Value of: Chris Tanev

[Randy Randerson]

Whoever says he is a #1 defensemen is clearly wrong and there are a lot of Canucks fans that will disagree with it as well. Tanev is only getting overrated because there is no point trading him for a return that makes us far worse. Tanev is the glue to the Canucks defense and it is very evident how much they miss him when he is out of the lineup. What return can replace that?

It's a classic case of Tanev having more value to the Canucks than he does by trading him, unless we get a Hall type return, or a package type deal.

Curious though, what does Tanev do for the Canucks other than help to tread water? wouldn't you be better off going full potato and drafting very high for a while? Not to mention that Tanev brings back some good futures to supplement the rebuild - add those to Boeser, Demko, Joulevi and a top 3 pick this year and that looks like a really good start

This is just a surface google search, a bit pressed for time, but it played out over a couple weeks, the deal was late into the off season if I recall correctly. Not claiming this is a perfect link but gives the jist of it.

http://nesn.com/2009/09/predators-maple-leafs-to-begin-bidding-war-for-phil-kessel/

Interesting, I hadn't heard anything about a bidding war that materialized for Kessel at the time. The trade compensation being based on the offer sheet compensation was obvious but didn't hear about other teams actually making offers, and certainly no teams that expected to be in the lottery

Either way, still hurts, but I guess if we had Seguin we wouldn't have Matthews

 

[MissionCanucksFan]

That is true, but having Hutton, Stecher, Tryamkin and later on Juolevi left to fend for themselves...that may not be the best idea. Gudbranson can't carry a pairing, Sbisa is awful, and everyone else is borderline NHL-tier defensemen.

Edler is really the only reliable one left, and he's been paired with Stecher and they have looked good, but that leaves Hutton/Tryamkin/Juolevi to be saddled with boat anchors as their partners as they are trying to develop and learn the NHL game.

I see no rush to move Tanev right now, if they can't garner a nice return. We need to make sure we develop these young defensemen before getting trigger happy. The Canucks have other assets they should be focused on moving before Tanev right now.

Last I checked we equally lose alot of games with Tanev in the line-up so what's the difference? It's like arguing a pound of lead is heavier than a pound of feathers.
When paired with Edler, he doesn't stand out, when paired with Sbisa or Hutton, he still gets beat. Yes there is alot about Tanev I like but I just don't have the emotional connection like others do. If trading Tanev makes this team better by bringing in assets with higher ceilings than Tanev while we are in our re-tool/re-build then I'm the first to say yes.
Sergachev was selected high enough in last year's draft and will equal Juolevi's value. The guy can skate, be agressive and hammer pucks at the net and has size. Again....a much higher ceiling that Tanev and yet do the same things Tanev can do.

 

[jimmythescot]

Curious though, what does Tanev do for the Canucks other than help to tread water? wouldn't you be better off going full potato and drafting very high for a while? Not to mention that Tanev brings back some good futures to supplement the rebuild - add those to Boeser, Demko, Joulevi and a top 3 pick this year and that looks like a really good start



Interesting, I hadn't heard anything about a bidding war that materialized for Kessel at the time. The trade compensation being based on the offer sheet compensation was obvious but didn't hear about other teams actually making offers, and certainly no teams that expected to be in the lottery

Either way, still hurts, but I guess if we had Seguin we wouldn't have Matthews

He's young enough that he can provide veteran leadership to the next core. While I don't like Benning at all, the team is obviously being built around defence and when the Canucks lose the Sedins, we will be in a position where we'll have a forward group of mostly journeymen who will help us along to high picks despite the defence.

I'd rather not trade Tanev unless the deal is too good to pass up.

 

[MissionCanucksFan]

Curious though, what does Tanev do for the Canucks other than help to tread water? wouldn't you be better off going full potato and drafting very high for a while? Not to mention that Tanev brings back some good futures to supplement the rebuild - add those to Boeser, Demko, Joulevi and a top 3 pick this year and that looks like a s

See....that's the thing with some fans. Even Canucks fans. They become so loyal and emotionally attached to pro athletes that making tough decisions actually becomes tough.
These athletes are generally good people but they are PAID for a service. When they are here, yes they do good in the community and blah blah blah....but so will the next guy and the next after that. Not only that fact is when his contract is up, they are gone to the highest bidder. Fair enough
Now....if Tanev brings back a stud prospect such as Sergachev for example....you don't even debate that.
Now I know there are alot of sensitive Tanev fans here and that's fair but I swear...once Sergachev scores a few goals or doles out a thundering hip check, Canuck fans will all forget about Tanev.....and surely everyone here can agree to that fact

 

[Nuckles]

OTOH, I think a big reason for why the kids in Toronto are doing so well early on is just because they always kept a "team"/team structure in place. IE they did the opposite of what EDM did.

JVR, Bozak, Kadri, Komarov, Matt Martin, the semi-youths Brown and Hyman, Michalek, Polak, Gardiner, Reilly, Hunwick and so forth, -- like its an established NHL core. The core of a PO contender? Nah, of course not. But its definitely the core of a team. You got a PP unit that is decent. You get a unit that can take late shifts. Even if its thin, its still enough to at least be in that essential position where the kids have to earn their ice time. Like if Matthews bombed, he wouldn't play the top PP unit or last shift of the game when needing a goal or whatever. If Marner bombed he would be in the AHL. The same for Nyls. In EDM, it was always the complete opposite. They had no alternatives more or less to their high picks. Either they performed or not, they still played.

You definitely want the dynamic Toronto has. As this league is right now, I think good teams develop good players, and the premium in talent bad teams get in the draft has to be very very big to make up for the advantage good teams has on the development side...

Bingo. The last thing we want is an Edmonton situation. You need reliable vets to take tough match-ups away from younger, inexperienced players and to mentor them.

Vancouver should end their love affair with these players and make a business decision.

You don't keep a guy like Tanev through his prime years, when those prime years coincide with what should be a team rebuild.

They're going to get quite a bit for Tanev, if they trade him sooner rather than later.

If they wait, they could regret it.

Not according to 95% of this thread. A mid/late 1st and a good prospect does a lot less for this team long-term than keeping Tanev. There's a very good reason why I would only move him for a huge return (something most people would consider to be a severe overpayment). We could trade him in the last year of his contract and still get a late 1st+, so why on earth would we trade him now for something similar to that?

 

[smirob]

Another RHD doesn't make sense for MTL

I could see TB being a logical fit, with a lot of young forwards - there's a deal there somewhere.

 

[Randy Randerson]

He's young enough that he can provide veteran leadership to the next core. While I don't like Benning at all, the team is obviously being built around defence and when the Canucks lose the Sedins, we will be in a position where we'll have a forward group of mostly journeymen who will help us along to high picks despite the defence.

I'd rather not trade Tanev unless the deal is too good to pass up.

To me it seems like the Canucks are in need of a full tear down. "Veteran Leadership" is something you can buy in free agency when the time is right IMO, whether its top free agents or character role players

Tanev is undoubtedly your most valuable asset and on a very tradeable contract where some of your other pieces (Sedins) contracts might make it hard to find teams that want them and can afford them - the teams that want them probably won't be able to afford them without a ton of bad cap returned and retention, and the teams that can afford them will have no use for players of their age. Tanev is also a piece that helps to keep you out of the basement where you need to be....drafting 6th-10th every year might work, but the odds say you're way better off to draft top 3 to find the guys you're going to build around. So if it's me, I deal Tanev for the best package available...and you'll get something really good, like a mid 1st and A level prospect (probably a 15-30 prospect in the league, not a top 10 type IMO)

I don't hate the Canucks farm right now, but I think you'd have to be very lucky for one of the guys you have already to turn out as a franchise player, but if you added a Patrick/Liljegren/Hischier and a Dahlin/Merkley then that feels like a young core to build around and the pieces you get back from Tanev would add to the Boeser/Demko/Juolevi level of prospects with premier supporting cast type potential

See....that's the thing with some fans. Even Canucks fans. They become so loyal and emotionally attached to pro athletes that making tough decisions actually becomes tough.
These athletes are generally good people but they are PAID for a service. When they are here, yes they do good in the community and blah blah blah....but so will the next guy and the next after that. Not only that fact is when his contract is up, they are gone to the highest bidder. Fair enough
Now....if Tanev brings back a stud prospect such as Sergachev for example....you don't even debate that.
Now I know there are alot of sensitive Tanev fans here and that's fair but I swear...once Sergachev scores a few goals or doles out a thundering hip check, Canuck fans will all forget about Tanev.....and surely everyone here can agree to that fact

Ya I agree with dealing Tanev, and I think a Sergachev type prospect is attainable...he might be the best of what you could get back but not crazy to think he's attainable. Certainly a prospect on the Jost/Sanheim/Vrana/Bean/Fabbro level and a mid 1st rounder seems right to me - from a Leafs perspective if Tanev was healthy I'd do Kapanen+our 1st and when the new rankings come out I think we'll
see Kapanen in the top 30

The absence of Tanev will also help you guys to turn this year and next year's picks into premier prospects

We had a similar situation in Toronto for a loooong time, and when we finally went full rebuild it netted really good results, easy to replace the old guard with high ceiling kids in the minds eye of the fanbase imo

 

[MissionCanucksFan]

- I'd do Kapanen+our 1st

Toss in Carl Grundsrom and you've got a deal

 

[Randy Randerson]

Toss in Carl Grundsrom and you've got a deal

I'd think about it, I'm not as high on Grundstrom as most...he's also a guy that could fill the top line LW if he turns out even if he's not that in a vacuum, a more talented Hyman could go a long way on Matthews' line

 

[Brock Radunske]

Toss in Carl Grundsrom and you've got a deal

Kapanen + 1st + Grundsrom is probably good value for the Leafs but I really don't want to give up Kappy. He has all the tools to be a top line winger.

 

[MissionCanucksFan]

Bingo. The last thing we want is an Edmonton situation. You need reliable vets to take tough match-ups away from younger, inexperienced players and to mentor them.




Not according to 95% of this thread. A mid/late 1st and a good prospect does a lot less for this team long-term than keeping Tanev. There's a very good reason why I would only move him for a huge return (something most people would consider to be a severe overpayment). We could trade him in the last year of his contract and still get a late 1st+, so why on earth would we trade him now for something similar to that?

The Edmonton situation wasnt for the age and lack of talent. It was due to throwing these 18 yr Olds into the fire right off the bat. That and going thru 5 different coaches and 7 different philosophies etc....

You put those guys in a full 2 years of AHL or back to juniors and fully develop them properly and you've got a better result.

The good prospect you talk of was one that Benning and Co were seriously very high on and capable of a great NHL career. With Benning's ability to draft well and 2018 being a deep draft, there is a great thought that Benning will draft a stud in that mid round 1st to go with the great pick he already has. And that pick could ALSO turn out to be better than Tanev.
We'really not repeating the Hall/Larsson trade nor are we getting Landeskog for Tanev so please quit aiming so high. Surely Tanev gets dealt at the deadline or draft. The thing to think about is WHO and WHAT package is coming back

 

[clunk]

Kapanen + 1st + Grundsrom is probably good value for the Leafs but I really don't want to give up Kappy. He has all the tools to be a top line winger.

Tanev IS a top pairing d-man. I think that's much more important than potential.. Especially when pairing him with a kid in Rielly he would greatly benefit.

 

[HalfPastDan]

What's his outlet pass like? How good is he at moving the puck out of the D zone?

TB has a fairly shiny-looking 1st right now. I think we're in the bottom third of the league, and we have a solid forward prospect pool.

I don't know if Tanev should be the guy we target, because it feels like we're at a point where our defense is struggling because of a lack of Dman with offensive skills. But we could deal a 1st + prospect for the right guy.

His first pass is outstanding. One of his best traits is his ability to contribute to positive possession with his elusiveness in the defensive zone leading to quick effective outlets.

Goal line to opponents blue line he's one of the best in the game - but cross that blue line and you won't get much from him.

He's a defensive defenseman for sure, but I think it's his transitionary ability that would be most valuable to a team that could actually score on the rush. He'd pick up a lot more points if our forwards weren't:

1. Offensively inept.
2. Primarily cycle scorers.

 

[Boxertim]

Tanev for Myers +

Though the Jets have a lot of RD

 

[Cogburn]

Tanev for Myers +

Though the Jets have a lot of RD

No thanks, we have a lot of RD. Aside from rebuilding, our motivation to move Tanev would be to clear the logjam of Tanev, Gudbranson, Stetcher, Biega and Tryamkin (who is LHD but plays on the right). We're looking for a one piece return of a top offensive forward, and would rather add then have multiple pieces come back.

 

[PG Canuck]

Curious though, what does Tanev do for the Canucks other than help to tread water? wouldn't you be better off going full potato and drafting very high for a while? Not to mention that Tanev brings back some good futures to supplement the rebuild - add those to Boeser, Demko, Joulevi and a top 3 pick this year and that looks like a really good start

Refer to this post: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=126956911&postcount=315

Besides, I don't see much worthy of accepting for Tanev, anyways.

 

[PG Canuck]

Last I checked we equally lose alot of games with Tanev in the line-up so what's the difference? It's like arguing a pound of lead is heavier than a pound of feathers.
When paired with Edler, he doesn't stand out, when paired with Sbisa or Hutton, he still gets beat. Yes there is alot about Tanev I like but I just don't have the emotional connection like others do. If trading Tanev makes this team better by bringing in assets with higher ceilings than Tanev while we are in our re-tool/re-build then I'm the first to say yes.
Sergachev was selected high enough in last year's draft and will equal Juolevi's value. The guy can skate, be agressive and hammer pucks at the net and has size. Again....a much higher ceiling that Tanev and yet do the same things Tanev can do.

What are you even going on about? I now have a strong emotional attachment to Tanev because I don't want to trade him? Go look at Tanev's underlying numbers and quite relying solely on your eye test because it is clearly failing you.

I want to trade Tanev for assets as well, but he's still very valuable to the Canucks defense and is their best defensemen. For over half the offers in this thread, it's not even worth it.

 

[Nucker101]

A player who scores a ppg in the AHL is considered NHL ready.

Kapanen was drafted 22nd overall so has the pedigree to be a top 6 winger, and has proven it in the AHL before he got injured.

Kap + B prospect like Riechel or Lindberg + a our highest 2nd round draft choice should be enough for Tanev who is a solid, but one-dimensional D.

Alright

Subban(NHL-ready numbers) + 2nd + B prospect for Kadri

 

[Ola]

Hm, do you guys think anything like this might be workable?

To VAN:
JT Miller
Kevin Klein
Ryan Gropp

To NYR:
Chris Tanev
Jake Virtanen

I know many NYR fans will say that JT is untouchable and that Virtanen just isn't very good while Tanev isn't that huge upgrade over Klein. But I think AV really would like to get Tanev on board, and while Virtanen probably (?) will become a career 4th lineer, the Metropolitan will always be a very tough division. NYR face a risk of becoming a bit to weak. They could definitely use someone with a bit snarl.

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

No way I would do that from a Canucks POV ^ What do we need Miller for? Tanev is much better than Klein, Virtanen is a 20 year old PWF.

 

[Ola]

Shirokov- Lol what do you mean?

JT Miller is 23 y/o and would lead Vancouver in scoring. Can play all forward positions. Gritty. Are you confusing him with like Kip Miller?

Yeah Tanev is better than Klein, but why do you think Miller is included? Miller and Klein for Tanev is a huge over-payment, hence Virtanen would have to be included. Klein would take Tanev's ice time and help ease in the kids. Gropp is a good prospect, high 2nd round pick. PFW. Virtanen makes him expandable for NYR and he is definitely a good add by Vancouver.

JT Miller must be the most underrated young player in this league. He is outscoring Taylor Hall and is what 3 years younger. JT was a huge reason for the US winning the WJCs in 13', he pwned the 11' WJC U18 with 12 pts in 6 games. Last season he was NYR's best forward at 22. He has all the pedigree and has delivered all the way, there is no reason for people to not even know who he is. Is EA Sports rating him low or what??

 

[The Iron Goalie]

Shirokov- Lol what do you mean?

JT Miller is 23 y/o and would lead Vancouver in scoring. Can play all forward positions. Gritty. Are you confusing him with like Kip Miller?

Yeah Tanev is better than Klein, but why do you think Miller is included? Miller and Klein for Tanev is a huge over-payment, hence Virtanen would have to be included. Klein would take Tanev's ice time and help ease in the kids. Gropp is a good prospect, high 2nd round pick. PFW. Virtanen makes him expandable for NYR and he is definitely a good add by Vancouver.

JT Miller must be the most underrated young player in this league. He is outscoring Taylor Hall and is what 3 years younger. JT was a huge reason for the US winning the WJCs in 13', he pwned the 11' WJC U18 with 12 pts in 6 games. Last season he was NYR's best forward at 22. He has all the pedigree and has delivered all the way, there is no reason for people to not even know who he is. Is EA Sports rating him low or what??

Not saying JT isn't good, but outscoring Hall...Miller has 45GP 14G/32Pts, while Hall has 36GP 11G/29Pts. Thats a 3 goal/3Pt difference with a 9GP gap in Taylor's favor. Also to your point that Miller would lead the Canucks in scoring...I dont think so. The Rangers are an actually good team, unlike the Canucks, and can score goals. The Rangers have 156GF this season - tops in the league - while the Nucks have a poor 108GF. Miller would have a much harder time scoring in Vancouver.

Miller is a nice piece, but I feel your overselling him.

 

[loyaltotheend]

Alright

Subban(NHL-ready numbers) + 2nd + B prospect for Kadri

These salty "oh yeah?!" proposals are always dumb.

We are not in the position you are. Toronto already traded away the vets for youth/futures, and are now on the other side of the curve.

You don't have to like any offer from us, or anyone else. Not trying to convince you to take them. But the philosophy is good. You could get good pieces to help your future, even if you think the value is not quite enough right now.
As someone else pointed out, you're just treading water. I'm confident none of you believe you're a contender. Moving out Tanev would also help your pick get closer to top 5

 

[dellzor]

Hm, do you guys think anything like this might be workable?

To VAN:
JT Miller
Kevin Klein
Ryan Gropp

To NYR:
Chris Tanev
Jake Virtanen

I know many NYR fans will say that JT is untouchable and that Virtanen just isn't very good while Tanev isn't that huge upgrade over Klein. But I think AV really would like to get Tanev on board, and while Virtanen probably (?) will become a career 4th lineer, the Metropolitan will always be a very tough division. NYR face a risk of becoming a bit to weak. They could definitely use someone with a bit snarl.

That offer is atrocious

Please apologize to Vancouver fans

Reasons

Tanev is a MASSIVE upgrade over Klein (don't know why we would want a 32 y/o 3rd pairing D when we're rebuilding / re-tooling lol) + Signed to an amazing contract in his prime years
JT Miller is good, but adding Virtanen into the deal made me barf even if I think he's gonna bust. Plus he's playing on the 2nd highest GF / GP team in the NHL while the Canucks are ranked 25th in that category...

 

[4thline]

Lol at the reactions to the Miller deal. Stripes shown.