Value of: Christopher Tanev to Toronto

[mikeo1]

Marner or nylander for Tanev

Kadri is fair value.

 

[Addison Rae]

Marner or nylander for Tanev

Kadri is fair value.

Not sure what you're laughing at, Tanev is a prime aged fantastic number #2 dman on an excellent contract.

You're in the vast minority if you think Kadri is fair value.

 

[Icebreakers]

There is absolutely no way that either of those players would ever be dealt for Tanev, as useful as he is. Nylander and Marner are elite forward prospects. Don't be silly.

But Tanev certainly has value. I don't want to discredit the player. He's a solid D. I just think it would take somebody with a higher pedigree for Toronto to even consider moving those guys.

Hes not wrong. Hes not saying the leafs should trade Marner or Nylander for Tanev. Hes just saying thats what Vancouver would ask for if Tanev was traded. Him saying it would take Marner/Nylander isnt the same as saying Tanevs value is equal to Marner/Nylander. Hes saying theres no deal to be made unless if you make an offer VAN cant refuse because they are not looking to deal Tanev.

 

[Addison Rae]

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...ters&minutes=400&disp=1&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

This site is pretty good. I'm not sure I'd call him elite in that area, I think some of the hype is unwarranted.

Think he's a good #2. Cost would be ~~Nylander. Incentive for VAN is, well, they aren't winning a cup in the sedin era. So get some really good young players and rebuild the team instead of consistently and insistently signing the Vrbatas and Erikssons of the world in a feeble attempt to scrape and claw back to former glory at the expense of wasting a lot of years of the franchise.

Chris Tanev was first in the league in shot supression relative to teammate last year, to say he isn't elite is mind boggling. It's like saying Patrick Kane isn't elite offensively.

 

[Jared Dunn]

Zaitsev is better than Tanev.

Thanks, though.

By absolutely no metric is Zaitsev better than Tanev

 

[Man Bear Pig]

Kadri isn't enough to from the Leafs. Marner or Nylander is too much.

 

[VanJack]

Not sure why this thread is still alive.....Canucks are team still desperately thin on the blueline, and the Leafs are rebuilding and just not in a position to give up an 'A' grade prospect for Tanev....so just can't see a great fit here....but looking at the Leafs goaltending mess, wondering what a package involving Tanev and Thatcher Demko might fetch from the Leafs?....only trouble is the 'Nucks will need an impact d-man coming back.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Not sure why this thread is still alive.....Canucks are team still desperately thin on the blueline, and the Leafs are rebuilding and just not in a position to give up an 'A' grade prospect for Tanev....so just can't see a great fit here....but looking at the Leafs goaltending mess, wondering what a package involving Tanev and Thatcher Demko might fetch from the Leafs?....only trouble is the 'Nucks will need an impact d-man coming back.

I don't think goaltending is the problem I think its their blue line, they could absolutely use a player like Tanev, but no way the leafs would be willing to over pay for him. These teams do not make good trading partners. Period.

 

[Man Bear Pig]

Not sure why this thread is still alive.....Canucks are team still desperately thin on the blueline, and the Leafs are rebuilding and just not in a position to give up an 'A' grade prospect for Tanev....so just can't see a great fit here....but looking at the Leafs goaltending mess, wondering what a package involving Tanev and Thatcher Demko might fetch from the Leafs?....only trouble is the 'Nucks will need an impact d-man coming back.

Trade for a goalie? We just traded for one who's started a whopping 4 games. Little premature to call it a mess at this point.

 

[PG Canuck]

Zaitsev is better than Tanev.

Thanks, though.

Zaitsev is not even close to Tanev.

 

[NarcoPolo]

By absolutely no metric is Zaitsev better than Tanev

Except maybe offensively.. Tanev seems like a fantastic defensive dman but the guy has a career high of 20 points. Sure I'd rather have him then all of our dmen outside of Rielly but he's not that great offensively.

 

[sutlaf]

tanev for ra dickey, tulowitzki and mattthews

 

[kanucks25]

This thread has come up a few times since the WHC where Tanev and Rielly were great as a pairing and it's toxic every time.

There's no trade to be made here. The Leafs aren't willing to give up anything the Canucks actually want, and the Canucks need Tanev anyway.


e/ Kadri for Tanev as a base also makes zero sense

 

[Zaddy91]

ok then edler for

nylander

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Don't really see a deal here... Kadri isnt worth Tanev, and the Leafs aren't close enough to the playoffs that they need to trade a blue chipper for a win now defenseman like Tanev. Although if they were, Nylander for Tanev would probably be the closest. We'd probably have to add to Tanev to get Marner.

You would, you would also have to add to get Nylander

 

[Gavy]

Is Tanev a leader for the Canucks? Tanev would be the perfect fit to play with Rielly and especially if he can come in and be a leader. We don't have any capable vets on the backend. Gardiner isn't a leader and Hunwick and Polak are " good pros" but they aren't NHL calibre.

Would Canucks entertain a deal where the main piece is the Leafs first in 2017? Very likely that's a top 5 pick

 

[TacitEndorsement]

When they were on the same team (IIHF) Rielly was better.

No Tanev trade would happen. As Tanev simply does not have the value of Nylander, Marner, or Rielly. And I don't expect that Vancouver would want a package.

I recall Tanev being the best Dman that tournament.

 

[Addison Rae]

Is Tanev a leader for the Canucks? Tanev would be the perfect fit to play with Rielly and especially if he can come in and be a leader. We don't have any capable vets on the backend. Gardiner isn't a leader and Hunwick and Polak are " good pros" but they aren't NHL calibre.

Would Canucks entertain a deal where the main piece is the Leafs first in 2017? Very likely that's a top 5 pick

The Leafs absolutely would not be picking top 5 with Tanev added for nothing on their roster.

 

[Gavy]

The Leafs absolutely would not be picking top 5 with Tanev added for nothing on their roster.

That whole post and you only reply to disagree with my last 7 words.

 

[DJN21]

Good chance Zaitsev is as good as Tanev. He's really good. And yes I'm aware that Tanev is quite good.


Tanev just straight up doesn't get you Nylander or Marner, or even close for that matter. Let alone Nylander or Marner+

Lol is this real life?

 

[ToneBone03]

In terms of player values I think this is pretty close. Fair value is set by the open market, though... so it would depend on what offers Benning would receive from other teams as well.

There would probably have to be a small addition from the Leafs side of things but the basis of the deal would definitely not involve Nylander or Marner. That's laughable and would immediately involve Lou hanging up the phone. Lol

 

[Gurilla]

If it takes a player like McCann to get Gudbranson and Hall to get Larsson then Tanev could easily fetch Nylander + Marner. Tanev is underrated.

 

[Liferleafer]

Think Marner or Nylander+ to get the conversation started

I thought about it.....no was what i came up with.

 

[NarcoPolo]

If it takes a player like McCann to get Gudbranson and Hall to get Larsson then Tanev could easily fetch Nylander + Marner. Tanev is underrated.

dont forget schenn for JVR!

 

[BB6]

That whole post and you only reply to disagree with my last 7 words.

I don't think its an easy question to answer but I'm going to say no and heres why, I think its been rumored through a few eras in the Canucks org that ownership will not allow/support a full blown rebuild. Which means we can't trade our best D man whos on a solid contract for a few years away for a pick which is lets say even if its a really good prospect, thats 3 years min maybe 4 away from really contributing.

If ownership gave the green light, its for sure an interesting thing to think about but still super risky imo, it would have to far enough into the season that you guys wouldn't want to trade that pick away if you were low enough for such a pick to entice us.