Jamie Huscroft Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Just now, JohnnyCanuck7 said: NO. Why do we want to trade all our fan favorites and players from the cup run??? Why not? You can't keep players just because they happen to be a fan favourite or they were a part of a Stanley Cup run that happened 5 years ago. Complacency killed this team in 2011/12 and one would hope that the current management team doesn't want to repeat those mistakes. Chris Tanev is a valuable asset. Is it wise to trade him? Maybe, but the return has to be something that makes you better than you were before you made the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 trading Tanev would be akin to the entire Canucks roster tweeting out a WTF like Mitchell did Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Huscroft Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 1 minute ago, JohnnyCanuck7 said: Besides, who will be the next Canuck who stays here there entire career? JUST KEEP TANEV What relevance does a career Canuck have to a team (and more importantly an ownership group) that wants to make the playoffs year in year out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JiffyPB Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 There's definitely something to that theory that Botch gets some of his material from CDC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Depends on what we get. If we can move him for a Landeskog calibre player or upgrade him to Trouba then yes. If not, I'm more than fine with keeping this top 4 together Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 2 hours ago, kloubek said: So he acknowledges how very good Tanev is, at the same time he suggests we should consider trading him. Kind of an oxymoron. Not really. If you want something good you have to trade something good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Huscroft Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 4 minutes ago, Baggins said: Not really. If you want something good you have to trade something good. Exactly. You aren't always going to be able to trade a Patrick White and Daniel Rahimi for Christian Ehrhoff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowichan Canuck Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 1 hour ago, Wild Sean Monahan said: Of course nobody is untouchable, but what would be considered an acceptable (yet realistic) return? Botch seems to suggest the Canucks could land somebody at least on par with Taylor Hall but I don't see that being realistic. Based on his logic they could probably get Landeskog (reading into it here), a player most would agree is a step below Taylor Hall. What I'd like to see is what CDC considers a worthwhile yet realistic return. Spitball some ideas here people. Tanev for (not necessarily straight across): Barrie Landeskog Draisaitl Provorov Reinhart Kucherov Domi Jost Nylander are all players I would target in a form of trade including Tanev. If it was my choice, I'd want a PMD defenseman in return for Tanev, so preferably Barrie as I think he is exactly what our team offense is missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyCanuck7 Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 11 minutes ago, Jamie Huscroft said: Why not? You can't keep players just because they happen to be a fan favourite or they were a part of a Stanley Cup run that happened 5 years ago. Complacency killed this team in 2011/12 and one would hope that the current management team doesn't want to repeat those mistakes. Chris Tanev is a valuable asset. Is it wise to trade him? Maybe, but the return has to be something that makes you better than you were before you made the deal. Yeah, but to win you need team chemistry and pretty much everyone we traded away brightened up the locker room. It's not 100% on ice to win a cup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xereau Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 His value is probably at its highest it will ever be. He was dominant at the worlds. He is a darling of the analytics community. He has a decent contract, and lots of term left. If the return is high, like a legit top 3 sniper and a blue chip D prospect, I would have to say, YES, DO IT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Huscroft Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 3 minutes ago, JohnnyCanuck7 said: Yeah, but to win you need team chemistry and pretty much everyone we traded away brightened up the locker room. It's not 100% on ice to win a cup I'm going to disagree. Chicago won a cup, actually a few, with guys in that room who weren't always on the same page. While I agree (to an extent) that chemistry is important, I don't think it is the key piece that wins you championships year in, year out. It's a business. Your business is to win games and ultimately compete for the Stanley Cup. You don't do that by catering to a fan base who is in love with the past or will be hurt when players are traded. You do that by making the team you run the best team it can be through whatever means necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Huscroft Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 3 minutes ago, xereau said: His value is probably at its highest it will ever be. He was dominant at the worlds. He is a darling of the analytics community. He has a decent contract, and lots of term left. That is bang on. If you can be a better team after trading him than you were before you did. You trade him. Easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Monahan Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 19 minutes ago, Cowichan Canuck said: Tanev for (not necessarily straight across): Barrie Landeskog Draisaitl Provorov Reinhart Kucherov Domi Jost Nylander are all players I would target in a form of trade including Tanev. If it was my choice, I'd want a PMD defenseman in return for Tanev, so preferably Barrie as I think he is exactly what our team offense is missing. I don't see Draisatl or Provorov being moved for sure. Reinhart I don't think would be either, but @SabreFan1 would be he guy to ask on that. By Jost do you mean Tyson Jost or Roman Josi? I'd want a fairly significant add on to Jost, there's no guarantee he becomes anything in the league. I'd gladly take Josi but I don't see that happening. And finally, do you mean Willie or Alex nylander? The rest (Barrie, Landy, Kuch, and Domi) are all options I would explore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 If it's for Taylor Hall level player, I would definitely consider it. Otherwise, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 3 hours ago, Wild Sean Monahan said: I came across this piece by Botchturd this morning and thought it might be something CDC would be interested in. ... See, there's your first problem... But really, I'd be open to trading pretty much anyone for the right return. Tanev is no exception, especially now that we have Guddy to help on the right side (and Tryamkin who played there to end last year). Trading a top 4 D would weaken us, but if the return is significant enough it may be worthwhile. 2 hours ago, Jägermeister said: I'd trade him if the price is right. Even if you disagree about him being better than Larsson, he isn't far off. I'd say at this point in his career he has proven more, albeit he doesn't have the potential Larsson does. And look at the return that he got. Tanev could bring us some really attractive pieces, and while I would be sad to see him go, I'm all for making the team better should we get an offer that does that. I would take Larsson for Tanev straight up. Larsson is more dynamic and has higher potential while already facing tougher competition in more defensive starts. All that at three years younger. And signed longer term at a lower cap hit. So yeah, I'd even add slightly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Huscroft Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Also, I was thinking about it. If you're going to move Tanev for a legit scoring forward, you would think that the Canucks are perhaps looking to next years free agent class. One name that pops up in that is Shattenkirk. Sure, there's the chance the Blues re-sign him, but if there has been this much talk of trading him, there's a good chance he's going to free agency in July. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNewGM Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 .. Tanev IS better then Adam Larrson. ANd i would trade him for tyler seguin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yes we can nucks Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 38 minutes ago, xereau said: His value is probably at its highest it will ever be. He was dominant at the worlds. He is a darling of the analytics community. He has a decent contract, and lots of term left. If the return is high, like a legit top 3 sniper and a blue chip D prospect, I would have to say, YES, DO IT. To me, these are reasons that we should keep Tanev. He's turning out to be one of the league's premier defensive defensemen, and gotten recognition for it. He's still reaching his potential. He's the type of dman that every team needs and wants. We have him. Why trade him away? Trading him would bring back a sniper. I get it. But realistically, I think he would only bring back a secondary scorer.... not a top 3 and a blue chip D prospect as you say. I know that's something the Canucks need. But then, we'd leave a big hole on defense.... and defense was a huge deficiency last season. So in the end, we end up fixing one hole by creating another one. I say we keep Tanev, and bring in that secondary scorer by trading other players and/or by spending cap money that we still have. Who? Well, I'll leave it to Benning and company. I'm sure they're tracking who would be avaiilable before the summer is out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 3 minutes ago, TheNewGM said: .. Tanev IS better then Adam Larrson. ANd i would trade him for tyler seguin. Care to share why you feel that way? And of course we'd trade him for Seguin - I'd trade him for McDavid as well among others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNewGM Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Just now, elvis15 said: Care to share why you feel that way? And of course we'd trade him for Seguin - I'd trade him for McDavid as well among others. Tanev performed at the worlds, and has been trending upwards steadily. Alex Edler is such garbage at defense its unbelievable actually , and Tanev has to babysit him like a toddler at a rave party. Therefore , Tanev is a number one shut down guy by all meassure, while larsson is pretty good , and young, but not a top level guy , yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.