King Heffy Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 No thanks to moving Tanev. We're going to have two very young goalies next year and losing a, defenceman who can play defense will only hurt their development. They can have Larsen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Building Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 3 minutes ago, Dazzle said: I'm very intrigued by Kane's skill level. I think everyone would be. He may or may not blossom here, but one thing I am a bit hesitant about, besides the return that Buffalo might want is that he might influence Virtanen in the wrong way. Or that he could cost Virtanen + before we even know what Virtanen develops into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 1 hour ago, Provost said: Yep... while I don't think you can use the Hall for Larsson trade as market value since Edmonton got robbed.... Tanev is a much more highly regarded defencman than Larsson. He is also a top pairing guy signed to a ridiculously low cap hit going forward. I have no issues at all moving on from Tanev, but you have to maximize value. Unless a team blows you away, his value is likely to be much higher at the deadline for a contender with an injury or in the offseason as teams try to replace players lost in the expansion draft. That's debatable, but I totally agree if we move someone like Tanev (solid player, young, good cap hit) you definitely only do it if you maximize value. But yeah, people jumping to "oh Benning will offer Tanev for Kane straight up clearly" as if that's the only outcome from this. But then that's a conclusion without any forethought. For instance, Buffalo has top right D already. Ristolanen and Bogosian are right side, as is Franson. They could still upgrade there, but they're stronger on the right than they are on the left. Kulikov, Gorges - both have no points so far this year. They'd aim for someone to maybe help offensively but perhaps as a two-way, left side D who can do more than what they're getting now. We are not moving Tanev to them, and they likely are looking at other options in any case as a return for Kane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missioncanucksfan Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 1 hour ago, Canucks Curse said: sbisa + CBJ 2nd + subban for Kane + 5th Sbisa, Baertschi + 3rd would be my package and cap trade Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 Tanev for Kane, love it. Buffalo should take the over on the cap hit from Kane to equalize.. perhaps we get a 3rd to 5th rounder as well. Tanev is getting thoroughly beat up these past 2 seasons.. does not hit, chases forwards. Looks great skating out of his own end.. great first time pass. and because of his stats looks awesome in analytics. He will do better with another club, and is an asset to move from a position of strength as Stetcher can replace him nicely. Kane is a powerhouse, great shot, physical presence.. and would be a fantastic start of the change needed from the "rope a dope" offence we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustABandwagoner Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 7 minutes ago, King Heffy said: No thanks to moving Tanev. We're going to have two very young goalies next year and losing a, defenceman who can play defense will only hurt their development. They can have Larsen. Sabres will be like You can have NOTHING then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 5 minutes ago, Green Building said: Kane has scored many many more goals than Yakupov. 30, 20,19,19,17 are sample goal totals from previous years. I don't advocate moving our pieces for him, but that's why he's immediately worth more than Yak was at the time of Yak's trade. Yakupov Goals per game: 52/265 = 0.196 Points per game: 115/265 = 0.434 Kane: Goals per game: 129/430 = 0.3 Points per game: 257/430 = 0.598 Their stats are relatively comparable once you factor in the type of team each player were on. Yakupov is still 3 years younger, 3.5 million less in salary cap, and no off-ice issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tavrohorvat53 Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 SERIOUSLY? BEN HUTTON? ANOTHER FAN FAVOURITE?? GTFO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missioncanucksfan Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 1 minute ago, elvis15 said: That's debatable, but I totally agree if we move someone like Tanev (solid player, young, good cap hit) you definitely only do it if you maximize value. But yeah, people jumping to "oh Benning will offer Tanev for Kane straight up clearly" as if that's the only outcome from this. But then that's a conclusion without any forethought. For instance, Buffalo has top right D already. Ristolanen and Bogosian are right side, as is Franson. They could still upgrade there, but they're stronger on the right than they are on the left. Kulikov, Gorges - both have no points so far this year. They'd aim for someone to maybe help offensively but perhaps as a two-way, left side D who can do more than what they're getting now. We are not moving Tanev to them, and they likely are looking at other options in any case as a return for Kane. Bogosian is hurt as usual and Franson flat out suck. Also Kulikov is injured. Buffalo is in huge need of Defenders. Rolling out Tanev on their 2nd pairing would be huge. If it's Tanev in the deal then I'm hoping to see Buffalo add. 2nd or decent prospect would suffice BUT, I'm seeing Baertschi as also the odd man out in the LW position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 5 minutes ago, Tavrohorvat53 said: SERIOUSLY? BEN HUTTON? ANOTHER FAN FAVOURITE?? GTFO It was a suggestion. Calm down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tavrohorvat53 Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 Just now, Pears said: It was a suggestion. Calm down. Would you trade bo horvat for kane? if you wouldn't then Ben hutton shouldn't be either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintPatrick33 Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 Been five years since this guy hit 30, other than that he has either been injured or had off-ice issues. He is overrated and would become like another David Booth on this team. Keep kickin them tires Aqua. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Building Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 6 minutes ago, Lancaster said: Yakupov Goals per game: 52/265 = 0.196 Points per game: 115/265 = 0.434 Kane: Goals per game: 129/430 = 0.3 Points per game: 257/430 = 0.598 Their stats are relatively comparable once you factor in the type of team each player were on. Yakupov is still 3 years younger, 3.5 million less in salary cap, and no off-ice issue. Look I'm not going to sit here and rip Yakupov, and I get what you're saying, but in my opinion Kane's on ice resume is better than Yakupov's at this point and again, in my opinion, it's not even debatable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Scofield Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 If Buffalo added more to the trade, then I'd be all in for it. Idk if it's just me but Tanev really hasn't looked the same since his past seasons, hopefully just a slow start. In hockey you have to take risks, its a high risk high reward type of trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 Tanev 4th For Kane Foligno That's what I want Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 12 minutes ago, missioncanucksfan said: Bogosian is hurt as usual and Franson flat out suck. Also Kulikov is injured. Buffalo is in huge need of Defenders. Rolling out Tanev on their 2nd pairing would be huge. If it's Tanev in the deal then I'm hoping to see Buffalo add. 2nd or decent prospect would suffice BUT, I'm seeing Baertschi as also the odd man out in the LW position. Bogosian has been injured, and will be a bit longer but they have to consider their roster spots that are open when they're healthy. Franson on the 3rd pairing is fine. Kulikov on the other hand is only day to day but even when he was playing he had yet to score. Gorges you might expect that much out of, but Kulikov is particularly struggling. SabreFan can give us a better perspective I'm sure, but while Tanev wouldn't hurt (he won't hurt any team) he's not what they're looking for in a return most likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 Sbisa and Larsen. For draft picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaimito Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 not sure if it is a good move at all. The guy is not a team player. Unless he matures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 Tanev is going nowhere. Hutton on the other hand...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missioncanucksfan Posted November 16, 2016 Share Posted November 16, 2016 50 minutes ago, elvis15 said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.