Value of: Chris Tanev for a young center (similar to Bo Horvat calibre?)

[Horse McHindu]

Chris Tanev for a young center (similar to Bo Horvat calibre?)

If the Canucks were to trade Chris Tanev, would Tanev be capable of fetching a 'Bo Horvat' calibre center? (i.e. similar age, style, calibre, etc.). A Bo Horvat clone if you will.

The reason why I ask is this:

My hope is that if the Canucks were to land another 'Bo Horvat' type guy, they could try and build a future Bergeron-Krejci 1-2 punch at center.

With Horvat, Sutter, and this Horvat-clone (via Tanev trade) at Center, the Canucks could be set down the middle for years to come. Once this trade takes place, you could then finally look at options of moving the twins and truly shifting to a new core.

As far as filling the void for Tanev goes, I'd offer Boeser, Stetcher, and a draft pick to Winnipeg for Trouba.

All of a sudden, the Canucks' new identity starts to shape up. They'd have 3 two-way centers down the middle (including a prototypical 4th line shut down center in one of Gaunce or Cassels in the future), and they'd have the makings of a very big and mean defense (i.e. Trouba, Gudbranson, Tryamkin, complemented by the skill of Juolevi, Hutton, and...whoever).

Click to read more...

 

[Horse McHindu]

My personal philosophy:

Just to be clear with what my personal hockey philosophy is as it relates to the Canucks:

1) I'm highly interested in targeting 20-23 year olds. Even 20-22 if it narrows the scope a bit. However - no reclamation projects. I'm willing to pay 'big' for these types of assets if it gives the Canucks a 'guarantee' of sorts, even if you run the risk of trading an asset that ends up being as good or better than the piece you are acquiring (i.e. trading Boeser and Stetcher for Trouba for instance, might result in one or both of Boeser or Stetcher becoming as good or better than Trouba, but as of right now, Trouba's 'probability' of becoming a Top pairing guy/superstar is far greater than Boeser and Stetcher and so by that virtue alone, I'd be willing to make that kind of trade).

2) I feel the Canucks goaltending situation is solidified (or close to solidified) with one of Markstrom and Demko as our future guy. My next focus is a desire to hyper-target one more 20-23 year 'very good' center (perhaps using Tanev as the trading chip), while bringing in another 'guaranteed' young good stud on defense (Trouba).

3) I believe that by targeting 20-23 year old studs, it caters to all of management, ownership, and fans. Canuck fans get to see a shift from the old guard to the new core, while Management allows the team to get significantly younger and shifting to a new core, while simultaneously being competitive. With this type of focus, Ownership can also expect to see results a lot sooner than expected, while not being dependent on keeping the twins.

 

[2020 Cup Champions]

Seems like the state of the Canucks is affecting the fans' sanity...

 

[Horse McHindu]

Seems like the state of the Canucks is affecting the fans' sanity...

Ok, so walk me through this then. Enlighten me. Why do you feel like trading Chris Tanev for a Bo Horvat clone is a bad idea? If the value is off (i.e. Tanev isn't worth a Bo Horvat clone), then I'll admit ignorance and move on.

If it's fair value however, then my line of thinking is this:

If you have essentially two Bo Horvat's at center, along with Sutter as your 3rd, and one of Gaunce/Cassels as your 4th line C in the foreseeable future, then the Canucks would be set down the middle. Having 4 centers with a strong defensive sense, would potentially be similar to the New Jersey Devils model of 95-03, or more recently, the Bruins model with Bergeron-Krejci.

The extension to my idea, is that the Canucks make the move for Jacob Trouba......even if it means giving up Boeser and Stetcher (and maybe a low-end pick).

The Canucks would then have a new identity emerging.

1) Great two-way depth down the middle (Horvat, Horvat clone, Sutter, Gaunce/Cassels).

2) A big and mean belligerent defense (Trouba, Gudbranson, Tryamkin), that would hopefully be complemented by skill (Hutton, Juolevi).

3) With the arrival of another good young center from the Tanev trade, the Canucks could then finally look at options at moving the Sedins' in order to truly kick off the rebuild (which is what most fans want), but without necessarily making us a non-competitive team for a few years (which is what Ownership wants).

Given the potential that Edmonton, Winnipeg, and Calgary has in terms of possibly becoming an offensive power house one day, I like the idea of the Canucks building a more defensive-oriented team that caters to their current existing strength (goaltending).

 

[PB37]

I never understood trade proposal posts with verbiage like " I'm willing to " juxtaposed into it, as if the poster writing it actually has a say in a trade going down.

 

[The Alien]

You can't keep robbing Peter to pay Paul. Having one or two studs isn't worth the cost of all our young cost-controlled depth. We need to surround good players with good players if we aren't going to wait for elite talent to emerge through the system.

 

[Horse McHindu]

young cost-controlled depth.

In terms of cost controlled depth, couldn't you just as easily get a fringe UFA or a PTO kind of guy? (i.e. The Mason Raymond's of the world, and the Tuomo Ruutu's of the world).

My line of thought is that it's better to have young established core players (signed long term), and then focus on building/acquiring depth afterwards. Also, I'm sure if the Canucks traded the twins, they'd be able to land some picks/prospects, etc., that would fill the need of'young cost-controlled depth' anyways.

 

[WTG]

What centers do you have in mind?

I only can think of a couple 3 of them being in our division and the other wenneberg which isn't happening because cbj is fine on the right side thus don't value Tanev highly

 

[Zaddy91]

Chris Tanev for Ryan Nugent Hopkins

 

[WTG]

Chris Tanev for Ryan Nugent Hopkins

What happens to nurse and larsen?

 

[The Alien]

In terms of cost controlled depth, couldn't you just as easily get a fringe UFA or a PTO kind of guy? (i.e. The Mason Raymond's of the world, and the Tuomo Ruutu's of the world).

My line of thought is that it's better to have young established core players (signed long term), and then focus on building/acquiring depth afterwards. Also, I'm sure if the Canucks traded the twins, they'd be able to land some picks/prospects, etc., that would fill the need of'young cost-controlled depth' anyways.

I do see what you're saying, but I think if you're not building around generational talent, you need high end complimentary pieces. A core of a few good players with a bunch of Raymonds and Ruutus is just a bad team. And since we traded our picks and prospects for Trouba, we still find ourselves lacking in future depth. You can only package assets for players for so long, until you run out of assests. Then you go trading your GOOD depth, like the twins.

In a cap world, you need some young guys outperforming their ELCs if you want to contend. Constantly trading youth for established players depletes our depth, replacing potential with Mason Raymond.

 

[Blueangel1891]

Schenn from the Flyers? Although he hasn't played center in ages

We better just keep sucking this season, keep Tanev and draft Nolan Patrick

 

[Brock Radunske]

What happens to nurse and larsen?

Putting Nurse on the 3rd pairing and 2nd PP unit wouldn't be a bad thing.

 

[Trapper]

I never understood trade proposal posts with verbiage like " I'm willing to " juxtaposed into it, as if the poster writing it actually has a say in a trade going down.

If you can argue for 75 pages about I'll never accept that offer or player x is garbage, you can certainly write I'm willing too.

 

[strictlyrandy]

Tanev for RNH isn't a bad basis.

 

[Hunter368]

Ok, so walk me through this then. Enlighten me. Why do you feel like trading Chris Tanev for a Bo Horvat clone is a bad idea? If the value is off (i.e. Tanev isn't worth a Bo Horvat clone), then I'll admit ignorance and move on.

If it's fair value however, then my line of thinking is this:

If you have essentially two Bo Horvat's at center, along with Sutter as your 3rd, and one of Gaunce/Cassels as your 4th line C in the foreseeable future, then the Canucks would be set down the middle. Having 4 centers with a strong defensive sense, would potentially be similar to the New Jersey Devils model of 95-03, or more recently, the Bruins model with Bergeron-Krejci.

The extension to my idea, is that the Canucks make the move for Jacob Trouba......even if it means giving up Boeser and Stetcher (and maybe a low-end pick).

The Canucks would then have a new identity emerging.

1) Great two-way depth down the middle (Horvat, Horvat clone, Sutter, Gaunce/Cassels).

2) A big and mean belligerent defense (Trouba, Gudbranson, Tryamkin), that would hopefully be complemented by skill (Hutton, Juolevi).

3) With the arrival of another good young center from the Tanev trade, the Canucks could then finally look at options at moving the Sedins' in order to truly kick off the rebuild (which is what most fans want), but without necessarily making us a non-competitive team for a few years (which is what Ownership wants).

Given the potential that Edmonton, Winnipeg, and Calgary has in terms of possibly becoming an offensive power house one day, I like the idea of the Canucks building a more defensive-oriented team that caters to their current existing strength (goaltending).

Boeser and a small dark horse D prospect is going to land you Trouba? Is this what your saying here? If no please clarify. If yes, you realize the Jets have zero needs for wingers right? Dark horse small D of little interest. You think Chevy is going to trade Trouba for that?

 

[Horse McHindu]

What centers do you have in mind?

I only can think of a couple 3 of them being in our division and the other wenneberg which isn't happening because cbj is fine on the right side thus don't value Tanev highly

To be honest, one of the guys that I had in mind was Sean Couturier. I doubt the Flyers would give him up though.

While a Horvat-Couturier-Sutter 1-2-3 combo wouldn't be confused with Sakic-Forsberg-Ricci, I like the fact that the Canucks would have 3 very good two-way centers with exceptional defensive ability. Assuming Horvat takes another leap in his game, I'm almost inclined to compare a Horvat-Sutter-(Horvat Clone or, lets say Couturier) to the mid-late 90's Devils of Rolston-Holik-Carpenter (I know they got Arnott later on, but the Devils won in 95' without Arnott if I recall correctly).

I just take a look at this Canucks team, and notice that their one real strength right now is goaltending. I believe that Demko will be similar to Corey Schneider long term.

Our next thing that has the potential to be a strength, is our centers and their respective two-way games (or defensively responsible games). Horvat, Sutter, and one of Gaunce/Cassels will fit this bill. That's why I'd like to get another good young two-way center.

You'd then have good goaltending, complemented by defensively responsible centers, and then you could just focus on building up the defense (i.e. assets from a Sedin trade, etc.).

In terms of the 'identity' of the defense, I think it would be interesting if the Canucks could add a guy like Trouba to the Gudbranson and Tryamkin. All of a sudden, the Canucks would have a big and belligerent defense.......which could then be complemented by the likes of Hutton and Juolevi in terms of skill.

Future Canucks:

###-Horvat-###
###-Couturier (or a "Horvat clone")###
###-Sutter-####
###-Gaunce/Cassels-####

[good two-way centers with defensive savviness]. Tanev - gets you "Horvat clone" or a guy like Couturier.


Juolevi-Trouba
Hutton-Gudbranson
Sbisa-Tryamkin

[blend of a big and mean defense complemented by skill. Perhaps an asset from a Sedin trade or Edler trade can land us another high quality d-man at some point).

Demko
Markstrom/whoever

Ultimately, the Canucks mold themselves into a very defensively responsible team. Given the burgeoning offensive powerhouses in Edmonton, Winnipeg, and Calgary, I think this might be a good way for the Canucks to go.

 

[Nuckles]

Tanev for RNH isn't a bad basis.

Yeah, not bad for Edmonton. Bad for Vancouver.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Boeser and a small dark horse D prospect is going to land you Trouba? Is this what your saying here? If no please clarify. If yes, you realize the Jets have zero needs for wingers right? Dark horse small D of little interest. You think Chevy is going to trade Trouba for that?

I admittedly do not how to guage value pretty well. A few days ago, I suggested Boeser and our 2017 1st round pick, and many claimed that it was overkill........and that the Jets wouldn't be interested in that as they would want a defenseman.

Hence, my proposal of Boeser, Stetcher, and a low end draft pick (which by your account, is nowhere near enough for Trouba).

I'm open to listening as to what would be fair value.

 

[Machinehead]

Tanev should land a much better player than Bo Horvat.

 

[THall4]

What happens to nurse and larsen?

Who cares about Larsen. Hes useless to us

Tanev and Larsson would be a nice 1-2 punch on the RHD side. Nurse is a LHD so hes not effected at all.

 

[Prairie Habs]

I never understood trade proposal posts with verbiage like " I'm willing to " juxtaposed into it, as if the poster writing it actually has a say in a trade going down.

Isn't that vastly preferable to when posters speak as if they know what their GM was thinking?

"If I was in charge I would be willing to do this" rather than "well our GM would never trade him unless he was packaged for an upgrade"

 

[Aceboogie]

Yeah, not bad for Edmonton. Bad for Vancouver.

Plenty of fans are dying to give up their young center for Tanev as evidence by this thread eh?

*Crickets*

 

[Addison Rae]

Plenty of fans are dying to give up their young center for Tanev as evidence by this thread eh?

*Crickets*

we'll keep our top pairing dman on an excellent contract then

 

[AlphaBravo]

Plenty of fans are dying to give up their young center for Tanev as evidence by this thread eh?

*Crickets*

Not a Canucks fan, but I am sure plenty of teams would be willing to give up young centers (other young number one centers of the McDavid, Matthews etc. ilk) for a defenseman like Tanev. It took Taylor Hall to get Larsson, who is a good defenseman but not an elite one. Tanev could definitely fetch a young center and then some.