Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum Closure

The case for why Chris Tanev is bad for the Team

CaptainLinden16

By CaptainLinden16
in Canucks Talk

Recommended Posts

Junkyard Dog Canucks All-Star

Junkyard Dog

Posted
Posted

I'd rather keep Tanev over Edler if given the choice.

 

I also think Tanev is the superior defenseman. When Edler is at the top of his game he can be superior but the majority of the time Edler is not at the top of his game. Consistency is one of Edler's weaknesses when it is probably Tanev's greatest strength. Also defense >>>>>>>> offense when it comes to defenseman, especially in the playoffs.

 

Simply put Tanev would be the better defenseman to have during the playoffs. Also Tanev has the ability to make whatever defenseman his partner is play better. Case in point Edler. After a horrendous year with Torts Edler was paired with Tanev for the majority of the next season and wouldn't you know he bounced back. I'm not saying Tanev is the sole reason, there were many other, but that doesn't deter the fact that his ability to make his partner play better helped Edler significantly 

 

There's also the intangibles like the fact that Edler will be on the wrong side of 30 this time next year and that Tanev is a right handed shot with a solid contract.

 

Tanev would be the type of defenseman I would want Juolevi learning from when he becomes ready.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BlackRedYellow Abbotsford Regular

BlackRedYellow

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

 I have watched every Canucks game since 94, and He is a liability on the ice plain and simple.

 

I really really doubt that :P

And Edler has been a way bigger liability than Tanev the last seasons. I guess that's way he gets most of the criticism.
 

With that said, I like them both and they're a fine pairing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stonecoldstevebernier Canucks Third-Line

stonecoldstevebernier

Posted
Posted

I agree with the assessment that Edler is unfairly ridiculed around here. Don't agree with the way you went about it. Edler is our best offensive d-man, but he's not a point producing machine, so I do think sometimes he's asked to do too much to push the offense from the back end. Hopefully Hutton's development can alleviate some of his responsibilities; Edler was at his best with Ehrhoff and Salo here, and even Bieksa and Hamhuis chipped in notable numbers, so he didn't have to carry the load all by himself. (That, and his injury problems; I think also the suspensions he's had have caused him to back off on the physical play too, sadly.) Aside from the rookie Hutton, who else was his supporting cast offensively last year? Weber, Bartkowski, Sbisa, a battered Hamhuis, Biega...

So of course he'll look bad on some nights paired with a 'safe' d-man like Tanev. But Tanev's lack of offensive prowess doesn't make him anywhere near useless, he and Edler make a very effective pair together because of their playing styles. And given the fact that we have no true #1 d-man, the two of them together are pretty central to our defense structure... just like how Karlsson and Methot balance each other out so well. But Edler isn't Karlsson, so he gets criticized to no end for his defensive blunders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BlackRedYellow Abbotsford Regular

BlackRedYellow

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, stonecoldstevebernier said:

I agree with the assessment that Edler is unfairly ridiculed around here. Don't agree with the way you went about it. Edler is our best offensive d-man, but he's not a point producing machine, so I do think sometimes he's asked to do too much to push the offense from the back end. Hopefully Hutton's development can alleviate some of his responsibilities; Edler was at his best with Ehrhoff and Salo here, and even Bieksa and Hamhuis chipped in notable numbers, so he didn't have to carry the load all by himself. (That, and his injury problems; I think also the suspensions he's had have caused him to back off on the physical play too, sadly.) Aside from the rookie Hutton, who else was his supporting cast offensively last year? Weber, Bartkowski, Sbisa, a battered Hamhuis, Biega...

So of course he'll look bad on some nights paired with a 'safe' d-man like Tanev. But Tanev's lack of offensive prowess doesn't make him anywhere near useless, he and Edler make a very effective pair together because of their playing styles. And given the fact that we have no true #1 d-man, the two of them together are pretty central to our defense structure... just like how Karlsson and Methot balance each other out so well. But Edler isn't Karlsson, so he gets criticized to no end for his defensive blunders.

My point exactly! They both have their downsides (as every player has) but together I really like them. They are a solid first pairing, as long as both are healthy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nuxfanabroad Canucks Hall-of-Famer

Nuxfanabroad

Posted
Posted

It's my policy to never minus a human.  Just so darn compassionate & reluctant to express criticism, I once even hugged a lass tighter, as she didn't smooch satisfactorily! :^)

 

I'm wondering if this significant minus reading may be indirectly linked to abrupt climate change? Everything's linked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
I.Am.Ironman Canucks Second-Line

I.Am.Ironman

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

again, I purposefully made the title provocative, and I think a lot of people are choosing to skip reading the post as it is too long; but I am not truly trying to say that he is a bad player.  I am just trying to bring to light how Edler is in every trade proposal and is a burning pile of dog crap while cigarette smoking cool as you like two foot Tanev is the corner stone of the franchise.  This is not meant to say that Tanev is bad absolutely.  Tanev is a good player.  It is meant to say that Tanev is not as good as Edler.  I would argue that he isn't even close. 

To be fair Tanev has been included in a number of armchair proposals for Landeskog when those rumours were milling about. And they are different players; each of them bring something different to the table which is why they make a good tandem. The Sedins put up points but they aren't exactly defensive stalwarts. In 2011 Manny Malhotra was an integral part to our team because of the defensive/face off  prowess that he brought to the table. He got maybe 25-30 points that year? Yet when he went down we were a different team. There are two sides to the game offence and defence - you need both.

 

i haven't seen anyone claim Tanev as a franchise D or cornerstone. He is a good player and very effective at what he does.... Defending. Edler gets more hate than he deserves but to say he is a better player than Tanev is comparing apples to oranges. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Standing_Tall#37 Canucks First-Line

Standing_Tall#37

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, CanucksSayEh said:

The answer is simple really. Tanev is elite at what he does regardless of who he plays with. Edler is poor with Tanev, and worse without. Shooting the puck hard is Edlers strong suit, too bad the net isn't as big as it is in soccer. 

Exactly, Tanev is great defensively and helps to protect Edler's play in his own end so that the Canucks can take advantage of his offensive skills while hopefully Tanev can guard against some of Edler's delicious tape to tape turnovers that he's famous for serving up the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...