Proposal: Bos - Van

[JoeIsAStud]

I don't think you understand the whole pending Free Agent thing, hence why Canucks fans really scoff at this proposal. Giving our best defensemen for a player that will leave, yes, that is definitely great value.

Sure, obviously if you don't think you can sign him then it doesn't make sense.

For Boston they are trading 7 years of Marchand for Tanev, because Boston believes they should be pretty easily able to resign Brad.

Honestly, I think this is just one of those cases where a deal doesn't work for either team. Boston has no interest in dealing it's best winger, and it seems like Vancouver has no interest in dealing their best defenseman.

Boston does not get better by dealing Marchand for Tanev
Vancouver does not get better by dealing Tanev for Marchand

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Tanev = Larsson now?

Tanev is an offensively inept #4 dman. Solid but very unspectacular. Selling this guy as a top billing shutdown dman is just dishonest.

Uhh they did a poll on here most fans, (not just nucks fans) voted that he is a top pairing dman, his lack of offense does not make him a #4.


Look I know you hate our team, we hate yours as well but could you just try and be logical for once? I hate Marchand HATE, but I would grudgingly welcome him to this team he is a very good player.
Any Canuck fan that says otherwise needs to grow the **** up!


So is Tanev, one of the best defensive dmen in the league, kind of why many (including players and coaches) on the world championship team were calling him the unsung hero of the tournament.

As has already been said how is calling him a top billing shut down dman wrong? that's exactly what he is.

For the record I don't think either team does this trade both players are to important to their respective teams. Also its been 5 years since 2011 people on both sides really need to move on.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Give us a comparison? Larsson was a 4th overall pick and is 3 years younger than Tanev. Chiarelli gambled on Larsson's potential.

I can't think of a defensive dman who has the value of a 37 goal 70 point winger.

He's not a 70 point winger until he puts up 70 points bud.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Bad proposal. God no.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

Well if we're playing that game, value for Tanev has been set. 1 Top 5 LW in the NHL see Adam Larsson.

Tanev is clearly not worth that.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Tanev is clearly not worth that.

Yah and Marchand is clearly not worth a #1 Dman either.

 

[BrockBoeser6]

Tanev is clearly not worth that.

I see you're not understanding that the whole point of that post was to show people that using past trades to set a players value is stupid and doesn't work at all.

 

[PG Canuck]

Sure, obviously if you don't think you can sign him then it doesn't make sense.

For Boston they are trading 7 years of Marchand for Tanev, because Boston believes they should be pretty easily able to resign Brad.

Honestly, I think this is just one of those cases where a deal doesn't work for either team. Boston has no interest in dealing it's best winger, and it seems like Vancouver has no interest in dealing their best defenseman.

Boston does not get better by dealing Marchand for Tanev
Vancouver does not get better by dealing Tanev for Marchand

Well Vancouver doesn't need anymore forwards on top of things, even though Marchand is good, we can't sacrifice a defensemen for him.

But yeah, a deal both sides just wouldn't be able to make.

 

[bb_fan]

Yah and Marchand is clearly not worth a #1 Dman either.

when you start offering a #1 d-man for him, let every know.

until then, a top 4 d-man just doesn't cut it.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

when you start offering a #1 d-man for him, let every know.

until then, a top 4 d-man just doesn't cut it.

Wow not even the point I was trying to make, here's a bit of advice, read all of the post before making comments, when you ignore context, it's really hard to take you seriously.

 

[nmbr_24]

Yah and Marchand is clearly not worth a #1 Dman either.

there is no #1 D in this proposal

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

there is no #1 D in this proposal

Tanev's value is that of a top paring dman, they did a poll most agreed on here.

Many Bruins fans have stated over and over again that Tanev's value is no where near Marchands.

Hence, if Marchnd is seen as that valuable, his value is indicative of a #1 Dman, no?

Do you understand?

 

[bb_fan]

Wow not even the point I was trying to make, here's a bit of advice, read all of the post before making comments, when you ignore context, it's really hard to take you seriously.

Wow not even the point I was trying to make, here's a bit of advice, read all of the post before making comments, when you ignore context, it's really hard to take you seriously.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Wow not even the point I was trying to make, here's a bit of advice, read all of the post before making comments, when you ignore context, it's really hard to take you seriously.

What point were you trying to make? I was going off the value your fellow fans were setting for Marchand (IE. that his value is higher than a top pairing Dman), I was making a point that this is not his value.

You made a post that completely missed the context of mine and then you commented back with a post that just makes YOU look silly. Way to go bud.

Notice how I have said in the past in this thread that Marchand is a very good player, yet you and your fellow fans continue to devalue Tanev.

 

[BruinLVGA]

Yah and Marchand is clearly not worth a #1 Dman either.

Are you saying that Tanev is a #1 defenseman? That is NOT the same as being the #1 defenseman the Canucks have. Let's be clear on this point.

 

[BruinLVGA]

Tanev's value is that of a top paring dman, they did a poll most agreed on here.

Many Bruins fans have stated over and over again that Tanev's value is no where near Marchands.

Hence, if Marchnd is seen as that valuable, his value is indicative of a #1 Dman, no?

Do you understand?

A poll... Ah then that settles it.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Are you saying that Tanev is a #1 defenseman? That is NOT the same as being the #1 defenseman the Canucks have. Let's be clear on this point.

When did I say that? Again context is a beautiful thing.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

A poll... Ah then that settles it.

When fans of different teams on here agree that he is top paring of course it doesn't settle it, but it helps a long with praise from players, coaches and personnel that also helps.

The only people that seem to disagree are those that choose to base their opinion on stats alone. Or the classic, "well I have watched a couple of games so that makes me informed"


Most of us don't believe he is a #1 Dman but he is top pairing.

 

[nmbr_24]

Tanev's value is that of a top paring dman, they did a poll most agreed on here.

Many Bruins fans have stated over and over again that Tanev's value is no where near Marchands.

Hence, if Marchnd is seen as that valuable, his value is indicative of a #1 Dman, no?

Do you understand?

Is he a #1 D? I don't think so.

 

[Legend123]

When fans of different teams on here agree that he is top paring of course it doesn't settle it, but it helps a long with praise from players, coaches and personnel that also helps.

The only people that seem to disagree are those that choose to base their opinion on stats alone. Or the classic, "well I have watched a couple of games so that makes me informed"


Most of us don't believe he is a #1 Dman but he is top pairing.

sorry, he may be on Vancouver and bottom feeders and but isnt in contending teams. I just cant see him as a top pairing Dman.

 

[BruinLVGA]

When did I say that? Again context is a beautiful thing.

Did anyone say/hint/infer that Marchand was worth a #1 defenseman? Not that I can see. The only other player associated with Marchand in this thread is Tanev. Hence when you say "he is not worth a #1 defenseman", pretty much the only possibility left is you hinting at Tanev's being a #1 defenseman. This, judging by the puzzled answer of all Bruins fans, doesn't seem to be a thought only I had. Folks can't truly imagine that you might be referring to some obscure poll about Tanev. I wish I could read minds, but still working on it.

 

[bb_fan]

What point were you trying to make? I was going off the value your fellow fans were setting for Marchand (IE. that his value is higher than a top pairing Dman), I was making a point that this is not his value.

You made a post that completely missed the context of mine and then you commented back with a post that just makes YOU look silly. Way to go bud.

Notice how I have said in the past in this thread that Marchand is a very good player, yet you and your fellow fans continue to devalue Tanev.

where have I devalued Tanev?

take you own advice, and go back and read the thread before commenting and making yourself look so silly there bud.

oh, and this is were you compared him to a #1:

Tanev's value is that of a top paring dman, they did a poll most agreed on here

talk about making oneself look silly there bud......

'meh.... an HF poll said so... it has to be true'.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

What point were you trying to make? I was going off the value your fellow fans were setting for Marchand (IE. that his value is higher than a top pairing Dman), I was making a point that this is not his value.

You made a post that completely missed the context of mine and then you commented back with a post that just makes YOU look silly. Way to go bud.

Notice how I have said in the past in this thread that Marchand is a very good player, yet you and your fellow fans continue to devalue Tanev.

There is a definite difference in value between a #1 and a "top pairing defenseman" which can range from a #2-4 and just happen to play on a top pairing.

Marchand is not worth a #1 defenseman -- he is worth more, and a better player, than Tanev. Simple as that. Marchand produces at a high level in all three zones.

 

[BruinLVGA]

When fans of different teams on here agree that he is top paring of course it doesn't settle it, but it helps a long with praise from players, coaches and personnel that also helps.

The only people that seem to disagree are those that choose to base their opinion on stats alone. Or the classic, "well I have watched a couple of games so that makes me informed"


Most of us don't believe he is a #1 Dman but he is top pairing.

Nucklehead... A poll amongst fans =/= a fact set in stone. Far from it actually, considering most of the stuff (threads/posts) one can read around here...

I am a big proponent myself of the fact that generally speaking, opinions of folks who see often a player are more valuable than those who don't. With that you are telling Bruins fans that they don't know what they are talking about. By the same token, you have no clue what you are talking about re Marchand. What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.
So... What is out there that is available for everyone to see? Stats. And to be frank, I think by itself the lack of production says that Tanev could never be a #1. If you ask for my opinion, what I see & hear reminds me of a Johnny Boychuk. A reliable, strong defensive defenseman (even though Johnny Rocket had a knack for very timely, heavy goals from time to time). A #3, not top pairing.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Nucklehead... A poll amongst fans =/= a fact set in stone. Far from it actually, considering most of the stuff (threads/posts) one can read around here...

I am a big proponent myself of the fact that generally speaking, opinions of folks who see often a player are more valuable than those who don't. With that you are telling Bruins fans that they don't know what they are talking about. By the same token, you have no clue what you are talking about re Marchand. What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.
So... What is out there that is available for everyone to see? Stats. And to be frank, I think by itself the lack of production says that Tanev could never be a #1. If you ask for my opinion, what I see & hear reminds me of a Johnny Boychuk. A reliable, strong defensive defenseman (even though Johnny Rocket had a knack for very timely, heavy goals from time to time). A #3, not top pairing.

Marchand is a very good top sixer, I would love to have him on the Canucks, I have never said otherwise.

Not at the expense of Tanev though.

By this same token you could say that Marchand is very similar to Alex Burrows, produces in all ends, very good two way player, 30 goal scorer.

I would never have said that Burrows is worth more than a #2/3 Dman. I especially would not have said that whatever players value is not in the same stratosphere as Burrows either.

Look we as a fanbase see Tanev as a #2 dman (whether bruins fans agree or disagree) and yes top pairing by no means #1, but in reality the only thing holding him back from that is his lack of offense.

As I have said this trade makes no sense for either team, we are happy to keep Tanev, the Bruins are happy to keep Marchand.