[Speculation] Tanev to Toronto (Scott Cullen)

[Gaudette Celly]

3 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

I'm ok with trading Tanev with the caveat on what the return is. 

 

We would need someone in to replace him that can actually defend, not just be a power play QB.

We do have some prospects that can potentially fill his spot in Holm, Brisebois, and Chatfield, but in the case of the latter two we're a couple years away from them breaking in then a couple more from being established difference-makers.  Of course in a rebuild that shouldn't matter so much, but still want to avoid tire-firedrills if possible.

[Borvat]

5 hours ago, Hutton Wink said:

That's the irony -- some call for a tear-down rebuild, then turn around and fret "but who's our replacement for Hank?"

 

1 hour ago, Hutton Wink said:

We do have some prospects that can potentially fill his spot in Holm, Brisebois, and Chatfield, but in the case of the latter two we're a couple years away from them breaking in then a couple more from being established difference-makers.  Of course in a rebuild that shouldn't matter so much, but still want to avoid tire-firedrills if possible.

Interesting contradiction. Some call for a tear down rebuild then fret "but we need to avoid tire-firedrills"   My point exactly regarding a top six center to fill the void.  There are certain positions that are "needs" unless you want to have a melt down and players losing all hope of winning.

[Gaudette Celly]

4 hours ago, Borvat said:

 

Interesting contradiction. Some call for a tear down rebuild then fret "but we need to avoid tire-firedrills"   My point exactly regarding a top six center to fill the void.  There are certain positions that are "needs" unless you want to have a melt down and players losing all hope of winning.

Key point being, some call for a "full" rebuild but are not prepared for a the inevitable results of a "full" rebuild when it happens.

[VIC_CITY]

8 hours ago, Borvat said:

I don't disagree, but to say put in a plug who cares isn't reality.  Lots of people and players care, to the point of not wanting to be here.  With the new lottery system finishing last guarantees you nothing unlike the past.  I am all for a re-build but it doesn't have to be tank until we hit the jackpot.  What if the jackpot doesn't happen for the next ten years - McDavid / Crosby.

I think you're taking what he's saying a little too literally. I believe what he meant was that the issue isn't really that pressing in the short term. Besides, it would never come to that. We'd either re-sign Henrik or throw in one of Sutter, Gaudette or Glass/Mittelstadt/Vilardi assuming we draft one of them this year. Not exactly championship caliber but good enough until someone progresses enough to take the reigns. 

 

Also, I don't think anyone is suggesting that we tank until we finally land our version of McDavid/Matthews. What we're arguing is that we should only be targetting players that are Bo's age or younger. We'll be worse in the short term but after 2-3 years we'll have a constant wave of players hitting their prime, year after year. At that point we can look at acquiring players 26 and older because they'll fit in perfectly. Obviously we'll need a few veterans around until then but I just wouldn't use our best trade asset (Tanev) to acquire those guys. Veterans can be found in free agency or traded for with drafts picks once we're contending.

 

This team needs to be built around Bo. Hopefully we end up drafting a few guys that end up being right up their with him but make no mistake about it, this is Bo's team. The focus now needs to be on the wave behind him. 

[shiznak]

On May 25, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Screw said:

Tanev has at least 5 years of peak hockey in him at 27 years old.  A team that wants to win during that window will grab him.  

5 years? More like 2-3, maybe 4.

 

Remember Tanev has yet to play a full season with this team, and is always hampered with injuries. His body will break down a lot quicker than someone who has yet sustain a major injury. 

[stawns]

On 2017-5-30 at 7:42 PM, VIC_CITY said:

I think you're taking what he's saying a little too literally. I believe what he meant was that the issue isn't really that pressing in the short term. Besides, it would never come to that. We'd either re-sign Henrik or throw in one of Sutter, Gaudette or Glass/Mittelstadt/Vilardi assuming we draft one of them this year. Not exactly championship caliber but good enough until someone progresses enough to take the reigns. 

 

Also, I don't think anyone is suggesting that we tank until we finally land our version of McDavid/Matthews. What we're arguing is that we should only be targetting players that are Bo's age or younger. We'll be worse in the short term but after 2-3 years we'll have a constant wave of players hitting their prime, year after year. At that point we can look at acquiring players 26 and older because they'll fit in perfectly. Obviously we'll need a few veterans around until then but I just wouldn't use our best trade asset (Tanev) to acquire those guys. Veterans can be found in free agency or traded for with drafts picks once we're contending.

 

This team needs to be built around Bo. Hopefully we end up drafting a few guys that end up being right up their with him but make no mistake about it, this is Bo's team. The focus now needs to be on the wave behind him. 

a team has players of a variety of ages and skillsets.  To say they should be bringing in players older than Horvat is the epitome of stupid

[coryberg]

Trading tanev for futures (picks or expansion exempt players) would be ideal. You would have to add sbisa to the pro's side of the ledger. Without a deal we lose him to Vegas, if we trade tanev we keep Luca. Tanev is a better player no doubt, but not by miles.