Proposal: Bos - Van

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Ehh, maybe so. I'm just being facetious anyway. I DO think it's beyond silly to suspend your fandom over a player though.

Oh I totally agree, except if that player is a distraction like Avery. That's the exception more than the rule though.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

ill cut canuck fans some slack... theres at least a dozen players in history i would have got violently sick if they ever became bruins.

just mention ulf samuelsson to a bruin fan and we will all get it.

if canuck fans say they dont want marchand, we shouldnt take exception.

if they say tanev is worth more... they are wrong.

its two differnt arguments.

now contracts do factor into these debates... and marchand 1 year away from ufa makes no sense for a non playoff team. i might argue marchand makes no sense to any rebuilding team even if he is resigned.

tanev on the other hand makes sense to all 30 teams.

so tanev has the more valuable contract.

ultimately no one from either fan base likes this idea. we should all respect each others opinion and let it die. tanev is a good player that boston wouldnt want to deal marchand for and marchand is considered to be a punk by vancouver fans

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

ill cut canuck fans some slack... theres at least a dozen players in history i would have got violently sick if they ever became bruins.

just mention ulf samuelsson to a bruin fan and we will all get it.

if canuck fans say they dont want marchand, we shouldnt take exception.

if they say tanev is worth more... they are wrong.

its two differnt arguments.

now contracts do factor into these debates... and marchand 1 year away from ufa makes no sense for a non playoff team. i might argue marchand makes no sense to any rebuilding team even if he is resigned.

tanev on the other hand makes sense to all 30 teams.

so tanev has the more valuable contract.

ultimately no one from either fan base likes this idea. we should all respect each others opinion and let it die. tanev is a good player that boston wouldnt want to deal marchand for and marchand is considered to be a punk by vancouver fans

I wouldn't say he worth more, I just find it funny that people think he is not in the same stratosphere as Marchand.

Most of us would be find with having Marchand he is a great player, and would make us better for sure. The ******** fans would quickly get over it.

 

[Homesick]

Top 20 in blocked shots two straight seasons. Soft is not the word you are looking for.

676th for hits tells me "soft" might be taking it easy on Tanev. There's elementary school playgrounds that have more physical games than Tanevs
You don't go anywhere in the playoffs with guys on your top pairing that lack the physical element or offensive ability

 

[BruinLVGA]

Honestly as good as Marchand is do you really think he puts up any where close to 37 goals playing on our second line?

I honestly don't know.

What I know is that a player who plays only 18 1/2 minutes a game, has limited & low quality (= with the 2nd unit) PP time, has a very sizeable chunk of PK, manages to put up nearly 40 goals (let's not forget he missed 5 games) while shooting below his average shooting percentage, was the league's leader in 5on5 goals in 15-16, while having only 47.4% of offensive starts, IS likely to put up ~40 goals again under normal circumstances.

If I was in the Canucks coach's shoes, if I had a ~40 goal scorer LW in his absolute prime, I would not put him on the 2nd line, but I guess that doing that would mean taking Daniel Sedin's spot and I guess that in Vancouver is akin to peeing in holy water.
Now imagine Marchand & his 37 goals in 77 games, having 60% offensive starts like the Sedins have...

Yah and Marchand is producing playing with one of the best two way C's in the game.

Bold is true.

However, do note that Marchand's production is not impacted favorably by having had to be on a line that is constantly tasked with the toughest assignments.
Burrows offensive starts (career) is at 57.2% offensive... Marchand 51.0%... Burrows highest was 74.1% (2 seasons above 70%, 2 seasons above 60%)... Marchand 54.5%...

Also it is important to note that in Burrows career year @ 67 points (35g/32a), he played with a guy who got 112 points (H. Sedin) and another (D. Sedin) who got 85. Not exactly the same as 68 points Bergeron and 25 points (horrible...) Connolly.

Lastly Burrows that year shot at a 16.7% clip, a full 4.0% above his career average (even though I must admit he sustained that the year before and the year after), while Marchand was below his career average in 15-16.

Then the next highest points season for Burrows is 15 points away from that season, Marchand has two seasons within 6 and 8 points.

All these things tell me that Burrows & Marchand might have a similar style, but Burrows had a much better situation re being put in the condition to put up many points, and his 35 goals, 67 points was a year where everything aligned perfectly. A career year to which he never even got remotely close. An anomaly. All of this tells me that Marchand is the best player of the two, by a nice, significant margin.

You really need to get over 2011, if we got Marchand we would instantly be a better team. If us becoming better makes you suspend your fandom then good riddance. I would rather cheer for a team that does everything to win, not one that holds silly childish grudges.

Best post of yours in this thread, by a country mile.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

676th for hits tells me "soft" might be taking it easy on Tanev. There's elementary school playgrounds that have more physical games than Tanevs

Yah except toughness is not only measured by how many hits you make, I can't understand why you don't know this.

Lidstrom was one of the best Dmen in history how many hits did he average a year?

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

I honestly don't know.

What I know is that a player who plays only 18 1/2 minutes a game, has limited & low quality (= with the 2nd unit) PP time, has a very sizeable chunk of PK, manages to put up nearly 40 goals (let's not forget he missed 5 games) while shooting below his average shooting percentage, was the league's leader in 5on5 goals in 15-16, while having only 47.4% of offensive starts, IS likely to put up ~40 goals again under normal circumstances.

If I was in the Canucks coach's shoes, if I had a ~40 goal scorer LW in his absolute prime, I would not put him on the 2nd line, but I guess that doing that would mean taking Daniel Sedin's spot and I guess that in Vancouver is akin to peeing in holy water.
Now imagine Marchand & his 37 goals in 77 games, having 60% offensive starts like the Sedins have...



Bold is true.

However, do note that Marchand's production is not impacted favorably by having had to be on a line that is constantly tasked with the toughest assignments.
Burrows offensive starts (career) is at 57.2% offensive... Marchand 51.0%... Burrows highest was 74.1% (2 seasons above 70%, 2 seasons above 60%)... Marchand 54.5%...

Also it is important to note that in Burrows career year @ 67 points (35g/32a), he played with a guy who got 112 points (H. Sedin) and another (D. Sedin) who got 85. Not exactly the same as 68 points Bergeron and 25 points (horrible...) Connolly.

Lastly Burrows that year shot at a 16.7% clip, a full 4.0% above his career average (even though I must admit he sustained that the year before and the year after), while Marchand was below his career average in 15-16.

Then the next highest points season for Burrows is 15 points away from that season, Marchand has two seasons within 6 and 8 points.

All these things tell me that Burrows & Marchand might have a similar style, but Burrows had a much better situation re being put in the condition to put up many points, and his 35 goals, 67 points was a year where everything aligned perfectly. A career year to which he never even got remotely close. An anomaly. All of this tells me that Marchand is the best player of the two, by a nice, significant margin.



Best post of yours in this thread, by a country mile.

Ok I see your points, they play a similar style but Marchand is a lot better.

 

[BruinLVGA]

Yah except toughness is not only measured by how many hits you make, I can't understand why you don't know this.

Lidstrom was one of the best Dmen in history how many hits did he average a year?

But Lidström put up a bus load of points. If a defensive defenseman (= no points production) lacks in the hits department, it's another point that is detrimental to his play & it's not compensated, like in Lidström's case by elite point production.

 

[BruinLVGA]

Ok I see your points, they play a similar style but Marchand is a lot better.

Yup.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

But Lidström put up a bus load of points. If a defensive defenseman (= no points production) lacks in the hits department, it's another point that is detrimental to his play & it's not compensated, like in Lidström's case by elite point production.

That's not the point I was trying to make though, you just don't measure a players hits to determine whether they are soft, Plenty of players are tough that don't hit.

 

[BruinLVGA]

That's not the point I was trying to make though, you just don't measure a players hits to determine whether they are soft, Plenty of players are tough that don't hit.

Oh, sorry, I missed that. On this I agree then.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

That's not the point I was trying to make though, you just don't measure a players hits to determine whether they are soft, Plenty of players are tough that don't hit.

tough can mean... get the job done

but it can also mean... intimidate the other side... extract a price

those who intimidate/extract a price... have a bonus value that others dont have... much like winning faceoffs is a bonus value... much like being good at shootouts is a bonus value

the word 'soft' gets tossed around too much and loses its meaning. a better word should be non-physical. when dmen are non-physical its a negative

chara is MUCH MUCH MUCH more valuable when hes physical. krug would be more valuable if he could dominate the front of the net and crush guys in the corner.

miller and mcquaid are in the nhl only because being physical is a huge bonus for dmen

until tanev either devolops more physical style... or scores more points... hes not very sexy to other fan base. im reminded how brian engloom was a valued montreal canadian... or how mike ramsey was a mainstay in buffalo...

a good solid stayhome dman can be loved by his hometown fans, but usually these guys top out as second pair guys. they dont usually get involved in high profile trades.

kevin lowe in edmonton can be another example... brad mccrimmond... theres been alot of guys who had very very good 10-15 year careers without scoring points or being physical beasts... but none have ever been involved in trades for top 10 goal scorers.

 

[CherryToke]

676th for hits tells me "soft" might be taking it easy on Tanev. There's elementary school playgrounds that have more physical games than Tanevs

do you think Duncan Keith is also soft?

You don't go anywhere in the playoffs with guys on your top pairing that lack the physical element or offensive ability

Maybe but that doesn't make Tanev soft..

 

[CherryToke]

If you want to see a soft dman, watch Yannick Weber. The guy is afraid to go into corners vs bigger opponents and constantly turns pucks over as a result. That is soft.

 

[PG Canuck]

You don't become one of the better NHL defenders with great advanced stats while being soft, I'm sorry but that just doesn't work.

 

[FinnBruin]

Uhhhh Bergeron is a 65+ point center, passing on offensive opportunities?

Yeah, because of their defensive abilities they get a lot of D-zone starts. Which obviously is passing on offensive opportunities. That they still score that much just goes to show how good they are. Obviously they would score more if they started in the offensive zone as often as, say, the Sedins.

 

[kdog82]

Marchand is gonna play 1st line LW in the WCH with Crosby and Beregron. Enough said. Marchand is severely undervalued on these boards.

I'd bet most around here would say Duchene/Couture are better or more valuable than Marchand when in reality they are not.

Shake your heads a little and realize that Marchand is widely considered one of the most valuable overall wingers in the game.

My fear as a Bruins fan is that he is going to price himself out of Boston if Sweeeney doesn't lock him up soon.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Marchand is gonna play 1st line LW in the WCH with Crosby and Beregron. Enough said. Marchand is severely undervalued on these boards.

I'd bet most around here would say Duchene/Couture are better or more valuable than Marchand when in reality they are not.

Shake your heads a little and realize that Marchand is widely considered one of the most valuable overall wingers in the game.

My fear as a Bruins fan is that he is going to price himself out of Boston if Sweeeney doesn't lock him up soon.

I think Marchand is a very good player, but the two players you compared him to play a more important position. So its kind of ridiculous to even compare them.

 

[Homesick]

676th for hits tells me "soft" might be taking it easy on Tanev. There's elementary school playgrounds that have more physical games than Tanevs
You don't go anywhere in the playoffs with guys on your top pairing that lack the physical element or offensive ability

See 2nd paragraph

Yah except toughness is not only measured by how many hits you make, I can't understand why you don't know this.

Lidstrom was one of the best Dmen in history how many hits did he average a year?

If you're going to address a post quote all of it.

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

Marchand is gonna play 1st line LW in the WCH with Crosby and Beregron. Enough said. Marchand is severely undervalued on these boards.

I'd bet most around here would say Duchene/Couture are better or more valuable than Marchand when in reality they are not.

Shake your heads a little and realize that Marchand is widely considered one of the most valuable overall wingers in the game.

My fear as a Bruins fan is that he is going to price himself out of Boston if Sweeeney doesn't lock him up soon.

at the last games kunitz was crosbys winger? i sure hope you dont think marchand is at that level

but in all seriousness i guess coaches look for chemisty in these short touniments? bergeron is so smart on the ice, he and crosby always click... and marchand/bergeron as a duo are one of the top 5 duos in the league

crosby is not easy to play with. pittsburgh has been searching for linemates for him for a decade now. most guys hold crosby back

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

See 2nd paragraph

If you're going to address a post quote all of it.

The only physical element he is missing is hitting, no he doesn't hit, he blocks shots, takes hits and as Bieksa said "he could play hockey with a cigarette in his mouth", as in he doesn't get rattled even by physical play. So once again calling him soft is ridiculous and completely untrue.

If you don't like the player fine, many people disagree with you, people who aren't driven by a hatred of said team. Maybe lose the bias it will open your eyes bud.

 

[Hi-wayman]

The only physical element he is missing is hitting, no he doesn't hit, he blocks shots, takes hits and as Bieksa said "he could play hockey with a cigarette in his mouth", as in he doesn't get rattled even by physical play. So once again calling him soft is ridiculous and completely untrue.

If you don't like the player fine, many people disagree with you, people who aren't driven by a hatred of said team. Maybe lose the bias it will open your eyes bud.

Tanev doesn't need to hit in order to be useful as to how Benning is trying to rebuild the Canucks as a tough team to play against. The defense has Edler and Gudbranson to do that.

As far as the discussion who is more valuable, if you are talking trade value, Marchand will definitely likely garner more return if both were offered to all the NHL teams, but it would not be the Canucks being one of the high bidders. Not even if the cost of Marchand didn't include Tanev. Instead of looking at value you need to look at usefulness those players bring to the makeup of individual teams. Hockey is a team sport and no matter how skilled a player is, it is the team that wins or loses. The only consideration a GM or coach has about a player is hoe well that player and his skill set fits the team, The Oilers for the last few years is a great example is a team loaded with high skilled players and no team fit.

Benning is trying to build the Canucks as a team that is going to be hard to play against. Marchand would fit well on that type of Canuck team, but Benning has had to rebuild the Canucks almost from the ground up. Being a hard team to play against does not mean you win those games, but it is a trait that will eventually pay offf, especially in the playoffs.

The Canucks are now a decent team in goal and on the blueline, both roster wise & developing prospects. Other than the Sedin line, the forwards are still in a major rebuild stage. Currently the future looks good as the younger forward prospects are starting to develop into quality NHLers but it is likely to take at least 2 years of drafting and developing enough forwards to equal the team's goalies and defense. Marchand for now, doesn't fit the Canucks team because the Canucks don't have enough quality forwards to benefit from what he can currently bring the Canucks where as Tanev does fit by anchoring the Canuck defense.

 

[OConnellsProtege]

You don't become one of the better NHL defenders with great advanced stats while being soft, I'm sorry but that just doesn't work.

I wouldn't describe Tanev as soft, either. More of a meticulous, study his matchups and frustrate the opponent with his stick, skating and positioning type of guy. He's taken plenty of hits and keeps headstrong. I would love him on the Bruins, but the asking price turns my stomach.