[Rumour] Canucks have not offered C.Tanev a contract extension

[DefCon1]

40 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

Don’t know. But losing Tanev and adding someone not of his defensive caliber like a Barrie doesn’t help and probably makes things worse long term. If they are gonna improve the defence it better be via something like the 2 you mentioned or second tier with youth like a Cernak. Cause we can’t pretend to fix our defence anymore. If a reasonable deal can’t be done. Play the Raffertys and Joulevis see where they are at. Re access next year

Canucks need a defensive D man either way if we lose Tanev. Rafferty or Joulevi are not that type of D and we dont have one in our pipeline. So if Tanev walks, Benning will sign a replacement either through FA or trades. We really cant be experimenting with 2 young D and wasting Petersson and Hughes ELC years.

[DeNiro]

4 minutes ago, DefCon1 said:

Canucks need a defensive D man either way if we lose Tanev. Rafferty or Joulevi are not that type of D and we dont have one in our pipeline. So if Tanev walks, Benning will sign a replacement either through FA or trades. We really cant be experimenting with 2 young D and wasting Petersson and Hughes ELC years.

We need a two way defenseman not a defensive defenseman.

 

That was painfully obvious in the playoffs.

 

Sitting back and blocking shots is not a recipe for success. Moving the puck is. It’s why Dallas is having so much success.

 

If we’re targeting a D man it needs to be one that can contribute a both ends of the ice. Guys like Krug, Pietrangelo, and Hamonic to a lesser extent are guys we need to target.

[DefCon1]

4 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

We need a two way defenseman not a defensive defenseman.

 

That was painfully obvious in the playoffs.

 

Sitting back and blocking shots is not a recipe for success. Moving the puck is. It’s why Dallas is having so much success.

 

If we’re targeting a D man it needs to be one that can contribute a both ends of the ice. Guys like Krug, Pietrangelo, and Hamonic to a lesser extent are guys we need to target.

Well, I was saying the we need a D man who is also decent in terms of defense. So a 2 way D will be great and an elite 2 way D like Pietrangelo will be even better.

[smithers joe]

we need a younger chriss tanev to grow with quinn. cernak would be perfect. play  juolevi  and rafferty. don’t go after guys that wii break the bank.

[aGENT]

3 hours ago, oldnews said:

Hughes Tanev

Edler (Stecher?) / Cernak? Mayfield?  (or focus on a future, like Foote?)

Juolevi Myers

Looks an awful lot like what I'd like to see.

 

Barring a Cernak, Foote et al trade not happening... I'd happily see us target Stralman for Erriksson + swap as a solid stop gap to play with Edler in that lineup. Despite their ages, they could eat a lot of tough 5v5 minutes. Or conversely swap Stralman and Myers as well.

 

Hopefully we can move on from Benn and re-sign a slightly cheaper Fanta too. He'd be an excellent tag team with Juolevi, then let Rafferty do fill in duty on the right.

[DeNiro]

8 minutes ago, smithers joe said:

we need a younger chriss tanev to grow with quinn. cernak would be perfect. play  juolevi  and rafferty. don’t go after guys that wii break the bank.

I disagree we need another Chris Tanev.

 

Tanev has been a warrior for us but paying 5+ million for a D man that only scores a couple goals a season and blocks way too many shots to stay healthy is not smart spending.

 

We need a D man that is big and nasty but can also move the puck. He needs to be like Seabrook was to Keith.

 

Ekblad would be a great target in that sense if we could get it done.

[JM_]

1 hour ago, DefCon1 said:

I rather we do a miller trade than an Eriksson signing lol. People need to see that we have to give up something to get something and that would be fine with me. 

no kidding 

 

Lots of radio silence out of the Benning camp this year. Makes me think something big is cooking. 

[DeNiro]

4 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

no kidding 

 

Lots of radio silence out of the Benning camp this year. Makes me think something big is cooking. 

Same.

 

He’s known to like to make big moves right before the draft. 
 

Being almost a week out I could see something get done trade wise this week.

 

If we could get something done surrounding Gaudette, Virtanen, a pick and a prospect for Ekblad that would be amazing.

[smithers joe]

2 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

I disagree we need another Chris Tanev.

 

Tanev has been a warrior for us but paying 5+ million for a D man that only scores a couple goals a season and blocks way too many shots to stay healthy is not smart spending.

 

We need a D man that is big and nasty but can also move the puck. He needs to be like Seabrook was to Keith.

 

Ekblad would be a great target in that sense if we could get it done.

we can’t afford a player like that. we need to grow our own d men and cernak is second pairing d man on tampa. it might be a top pairing d here.  i’ld have; 

hughes and cernac;  edler and rafferty;  juolevi and myers.  cernac is coming off of an entry level  contract, so we might be able to sign him to bridge deal. he is only 23 years old with his best years ahead of him. 

[DeNiro]

1 minute ago, smithers joe said:

we can’t afford a player like that. we need to grow our own d men and cernak is second pairing d man on tampa. it might be a top pairing d here.  i’ld have; 

hughes and cernac;  edler and rafferty;  juolevi and myers.  cernac is coming off of an entry level  contract, so we might be able to sign him to bridge deal. he is only 23 years old with his best years ahead of him. 

A D that has two rookies in it is not likely one that makes the playoffs.

 

I doubt if Benning is looking to overhaul the D that Cernak is the solution. Sure he may be one part, but we’d have to do a lot more than that.

 

I would be okay overpaying for Ekblad though. I think his contract will look like a bargain over the next few years. He’s exactly the mold of defenseman this team should be looking for. A young Pietrangelo that you don’t have to pay 9 million + for.

[Devron]

56 minutes ago, DefCon1 said:

Canucks need a defensive D man either way if we lose Tanev. Rafferty or Joulevi are not that type of D and we dont have one in our pipeline. So if Tanev walks, Benning will sign a replacement either through FA or trades. We really cant be experimenting with 2 young D and wasting Petersson and Hughes ELC years.

We need D that are good defensively but can also move the puck. Joulevi for sure has that potential. It’s not about experimenting. We gotta stop trying to fill holes through free agency. We have to grow our players to be successful. That what successful teams do. We have one year left of entry level contracts with Hughes and Petey. Its not All or Nothing! 

Edited September 27, 2020 by Devron44

[JM_]

9 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Same.

 

He’s known to like to make big moves right before the draft. 
 

Being almost a week out I could see something get done trade wise this week.

 

If we could get something done surrounding Gaudette, Virtanen, a pick and a prospect for Ekblad that would be amazing.

Florida owes us so I hope that actually happens. 

 

It seems like some sort of Eriksson deal might also be possible with Detroit given how open Yzerman is about collecting assets, but I like Jim's stance with Loui. Screw him, he needs to terminate and move on. It seems silly to me that he'd not play in the NHL for up to 18+ months waiting for a buyout in his last year. He's only going to get 3.67 mil if it plays out that way so he should go get himself a Gagner type deal somewhere.

 

 

[DeNiro]

4 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

Florida owes us so I hope that actually happens. 

 

It seems like some sort of Eriksson deal might also be possible with Detroit given how open Yzerman is about collecting assets, but I like Jim's stance with Loui. Screw him, he needs to terminate and move on. It seems silly to me that he'd not play in the NHL for up to 18+ months waiting for a buyout in his last year. He's only going to get 3.67 mil if it plays out that way so he should go get himself a Gagner type deal somewhere.

 

 

Freeing up 5-6 mil would be a game changer for us.

 

Suddenly Benning could be in the market to make real upgrades this offseason.

[Devron]

5 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

Florida owes us so I hope that actually happens. 

 

Would be absolutely wild if JB pulled Ekblad outta Florida. Reminds me of the Luongo trade. I couldn’t believe it at the time 

 

 

[DeNiro]

1 minute ago, Devron44 said:

Would be absolutely wild if JB pulled Ekblad outta Florida. Reminds me of the Luongo trade. I couldn’t believe it at the time 

 

 

Only question is what does Florida need?

[Devron]

2 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Only question is what does Florida need?

Sounds like a change of culture is what I’ve been reading. So I’m guessing they would be looking for quality guys. Gaudette, hate to say it Boeser (not on the trade him bandwagon). Virtanen -probably not a fit with his history

 

Also they will want a high draft pick or a quality young Dman in return 

Edited September 27, 2020 by Devron44

[Herberts Vasiljevs]

3 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Only question is what does Florida need?

Scoring - especially because Hoffman and Dadonov are going to free agency. Ekblad is one of the very few guys I'd actually trade Boeser for, but even so, I don't see how Florida could possibly justify trading Ekblad.

[Provost]

1 minute ago, DeNiro said:

Freeing up 5-6 mil would be a game changer for us.

 

Suddenly Benning could be in the market to make real upgrades this offseason.

One would "think" it is possible to move Loui with 50% retained and at least one of Sutter/Beagle/Roussel/Baertschi with just a small sweetener attached.  I just can't see how a mid round pick is worth more than the opportunity cost of having money to spend this offseason.

I am genuinely starting to get worried that we won't be able to get rid of enough money.  Some of them aren't big deals, so what is the hold up?  Teams seem to be open for business, and unless we have pending deals with Tampa or Dallas there is nothing to wait for.  We are just days away from the draft and we need to have some movement before then to be in the market for other deals.  If we are shedding money, I would want to have it done before the draft so we can also consider taking on money for players that fit our needs more. 

Heck, even getting a player like Derek Stepan would be interesting as a 3C upgrade with only a year remaining... they would have to retain salary or take back one of our bad contracts but they are apparently in another "burn it all to the ground" shedding all contracts they can.

[Devron]

2 minutes ago, Herberts Vasiljevs said:

Scoring - especially because Hoffman and Dadonov are going to free agency. Ekblad is one of the very few guys I'd actually trade Boeser for, but even so, I don't see how Florida could possibly justify trading Ekblad.

If I was Florida I wouldn’t trade unless it was a huge package back. Makes no sense outherwise 

[oldnews]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

Looks an awful lot like what I'd like to see.

 

Barring a Cernak, Foote et al trade not happening... I'd happily see us target Stralman for Erriksson + swap as a solid stop gap to play with Edler in that lineup. Despite their ages, they could eat a lot of tough 5v5 minutes. Or conversely swap Stralman and Myers as well.

 

Hopefully we can move on from Benn and re-sign a slightly cheaper Fanta too. He'd be an excellent tag team with Juolevi, then let Rafferty do fill in duty on the right.

I wouldn't be opposed to adding reasonably to LE to swap out for Stralman.

The problem as I see it, however is that I wonder why Florida would entertain that?  They dumped Matheson already.

Stralman imo is not 'unmoveable' - might have relatively 'neutral' value in this market context, but to a competing team like Florida ( they had 78 pts this year, like this team, and 4 pts less than the SCFinalist Stars....) Stralman provides on ice performance that imo exceeds LE's value by a fair margin.  Just my opinion, but I doubt they're looking to move a contract as intently as they were, and I have to wonder if Stralman were someone they'd want to downgrade on in exchange for young forwards or futures as compensation...  That might come down to finances that I have no idea about (their ownership's will to spend or not) - but I'd be surprised - and I do wonder why people are still entertaining the Ekblad pipe-dream - I don't think the intent to move a big contract every reasonably translated into Ekblad - and even moreso now that they've moved Matheson.  They're 'competitive' - they're not rethinging - 'retool' perhaps - but to me it's akin to someone hearing the Canucks are looking to move a big forward contract, and instead of the obvious (LE) - we wind up talking about Horvat...(and then after LE were moved...?) 

Edited September 28, 2020 by oldnews