Christopher Tanev | #8 | D

[theo5789]

27 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

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

The more reason they need a defensive stalwart like Tanev since they'll be playing with empty nets all season!

 

2 hours 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

Tanev hasn't been offered anything. Otherwise it's tampering. It's more speculation. Tanev has always said he wants to stay here and his teammates and GM have said they wanted him here. That's all the facts that we have.

[theo5789]

On 9/23/2020 at 10:59 AM, 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

Stecher will be too expensive to retain unless he takes a massive paycut. Rafferty/Chatfield would be a potential Stecher replacement or 7/8 guy. Tryamkin will require another season before he arrives. We made a point to bring in a top 4RD in Myers seeing as it was a hole we needed to fill. Losing Tanev is a step back and it's much harder to shelter a Rafferty/Chatfield (especially when losing guys like Tanev who have shown they can do an excellent job of doing so and could continue so with OJ/Rathbone in the near future).

 

Yes we need to consider all options, but Tanev's spot IMO is the toughest to replace at the moment (unless it's through trade taking away a key piece in a different area of the roster). Hughes moving to the right is probably the best internal option as Juolevi and Rathbone are much more likely to step up next season, but they too will need sheltering like Hughes did. But then that simply shifts the hole to the LD side of things and still banking that a young player can jump into a top 4 spot and if we don't keep Tanev, we still have a gaping hole to fill on our top PK unit that Hughes won't cover.

 

Demko is showing glimpses that he could take a bigger role and it'll be cheaper to sign a 1B if necessary than a starter like Marky if he isn't willing to take a fair deal. Toffoli can be more comfortably replaced with us having Boeser already, Jake could step up if he's still here, and Lind/MacEwen have grown their games this past season. Hoglander will get a look and if we are looking to the future like you did with Tryamkin, then Podkolzin looks promising as well.

 

I don't buy the whole 2-3 years away from competing thing. We were a game away from the conference finals this year, so I'm not sure how we proved that. Tanev technically didn't miss a game this year and we were a much better team this season. He was a key part of our playoff run this season.

[WeneedLumme]

6 hours ago, Fred65 said:

As I understand he's been offered good coin by Pitts...

Seriously? 

[Fred65]

12 hours ago, WeneedLumme said:

Seriously? 

Here's a decent review of the Tanev predicament

 

https://thehockeywriters.com/canucks-tanev-replacements-trade-free-agency/

[CallAfterLife]

On 9/23/2020 at 11:43 PM, lmm said:

All three blossomed in the NHL

Have I just awoken from a rumplestiltskin nap?

Major brain freeze on my part.

 

But I do stand behind my point. Tanev's injury history should be noted when signing a multiyear contract at the back end of his career. His lower body has taken a beating over the years. Even his skating is slightly but noticeably not what it use to be. I'd rather give Rafferty and Chatfield an opportunity to develop in the NHL on ELC's and use the extra money to resign everyone else. There would be enough cap space to offer Markstrom enough money to sign a new contract without a NTC, resign Toffoli and give the RFA's raises. 

 

If the Canucks didn't have dead cap space in Eriksson, Baertschi, Ferland and Luongo this wouldn't even be an issue. 

Edited September 28, 2020 by CallAfterLife

[lmm]

6 hours ago, CallAfterLife said:

Major brain freeze on my part.

 

But I do stand behind my point. Tanev's injury history should be noted when signing a multiyear contract at the back end of his career. His lower body has taken a beating over the years. Even his skating is slightly but noticeably not what it use to be. I'd rather give Rafferty and Chatfield an opportunity to develop in the NHL on ELC's and use the extra money to resign everyone else. There would be enough cap space to offer Markstrom enough money to sign a new contract without a NMC, resign Toffoli and give the RFA's raises. 

 

If the Canucks didn't have dead cap space in Eriksson, Baertschi, Ferland and Luongo this wouldn't even be an issue. 

You know there is one thing I notice pretty consistantly around here. People seem to really overestimate how fast players develope. There is a thread about whether Jake V was rushed in his developement. many posters have said, "sure he was rushed, but all his problems are self inflicted" Its like saying he was rushed is enough to forgive management and place the blame on Jake.

I have read posters say things like Demko/ Gaudette, Jake, Goldie, Sautner, Dahlen, etc need to play 20 games in Utica to hone their 200 foot game. 

2 of those guys are gone, Sautner has never arrived and the knives are out for Hockey Gaud and Jake V.

 

But this is about Quinn Hughes you are saying to yourself. What does this have to do with QH?

Hughes is young and needs sheltering just like those other players. Now we know he is not getting sheltered minutes, and he is not getting sheltered match ups.

So he needs sheltering from his D partner.

Look at Petey, the kid won the Calder by himself, but he is not ready to drag his linemates behind him, he played better with Miller and then Toffoli.

Who is Quinn Hughes' JT Miller if it is not Chris Tanev? Myers, Benn, Fanta (not even signed),  It is not Rafferty, Chatfield OJ or Rathbone.

 

It was only a few years ago that management thought Benny and Goob were a second pair NHL D-team.

 

I would rather let Petey stick with Miller and rotate the RW than let Hughes struggle with a lesser D partner.

 

With that all said, I don't want Tanev signed to a 5 + year contract either

Edited September 26, 2020 by lmm

[CallAfterLife]

19 minutes ago, lmm said:

You know there is one thing I notice pretty consistantly around here. People seem to really overestimate how fast players develope. There is a thread about whether Jake V was rushed in his developement. many posters have said, "sure he was rushed, but all his problems are self inflicted" Its like saying he was rushed is enough to forgive management and place the blame on Jake.

I have read posters say things like Demko/ Gaudette, Jake, Goldie, Sautner, Dahlen, etc need to play 20 games in Utica to hone their 200 foot game. 

2 of those guys are gone, Sautner has never arrived and the knives are out for Hockey Gaud and Jake V.

 

But this is about Quinn Hughes you are saying to yourself. What does this have to do with QH?

Hughes is young and needs sheltering just like those other players. Now we know he is not getting sheltered minutes, and he is not getting sheltered match ups.

So he needs sheltering from his D partner.

Look at Petey, the kid won the Calder by himself, but he is not ready to drag his linemates behind him, he played better with Miller and then Toffoli.

Who is Quinn Hughes' JT Miller if it is not Chris Tanev? Myers, Benn, Fanta (not even signed),  It is not Rafferty, Chatfield OJ or Rathbone.

 

It was only a few years ago that management thought Benny and Goob were a second pair NHL D-team.

 

I would rather let Petey stick with Miller and rotate the RW than let Hughes struggle with a lesser D partner.

 

With that all said, I don't want Tanev signed to a 5 + year contract either

Have you looked at Pettersson's point totals? 66 points in 71 games played in his first season. He was mainly paired with Boeser. 66 points 68 games in his second season. Miller isn't sheltering Pettersson as much as you're claiming. Miller's mainly been sheltering Pettersson from taking face offs. And don't forget that Miller was initially brought in to play with Horvat. 

 

Miller had a career year under Pettersson. It's a complete false equivalency to say that Miller has the same effect on Pettersson like Tanev has on Hughes. 

 

I'm not discounting the time it takes to develop prospects. But I also think that being given an opportunity is an important stage of development. Stecher played 4 games in the AHL simply because Willie Desjardins was trying to save his job and didn't want to give him a chance. Look at Ryan Graves in Colorado. He had never played a full season in the NHL prior to this year and he ended up playing on Colorado's top pairing with Makar. 

 

I don't want Tanev to leave but signing him to a long term contract carries more risk compared to Markstrom and Toffoli. 

[lmm]

On 9/25/2020 at 11:19 PM, CallAfterLife said:

Have you looked at Pettersson's point totals? 66 points in 71 games played in his first season. He was mainly paired with Boeser. 66 points 68 games in his second season. Miller isn't sheltering Pettersson as much as you're claiming. Miller's mainly been sheltering Pettersson from taking face offs. And don't forget that Miller was initially brought in to play with Horvat. 

 

Miller had a career year under Pettersson. It's a complete false equivalency to say that Miller has the same effect on Pettersson like Tanev has on Hughes. 

 

I'm not discounting the time it takes to develop prospects. But I also think that being given an opportunity is an important stage of development. Stecher played 4 games in the AHL simply because Willie Desjardins was trying to save his job and didn't want to give him a chance. Look at Ryan Graves in Colorado. He had never played a full season in the NHL prior to this year and he ended up playing on Colorado's top pairing with Makar. 

 

I don't want Tanev to leave but signing him to a long term contract carries more risk compared to Markstrom and Toffoli. 

Maybe I am mis-using "sheltered" or maybe you are atributing more negative connotation than I am intending.

 

First let me say, that I have great expectations of boith Petey and Quinn.

I am not demeaning them by suggesting they deserve sheltering, or protection, or  mentoring, or "veteran leadership" if you prefer.

I believe that Elias Pettersson will be as good as Sundin or P. Forsberg or maybe Crosby, you know a guy that can take 2 plugs amd make a first line out of them. But I do not beleive he is that yet, nor should that be expected of him. That is what I call sheltering. You might call it not expectiong too much too soon.

Pettersson entered his sophmore slump with 7 games left in his rookie season, as players started adapting to his game. That ended with the Miller trade. Not sure where you got Miller was brought in for Bo idea. 

It is true Miller benefits from playing with Petey, but Pete benefits from Miller also. Brock benefits from them both.

 

Hughes is sheltered from the PK, and I think that is wise. BUt I can see a time in the not to near future when Hughes, Horvat and Pttersson are all on the PK.

But that will be when Edler, Tanev, Loui, Beagle and Sutter are all gone.

 

 

[-AJ-]

1 hour ago, lmm said:

Maybe I am mis-using "sheltered" or maybe you are atributing more negative connotation than I am intending.

 

First let me say, that I have great expectations of boith Petey and Quinn.

I am not demeaning them by suggesting they deserve sheltering, or protection, or  mentoring, or "veteran leadership" if you prefer.

I believe that Elias Pettersson will be as good as Sundin or P. Forsberg or maybe Crosby, you know a guy that can take 2 plugs amd make a first line out of them. But I do not beleive he is that yet, nor should that be expected of him. That is what I call sheltering. You might call it not expectiong too much too soon.

Pettersson entered his sophmore slump with 7 games left in his rookie season, as players started adapting to his game. That ended with the Miller trade. Not sure where you got Miller was brought in for Bo idea. 

It is true Miller benefits from playing with Petey, but Pete benefits from Miller also. Brock benefits from them both.

 

Hughes is sheltered from the PK, and I think that is wise. BUt I can see a time in the not to near future when Hughes, Horvat and Pttersson are all on the PK.

But that will be when Edler, Tanev, Loui, Beagle and Sutter are all gone.

 

 

Good post, agree.

 

I will say that when Miller was brought in (and later on after Ferland was added as well), a lot of fans envisioned Ferland on the 1st line with Petey and Miller on the 2nd line with Bo and Pearson. Personally, I believed to Miller to be enough better that he was a better fit on the first line. Turns out he was better than even I expected, but I do believe I was in the minority, or at least it was a 50-50 split at best.

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, -AJ- said:

Good post, agree.

 

I will say that when Miller was brought in (and later on after Ferland was added as well), a lot of fans envisioned Ferland on the 1st line with Petey and Miller on the 2nd line with Bo and Pearson. Personally I believed to Miller to be enough better that he was a better fit on the first line. Turns out he was better than even I expected, but I do believe I was in the minority, or at least it was a 50-50 split at best.

You were not alone but we were definitely in the minority 

[Captain Canuck #12]

1 hour ago, -AJ- said:

Good post, agree.

 

I will say that when Miller was brought in (and later on after Ferland was added as well), a lot of fans envisioned Ferland on the 1st line with Petey and Miller on the 2nd line with Bo and Pearson. Personally, I believed to Miller to be enough better that he was a better fit on the first line. Turns out he was better than even I expected, but I do believe I was in the minority, or at least it was a 50-50 split at best.

I believe the thinking at the time was that Ferland would be a good fit with Petey because not only he did have some ability to be a first line player, but could also be a big time deterrent to anyone trying to rough Petey up, ala Matheson.

[-AJ-]

46 minutes ago, Captain Canuck #12 said:

I believe the thinking at the time was that Ferland would be a good fit with Petey because not only he did have some ability to be a first line player, but could also be a big time deterrent to anyone trying to rough Petey up, ala Matheson.

That is exactly it as I recall.

 

[aGENT]

9 hours ago, Captain Canuck #12 said:

I believe the thinking at the time was that Ferland would be a good fit with Petey because not only he did have some ability to be a first line player, but could also be a big time deterrent to anyone trying to rough Petey up, ala Matheson.

And some us tried to explain that Miller was a better, more skilled actual hockey player and at the same time, while not a pugilist at Ferland's level, is not exactly a wall flower either 

[CallAfterLife]

10 hours ago, lmm said:

Maybe I am mis-using "sheltered" or maybe you are atributing more negative connotation than I am intending.

 

First let me say, that I have great expectations of boith Petey and Quinn.

I am not demeaning them by suggesting they deserve sheltering, or protection, or  mentoring, or "veteran leadership" if you prefer.

I believe that Elias Pettersson will be as good as Sundin or P. Forsberg or maybe Crosby, you know a guy that can take 2 plugs amd make a first line out of them. But I do not beleive he is that yet, nor should that be expected of him. That is what I call sheltering. You might call it not expectiong too much too soon.

Pettersson entered his sophmore slump with 7 games left in his rookie season, as players started adapting to his game. That ended with the Miller trade. Not sure where you got Miller was brought in for Bo idea. 

It is true Miller benefits from playing with Petey, but Pete benefits from Miller also. Brock benefits from them both.

 

Hughes is sheltered from the PK, and I think that is wise. BUt I can see a time in the not to near future when Hughes, Horvat and Pttersson are all on the PK.

But that will be when Edler, Tanev, Loui, Beagle and Sutter are all gone.

 

 

The initial plan was for Miller to play with Pettersson and Boeser. But then Ferland signed with the Canucks after the draft. Ferland even publicly said after he chose to sign with the Canucks because he was promised an opportunity to play with Pettersson and Boeser. Ferland started the season with Pettersson and Boeser. Miller started the season with Horvat and Pearson / Eriksson. That was the reality when the season started in 2019. There was a lack of chemistry and injuries happened and Green juggled the lines. Miller emerged as the most effective guy to align with Pettersson. 

 

I'm not attributing a negative conation to the term sheltering. Nor am I advocating for Pettersson to play with a plug. I'm not even saying that Pettersson should be given plugs to drag along when he reaches his peak years. I'm just saying that Pettersson's point totals show that he can play with anyone that can match his skills and smarts. 

 

I'm not advocating for Hughes to be used on the PK. Nor am I disputing that he should be paired with someone who can compliment him. I'm just saying that under the current circumstances the Canucks as a whole may be better served if they move on from Tanev. If another team is willing to throw Tanev term and money, I don't think the Canucks should be pressured to match that offer simply because Tanev is currently the best player to play with Hughes. 

[aGENT]

7 hours ago, CallAfterLife said:

If another team is willing to throw Tanev term and money, I don't think the Canucks should be pressured to match that offer simply because Tanev is currently the best player to play with Hughes. 

I'm sure the Canucks have a max number for both term and dollars that they'll agree to extend Tanev to. He'll either sign at those numbers (or less), or he'll go elsewhere.

Edited September 30, 2020 by aGENT

[lmm]

On 9/29/2020 at 11:37 AM, CallAfterLife said:

The initial plan was for Miller to play with Pettersson and Boeser. But then Ferland signed with the Canucks after the draft. Ferland even publicly said after he chose to sign with the Canucks because he was promised an opportunity to play with Pettersson and Boeser. Ferland started the season with Pettersson and Boeser. Miller started the season with Horvat and Pearson / Eriksson. That was the reality when the season started in 2019. There was a lack of chemistry and injuries happened and Green juggled the lines. Miller emerged as the most effective guy to align with Pettersson. 

 

I'm not attributing a negative conation to the term sheltering. Nor am I advocating for Pettersson to play with a plug. I'm not even saying that Pettersson should be given plugs to drag along when he reaches his peak years. I'm just saying that Pettersson's point totals show that he can play with anyone that can match his skills and smarts. 

 

I'm not advocating for Hughes to be used on the PK. Nor am I disputing that he should be paired with someone who can compliment him. I'm just saying that under the current circumstances the Canucks as a whole may be better served if they move on from Tanev. If another team is willing to throw Tanev term and money, I don't think the Canucks should be pressured to match that offer simply because Tanev is currently the best player to play with Hughes. 

p1 Don't you think anyone the canucks talked to heard that they "could" play with Petey?

p2 so we agree Petey will be good/great. really great/phenominal

 

But didn't you also say that Marky and Toffoli were higher priorities than Tanev?

I agree Tanev should not get long term and huge $, but if he is not signed, they need to replace him. And it is not anyone already on the team, and not anyone in the system unless one of our guys is ready to pop like Ryan Graves. Nobody in the bubble could beat out Benn or Fanta, so I doubt he is in our system. Maybe its Carson Sousey, or maybe he is another Gudbranson. He is also a lefty.

I would rather play Roussell, Virtanen, Boeser, Ericksson or Motte  with Petersson and Miller than I would Quinn with Myers, Stecher or Benn. Maybe its Rafferty or Chatfield, but I doubt it, they will be lucky to supplant Benn.

[Outsiders]

Wonder if the Canucks want to see what Tyson Barrie wants in free agency? tough year for him in TOR and the might not get huge money due to COVID. Wonder if he has interest in coming to VAN on a short term 2-3 year deal in the 4.25-4.75 range? Feel as though this could be why the Canucks aren't talking contract with Tanev right now. Might circle back once they have checked in on Barrie

[-AJ-]

3 hours ago, Outsiders said:

Wonder if the Canucks want to see what Tyson Barrie wants in free agency? tough year for him in TOR and the might not get huge money due to COVID. Wonder if he has interest in coming to VAN on a short term 2-3 year deal in the 4.25-4.75 range? Feel as though this could be why the Canucks aren't talking contract with Tanev right now. Might circle back once they have checked in on Barrie

Barrie would bring more offense for sure, but I think our defensive game as a whole would take a pretty big hit by replacing Tanev with Barrie. The only way I think it makes sense is if Barrie is significantly cheaper than Tanev and we need to save that space.

[aGENT]

7 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

Barrie would bring more offense for sure, but I think our defensive game as a whole would take a pretty big hit by replacing Tanev with Barrie. The only way I think it makes sense is if Barrie is significantly cheaper than Tanev and we need to save that space.

Even then, we're likely better off using the 'cheap Barrie' money on a good, depth,  defensive D that can at least replace Tanev's match up/PK minutes. We already have Hughes  primarily (and secondarily Myers, Edler and soon Juolevi) to provide offense. Barrie would have no role here.

[CaNuCkSLoUiE23]

Sad to think the last game Tanev played for us might’ve been the last time we saw him in a Canucks jersey