Keep Tanev or Toffoli?

Who would you pick (at similar cap hits and term)?


  • Total voters
    248
Status
Not open for further replies.

PuckMunchkin

Very Nice, Very Evil!
Dec 13, 2006
13,008
10,717
Lapland
Hard to say.

We are in win now mode. It follows that Tanev is the more likely candidate, as replacing what he can bring when healthy is not possible to do with our cap situation and prospect pool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HockeyWooot

sting101

Registered User
Feb 8, 2012
16,784
16,102
these are really hard decisions because the term and dollars they want can change it from... yes no brainer to i wouldn't touch that contract.
All of Marky Toffoli and Tanev leaving will obviously set us back. Toffoli the least IMO Tanev 2nd and Markstrom the most.

Toffoli could be replaced by Leivo and Podkolzin (by next playoffs) so it makes some sense to walk away if he wants too much term. He's slow is 28 and is the very definition of the type of player you DO NOT give a 5 or 6 yr deal to. He would be great for 3 or 4

Tanev would be a tough loss but potentially Edmundson or Brodie could be had on a better contract if he wants 4 or 5 yrs. I think Tanev has to take a little less if he wants to stay but it's a tough one because he's a career Canuck and a true warrior. Have to be careful to not hand out award deals though so lets hope he plays ball like Edler has.

Markstrom is a game changer and is vitally important but Demko could be a huge cap savings and peaking along with the young core instead of turning 32 33 34 35 while that happens....it's something to consider. For sure he needs to stay to avoid a set back next year but i worry about his knees long term
 

tyhee

Registered User
Feb 5, 2015
2,672
2,817
I can’t believe people just watched the Leafs lose and still picked Toffoli. All the offence in the world can’t keep the puck out of your net, he shouldn’t cost too much money, and has been the perfect partner for Hughes all season.

what am I missing here?

I picked Toffoli earlier and still would.

My reasoning was simply that while each carries a risk of his play falling off a cliff, imo that risk is higher for Tanev. As great as his value has been to the Canucks, it would be a pleasant surprise if that value remains high throughout the term of his next contract.

I'm pessimistic about the chances of the Canucks being Cup contenders the next couple of seasons (this year seems to me a better chance than next season) so really don't want the Canuck signing more beaten up veterans to lengthy contracts that are likely to turn bad before the Canucks reach the level of the elite teams in the league.
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
22,680
16,164
I picked Toffoli earlier and still would.

My reasoning was simply that while each carries a risk of his play falling off a cliff, imo that risk is higher for Tanev. As great as his value has been to the Canucks, it would be a pleasant surprise if that value remains high throughout the term of his next contract.

I'm pessimistic about the chances of the Canucks being Cup contenders the next couple of seasons (this year seems to me a better chance than next season) so really don't want the Canuck signing more beaten up veterans to lengthy contracts that are likely to turn bad before the Canucks reach the level of the elite teams in the league.

Fortunately the Canucks have no cap space to go and out and sign any more re-treads to long-term deals. One they decide between Tofoli and Tanev (assuming now there's no way they can let Markstrom walk), they'll have no more cap room. Their only salvation would be jettisoning some bad contracts--but the chances of that happening are remote.
 

Bettman Returnz

Why so serious?
Jul 28, 2003
4,788
2,675
BC
Visit site
This is such a tough one ! I go back and forth on it. Ideally both but something has to give, cap wise. We have too many boat anchors at the moment. And also would depend on what’s a fair resign price tag for both... they both come with pros and cons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catamarca Livin

Teflon Jim

Registered User
Apr 4, 2018
725
206
I agree keep both and other players can be bought out or traded with retention if need be .
As for value of these bottom six players I'm sure these playoffs have shown they are of value on a playoff run and are not worthless as many suggest.
 

bossram

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
16,685
17,125
Victoria
I picked Toffoli earlier and still would.

My reasoning was simply that while each carries a risk of his play falling off a cliff, imo that risk is higher for Tanev. As great as his value has been to the Canucks, it would be a pleasant surprise if that value remains high throughout the term of his next contract.

I'm pessimistic about the chances of the Canucks being Cup contenders the next couple of seasons (this year seems to me a better chance than next season) so really don't want the Canuck signing more beaten up veterans to lengthy contracts that are likely to turn bad before the Canucks reach the level of the elite teams in the league.

Agreed on these fronts. We can already see that Tanev is declining.
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
22,680
16,164
Tofoli and Pearson just seem to fit with this group.....They're both Stanley Cup winners in L.A., and still in the prime of their careers. I'd find a way to bring them both back.

And if that means sacrificing someone like Tanev, as tough as that is, is has to be done. Canucks have to get younger, bigger and stronger on the blueline anyway.
 

Fatass

Registered User
Apr 17, 2017
23,891
15,573
How about don’t screw up the cap so badly in the first place that you have to choose between which really good UFAs you have to sacrifice because you’ve got a slew of crappy guys (you've signed to stupid long term deals) you have to keep. It’s insane a team coming out of a rebuild (ya, right.) has a serious cap issue!
 

Catamarca Livin

Registered User
Jul 29, 2010
4,908
983
I have gone back and forth Toffoli is the better player. Tanev plays a more important position and a position of weaker depth for Canucks. Ideal would be sign Toffoli trade for younger better right d man
 

SomeSortOfHockey

Registered User
Oct 9, 2013
91
18
Tanev is a RD. They are more rare and more expensive. Its not easy to replace him. Tofoli also seems like very good fit for the team, in my opinion he is a better fit then Boeser moving forward for the next couple years.

The team can keep both and Markstrom and resign Gaudette/Virtanen/Stecher(RD). They just need to clear about 7.5 mill in cap space this year. And let some players walk next year. Hard but possible. Give up picks or prospects to jettison Ericson who may have a high cap hit but only has 5 mill on salary remaining over the next two years which isn't bad for a team operating bellow the cap. If Ferland remains out then the space is there.

Personally I think they resign Tanev for a mid term deal in the Edler/Myers range, 6 million. At this point for a quality RD like him its a good deal.

Stecher is another RD and with no one to replace him and the fact RDs are hard to find I think he re signs as well. He is a RFA and a 1 year deal with a very small raise if any would probably work for both sides, Stecher gets to UFA status at 27, Vancouver maintains more cap flexibility going into a year where Petterson and Hugh's certainly add over 15 mill extra to the cap ontop of their current contracts/bonuses.

Tofoli I think they sign as he fits the team. 5 or 6 year deal in the Horvat range, I say 5 to 5.5 mill. Could be maybe 4 years and 5 mill at the low end but Tofoli is the one with leverage.

Markstrom again a multi year deal (maybe 4 or 5 years) at 6 mill. Could be higher but you never know with the goalie market.

Virt and Gaud I dont see a huge raise for after these playoffs and given their status.

Trade bait to get rid of bad contracts or tweak the lines imo are: Virtanen, getting older each year (yes he is young but not that young), he still has lots of value, but the team must be starting to lose patience with him. I think if it makes sense at this point he is gone. Gaud has potential and very good trade value. Again I dont see the long term fit and if the trade is good I can see him moving mostly because of what he can bring back. Boeser, good player, high trade value. Salary vs fit I believe the rumors were not wrong. I think Tofoli is a better fit and the Canucks would have no issue in trading him for the right return.

With these pieces I dont see a issue getting rid of bad contracts and making space for the right players in the right positions. No way they trade all these players but any one of them could be in play in my opinion and they all have very high value (we are taking about young players other teams want who the Canucks can replace and live without) Also they need to find a way to get rid of Erickson. His contract is bad and large and its for two more years which means it causes issues in the two worst cup crunch years coming up. They should be prepared to give up what ever it takes to get rid of him.
 
Last edited:

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
22,680
16,164
Updated the poll to reflect reality
Lol!...yep, reality is they're not signing any of them. The correct answer in the UFA Jeopardy Game was: "Let 'em both walk, along with Stecher and Markstrom".

I'm betting early on, that was the least favorite response in the poll. But that's where we're at.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad