[Speculation] Current asking price for CGY’s Chris Tanev

[Bobby Lou]

4 hours ago, Diamonds said:

I'm good with not trading any more futures this year. We've already traded our 1st, 2nd, 5th, and one of our 3rd/4th rounders this year plus one of our more promising prospects.

 

As much as I want to win the cup, no number of trades will guarantee that. I don't want to see this team fall short and become a one and done team because we traded all of our futures for rentals. We've already made two major acquisitions in Zadorov and Lindholm (plus DeSmith if you want to go back that far), and Juulsen and Friedman have shown to be capable depth.

 

With the number of assets we've already parted with I think Tanev costs too much and doesn't make sense. If we can pick up a super cheap upgrade on Friedman for our 8th defenseman then great, but otherwise I think we should just stand pat and see what this team is capable of.

100% this ^^^

 

If the Tanman really wants to come home to Vancity we can always sign him in the offseason if it's a reasonable term and cap.

 

This team like all good perennial contenders is going to need good young players to fill gaps on ELCs with the OEL buyout rising and our current group's raises. 

 

I have alot more confidence in Juulsen than most and Friedman as a #8 is nothing to scoff at either.

[NHL97OneTimer]

8 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Myers isn't indispensable. If he can be moved during the season, the Canucks will move him. That's money off the books that can be allocated to signings that need to happen in the off-season.  

He's not indispensable, I agree.  But he is very serviceable and his toughness is something we will need.  If we trade him and pick up Tanev, we would have a better defenseman.....but then we would lose toughness and likely prospects / picks.  We may also find Tanev to be injured where the bigger guy would have been healthier.  I'm not against trading Myers, I just think it's not as easy of a decision now as it was at the start of the season given how Myers is playing much better and the defense overall is not as compromised as it was.  Having guys like Juulsen playing much better, having Zadorov, seeing Hronek fulfill his potential, etc.....all reasons to not panic and sell the future.  

 

Lastly, I'm hopeful that Myers will sign on the cheap next year ($3M/yr or less)......we'll need that from some guys.  Tanev won't be that guy and I'd rather have collective strength than individual (and older) strength.

[NHL97OneTimer]

8 hours ago, aGENT said:

 

He/it sure has (and I'd add appropriate partners), which means he's actually movable.

 

We have enough size, with Zadorov, Soucy, Juulsen, Cole etc. And neither Tanev or Hronek are small wilting flowers either.

 

Tanev is a better D man that can do more than just occasionally "step up", and would also free up cap to add Tanev +.

 

Tanev + Bjugstad, or Tanev + Lyubushkin is >>>>>>> Myers.

But what do you give up to get there and will it be worth it?  Believe me, I'm a fan of Tanev but it's not an easy decision.  We don't need the cap space for this year....we need it for next year.

[NHL97OneTimer]

12 hours ago, tas said:

I don't know if "not a liability" is good enough for a team that wants to win a cup. I like juulsen a lot but I don't think my heart could handle him in game 7 ot. 

 

chris tanev was baptized in the stanley cup finals. 

As per above, what do you give up?  Juulsen is like Rome a decade ago.  You need guys who are solid on the cheap.

[NHL97OneTimer]

13 hours ago, tas said:

yeah, no. 

 

he is the toughest guy in the friggin' league. 

Myers and Tanev in a scrap.....who wins?  Given the number of slapshots Tanev can take, I'll admit he's tough, but I'm talking about the type of toughness that keeps EP safe out there.

[Johngould21]

3 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

He's not indispensable, I agree.  But he is very serviceable and his toughness is something we will need.  If we trade him and pick up Tanev, we would have a better defenseman.....but then we would lose toughness and likely prospects / picks.  We may also find Tanev to be injured where the bigger guy would have been healthier.  I'm not against trading Myers, I just think it's not as easy of a decision now as it was at the start of the season given how Myers is playing much better and the defense overall is not as compromised as it was.  Having guys like Juulsen playing much better, having Zadorov, seeing Hronek fulfill his potential, etc.....all reasons to not panic and sell the future.  

 

Lastly, I'm hopeful that Myers will sign on the cheap next year ($3M/yr or less)......we'll need that from some guys.  Tanev won't be that guy and I'd rather have collective strength than individual (and older) strength.

I find with Myers as his minutes go up his play suffers. Since Soucy has been out of the lineup, I'm starting to notice blips in his game. He can't play top two minutes period. He's better suited as a 4, 5, or 6 guy, and killing penalties.

[Coconuts]

7 hours ago, Diamonds said:

I'm good with not trading any more futures this year. We've already traded our 1st, 2nd, 5th, and one of our 3rd/4th rounders this year plus one of our more promising prospects.

 

As much as I want to win the cup, no number of trades will guarantee that. I don't want to see this team fall short and become a one and done team because we traded all of our futures for rentals. We've already made two major acquisitions in Zadorov and Lindholm (plus DeSmith if you want to go back that far), and Juulsen and Friedman have shown to be capable depth.

 

With the number of assets we've already parted with I think Tanev costs too much and doesn't make sense. If we can pick up a super cheap upgrade on Friedman for our 8th defenseman then great, but otherwise I think we should just stand pat and see what this team is capable of.

 

Pretty much, only way I'd take Tanev at this point is via UFA. I'm not interested in giving up the assets it'd take to acquire him via trade, and I recognize his value as a defensive defenseman. 

 

But I'm also not as driven by sentiment when it comes to acquiring Tanev, if he doesn't play for the Canucks again it won't bother me. 

 

Outside of cheaper depth acquisitions at this point I'd just let it ride and see what happens. 

Edited February 14 by Coconuts

[NHL97OneTimer]

2 hours ago, RWJC said:

Tanev for a 2nd imho is a no-brainer.

We are very lucky thus far to have escaped significant injuries (barring Soucy) on the backend and should we encounter that, the balance of this club will be upended. Tanev is a good purchase if rumoured asking price is true. His addition would provide even more stability and balance to a cup contending club. We need that quality of depth, not just pin hopes on some AHL call ups to weather the storm short or longterm. People should remember where this club has been the last few seasons to where we are now. So much talk of tear down and rebuild in the past to get to exactly where we are now. Jump on the chance and load up (within reason) for this season and next because parity can change rapidly in the NHL these days…we are testament to that. 
we have the youthful core, we have some stud prospects in the pipeline. We can afford to drop a second and marginal prospect for a guy who is greatly respected/familiar and will bleed for this team in leading it.

 

I wouldn’t underestimate the impact a “glue” guy can have in a room when chasing the cup. He is the prototype of player that helps you win one. Character through and through. 
 

we also have a chance to secure a guy who excels in his role and is invaluable to coaching when it comes to player matchups in playoff time. Tanev has a pretty solid book on the rest of the league and respected for his style of game.  I’d argue we still dont currently have a Dman as capable as he is defensively. He’s a solid add for the right price. 

That's not the point though.....you can't just give a 2nd to them since you have to create the cap space too.  Who do you send back?  If they could do some fancy accounting to make it work without subtracting from the roster and without giving up more prospects and picks (other than a 2nd), I can see them doing it.  I just don't think it's possible.  

[TopChed]

23 hours ago, Alflives said:

Actually it’s smart. If there is injury (in the playoffs) there’s a very good player to step up. 

Or we get swept in the 1st round because we have no 2nd line and 4m pounding glizziz in the press box.

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, TopChed said:

Or we get swept in the 1st round because we have no 2nd line and 4m pounding glizziz in the press box.

How do you figure? You do realize the recent Cup winners have been way over the Cap, right? It’s called giving a great core the best chance to win the Cup. The contracts in concern (by you) are expiring. There is literally no downside to adding Tanev. IMHAO we should add both Tanev’s! 
Now drink scotch, if you’re of age of course. 

[RWJC]

8 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

That's not the point though.....you can't just give a 2nd to them since you have to create the cap space too.  Who do you send back?  If they could do some fancy accounting to make it work without subtracting from the roster and without giving up more prospects and picks (other than a 2nd), I can see them doing it.  I just don't think it's possible.  

 

Soucy is likely an LTIR candidate. He's missed a large portion of the season thus far and i'd argue hasn't even fully been able to integrate or develop real chemistry.

His injury luck this season is at least a solid alibi.

If I was PA/JR I'd be utilizing every avenue we could  *ahem cap circumvention ahem* as most other successful NHL clubs seem to have mastered the art. 

 

In terms of trade, perhaps Mikheyev in a package. Maybe that's why Kessel is being considered. Would love to have Mik for depth but trading him facilitates insuring a greater area of need and also relieves some cap space going into next two seasons. Time is now and if Mik is going to take another season to fully reclaim his pre-injury self, we can't afford to carry his cap hit with our trajectory. Trading him offers us a lot of options. Major problem is his N-MTC.

As such, maybe that's not a feasible trade, and I understand your skepticism as to whether its worth it or not, but i believe if something is possible it should be explored.

 

 

 

[tas]

49 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

As per above, what do you give up?  Juulsen is like Rome a decade ago.  You need guys who are solid on the cheap.

rome debatably cost the team a cup. 

 

mid-round picks and/or b prospects, but I would not be surprised to see mikheyev move to allow for the dollars (who I also like, and I have no concern over his offensive slump currently). I feel like there are better fit options and better ways to allocate those dollars, and I also feel that he and kuzy were a bit of a package deal. I mean, they're professionals and they know it's a business and it doesn't appear he's going to sulk or anything, but he seemed pretty bummed after the trade. with zadorov a long shot to be retained long term, the lack of russians will likely play some kind of role in how happy he is sticking around. 

 

if calgary intends to hang on to kuzy rather than flipping him, maybe there's even interest there in reuniting these guys. mikheyev is a good player, not old, could fit into calgary's retool -- they can't rebuild with huberdeau and kadri locked in -- and he'd probably appreciate the opportunity to be in their top 6. they move hanifin and marky for big returns, tanev for assets, and suddenly you're off to an alright start to your new look with huberdeau, kadri, kuzy, mik, sharangovich, coleman?, mangiapane?, backlund?, their younger kids like zary and pelletier, weegar, andersson, wolf, etc. 

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

But what do you give up to get there and will it be worth it?  Believe me, I'm a fan of Tanev but it's not an easy decision.  We don't need the cap space for this year....we need it for next year.

According to this thread, our '25 2nd and a B prospect. I'm fine with that. Much over that and I'm happy to sign him in the offseason and see what other bargains they can find this TDL.

 

We can afford Tanev next year.

[Bobby Lou]

4 hours ago, TopChed said:

Or we get swept in the 1st round because we have no 2nd line and 4m pounding glizziz in the press box.

3 days later.... broken record mate.

[Breadnbutta]

After listening to spittin chicklets with Brock I hate Benning even more.

 

They gotta bring tanev back 

[Provost]

9 hours ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

That's not the point though.....you can't just give a 2nd to them since you have to create the cap space too.  Who do you send back?  If they could do some fancy accounting to make it work without subtracting from the roster and without giving up more prospects and picks (other than a 2nd), I can see them doing it.  I just don't think it's possible.  

Tanev with 50% retained fits.  No shenanigans needed.  We can add someone else too with only mild shenanigans.

Soucy can also go on LTIR until what appears to be close to the end of the season, and IF we don't have another long term injury at that point we simply run with a 20 man roster instead of a 23 man roster for the last few games of the season to make the little bit of extra cap space for players we add.

Heck there will almost certainly be a couple guys banged up enough that we can give one of them the last ten games/2 weeks off of the season for a legitimate injury they "could" play through but don't need to because it is better to be healed up when the playoffs start than grind out a few meaningless games at the end of the season when we have plenty of depth to cover them.  That creates even more cushion for cap space in case Soucy is actually back on schedule.  Doesn't have to be a key guy, Mikheyev's knee is clearly still not 100% so a little rest and then some rehab might give him some more of his speed back right when we need it.

[tas]

6 hours ago, Breadnbutta said:

After listening to spittin chicklets with Brock I hate Benning even more.

 

They gotta bring tanev back 

can you elaborate or post a link?

[OldFaithfulcap]

Tanev is great and all but price is high and cap issues.

 

Could we bring back schenn?

Edited February 15 by OldFaithfulcap

[canucks curse]

38 minutes ago, OldFaithfulcap said:

Tanev is great and all but price is high and cap issues.

 

Could we bring back schenn?

Price for tanev is now 2nd + B+ prospect 

we can do that 

2025 2nd + Hirose 

[canucks curse]

8 hours ago, Breadnbutta said:

After listening to spittin chicklets with Brock I hate Benning even more.

 

They gotta bring tanev back 

Yes tell us more 

[OldFaithfulcap]

2 minutes ago, canucks curse said:

Price for tanev is now 2nd + B+ prospect 

we can do that 

2025 2nd + Hirose 

 

Cap space. Calgary's only retained salary one time before. 

[canucks curse]

2 minutes ago, OldFaithfulcap said:

 

Cap space. Calgary's only retained salary one time before. 

We have cap space for tanev pro rated yes 

[Alflives]

26 minutes ago, canucks curse said:

We have cap space for tanev pro rated yes 

Yup. And put spicy on retroactive LTIR. 

[Bob Long]

9 hours ago, Breadnbutta said:

After listening to spittin chicklets with Brock I hate Benning even more.

 

They gotta bring tanev back 

 

What now? 

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, OldFaithfulcap said:

 

Cap space. Calgary's only retained salary one time before. 

Pick up Tanev with Soucy on IR. Move Myers in now even more shallow RD market.

 

Winning.