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

[Signing] Flames sign Christopher Tanev


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Millerdraft said:

One good thing about adding Barrie would be some additional secondary scoring to offset some of the bottom six scoring woes, I guess.

 

Yes, after the swing and miss on OEL I’m looking for any bit of upside I can find!

A few things about that:

A two way D will still bring some secondary scoring - perhaps not as much, but they'll also give up less - really it's the balance that matters - if you score 1.5 less goals a game, but give up 2.0 less, that's a better winning formula than in reverse.  With the balance of the blueline shifting towards youth, integrating Hughes and  probably Juolevi this year, I don't think it's the time to add a Barrie - that time was probably before the youth emergence - and the price then was too high, thankfully, because I'd prefer what has emerged far more than having gone out to buy a Barrie before his value tanked.

 

The bottom six doesn't have 'scoring woes'.   I think looking at their role in relative context matters - ie yes, Vegas might get scoring from their 3rd or 4th lines - but those lines get 55% ozone starts (on average) - while their top six handles harder minutes, penalty killing duties, etc.  Ours is a 'foundation' is their specifically to be far more defensive on the balance - what really matters in the end is their effectiveness in preventing scoring - and what is expected of their production has to be adjusted to context.

 

When you do that - and look at their goal metrics in context - for example Beagle and Motte - 60%+ dzone starts in the playoffs (closer to 80% in reg.season) - they were a +2 and an even 0....  meaning they outscored the opponent 5on5 in the playoffs while playing the kind of minutes (fans in Vancouver should realize how hard their minutes are).  Yeah, they 'only' had 2 and 5 points - but that is not scoring woes - the reality is they inflicted scoring woes on the opposition - facing players that are 'expected' to score.  When they do that, they take considerable pressure off our young top 6 to score at the same time as providing better opportunities for them to do so (ie the Canucks top 6 and Hughes getting heavily tilted ozone deployment, while Vegas' sees the reverse effect).  It's a two way game - preventing scoring is "production".

 

EP is developing rapidly - but I don't think there is any question that the 'foundation' has made his early NHL career much more opportune - as did the Miller acquisition which gave him a high end faceoff guy, a heavy natural center presence, a hard on the puck forechecking element, a big body to battle down low in his own zone - a truly great fit and addition to complement EP - and at the same time, that foundation bottom six to help provide the right situational use to help be more succesful from the get-go (great for a young players confidence imo).  Likewise with Hughes - he wasn't 'thrown into' an upward battle - he was brought in alongside EP and Gaudette with team-high ozone starts, good veteran partners, etc.

 

When these young guys develop, get stronger, elevate their game without the puck - the team can ease off the 'foundation' and perhaps reduce the balance to more of a single shutdown unit - however - there are different stages - and ways to build a team - so it's not self-evident that a team abandon the kind of bottom six we presently have simply because their youth have developed into their prime stages of their career.   The best Canucks team ever - the 2011 version that was probably both the best offensive and defensive team in the NHL simultaneously - was still tilting the ice for the Sedins, while having Malhotra, Lapierre, Hansen, Glass - getting between 60 and 82% defensive zone starts.....a few of them may have approached the 30 pt mark - which may seem unimpressive at first glance - but quite excellent in context (and probably easier to do than in the present context, because that was pretty much a veteran group from top to bottom....)   Personally, the present form of this team's build - is not necessarily one I'd shift towards chasing Vegas goalposts even as this team develops - I love a good balance of offense to defense - I think that's an excellent 'model' - and a model with built in adaptability/versatility - after all those Hansen, Malhotra types do not lack talent - and neither do Sutter or Motte - who can really break a team when they counterpunch score up a steep grade against the opposition's best.  For me, a signature example of this was when the Oilers were supposed to dominate the NHL a few seasons ago - and opening night Sutter and Dorsett wreaked havoc on the McDavid line - dismantled them really - and it broke their confidence - a thing of beauty for folks that love bottom six shutdown types and don't necessarily expect a great deal of secondary scoring from them (which isn't necessarily needed if they're not giving up much to the opposition's scoring forwards....

 

In the present I'd prefer they integrate a young, two way guy that can move the puck - ie Juolevi - I think he's an excellent fit for the team's needs right now - and a RHD that is comparable would be great.  In the meantime, make sure the guy they add to play the bigger minutes on the right side - can handle himself in the dzone...

 

 

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

37 minutes ago, Tetsuro88 said:

with Tanev, Barrie and Stecher gone.  Maybe Benning really needs to explore the Eriksson dump with a 1st ... otherwise we are playing musical chairs and will be left without a chair...

What is the point at this stage? We are a longshot to sign AP even with cap space and no one else left in UFA will cost us much to warrant clearing out cap next year. JB can cross that bridge when a team gifts wrap him a top 4 d in a trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

What is the point at this stage? We are a longshot to sign AP even with cap space and no one else left in UFA will cost us much to warrant clearing out cap next year. JB can cross that bridge when a team gifts wrap him a top 4 d in a trade.

Lots of options on the trade front. Teams still want to shed salary and adjust their teams. were going to acquire a D via trade I am sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, oldnews said:

A few things about that:

A two way D will still bring some secondary scoring - perhaps not as much, but they'll also give up less - really it's the balance that matters - if you score 1.5 less goals a game, but give up 2.0 less, that's a better winning formula than in reverse.  With the balance of the blueline shifting towards youth, integrating Hughes and  probably Juolevi this year, I don't think it's the time to add a Barrie - that time was probably before the youth emergence - and the price then was too high, thankfully, because I'd prefer what has emerged far more than having gone out to buy a Barrie before his value tanked.

 

The bottom six doesn't have 'scoring woes'.   I think looking at their role in relative context matters - ie yes, Vegas might get scoring from their 3rd or 4th lines - but those lines get 55% ozone starts (on average) - while their top six handles harder minutes, penalty killing duties, etc.  Ours is a 'foundation' is their specifically to be far more defensive on the balance - what really matters in the end is their effectiveness in preventing scoring - and what is expected of their production has to be adjusted to context.

 

When you do that - and look at their goal metrics in context - for example Beagle and Motte - 60%+ dzone starts in the playoffs (closer to 80% in reg.season) - they were a +2 and an even 0....  meaning they outscored the opponent 5on5 in the playoffs while playing the kind of minutes (fans in Vancouver should realize how hard their minutes are).  Yeah, they 'only' had 2 and 5 points - but that is not scoring woes - the reality is they inflicted scoring woes on the opposition - facing players that are 'expected' to score.  When they do that, they take considerable pressure off our young top 6 to score at the same time as providing better opportunities for them to do so (ie the Canucks top 6 and Hughes getting heavily tilted ozone deployment, while Vegas' sees the reverse effect).  It's a two way game - preventing scoring is "production".

 

EP is developing rapidly - but I don't think there is any question that the 'foundation' has made his early NHL career much more opportune - as did the Miller acquisition which gave him a high end faceoff guy, a heavy natural center presence, a hard on the puck forechecking element, a big body to battle down low in his own zone - a truly great fit and addition to complement EP - and at the same time, that foundation bottom six to help provide the right situational use to help be more succesful from the get-go (great for a young players confidence imo).  Likewise with Hughes - he wasn't 'thrown into' an upward battle - he was brought in alongside EP and Gaudette with team-high ozone starts, good veteran partners, etc.

 

When these young guys develop, get stronger, elevate their game without the puck - the team can ease off the 'foundation' and perhaps reduce the balance to more of a single shutdown unit - however - there are different stages - and ways to build a team - so it's not self-evident that a team abandon the kind of bottom six we presently have simply because their youth have developed into their prime stages of their career.   The best Canucks team ever - the 2011 version that was probably both the best offensive and defensive team in the NHL simultaneously - was still tilting the ice for the Sedins, while having Malhotra, Lapierre, Hansen, Glass - getting between 60 and 82% defensive zone starts.....a few of them may have approached the 30 pt mark - which may seem unimpressive at first glance - but quite excellent in context (and probably easier to do than in the present context, because that was pretty much a veteran group from top to bottom....)   Personally, the present form of this team's build - is not necessarily one I'd shift towards chasing Vegas goalposts even as this team develops - I love a good balance of offense to defense - I think that's an excellent 'model' - and a model with built in adaptability/versatility - after all those Hansen, Malhotra types do not lack talent - and neither do Sutter or Motte - who can really break a team when they counterpunch score up a steep grade against the opposition's best.  For me, a signature example of this was when the Oilers were supposed to dominate the NHL a few seasons ago - and opening night Sutter and Dorsett wreaked havoc on the McDavid line - dismantled them really - and it broke their confidence - a thing of beauty for folks that love bottom six shutdown types and don't necessarily expect a great deal of secondary scoring from them (which isn't necessarily needed if they're not giving up much to the opposition's scoring forwards....

 

In the present I'd prefer they integrate a young, two way guy that can move the puck - ie Juolevi - I think he's an excellent fit for the team's needs right now - and a RHD that is comparable would be great.  In the meantime, make sure the guy they add to play the bigger minutes on the right side - can handle himself in the dzone...

 

 

Great post.  The defensive guys sure don't get enough love on here these days; people were still moaning about Beagle despite how great he was for us in the playoffs, and how much we struggled in the regular season when he went down.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that it's for the best.  After reading some views from the posters, all I know that Tanev is great for the defensive side but is injury-prone.   Is he a good player, a top tier, elite level type of defenseman0?  I would say no.  He is a top 4, yes but not Norris-type.  I think that our defensive prospect need to be given a shot within a few years and if we sign Tanev for 4 years and what if OJ, and other prospects shine?   Then we'd be stuck with Tanev's contract, long term and will he still be a good defenceman 3-4 years from now?  It is a biggest question.  I also feel that our defensive prospect pool are getting stronger and with greater depth and it's time to give them a shot to see what they have in them.   I think Benning has shown a stronger focus on defence in this year's draft showing us that he needs to find some goodies from the draft despite no first two rounds of picks.  Defence takes a longer to develop and our defensive prospects has been in minor for a long time and is showing some signs of being a NHL-ready prospect in Rafferty, OJ and possibly Rathbone straight out from college.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Schmutzhaken said:

I will feel bad for Marky and Tanev, but I will be just tickled WHEN things go sour 

I feel bad for benning when people criticize his moves. Or lack there of. 

 

Hes an honest person who got an impossible task thrown at him, and its only now that hes learned from his (perhaps ownerships) mistakes. 

 

I dont think lou little was a benning signing, for the record. I think it was a sedin/aqua last ditch all in. 

 

It failed, and now jay bee has the bawls to say when sheet is effed up. 

 

I like it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Silky mitts said:

Actually calgary probably needs an overhaul already, their top end talent simply is not good enough. Now that they have marky he is too good to let them tank. Mediocrity seasons ahead for them.

I didnt wanna be the one to say it, but sweet baby jeebus...

 

if canucks fans have, i hope, learned anything, its that to win the stanley cup, vancouver cant put all their eggs in one basket. 

 

Better to put bullets in chambers, instead of playing Russian roulette with a six by six. 

 

We can thank louie for that little life lesson. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure what JB is doing but it better be good. Hard to lose three heart and soul guys in 24 hours when two of them left on pretty affordable contracts, and probably were willing to take less to stay with the team. Doesn’t send a good message to the young guys coming up...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no way we could have given Tanev that term of 4 years. I'm saddened to see him go but the offer was too good for him to pass up. At the very most, we could have given him a 2-year deal. Can't fault Tanev for taking that deal at all. Also can't see him lasting the duration of that contract either. Wish him well, I just wish it wasn't Calgary. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I wish this had been Winnipeg.

 

Him going back to the Manitoba-Moose hood would have been an awesome outcome....and they did have to retool/ are still retooling their entire right side....

That would of been a lot easier to take. I find the Jets easy to root for and having Tanev there would of been fun. Now, Tanev and Marky in the hot dog and mustard jerseys, fugly. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...