Christopher Tanev | #8 | D

[Fred65]

I read this in Canucks corner .... a slow day 

Quote

The Pittsburgh Penguins may try to add a second Tanev brother to the fold this offseason.

Penguins general manager Jim Rutherford is expected to pursue Vancouver Canucks defenseman Christopher Tanev by attempting to shed enough cap space to sign him, league and team sources told The Athletic's Rob Rossi and Josh Yohe. Pittsburgh has reportedly made adding a right-shooting blue-liner a priority.

Rutherford isn't opposed to offering the rearguard a five-year contract that would last as long as the pact he agreed to with Tanev's younger brother, Brandon, a team source told Rossi and Yohe.

The elder Tanev, who will turn 31 in December, is a pending unrestricted free agent. The 2019-20 campaign was the final season of the five-year, $22.25-million deal he inked with the Canucks in 2015. That agreement carried a $4.45-million cap hit, and the defenseman is reportedly seeking a raise. However, the Penguins would prefer not to sign off on a deal with a cap hit over $5 million.

Tanev said in June that he'd love to play his whole career with Vancouver. He's spent all 10 of his NHL campaigns with the Canucks, who signed him as an undrafted free agent in 2010.

The Penguins reeled in Brandon Tanev with a six-year, $21-million contract in July 2019. The 28-year-old forward posted 11 goals and 25 points in his first campaign with the club.

 

[-DLC-]

^They're talking about that on 650 right now.  Hmmm....

[Provost]

Honestly, if the asks are that high for Markstrom and Tanev... we are best of trying to just clear some low dollar/high cap contracts and be a player in taking on contracts from cap strapped teams.

 

If you take away the $10 million needed to sign Markstrom and Tanev, and replace it with $2.5-3 million on a veteran back up, and the same for Stecher.... we start seeing a lot of daylight under the cap ceiling to make some moves where we can take back more cap than we send out.

[CallAfterLife]

5 hours ago, Provost said:

Honestly, if the asks are that high for Markstrom and Tanev... we are best of trying to just clear some low dollar/high cap contracts and be a player in taking on contracts from cap strapped teams.

 

If you take away the $10 million needed to sign Markstrom and Tanev, and replace it with $2.5-3 million on a veteran back up, and the same for Stecher.... we start seeing a lot of daylight under the cap ceiling to make some moves where we can take back more cap than we send out.

I think the Canucks are better off letting Tanev walk. Use Tanev's cap space to give Markstrom enough money that he'll agree to a contact without a NMC, sign Toffoli and give the RFA's a raise. I'm just not confident that Tanev's body will stay healthy enough to deserve both term and money on his next contract. 

[Fred65]

12 hours ago, CallAfterLife said:

I think the Canucks are better off letting Tanev walk. Use Tanev's cap space to give Markstrom enough money that he'll agree to a contact without a NMC, sign Toffoli and give the RFA's a raise. I'm just not confident that Tanev's body will stay healthy enough to deserve both term and money on his next contract. 

Plus lest we forget we have an AHL All-Star RHD in Utica, I don't believe he should be considered chopped liver. They assigned  him to Utica to show his stuff and more so than any other player in Utica proved himself. He had the third most points of any defensemen in AHL and the only one in the top three that was a rookie. He was O/A 16th for +/- again as a rookie. Jalen Chatfield RHD, who Benning seems to like, is 36th in +/- and 241st in points. So we do have some coverage, do we have the jam is the question. If Tanev goes I assume Stecher stays. I'd like to keep Tanev he adds a lot to the club, but long term (remember we're 2-3 years from contention,) he's likely not going to be at his peak.

[Thirston]

Personally I really like Tanev but he is wayyy to injury prone imo. I’d be very careful giving him a big contract long term. I’d let him and marky go unless pretty big hometown discounts or shorter terms which probably wouldn’t happen. 

[Thirston]

Just now, Thirston said:

Personally I really like Tanev but he is wayyy to injury prone imo. I’d be very careful giving him a big contract long term. I’d let him and marky go unless pretty big hometown discounts or shorter terms which probably wouldn’t happen. 

I’m not saying let them walk for nothing but try to get some good assets in return. 

[CallAfterLife]

1 hour ago, Fred65 said:

Plus lest we forget we have an AHL All-Star RHD in Utica, I don't believe he should be considered chopped liver. They assigned  him to Utica to show his stuff and more so than any other player in Utica proved himself. He had the third most points of any defensemen in AHL and the only one in the top three that was a rookie. He was O/A 16th for +/- again as a rookie. Jalen Chatfield RHD, who Benning seems to like, is 36th in +/- and 241st in points. So we do have some coverage, do we have the jam is the question. If Tanev goes I assume Stecher stays. I'd like to keep Tanev he adds a lot to the club, but long term (remember we're 2-3 years from contention,) he's likely not going to be at his peak.

I like Tanev. I think he adds grit and leadership on top of playing solid defence. But I'd much rather keep Stecher. Just as much grit and leadership and less milage. Stecher may be small but he's can play defence and win battles no question. Also size isn't what cost the Canucks against Vegas it was mobility. That's something Stecher can contribute over Tanev. 

 

I think Chatfield could parter well with Hughes since he's more defensively minded compared to Rafferty. Let Rafferty partner with someone that will give him the chance to shine and give the Canucks another good mobile pairing. I'm really curious about Rafferty. His 45 points in 57 games is quite comparable to Jake Bean's 48 points in 59 games. Rafferty is 3 years older though. And on the eye test Bean looks to be a better skater. 

 

Edler-Stecher 

Hughes-Chatfield

Juolevi-Myers

Every tandem has the ability play good defence and transition the puck up ice and support the forwards. Let Rafferty step in if injuries happen on the right side. 

 

After watching the new TSN documentary on pain killing drugs in hockey I'm really uncertain that Tanev should be signed long term. If Tanev was using Toradol like Kesler, I'm concerned for the overall health of his body long term. Like Kesler, Tanev's body could break down in the middle of his contract. 

[-DLC-]

2 hours ago, Thirston said:

I’m not saying let them walk for nothing but try to get some good assets in return. 

The issue is this:  people want to get rid of players because _______________ but don't put that into the equation when expecting good assets in return.  If you feel a player is broken down what makes you think other teams won't also use that argument?  

 

What you'd get in return likely won't fill the gap that will be there.  A lot of Quinn's leeway to do what he does out there relies on Tanev to solidly back it up.  So there's that.

[aGENT]

Are people seriously discussing Rafferty and Chatfield as actual options for letting Tanev walk...?

 

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]

27 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Are people seriously discussing Rafferty and Chatfield as actual options for letting Tanev walk...?

 

Again the fanbase/media overrating our players and prospects.

 

They are good prospects, but that is all that they are, and have not established a thing yet.

[aGENT]

Just now, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

Again the fanbase/media overrating our players and prospects.

 

They are good prospects, but that is all that they are, and have not established a thing yet.

And even that is a bit of a stretch. I mean Chatfield probably has a ceiling of a #7-8 D. A perfectly useful player but...

 

And Rafferty looks like he might be able to become a #6-7, PP2, depth offensive D. Say Yannick Weber-esque. Again, nothing to sneeze at and certainly better than the hockey careers 99.999% of CDC had but...

 

And we're talking about them replacing our top defensive D, steadying backup/safety to let Hughes do his thing and one of our primary PK options...?

 

Dafuq?

[Fred65]

20 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Are people seriously discussing Rafferty and Chatfield as actual options for letting Tanev walk...?

 

 provocative but that's about all. We have a conundrum with the Cap if you haven't noticed And management wouldn't be doing it's due diligence if it doesn't explore all options. At RHD we have Stecher, Tryamkin, Rafferty and Chatfield ( who Benning talks up quite a bit ) and who knows there's been talk of Hughes playing the right side. They're all cheaper than Tanev. We don't have a clone of Tanev, he's been a great player and a great signing by Gillis. One other point this team is 2-3 years away from being a real contender, we just proved that. We do play without Tanev pretty regularly. It serves no purpose to let Tanev walk and then pay big bucks for a replacement, makes no sense, you've solved nothing of the Cap problem

[CallAfterLife]

3 hours ago, Fred65 said:

 provocative but that's about all. We have a conundrum with the Cap if you haven't noticed And management wouldn't be doing it's due diligence if it doesn't explore all options. At RHD we have Stecher, Tryamkin, Rafferty and Chatfield ( who Benning talks up quite a bit ) and who knows there's been talk of Hughes playing the right side. They're all cheaper than Tanev. We don't have a clone of Tanev, he's been a great player and a great signing by Gillis. One other point this team is 2-3 years away from being a real contender, we just proved that. We do play without Tanev pretty regularly. It serves no purpose to let Tanev walk and then pay big bucks for a replacement, makes no sense, you've solved nothing of the Cap problem

I'd honestly prefer to give Rafferty and Chatfield chances if it means not having to gamble on with Tanev staying healthy throughout his contract. Tanev was lucky this season and pause helped stay healthy for the playoffs. 

 

Plus it's not like Rafferty and Chatfield didn't have a similar path to the NHL like Tanev. All three were college free agents that signed and developed in the AHL and blossomed in the NHL. 

[lmm]

6 hours ago, CallAfterLife said:

I'd honestly prefer to give Rafferty and Chatfield chances if it means not having to gamble on with Tanev staying healthy throughout his contract. Tanev was lucky this season and pause helped stay healthy for the playoffs. 

 

Plus it's not like Rafferty and Chatfield didn't have a similar path to the NHL like Tanev. All three were college free agents that signed and developed in the AHL and blossomed in the NHL. 

All three blossomed in the NHL

Have I just awoken from a rumplestiltskin nap?

[Captain Canuck #12]

11 minutes ago, lmm said:

All three blossomed in the NHL

Have I just awoken from a rumplestiltskin nap?

Yes you have, but don't worry, the sudden blossoming of Rafferty and Chatfield was about all the noteworthy news from 2020.  You didn't miss much else

Edited September 24, 2020 by Captain Canuck #12

[WeneedLumme]

On 9/23/2020 at 10:20 AM, debluvscanucks said:

lThe issue is this:  people want to get rid of players because _______________ but don't put that into the equation when expecting good assets in return.  If you feel a player is broken down what makes you think other teams won't also use that argument?  

 

What you'd get in return likely won't fill the gap that will be there.  A lot of Quinn's leeway to do what he does out there relies on Tanev to solidly back it up.  So there's that.

Yes. And when you have a cap problem, as most competitive teams will now with the flat cap, career Canucks (like Tanev) are far more likely to help out the team with a hometown discount than are any players acquired from elsewhere. It would be extremely difficult to replace his level of utility for the same price he would be likely willing to accept to stay here.

[Fred65]

1 hour ago, WeneedLumme said:

Yes. And when you have a cap problem, as most competitive teams will now with the flat cap, career Canucks (like Tanev) are far more likely to help out the team with a hometown discount than are any players acquired from elsewhere. It would be extremely difficult to replace his level of utility for the same price he would be likely willing to accept to stay here.

As I understand he's been offered good coin by Pitts so he can play alongside his brother. Pitts is not going to re-sign Justin Schulz who's being paid $5mill plus a mill in bonus money, both RHD

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

As I understand he's been offered good coin by Pitts so he can play alongside his brother. Pitts is not going to re-sign Justin Schulz who's being paid $5mill plus a mill in bonus money, both RHD

Pittsburgh has 6 million free and still need to resign either Matt Murray or Jarry, their goalies.  One of them will make at least 2 million, so I really don't see how they can offer more then 4 million per year.  Who knows, maybe they're offering a 6 year deal to Tanev. 

[Fred65]

1 hour ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Pittsburgh has 6 million free and still need to resign either Matt Murray or Jarry, their goalies.  One of them will make at least 2 million, so I really don't see how they can offer more then 4 million per year.  Who knows, maybe they're offering a 6 year deal to Tanev. 

From every thing I've read the golaies it Pitts are on their way out