Marty_Blopper Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 2 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. This. Unless We’re getting a young player with cheap term(aka Ek), then there’s no point in mortgaging the future. This year could be a one off, or could be the way of the future. It too soon sell the big names on the farm, in my opinion. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 5 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. I also think that's a lateral move, at best on rhd. Myers has had a great year and is a workhorse and tanev, well we know how that story goes in Van. I don't see them moving Myers, tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Just now, Bob Long said: not even if there was a workable extension in place? Nope, not for me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Just now, stawns said: Nope, not for me just for yuks, who would you consider moving him for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 I think we trade for a couple players like Josh Anderson, plus a D like Tanev that you won't over pay for. That way you have picks so the future looks bright rather then fall back again and have nothing in the cupboard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goose Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Can Quinn vouch for Brandon too? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 (edited) 48 minutes ago, Bob Long said: just for yuks, who would you consider moving him for? Honestly? No one I don't think. Like I said, if they want a sustained window and not a one (or two) and done, they need young elite prospects on cheap contracts so they can move older, high priced vets........they need to be able to turn over without losing much in short term. Lek has star power, imo Edited January 26 by stawns 1 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goose Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 31 minutes 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. I would be chomping at the bit to see Soucy Tanev Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Screw Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 1 hour ago, Rick_theRyper said: Reported price a 1st round pick. Add a cheap prospect for Calgary to retain a serious % on his contract. No way I would pay a 1st for a half-dead Tanev. If we are talking Ek from Minny then ok. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 7 minutes ago, Tofu_Bud said: I would be chomping at the bit to see Soucy Tanev 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Way I see it if we can trade for a couple guys with playoff experience like Josh Anderson and Maroon we won't get push around and our D is bid as is. They won't cost you the young stars we have but would make us harder to play against and both look like RT type of players. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 Watch the team trade for him and he gets injured again. How about we look elsewhere? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzle Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 1 hour ago, stawns said: They've got one injury prone dman, they don't need another. .5+.5=1? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 For the last like 3 seasons he’s been in the like 96th percentile for even strength defence! I’ve been hoping he’d be a target for us because like we all know Tanev’s value is in his stellar defence! Just needs to block less shots so he doesn’t get hurt so much. I’d give up a 1rst if he came with a reasonable extension. I mean obviously would love to keep our 1rst round pick but when you’re a contender you have to take your shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainCanuck12 Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 I dont' think there's a player in the NHL who leaves himself more open to taking big hits than Tanev. When you combine his advanced age and injury history with the ramped up frequency and intensity of the hitting in the playoffs, I don't think he's a guy we should be making an investment in to help bring us playoff success, unless he comes cheap. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goose Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 33 minutes ago, flickyoursedin said: For the last like 3 seasons he’s been in the like 96th percentile for even strength defence! I’ve been hoping he’d be a target for us because like we all know Tanev’s value is in his stellar defence! Just needs to block less shots so he doesn’t get hurt so much. I’d give up a 1rst if he came with a reasonable extension. I mean obviously would love to keep our 1rst round pick but when you’re a contender you have to take your shot. 17 minutes ago, CaptainCanuck12 said: I dont' think there's a player in the NHL who leaves himself more open to taking big hits than Tanev. When you combine his advanced age and injury history with the ramped up frequency and intensity of the hitting in the playoffs, I don't think he's a guy we should be making an investment in to help bring us playoff success, unless he comes cheap. In the past I would have agreed w this, but Tanev has been relatively healthy w CGY and I have a hunch playing under Tocchett he would be running around a lot less/less tire fire moments where he has to bail the team out. Canucks seem to play relatively composed. Its a chance I might be willing to take 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 49 minutes ago, Tofu_Bud said: In the past I would have agreed w this, but Tanev has been relatively healthy w CGY and I have a hunch playing under Tocchett he would be running around a lot less/less tire fire moments where he has to bail the team out. Canucks seem to play relatively composed. Its a chance I might be willing to take We know how his story in Vancouver goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 lol is there even a point of discussion any realistic trade scenario? Canucks fan just dumpster every other teams player value and talk about unrealistic trade scenario all day. Like a late 3rd round pick and some random prospect for tanev with retention take it or leave it lol. Tanev is a 20min plus top shutdown defenceman even as a rental. He’s like linden and will play on 1 leg if he have to.. most teams will pay at least a 2nd + for him and if 50% retention maybe a late 1st but no not the Canucks we will give u a late 3rd because it’s all he’s worth 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 6 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said: lol is there even a point of discussion any realistic trade scenario? Canucks fan just dumpster every other teams player value and talk about unrealistic trade scenario all day. Like a late 3rd round pick and some random prospect for tanev with retention take it or leave it lol. Tanev is a 20min plus top shutdown defenceman even as a rental. He’s like linden and will play on 1 leg if he have to.. most teams will pay at least a 2nd + for him and if 50% retention maybe a late 1st but no not the Canucks we will give u a late 3rd because it’s all he’s worth And everyone here agreed that anything anyone would be ok giving up would t be enough for Calgary People are just saying what they be ok giving up, not what they think the team could get tanev for 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 2 hours ago, -AJ- said: 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. Have to think if we're adding a top 4 RHD like Tanev, that we'd have a plan to move expiring Myers out either in that trade or a separate deal. Also don't think anyone is suggesting Hughes-Tanev is a better pairing than Hughes Hronek. But Hughes-Tanev and Cole/Zadorov-Hronek is a better top 4 than we're currently putting on the ice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 7 minutes ago, aGENT said: Have to think if we're adding a top 4 RHD like Tanev, that we'd have a plan to move expiring Myers out either in that trade or a separate deal. Also don't think anyone is suggesting Hughes-Tanev is a better pairing than Hughes Hronek. But Hughes-Tanev and Cole/Zadorov-Hronek is a better top 4 than we're currently putting on the ice. I don't see what the point nt of that would be, especially for tanev. Myers is probably playing as well as tanev and is a workhorse who rarely gets hurt. Seems like a lateral move at best, the very best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 30 minutes ago, stawns said: And everyone here agreed that anything anyone would be ok giving up would t be enough for Calgary People are just saying what they be ok giving up, not what they think the team could get tanev for yes so why bother having a discussion if every trade scenario with every single player from other team they are ONLY ok if we lowball the shit out of the other team and fleece them. we over value every single one of our tradable asset while diminishing every other teams trade asset to a pulp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coryberg Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 3 hours 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. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 33 minutes ago, stawns said: I don't see what the point nt of that would be, especially for tanev. Myers is probably playing as well as tanev and is a workhorse who rarely gets hurt. Seems like a lateral move at best, the very best. Improvement (better roster fit even if moderate overall), shave cap, give us a leg up on extending Tanev who's a far better roster fit after this season as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 If we acquire Tanev I don’t think it would be to pair with Hughes. I see him more as a bottom pair guy that gets a big part of the Pk minutes. Something like: Hughes Hronek Soucy Myers Zadorov/Cole Tanev That’s a deep defence that can withstand injuries. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.