Speculation- Hughes wanting Canucks to trade for Tanev

[HKSR]

6 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

 

Hmmmm ..   this is interesting,

 

the last 2 years (this and next season) of SIDS contract is a cap hit of 3 mil per.

 

we hold our next 3 years of 1st rnd picks and 2 second rnds..

 

 

I guess if there is any team that has close ties to the Penguins and Crosby, it would be Vancouver.  Not sure if it's enough to have the Penguins move on from the franchise icon though.  Not even sure what a package would look like to get this cap compliant.  Kuzmenko would be in the package for sure, but that's not enough in terms of cap going the other way.  Would have to be a lot of movement of players...something like:

 

To VAN

Sidney Crosby (8.7)

Ryan Graves (4.5)

 

To PIT

Andrei Kuzmenko (5.5)

Tyler Myers (6.0)

Jonathan Lekkerimaki -- no way you get Sid without losing Lekkerimaki or Willander

Filip Johansson

1st

3rd

 

 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

edit:  ah, I shouldn't try to turn this into a discussion of prior Canuck GMs.

 

(just that a GM with an eye for talent wouldn't have let the subject of this thread (Tanev) walk for nothing.  And here we are discussing means of re-acquiring him like years *LATER*)

Edited January 26 by NewbieCanuckFan

[stawns]

9 minutes ago, tas said:

he did his last season after he and the trainers and equipment staff revamped his whole kit. he's been mostly healthy ever since. 

 

Sorry, too much history there to overspend on tanev.  They already have an injury prone top 4 dman, they can't afford to have two, imo.  

[SilentSam]

3 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Can't imagine Sid leaving PIT.   If this happened, we'd need to send Kuzmenko back and go all in.   Would be a lot like Ray Borque getting traded.   The only difference is Crosby has already won the cup 3 times.    Third party in for retention.   Well.   That's a thought I hadn't thought.    Talk about loading up! 

Pretty sure they would want  want 2 of 3 1st rnd picks over the next 3 years.

and at least one of , lettermaki, Dman Petterson , Willander ,  Brushcevisch,.  
Silovs , Koskenvuo.

 

Crosby on the right team  ,  would inject another level of game play ,  and bring another level of leadership to the group that would refresh his own play and raise others to there best potential.

 

2 years for one of the most prolific NHL players in the history of the game,.  Who still has high level  game in him, on a team rising rapidly..    a have profound effect on a team like Vancouver for the next decade.

[Dizzle]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

 

Sorry, too much history there to overspend on tanev.  They already have an injury prone top 4 dman, they can't afford to have two, imo.  

 

At 50% retained I’d give up a 3rd. But I wouldn’t break the bank for him. Old and (like you said) injuries are a concern. That being said…. If  healthy he could be very helpful. 

[SilentSam]

8 minutes ago, Captkirk888 said:

I watched the vid, it’s just hypothetical chat by these guys. In all likely hood Crosby retires a Penguin.

But ya never know….

Great TDL talk anyway!!

[Captkirk888]

1 minute ago, SilentSam said:

Great TDL talk anyway!!

Fur sure, plus it would be unbelievably awesome if the Canucks got him. Speculation is fun.

[IBatch]

4 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Pretty sure they would want  want 2 of 3 1st rnd picks over the next 3 years.

and at least one of , lettermaki, Dman Petterson , Willander ,  Brushcevisch,.  
Silovs , Koskenvuo.

 

Crosby on the right team  ,  would inject another level of game play ,  and bring another level of leadership to the group that would refresh his own play and raise others to there best potential.

 

2 years for one of the most prolific NHL players in the history of the game,.  Who still has high level  game in him, on a team rising rapidly..    a have profound effect on a team like Vancouver for the next decade.

Messier 2.0?   Maybe we should just stay away.    We also needed a center then given we went after Gretzky and didn't re-up Ronning.   At the time, Messier was every bit as iconic as Crosby is now too. 

 

Edit:  Messier had just had two typical Messier type seasons.   Close to 50 goals etc, and it was the dead puck era.  
 

That said it's Crosby so how could you say no?   

Edited January 26 by IBatch

[coho8888]

1 hour ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Even for the Province that is hands down the worst article I've ever read. You don't know hockey well enough to even speculate on a trade you want chatGPT to do it for you?

The whole thing is speculation. It's a second hand story, with no confirmation. And did Tanev's name get even mentioned at all from Hughes?

 

Wow. I'm saddened for newspapers.

yep.  Conversation probably went down like this:

 

Quinn, the defense has been solid this year, do you think it could benefit by adding a veteran defensemen for the playoffs?

 

Quinn:  “sure, always room for improvement “

 

headline reads:  “Quinn Hughes begs management to trade for Tanev.”

 

[SilentSam]

1 minute ago, IBatch said:

Messier 2.0?   Maybe we should just stay away.    We also needed a center then given we went after Gretzky and didn't re-up Ronning.   At the time, Messier was every bit as iconic as Crosby is now too. 

 

nah ,  I cringe at that comparison..

lol

 

Sid is a “driver” type player ,   
 

Messier was opportunistic,.  scoring and with dirty play .   That’s not a “ lead by example “ type player.

 

Crosby is .    and I think his work would polish up JT to his full “ceiling of potential “,

 

as well as others.

[tas]

6 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

Sorry, too much history there to overspend on tanev.  They already have an injury prone top 4 dman, they can't afford to have two, imo.  

tanev is no more injury prone than anybody else anymore. outside of a brief period last year and 3 games this year, he hasn't missed a game going back to his last season in van. 

 

I'll take a guy who blocks shots with his face and comes back the same game any day. 

[SilentSam]

5 minutes ago, tas said:

tanev is no more injury prone than anybody else anymore. outside of a brief period last year and 3 games this year, he hasn't missed a game going back to his last season in van. 

 

I'll take a guy who blocks shots with his face and comes back the same game any day. 

Tanev comes with his own ambulance ,  

 

 

[IBatch]

13 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

 

nah ,  I cringe at that comparison..

lol

 

Sid is a “driver” type player ,   
 

Messier was opportunistic,.  scoring and with dirty play .   That’s not a “ lead by example “ type player.

 

Crosby is .    and I think his work would polish up JT to his full “ceiling of potential “,

 

as well as others.

lol.  You shouldn't.    From 23-36, their stats aren't much different.    Messier was a lot rougher along the edges, and a lot tougher too, but he was probably faster, and had mad skills himself.    In the dead puck era, he scored 84, and 99 points before signing with us, at age 35 and 36.   His shit didn't stink back then, same as Crosby's doesn't now.      If you watched him play you know what I mean.   Sucked that his ego was too big for the room.     Messier was one of the very best (like Crosby) to ever play the game though.    It truly wouldn't be much different as far as the player goes, if we got him now ... the only difference is, we didn't watch Crosby beat us in the final a few years ago, crossheck Momesso like he was trying to break his back, and all of that (not even getting into the Linden game six stuff).     Aside from Vancouver fans, Messier is still revered around the league.   It's our cross to bear for sure.     Messier not a "lead by example"... I watched every 1989-1990

game.    Nobody thought they could do it without Gretzky.   Messier was a lot like Howe, just played center instead.   Did it all.     Was such a disappointment in Vancouver.    All he did, was skate fast circles from blue line to blue line.   Watched  a lot of games live back then.    

Edited January 26 by IBatch

[Reznor]

16 hours 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.

 

 

Sorry, but I don't think that is what would or should happen. 

 

I feel that if we were to get Tanev back, he immediately slots in with Huggy. This allows Hronek to be the offensive presence on the 2nd pairing, meaning that we can have backend pressure applied the vast majority of the time 5 on 5. I suspect Hronek would still man the 1PP unit with Hughes, but to me, this is a better 5 on 5 setup:

Hughes Tanev
Soucy Hronek

Zadorov Myers
Cole
Juulsen

Now, I realize this means that we have Cole on the bench with everyone healthy. That's brutally poor use of a 3m player. But if history is anything to consider, we can almost guarantee at least one of these guys will be injured either come playoffs, or especially during playoffs. To have an A+ 3rd pairing defenceman in Cole waiting in the wings to fill the vacated position means we can continue without THAT much of a detriment to our defensive corps. 

In addition, we can assume that we would want to re-sign Tanev aftewards and not just use him as a rental. Assuming that occurs, it most likely means that Cole is gone, and his salary gets put towards that of Tanev so it isn't like after this season it costs us a lot more to make this move.

I think it's a good move all around - as long as the price to acquire is reasonable.

[stawns]

26 minutes ago, Dizzle said:

 

At 50% retained I’d give up a 3rd. But I wouldn’t break the bank for him. Old and (like you said) injuries are a concern. That being said…. If  healthy he could be very helpful. 

 

I agree, I'd be fine with tanev as he's one of my favourite Canucks and if you can get him for a lower pick and a b prospect, then I'm all for it

[IBatch]

Just now, stawns said:

 

I agree, I'd be fine with tanev as he's one of my favourite Canucks and if you can get him for a lower pick and a b prospect, then I'm all for it

Didn't think we'd get Zadarov.   Not sure CAL

will want to keep playing with us. 

[stawns]

17 minutes ago, tas said:

tanev is no more injury prone than anybody else anymore. outside of a brief period last year and 3 games this year, he hasn't missed a game going back to his last season in van. 

 

I'll take a guy who blocks shots with his face and comes back the same game any day. 

 

Sorry, not a chance I'd be willing to take for a price any higher than a later round pick and b prospect.  I can see it now.......the team gives up a huge price (because there will be a bidding war), get tanev, play him in the top 4 and then both he and soucy get injured for the playoffs.  Team f***ed, org depleted, no cup 

[stawns]

To me, it's a moo point anyway because I think their d corp us quite good and theyre better shoring up other areas, rather than spending on the d corp, which they've already done

[dannydog]

8 hours ago, QuinnNorris said:

I hear all the arguments for and against acquiring Tanev.  I think what Quinn wants…. He should get! Tanev is still a legit top 4 d man.  I’d argue we have only Hughes and Hronek as legitimate top #1and #2 d men.  Maybe Soucy is a borderline #4.  The rest are good 3rd pair guys.  Other than Big Z’s size and fights I haven’t been impressed with him.  I’d argue Myers makes better decisions with the puck.  Tanev would slot beautifully into that #3 d man slot.  Our depth could handle the rigours of a playoff run.  Because we know injuries happen in the playoffs.  One more scoring winger would also be nice.

I’d rather keep what big Z offers than an over priced Myers. Sure Myers is playing much better in Footes system than last year but I see much more from big Z when he gets more in tuned with that style of play. Drop Myers ,pick up Tan man and have a much better D for less.

[stawns]

3 minutes ago, dannydog said:

I’d rather keep what big Z offers than an over priced Myers. Sure Myers is playing much better in Footes system than last year but I see much more from big Z when he gets more in tuned with that style of play. Drop Myers ,pick up Tan man and have a much better D for less.

 

Hopefully they can keep them both.  And I don't see tsnev as an improvement on myers

Edited January 26 by stawns

[tas]

9 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

Sorry, not a chance I'd be willing to take for a price any higher than a later round pick and b prospect.  I can see it now.......the team gives up a huge price (because there will be a bidding war), get tanev, play him in the top 4 and then both he and soucy get injured for the playoffs.  Team f***ed, org depleted, no cup 

you've never taken those bleak coloured glasses off, though, stawns. 

 

it's more fun to believe. 

[stawns]

1 minute ago, tas said:

you've never taken those bleak coloured glasses off, though, stawns. 

 

it's more fun to believe. 

 

Are you kidding?  I was one of the lone positive voices about this team for years.  I was one of the only ones in the last two years who said this was a playoff team with an actual coach.

 

I'm one of the more positive posters here.  It's not my responsibility to change the context of how people interpret my posts.  This place is full of homers who have "suddenly" become rah rah posters, who have done nothing but talk shit and wring their hands together for the last 3-4 years.  My feelings and thoughts about this team have never changed.

 

If you interpret my posts as negative, that says more about you than it does about me

 

 

[tas]

7 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

Are you kidding?  I was one of the lone positive voices about this team for years.  I was one of the only ones in the last two years who said this was a playoff team with an actual coach.

 

I'm one of the more positive posters here.  It's not my responsibility to change the context of how people interpret my posts.  This place is full of homers who have "suddenly" become rah rah posters, who have done nothing but talk shit and wring their hands together for the last 3-4 years.  My feelings and thoughts about this team have never changed.

 

If you interpret my posts as negative, that says more about you than it does about me

 

 

you know, a lot of that is fair, and my post was more dismissive than I intended it to be so I apologize. I agree that when it comes to standing by the team as a whole, you've been pretty solid. 

 

I just meant more when it comes to individual situations like these, in my assessment, you more often see half empty than half full. 

[Jester13]

32 minutes ago, Reznor said:

Sorry, but I don't think that is what would or should happen. 

 

I feel that if we were to get Tanev back, he immediately slots in with Huggy. This allows Hronek to be the offensive presence on the 2nd pairing, meaning that we can have backend pressure applied the vast majority of the time 5 on 5. I suspect Hronek would still man the 1PP unit with Hughes, but to me, this is a better 5 on 5 setup:

Hughes Tanev
Soucy Hronek

Zadorov Myers
Cole
Juulsen

Now, I realize this means that we have Cole on the bench with everyone healthy. That's brutally poor use of a 3m player. But if history is anything to consider, we can almost guarantee at least one of these guys will be injured either come playoffs, or especially during playoffs. To have an A+ 3rd pairing defenceman in Cole waiting in the wings to fill the vacated position means we can continue without THAT much of a detriment to our defensive corps. 

In addition, we can assume that we would want to re-sign Tanev aftewards and not just use him as a rental. Assuming that occurs, it most likely means that Cole is gone, and his salary gets put towards that of Tanev so it isn't like after this season it costs us a lot more to make this move.

I think it's a good move all around - as long as the price to acquire is reasonable.

Is Tanev still a minute-munching dman that can keep up with Hughes? Hughes - Hronek pairing is such a solid pairing, and with Hronek being the age that he is, he's shown he's able to keep up. 

[canucks curse]

Good organizations listen to their star leaders 

if Quinn really wants him PA JR should get him