canucks.brad Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 LOL...no way the Leafs give up Nylander for Tanev... Last year maybe...but not now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 2 hours ago, Warhippy said: Kapanen and a 1st or Nylander and a 2nd. This would be a great return for us, but I don't think Nylander is in the cards unless its a 1 for 1 deal with no pick involved, even then don't think they give him up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beni Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 54 minutes ago, Trebreh said: JB should announce that Tanev is on the block at the draft to get a bidding war. That may actually net a good return, who knows. Haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Well, if JB is seriously considering taking another defenseman at 5, then I could see us moving one. Though with the departure of Tryamkin, and potentially losing a D in the expansion draft, I really don't think we should even be considering trading a defenseman, especially of Tanev's caliber. Though, if we were to trade him, and we're talking about prospects, not roster players coming back, then I'd want: 2 of Kapanen/Rychel/Leipsec/Nielsen and their 1st. They should expect to eat the entirety of his contract as well, seeing as it's so reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Eff the Leafs. Even with Tanev I still wouldn't watch them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McDavyCrockett Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Tanev would be an excellent addition to that team. If I'm Benning I drive a hard bargain and force them to pony up Dermott, Kapanen, and Gauthier- prospects who've already started to develop and come along nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Trebreh said: JB should announce that Tanev is on the block at the draft to get a bidding war. all 1040 has to do is say there's an unconfirmed rumour that Tanev has been asked for his list of teams he doesn't want to be traded to. But i bet Benning has already been contacted by TO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 16 minutes ago, Ossi Vaananen said: Well, if JB is seriously considering taking another defenseman at 5, then I could see us moving one. Though with the departure of Tryamkin, and potentially losing a D in the expansion draft, I really don't think we should even be considering trading a defenseman, especially of Tanev's caliber. Though, if we were to trade him, and we're talking about prospects, not roster players coming back, then I'd want: 2 of Kapanen/Rychel/Leipsec/Nielsen and their 1st. They should expect to eat the entirety of his contract as well, seeing as it's so reasonable. If we traded Tanev at worst we'd lose Biega to Vegas since we'd be able to protect Edler, Guddy and Sbisa. Hutton is exempt. So if they do move tan man I think Jim probably signs some depth UFA D man to try to fill the hole a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 I think we are better off making a trade for a single better player rather than getting a package of OK prospects/picks. If you get the best player in the deal it almost always wins, it is a lot easier to fill out the middle and lower half of your roster than it is to get a top pairing D or a top line forward. The best player also means your next best guy shuffles down in the lineup and gets easier minutes against worse opposition... and that makes them better too. That effect moves all the way down the lineup. If we trade Tanev, we had better get a top line forward that moves a guy like Baertschi down to the 2nd line... even if it means we have to add a piece as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 17 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said: all 1040 has to do is say there's an unconfirmed rumour that Tanev has been asked for his list of teams he doesn't want to be traded to. But i bet Benning has already been contacted by TO. I was of the belief that his modified NTC clause doesn't kick in until July, so there is no such thing as a list for him right now. There are plenty of other ways to get the word out that a player is on the block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 1 minute ago, Provost said: I was of the belief that his modified NTC clause doesn't kick in until July, so there is no such thing as a list for him right now. There are plenty of other ways to get the word out that a player is on the block. yah but its 1040 so there's no expectation for facts. I think the GMs yap constantly so there's probably potential trades in the works already. Really for TO not to offer their 1st and Kapanen e.g., or like Ossi says above "2 of Kapanen/Rychel/Leipsec/Nielse" would be a wasted opportunity on TOs part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billabong Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Tanev is a must trade. This is a rebuild. That means sell off assets that are worth something for picks and prospects to reload For a competitive team were gonna suck next year and the next and probably a little better in 3 years...how good will tanev be at 30 years old, playing the way he plays, blocking shots, getting hit and be pretty worn down by then. It just makes absolutely no sense to keep him and let that asset rot away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrible.dee Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 3 hours ago, NUCKER67 said: It's not crazy. Carrick is a 23-year old RHD with similar numbers to Tanev. Leipsic is a 22-year old LW who was over a point a game with the Marlies. In his 6 NHL games with the Leafs he got 3 points. Plus TOR's 1st. That would give us two 1sts. They're not stars, but they're young and could become good players. Yes, essentially it's a whole lota "meh"......."meh" is not the substance by which this team will change it's fortune It's simple, anyone in the league can have Tanev or anyone in our system not named Horvat or Boesser, but the currency in which we need to trade is "Good!!" Save the "meh" for Sakic, we aren't interested Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Cullen is about as bright as his sidekick Travis Yost. Not very. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honky Cat Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 I don't like it...What good is two "B" prospects and a 15 OA to a team on a rebuild..?...Giving up a top quality RHD (one of the tops in the league at shot suppression) on a great contract...Quantity does not equal quality in this case... The Tanev to Toronto proposals don't work..They're not going to give up Nylander (nor should they),and the replaceable parts they have to offer us.. is of no value to a rebuilding team with long term plans in mind...Toronto fans are always going to hate it because they overvalue their prospects more than any other team. Benning should try and pry the 1st round pick from Buffalo or Arizona.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 This team doesn't need to make these kind of volume deals. Some delusional people at a distance may mistake the 'rebuild' for having just started (and a few willfully blind people around here) - but they have no real concept of where this team is in it's process. They haven't torn it down - meaning they've added roster pieces in some of their transition moves - Sutter, Gudbranson, Sbisa, Baertschi, Granlund..... And they've added prospects - not simply picks - to the point that really, all they're looking to do at this point is add a couple key pieces - a pmd and a playmaking C. Does Toronto have either to offer? No - they don't really have the pieces to get a Tanev deal done. A small winger - even if he's talented - is Leipsic a good fit wadr? We just added a high upside winger in Goldobin - and another in Dahlen + Boeser, Baer, Granny....Virtanen...where does Leipsic fit here? A small third pairing D that showed AHL upside but has been sheltered in the NHL, hasn't had his production translate,, would be exposed in expansion and isn't a pp quarterback nor does he bring mobile size to our blueline....is Carrick a worthwhile fit? Kapanen is the most interesting piece being spoken of - I like Kapanen - like the other pieces not sure he's a great fit or represents any kind of primary need for this team. I'd probably take him as a piece in a deal for Edler, but not Tanev. A mid 1st just isn't incentive enough. Sorry Toronto, would really like to help you with precisely what you need, but we have no urgency to deal Tanev whatsoever, and you don't really have the pieces to get it done. To put it simply - if you want Tanev, it's probably going to hurt more than you like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustABandwagoner Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 2 hours ago, canucks.bradley said: LOL...no way the Leafs give up Nylander for Tanev... Last year maybe...but not now What if we add like 2x 2nd rounders + prospect? and ofc tanev too lol . Man i really want nylander or is he an untouchable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattrek Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 3 hours ago, DontMessMe said: I would do something similar Tanev Granlund 2nd (Vancouver) 4th SJS Or absolute best Tanev Granlund 2nd (Vancouver) 2nd (CBJ) For Nylander <3 Both of you should never become GM's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustABandwagoner Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 3 minutes ago, Mattrek said: Both of you should never become GM's. and im sure you'll overvalue our players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattrek Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 2 hours ago, Provost said: I think we are better off making a trade for a single better player rather than getting a package of OK prospects/picks. If you get the best player in the deal it almost always wins, it is a lot easier to fill out the middle and lower half of your roster than it is to get a top pairing D or a top line forward. The best player also means your next best guy shuffles down in the lineup and gets easier minutes against worse opposition... and that makes them better too. That effect moves all the way down the lineup. If we trade Tanev, we had better get a top line forward that moves a guy like Baertschi down to the 2nd line... even if it means we have to add a piece as well. I agree. I'd even be willing to add one of our 2nds to Tanev in order to get Nylander. Quality over quantity and if we got him we'd start to look really good having our 1-2 punch up the middle with 1A, 1B lines. Sedins/Sutter would both be interchangeable 3rd lines with Sutter's being the shutdown line. Of course this doesn't account for if Virtanen, Rodin, Cramarossa or Dahlen make a push to join the team and other trades could be made, but damn I'm happy with the way we'd look. Baertschi-Horvat-Boeser Eriksson-Nylander-Goldobin Sedin-Sedin-Granlund Boucher-Sutter-Dorsett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.