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

Can the Canucks afford to let Chris Tanev walk away?

Rate this topic


Patel Bure
 Share

Recommended Posts

Can the Canucks afford to let Chris Tanev walk away?
 

It’s no secret that the Canucks will have some tough decisions to make as far as the cap goes.   Toffoli, Markstrom, Virtanen, Gaudette, Stecher, and Tanev just to name a few.   
 

Tryamkin has re-signed with the KHL for another year, and so any thoughts of him replacing Tanev are now a pipe dream.   
 

Ideally, the Canucks could let Tanev walk so that they could re-up everyone else, but here’s what our defense would look like without Tanev.

 

Edler-Stecher

Hughes-Myers

Benn-Rafferty

 

Chatfield or Fantenberg

 

Does that defense scream elite to you?  Not to me.   On top of that, that defense is assuming that everyone is at 100% but that isn’t the case most of the time.   
 

I can’t see the Canucks moving on from Tanev unless they move one of their forwards for an adequate Tanev replacement on the back-end, OR the Canucks absolutely “shoot the moon” and somehow clear a bunch of cap space that they can sign a Joel Edmundson or Alex Pietrangelo.  
 

As injury prone as Tanev is, and as much he will likely decline in the coming years, I think he’s simply too valuable for us.   
 

So - what do you think?  Do you think the Canucks will move on from Tanev at the end of the season?   
 

My prediction is that Stecher will be given the Hutton treatment and will be the cap casualty so to speak.   I can also see the Canucks possibly moving Jordie Benn before the start of next season if they feel that Chatfield is NHL ready (along with other teams finishing most of their off season transactions and having a much clearer idea of their cap space for next season).    
 

All in all though, I can’t see the Canucks moving on from Tanev unless they move one of their forwards for an elite defensive prospect, or, they absolutely “shoot the moon” for Alex Pietrangelo and clear out a whole bunch of cap beforehand.

 

So in answering my own question, I can’t see us moving on from Tanev barring anything drastic because losing Tanev would be too devastating to our defense.

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

1 minute ago, Where's Wellwood said:

I'd have Rathbone above Benn on the depth chart

Edler-Myers

Hughes-Tanev

Chatfield-Rafferty 

 

I could see that happening, but I think coaching and management might have some reservations about the inexperience of that 3rd pairing.   
 

Maybe Benn replaces Rafferty in the above scenario, and Rafferty is used as a sweetener to move someone like Baertschi or Sutter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tanev is damaged goods body wont hold up. Toffoli gives us an elite top six and Marky has shown he can bail out the defense.  I would not sign him to a lengthy contract whatsoever. Love the guy but it's probably time to move on. And we got Rathbone coming in !

Edited by Silky mitts
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Silky mitts said:

Tanev is damaged goods body wont hold up. Toffoli gives us an elite top six and Marky has shown he can bail out the defense.  I would not sign him to a lengthy contract whatsoever. Love the guy but it's probably time to move on. And we got Rathbone coming in !

Miller-Pettersson-Toffoli

Pearson-Horvat-Boeser 

Roussel-Gaudette-MacEwen

Motte-Sutter-Virtanen

 

Edler-Stecher

Hughes-Myers

Chatfield-Rafferty 

 

Markstrom

Demko

 

........I don’t know.   That defense still looks quite suspect to me and that’s at 100% full health!   An injury to Edler or Hughes would make that defense a bottom 5 defense in the league.   I would love to move on from Tanev, but I’m not sure we could with that line-up.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

Canucks will have another rookie dman walk on for cap management.

 

Benn is probably gone and maybe Troy.

 

Tanev stays I think Canucks can't let him walk. I think TT walks.

Given what we gave up for Toffoli, I can’t see Benning letting him go.  Pearson’s presence aside, Toffoli has gone on record saying that he loves it here.  I think both sides will try and get things done.  
 

I think you’re right about Stecher and Benn.

 

1) Rafferty replaces Stecher

2) Chatfield replaces Benn (and we re-sign Fantenberg?)

Edited by DarkIndianRises
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Given what we gave up for Toffoli, I can’t see Benning letting him go.  Pearson’s presence aside, Toffoli has gone on record saying that he loves it here.  I think both sides will try and get things done.  
 

I think you’re right about Stecher and Benn.

 

1) Rafferty replaces Stecher

2) Chatfield replaces Benn (and we re-sign Fantenberg?)

What we gave up for TT is a sunk cost. She gone. 

 

If Benning over pays we'll be in big trouble.  I don't think TT stays. I think he leaves....but I was wrong once before....

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Edler-Myers

Hughes-Tanev

Chatfield-Rafferty 

 

I could see that happening, but I think coaching and management might have some reservations about the inexperience of that 3rd pairing.   
 

Maybe Benn replaces Rafferty in the above scenario, and Rafferty is used as a sweetener to move someone like Baertschi or Sutter?

FYI, Chatfield is an RD. In that scenario, it is more likely Brisebois that takes the LD spot and he was Rafferty's partner and looked decent in Utica. Juolevi and Rathbone would be in the mix as well. Chatfield would be battling Rafferty for that bottom pair RD (assuming Stecher isn't back) or 7/8 spot with Woo being a long shot.

 

With that said, if we don't re-sign Tanev, we will need to replace him. So it's either we pay him his 5 million +/- or will be replacing him with someone around the same dollar value or more. I think we don't complicate things and take away a partner that Hughes is comfortable with and simply keep Tanev.

 

Of course there are D that can play both sides and that could change things up should Green be comfortable doing so.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, theo5789 said:

Rathbone is an LD, so I don't think his arrival will affect Tanev's spot.

 

Having a top heavy offense and relying on goaltending to bail out a defense that would only be worse without Tanev (and assuming we are throwing in a rookie) seems very much like the Toronto model that can be entertaining and work well enough in the regular season (in fact Toronto is desperate for a player like Tanev). It won't be effective come playoff time. I don't know if Tanev is the answer, but I would focus on upgrading the defense and removing Tanev without a viable replacement is taking a step back from that.

Agreed. Just with what Tanev will ask for in dollar and term I think its best to walk away. If he is willing to sign short term then maybe why not, just can't see him staying healthy either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Given what we gave up for Toffoli, I can’t see Benning letting him go.  Pearson’s presence aside, Toffoli has gone on record saying that he loves it here.  I think both sides will try and get things done.  
 

I think you’re right about Stecher and Benn.

 

1) Rafferty replaces Stecher

2) Chatfield replaces Benn (and we re-sign Fantenberg?)

If we make the playoffs, the value we paid for Toffoli is paid off. The reason we added him was because we were thought to have lost Boeser for the remainder of the season and didn't want that news to hurt the team's confidence after the season they had put up so far. Re-signing him is gravy and a luxury if we are able to fit him in. I don't see him as a necessity for the team. It's fun to see a high powered offense, but without the balance, it won't be an effective team in the long haul. Defensive depth is always tested come playoff time.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Silky mitts said:

Agreed. Just with what Tanev will ask for in dollar and term I think its best to walk away. If he is willing to sign short term then maybe why not, just can't see him staying healthy either. 

I just don't see a viable replacement and Tanev wants to be here. We would get the best valued contract from a top 4 RD. A trade won't come cheap and he's the most affordable UFA option and I'd argue that he's in the top 3 available this offseason anyway.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

I just don't see a viable replacement and Tanev wants to be here. We would get the best valued contract from a top 4 RD. A trade won't come cheap and he's the most affordable UFA option and I'd argue that he's in the top 3 available this offseason anyway.

Would you be comfortable giving him term? Do you see him staying healthy looking back at his career and injury history? If we can get a good contract on a short term such as a 2 year I would be ecstatic. But he probably wants term..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Silky mitts said:

Would you be comfortable giving him term? Do you see him staying healthy looking back at his career and injury history? If we can get a good contract on a short term such as a 2 year I would be ecstatic. But he probably wants term..

If Tanev gives us a bargain with term, I think it would be much safer. Something like a five year deal at $1.5M below market value would still be worth it in my eyes. The other option would be 2 or 3 years at or near market value, but a longer deal that's cheaper might help us with our crunch for 2021.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

I still find it bewildering that anyone thought Tryamkin was any sort of replacement for a 10-year veteran with over 500 games who's been consistently one of our better defensemen for about eight of those years.

 

I agree that Tanev is a very solid player but I had to chuckle when I read 10 year veteran with 500 games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

I agree that Tanev is a very solid player but I had to chuckle when I read 10 year veteran with 500 games.

Haha yeah, the injuries have definitely piled up. Worth noting though that he's played in two shortened seasons now, so that lessens his games too.

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...