The Case for Trading Chris Tanev

[10pavelbure96]

It's not about who is better. Larsson is going to get better, there is potential there, also Larsson has lots of tools in his tool box, whether he reaches his max potential is a risk that many teams would be happy to take. 

 

Tanev is one dimensional and what you see is what you get. No way Tanev gets us a Hall or anything close for that matter.

[Crabcakes]

I've gone through the depth charts and at this point, minus Tryamkin, don't see where there is more depth on defense than at forward.  You could argue the opposite because while there are NHL players to fill all spots when the lineup is healthy, there are more forwards outside the 18 skaters in a normal line up who have NHL experience than defenders imo.

 

In fact, on defense, I see a legitimate top 6 and one proven spare, Biega.  Others are unproven.  Keeping in mind that it is possible to lose one player in expansion.

 

Edler Stecher

Hutton Tanev

Sbisa Gudbranson

Pedan Biega

McEneny Subban

 

At forward, there are 9 players who should play in a top 9.  They may be shy on high end talent but the bodies exist.  

 

Baertschi Horvat Boeser

Sedin Sedin Granlund

Eriksson Sutter Goldobin

Gaunce Chaput Dorsett

Skille Megna Virtanen

 

Granted, given the expansion draft, and the likelihood that many teams will be attempting to get compensation for players they would otherwise lose for nothing, there may be opportunites and a great deal of moves.  This, and the usual moves that are made near the draft and July 1 may add up to a very lively off season.  So, the depth chart we see in September could look very different than the one above.

 

 

 

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, 10pavelbure96 said:

It's not about who is better. Larsson is going to get better, there is potential there, also Larsson has lots of tools in his tool box, whether he reaches his max potential is a risk that many teams would be happy to take. 

 

Tanev is one dimensional and what you see is what you get. No way Tanev gets us a Hall or anything close for that matter.

That is the unfortunate thing about the expected return on Tanev if he is traded. There are no teams really in the same position as Edmonton was in that would be willing to give up a guy like Hall for Tanev at the best of times. It really was a one off very specific need based trade. 

 

Tanev woukd get us a good return. I have no doubt about that. But the expectation of a Hall/Larsson deal just isn't realistic.

[oldnews]

6 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

 Don't disagree but can't really blame them for taking both. One they got for free and the other pretty much free.

I don't know.  I thought the Pens were way too front/top heavy last year - but they game-planned to their strengths, they demanded their forwards really apply constant defensive pressure to support an average blueline - and they wound up compensating for their weak spots and winning a Cup in a pretty unconventional - and impressive - way.

So perhaps the Coil can do likewise.

When I look at their bottom 9 forwards

Lucic RNH Eberle

Maroon Letestu Kassian

Pouliot Desharnais Slepyshev

I wonder how the hell they shut anyone down.  But they have three pretty good D pairings - and somehow they manage to play solid D / good systems hockey.  I did not think San Jose would have as much trouble breaking them down as they did (although San Jose has a long history of folding).....We'll see - I am really looking forward to the Anaheim Edmonton series - that's one I'm going to watch closely.

[wallstreetamigo]

5 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I don't know.  I thought the Pens were way too front/top heavy last year - but they game-planned to their strengths, they demanded their forwards really apply constant defensive pressure to support an average blueline - and they wound up compensating for their weak spots and winning a Cup in a pretty unconventional - and impressive - way.

So perhaps the Coil can do likewise.

When I look at their bottom 9 forwards

Lucic RNH Eberle

Maroon Letestu Kassian

Pouliot Desharnais Slepyshev

I wonder how the hell they shut anyone down.  But they have three pretty good D pairings - and somehow they manage to play solid D / good systems hockey.  I did not think San Jose would have as much trouble breaking them down as they did (although San Jose has a long history of folding).....We'll see - I am really looking forward to the Anaheim Edmonton series - that's one I'm going to watch closely.

Me too. Outside of the fact it should be an exciting series and a good matchup, I think it's a good test for the Oilers.

 

At the very least they could probably pretty easily move Maroon if they chose to. Probably Lucic too. But I think they will figure it out. They finally seem to at least have a true team building strategy they are following.

[silver]

17 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

That is the unfortunate thing about the expected return on Tanev if he is traded. There are no teams really in the same position as Edmonton was in that would be willing to give up a guy like Hall for Tanev at the best of times. It really was a one off very specific need based trade. 

 

Tanev woukd get us a good return. I have no doubt about that. But the expectation of a Hall/Larsson deal just isn't realistic.

Tanev will definitely not get us a player of Hall's pedigree. Even if we were able to get someone in that 24-25 year old age range , I feel they'd be too old for when our core is ready anyways. Im all for a first and a prospect such as kapenen and Toronto's first. We need to look at building a team that is ready in 4 years

[oldnews]

15 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

I've gone through the depth charts and at this point, minus Tryamkin, don't see where there is more depth on defense than at forward.  You could argue the opposite because while there are NHL players to fill all spots when the lineup is healthy, there are more forwards outside the 18 skaters in a normal line up who have NHL experience than defenders imo.

 

In fact, on defense, I see a legitimate top 6 and one proven spare, Biega.  Others are unproven.  Keeping in mind that it is possible to lose one player in expansion.

 

Edler Stecher

Hutton Tanev

Sbisa Gudbranson

Pedan Biega

McEneny Subban

 

At forward, there are 9 players who should play in a top 9.  They may be shy on high end talent but the bodies exist.  

 

Baertschi Horvat Boeser

Sedin Sedin Eriksson

Eriksson Sutter Goldobin

Gaunce Chaput Dorsett

Skille Megna Virtanen

 

Granted, given the expansion draft, and the likelihood that many teams will be attempting to get compensation for players they would otherwise lose for nothing, there may be opportunites and a great deal of moves.  This, and the usual moves that are made near the draft and July 1 may add up to a very lively off season.  So, the depth chart we see in September could look very different than the one above.

 

 

 

I agree.  I don't think the team will be looking to deal Tanev - unless someone blows their door down with an offer.

They need to keep Tanev who balances (and anchors) the lineup.

I think they should look to move a LHD - as they were before losing Tryamkin - and then go to the UFA market to compensate.

I liked the suggestion someone made about targetting Kulikov who struggled somewhat in Buffalo this year.

Bringing him in on reasonable terms - a still young, heart of his career guy who has had some very good seasons and has over 500 games under his belt already - would be a good risk imo.  So while they may not have had an intention of going to free agency for much, perhaps the Tryamkin decision opens the door to a UFA signing.

 

If they could either deal Edler to Tampa for example - or 'trade' him to LV by agreeing to expose him in exchange for a 2nd/AHLer type deal - then they'd gain a pick/prospect in the process (or perhaps a forward like Killorn who would enable them to lose a foward in expansion and not worry much about it).

 

Kulikov Tanev

Hutton Gudbranson

Sbisa Stecher

 

Juolevi Biega

Pedan Subban

 

Serviceable enough imo.

[aGENT]

26 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

That is the unfortunate thing about the expected return on Tanev if he is traded. There are no teams really in the same position as Edmonton was in that would be willing to give up a guy like Hall for Tanev at the best of times. It really was a one off very specific need based trade. 

 

Tanev woukd get us a good return. I have no doubt about that. But the expectation of a Hall/Larsson deal just isn't realistic.

 

5 minutes ago, silver said:

Tanev will definitely not get us a player of Hall's pedigree. Even if we were able to get someone in that 24-25 year old age range , I feel they'd be too old for when our core is ready anyways. Im all for a first and a prospect such as kapenen and Toronto's first. We need to look at building a team that is ready in 4 years

To get a young player of higher value, we'd have to package one of our D likely with a forward like Baer.

 

Hutton + Baer or Tanev + Baer gets the conversation started on where we need to go IMO. Which is an upgrade at forward and converting D assets to futures. 

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, J.R. said:

 

To get a player of higher value, we'd have to package one of our D likely with a forward like Baer.

 

Hutton + Baer or Tanev + Baer gets the conversation started on where we need to go IMO. Which is an upgrade at forward and converting D assets to futures. 

I agree but how do you think the Tryamkin situation and the possibility of losing a guy like Sbisa affects the ability and willingness of Benning to move D assets?

[aGENT]

Just now, wallstreetamigo said:

I agree but how do you think the Tryamkin situation and the possibility of losing a guy like Sbisa affects the ability and willingness of Benning to move D assets?

Likely a fair bit unfortunately. A week ago I would have been open to moving both Tanev and Edler. Now I'd wager we're keeping at least one (if not both).

 

I think moving a D now depends on how ready they think Juolevi can be for a sheltered 3rd pairing role (I bet they keep a VERY close eye on his training leading up to the ED). And how easily they think they can fill depth D via a UFA. Both Hutton and Sbisa are relatively replaceable (at least in the short term with a team not expecting to do much next year). Tanev or Edler would obviously be larger immediate holes (if perhaps better in the long term for moving them now).

 

The ED really throws a wrench in things if we can't get value for one of Edler/Tanev/Sbisa before it. Then we're either losing Sbisa for free or paying to protect him. Upside being that all three will have more value after the ED.

 

I don't envy the decisions they'll have to make there.

[wallstreetamigo]

4 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Likely a fair bit unfortunately. A week ago I would have been open to moving both Tanev and Edler. Now I'd wager we're keeping at least one (if not both).

 

I think moving a D now depends on how ready they think Juolevi can be for a sheltered 3rd pairing role (I bet they keep a VERY close eye on his training leading up to the ED). And how easily they think they can fill depth D via a UFA. Both Hutton and Sbisa are relatively replaceable (at least in the short term with a team not expecting to do much next year). Tanev or Edler would obviously be larger immediate holes (if perhaps better in the long term for moving them now).

 

The ED really throws a wrench in things if we can't get value for one of Edler/Tanev/Sbisa before it. Then we're either losing Sbisa for free or paying to protect him. Upside being that all three will have more value after the ED.

 

I don't envy the decisions they'll have to make there.

Good take I totally agree. I am hoping that they don't rush Juolevi if he isn't ready. 

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Good take I totally agree. I am hoping that they don't rush Juolevi if he isn't ready. 

I don't think they will. I think largely he's ready for the NHL in everything but strength/size. If he can get close to/around 195lbs this summer, I think he'd be ok, sheltered, on a 3rd pair and perhaps partnered with the likes of Gudbranson. But if he can't, I don't think they'd force the issue.

 

For me, this really boils down which of the three D we're most likely to get value for ahead of the ED. In my mind, that's Tanev. I could see a team actually pony up to get him and have him be an upgrade on their current 3rd (protected) D.

 

Edler's age and NTC complicate matters too much in an already complicated situation and Sbisa basically has no (negative?) value ahead of the ED as he'd just be another 4/5 D that team would have to expose and risk. We'd be lucky to get a 4th or 5th for him at that point. Tanev's the only move we have here IMO. And even then, that's no guarantee we actually get decent value. And if we can't... rock, meet hard place.

[Mattrek]

While I'm not opposed to trading him with Tryamkin gone this has no chance of happening unless we get a D-man back in any deal. We already probably lose Sbisa to the draft, we can't afford to lose another top 4 D on top of that.

[Hairy Kneel]

Which team could have used Tanev these playoffs?

That is, of those teams that have been eliminated. And with a possibility of increasing there defensive game with Tanev.

[oldnews]

40 minutes ago, J.R. said:

I don't think they will. I think largely he's ready for the NHL in everything but strength/size. If he can get close to/around 195lbs this summer, I think he'd be ok, sheltered, on a 3rd pair and perhaps partnered with the likes of Gudbranson. But if he can't, I don't think they'd force the issue.

 

For me, this really boils down which of the three D we're most likely to get value for ahead of the ED. In my mind, that's Tanev. I could see a team actually pony up to get him and have him be an upgrade on their current 3rd (protected) D.

 

Edler's age and NTC complicate matters too much in an already complicated situation and Sbisa basically has no (negative?) value ahead of the ED as he'd just be another 4/5 D that team would have to expose and risk. We'd be lucky to get a 4th or 5th for him at that point. Tanev's the only move we have here IMO. And even then, that's no guarantee we actually get decent value. And if we can't... rock, meet hard place.

I'm not a fan of this reasoning.

Selling Tanev imo is a bad idea if as you suggest the market is a buyer's market / values negatively impacted by ED.  Dealing Tanev also makes this team a whole lot less respectable and imbalanced imo - no one holds the group together quite like his presence - that is unless you're looking forward to crushed confidence and lining up for lottery picks.

 

I think there are other factors to look at and boiling it down to simply return isn't the way to look at it, particularly in the short term.

A lot of teams are going to lose an asset in expansion - and the market could shift quite dramatically to a seller's market as competitive teams look to replenish what they lost, some of them, very good players.  The relative difference in Tanev's value could represent a significant loss.

In addition, the relative value of a guy like Edler vs Tanev is not likely to remain a constant - Tanev is 26, with three years of term remaining.  Edler is 30, with 2, (and a number of significant, limiting injuries in his past - unfortunately not the player he was and unlikely to be again.)   You have lots of time if your intention is to deal Tanev in the end.  Edler on the other hand....

 

I think the wiser thing to do is retain Tanev and resolve to move Edler, whether it's before or at the ED.  I disagree that age and NTC complicate matters too much in an already... That to me sounds like you're talking yourself into a preference to use Tanev to add a forward.  

It's a crossroads imo and one way or another, Edler looks to be the most obvious rebuild move - and if you retain Edler, you sure as hell may as well retain Tanev as well.   For me, it's a LHD that's got to move by ED - and that comes down to Edler or Sbisa.  If you're going to lose on someone, you take the loss there as opposed to on Tanev's value - for a number of reasons.

 

And how much of a loss is it?  

You're going to lose an asset regardless.  You're also not going to get a blockbuster return on Edler regardless.

Hypothetically, if you can 'only' get the equivalent of a 2nd for Edler - imo a giveaway even under the circumstances, but for spitball sake, say you get a 2nd for Edler (as opposed to a late pick as you suggest for Sbisa - or adding to Tanev to get a forward - which I think is no longer a wise move given the shift of balance in losing Tryamkin and adding Dahlen, Goldobin and a top 5 likely forward.

So you get a 2nd for Edler - you manage to retain Sbisa - and you potentiallu sign a UFA - say a guy like ?Kulikov?.

Would I deal Edler for Kulikov one for one?  I dunno, maybe under the circumstances.  Would I like to retain Sbisa - yes.  Is the 2nd therefore such a loss?  Maybe not so much.  The same/similar scenario can be played out with Tanev or Sbisa of course, but I think the timeline to move Edler is far more sensitive than Tanev - the ED is the imperative (and also does not require him waiving for him to be moved).

[messier's_elbow]

6 hours ago, Where'd Luongo? said:

Tanev for Ho-Sang

No thanks. 

[Phat Fingers]

1 hour ago, 10pavelbure96 said:

It's not about who is better. Larsson is going to get better, there is potential there, also Larsson has lots of tools in his tool box, whether he reaches his max potential is a risk that many teams would be happy to take. 

 

Tanev is one dimensional and what you see is what you get. No way Tanev gets us a Hall or anything close for that matter.

Tanev is a guy that could get a decent return. Especially if he was the key component of a package deal. He's not going to get you a former 1st OA 30g plus winger. 

 

 

[oldnews]

Philly's gonna give us their mid 1st for Edler.

They have some UFAs (MDZ and Schultz) = some holes opening up - and McDonald is....(not very good = a bad contract)

And a lot of young D - Provorov, Morin, Gostisbehere, Hagg. 

They could use a veteran top 4 D and have always loved Edler.

The price for D is only going to rise after ED - teams will be looking to fill losses / holes....

They only really have Gost and Gudas to protect - opportune time for them to shop is now.

[stanleysteamersmyl]

11 hours ago, Solinar said:

Unless you want to shelter Juolevi with Tanev as his defense partner, which puts Edler and Stecher back together, which was real gud.  And that leaves Sbisa playing with Subban.  Each line has a puck mover and a defensive partner.  Oh, and that's without Gudbranson in the mix.  Or Hutton....

I can't see two small defense men on the team. 

[shiznak]

Trade Tanev, protect Sbisa, sign one of Stone or Franson, and call it an off-season.

 

Edler - Stecher

Hutton - Gudbranson

Sbisa - Stone/Franson

Pedan/Subban