Rumor: Benning shoots down current Tanev rumors; won't guarantee he won't be traded

[KreiderHouseRules*]

The only way I would trade Tanev is in a 1 for 1 trade for an exceptional young talent in return. Not saying quite Taylor Hall for Larsson value but that is the only kind of trade I would personally consider. It needs to be a pure quality trade otherwise I would prefer to keep the better player, partially due to the lack of high-end players in our organization.

Kreider is better than Tanev already.

Hayes likely will be.

Kreider+Hayes for Tanev is a joke.

Kreider+Hayes gets you a Shattenkirk/Barrie/Vatanen - not Chris "20-point" "Shoot At Goalie's Chest" Tanev.

Nichushkin, Johns, AND Honka? For Chris Tanev????

And VAN fans saying "I'd consider it" - lmao!

I've literally never seen a more overrated player.

Go YouTube search "Chris Tanev highlights."

The first result is a 24 second clip. 24 seconds about sums up Tanev's career highlights in the NHL.

The second result is a 4 minute clip of Tanev just...doing...various things on the ice...almost all of which would not fall under the "highlight" category. Tanev shooting into the goalie. Tanev making a pass. Tanev poke checking a puck into the corner. Thank God I watched it in HD.

When you have to use boring, harmless, meaningless shots and passes rather than plays that even result in goals in a "highlight video," you know there's something wrong.

 

[FOurteenS inCisOr]

4. Benning is a good player evaluator, if he feels like a player will work on this team and gives away literal lottery picks to get said player is it really that bad?

His player evaluation is awful.

Amateur scouting at this point seems poor. He's made a few good picks (McCann, Boeser, Tryamkin [I guess...maybe]), but he's botched a 5th and 6th overall and made some late round head scratchers as well.

His pro scouting has been atrocious. Apart from Vrbata and Baertschi it's really all negatives.

Your other points aren't much better...

 

[FOurteenS inCisOr]

Kreider is better than Tanev already.

Hayes likely will be.

Kreider+Hayes for Tanev is a joke.

Kreider+Hayes gets you a Shattenkirk/Barrie/Vatanen - not Chris "20-point" "Shoot At Goalie's Chest" Tanev.

Nichushkin, Johns, AND Honka? For Chris Tanev????

And VAN fans saying "I'd consider it" - lmao!

I've literally never seen a more overrated player.

Go YouTube search "Chris Tanev highlights."

The first result is a 24 second clip. 24 seconds about sums up Tanev's career highlights in the NHL.

The second result is a 4 minute clip of Tanev just...doing...various things on the ice...almost all of which would not fall under the "highlight" category. Tanev shooting into the goalie. Tanev making a pass. Tanev poke checking a puck into the corner. Thank God I watched it in HD.

When you have to use boring, harmless, meaningless shots and passes rather than plays that even result in goals in a "highlight video," you know there's something wrong.

Wow.

You realize there's more to defense than points and flashy plays, right?

Tanev is one of the best defensive D in the league.

 

[Black Noise]

Kreider is better than Tanev already.

Hayes likely will be.

Kreider+Hayes for Tanev is a joke.

Kreider+Hayes gets you a Shattenkirk/Barrie/Vatanen - not Chris "20-point" "Shoot At Goalie's Chest" Tanev.

Nichushkin, Johns, AND Honka? For Chris Tanev????

And VAN fans saying "I'd consider it" - lmao!

I've literally never seen a more overrated player.

Go YouTube search "Chris Tanev highlights."

The first result is a 24 second clip. 24 seconds about sums up Tanev's career highlights in the NHL.

The second result is a 4 minute clip of Tanev just...doing...various things on the ice...almost all of which would not fall under the "highlight" category. Tanev shooting into the goalie. Tanev making a pass. Tanev poke checking a puck into the corner. Thank God I watched it in HD.

When you have to use boring, harmless, meaningless shots and passes rather than plays that even result in goals in a "highlight video," you know there's something wrong.

So Larsson can get Hall but Tanev shouldn't even get Kreider???

 

[Machinehead]

Last year, the Canucks faced about 25 shots against every 60 minutes Taven was on the ice. Every 60 minutes he wasn't on the ice, they faced 33.

A team facing 25 shots per game would have been #1 in the whole league in shots against.

A team facing 33 would have been 30th.

He takes the Canucks from literally the worst to literally the best.

 

[Machinehead]

So Larsson can get Hall but Tanev shouldn't even get Kreider???

Don't bother, he's one of those Rangers fans who thinks Kreider is Ovechkin.

There's no middle ground. Rangers fans either think he's a hall of famer or absolute trash.

I'm one of like three people in New York who thinks Kreider is just a really good 2nd liner.

 

[thepuckmonster]

Last year, the Canucks faced about 25 shots against every 60 minutes Taven was on the ice. Every 60 minutes he wasn't on the ice, they faced 33.

A team facing 25 shots per game would have been #1 in the whole league in shots against.

A team facing 33 would have been 30th.

He takes the Canucks from literally the worst to literally the best.

Overrated

 

[KreiderHouseRules*]

Last year, the Canucks faced about 25 shots against every 60 minutes Taven was on the ice. Every 60 minutes he wasn't on the ice, they faced 33.

A team facing 25 shots per game would have been #1 in the whole league in shots against.

A team facing 33 would have been 30th.

He takes the Canucks from literally the worst to literally the best.

You forgot "#fakestats"

 

[Machinehead]

You forgot "#fakestats"

#TheyreLiterallyDocumentedFactsThatLitterallyHappenedInNationalHockeyLeagueGamesWhatThe****areYouTalkingAbout

 

[Josepho]

You forgot "#fakestats"

Elaborate.

 

[KreiderHouseRules*]

Don't bother, he's one of those Rangers fans who thinks Kreider is Ovechkin.

There's no middle ground. Rangers fans either think he's a hall of famer or absolute trash.

I'm one of like three people in New York who thinks Kreider is just a really good 2nd liner.

Don't talk about hyperbole and then say that I think Kreider is Ovechkin. Talk about middle ground much, hypocrite?

I'm on the same page with Kreider being a really good 2nd liner... who at 25 still has plenty of time to develop and improve. Contrary to recent HF belief, players RARELY peak at 25.

I just fail to see how a really good 2nd liner with 1st line, game-breaking potential is worth less than an older 3D with zero offense.

(Hint: it's because he isn't.)

 

[Machinehead]

There's only three teams in the world where Tanev is a 3D (or lower) - Sweden, Canada, and the LA Kings.

And yes, most forwards have peaked by 25.

 

[thepuckmonster]

You forgot "#fakestats"

Just because you don't understand them doesn't make them fake dude

 

[2020 Cup Champions]

Independently verifiable stats aren't real, but "game breaking potential" based on literally nothing is...

 

[FOurteenS inCisOr]

Don't talk about hyperbole and then say that I think Kreider is Ovechkin. Talk about middle ground much, hypocrite?

I'm on the same page with Kreider being a really good 2nd liner... who at 25 still has plenty of time to develop and improve. Contrary to recent HF belief, players RARELY peak at 25.

I just fail to see how a really good 2nd liner with 1st line, game-breaking potential is worth less than an older 3D with zero offense.

(Hint: it's because he isn't.)

But we're not talking about a 3D with no offense.

 

[KreiderHouseRules*]

#TheyreLiterallyDocumentedFactsThatLitterallyHappenedInNationalHockeyLeagueGamesWhatThe****areYouTalkingAbout

How naive is this? Facts?

You're looking at a bunch of raw data, and you're assigning interpretations (note: not facts) that you naively think are causation, when they're in fact, merely correlation.

There are 11 other players on the ice with Tanev at ES. That's 11 factors you're ignoring and pretending they're accounted for.

Correlation: Let's say that when Brassard is on the ice vs when Stepan is on the ice, the NYR have the puck more, and generate more chances. That also equates to them giving up fewer chances because they have the puck more.

You're taking that correlation and saying "Brassard is a better defensive player than Stepan because NYR gave up more goals with Stepan on the ice." That's precisely where you're jumping into causation where there isn't any. It's not cause and effect. It's correlation. We can still give Tanev credit for being part of a unit that suppressed shots, but you're now extrapolating extremely raw, unregulated data (arbitrarily defined slot, arbitrarily defined "quality scoring chance" among other unregulated and biased data points) into something else and calling it "facts!"

You're ignoring the majority of factors involved in a bunch of random, unique situations and trying to make people believe that your claim takes everything into account. That's fraud.

I can't be any clearer than that.

 

[Machinehead]

But we're not talking about a 3D with no offense.

We're talking about a 1D with no offense!

 

[thepuckmonster]

Independently verifiable stats aren't real, but "game breaking potential" based on literally nothing is...

Gif and post of the year.

 

[FOurteenS inCisOr]

We're talking about a 1D with no offense!

Haha, fair enough.

I actually think Tanev could get a couple seasons with ~30 points under his belt with his passing ability. Closer to 20 will be the norm, though.

 

[Machinehead]

How naive is this? Facts?

You're looking at a bunch of raw data, and you're assigning interpretations (note: not facts) that you naively think are causation, when they're in fact, merely correlation.

There are 11 other players on the ice with Tanev at ES. That's 11 factors you're ignoring and pretending they're accounted for.

Correlation: Let's say that when Brassard is on the ice vs when Stepan is on the ice, the NYR have the puck more, and generate more chances. That also equates to them giving up fewer chances because they have the puck more.

You're taking that correlation and saying "Brassard is a better defensive player than Stepan because NYR gave up more goals with Stepan on the ice." That's precisely where you're jumping into causation where there isn't any. It's not cause and effect. It's correlation. We can still give Tanev credit for being part of a unit that suppressed shots, but you're now extrapolating extremely raw, unregulated data (arbitrarily defined slot, arbitrarily defined "quality scoring chance" among other unregulated and biased data points) into something else and calling it "facts!"

You're ignoring the majority of factors involved in a bunch of random, unique situations and trying to make people believe that your claim takes everything into account. That's fraud.

I can't be any clearer than that.

Actually the Brassard vs Stepan example you keep coming up with is garbage because the Rangers DON'T generate more or have the puck more when Brassard is on the ice. Stepan has ALWAYS been a better generator and better overall possession player. Brassard is just better defensively. Always has been.

 

[thepuckmonster]

Haha, fair enough.

I actually think Tanev could get a couple seasons with ~30 points under his belt with his passing ability. Closer to 20 will be the norm, though.

Until the 2PP becomes half reliable he will flirt but maybe not surpass. Especially given he and Edler's zone starts.

 

[KreiderHouseRules*]

Actually the Brassard vs Stepan example you keep coming up with is garbage because the Rangers DON'T generate more or have the puck more when Brassard is on the ice. Stepan has ALWAYS been a better generator and better overall possession player. Brassard is just better defensively. Always has been.

Way to sidestep the entire argument to cherrypick one thing that I didn't even say.

Reading comprehension:

Lesson 1: *Key Words*

"Let's say" means let's assume, or let's pretend for a moment.

I'm glad you are done with the charade now.

 

[Machinehead]

It's not "Let's say." It's exactly what you've been arguing since Brassard was traded.

And regardless, it doesn't work that way. Generation, suppression, and possession are not entirely dependent on each other. Tanev is awful at generation but amazing at possession. Roman Josi is an amazing shot generator and the worst shot suppressor in the league.

 

[KreiderHouseRules*]

Haha, fair enough.

I actually think Tanev could get a couple seasons with ~30 points under his belt with his passing ability. Closer to 20 will be the norm, though.

Of course he could.

But then let's afford Kreider (who's almost 2 years younger) the same benefit: he could score 55-60 points easily if he's able to bring the effort consistently.

Chris Tanev is a blackhole:

1 goal and 4 primary assists at 5on5 all season.

Elite!

1D!

Woohoo!

 

[Machinehead]

"Kreider could score 55-60 points easily if only he was better at hockey!"

-Rangers fans since 2012