Can the Canucks afford to let Chris Tanev walk away?

[5Fivehole0]

Tanev already said he'd sign a 1 year deal if he needs to, to stay in Van

[MeanSeanBean]

2 hours ago, Where's Wellwood said:

I'd have Rathbone above Benn on the depth chart

Benn is a 500 game NHL vet, while Rathbone is untested at the pro level. Rathbone is a very exciting prospect for us, but without even seeing him in the NHL there is no way you can assume he places ahead of Benn. In my opinion of course.

[Devron]

Like Edler we need him for another 1 or 2 minimum. It’s exciting that we have the potential to have a pretty decent top 6 but we are a couple years to go yet. However I’d like to see Fanta walk and Benn traded or be the 7th guy. We need to see some of these prospects get their feet wet in the big league 

[Slegr]

If it’s a good deal, I can see Tanev staying for another couple of years as we transition to a younger defence. His injury-prone play could be a blessing in disguise the next couple of years as we test out some newbies in the system. 

[canuktravella]

3 hours 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?

chatfield isnt even good in ahl why woukd he have a roster spot rathbone juolevi and brisebois and sautner are ahead of him 

[canuktravella]

our defense hasnt been elite since 2012 it wont be elite with tanev here or gone  do you wanna pay 6-7 mill to provide no physicality or offense  id rather see him walk let juolevi rathbone and rafferty have their shot  if they fail  make a big trade 

[Gurn]

3 hours ago, Chris12345 said:

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....

Are you sure you weren't, just mistaken?

[theo5789]

3 hours 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.

 

Regardless, he's not someone we can let go unless we replace him. Without him or a suitable replacement, I think we sink back down in the standings, as Markstrom was already standing on his head to get us around playoff level. It blows my mind how he's still so underrated by some people. I would say that in the rough years when Edler was underperforming, Tanev was our best defenseman for two or three years, and even now is still third in my eyes below Edler and Hughes.

 

Rathbone, Rafferty, et. al are exciting untested players, but we would be extremely naive to think assume with certainty that they could jump into a top four role immediately. Most players aren't Quinn Hughes. In fact, almost no one in NHL history has done what Hughes did this year.

I don't think many were suggesting that Tryamkin would replace Tanev though. I think the idea was he would be an upgrade to Stecher and could be trusted more on the PK (Nikita was the top RD on his KHL team) and ease some of Tanev's minutes there and allow Myers to focus on the even strength time.

 

I agree with the rest though.

[theo5789]

3 hours 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..

Up to 4 years, I'd be comfortable (and hopefully reasonable dollars). I think Hughes takes a lot of pressure off of him by being able to get the puck out of the zone with control. I thought Tryamkin would arrive this season as an upgrade to Stecher and could also ease some RD minutes on the PK, but he could arrive the following season instead. These are the key areas that forces the injuries IMO.

[KirkSave]

4 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Can the Canucks afford to let Chris Tanev walk away?

Yes, if the price is too high. If he is willing to re-sign with the canucks for less than what he could get elsewhere, I agree with other posters in that a 2-3 year deal would be ideal. However, this may be his last chance to "cash in" on a lucrative, long term contract, so he may move on. Toronto could desperately use a player of his quality and they are in win now mode and have a weak R side d corp at the moment.

 

Whether he stays or goes depends if Tanev wants to stay in Van because he absolutely loves the team/city, get the biggest dollar amount or chase the cup with a legit contender in a win now opportunity as the Canucks are still about 3 years out from being an elite team IMO.

 

Personally, I hope we re-sign him to a 2-3 year deal. He compliments Hughes game and is like Hamhuis used to be. Plays well every night, whose under the radar style of play makes his teammates better.

[Ghostsof1915]

Long term our defence is going to be due for a shake up regardless. 

- Tanev, Stecher this offseason?

- Edler, Benn 2021? 

 

Leaving Hughes, Myers, Rathbone, Rafferty,  Woo, and Juolevi at the end of 2021 (With only Woo, Rathbone and Myers still under contract) 

 

Now is the team that comfortable with 3 rookies on the defence? The team is going to have to start drafting heavy on the defence regardless because

they take the longest to develop. Unless the team can find other UFA gems and plunder them from the NCAA or find good cheap free agents that other teams 

are willing to let go. 

 

Otherwise there's going to have to be a lot of wheeling and dealing to keep to the cap. 

 

[IBatch]

  Don’t see the team moving from Tanev but i suppose it’s possible.   Our defense is still our weakest link.   Do think we might move on from Stetcher though and save a little there.  Also see Tanev signing a one year deal - report about three weeks ago said as much (that’s what they are looking at).  He’s not old for a defensive defenseman.  Just look at how Edler is aging ... his injuries are more of a concern but really even that kind of helps the team right now as then we get to see how the NHL readyish guys are which could help with decisions  later. 
 

QHs likes playing with him and says Tanev has helped.    He’s a mentor and a leader and well liked in the dressing room too.    As far as Alex P goes that’s a pipe dream.  Slim chance he won’t sign in St Louis.   
 

Benn is definitely expendable although it’s always like to have depth - and because of that and his history and cheap cap hit wouldn’t be too hard to move with only a year left.   Believe that’s OJs chance and that he will get his feet wet next season too.

 

The team really needs two guys to step up and take over, and do a better job then their replacements - one for Edler and one for Tanev long term.   It’s anyone’s guess who that might be and if it will even happen at all with the prospects we have.  

Markstrom, Tanev and then TT (who I’d love to keep but really he’s a luxury... and we could definitely come to regret that in the same way we are with Ferland already and how Sutter is also making things hard cap wise.  Thankfully we only need to wait a year and we should have cap space galore to work with.  And some more the following year too.  That’s when we should be looking for upgrades in the top six and the top four D. 

To answer your question id say most likely NO we can’t move on from Tanev yet.   He could easily stay for 5 more years (one or two year deals at a time) ...

[coolboarder]

I don't know how Tanev can play for longer when he had injury issue and can decline faster so we ought to be prudent with what Tavev is looking for.  We can afford him only if he seeks a slight raise with some bonus on if he wins Norris Trophy, something like that.   It has to be one-year deal so that he can walk away with ED coming up.

[IBatch]

3 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

I don't know how Tanev can play for longer when he had injury issue and can decline faster so we ought to be prudent with what Tavev is looking for.  We can afford him only if he seeks a slight raise with some bonus on if he wins Norris Trophy, something like that.   It has to be one-year deal so that he can walk away with ED coming up.

Agree with the one year thing for a variety of things including the ED.   We need to keep three guys and two of them need to be our young players .. maybe all three even. 

[zimmy]

Love, love  love Tanev. He's been the ultimate warrior for this team. Taken many bullets without complaint. 

As much as I value him and recognize his value to the team I often wonder if there is the same appreciation for him in the industry?

If it gets to that point, who pays up for him? Who will give term? What possible destinations are there and will there be a situation for Chris and his agent to leverage? 

I have my doubts that there will be endless suitors but I suppose it only takes one.

[coolboarder]

33 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Agree with the one year thing for a variety of things including the ED.   We need to keep three guys and two of them need to be our young players .. maybe all three even. 

I agree.  Also another factor, since he doesn't bring offense and that's the well-known fact and if he can keep it up is also another unknown factor and if he slows down, he become a liability and doesn't bring anything to their offense. 

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

Uncomfortable realization I had earlier today:

 

If we let Tanev walk, and don’t find a way to upgrade the remaining D, this team actually starts looking quite a bit like the Leafs.   

[Patel Bure]

4 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Uncomfortable realization I had earlier today:

 

If we let Tanev walk, and don’t find a way to upgrade the remaining D, this team actually starts looking quite a bit like the Leafs.   

Completely agree.

 

Edler-Stecher

Hughes-Myers

Rathbone-[Benn-Rafferty] 

 

Is what our defense will look like if we walk from Tanev.   Not only is that defense very underwhelming, but that defense would literally be one injury away from being a bottom 5 defense in the league (even moreso if Edler or Hughes were to go down with injury).     
 

As ideal as it would be to let Tanev walk, I’m not sure if we could afford to.   
 

As ideal as it would be to trade a guy like Virtanen up front for help on defense, I don’t think Virtanen would net the kind of return that we’d need.

 

The more and more I think about it, the more that I realize that the only real way to address our short term and long term needs on defense (ie having a young elite top pairing dman in our system outside of Quinn Hughes), would be in moving one or both of Boeser and Podkolzin.

[IBatch]

11 hours ago, canuktravella said:

our defense hasnt been elite since 2012 it wont be elite with tanev here or gone  do you wanna pay 6-7 mill to provide no physicality or offense  id rather see him walk let juolevi rathbone and rafferty have their shot  if they fail  make a big trade 

He won’t get much more then he’s getting now, even without Covid.    This season he was still a solid NHL defenseman and QHs has nothing but good things to say about how much he helped his transition and how much he likes having him as a partner (without someone like that him his plus minus would be even worse).    If he was on the L side then maybe as we are much deeper there ... our R side is thin even with him in the lineup.   Rafferty might be able to replace Stetcher, but none of these guys are ready to replace Tanev at this point.    A one year deal makes a lot of sense for the team - and he’d be taking one for the team for sure by staying in Vancouver on a one year deal too - although I see him slowly working his way towards the bottom pairing and really replacing Stetcher for up to five more years on one or two year deals at a time.      
 

Our defense won’t be elite again anytime soon - agree on that point.    That said like the MG defense - money will free up to afford the equivalent of a couple 6 million dollar guys (4 million back then) - a chance for our own Hamhuis/Erhoff types.   In two seasons.    When that happens our window will be opened more then the crack it is now.   
 

Edit:  The teams strength is in its forward prospect group still - enough guys to replace a lot of  LE, Beagle, Sutter, Roussel,Pearson etc...the cash savings from that hopefully can be used to plug some holes - but not this off-season.  As early as the following one though ... as long as JB doesn’t do anything stupid like trading BB and replacing him with TT (unless the return is too good to pass on). 

Edited July 19, 2020 by IBatch

[IBatch]

10 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Up to 4 years, I'd be comfortable (and hopefully reasonable dollars). I think Hughes takes a lot of pressure off of him by being able to get the puck out of the zone with control. I thought Tryamkin would arrive this season as an upgrade to Stecher and could also ease some RD minutes on the PK, but he could arrive the following season instead. These are the key areas that forces the injuries IMO.

Myers and QHs definitely played a huge role in keeping the work load off Edler and Tanev.   They both had one of their best health seasons in a long time ...  would be nice to upgrade Stetcher at this point ... worrisome that when the kids start that the injuries could start coming back - however the team doesn’t have a choice in that regard, at least next season.   After that the leftover money most definitely should be concentrated on looking for long term vets to shore up each side.   Possibly with trades - possibly with UFAs.