Jump to content

Speculation- Hughes wanting Canucks to trade for Tanev


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Jester13 said:

Hughes - Hronek

Soucy - Myers

Cole/Zadorov - Tanev

 

I mean, for the right price, I'd love to have Tanev on the bottom pair and watch him win the cup with us this year. That's a cup-winning backend.

 

 

Agreed, that is a stout D corps

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:

Yeah I agree with the sentiment. Loved Tanev when he was on our team, but don't want to overpay for an older guy that we probably won't resign. Would rather target one of those younger players I mentioned, like Carrier or Fabbro. Mgmt needs to consider long term fit and what they are doing with all of the UFA Dmen next season too.

 

How will we make the cap work this year? I expect they will be shipping out cap (most likely Kuz) which will give them some space to add a top 6 forward and a PMD (perhaps with salary retained).

 

I could live with a lower pick and prospect like hirose or something.  Tanev is still a very good rhd to have in the lineup

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Hughes plays over 24min a night.  No way Tanev can keep up that pace over a long playoff run.  If he's brought in to play 2nd pairing, I'd be ok with that, but I'd drop his minutes substantially.  I'd imagine a shutdown pair of Soucy and Tanev would be incredible.

Some of that time is PP time and I'd suspect that some of the 5v5 minutes will have Hughes with Hronek as well. Tanev playing between 18-20 minutes a night should be reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, stawns said:

 

I could live with a lower pick and prospect like hirose or something.  Tanev is still a very good rhd to have in the lineup

We would need to ship out some salary to make the cap hits work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stawns said:

 

I could live with a lower pick and prospect like hirose or something.  Tanev is still a very good rhd to have in the lineup

He would be amazing, but as you say, for a 3rd round pick + prospect. Realistically if we are not paying a 1st roudn pick then I think VAN is outbid by other teams (TOR in particular).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bob Long said:

How about Myers (for the cap balance), our 1st and Lekkeriamki for Lindholm and Tanev (1/2 retained) with an extension in place for Lindholm first.

Is that enough?  Lol I'd absolutely take that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Jim Tim said:

I find that interesting, since didn't we change up our strength and conditioning coaches/medical staff last year?

 

That's a good question. Have the Canucks just been luckier this year? Or better strength and conditioning? Or are they playing so well that they don't get themselves in positions to get injured as often? Like they are not getting peppered with shots that they need to block?

 

Probably a combination of things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bob Long said:

How about Myers (for the cap balance), our 1st and Lekkeriamki for Lindholm and Tanev (1/2 retained) with an extension in place for Lindholm first.

 

Lindholm's production has been declining the last 2 seasons and he turns 30 next December. He will be looking for an $8m+ long term contract. Do you really want to sign that extension? (I don't think it's affordable for VAN considering the RFAs we have to resign either).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure I'd give up a 1st for a pending UFA. Tanev was often my favourite player while here, but he's getting a wee bit old and we know he's not very durable. Maybe a 2nd would be something I could stomach. Our depth on D would definitely start to rival 2010-11 if we didn't give up any roster players and it's crazy to think we'd be regularly scratching a guy like Soucy, Cole, or Myers. Is Tanev + Zadorov any good? Did they play together in Calgary?

 

I'm not convinced Hughes + Tanev is any better than Hughes/Hronek. I would say we could do it to manage Hronek's minutes better, but I feel like he can actually manage 23-25 minutes without too much difficulty, so he doesn't need too much of a break. Tanev's most likely role would be as a PK specialist and the 2RD, likely bumping whoever currently resides in that role to 3RD and then having a ridiculously deep 7/8 extra pair of defensemen. It'd be insane to have Juuslen and a guy like Cole BOTH on call in case of injuries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BigTramFan said:

 

Lindholm's production has been declining the last 2 seasons and he turns 30 next December. He will be looking for an $8m+ long term contract. Do you really want to sign that extension? (I don't think it's affordable for VAN considering the RFAs we have to resign either).

 

not 8's no, something in the 7s would be fine tho. He'd really stabilize a 2nd line. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:

He would be amazing, but as you say, for a 3rd round pick + prospect. Realistically if we are not paying a 1st roudn pick then I think VAN is outbid by other teams (TOR in particular).

I agree, I don't see Cal taking that deal either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

How about Myers (for the cap balance), our 1st and Lekkeriamki for Lindholm and Tanev (1/2 retained) with an extension in place for Lindholm first.

Season 5 No GIF by The Office

 

Lek is untouchable, imo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, stawns said:

Season 5 No GIF by The Office

 

Lek is untouchable, imo

 

its funny I feel that way about Willander. 

 

With our current Hughes window and our ability to score right now, I see Lekk as the guy to move - if they are going to go "all in" and decide to shop one of these guys.

 

IMO its always easier to replace a scoring winger than a legit top RHD. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Strawbone said:

 

That's a good question. Have the Canucks just been luckier this year? Or better strength and conditioning? Or are they playing so well that they don't get themselves in positions to get injured as often? Like they are not getting peppered with shots that they need to block?

 

Probably a combination of things.

Having the puck in the other team's zone more often than not probably helps 😆

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giving up Lekker and a 1st we better be getting back Tanev, Lindholm and 2 2nd's then.

 

To me one of our 1st or Lekker is worth more then Tanev and Lindholm.

 

I would be ok with the first for both and Myers with both players having a cheaper 3 year deal in place.

 

I just don't think now is the time to blow up our future fully.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

its funny I feel that way about Willander. 

 

With our current Hughes window and our ability to score right now, I see Lekk as the guy to move - if they are going to go "all in" and decide to shop one of these guys.

 

IMO its always easier to replace a scoring winger than a legit top RHD. 

 

 

They need lek as much, or more, than TW.  My guess is Boeser is going to be too expensive to keep and they need young players on cheap contracts to fill those spots.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cripplereh said:

Giving up Lekker and a 1st we better be getting back Tanev, Lindholm and 2 2nd's then.

 

To me one of our 1st or Lekker is worth more then Tanev and Lindholm.

 

I would be ok with the first for both and Myers with both players having a cheaper 3 year deal in place.

 

I just don't think now is the time to blow up our future fully.

 

Agreed, I wouldn't do lek straight up for EL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, stawns said:

 

They need lek as much, or more, than TW.  My guess is Boeser is going to be too expensive to keep and they need young players on cheap contracts to fill those spots.

 

sure but thats a problem for the 25/26 off season. 

 

all in means going for it now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...