Proposal: NYR- Vancouver

[HydroF]

Tanev can fetch more.

 

[n8]

God this is a bad, bad, bad trade for Vancouver. Legendary stuff.

my exact reaction, except from the Ranger perspective. This makes our expansion draft issues even worse.

 

[GoodbyeLuongo]

Rangers do not need or want Tanev. They have plenty of multi-million dollar stay at home blueliners already.

Yeah except unlike the ones the Rangers have, this one can play defense. I would be hard-pressed to find a team that doesn't want Tanev. That being said, no to this deal. I like Buchnevich, but Tanev is damn near untouchable. Our defense is a disaster as is, I don't wanna see it without him. When Juolevi hits the NHL, then maybe there's a slight opening to discuss a deal

 

[PG Canuck]

Wait, Vancouver is rebuilding?

Signing top UFA's, trading for established players, keeping high priced depth.

Well we should be, but we are not.

 

[biturbo19]

Horrendous for the Canucks.

Moving Tanev really doesn't make much of any sense in the first place...but if he were to be moved, it would have to be for an absolute stud 1st line caliber prospect, or a bluechip D prospect with top-pairing upside+. Or a a Top-10 selection in a draft deep enough to net the Canucks that caliber of prospect themselves.


I honestly don't think the Rangers have anything that would actually appeal to the Canucks in a trade for Tanev.

 

[biturbo19]

Wait, Vancouver is rebuilding?

Signing top UFA's, trading for established players, keeping high priced depth.

"Rebuilding" doesn't mean trading 26 year old top pairing defencemen for magic beans, just because.

 

[Maukkis]

Awful for Vancouver. A top 30 defenseman for a non-elite prospect and a pick. I wouldn't trade Tanev at all.

 

[Irishguy42]

Rangers don't do this because they won't trade Buch and it screws up stuff for the expansion draft (for the foreseeable future).

Vancouver don't do this because it's a bad offer for Tanev, who they probably don't want to move anyway.

 

[bernmeister]

Awful for Vancouver. A top 30 defenseman for a non-elite prospect and a pick. I wouldn't trade Tanev at all.

A little harsh to say non elite, no?
Is he not a top prospect by any measure?

 

[bernmeister]

Tanev for Buchenvich and a second.



The canucks need more forward
prospects. Other than Boeser they dont have any potential top six forwards. The Rangers get their top pairing rhd. I think it makes sence for both teams. Tanev could make the rangers contenders and Buch could help the canucks rebuild.

given correctness of post 33 above,
counter:
Stepan for Tanev
straight up

would prefer from Canes expansion exempt ELC = expansion exempt Pesce + Murphy + cap dump Bickel + favorable swap of comparable picks. However interested in view of this as fallbck option.

 

[Skobel24]

given correctness of post 33 above,
counter:
Stepan for Tanev
straight up

would prefer from Canes expansion exempt ELC = expansion exempt Pesce + Murphy + cap dump Bickel + favorable swap of comparable picks. However interested in view of this as fallbck option.

Vancouver still doesn't do that. They have Sedin, Horvat, Sutter for their top 3 center spots. Losing Tanev guts their defense for a player who doesn't fill as much of a need.

 

[Savant]

Don't think Tanev is the player that the Rangers should be looking at

 

[Maukkis]

A little harsh to say non elite, no?
Is he not a top prospect by any measure?

My definition of elite is the absolute best of the best. Matthews, Laine, Pulju, Provorov, Strome etc. Buchnevich is clearly behind them.

 

[bernmeister]

Don't think Tanev is the player that the Rangers should be looking at

concur.
decided to extend courtesy to OP to see if topic could be developed
but I agree w/you, not a smooth fit if one at all

My definition of elite is the absolute best of the best. Matthews, Laine, Pulju, Provorov, Strome etc. Buchnevich is clearly behind them.

Fair and reasonable. thank you.
those all look great
we will see as to Buch, I still regard him as "top prospect" but I yield on "elite" until proven

 

[TGWL]

My definition of elite is the absolute best of the best. Matthews, Laine, Pulju, Provorov, Strome etc. Buchnevich is clearly behind them.

Seems more like you're going with potential franchise players. In which case, most teams will risk the boom/bust with those prospects, rather than trading them away for a "Top 30 D-man."

I'd assume the Canucks would take JT Miller over Buch. He's more proven, and still has potential to do more. Miller got a little over 100 minutes on the powerplay this season. The next one on the list? Lindberg, with just over 50 minutes. I think JT can do a lot more, and is worth more to teams than Buch, at least for now. I mean, he's only 23.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

Rangers won't trade Buchnevich under any circumstances

 

[TGWL]

Rangers won't trade Buchnevich under any circumstances

That's taking it a bit far.

 

[turkulad]

You just don't trade Tanev.

 

[Oscar Lindberg]

That's taking it a bit far.

Considering they said earlier in the summer that the only players untouchable on the team were Hank, Skjei and Buch, I really don't think it's taking it too far

 

[CherryToke]

Buchnevich>McCann

Maybe but McCann holds more trade value currently.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Maybe but McCann holds more trade value currently.

Why would that be?

 

[CherryToke]

Why would that be?

1st round pick, one year younger, already played a season in the NHL. Less risk of busting.

 

[One Winged Angel]

1st round pick, one year younger, already played a season in the NHL. Less risk of busting.

The last part is conjecture on your part.

Any unbiased person who has seen the both of them play can tell you that Buchnevich's talent level and ceiling are significantly higher.

 

[Hi-wayman]

Well we should be, but we are not.

rebuilding does not mean replacing a whole team with young players strait out of junior. Rebuilding means restructuring the team to improve its chances of winning both now and in the future. This can include retaining some older core players because they bring talents needed by the team. It also includes acquiring players, no matter what age that fit roles needed by the team. Rebuilding often also includes changing the team style & identity because the opposition teams are or have changed theirs.

Up to now, Vancouver has been a soft team to play against who relied on a slower than average transition game & the Sedin's cycling. The west, especially the Pac. Div, changed to a big, tough style with speed. Benning has started to rebuild the Canucks in the traditional way starting from the goal out. Except for a RW for the Sedins, he has shied away from acquiring fast, but soft, high scoring wingers. They might help the Canuck's goal scoring total, but would not improve the team's win / loss total within the Pac. Div.

Benning wants the Canucks to be known as a hard team to play against some what on the Boston model, It is not likely that the Canucks have enough skilled talent to do much of a splash in the playoffs this season or next, but the team's back end is much stronger and tougher then last season and given 2 years to improve the front end, zi see the Canucks being a strong rebuilt team by then.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

rebuilding does not mean replacing a whole team with young players strait out of junior. Rebuilding means restructuring the team to improve its chances of winning both now and in the future. This can include retaining some older core players because they bring talents needed by the team. It also includes acquiring players, no matter what age that fit roles needed by the team. Rebuilding often also includes changing the team style & identity because the opposition teams are or have changed theirs.

Up to now, Vancouver has been a soft team to play against who relied on a slower than average transition game & the Sedin's cycling. The west, especially the Pac. Div, changed to a big, tough style with speed. Benning has started to rebuild the Canucks in the traditional way starting from the goal out. Except for a RW for the Sedins, he has shied away from acquiring fast, but soft, high scoring wingers. They might help the Canuck's goal scoring total, but would not improve the team's win / loss total within the Pac. Div.

Benning wants the Canucks to be known as a hard team to play against some what on the Boston model, It is not likely that the Canucks have enough skilled talent to do much of a splash in the playoffs this season or next, but the team's back end is much stronger and tougher then last season and given 2 years to improve the front end, zi see the Canucks being a strong rebuilt team by then.

This is exactly what I and every other logical Canucks fan has been saying for months now. People still don't seem to understand it, but you articulated it perfectly!