[Rumour] Canucks being approached about Tanev

[Warhippy]

I think that there's a possibility that people are forgetting the dark horse in all this.

 

Vegas.

 

Vegas holds a top 10 pick this year, but also everyone's cast off players, of which there will be some very very good ones.

 

Just food for thought

[coryberg]

16 hours ago, Warhippy said:

 

 

Canuck luck

 

[48MPHSlapShot]

I would love to just knock TO's name right out of this. If we are to make this deal, we need to knock it out of the park, and I just don't think Toronto has what it takes to make that happen. Best case scenario is that we land 17th overall and a B prospect? 

 

No thanks. There are plenty of other teams with better pieces to offer. Or we simply hold on to Tanev into next season. His no trade clause isn't that damning (8 teams he won't go to). 

 

There's no reason to move him for Maple Leaf leftovers.

[messier's_elbow]

26 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

I would love to just knock TO's name right out of this. If we are to make this deal, we need to knock it out of the park, and I just don't think Toronto has what it takes to make that happen. Best case scenario is that we land 17th overall and a B prospect? 

 

No thanks. There are plenty of other teams with better pieces to offer. Or we simply hold on to Tanev into next season. His no trade clause isn't that damning (8 teams he won't go to). 

 

There's no reason to move him for Maple Leaf leftovers.

Screw the leafs and their crappy proposals. I'd way rather trade Tanev plus both seconds for 3rd overall. Draft Vilardi at 3 and Heiskanen/Makar/Petterson/Glass/Mittelstadt at 5th and actually look like a promising young team in 2 years. 

[Screw]

Just now, messier's_elbow said:

Screw the leafs and their crappy proposals. I'd way rather trade Tanev plus both seconds for 3rd overall. Draft Vilardi and Makar at 5th and actually look like a promising young team in 2 years. 

The Loungo saga taught me that you should ignore any proposal coming out of Toronto, always.

[48MPHSlapShot]

I look at it this way. 

 

Whichever team that is willing to offer up the best individual piece is the clear frontrunner, and the most likely to get the deal done. 

 

One thing that has to be made clear is that we're not looking for a package here. In terms of prospects and young players, we have pretty decent forward depth, and though our D depth is lacking with Tryamkin bolting to the KHL, I'm guessing the next 2 drafts will change that quite substantially.

 

Simply put, we need quality now. Not B prospects like Kapanen, mid-late rd picks, or reclamation projects like Kane. Whoever has the best individual piece to offer up wins the Tanev sweepstakes, even if we have to add to it. 

 

That'd be my bottom line.

[Wilbur]

45 minutes ago, coryberg said:

 

In the reprint of the series I wonder if "STAR-ROOKIE" changed to "1ST ROUND FODDER"?

[aGENT]

59 minutes ago, CanuckleHorse said:

If we were to get a good young centre in this years draft I Think we would be smart to trade Gaudette just because I think he might look to leave because we have to many centers ahead of him also he could net us another first and that would be a great return for a 5th rounder.

Too many C's?!  First, there's no such thing. C's can play W.

 

Second, In a few years Hank's gone and while Sutter might be ahead of Gaudette for a couple years, he'll be trending to 4C or traded/not re-signed. A centre depth chart of:

 

This year's 1st

Horvat

Gaudette

Sutter/Gaunce

 

Looks fine to me.

 

 

[CanuckleHorse]

26 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Too many C's?!  First, there's no such thing. C's can play W.

 

Second, In a few years Hank's gone and while Sutter might be ahead of Gaudette for a couple years, he'll be trending to 4C or traded/not re-signed. A centre depth chart of:

 

This year's 1st

Horvat

Gaudette

Sutter/Gaunce

 

Looks fine to me.

 

 

I'm thinking he might want to make the jump sooner but hey you never know I do like his value right now.

[aGENT]

Just now, CanuckleHorse said:

I'm thinking he might want to make the jump sooner but hey you never know I do like his value right now.

He's going to be in college at least through next year. Then probably a year in Utica. He's two seasons out from 'maybe' making the jump starting on the 4th line likely. From there he can try to earn Sutters 3C spot in Sutter's final contract year.

 

Non-issue.

[YummyCakeFace]

Usually Canuck fans over value their teams players. This is one time it's legit.  Tanev brings a lot. My concern is if Benning does decide to move him, he's gonna get duped.  If Tanev goes to Dallas, Benning should be getting the 3rd overall AND a prospect. I find it insulting to hear Nill wants Tanev, 33, 55. No way.  I'd rather keep him than get screwed like that. 

[CanuckleHorse]

2 minutes ago, J.R. said:

He's going to be in college at least through next year. Then probably a year in Utica. He's two seasons out from 'maybe' making the jump starting on the 4th line likely. From there he can try to earn Sutters 3C spot in Sutter's final contract year.

 

Non-issue.

I'm hoping he don't want to follow his buddy Zachary Ashton-Reece to Pittsburgh they did play very well together.

[aGENT]

Just now, CanuckleHorse said:

I'm hoping he don't want to follow his buddy Zachary Ashton-Reece to Pittsburgh they did play very well together.

All the college players go free agency!!!! 

 

It rarely happens. It's not in their hockey career or financial best interests. And it largely only happens to late bloomers who didn't look like possibly NHL'ers until their 3rd or 4th years. I doubt Gaudette stays in college past this season.

[stawns]

1 hour ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

I would love to just knock TO's name right out of this. If we are to make this deal, we need to knock it out of the park, and I just don't think Toronto has what it takes to make that happen. Best case scenario is that we land 17th overall and a B prospect? 

 

No thanks. There are plenty of other teams with better pieces to offer. Or we simply hold on to Tanev into next season. His no trade clause isn't that damning (8 teams he won't go to). 

 

There's no reason to move him for Maple Leaf leftovers.

I think a lot of people are under estimating Kapenen, he's going to be a solid top 6 fwd

[Wolfgang Durst]

15 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

You're assuming JB has a guy in mind.  Nothing he's said about this draft would point to that conclusion.  The fact that's he's stated over and over that he's comfortable picking who ever is left at 5 and feeling he's going to get a foundational player would make one assume he doesn't have a specific guy in mind... Like J.R has stated befo re, JB also likely has players ranked in tiers. 

 

In tier 1 it's Nolan and Nico

in tier 2 we can assume it's Vilardi, Glass, Hieskanen, Mittelstadt, makar, Pettersson

in tier 3 it's Liljegren, tippet, Necas,

in tier 4 it's Rasmussen, Foote, Tolvanen, Suzuki

in tier 5 it's Brannstrom, vesalainen, hague, kostin

 

A deal with Dallas guarantees you two players in tier 2, but it also cost you a 2nd round pick

A deal with ARZ also guarantees two players in tier 2, you keep your second round pick which is another chance to add a top asset, and you also gain a (b or c) prospect

A deal with BUF also guarantees two players in tier 2, it doesn't cost you a 2nd round pick, and again you also gain a (b or c) prospect

A deal with TB guarantees you a player in tier 2 and a player in tier 4 (with the possibility that a higher tier player drops), it doesn't cost you any extra picks, but you also get a (b-b+ prospect)

A deal with TO guarantees you a player in tier 2 and a player in tier 5 (with the possibility that a higher tier player drops), it doesn't cost you any extra picks, but you also get one (b-c) prospect and another (b-b+) prospect

 

When you think about it in that aspect, the Dallas trade makes the least sense.  

 

Wonderful post as a basis for further discussion.

 

You can make a case that the trade with Dallas to acquire the 3rd overall could be the best scenario, because the #3 would get you Gabe Vilardi and Vilardi is let's say only 1 year away from the NHL.

 

Acquiring the 7th overall from ARZ or the 8th overall from BUF would get you Pettersson. He is at least 3 or even more years away from  the NHL. That's a significant difference. There might be people who just don't care about seeing a projected 1C at Rogers Arena in 1 year from now or in 3 or more years from now. Reality  is that a lot of supporters are impatient and want the rebuild finalized as soon as possible.

 

In fact I guess the Canucks may have only a few options because BUF is probably acquiring a D-Man in a Evander Kane trade with L.A. ( Mc Nabb , Martinez) and there- fore no longer interested in Tanev.

 

Personally I think  that the assessment of trade options has not only to include the 1st round pick which comes back but also the additional prospect / prospects. It think your have to base your conclusion on the total return and not just on the 1st round picks. Another factor which should be included is the urgency other teams need help at the backend. The bigger the need for a team (win-now, losing D-Man in free agency) the higher the return. Dallas want to become a legitimate contender next season and I guess they recognized last season that their D-Corps is not experienced enough for a contender (a lot of young guys like Lindell...). I have read on  NHL rumours that Dallas wants an experienced Top-4 D-Man for their 3rd overall. Pretty sure that Canucks can hang on their 2nd round picks.

 

Personally I hope for a trade with Dallas. It would be great if JB insists on including Julius Honka in that Deal and offers an additional  forward (right winger)  to Dallas.

We will see what's going to happen. 2 more weeks and we all will know the return the Canucks get for a player like Tanev.

 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

2 minutes ago, Wolfgang Durst said:

Wonderful post as a basis for further discussion.

 

You can make a case that the trade with Dallas to acquire the 3rd overall could be the best scenario, because the #3 would get you Gabe Vilardi and Vilardi is let's say only 1 year away from the NHL.

 

Acquiring the 7th overall from ARZ or the 8th overall from BUF would get you Pettersson. He is at least 3 or even more years away from  the NHL. That's a significant difference. There might be people who just don't care about seeing a projected 1C at Rogers Arena in 1 year from now or in 3 or more years from now. Reality  is that a lot of supporters are impatient and want the rebuild finalized as soon as possible.

 

In fact I guess the Canucks may have only a few options because BUF is probably acquiring a D-Man in a Evander Kane trade with L.A. ( Mc Nabb , Martinez) and there- fore no longer interested in Tanev.

 

Personally I think  that the assessment of trade options has not only to include the 1st round pick which comes back but also the additional prospect / prospects. It think your have to base your conclusion on the total return and not just on the 1st round picks. Another factor which should be included is the urgency other teams need help at the backend. The bigger the need for a team (win-now, losing D-Man in free agency) the higher the return. Dallas want to become a legitimate contender next season and I guess they recognized last season that their D-Corps is not experienced enough for a contender (a lot of young guys like Lindell...). I have read on  NHL rumours that Dallas wants an experienced Top-4 D-Man for their 3rd overall. Pretty sure that Canucks can hang on their 2nd round picks.

 

Personally I hope for a trade with Dallas. It would be great if JB insists on including Julius Honka in that Deal and offers an additional  forward (right winger)  to Dallas.

We will see what's going to happen. 2 more weeks and we all will know the return the Canucks get for a player like Tanev.

 

But it doesn't come down to who's ready the quickest it comes down to who brings the most impact in the NHL, do they provide the most value to the team winning or value in a trade for another asset. 

 

At 3 vilardi would be able to be picked and it would gaurantee you to get him,  but he could also be their at #5 as well.  The whole basis on trading more assets up for a player the could very well be their at 5 would poor asset management.

 

 There is also zero chance dallas moves honka

[timberz21]

4 hours ago, smokes said:

Toronto Maple Leafs Trade Target: Chris Tanev

64

A look at the oft-discussed Canucks’ defender, and whether the Leafs can acquire him.

 

As we all know by now, the Toronto Maple Leafs have a hole at right defence. As they seek to become a bona fide contender, they want to add someone to play with either Corsi superstar Jake Gardiner or glass cannon Morgan Rielly (Nikita Zaitsev will pair with the other.) So they’re in the market for a back-end upgrade.

 

Enter Chris Tanev.

Who is Chris Tanev?

Chris Tanev, whose name I will misspell as Christ Anev at least once in this piece, is a right-shooting defenceman currently playing for the Vancouver Canucks. Tanev is 27 years old, 6’2”, and a lean 195 lbs.

Tanev was an undrafted free agent, signed by the Canucks out of college after one year with the Rochester Institute of Technology Tigers (side note: dope team name.) He bounced between the AHL and the NHL for a couple of seasons — he actually played in the last three games of the 2011 Stanley Cup Final — before latching on with the big club full-time in 2013. In 2014-15, Tanev bumped up to Vancouver’s top pairing with Alex Edler. He and Edler have been partnered on and off since; Tanev’s most frequent 5v5 partner this season was lead balloon Luca Sbisa.

Stylistically, Tanev is a positionally-sound puck-moving defenceman. Kevin Bieksa had a classic quote describing Tanev’s style during the 2011 Finals: "He could have played with a cigarette in his mouth. Everyone saw the way he played — very cool, very consistent with the puck." He’s a very defence-focused defenceman, but he’s not your classic, static Hal Gill type; he’s all about movement and positioning. It works well for him: Chris Tanev is one of the best shot-suppressing defencemen in the NHL.

 

Shot suppression, and all the related good things associated with it, are what make Tanev special. He was easily the best Canuck defender by most defensive metrics — Corsi Against/60, Scoring Chances Against/60, etc. This is all the more impressive because (as with most things) the Canucks were generally bad at it, and because (as with most things) Luca Sbisa was really bad it. Tanev’s numbers improved immensely whenever he was separated from his partner.

 

Now for the bad news: Tanev does not produce. At all. Ever. In 5v5 points per 60 minutes, Tanev was 189th out of 197 defencemen this year (min. 500 minutes played.) His CF/60 is completely unimpressive, as compared to his stalwart CA. There’s some reason for that — Tanev is 174th on that list in offensive-zone start percentage, and he played a lot of minutes against top forward lines. This only makes his defensive numbers more impressive, but Tanev has never had notable offensive production and probably never will. Know that going in. He is a defensive defenceman.

Final note about Tanev the player: his injury history is not great. He missed 29 games this season from a couple of injuries (ankle and upper-body), although he played most of the latter part of the miserable Canucks season. Tanev missed 13, 12, and 18 games in the seasons before; he is nearing the label of “injury-prone”, though still quite effective when he plays.

 

Why would the Leafs and Canucks make a trade for him?

Tanev is currently signed for three more seasons at $4.45M per year, on a deal that Canucks GM Jim Benning signed him to in March 2015. While Benning and the Canucks clearly value Tanev as a player, they also finished 29th this season and they probably won’t make the playoffs again for the duration of Tanev’s contract. Considering Tanev is maybe the most valuable trade piece left on Vancouver’s roster, does it really make sense to keep him around until his 30s? A further point on this topic: Tanev has a modified no-trade clause that will kick in for next season, but as of right now, he has no trade protections.

Benning has said he’s not going to shop Tanev, but that’s exactly what you say when you’re awaiting offers. Canucks beat writer Jason Botchford described Benning as sounding “open” to trading Tanev.

Hold that thought. So why would the Leafs want him?

 

Well, the obvious reasons are that, as stated above, they need a top-four RHD and they’re a defensively porous, offensively potent team. Tanev is good at exactly the things the Leafs are bad at, and the Leafs have more than enough people to cover Tanev’s weaknesses.

Have a look at this:

Doesn’t that look like a nice, complementary match? You might have thought it did if you watched the World Championships last spring, because Rielly and Tanev paired up to form one of Team Canada’s best defensive pairings. The two were never on for a goal against together. They didn’t produce many points, as is Tanev’s custom, but several players—including Connor McDavid and Brendan Gallagher—left the tournament singing Tanev’s praises. Check out the fancy stats for 2016 World Championship defencemen (and ignore that Marchenko and Ceci were also overperforming.)

So: Tanev seems like exactly the jigsaw piece to fit the Leafs’ puzzle. Further, if he meshes well, the Leafs would be able to play a solid top-four defence group for a combined cap hit of $19M. If the Leafs are hesitant to shell out big money for a free agent defenceman of the Kevin Shattenkirk class — who might cost in the $7M range annually — Tanev would seem like a nice compromise choice. You aren’t buying a sure thing — Rielly and Tanev as a top pairing over the long term is uncertain, and you might be looking at more of a rotation with Gardiner and Zaitsev. But it’s certainly worth considering.

What would he cost?

So let’s get down to brass tacks.

First up: if the Leafs acquire Tanev, they’re going to have to protect him in the expansion draft. The Canucks shouldn’t really have a huge problem for the expansion draft because they don’t have that many good players, but they seem to value defenders like Luca Sbisa and Erik Gudbranson more than I do, which means they may want to do a trade for Tanev before June 18th in order to gain a free protection slot. If the Leafs want to wait until after the expansion draft to make a trade for Tanev (so as to avoid losing/paying to protect Connor Carrick), they might be outbid by a team willling to pull the trigger earlier.

Anyway. That aside, here’s Jason Botchford:

I think a first-rounder plus something [is the return the Canucks are looking for]… I think you can get a substantial amount for him. Chris Tanev is worth a hell of a lot. Defencemen like him are very difficult for teams to get. Obviously, we know he is a top-four defenceman, and I think with the right pairing partner, he is a top-pairing guy. If you put him up on the right-side of a second pairing, you have a real chance to build a top-four that can compete.

Elliotte Friedman describes the price for Tanev as “very high”, and that Vancouver “is not looking to do this unless it’s a great deal.” Friedman does not enlighten us as to what that price might specifically be.

 

Scott Cullen had the guts to moot around an actual trade proposal for Tanev, and he was rewarded by being roundly mocked for it. But Cullen’s trade proposal, at least in my opinion, was not laughable. He suggested the Leafs might succeed with a package of Brendan Leipsic, Connor Carrick, and a first-rounder. This gives the Canucks two promising 23-year-olds, one a left wing who just tore up the AHL, and one a RD who is at least capable of playing a regular NHL shift. That and an additional first is at least worth considering from Vancouver’s position.

Is the price for Tanev going to go higher than that? Botchford (who may be biased) talks up Tanev as the kind of guy who is in universal demand, but he’s probably not far off. Right-handed top-four defenders are always popular, and the Leafs would most definitely not be the only suitor. At the same time, Chris Tanev does not score at all, and points tend to drive prices...but the market for defence is strange.

To take an example, Jason Demers, a right-shooting D who is nearly as good as Tanev in shot suppression and is better at most other things. Demers was traded along with a third-round pick from San Jose to Dallas in 2014...for third-pairing defenceman Brenden Dillon, who is pretty clearly worse. Stay-at-home defenceman Adam Larsson famously cost Edmonton a superstar left wing in Taylor Hall, while Edmonton unloaded a quality RHD in Jeff Petry for a second and a fifth at the 2015 trade deadline. Defensive defencemen are almost a Rorschach test.

If Adam Larsson set the market for defensive RHD, then Tanev is going to cost somebody a mint. But I think it’s more likely that a deal along the lines of Cullen’s description would set the template, of a first combined with a couple of young players/prospects. The Canucks can probably have their choice of Leaf wing prospects (Toronto has too many AHL LWs anyway, with the expansion draft and waivers hanging over them); you can make a list headed by Kasperi Kapanen and going down through Leipsic, Josh Leivo, Kerby Rychel, Carl Grundstrom, Jeremy Bracco, and so on. This runs the risk of getting into three-quarters-for-a-loonie territory, but...I don’t think Tanev is going to be able to command a prospect better than Kapanen, nor multiple firsts. If he does, the Leafs will likely have to bow out of bidding for him, because any trade would become a mistake for us.

So: set the upper limit of a Leafs deal for Tanev at 1st + Kapanen + Rychel. On those terms it’s definitely worth it for the Canucks, rather than hanging on to Tanev (which is not something they should really do.) Is it enough to outbid other teams? Only time and Jim Benning will tell.

 

http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2017/6/6/15743666/toronto-maple-leafs-trade-target-chris-tanev-morgan-rielly-right-hand-defence-vancouver-canucks

This is probably the more realistic assessment of Tanev's situation I've seen. 

[aGENT]

26 minutes ago, stawns said:

I think a lot of people are under estimating Kapenen, he's going to be a solid top 6 fwd

I don't think people are under estimating him but if there's one things we already have a lot of, it's 'Kapenen's'. He doesn't fill a pressing need. Good player/fair 'value' or otherwise.

 

12 minutes ago, Wolfgang Durst said:

In fact I guess the Canucks may have only a few options because BUF is probably acquiring a D-Man in a Evander Kane trade with L.A. ( Mc Nabb , Martinez) and there- fore no longer interested in Tanev.

I don't think Tanev was ever particularly destined for BUF. Their more pressing need is on left D. And there's no way in hell we were sending Tanev for Kane alone. Kane and their 8th would peak my interest but I'm not even sure that gets it done. They can likely get more value for Kane from a contender.

 

Now DAL, TBL, ARZ (not to mention TOR) etc could all use a top4, righty D...we'll see if anyone's willing and able to pony up.

[Alflives]

7 minutes ago, timberz21 said:

This is probably the more realistic assessment of Tanev's situation I've seen. 

If all Tanev can return is what this (clearly Leaf's biased) reporter suggests, then Tanev remains here.  My goodness!  Seriously?  The guy suggests Leaf's crap scraps for (what he himself said) is the best shot suppression dman in the league.  Ha Ha Ha

We will not trade with TO, because the Leafs desire what we have.  The Leafs will be garbage in their own end with the selfish one-way forwards they have.  They get NO help from us.  LOSER LEAFS....

[Alflives]

Tampa pays Drouin

Dallas pays 3rd overall

TO (just no to any offer)

Calgary pays Sam (18 year old) Bennett

Buffalo pays Sam Reinhart

Arizona pays Strome