[Signing] Flames sign Christopher Tanev

[RWMc1]

He's just so used to blocking a ton of shots for Marky. It's an addiction!!!

[PhillipBlunt]

3 hours 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...

Barrie was never a Canuck. Thank Gord. 

[189lb enforcers?]

5 hours ago, Pete M said:

If JB is going with prospects on defence that he thinks are ready to take the next step, then it is important to sign a forward who can play a sound defensive game, who can score and who can play in the top six.....does anyone know of a player that fits this need?

Killorn? 

[Provost]

Bah, this and Stecher's interviews make me sad.  I remember Benning saying "We want guys who want to be here".  Those two guys definitely fit the bill.

"You want to play where you are wanted and that is what enticed me to Calgary".... pretty much the same sentiment as Stecher gave, they definitely felt like they weren't wanted here.

https://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040/tanev-thought-i-d-be-a-career-canuck-so-moving-on-is-tough-excited-for-new-chapter-in-calgary-1.1537288

Edited October 10, 2020 by Provost

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, rekker said:

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. 

that is awesome.  a bit of milk in those jerseys, as well.

 

San Jose may be milkhotdogs....

 

But the Flames are milkhotdogs, with mustard.

 

Edited October 10, 2020 by oldnews

[Nave]

[JeremyCuddles]

After having some time to sleep on this, and reflect. I have come to the conclusion I still don't care. Listen, he was a warrior for us. He battled. Lost some chiclets (maybe could have saved those chiclets if he had enough athletic ability to take the puck away instead of sitting in front of it but regardless). Grew a gorgeous head of hair. But at the end of the day like with the Sedins. Out with the old guard, in with the new. Is our blueline lesser without him, sure. But we have kids that we need to get in there so it's fine. There's still the trade possibility. Buffalo has like 30 RD, something's gotta give you imagine. I wish him well in Calgary, he's gonna wish he went East after he stares down Hughes 5 times a season.

[Ray_Cathode]

1 hour ago, suitup said:

What? That would've been affordable for us wouldn't it? 

Not for four years. We are already paying the price for signing contracts longer than the effective value of players. Think Eriksson, Luongo (not Benning’s mistake for a change), Ferland, Baertschi, Sutter, Beagle, Roussel, and is Edler really worth six million? Eriksson, Ferland, Baertschi, Sutter = 18 million. If we are going to be able to afford to keep our core, we need to be plugging in our young guys and we have to have an ongoing supply - which means we need to keep our prospects and our draft slots. Looks like we’ll get to using our young guys because we have misspent so much cap that we won’t have a choice. So we have 8 mil cap space, Virtanen and Gaudette are unsigned, we need two right side D, and we don’t have a number one (barely even a number two) right side D.  What a mess. Looks like Myers will become our first line right D by default.

 

 

[Me_]

Two sentences on every notable move from Day 1 of NHL free agency

 

Fully agree with this:

 

[Me_]

17 hours 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...

Makes as much sense as a poodle in a tree.

[Me_]

On 10/9/2020 at 11:01 PM, MoneypuckOverlord said:

&^@# you jim.  

Yes.

 

Thank you Jim.

[FireGillis]

I'm not worried about the defense like you guys. I want to see the kids like Juolevi and Rathbone get a chance and nhl experience.  

[Ilya Mikheyev]

1 hour ago, FireGillis said:

I'm not worried about the defense like you guys. I want to see the kids like Juolevi and Rathbone get a chance and nhl experience.  

I think Juolevi will make the team, but I don't think either should be starting the season in the top-4 on their off-side with Edler or Hughes

[Boudrias]

11 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Not for four years. We are already paying the price for signing contracts longer than the effective value of players. Think Eriksson, Luongo (not Benning’s mistake for a change), Ferland, Baertschi, Sutter, Beagle, Roussel, and is Edler really worth six million? Eriksson, Ferland, Baertschi, Sutter = 18 million. If we are going to be able to afford to keep our core, we need to be plugging in our young guys and we have to have an ongoing supply - which means we need to keep our prospects and our draft slots. Looks like we’ll get to using our young guys because we have misspent so much cap that we won’t have a choice. So we have 8 mil cap space, Virtanen and Gaudette are unsigned, we need two right side D, and we don’t have a number one (barely even a number two) right side D.  What a mess. Looks like Myers will become our first line right D by default.

 

 

In retrospect Canuck fans can regret some of the contracts you mention. To a degree we have to review them in the context they were signed. What was the market demanding which gave these players multiple options to go elsewhere. What was the immediate need for the team that encouraged their signing? What benefit did these players provide for the younger players who will form the core for a CUP challenge? What other players development have made the role of those we now want to discard possible? 

 

So many variables come into play. The development of a team is kinda like a living organism. Changes whether expected or not happen and management has to react with the long term goal of a CUP in the crosshairs.  

[canucklehead80]

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

In retrospect Canuck fans can regret some of the contracts you mention. To a degree we have to review them in the context they were signed. What was the market demanding which gave these players multiple options to go elsewhere. What was the immediate need for the team that encouraged their signing? What benefit did these players provide for the younger players who will form the core for a CUP challenge? What other players development have made the role of those we now want to discard possible? 

 

So many variables come into play. The development of a team is kinda like a living organism. Changes whether expected or not happen and management has to react with the long term goal of a CUP in the crosshairs.  

Not to forget that as a floundering team, we needed to offer "more" (whether it be term, $ or clauses) to attract free agents. 

[Devron]

If you google Canucks more stuff comes up about the flames then Canucks lol

[Barry_Wilkins]

2 hours ago, canucklehead80 said:

Not to forget that as a floundering team, we needed to offer "more" (whether it be term, $ or clauses) to attract free agents. 

And if that "more" exceeds your internal limit on what you think the player is worth, you walk. You don't keep upping your bid until there's no one left to bid against. And the overpay on cap per year isn't even the biggest issue. It's the extra year or two on term for those contracts that's now come home to bite them.

[VforVasili]

Tanev was a warrior and will be missed. Here’s the thing about warriors who block as many shots as he does though: they don’t tend to age well. 
 

I think Benning did the right thing For the team by not signing him to a long extension, even if I believe in my heart he deserved to get paid for last performance. It was the right call. 

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]