Toggle sidebar

Proposal: Nyr + van

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Ched Brosky said:
Kreider and Skjei I'd consider, this no
Click to expand...

That or Mika Zibanejad & Brady Skjei for Chris Tanev, but even then I'm hesitant. Losing Tanev really louses up our defense pairings. Erik Gudbranson would have to handle fist pairing rather than second pairing. That was our defense problem last season. asking too many defensemen to play positions above their their skill level.
 
TOGuy14 said:
I am pretty sure even you knew this was a bad proposal for VAN when you wrote it up because you tried to pump the tires on your prospect by listing his slapshot speed and his Hockey's Future rating lol.
Click to expand...

LOL nah, originally I didn't include that info, but anyone not familiar with Graves was going to look up his rating and read about his slapshot anyway. Figured I'd save you the time. Graves posted very good offensive numbers in the CHL, and is already playing in the AHL where he has continued to impress. Slapshot is just a bonus. Personally, I'm very high on him, and many others are too. He has potential to be a better overall player than Brady Skjei.

Anyway, if you really want a better forward, I'd just offer you guys Zucc, but his age wouldn't coincide with a Canucks revival in a few years, and that's the thing - you'd need a top caliber forward under the age of 26 to achieve that. Not many of those are being traded, unless you wanna hit up the Oilers.

Hell, if I'm the Oilers, I'd offer you RNH+Nurse right now for Tanev.
 
So the Canucks are just gonna leave a gaping hole on the right side after paying a premium to upgrade the right side earlier this summer?
 
Last edited:
Hi-wayman said:
That or Mika Zibanejad & Brady Skjei for Chris Tanev, but even then I'm hesitant. Losing Tanev really louses up our defense pairings. Erik Gudbranson would have to handle fist pairing rather than second pairing. That was our defense problem last season. asking too many defensemen to play positions above their their skill level.
Click to expand...

No thanks on that price

Would do the OP but doesn't seem like enough for VAN fans in which case probably better to switch targets
 
RangerGuru said:
No thanks on that price

Would do the OP but doesn't seem like enough for VAN fans in which case probably better to switch targets
Click to expand...
Yeah, that is a good idea. Canucks are quite happy to keep Tanev. I think you are going to be disappointed when reality sinks in and you find out how much a right side first pairing defenseman is going to cost. Best you draft one and wait the years out while he develops.
 
Hi-wayman said:
Yeah, that is a good idea. Canucks are quite happy to keep Tanev. I think you are going to be disappointed when reality sinks in and you find out how much a right side first pairing defenseman is going to cost. Best you draft one and wait the years out while he develops.
Click to expand...

What is this draft you speak of?
 
NNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We don't want to move Tanev, our management group is intent on trying to compete, Tanev is the closest approximation to a number one D we have (and even then is a top line, right handed, shut down D), Tanev is signed to a sweet deal, our right side is unjustifiably weak without him, our D in general is awful without him, etc, ad nauseum.

Other teams don't value him as we do, so we will not trade him to other teams. If he were, for what ever reason, be moved, we'd need someone who has the same level of impact on our team Tanev has had, not two players who might, possibly, do so in a number of years.
 
Knew it was Tanev before even clicking lol.

Rangers aren't a good fit for trade considering their prospect pool is even worse than ours.
 
TOGuy14 said:
I am pretty sure even you knew this was a bad proposal for VAN when you wrote it up because you tried to pump the tires on your prospect by listing his slapshot speed and his Hockey's Future rating lol.
Click to expand...

He has a rare slapshot. Its an 80 slapshot on the 20-80 scale.
 
KingDeathMetal said:
I dunno, you guys are always talking about how dumb your GM is, thought he might be looking to unload Tanev. :-)
Click to expand...

Posts like this make your credibility even worse. If you know it's a bad proposal and still wanna post it, keep it to your team board rather than the main board where you'll get some serious flame worthy posts usually from both sides.
Luckily this one has been quite civil with both teams agreeing neither can or would make a deal like this right now as neither are in a position to deal from their biggest weaknesses. Canucks need Tanev to compete for a playoff position. Rangers need to add some decent youth after no first round picks the last couple seasons and losing some decent players to UFA.
 
Yeah, NYR have been 'going for it' for like, 8 years in a row it seems. It's time they started a rebuild/retool. And as for the Canucks' perspective, the value isn't quite there, and we simply rely too heavily on Tanev on our back end. Since ownership is against tanking, Tanev is kind of a non-starter. That's why Canucks fans have been asking the moon for Tanev all summer (the Larsson trade is another reason). Both teams say no thank you here.
 
bernmeister said:
Also, when Stepan is traded, Miller is needed for pivot depth
Click to expand...

With Brassard traded, there is little likelihood that Step will be moved anytime soon regardless of when his NMC kicks in after this season. If he is moved, you have 3 centre's under the age of 25with the most experienced one having 3 years in the NHL. I just don't see it.
 
KingDeathMetal said:
Figured someone would bring up Hall. Fair enough, but I wouldn't expect many Hall/Larsson type deals in the future. Oilers severely overpaid because they have more offense talent than they know what to do with, elite offensive talent at that, plus they knew they'd sign Lucic.

Miller is expected to grow into a 55-60pt player who can grind too, and he's young. That plus Graves, who has serious potential and most NYR fans would not want to trade at all, is a pretty good offer. I would add a 1st though, if that's what it took.

Personally, I think Graves could be close to what Jovanovski was at his best, with better offense. He has very good upside.
Click to expand...

You add the 1st and I pull the trigger

Tanev for Graves miller and a 1st isn't going to get much better from other teams
 
KingDeathMetal said:
LOL nah, originally I didn't include that info, but anyone not familiar with Graves was going to look up his rating and read about his slapshot anyway. Figured I'd save you the time. Graves posted very good offensive numbers in the CHL, and is already playing in the AHL where he has continued to impress. Slapshot is just a bonus. Personally, I'm very high on him, and many others are too. He has potential to be a better overall player than Brady Skjei.

Anyway, if you really want a better forward, I'd just offer you guys Zucc, but his age wouldn't coincide with a Canucks revival in a few years, and that's the thing - you'd need a top caliber forward under the age of 26 to achieve that. Not many of those are being traded, unless you wanna hit up the Oilers.

Hell, if I'm the Oilers, I'd offer you RNH+Nurse right now for Tanev.
Click to expand...

Honestly, there aren't really any pieces on the Rangers that would entice me to want to move Tanev. He is probably the most valuable piece the Canucks have right now.

I'd probably take that Oilers offer you have, but the equivalent from NYR would have to be like Stepan + Buch. I don't see you guys likeing that.

EDIT: I'd actually probably prefer Miller to Stepan. But still.
 
mstad101 said:
Posts like this make your credibility even worse. If you know it's a bad proposal and still wanna post it, keep it to your team board rather than the main board where you'll get some serious flame worthy posts usually from both sides.
Luckily this one has been quite civil with both teams agreeing neither can or would make a deal like this right now as neither are in a position to deal from their biggest weaknesses. Canucks need Tanev to compete for a playoff position. Rangers need to add some decent youth after no first round picks the last couple seasons and losing some decent players to UFA.
Click to expand...

Where did I say this was a bad proposal? It's actually a really good offer, if Tanev was to be traded. My tongue in cheek reply about your GM's stupidity was more of nod to the fact most smart Vancouver fans probably wouldn't want to see him traded at all.

How is offering our best D prospect besides Skjei and probably our best young forward not a credible offer? Saying you would turn it down, fine, I get it. "Hurts credibility"? Get the F out of here.
 
Pavel Buchnevich said:
AHL All-Star in his first season of pro hockey. Top 5 prospect for the Rangers. I think he's our best defenseman prospect, better than Skjei, although most prefer Skjei.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm talking about, man. Graves is a really good prospect. Again, I totally understand why Vancouver fans want nothing to do with trading Tanev, but if Benning were to gauge interest from around the league and the Rangers wanted in, I'd think Graves would have to be a part of any deal. I mean if I was Vancouver, that's one of the demand I'd make.
 
KingDeathMetal said:
Where did I say this was a bad proposal? It's actually a really good offer, if Tanev was to be traded. My tongue in cheek reply about your GM's stupidity was more of nod to the fact most smart Vancouver fans probably wouldn't want to see him traded at all.

How is offering our best D prospect besides Skjei and probably our best young forward not a credible offer? Saying you would turn it down, fine, I get it. "Hurts credibility"? Get the F out of here.
Click to expand...

As good as those players look they are still question marks, Tanev is a proven commodity that we are in dire need of. Those two players even with a low first rounder added, don't constitute an overpayment and that is what it would take. We don't want to move Tanev.
 
Nucklehead Supreme said:
As good as those players look they are still question marks, Tanev is a proven commodity that we are in dire need of. Those two players even with a low first rounder added, don't constitute an overpayment and that is what it would take. We don't want to move Tanev.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Just sayin'...it wasn't like I came at you guys with "HOW ABOUT MARC STAAL AND A 3RD FOR TANEV??" lol
 
Nucklehead Supreme said:
As good as those players look they are still question marks, Tanev is a proven commodity that we are in dire need of. Those two players even with a low first rounder added, don't constitute an overpayment and that is what it would take. We don't want to move Tanev.
Click to expand...

Don't blame you. He's a hell of a defenseman. He's the perfect kind of defenseman in today's NHL. Solid, mobile two-way defender that can take on any type skater in a one-on-one situation, his positioning is solid and he doesn't make many blunders. Moves the puck well out of his own zone. He's no Karlsson, Burns or Subban, but he can skate it out if needed.

A solid, mobile, two-way defender. Every team wants and needs a Tanev.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom