[Rumour] Canucks being approached about Tanev

[aGENT]

5 minutes ago, stawns said:

that doesn't mean they are trade partner.......it's pretty widely understood that TO has interest in Tanev.  Personally, I have always liked kapenen, and though he's smaller in stature, Finns always play gritty and bigger than their size.  They may not need him, like TO needs Tanev, but there might be a deal there and they do need another first.

Nothing against Kapanen at all. But another smaller, skilled winger is about the last thing we need to trade for. TOR doesn't particualarly have the pieces we'd require back, to acquire Tanev. At least not that they'd part with.

 

Agree on Finns.

 

We don't 'need' another 1st, we'd like another 1st.

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Nothing against Kapanen at all. But another smaller, skilled winger is about the last thing we need to trade for. TOR doesn't particualarly have the pieces we'd require to acquire Tanev. At least not that they'd part with.

 

Agree on Finns.

 

We don't 'need' another 1st, we'd like another 1st.

I would agree that they can probably find a better deal, but if not, I'd be ok with that deal.  They have to move on tanev while value is high and he's not injured.

 

IMO, if they want to be a team that is going to be in the upper 3rd of the league in the next 5 years (give or take), they are going to need to have a draft with multiple 1sts in the next 2 years.

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

I would agree that they can probably find a better deal, but if not, I'd be ok with that deal.  They have to move on tanev while value is high and he's not injured.

 

IMO, if they want to be a team that is going to be in the upper 3rd of the league in the next 5 years (give or take), they are going to need to have a draft with multiple 1sts in the next 2 years.

The 'value' is fine but I think there's another/better deal out there to be had of comparable value but better player fit.

 

As for the 2nd point, it sure wouldn't hurt.

[CaptainLinden16]

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Not in this draft.  There isn't enough separetion among prospect between 3-15

 

the player taken at 7-14 has just as good as a chance to being a better player in the long run than the player taken at 5.  Heck the player we would plan on taking at 5 has a really good chance of still being around in the 7-10 range.

You are not considering a few things:

 

It is easier to trade up to 1 from 3.  Maybe the 3 and 33 get you the 1 overall?  Maybe Patrick drops to 3.  He ain't dropping to 4.

 

Jim maybe already has a defined top 10 even though most us don't.  He may relish the idea of picking the top 2 players that he wants rather than hoping that they would drop to him.

 

Even if talent is the same between 3-15, you can at least pick the style you want and that does count when building a team.

 

When attempting to trade for the player you really wanted at #5 or wherever.  The values wont be the same as crap shoot between 3-15.  Some team may have Vilardi at #1...Some team may have Liljegren at #3...I am not saying you or Jim want those players, but if we get Tippet or Makar that doesn't mean we can then exchange them for whatever we really wanted.

 

Now Jim may think Tippet is the #2 or Glass #1 in this draft or whatever it may be.  Those two maybe available 8-12.  Maybe they won't.  I think you are shooting for perfection by trading for a later pick and a prospect in the hope that Jim/You get the guy on your board.

 

I get what you are saying, but if Tanev in any way equals the #3 then you do it!  If they want the 2nd round picks then I want Honka or the #29.  I would take both Neimi and Lethonen in either scenario as cap dump(s).

[CaptainLinden16]

17 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Nothing against Kapanen at all. But another smaller, skilled winger is about the last thing we need to trade for. TOR doesn't particualarly have the pieces we'd require back, to acquire Tanev. At least not that they'd part with.

 

Agree on Finns.

 

We don't 'need' another 1st, we'd like another 1st.

I just want a player with elite potential.  I don't care if he is small or YUUGE.  I just want someone who may someday be a 1st line player.  I don't own a crystal ball, but Kapanen feels like a 2nd-3rd line two way guy.  Very solid professional, but we need something more dynamic.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

11 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

You are not considering a few things:

 

It is easier to trade up to 1 from 3.  Maybe the 3 and 33 get you the 1 overall?  Maybe Patrick drops to 3.  He ain't dropping to 4.

 

Jim maybe already has a defined top 10 even though most us don't.  He may relish the idea of picking the top 2 players that he wants rather than hoping that they would drop to him.

 

Even if talent is the same between 3-15, you can at least pick the style you want and that does count when building a team.

 

When attempting to trade for the player you really wanted at #5 or wherever.  The values wont be the same as crap shoot between 3-15.  Some team may have Vilardi at #1...Some team may have Liljegren at #3...I am not saying you or Jim want those players, but if we get Tippet or Makar that doesn't mean we can then exchange them for whatever we really wanted.

 

Now Jim may think Tippet is the #2 or Glass #1 in this draft or whatever it may be.  Those two maybe available 8-12.  Maybe they won't.  I think you are shooting for perfection by trading for a later pick and a prospect in the hope that Jim/You get the guy on your board.

 

I get what you are saying, but if Tanev in any way equals the #3 then you do it!  If they want the 2nd round picks then I want Honka or the #29.  I would take both Neimi and Lethonen in either scenario as cap dump(s).

To get in the top 2 this year it's going to cost you.  It's not worth it.  And at 3 sure JB could really be sold on a player, but when 100% of the other scouts aren't sold on anyone, you'd have to question why? 

 

I see more value in moving tanev to a mid round pick + than trading tanev + to try and get into the top 3.  because i'm not sold on any player in the 3-10 range.  The player picked a 7, or ,8 or 14 could easily become the better player than that kids picked at 3. 

[CaptainLinden16]

4 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

To get in the top 2 this year it's going to cost you.  It's not worth it.  And at 3 sure JB could really be sold on a player, but when 100% of the other scouts aren't sold on anyone, you'd have to question why? 

 

I see more value in moving tanev to a mid round pick + than trading tanev + to try and get into the top 3.  because i'm not sold on any player in the 3-10 range.  The player picked a 7, or ,8 or 14 could easily become the better player than that kids picked at 3. 

again, your plan is well and good if you get your guy at #12 or whenever; but what if you don't?  What if Jim's board has a drop off at #9?  It's not like the stock market.  You can't instantly turn that #12 into a comparable value to the #3 in this draft in another trade.  You are more than likely going to have to sit on the pick for a couple of years before moving it.  I would want to make sure I actually wanted the player I drafted if I had to sit on the pick for a period of time.  Beyond #10 you are getting left overs, maybe you get lucky and get who you wanted at #7 or even #3, but probably not.  Then you may end up with someone who you don't think very highly of.

 

Your mentality is fine if we are trading this pick within the first year, but I doubt that happens.

 

Any who, I personally want Tanev gone in any case as I think he is out of the league in a couple of years with all of his injuries.  Great player, but I doubt he ever plays an 82 game in a season, and I doubt he plays 250 more games.  Any first round pick is likely to get us that amount of games in the NHL, so lets do it and hope its a gem.

[Agoork]

I agree with ForsbergTheGreat.   I don't want to lose #33 in order to get the #3.  

55th or later and I could go for it, but I'd rather take a cap dump goalie back and keep all of our picks!

[canuckswincup8]

any of these trades for tanev is good:

Dallas - #3oa + goalie for tanev + 55th

Buffalo - #8oa + 

TBL - Drouin

Edmonton - package tanev for Puljujarrvi

 

[JM_]

Dont know if this has been posted yet but here's the TO homer view on it: http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2017/6/6/15743666/toronto-maple-leafs-trade-target-chris-tanev-morgan-rielly-right-hand-defence-vancouver-canucks

 

not all that far off many proposals on this thread. In TO terms this one writer anyway says "set the upper limit of a Leafs deal for Tanev at 1st + Kapanen + Rychel"

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

what basis do you have for that insecurity?

 

 

Canuck luck

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, J.R. said:

Nothing against Kapanen at all. But another smaller, skilled winger is about the last thing we need to trade for. TOR doesn't particualarly have the pieces we'd require back, to acquire Tanev. At least not that they'd part with.

 

Agree on Finns.

 

We don't 'need' another 1st, we'd like another 1st.

Actually, as a rebuilding team that has bridged the supposed "age gap" of prospects

 

Yes, we NEED another 1st, and 2nd, 3rd, 4th...we NEED extra picks in as many combinations as possible for the next 3-5 years.

[J-Dizzle]

32 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

Dont know if this has been posted yet but here's the TO homer view on it: http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2017/6/6/15743666/toronto-maple-leafs-trade-target-chris-tanev-morgan-rielly-right-hand-defence-vancouver-canucks

 

not all that far off many proposals on this thread. In TO terms this one writer anyway says "set the upper limit of a Leafs deal for Tanev at 1st + Kapanen + Rychel"

This guy quotes Botchford way too much to be taken seriously  

[Screw]

21 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

 

 

Canuck luck

[Canuck Surfer]

4 hours ago, EdgarM said:

A draft pick is not really comparable to a Hall as that player would still not had played 1 single NHL game never mind being a regular. Also, there is no McDavid or Matthews in this group so there is no guarantee the #3  pick will ever be close to a Taylor Hall. I still do not see the reasoning behind you rating Tanev so low. Your argument does not support this.

I have heard a hundred arguments, all CDC top shelf think tank members, presuming because Larsson fetched Hall, Tanev will. My opinion is Larsson is worth more than Tanev. A fair bit more. And also that Hall was achieved because of the status of the market at that time, and Edmonton's situation. So Jersey got a premium rarely seen. A market that will see us competing with guys like Vatanen, Ryan Murray, Hamonic or De Haan, possibly Fowler, Petrovic or Demers, and other good D, some worth more, some less, all on the market at the same time as us considering Tanev.

 

Tanev is a player who achieves what he does with much better than average speed, but few, if any, other stand out physical features.  One of the great players who thinks the game. Constantly executes effectively, efficiently. Cuts down angles. Closes out shooters. Is in the right position. Makes quickly the right pass or read. And he takes a hit, blocks a ton of shots, puts his body on the line. Remarkably efficient. I love Tanev!   

 

A 3rd overall, say Gabe Vilardi has a different level of stunning physical gifts and talents. Hall more so, because he add's amazing speed. They can run over guys like Tanev, regardless of whether in position or not. And have the skills to dangle and protect the puck, make plays with guys just as good, but bigger (like Larsson) on his hip while doing so. 

 

We can appreciate Tanev for his effectiveness and efficiency. Further still he does not own any magical ability to dangle the puck and skate it out of trouble. Duck defending forwards and streak to the net. Own a feared cannon of a shot that has to be respected? Larsson has one. Without great physical gifts and talents he is just not worth a 3rd overall pick, nevermind an established brute of a forward like Taylor Hall.  Who have those gifts? We can appreciate him, but not overrate him.

 

If he was worth what CDC says, a deal would already have been made.

 

edit > So we should just keep him. And enjoy his play. 

[CanuckGAME]

10 minutes ago, Screw said:

*shudders*

[Gaudette Celly]

2 hours ago, Agoork said:

 

Before the ED or XD... If Sbisa gets taken, it would rather complicate things.

[Screw]

5 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

Before the ED or XD... If Sbisa gets taken, it would rather complicate things.

If the trade is for exempt players then they could protect Sbisa.

[Nancouver]

41 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

I have heard a hundred arguments, all CDC top shelf think tank members, presuming because Larsson fetched Hall, Tanev will. My opinion is Larsson is worth more than Tanev. A fair bit more. And also that Hall was achieved because of the status of the market at that time, and Edmonton's situation. So Jersey got a premium rarely seen. A market that will see us competing with guys like Vatanen, Ryan Murray, Hamonic or De Haan, possibly Fowler, Petrovic or Demers, and other good D, some worth more, some less, all on the market at the same time as us considering Tanev.

 

Tanev is a player who achieves what he does with much better than average speed, but few, if any, other stand out physical features.  One of the great players who thinks the game. Constantly executes effectively, efficiently. Cuts down angles. Closes out shooters. Is in the right position. Makes quickly the right pass or read. And he takes a hit, blocks a ton of shots, puts his body on the line. Remarkably efficient. I love Tanev!   

 

A 3rd overall, say Gabe Vilardi has a different level of stunning physical gifts and talents. Hall more so, because he add's amazing speed. They can run over guys like Tanev, regardless of whether in position or not. And have the skills to dangle and protect the puck, make plays with guys just as good, but bigger (like Larsson) on his hip while doing so. 

 

We can appreciate Tanev for his effectiveness and efficiency. Further still he does not own any magical ability to dangle the puck and skate it out of trouble. Duck defending forwards and streak to the net. Own a feared cannon of a shot that has to be respected? Larsson has one. Without great physical gifts and talents he is just not worth a 3rd overall pick, nevermind an established brute of a forward like Taylor Hall.  Who have those gifts? We can appreciate him, but not overrate him.

 

If he was worth what CDC says, a deal would already have been made.

 

edit > So we should just keep him. And enjoy his play. 

Finally someone who sees the Hall/Larsson trade for what it was. So tired of people referencing that trade in respect to trading Tanev and what he's worth .

[Alflives]

3 hours ago, Agoork said:

 

Not sure if this is a legit source, but interesting.

I doubt there would be solid offers this far out from the draft.