Speculation- Hughes wanting Canucks to trade for Tanev

[aGENT]

8 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

why do we want a 34 year old Dman on an expiring contract with 1 goal in 45 games? 

 

I wasn't really interested in him when he was a Canuck and I am still baffled with the fans here who have missed him since he left. I get that he is an okay NHL defensemen, but what else about him makes him a fit now for Vancouver other than he used to be here?

Because he's still a top 5, defensive PMD in the league, an EXCELLENT pk'er and would allow us to have Hughes or Hronek on the ice for ~45-50 minutes of 60 minute game. He's more than just an "ok" defenseman.

[Jester13]

1 hour ago, 5forFighting said:

I think Bains is the only one who is a Toc type of player. His motor never stops. The other two fall closer to Kuz who we know falls out of favour too often. Lots of skill, not enough motor. 

 

See below for my shared sentiment on those players. 

 

42 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

You think so?  Raty is probably the best or second best two player in Abby.  Both he and Bains are ridiculously cerebral players who can see the game a couple of steps ahead.

 

People may be down on Raty a bit based on numbers, but his shift by shift play is fantastic and not something you can quantify, imo.  

 

And podz isn't too far behind.........all three are understand the game in all three zones at an NHL, imo.  You can throw Karlsson in there too.  If I'm PA, those are guys I'm not moving

 

[SilentSam]

11 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

why do we want a 34 year old Dman on an expiring contract with 1 goal in 45 games? 

 

I wasn't really interested in him when he was a Canuck and I am still baffled with the fans here who have missed him since he left. I get that he is an okay NHL defensemen, but what else about him makes him a fit now for Vancouver other than he used to be here?

It’s called fan  “love”..

and that happily ever after story they’ve wanted after never winning a cup .

 

 

[HKSR]

44 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

You think so?  Raty is probably the best or second best two player in Abby.  Both he and Bains are ridiculously cerebral players who can see the game a couple of steps ahead.

 

People may be down on Raty a bit based on numbers, but his shift by shift play is fantastic and not something you can quantify, imo.  

 

And podz isn't too far behind.........all three are understand the game in all three zones at an NHL, imo.  You can throw Karlsson in there too.  If I'm PA, those are guys I'm not moving

Haven't watched Raty in awhile.  Has he improved enough to warrant higher than a 2C ceiling? 

[aGENT]

14 minutes ago, IBatch said:

.    I'd take a mediocre regular season team that's built for the second season, every single time, over a great regular season team that rarely gets out of the first round. 

 

Why are people always talking about the Leafs on a Canuck board...

 

[aGENT]

Just now, HKSR said:

Haven't watched Raty in awhile.  Has he improved enough to warrant higher than a 2C ceiling? 

What's wrong with "just" having a 2C ceiling?

[HKSR]

Just now, aGENT said:

What's wrong with "just" having a 2C ceiling?

Absolutely nothing.  Not sure why you're asking that?  I'm just wondering if his progression makes him look like he'd be a 1C candidate at all.  I've always thought he'd be a 2C at best.  Still happy with that.

[IBatch]

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

Why are people always talking about the Leafs on a Canuck board...

 

Nice!    From where i'm sitting, they still haven't managed a better team then the one we beat in 94.   

[tas]

23 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

why do we want a 34 year old Dman on an expiring contract with 1 goal in 45 games? 

 

I wasn't really interested in him when he was a Canuck and I am still baffled with the fans here who have missed him since he left. I get that he is an okay NHL defensemen, but what else about him makes him a fit now for Vancouver other than he used to be here?

go read anything ever said about him by any teammate, coach, or manager he's ever had. 

 

the fact that people still don't understand there's more to this sport than numbers in a boxscore is baffling to me. 

[Coconuts]

47 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

Even then, why would you take the chance of replacing Myers, a workhorse who rarely gets hurt and is probably outplaying yanev anyway, with an injury prone player who is, at best, equal to Myers when he is healthy.

 

We can use his last couple years in Calgary as an argument that those injury days are behind him, but we know the tanev story in van, why risk it?

 

As a rental for a cheap price?  Absolutely.  Otherwise?  No thanks, imo

 

I've mentioned that I think there's a solid chance we bring Myers back in the past, it's usually resulted in some pushback and doesn't seem to be a popular opinion. But for conversation's sake I'll go over it again. 

 

Myers is a guy with a lengthy history of playing as a top 4D. He's good depth in a 5-6 role, and seems to do better when he's not asked to do as much. But yeah, he's a guy who can absolutely step up and play top 4 in the event of injuries.

He brings an element of size. 

He's a known quantity who knows the systems, players, culture, and so on.

He's shown a willingness to play physical, engage in scrums, ect. 

He's not awful offensively by any stretch, in fact he's third on the team in points from a D with 15 points thus far. 

He's an established presence in the room. 

He's likely to want to stay, there's a chance the Canucks could get him for less than other teams. 

He's demonstrated a willingness to try and mentor young players, as demonstrated by him trying to help Virtanen in the past. 

He's an RD, and I'm not convinced Zadorov is the better overall player. 

 

Myers has gotten a lot of grief from Canucks fans over the years while making 6M, but if he makes less going forward folks should also lower their expectations a bit. He wouldn't be a bad veteran to keep around. 

 

He's looked better under Tochett, when surrounded by a competent D core. 

Edited January 26 by Coconuts

[Optimist Prime]

14 minutes ago, aGENT said:

What's wrong with "just" having a 2C ceiling?

I have had him pencilled in as a 2C since his draft minus one year. If he meets that mark I will be incredibly impressed and I am thrilled he made it to the Vancouver Canucks system, hoping to see him get a call up at least this year.

[IBatch]

10 minutes ago, tas said:

go read anything ever said about him by any teammate, coach, or manager he's ever had. 

 

the fact that people still don't understand there's more to this sport than numbers in a boxscore is baffling to me. 

That's true.   Bring back Dana Murzyn please (ok early 90's Dana ... show the entire league how to clear a net).    Also if we had Willie Mitchell in 2011, we win the cup.   I'm sure of that.   For sure it's more than the box score.  

Edited January 26 by IBatch

[PureQuickness]

56 minutes ago, tas said:

I'm not a classic anti-jb guy (or travis green, for that matter). I could always see benning's plan, even when it didn't always get executed as intended, up until the summer after the bubble. he became so determined to overhaul the defense and got so locked on to oel that he got tunnel vision.  

 

Benning had the right ideas for the most part, or at least he was thinking the right things. He just overpaid on them and they often blew up in his face. Had the situation been in his favour, he would've been better off. Had Eriksson panned out for example, he would've kept the team going, which might have cost us Hughes in the future due to the success. But most of us wouldn't have cared.

 

Eriksson wasn't the only one who sucked that year in the UFA. There was Lucic and there was James Neal. Actually the rest of the 2016 UFA class was TERRIBLE and they all got similar contracts.

 

People blaming Benning for the Eriksson signing are ignoring the bigger picture.

 

That being said, the stuff in the latter half were bigger gambles than before AND we traded more picks in the process. It was clear that the pressure was on him and he was making more and more mistakes. I feel like if he had picked another coach besides Green, he may have had better success.

 

I didn't mind the Beagle signing at the time. The Caps' fans LOVED the guy and were complimentary of his contributions. The team couldn't afford him and he deserved the payraise. The problem wasn't that he was a BAD player. He was too slow for the team and we didn't have enough pieces to support players like him.

Edited January 26 by PureQuickness

[Coryberg]

17 minutes ago, aGENT said:

What's wrong with "just" having a 2C ceiling?

 

15 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Absolutely nothing.  Not sure why you're asking that?  I'm just wondering if his progression makes him look like he'd be a 1C candidate at all.  I've always thought he'd be a 2C at best.  Still happy with that.

I would be happy with him becoming an excellent 3rd line center like Malhotra/sutter.

[stawns]

38 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Haven't watched Raty in awhile.  Has he improved enough to warrant higher than a 2C ceiling? 

 

I don't think so, he does t have that explosive element to his game, but he's probably going to be a guy who is better actual player than a lot of 1C guys are.  He just won't have the numbers to get the attention

[IBatch]

23 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

Benning had the right ideas for the most part, or at least he was thinking the right things. He just overpaid on them and they often blew up in his face. Had the situation been in his favour, he would've been better off. Had Eriksson panned out for example, he would've kept the team going, which might have cost us Hughes in the future due to the success. But most of us wouldn't have cared.

 

Eriksson wasn't the only one who sucked that year in the UFA. There was Lucic and there was James Neal. Actually the rest of the 2016 UFA class was TERRIBLE and they all got similar contracts.

 

People blaming Benning for the Eriksson signing are ignoring the bigger picture.

 

That being said, the stuff in the latter half were bigger gambles than before AND we traded more picks in the process. It was clear that the pressure was on him and he was making more and more mistakes. I feel like if he had picked another coach besides Green, he may have had better success.

 

I didn't mind the Beagle signing at the time. The Caps' fans LOVED the guy and were complimentary of his contributions. The team couldn't afford him and he deserved the payraise. The problem wasn't that he was a BAD player. He was too slow for the team and we didn't have enough pieces to support players like him.

Was nodding etc, until you said Green.  Have no idea, why folks still think it was somehow coaching lol.   We had a terrible roster.   Edler and freaking Tanev were our top pairing.   Eventually he got Myers, who's been a whopping post mostly until this year.  

 

How on Earth, are you supposed to be a winning team, during a rebuild?   We sucked.   Green wasn't a bad coach, he had a bad roster and punched above his weight class.   I'm sure he'd be doing just fine with the roster we have right now at their ages.     Prefer Tochett, but i'm not so naive to believe we could or should have done better either.    QHs, Brock, Pearson, a lot of players liked Green and thanked him for getting their chances.    It ended which was fine... Bruce had his bump which was glorious.   Green won more games than Crow did, in a single playoff, and that team was a lot better, Cloutier, bubble or not.   

Edited January 26 by IBatch

[aGENT]

4 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Was nodding etc, until you said Green.  Have no idea, why folks still think it was somehow coaching lol.   We had a terrible roster.   Edler and freaking Tanev were our top pairing.   Eventually he got Myers, who's been a whopping post mostly until this year.  

 

How on Earth, are you supposed to be a winning team, during a rebuild?   We sucked.   Green wasn't a bad coach, he had a bad roster and punched above his weight class.   I'm sure he'd be doing just fine with the roster we have right now at their ages.     Prefer Tochett, but i'm not so naive to believe we could or should have done better either.    QHs, Brock, Pearson, a lot of players liked Green and thanked him for getting their chances.    It ended which was fine... Bruce had his bump which was glorious.   Green won more games than Crow did, in a single playoff, and that team was a lot better, Cloutier, bubble or not.   

 

Hot take...Green and Tochett are very similar coaches 

 

Yup, it was mostly roster/rebuilding until Green's last year. At that point he'd unfortunately lost the room and had to go. But he was never a bad coach.

[aGENT]

12 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

I don't think so, he does t have that explosive element to his game, but he's probably going to be a guy who is better actual player than a lot of 1C guys are.  He just won't have the numbers to get the attention

 

Yup when he eventually makes the big club, there will be fans poo-pooing him because he won't be flashy or put up massive counting stats, he'll just be a solid, reliable C. Coaches will probably love him and some fans will wonder why 

Edited January 26 by aGENT

[King Heffy]

5 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

Hot take...Green and Tochett are very similar coaches 

 

Yup, it was mostly roster/rebuilding until Green's last year. At that point he'd unfortunately lost the room and had to go. But he was never a bad coach.

What has Green done to suggest he is qualified to coach at any level?  He was a big part of the roster issues due to his insistence on gifting roster spots to AHL trash.  At no point did he show that he understood the game well enough to not be detriment to the organization.

[canucks curse]

Friedman name checked:

 

Lindholm

Henrique

Geuntzel

Vatrano

Monahan - and said Canucks see him as more of a 3C so not tons of interest right now

[nux_win]

2 hours ago, 5forFighting said:

I disagree, he is the one player who, if he knows who can make him better I listen to because he knows. 

I'm not saying he doesn't know.  I would trust his opinion for sure.  I'm just saying he should be quiet about it in the press.  I don't even know if it was leaked or if he spoke publicly but it's better to not talk about these things until after a deal is done.  Even if we were pursuing Tanev it's better not to talk about it because the price goes up when they know how bad we want him.  GCG!

[Ghostsof1915]

I always liked Tanev.

But I do not want to spend a 1st round pick to get him back.

Not when you can get him for free July 1.

 

Edited January 26 by Ghostsof1915

[Coconuts]

22 minutes ago, canucks curse said:

Friedman name checked:

 

Lindholm

Henrique

Geuntzel

Vatrano

Monahan - and said Canucks see him as more of a 3C so not tons of interest right now

 

Of those players I think Henrique and Vatrano might be the most likely 

 

I could see another team willing to pay more for Lindholm and I reckon Guentzel extends in Pittsburgh, I'm not convinced Calgary's interested in trading us a 2C either, it's a bit different than trading us a 5D in Zadorov 

 

Vatrano is a bit younger but he'll be 30 in March, whereas Henrique will be 34 on February 6th and would probably be more of a rental 

 

Vatrano has four more points but one more game played in comparison 

 

I still think Lindholm to Washington makes a lot of sense

Edited January 26 by Coconuts

[Hairy Kneel]

6 hours ago, stawns said:

 

For whatever reason, Tanev just can't stay healthy in Van.  There's no denying that 

At 34 and 4.5M 

Plus Calgary is going to want the moon for him. As a rental that's asking too much. Calgary is already counting their money and our top prospects.

Tanev ufa will want the same 4.5M too.

[spook007]

53 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Was nodding etc, until you said Green.  Have no idea, why folks still think it was somehow coaching lol.   We had a terrible roster.   Edler and freaking Tanev were our top pairing.   Eventually he got Myers, who's been a whopping post mostly until this year.  

 

How on Earth, are you supposed to be a winning team, during a rebuild?   We sucked.   Green wasn't a bad coach, he had a bad roster and punched above his weight class.   I'm sure he'd be doing just fine with the roster we have right now at their ages.     Prefer Tochett, but i'm not so naive to believe we could or should have done better either.    QHs, Brock, Pearson, a lot of players liked Green and thanked him for getting their chances.    It ended which was fine... Bruce had his bump which was glorious.   Green won more games than Crow did, in a single playoff, and that team was a lot better, Cloutier, bubble or not.   

For whatever reason Green kept hanging on to Baumer as his assistant... Wonder how he would have fared with a better ass coach (similar to Foote or Gonchar)?