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

[Nucker 67]

Sounds like the Tanev to PIT rumours are still going on. PIT may be very interested because they trust his game and they want to try and win one more time with Crosby and Malkin. There's also a possibility that Letang is moved. 

[Canucks Curse]

I think canucks are looking to find a young d man through trade and let Tanev go freeing up cap space to sign marky and toff

 

Virtanen+ Gaudette + Stecher for Dumba 

let Tanev walk, now have 14.3 mill to spread across Marky, Toff, Leivo and loose pieces, plus Ferland probably on LTIR next year

 

[aGENT]

@rekker ^^^^^^ 

[PhillipBlunt]

18 hours ago, EP40. said:

Selective hearing seems to be a favourite fallback for certain Canucks fans lol

 

If you only want to listen to certain things then do it without dismissing the other stuff...coming from the most reliable Canuck insider that is too who’s spoken with the players agents. If you think he’s fabricating then why in the hell would agents allow exclusively him to contact them 

Taj? Is that you?

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Taj? Is that you?

I think it's hilarious that people think the underlying information is the issue. Rick is still well connected to many agents and hockey people. The issue is the click bait spin and playing up of drama he started adding since he left 1130 (apparently without his journalistic integrity).

 

Nobody has an issue if Rick tweets out the facts. He simply doesn't do JUST that anymore.

[PhillipBlunt]

57 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I think it's hilarious that people think the underlying information is the issue. Rick is still well connected to many agents and hockey people. The issue is the click bait spin and playing up of drama he started adding since he left 1130 (apparently without his journalistic integrity).

 

Nobody has an issue if Rick tweets out the facts. He simply doesn't do JUST that anymore.

[SilentSam]

Let Tanev go.-aprx  4.5 m

Boeser and Sutter to Florida -aprx 9M

 

Ekblad to Vancouver. 7.5 m

 

 

[oldnews]

23 hours ago, Robert Long said:

I do, I think you did a great job showing Tanevs value, on his own and as Hughes partner.

 

 

remains highly under-rated - in an era where "analytics" are somewhat like the NHL of the 1980's - under-developed and lacking the two way game they will eventually need to catch up to.

 

today's 'analytics' would be better suited to the 1980's - where there simply weren't the quantity and quality of defensive players, two way players - shutdown units, etc.

 

the 'modern' NHL is fundamentally different than it was in that offensive era - 'analytics' - or at least what is represented as 'analytics' in the public, amateur realm - in most cases lag considerably behind the actual game - and the way many teams are built - where most successful GMs recognize/know almost as second nature - the value of defensive players.

 

there was a whole lot of room for improvement on the defensive side of the game in the 1980s - something that changed/progressed through the 90s - and as it did, it also pushed/necessitated that offensive players also step up their game = the nature of competition.   Any 'analytics' worth it's salt has to be far more cognizant of the ways they sandbag the whole range of defense-first players - otherwise they wind up failing to truly understand the nuances and complexities of the modern game - instead winding up star-gazing offensive players while whiffing on their limits, on the "contraindications" - and in the end wind up fluffing offensive players as a whole, almost as though they are competing in 1980s era hockey, where understanding the defensive side of the game remained in it's relatively elementary stages.

[JM_]

16 minutes ago, oldnews said:

remains highly under-rated - in an era where "analytics" are somewhat like the NHL of the 1980's - under-developed and lacking the two way game they will eventually need to catch up to.

 

today's 'analytics' would be better suited to the 1980's - where there simply weren't the quantity and quality of defensive players, two way players - shutdown units, etc.

 

the 'modern' NHL is fundamentally different than it was in that offensive era - 'analytics' - or at least what is represented as 'analytics' in the public, amateur realm - in most cases lag considerably behind the actual game - and the way many teams are built - where most successful GMs recognize/know almost as second nature - the value of defensive players.

 

there was a whole lot of room for improvement on the defensive side of the game in the 1980s - something that changed/progressed through the 90s - and as it did, it also pushed/necessitated that offensive players also step up their game = the nature of competition.   Any 'analytics' worth it's salt has to be far more cognizant of the ways they sandbag the whole range of defense-first players - otherwise they wind up failing to truly understand the nuances and complexities of the modern game - instead winding up star-gazing offensive players while whiffing on their limits, on the "contraindications" - and in the end wind up fluffing offensive players as a whole, almost as though they are competing in 1980s era hockey, where understanding the defensive side of the game remained in it's relatively elementary stages.

thats probably a good analogy. There's just so many things on the bench and on the ice that are factors I don't see a ton of value in simplified number gazing like just looking at corsi or oisv% in isolation. 

 

I'm more interested in some of the upcoming real time tracking, we might get some interesting info on things like gap control e.g. and also some team-based information on defensive positioning. 

[oldnews]

2 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

thats probably a good analogy. There's just so many things on the bench and on the ice that are factors I don't see a ton of value in simplified number gazing like just looking at corsi or oisv% in isolation. 

 

I'm more interested in some of the upcoming real time tracking, we might get some interesting info on things like gap control e.g. and also some team-based information on defensive positioning. 

I would qualify my points above - by pointing out that there were franchises - like the Montreal Canadians - perenial champions - that probably understood and had the two way game built into their 'culture' on a relatively better, deeper level than most of their competitors.   And if we take the analogy a step further - there are clearly franchises today that rely upon analysis that is far more informed, balanced, and practical - than the majority of what gets passed off as 'analytics' in the blogisphere - or even among the sportsnetworks, who might employ Travis Yost or smarmy types - while NHL teams themselves vet their decisions in far better forms - but understandably keep their cards close to their chests - because these are literally the analyses that are the tools of the trade in a highly competitive 'underlying' context - so don't expect any of them to come out and 'evidence' how/why their competitors/opponents might be lagging behind.  The irony is that the stereotypical/reputed 'analytics' teams - the Arizona Coyotes, the intemittent Florida Panthers, the Shanaplan/Dubas Maple Leafs.....how have they fared in the alleged 'analytics' era?  Obviously the 'best' analytics are neither common currency, nor are they recognized as such.  As the stereotypically 'old school' guys like Benning get mocked and prematurely dismissed as inevitable failures, or numerous #incorrect rethings rise to contenders - hopefully along with that comes the realization that unduly offensively weighted, or elementary one-metric-at-a-time 'analytics' are borderline useless, if not ironically negative value - and simply cannot compete with/in the real NHL.

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I would qualify my points above - by pointing out that there were franchises - like the Montreal Canadians - perenial champions - that probably understood and had the two way game built into their 'culture' on a relatively better, deeper level than most of their competitors.   And if we take the analogy a step further - there are clearly franchises today that rely upon analysis that is far more informed, balanced, and practical - than the majority of what gets passed off as 'analytics' in the blogisphere - or even among the sportsnetworks, who might employ Travis Yost or smarmy types - while NHL teams themselves vet their decisions in far better forms - but understandably keep their cards close to their chests - because these are literally the analyses that are the tools of the trade in a highly competitive 'underlying' context - so don't expect any of them to come out and 'evidence' how/why their competitors/opponents might be lagging behind.  The irony is that the stereotypical/reputed 'analytics' teams - the Arizona Coyotes, the intemittent Florida Panthers, the Shanaplan/Dubas Maple Leafs.....how have they fared in the alleged 'analytics' era?  Obviously the 'best' analytics are neither common currency, nor are they recognized as such.  As the stereotypically 'old school' guys like Benning get mocked and prematurely dismissed as inevitable failures, or numerous #incorrect rethings rise to contenders - hopefully along with that comes the realization that unduly offensively weighted, or elementary one-metric-at-a-time 'analytics' are borderline useless, if not ironically negative value - and simply cannot compete with/in the real NHL.

I'm sure they do have valuable info they keep to themselves, and should. 

 

I'm sure they had analytics that told the Canucks it was OK to play a style that allowed a high number of low percentage shots this season given how Marky handles them so well. But did analytics drive that decision, or simply let them track it? I suspect more of the latter.

 

How much do analytics play into Green's decision making? he can't watch everything on the ice so I suspect again he uses it to augment things he needs more info on or maybe to track player progress over how pairings interact. I really doubt anything we see in the media is used for that kind of decision making tho. 

[Alienhuggyflow]

On 9/23/2020 at 1:07 PM, BigTramFan said:

You can only "save" by giving up something you already own. Marky (and Tanev and Toffoli) are UFAs.

 

We don't own them anymore. If we don't retain them, we save nothing.

 

As I have shown you, we are already up against the cap limit without these guys. Replacing them with cheaper players will cost us whatever the new player costs.

 

 

Nucks have 15 million including bonuses. Burying LE and Baer opens 3 million, possible Ferland LTIR, trade Rousell or buy him out opens 2-3 mill, Stech replaced by Rafferty opens up 1.5 mill. Trade Benn replace with Joulevi, another mill. That's an extra 12-13 mill without making a major trade. There are numerous other things like LE walking away, moving Sutter, moving on from Marky etc. But go ahead and believe we have 5 million for those 3 while also having 5 million in bonus overages.  

[JeremyCuddles]

15 hours ago, SilentSam said:

Let Tanev go.-aprx  4.5 m

Boeser and Sutter to Florida -aprx 9M

 

Ekblad to Vancouver. 7.5 m

 

 

If this were to happen I'd cream my pants. Although from what I hear Ekblad is a slightly more defensively reliable, much less physical version of Risto. So I guess he's just a slightly worse defensively Edler. Lol. Still would be really interesting to see him with Hughes, or even maybe Juolevi/Rathbone assuming either reach top 4 potential.

[Tracksuit]

On 9/22/2020 at 1:35 PM, King Heffy said:

The only guy that's been floated out who's actually an improvement is Pietrangelo, who we can't afford.

It not the player as much as the skill they bring.

tanev is the least of our issues but the mix of Dmen we have is ineffective it’s been proven as ineffective the goaltender standing on his head every night isn’t a system.

we need a better mix of different skills.

stinks tanev the odd man out there’s others that I would rather see go but it is what is.

so many stuck on the we need RHD, no we don’t we need EFFECTIVE D and we need cap space.

We resign tanev means we can expect the exact same result in our own zone as this season. running around chasing the puck and letting 40+ shots a night unable to clear the crease. 

Not to mention older and slower When the games younger and faster, we have young guys that will save cap and can step up If they are ever given a Real chance. 
signing another Over priced ufa looking for a retirement contract isn’t the answer.

Benning would be wise to stay away from the ufa markets. His record is terrible. 

Vanek fantonberg were late cheap ufa signings those are the guys we need to find. Low risk low cap
 

 

 

[stawns]

On 9/24/2020 at 12:32 PM, Canucks Curse said:

I think canucks are looking to find a young d man through trade and let Tanev go freeing up cap space to sign marky and toff

 

Virtanen+ Gaudette + Stecher for Dumba 

let Tanev walk, now have 14.3 mill to spread across Marky, Toff, Leivo and loose pieces, plus Ferland probably on LTIR next year

 

[stawns]

My issue with letting Tanev walk is that you're not going to replace his hard mins with a cheap option and to replace hom via trade has a lot of moving pieces and a lot of "what ifs".  You know what you get with CT, why not just make the easy play here?

[King Heffy]

24 minutes ago, Tracksuit said:

It not the player as much as the skill they bring.

tanev is the least of our issues but the mix of Dmen we have is ineffective it’s been proven as ineffective the goaltender standing on his head every night isn’t a system.

we need a better mix of different skills.

stinks tanev the odd man out there’s others that I would rather see go but it is what is.

so many stuck on the we need RHD, no we don’t we need EFFECTIVE D and we need cap space.

We resign tanev means we can expect the exact same result in our own zone as this season. running around chasing the puck and letting 40+ shots a night unable to clear the crease. 

Not to mention older and slower When the games younger and faster, we have young guys that will save cap and can step up If they are ever given a Real chance. 
signing another Over priced ufa looking for a retirement contract isn’t the answer.

Benning would be wise to stay away from the ufa markets. His record is terrible. 

Vanek fantonberg were late cheap ufa signings those are the guys we need to find. Low risk low cap
 

 

 

We need shutdown defensemen.  If anything, we need another defensive minded guy. 

[grandmaster]

5 minutes ago, stawns said:

My issue with letting Tanev walk is that you're not going to replace his hard mins with a cheap option and to replace hom via trade has a lot of moving pieces and a lot of "what ifs".  You know what you get with CT, why not just make the easy play here?

Losing CT and not bringing in another quality defenceman would be disastrous for this team as defence has always been questionable in terms of being a legit contender. 
 

JB ought to make a play for Eckblad (if he truly is available). Otherwise we should sign CT because come free agency, some idiot will over pay him and we will lose our opportunity (as long as it is at a reasonable cost; 4-5M at the most).

[grandmaster]

4 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

We need shutdown defensemen.  If anything, we need another defensive minded guy. 

I agree but I also have the opinion that Myers, our Willie Mitchell 2.0, will be even better at this next season. I see his play improving each game since he arrived: 

[stawns]

1 minute ago, grandmaster said:

Losing CT and not bringing in another quality defenceman would be disastrous for this team as defence has always been questionable in terms of being a legit contender. 
 

JB ought to make a play for Eckblad (if he truly is available). Otherwise we should sign CT because come free agency, some idiot will over pay him and we will lose our opportunity (as long as it is at a reasonable cost; 4-5M at the most).

with Matheson gone I highly doubt Ekblad is available anymore..........I doubt he ever was.  I know Dumba isn't the answer