines

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Mackcanuck said:

Tanev played every regular season game(69) and every playoff game this year(17) logging huge minutes against opponents top lines

He was injured in game  69 and who knows when he would have been back and this was the only season he was "never" injured for man games missed. It's an argument of semantics and in his game relies on him blocking shots which is how he gets hurt. He is not worth signing to 5m+. He cannot stay healthy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

He was injured in game  69 and who knows when he would have been back and this was the only season he was "never" injured for man games missed. It's an argument of semantics and in his game relies on him blocking shots which is how he gets hurt. He is not worth signing to 5m+. He cannot stay healthy. 

 Every defenceman blocks shots, I want Tanman back, all the players on the team want him back,

you don't, I'm okay with that

Edited by Mackcanuck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mackcanuck said:

 Every defenceman blocks shots, I want Tanman back, all the players on the team want him back,

you don't, I'm okay with that

http://www.espn.com/nhl/statistics/player/_/stat/defensive/sort/blockedShots/seasontype/2

 

Not many people blocking more shots than Tanev and as I said he has shown his durable is an issue with blocking as many shots as he does. I am sure you want every canuck back regardless of what they want to be paid or how it works with the cap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, peaches5 said:

http://www.espn.com/nhl/statistics/player/_/stat/defensive/sort/blockedShots/seasontype/2

 

 I am sure you want every canuck back regardless of what they want to be paid or how it works with the cap. 

What makes you so sure about that??

There are some players I wouldn't shed a tear over letting go, and some will need to go

Hopefully thru trades rather than just letting them walk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he wants more than $4.5 Million I think its too much.  Maybe not in year 1 or 2 but beyond that he should be transitioning to bottom pairing and filling in on top four if required.  If that isn't the case this defense hasn't improved and it is not going to be good enough.  I would like to see 3 x $4.5 Million or 4 x $4 Million.  He is a great team mate and very important in the room.  But he can't drive play and isn't fleet of foot.  The Canucks window is realistically 2 - 3 years away.  Love him but.........  We don't need any more over payments please. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Borvat said:

If he wants more than $4.5 Million I think its too much.  Maybe not in year 1 or 2 but beyond that he should be transitioning to bottom pairing and filling in on top four if required.  If that isn't the case this defense hasn't improved and it is not going to be good enough.  I would like to see 3 x $4.5 Million or 4 x $4 Million.  He is a great team mate and very important in the room.  But he can't drive play and isn't fleet of foot.  The Canucks window is realistically 2 - 3 years away.  Love him but.........  We don't need any more over payments please. 

Why doesn’t he deserve a raise though? It’s not overpayment to give Tanev a raise of 1-1.5 million a year. He’s our second best defenseman behind Hughes and by far our best defensive defenseman. It would really hurt to lose a player like Chris Tanev.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Petey40 said:

Why doesn’t he deserve a raise though? It’s not overpayment to give Tanev a raise of 1-1.5 million a year. He’s our second best defenseman behind Hughes and by far our best defensive defenseman. It would really hurt to lose a player like Chris Tanev.

Yeah we kind of need 1 or 2 more defensive D(that play physical) too.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Petey40 said:

Why doesn’t he deserve a raise though? It’s not overpayment to give Tanev a raise of 1-1.5 million a year. He’s our second best defenseman behind Hughes and by far our best defensive defenseman. It would really hurt to lose a player like Chris Tanev.

Edler is our second best D.

 

And I think Tanev will get a small raise depending on the term... But he's an oft injured, +30, defensive D. I love the guy, and what he means to this group is worth bringing him back, but those guys don' get paid. Especially considering covid.

 

I think he could get $4.5-$5 and 4 years on the open market. Here, he's going to need to take $4.2-$4.5 at 4 years or say $4.5-$4.8 x 3 to stay.

Edited by aGENT
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Edler is our second best D.

 

And I think Tanev will get a small raise depending on the term... But he's an oft injured, +30, defensive D. I love the guy, and what he means to this group is worth bringing him back, but those guys don' get paid. Especially considering covid.

 

I think he could get $4.5-$5 and 4 years on the open market. Here, he's going to need to take $4.2-$4.5 at 4 years or say $4.5-$4.8 x 3 to stay.

I think it’s definitely debatable who the second best D on Canucks is, Tanev and Edler bring different elements to the D zone but I’d argue Defensively the edge goes to Tanev, and he’s been amazing for Hughes development and Canucks overall defensive play. It would be a difficult task to replace a player like him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since I think Tanev would be protected in the Seattle draft, I'd be willing to look at an NMC, if for no other reason than to lower his $$per a little bit. I'd think a 4yr 4.25M with an NMC would be pretty fair value. He's not an offensive threat by any means, and except for this year, has been injury prone. Looking at the Pietrangelo possible contract, you could justify a lower value based on: nowhere near as many points, does not get PP time, and again the injury issue. If Piet starts at 6.25 (just for arguments sake) then take off 1M for the lack of production, another .5 for no PP time, another .25 for injuries, and lastly another .25 for the NMC.

 

Just sayin'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/17/2020 at 12:45 PM, NUCKER67 said:

Tanev is highly valued around the league, Benning isn't going to just let him walk for nothing. I think Tanev will be re-signed to a very reasonable deal. He wants to be in VAN, VAN wants him here. Maybe 3 x $5?

I’d say 4 times 4 with a no trade will do it. He has been a warrior for this team. I can’t believe the disrespect he gets. Most of his injuries happen due to his work ethic. Even if he ends up being a depth defenceman near the end of the contract he will still be valuable and part of the soul of this team. There are times when loyalty should be rewarded.

Edited by Mad Jon
Made a little mistake
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Father Ryan said:

Since I think Tanev would be protected in the Seattle draft, I'd be willing to look at an NMC, if for no other reason than to lower his $$per a little bit. I'd think a 4yr 4.25M with an NMC would be pretty fair value. He's not an offensive threat by any means, and except for this year, has been injury prone. Looking at the Pietrangelo possible contract, you could justify a lower value based on: nowhere near as many points, does not get PP time, and again the injury issue. If Piet starts at 6.25 (just for arguments sake) then take off 1M for the lack of production, another .5 for no PP time, another .25 for injuries, and lastly another .25 for the NMC.

 

Just sayin'

Probably worth considering. A NMC probably ties our hands at the end of his deal, but it might be a cost worth paying to get him for cheaper (closer to $4.5M maybe).

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/18/2020 at 7:29 PM, -AJ- said:

Probably worth considering. A NMC probably ties our hands at the end of his deal, but it might be a cost worth paying to get him for cheaper (closer to $4.5M maybe).

Considering what our R hand D depth is (right now) he likely would still be a viable 3rd pairing, even then. Rafferty, Chatfield and Woo are the R side depth currently. I don't think Chatfield will ever be more than a 7-8 player, Rafferty maybe a 3rd pairing for PP duty but has to be protected defensively and Woo is probably 2-3 years away. In that hypothetical 4th year, it might be expensive, but Tanev could be a 7th Dman and a tutor. It's the Myers contract that will drag us down some. He'll still have another year AFTER Tanev's 4 year contract expires...and he's not as good as Tanev. At least, overall. 

I just thought an NMC/NTC would be in order, due to protecting him from the draft anyway. What other D man are we going to protect? Edler...he's a UFA then. Myers...that solves several million problems. Stetch...likely already gone. Benn...UFA. I don't think we have any other D men to protect, unless we resign Fantenburg to a multiyear deal, or pick up another one this year.

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...