Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[proposal] Canucks should consider trading Tanev and signing Gardiner


Recommended Posts

[proposal] Canucks should consider trading Tanev and signing Gardiner

 

While I've been happy with the moves that the Canucks have made this off-season, our defense in the long term still concerns me.    

 

Here is what our defense looks like right now:

 

Edler-Myers

Hughes-Tanev

Benn-Stecher

 

Fantenberg.

 

 

Short term concerns:

 

While that defense isn't too bad, I still have concerns for that left side.  If Edler goes down with injury (and perhaps I shouldn't be saying, "if,"........I should be saying, "when,"), you'll either have.....

 

1) A very young Quinn Hughes playing on the top pairing  OR

2) An honest yet talent-challenged 3rd pairing caliber dman in Jamie Benn moving up to fulfill that role.

 

In both cases, I think there are significant risks involved in having either of those men playing on the top pairing for any length of time.......and if the Canucks have playoff aspirations, and Edler injury could once again prove to be fatal.

 

 

Long term concerns:

 

One major concern I have for our defense long term, is the lack of Top 4 caliber defensemen in our system.       Two years from now, the Canucks will be faced with the following dilemna:

 

1) Do we re-sign 35 year old Alexander Edler?  If so, for how much?    As I addressed in another thread, will we have enough cap space to re-up Edler, given that Hughes and Pettersson will need to be re-upped at this same time?

2) IF Hughes is ready to assume that top pairing position on the team, who takes that 2nd pairing LD?    Is Olli Juolevi projecting to be a 2nd pairing defenseman as of this writing?    Can Tryamkin fulfill that role?     

 

2019-2020:

 

Edler-Myers

Hughes-Tanev

Benn-Stecher

 

2020-2021

 

Edler-Myers

Hughes-[Tryamkin? (as a Tanev replacement)]

Benn-Stecher

 

2021-2022

Hughes-Myers

[Tryamkin-Juolevi]-[Stecher-Woo]

[Tryamkin-Juolevi]--[Stecher-Woo]

 

My only problem with the above, is that we might be assuming too much..........and that we might be making unrealistic projections.

 

While it's nice to make assumptions that guys like Juolevi, Tryamkin, and Woo will easily be able to fill those Top 4 positional voids, I'm just not sure if they'll be able to be GREAT in those roles.   Are any of those guys projecting to be GREAT 2nd pairing dmen at the NHL level?   I'm not so sure.      

 

On top of all that, I'm also assuming that Hughes will automatically become a top pairing calibre dman.       Although it seems likely, it's by no means a guarantee.    

 

Gardiner would not only solidify the left side D both short term and long term, but would also allow the Canucks to make more realistic long term and conservative projections on their D: 

 

This is where I think a guy like Gardiner will come in handy.    The presence of Gardiner will allow the Canucks to:

 

1) Have more top pairing LD options if/when Edler gets injured.   Now, instead of relying on a very young Quinn Hughes, or the 3rd pairing calibre Jamie Benn, the Canucks could easily put Gardiner as an adequate top pairing replacement, while still allowing Hughes to develop his game on a 2nd pairing.

 

Edler-Stecher

Gardiner-Myers

Hughes-Benn

 

[If Edler gets injured]

 

Gardiner-Myers

Hughes-Benn

Fantenberg-Stecher

 

2) Let Edler walk after two years without having to worry if the Canucks will be deep enough:     If Hughes is good enough to assume Top pairing D at this point, great!  Stick him on the top pairing.  If he's not ready.......great!   Gardiner goes there.    For the purposes of conservatism, you can then make preliminary projections to have guys like Juolevi, Tryamkin, and Woo taking over those 3rd pairing positions instead of making "lofty" 2nd pairing forecasts:

 

2021-2022:

 

[Hughes-Gardiner]-Myers

[Hughes-Gardiner]-[Tryamkin-Stecher-Woo]

[Tryamkin-Juolevi]-[Tryamkin-Stecher-Woo]

 

3) Will the presence of Gardiner affect the development of Hughes?       

 

I think this is the biggest reservations that many people have (including Benning), with regards to signing Gardiner.     I'm of the opinion that it wouldn't for the following reasons:

 

A)    Even if Hughes plays on the 3rd pairing 5  on 5, you could still give Hughes boatloads of PP time.        

B-)  As mentioned earlier, injuries to the D are inevitable.  Hughes would likely start on the 3rd pairing, but would likely get significant minutes in a top 4 role due to inevitable injuries.   Significant minutes on the Top 4 would be great for Hughes' development.    You know what likely wouldn't be great for his development right now?   Getting significant minutes in a top 2 role (which is basically what would happen right now if injuries occurred to the D).    

C)    If Hughes proves to be a Top 4 calibre dman right from the get go, move one of Edler or Gardiner to the right side.   Plain and simple.    Gardiner has had extensive experience playing on the right side in Toronto, while Edler played on the right side with Erhoff back in 2011.   

 

[Gardiner-Edler]-[Edler-Gardiner]

Hughes-Myers

Benn-Stecher

 

Fantenberg

 

 

Long term cap ramifications:   

 

I don't want to speculate about the long term cap ramifications of simultaneously trading Tanev (for a pick) while signing Gardiner (my guess is that Gardiner would be had for 6 million), and so the extra cap hit we'd take on would be (6 - 4.45 = 1.55 million), but I think it would definitely be worth exploring on Benning's end.    Again - I have no idea if the Canucks would be able to afford this move in the long term.    I speculated enough in my other thread and so I want re-hash that over here.

 

Conclusion:

 

Bringing in Gardiner would solidify the Canucks' left side D both short term and long term.    We wouldn't be forced to overburden Quinn Hughes, and we could also make more realistic and conservative projections with regards to guys like Tryamkin, Juolevi, and Woo.   Canucks D would be absolutely set both short term and long term on that left side.

Edited by Hindustan Smyl
  • Thanks 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

Your heart is definitely in the right place but I'm not sure if Tanev lands the team a 1st at this stage.    Would love for it to happen obviously and I'd definitely be pleasantly surprised.

I think it would be an easy choice for WPG to make, that right side of theirs is swiss cheese. We'd probably have to add something to the deal like another prospect but I could see it happening. 

 

I thought the media heads were saying Gardiner didn't want to come here? maybe after this much time he would. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

moving Tanev for a pair of picks would be my choice. 2nd and 3rd rounders. 1 of those picks can have conditions like GP or if team makes playoffs or gets into 2nd round the pick changes.

 

Moving Tanev frees up 4.6m. We need that flexibility, we don't need to sign Gardiner though, we have Quinn as our puck moving PP QB. I have to assume he is going to have to settle for a shorter term contract or a 1 yr deal in the 4-5m range?

 

Moving Tanev should be highly considered now, since he is healthy. We could try to nab a replacement from a team that is cap strapped or looking to lose some salary. Stone from Calgary or Murphy from Chicago could be fill in replacements that could be had on the cheap. Or go for a reclamation project like Honka from Dallas?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I think it would be an easy choice for WPG to make, that right side of theirs is swiss cheese. We'd probably have to add something to the deal like another prospect but I could see it happening. 

 

I thought the media heads were saying Gardiner didn't want to come here? maybe after this much time he would. 

It would have to be a protected first though. When Chevy traded for Stastny he made sure the pick was protected and that was when the Jets were a heavy contender. He wont trade it otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said:

we don't need to sign Gardiner though, we have Quinn as our puck moving PP QB. I have to assume he is going to have to settle for a shorter term contract or a 1 yr deal in the 4-5m range?

 

 

 

For me, it's not so much about what type of dmen we would have (i.e. possibly too many PP QB's if we signed Gardiner), but rather, ensuring that we would have quality depth for both the short term and long term.   If Edler gets hurt, I REALLY don't want the developing Hughes to be thrown to the wolves, let alone a 3rd pairing dman in Benn potentially playing on the top pairing.   Since Hughes is slated to be one of our biggest pieces moving forward, the Canucks need to be careful as to how they develop him.   Rushing his development would be very counter-productive (i.e. Justin Schultz is a good/bad example of this).

 

Since the Canucks are trying to make a push for the playoffs, I wouldn't support the idea of replacing Tanev with Stone, Murphy, or Honka as doing that would send a very massive mixed message to the rest of the team, since all of those players are clear downgrades on Tanev.

Edited by Hindustan Smyl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Pears said:

Swapping Tanev for Gardiner would cost us even more cap space. So no, we should not consider this. 

True, but it might only be a difference of 1.55 million (6 for Gardiner - 4.45 for Tanev).

 

Weren’t you telling me in the other thread that the Canucks won’t have short term and long term issues with cap space, and that they’ll have “plenty of room” to sign everyone in the future?   

Edited by Hindustan Smyl
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, coastal.view said:

myers was just signed to a long term contract

we do not need another older dman on an expensive long term one

particularly since neither myers or gardiner can be considered elite

 

hutton is still out there

and could be signed cheap and short term

if depth is required

let's not block any up and coming dmen

hopefully both joulevi and woo need roster space over the next 2 seasons

we also have quite a few young dmen in the system

likely one or 2 others could break through

I like the idea of possibly resigning Hutton as a contingency, but he’s another guy that wouldn’t be able to fill in on a top pairing in case of injury (and again, in Edler’s case, it’s not a matter of “if” it’s a matter of “when.”).

 

The presence of Gardiner wouldn’t block Juolevi.   If Juolevi is good enough to make the line-up, he’d likely have to start on the 3rd pairing.  You could then shift one of Edler or Gardiner over to the right side (where they both have experience).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

I like the idea of possibly resigning Hutton as a contingency, but he’s another guy that wouldn’t be able to fill in on a top pairing in case of injury (and again, in Edler’s case, it’s not a matter of “if” it’s a matter of “when.”).

 

The presence of Gardiner wouldn’t block Juolevi.   If Juolevi is good enough to make the line-up, he’d likely have to start on the 3rd pairing.  You could then shift one of Edler or Gardiner over to the right side (where they both have experience).

 

not sure why you are fixated on gardiner

he will be overpaid and given too much term

by any team who signs him

he is not a long term asset and will turn into a bit of an anchor

 

as i previously posted, we already signed a dman with those same risks - myers

why do you want to double up on this potential problem

we need to sign someone shorter term - 2 years max

you do not seem to get this point, so i'll refrain from posting further in this thread

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yuck.  Let's not get rid of our best defensive defenseman for a complete liability in his own end.  Gardiner would have been a candidate for the Conn Smythe if Boston had won the cup.  He is simply not good enough defensively to play in the NHL.

 

We would be better off signing Hutton who is actually a good hockey player as opposed to this useless pylon.  Would prefer to just keep Tanev though.  Gardiner would struggle to even make the team, even if we traded Tanev.  Edler, Hughes, Myers, Stecher, Biega, Fantenberg, OJ, Sautner, and Briesbrois are all better than Gardiner.

Edited by King Heffy
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather not have another expensive, long term contract on the books, especially for another older player that would be largely redundant here considering Edler is still a good player, Hughes has top pairing offensive D written all over him, and we have Juolevi who should be pretty close to making the jump. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe Benning is done with reshaping the defence. The top six are set and you have Biega and Fantenberg as probable 7th/8th guys. I firmly believe Juolevi is close to making the team, and Brisebois will push for a call up spot. Rafferty and Teves weren't signed to be Utica drones and will also push for NHL time. In another year Woo will fight for a job and you also have Sautner, Chatfield, Eliot and possibly Rathbone all aiming for NHL time. So, to sign another defenceman would push some of the prospects further down the depth chart. IMHO Benning has assembled enough defensive depth to withstand the inevitable ton of injuries to the back end. And no to signing Hutton. Nice guy, works hard, but he has had his time in Vancouver so it is time to try another option.

 

Really, since Benning has been here, this roster and protected list is the strongest in years. Benning went out looking for size, speed, strength and skill and seems to have succeeded in improving the player pool. 

 

One more unrelated thought: Eriksson very probably refused a move to anywhere in Alberta, so that's why he wasn't part of the musical chairs that saw Neal and Lucic trade palcces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

 

not sure why you are fixated on gardiner

he will be overpaid and given too much term

by any team who signs him

he is not a long term asset and will turn into a bit of an anchor

 

as i previously posted, we already signed a dman with those same risks - myers

why do you want to double up on this potential problem

we need to sign someone shorter term - 2 years max

you do not seem to get this point, so i'll refrain from posting further in this thread

 

This is a good point too. Right now we need to be focusing our cap space on Boeser, not another UFA. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

 

not sure why you are fixated on gardiner

he will be overpaid and given too much term

by any team who signs him

he is not a long term asset and will turn into a bit of an anchor

 

as i previously posted, we already signed a dman with those same risks - myers

why do you want to double up on this potential problem

we need to sign someone shorter term - 2 years max

you do not seem to get this point, so i'll refrain from posting further in this thread

 

I’m fixated on Gardiner because

 

1) If and when Edler gets hurt, we won’t have a suitable player to fill in on the top pairing LD.

2) In two years time if we move on from Edler, the Canucks will be lacking in top 4 dmen.  Juolevi, Tryamkin, and Woo are by no means guaranteed to be Top 4 caliber dmen.

3) Gardiner has the type of game that will age relatively well.  He shouldn’t be too much worse at the age of 34 than he is now (barring injuries, which is admittedly a concern for him).  A 6 year deal to Gardiner is more than acceptable.

 

As far as risks go, think more long term.  Over these next two years when Edler and Tanev move on from this organization, we will need top 4 caliber dmen in the worst way possible. You can’t just have Hughes and Myers as top 4 caliber guys.   Tree, Woo, and Juolevi are far from being guarantees.

 

You can have Gardiner, Hughes, and Myers as your flashier offensive guys, while guys like Tryamkin, Woo, and possibly Juolevi can be more of your defensively responsible / all situations type guys.

 

I get your point just fine.   I simply do not agree with it.   Canucks will be in dire need to Top 4 quality dmen when Edler and Tanev leave this organization over the next two years.

  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Pears said:

This is a good point too. Right now we need to be focusing our cap space on Boeser, not another UFA. 

Canucks could pretty much Sign Boeser right now if they wanted to.  They have the cap space.

 

Moving Baertschi + Schaller (-5.3ish million) + the difference in Gardiner and Tanev’s cap (1.55) would still give us an extra 3.7-3.8ish million in extra cap space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

I’m fixated on Gardiner because

 

1) If and when Edler gets hurt, we won’t have a suitable player to fill in on the top pairing LD.

Jordie Benn is a good enough defender to fill in for Edler should he get hurt. That would also allow Juolevi to come up and get some much needed NHL minutes. 

 

3 minutes ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

 

I get your point just fine.   I simply do not agree with it.   Canucks will be in dire need to Top 4 quality dmen when Edler and Tanev leave this organization over the next two years.

We’ll have Hughes, Juolevi, Woo and possibly Tryamkin fixated in the top 4 with Myers still here as well if Seattle doesn’t take him. We’ll be fine. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not opposed to maybe moving Tanev at the deadline if one of our young D has stepped up. I am opposed to shipping him out and bringing in someone who will demand more money and term via ufa. Especially Gardiner, I'm definitely not a fan. Why spend money to have our defense degrade when we've already bolstered our offense with the moves we've made up front?

 

If Edler gets hurt the team will deal with it, all teams deal with injuries. The best preparation for injuries is depth and the Canucks have been working on addressing that already. I'm not interested in giving Gardiner whatever he's looking for in UFA to have him as a piece of that depth, not when there cheaper options still out there and younger options waiting to show what they can do already in our system. It'd be wise to let the season play out and see what developments occur before committing to another expensive, long term contract. There will be options next offseason or potentially available via trade if management decides we need more pieces. 

 

If Gardiner was willing to sign something GM's deem reasonable he'd have likely been signed already. 

Edited by Coconuts
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...