Can the Canucks afford to let Chris Tanev walk away?

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, gurn said:

not his role.

Funny how certain players need to be the perfect specimens to have any value when in reality almost every player could be nitpicked into not excelling in certain areas of their game. Like Hughes and physical play or EP and his faceoffs for a centerman, but they get a pass because they aren't a player they like and they provide the "sexy" offense. Actual (smart) defense is so underrated and they want to build the team with the current Toronto model, yet also make fun of them for their lack of defense (or so I think, unless they are closet Leafs fans).

[Crabcakes]

3 hours ago, grandmaster said:

Lol!

 

Tanev is a capable defenceman but he is not ahead of Edler. Meyers still needs to find his way and is likely to be better in time (his history will prove this). 
 

Those players I’ve listed need playing time to get good. None of them have had the opportunities. Next year will be that. As I said, Marky and TT are ahead of Tanev on the list and I’m sure most people here agree with that.

I didn't mention Edler at all.  I don't disagree with you about him but I don't know why you're bringing him up.  My opinion is that Edler before Hughes was our #1 and is a #3 on a good team.  He's getting long in the tooth but was much more comfortable as the #3 last year.

 

Who on your list is going to replace Tanev at #2?  Rathbone, Rafferty, Juolevi, Woo, etc.  None have even played regularly in the NHL before.  Is it Myers?  I thought he looked over his head as the #2 when he played up the line up last year.  I'd really like to see these guys get some games this year but it's going to be as bottom pair until they earn more ice time.  I think they're even pushing it moving on from Stecher (which is another player who the "majority" have accepted saying good bye to) and Stech has some of the best numbers 5v5 on the team

 

It's going to take a bold move to really improve the back end this year.  Miller-like.  Failing that, if they want to cut salary on the back end, I would look at moving Benn first but that's not a lot of cap.

[HockeyHarry]

In just a few weeks we’ll see how important our UFAs are in crunch time.

 

i like Tanev a ton, its his injury proneness that worries me. But i do think having a Solid Quinn partner helps Tanev not having to put himself in bad situations too rely on his shot blocking.

 

Tanev is a beast, a no fear team player.

and a easy target to get money from in team poker. He could be broke at the end of the Bubble playoffs.

[Nuxfanabroad]

Haven't scanned all comments yet..has it been said? In my mind, when you've committed 6 mill/term to the big rhD-giraffe, you pretty much have to move on from CT.

 

Great warrior, but he should go track down top $ & term. Not from us, with all our kids coming up to paydays.

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Haven't scanned all comments yet..has it been said? In my mind, when you've committed 6 mill/term to the big rhD-giraffe, you pretty much have to move on from CT.

 

Great warrior, but he should go track down top $ & term. Not from us, with all our kids coming up to paydays.

Care to explain why? Say Tanev comes in around 5 million, 11 million for two top 4 RD isn't unreasonable. Hell the Sharks paid 11.5 for one player. We didn't sign Myers to replace Tanev, we signed Myers because we really needed another top 4 RHD. Losing Tanev takes us back. There's no one on the UFA market that's going to be as good at a cheaper cost and a trade isn't going to be cheap. Relying on youth to step in and take on one of hardest defensive roles of the team is a big gamble.

[Grape]

4 hours ago, canuktravella said:

best defensive dman in league right lol   plus 43 in career isnt that good    best defensive dman all time  larry robinson was plus 722 in his career and  tanev is injured 38% of time not very durable 

Are you kidding me? The fact that he’s +43 is honestly insane to me, given how bad the Canucks have been most of the time during his career. 
 

You listed that stat to show how he “isn’t good,” but I think most of us would agree that’s phenomenal.

 

Also the fact that you cited +/- as a legit stat is laughable - as if it’s not something that’s heavily affected by surrounding factors.

Edited July 20, 2020 by Grape

[theo5789]

36 minutes ago, Grape said:

Are you kidding me? The fact that he’s +43 is honestly insane to me, given how bad the Canucks have been most of the time during his career. 
 

You listed that stat to show how he “isn’t good,” but I think most of us would agree that’s phenomenal.

 

Also the fact that you cited +/- as a legit stat is laughable - as if it’s not something that’s heavily affected by surrounding factors.

Artemi Panarin +36 last season almost matching Tanev's career number, defensive specialist forward. So good defensively that he averaged a whole second of PK ice time per game this past season!

[canuktravella]

1 hour ago, Grape said:

Are you kidding me? The fact that he’s +43 is honestly insane to me, given how bad the Canucks have been most of the time during his career. 
 

You listed that stat to show how he “isn’t good,” but I think most of us would agree that’s phenomenal.

 

Also the fact that you cited +/- as a legit stat is laughable - as if it’s not something that’s heavily affected by surrounding factors.

sorry you love tanev but hes really not that good but believe what you want 

[Crabcakes]

5 hours ago, HockeyHarry said:

Healthy Tanev playing with Quinn i like.

 

A Injuried Tanev with new big Contract I wont like.

 

anyone willing to gamble Tanev stays healthy?

Tanev played all 69 games last year.  That's a start.

[Nuxfanabroad]

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

Care to explain why? Say Tanev comes in around 5 million, 11 million for two top 4 RD isn't unreasonable. Hell the Sharks paid 11.5 for one player. We didn't sign Myers to replace Tanev, we signed Myers because we really needed another top 4 RHD. Losing Tanev takes us back. There's no one on the UFA market that's going to be as good at a cheaper cost and a trade isn't going to be cheap. Relying on youth to step in and take on one of hardest defensive roles of the team is a big gamble.

There are the usual pros & cons, which have been kicked around on these type of topics over the yrs

 

Then there's another thread last wk(Two Strategies) where I believe our off-season will take a divergent course, pending whether we make the PO's, or not. I think with the quality of our assets, we can prob acquire another youngish D that likes some rough play.

 

Make the PO's(pay off the Miller deal), then I'm quite happy to see them gamble with a younger roster, for a yr or two.

[coho8888]

6 hours ago, tas said:

yikes. that's a bad take. 

Consider the source.  Just saying.

 

 

[Junkyard Dog]

If Tanev walks and no there's no replacement than we won't be as good next year. Can't expect young guys to play at or above his level as rookies.

 

IDK about you guys but I don't want Leafs-like D. Need a good overall team.

[TNucks1]

6 hours ago, canuktravella said:

ive never seen the guy make a big hit in 10 yrs he doesnt clear the crease. he can skate and pass and break his foot blocking shots every yr naybe give him a 7 mill per 8 yr contract to make team suck anyother 8 yrs  

lol what, over reaction, sedins werent hitters or anything, but sure as hell were tough, hell even torts had there back and alot of others even burkie.tanev is tough as hell, damn look at his teeth hahaha.

Edited July 20, 2020 by TNucks1

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

There are the usual pros & cons, which have been kicked around on these type of topics over the yrs

 

Then there's another thread last wk(Two Strategies) where I believe our off-season will take a divergent course, pending whether we make the PO's, or not. I think with the quality of our assets, we can prob acquire another youngish D that likes some rough play.

 

Make the PO's(pay off the Miller deal), then I'm quite happy to see them gamble with a younger roster, for a yr or two.

But that doesn't answer why paying Myers 6 million means we have to move on from Tanev.

 

There are often proposals for deals, but often it's lopsided in our favour. Many are uptight at the thought of moving Boeser if you want a significant piece to fill that top 4 RD, and the sum of whatever parts will likely not net you much better than a Tanev unless you're willing to part with another 1st or significant prospect which people are also uptight about.

 

I'm fine with going with a younger roster, but not in a position that plays some of the hardest minutes on the team. This is why I'm comfortable with moving on from Toffoli assuming we can afford to retain him because you can slot in youth as we have depth there to up the odds of finding a replacement and also have them in a position (wing) that doesn't expose us as much. Much like center being a tough position to fill, we are lucky to have someone like Bo that can take the brunt of it and have a lot of support from Miller on wing capable of taking draws and Beagle and Sutter have taken many of those hard minutes to allow EP and Gaudette to hone their craft.

[grandmaster]

8 hours ago, King Heffy said:

The problem is a suitable replacement will cost more than simply re-signing Tanev, who is willing to take a discount, and there aren't a lot of guys that will be available anyway.  We don't currently have anyone in our system who can be trusted to play that role.

How can you say that when the chance is not given? Did you honestly think Hughes was going to be a number one D man in his rookie year? No, you didn’t. He played well and earned that.
 

I’m sure if you let Woo or Raferty play they might just surprise you as a #4 Defenceman. If they fail then move on to the next decent prospect that we have had waiting for the last couple years. If there are none of them that prove capable then you make a trade a quarter or half way into the season. 

 

I don’t get why some of you are not understanding this simple concept. This isn’t really that hard to figure out. 

Edited July 20, 2020 by grandmaster

[theo5789]

45 minutes ago, grandmaster said:

How can you say that when the chance is not given? Did you honestly think Hughes was going to be a number one D man in his rookie year? No, you didn’t. He played well and earned that.
 

I’m sure if you let Woo or Raferty play they might just surprise you as a #4 Defenceman. If they fail then move on to the next decent prospect that we have had waiting for the last couple years. If there are none of them that prove capable then you make a trade a quarter or half way into the season. 

 

I don’t get why some of you are not understanding this simple concept. This isn’t really that hard to figure out. 

Because Hughes had been tested in the world championships against men, he had his 5 game stint the year prior to assess him. We still had signed Benn and Fantenberg for LD depth and Edler was still around to take on the hard assignments. Hughes was taking on an offensive role and could be sheltered more especially being partnered with some like Tanev who is a defensive stalwart.

 

By losing Tanev, you're losing your top PK defender and a guy that often had to face the toughest competition (although that shifted towards Myers and Edler 5v5 last season). You can give a youngster a shot (if he has earned it), but it's a big hole to fill. Hughes replaced Hutton/Del Zotto. Not exactly the same loss as a Tanev. Not sure why that's so hard to figure out although maybe the concept is a bit too complex for those that can't see it.

 

I also hope you understand that if it doesn't work out, then that means we would likely be dropping games and other teams won't be lining up to help us out. That means we would be trading from a position of weakness to pay for  a position of weakness that we created on our own when we have a player that we could sign for free and is a known to us. Seems like an unnecessary gamble when we have higher quality players to fill in for a Toffoli to save cap instead.

Edited July 20, 2020 by theo5789

[Nuxfanabroad]

2 hours ago, theo5789 said:

But that doesn't answer why paying Myers 6 million means we have to move on from Tanev.

 

There are often proposals for deals, but often it's lopsided in our favour. Many are uptight at the thought of moving Boeser if you want a significant piece to fill that top 4 RD, and the sum of whatever parts will likely not net you much better than a Tanev unless you're willing to part with another 1st or significant prospect which people are also uptight about.

 

I'm fine with going with a younger roster, but not in a position that plays some of the hardest minutes on the team. This is why I'm comfortable with moving on from Toffoli assuming we can afford to retain him because you can slot in youth as we have depth there to up the odds of finding a replacement and also have them in a position (wing) that doesn't expose us as much. Much like center being a tough position to fill, we are lucky to have someone like Bo that can take the brunt of it and have a lot of support from Miller on wing capable of taking draws and Beagle and Sutter have taken many of those hard minutes to allow EP and Gaudette to hone their craft.

You're always a solid poster, who objectively explains clearly, I lose patience on these precise questions, mostly due to good ol' unforeseens:

 

- Will there even BE a 20-21 campaign!?

- We might get some big PO injuries(LTIR adjustments of convenience)

- CT's lady might pull a Miss Hoffman..(kidding, of course) & she may well have been innocent too!

 

We don't get the big bux that JB(& his crew) pull down. Of course, not privy to his master-plan either. For example, I'd be open to moving a big BB pkg(w/ fat cap outgoing), but also came to see I don't(or didn't) fully realize just how valued he is within the room. If his inclusion gets the other young stars signing cheaper?..well, prob I waste my time then dreaming up the perfect swap with some team out east.

 

IF I were a GM, guess I'd be pretty conservative/patient & wait for the drafted youth to build up to near overflowing. I really hate squandering that capital, so Toffoli would be a fairly high priority. Of course you understand every signing is an interconnected domino. So I can't see this matter as CT & Myers..or just pick 1.

 

Half-full, or empty?(a pro & a con):

Why do we actually have this current cap-squeeze? Well, a nice fact, is we've almost drafted TOO damn well for our own good. Hard to complain there.

 

& the con is why did we HAVE to sign so manyfreeken' vets!? Many summers I'd suggested slowing down the spending, anticipating this kinda squeeze might be on the horizon. Reminds me of my Missus(& her Sis) at the shopping mall. Seems to me they often spend just for the sake of spending!

 

***********************& I often hear******************

"Well ya can't blame JB for this COVID thing..how can anyone see THAT coming?!" We could prob apply this catch-all to 20, 25 other GM's at least.

It's just too convenient. One who sorts the budget is in The Business of anticipating the unexpected & unforeseens. Unless they suffer a meddlesome owner, within a cap-paradigm this IS their 1st order of business..period!

 

It's quite shocking to me, but cap space isn't the loved, sacred, revered thing that it ought to be. Seems like Sakic is the only bloke that appears to view this clearly. Now those bloody Avs are on the cusp.

 

Finally, altering your question: With around 20 mill left to ceiling, who do they prioritize?

For me, that really depends whether they make the PO's(paying our 1st to NJ) or not. Can't answer until.

 

 

Edited July 20, 2020 by Nuxfanabroad

[Provost]

We could use Tanev but at the same time can’t invest nearly the amount of term and money he could command on the market.

 

Barring him deciding to take a 1-2 year deal at a big discount, he is going to move along... maybe even just to go play with his brother on a contender.

 

Unless we make a trade, I think Stecher is the guy who remains, just for cap reasons. If you throw a 3-4 year term at Stecher you can probably get him at his current salary.  He has proven that he can play even as high up as the top pairing and not hurt you... he is kind of the D equivalent of Hansen as a great utility guy.

 

Hughes-Myers

Edler-Stecher

Benn-Rafferty

Brisebois 

 

it isn’t elite, or even very good... but it is what we can currently afford.  Next offseason is when we can fix it since there will be teams who would lose a D in expansion that we could pick up for cheap.

 

 

 

[theo5789]

6 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

You're always a solid poster, who objectively explains clearly, I lose patience on these precise questions, mostly due to good ol' unforeseens:

 

- Will there even BE a 20-21 campaign!?

- We might get some big PO injuries(LTIR adjustments of convenience)

- CT's lady might pull a Miss Hoffman..(kidding, of course) & she may well have been innocent too!

 

We don't get the big bux that JB(& his crew) pull down. Of course, not privy to his master-plan either. For example, I'd be open to moving a big BB pkg(w/ fat cap outgoing), but also came to see I don't(or didn't) fully realize just how valued he is within the room. If his inclusion gets the other young stars signing cheaper?..well, prob I waste my time then dreaming up the perfect swap with some team out east.

 

IF I were a GM, guess I'd be pretty conservative/patient & wait for the drafted youth to build up to near overflowing. I really hate squandering that capital, so Toffoli would be a fairly high priority. Of course you understand every signing is an interconnected domino. So I can't see this matter as CT & Myers..or just pick 1.

 

Half-full, or empty?(a pro & a con):

Why do we actually have this current cap-squeeze? Well, a nice fact, is we've almost drafted TOO damn well for our own good. Hard to complain there.

 

& the con is why did we HAVE to sign so manyfreeken' vets!? Many summers I'd suggested slowing down the spending, anticipating this kinda squeeze might be on the horizon. Reminds me of my Missus(& her Sis) at the shopping mall. Seems to me they often spend just for the sake of spending!

 

***********************& I often hear******************

"Well ya can't blame JB for this COVID thing..how can anyone see THAT coming?!" We could prob apply this catch-all to 20, 25 other GM's at least.

It's just too convenient. One who sorts the budget is in The Business of anticipating the unexpected & unforeseens. Unless they suffer a meddlesome owner, within a cap-paradigm this IS their 1st order of business..period!

 

It's quite shocking to me, but cap space isn't the loved, sacred, revered thing that it ought to be. Seems like Sakic is the only bloke that appears to view this clearly. Now those bloody Avs are on the cusp.

 

Finally, altering your question: With around 20 mill left to ceiling, who do they prioritize?

For me, that really depends whether they make the PO's(paying our 1st to NJ) or not. Can't answer until.

 

 

Thanks for a thought out response. Too often when I ask these questions, the posters either disappear from the thread or do not have much rationale behind it. I only ask because you have a statement that we should walk away from Tanev because of what we gave Myers which didn't see to have any ifs, but rather a must.

 

Now I get that a lot needs to be played out before any assessment can be fully made. There are many scenarios that can play out and still work (or not). So the way I see it is playoffs or not, we want to improve on the team (even if we win the Cup). IMO, losing our top, most reliable defensive dman, one who has chemistry with Hughes (think Methot to Karlsson for example) and is well respected in the room especially amongst the young new core is going to be a big hole to fill. We don't have anyone in the pipeline that is going to jump into this role or at least it's a very big longshot. This is a massive gamble that could set us back and we become closer to the Toronto model if we are shifting our cap towards an offensive style system (it's entertaining, but proven to be quite ineffective in the long run).

 

Tanev is a guy that wants to be here, has made a comment about willing to take a one year deal (even if it's been retracted by presumably his agent, the fact that he said it shows how much he values being here). He's within the top 2 or 3 available RD UFAs, so it's not like he's chopped liver. He could pursue the big bucks elsewhere, but he wants to be here (I believe he has a real home here).

 

We signed so many vets to insulate the youth. We probably did advance a lot faster than expected, but that doesn't mean you leave a major hole in your lineup. The reason I'm comfortable with Toffoli leaving is because we have potentially Virtanen that can step up, MacEwen could get a look, Podkolzin coming mid-season, Lind having an uptick year, Hoglander making the jump here, and even a Roussel has stepped up in a top 6 role before. The odds of finding a suitable replacement are much higher than banking on a Rafferty who's offense looks good but the hole is defense where he's still in question and Woo who hasn't seen a single pro game and no one has suggested that he could make that jump right away because he's still raw.

 

So I fully agree with prioritizing the cap, but I'm looking at what we do have in the system to increase the odds of remaining competitive. I'd be hard pressed to believe any team would've been able to plan for a pandemic and without a flat cap, we wouldn't be in that much of a predicament. But I still don't believe that because of Myers that we lose Tanev. It would take some major reason like a major injury, crazy wife, etc. In terms of play, I put him at a high priority at this moment.

[Grape]

14 hours ago, canuktravella said:

sorry you love tanev but hes really not that good but believe what you want 

I don’t “love” Tanev any more than other Canucks. He’s just a regular player to me. You’re just underselling him so significantly it’s laughable.