ABNuck Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 Not sure if already discussed...couldn't find anything in search. Anyways, what about Tanev (born in Toronto - UFA MNT8) at 4.45m off book for Barrie (born in Victoria - UFA) at 2.75m on book (2.75 retained by COL)...net savings for VAN of 1.70m to use at TDL or to use for Ferland off LTIR. Toronto gives up a bit of offense from the back-end but shores up the D more defensively...offence is not an issue for TML but keeping the puck out of their own net does seem to be more of an immediate issue if they are to compete. Vancouver gains a bit on the back-end offense but loses a shutdown guy. Barrie is 2 years younger so the concept here is more about competing for the next 5 years. I would then skate MYERS - HUGHES / EDLER - BARRIE as our top 4. Re-sign Stetcher and let him go to Seattle then add Olli into our bottom pairing (then go looking for a bottom pairing Right D to replace Stetcher). I think for the future (both players being UFAs) that both might be more likely to sign, what would probably amount to their final NHL contract, in their home town areas. Sidenote: WHC2016...Tanev with Rielly was Team Canada's top pairing, so there's some successful pairing history there. Thoughts? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Bell Posted January 31, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted January 31, 2020 We already have our power play quaterback. Absolutely zero need to do this and Barrie is going to want a boatload of cash which he really isnt worth. 1 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dixon Ward Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 Our defense is producing enough offense. We need to do better at keeping pucks out of our net and Tanev does that much better than Barrie. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 I actually like this idea @ABNuck The way the NHL is going I see having two puck moving d as a very good thing and we need to drive more 5 on 5 offence if we're going to survive any length of time in the playoffs. We'd have to retain 1/2 of Tanev's salary to make it work tho as TO doesn't have the cap room to take all of it. I also think we'd have to add in a decent prospect to swing the deal like a Lind or Woo. I do think Benning takes a hard look at adding Barrie in free agency too. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borvat Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said: I actually like this idea @ABNuck The way the NHL is going I see having two puck moving d as a very good thing and we need to drive more 5 on 5 offence if we're going to survive any length of time in the playoffs. We'd have to retain 1/2 of Tanev's salary to make it work tho as TO doesn't have the cap room to take all of it. I also think we'd have to add in a decent prospect to swing the deal like a Lind or Woo. I do think Benning takes a hard look at adding Barrie in free agency too. I think that Dman will need to be Rafferty or someone cheaper. Barrie has heated up lately and is going to want to get paid. Not sure how the Canucks add a $7Million+ defenseman next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 Given Dumbass' affinity for one way scoring players not sure they see value in Tanev for Barrie. Which is why the only notable name floating around as trade bait for Toronto is Kapanen. Guy that actually plays well in all zones. Besides, I think the Barrie train sailed when we signed Myers. Myers isn't exactly a great defender, he has a long stick but otherwise isn't particularly good defensively. And it's known Barrie isn't good defensively. That means the only good defensive righty we'd have on the blue line is 5'9 Stecher. Considering the only good defensive lefty we have is Edler. That leaves our defense looking quite suspect in our own zone. If we add a d-man I think it'd have to be a two way guy. Or at least I'd prefer a more two way guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 5 minutes ago, Borvat said: I think that Dman will need to be Rafferty or someone cheaper. Barrie has heated up lately and is going to want to get paid. Not sure how the Canucks add a $7Million+ defenseman next year. I think we can if the cap goes up by 3 mil and Jim moves out or buys out Baer. That would leave us close to 5 mil and we don't re-sign Tanev. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 Just now, Borvat said: I think that Dman will need to be Rafferty or someone cheaper. Barrie has heated up lately and is going to want to get paid. Not sure how the Canucks add a $7Million+ defenseman next year. LeBrun thinks he will be asking at least 8M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCNate Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 54 minutes ago, Bell said: We already have our power play quaterback. Absolutely zero need to do this and Barrie is going to want a boatload of cash which he really isnt worth. Barrie has struggled to put up points this season while being on the #2 PP in Toronto. Not sure he fills a hole on this team this year. I';d rather keep Tanev, and then see how JB is going to put together our D for next season. That very well may include signing Barrie, depending on the moves JB makes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 6 minutes ago, N7Nucks said: Myers isn't exactly a great defender I guess you couldn't watch the two games. I have them on tape as I couldn't live either - give me an address and I will send them to you. He was a BEAST and probably overall the best actual defender the past two games. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanuck Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 Why would Tanev waive his NTC to leave the only team he's ever known in the NHL, a solid playoff team right now as it looks, to go to what presently is a 'bubble' team (man that sounds good to say)? If he wants to go to Toronto he can just explore that in the off-season when he's UFA. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 2 minutes ago, BCNate said: Barrie has struggled to put up points this season while being on the #2 PP in Toronto. Not sure he fills a hole on this team this year. I';d rather keep Tanev, and then see how JB is going to put together our D for next season. That very well may include signing Barrie, depending on the moves JB makes. He has struggled to produce under Babcock. He has 18pts the last 20 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: I think we can if the cap goes up by 3 mil and Jim moves out or buys out Baer. That would leave us close to 5 mil and we don't re-sign Tanev. Other than Markstrom there's also Virtanen - he has arbitration rights and is 2 years to UFA. They can let Stecher walk and Gaudette doesn't have much leverage but Virtanen might not be all that cheap. There are also the bonus overages and they might want to keep some space to avoid a further carry over. Edited January 31, 2020 by mll 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 (edited) Would rather resign Tanev. We have our offense from defense, finally coming together. We need to maintain strong defensive group as well. Resign Tanev for 6 million per for 3 years. Edited January 31, 2020 by VegasCanuck Additional 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 We just have no way to sign him in the offseason, there is currently no chance of re-signing both Tanev and Markstrom... so there isn't enough to sign a much more expensive D man instead. For the remainder of the year, we have a good mix of offensive and defensive D men, moving out Tanev who is a great partner to Hughes and is 3rd in blocked shots in the league... would more likely cause issues than improve the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB5 Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 I like Barrie but I don't thinks this is the hockey trade that we need to make. The Canucks need puck movers but they also need people movers, i.e. guys that can clear the crease and block the shooting lanes. Tanev is a people mover who if replaced, should be replaced by another people mover. Either that or the Canucks keep him on the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brownky Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 54 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: I guess you couldn't watch the two games. I have them on tape as I couldn't live either - give me an address and I will send them to you. He was a BEAST and probably overall the best actual defender the past two games. Its the same as the Edler bash-fest. When a guy plays 21+ minutes in the hardest situations, there are plenty of chances to make an error. When that happens its kind of a self-reinforcing circle - He always makes mistakes, so people key in on every mistake. Ignoring the time he (by 'he' I mean take your pick, I've seen both Edler and Myers do it this year) muscles the puck off two guys in the low slot and chips the puck off the glass and out because that's a "boring" play that doesn't directly lead to a goal for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 25 minutes ago, Provost said: We just have no way to sign him in the offseason, there is currently no chance of re-signing both Tanev and Markstrom Is this some sort of physical law(s) that would be broken? The Tanev-Marky theorem that states that never these two shall be signed in same off-season by the same team? Any by having "no way to" means an ink shortage or simply another force field effect from the Tanev-Marky event horizon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 49 minutes ago, mll said: Other than Markstrom there's also Virtanen - he has arbitration rights and is 2 years to UFA. They can let Stecher walk and Gaudette doesn't have much leverage but Virtanen might not be all that cheap. There are also the bonus overages and they might want to keep some space to avoid a further carry over. all true. But there is a small window for it to happen if the cap goes up by enough. We can debate if thats the best use if the $ but I suspect Barrie will not get 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silky mitts Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 50 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said: Would rather resign Tanev. We have our offense from defense, finally coming together. We need to maintain strong defensive group as well. Resign Tanev for 6 million per for 3 years. There is no way we should give tanev 6 mil 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now