Player Discussion Chris Tanev (4 years, 4.5m AAV)

[Anglesmith]

Yeah but I think losing Brodie it's a wash

Coaching and forwards have not changed so system defense has not also

As an optimist (and someone who wanted to move on from Ward and bring in a pro), now that we have Ward installed full-time, let's see if having training camp to actually implement his own stuff makes any difference.

Everyone in the media has great things to say about Ward as a coach, and he has the engagement from our players by all accounts. Maybe there is another level to come.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

I do wonder if Ward was a factor in Brodie moving on.

 

[Anglesmith]

I do wonder if Ward was a factor in Brodie moving on.

I thought it was pretty telling that Brodie brought up the fact that the Flames tried to trade him last summer when he was talking about free agency about a week ago. I think that was probably the predominant factor. Once you have concrete evidence that your employer tried to move you somewhere else, it's a bit awkward to then feel like you are part of their plans moving forward.

Brodie could have re-signed last summer when Peters was the coach if he'd wanted to. Early in this past season during an intermission segment, Eric Francis let it slip that Brodie wouldn't be returning as though it was already a done deal. So I don't think Ward had anything to do with it.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

Meh. 3M would've been better.

 

[Half Clapper]

this guy is a solid d-man. no clue why there is so much hate

 

[Mazatt]

I pray to god we don't put Tanev and Hanifin together. We have seen that Hanifin is unable to consistently start breakotus as the only defensive option and Tanev is a pure defesnive defenseman. Putting Hamonic's replacement with the guy that Hamonic didn't work with would be silly

 

[Dertell]

Fancy stats never favour a defensive player.

This is not even wholly true when talking solely about defensive defensemen - Tanev himself used to have great analytics - but even if it was true, this makes them look even worse. Defensive players are far more dependent on abilities outside of scoring to justify any investment on them.

 

[Rubi]

I'm ok with this signing. Do I wish the term was less and the cap hit less? Sure I do. However it is what it is to get the deal done. I'm sure Treliving didn't just say write a cheque for what you want and I'll sign it.
Do I wish TJ was still a Flame? Sure I do. The facts are that the only way TJ was re-signing with the Flames is if Treliving makes a offer that couldn't be refused. Brodie wanted to move on for whatever reasons and it likely would have taken more than he signed for in Toronto to get him to sign in Calgary again.
Hamonic is gone and I doubt very many people out there are unhappy about that.
Treliving needed to find a quality top 4 d-man to replace one of those two players and there really wasn't much to choose from in the FA market. I think he signed the best d-man out there that wasn't going to cost an arm and a leg (which the Flames can't afford) and he certainly gets good reviews from Canuck fans.

 

[Volica]

Over a long season. Tanev tends to get injuries if he plays over 19 minutes a night. Might be wise to keep him around 18-19 minutes for the reg season then give him more in the playoffs.

Flames have the horses to do this.
In reality he's PK1 and Gio's 5v5 partner, which'll put him in that 18-20 range.

Noah and Ras will be the ones pushing likely top minutes nightly next year (or two of the top three).

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

If he stays healthy for you guys, he’s an absolute gem. Fearless shot blocker, reliable stay at home guy, eats big minutes. And he’s a terrific locker room presence, too. He’ll be missed in Vancouver.

 

[The Rainman]

Someone tell me how I should feel about this.

Over joyed!

 

[The Rainman]

Geez you guys should be still celebrating the signing of Marky who just improved your goaltending 100%! But no you want to piss all over the signing of Tanev who will only improve your D. Just reading your reaction on here, Tanev doesn't stand much of a chance with Flame fans!

 

[Rubi]

If he stays healthy for you guys, he’s an absolute gem. Fearless shot blocker, reliable stay at home guy, eats big minutes. And he’s a terrific locker room presence, too. He’ll be missed in Vancouver.

But, but... I've heard from reliable sources that he's not much better than Kris Russell?

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

But, but... I've heard from reliable sources that he's not much better than Kris Russell?

For what it’s worth - I would take Tanev on my team over Russell any day of the week.

He’s a warrior. Only downside is his versatility.

 

[Rubi]

For what it’s worth - I would take Tanev on my team over Russell any day of the week.

He’s a warrior. Only downside is his versatility.

I guess.... I really should stop believing everything Oiler fans post. Thanks.

 

[DFF]

Upside: Hamonic

Downside: Hamonic

 

[Rolo]

Blackhawks fan who has followed Tanev for many years. You guys got a good deal. He played the entire season + playoffs last year. I think in a 2nd pairing role, he will excel in Calgary with Hanifin or Valimaki as his partner. IMO he's a top 20 pure defensive defender in the NHL. His offense is nearly non existent, but decent first pass and can score the odd clutch goal.

 

[DFF]

Tanev is only 30

By the end of this contract, he is ready for the Norris.

People said Gio contract was too long but looks like he is still good to finish in good shape

 

[InfinityIggy]

Upside: Hamonic

Downside: Hamonic

Nah, he should be notably better than Hamonic at the same job. Hopefully.

 

[DFF]

Nah, he should be notably better than Hamonic at the same job. Hopefully.

We didn't get to see the good Hamonic except for maybe a couple months. The Hamonic that costed us 3 high picks.

 

[Fig]

I thought it was pretty telling that Brodie brought up the fact that the Flames tried to trade him last summer when he was talking about free agency about a week ago. I think that was probably the predominant factor. Once you have concrete evidence that your employer tried to move you somewhere else, it's a bit awkward to then feel like you are part of their plans moving forward.

Brodie could have re-signed last summer when Peters was the coach if he'd wanted to. Early in this past season during an intermission segment, Eric Francis let it slip that Brodie wouldn't be returning as though it was already a done deal. So I don't think Ward had anything to do with it.

I still somehow think there's a possibility that it was intentional. I think that Brodie to TML was somewhat intentional and that a year ago, he wasn't fully ready to go yet as Calgary was comfortable. I find it deafening that the two parties basically have quietly said nothing so far. Even if a bridge was burned you read off the script. I don't seem to hear it.

I can't seemingly help but wonder about the possibility of Brodie to TML being a reverse Hamonic situation.

Geez you guys should be still celebrating the signing of Marky who just improved your goaltending 100%! But no you want to piss all over the signing of Tanev who will only improve your D. Just reading your reaction on here, Tanev doesn't stand much of a chance with Flame fans!

To be fair, some posters just weren't sure. Not crapping. Some posters would have probably crapped on Brodie re-signing because it wasn't AP for 6 mil AAV.

I've been excited about this signing from the get go and was hoping for it (assuming Brodie was gone) even before UFA. I though will admit I am more fired up about this deal than the average Flames fan though.

I pray to god we don't put Tanev and Hanifin together. We have seen that Hanifin is unable to consistently start breakotus as the only defensive option and Tanev is a pure defesnive defenseman. Putting Hamonic's replacement with the guy that Hamonic didn't work with would be silly

I disagree. I think Tanev and Hanifin together will work fine, especially if Hanifin does as mentioned and works on his defensive game vs cheating more offense to cover for less defense as mentioned in the podcast.

Brodie and Hanifin are thoroughbred rovers. They're rare already, but two on a single roster is a bit overkill and much more complex planning is required than if we had only 1 rover and/or if we had offensive minded PMD dmen instead. If you think of a rover purely like an offensive minded dman, you're going to get messed up by overlooking the major differences between the two. This is what happened with Gully and partially with Peters. I hope Ward doesn't fall into the same with Hanifin.

 

[Nanuuk]

I think Kylington is a rover as well and that has perhaps limited his playing time.

 

[Fig]

I think Kylington is a rover as well and that has perhaps limited his playing time.

...

I don't know how I didn't think of this before as well. Yes, Kylington is definitely a rover of the Brent Burns/Karlssson type. Not thoroughbred, but still pretty much a full on rover. What you are saying makes sense.

2 rovers on the dcorps is already difficult, 3 would have been pure adventure.

 

[User1996]

What is the definition of a rover being used? I think there are very few true rovers in the league and not sure I would classify many of our guys as one.

 

[Fig]

What is the definition of a rover being used? I think there are very few true rovers in the league and not sure I would classify many of our guys as one.

The definition of a rover may differ slightly from person to person. My personal easiest summary is that it is a dman who is willing to be defensively responsible, yet still impossible to predict where he will go on the ice on any given play.

You know those hockey dome games and the player is on those tracks? I feel like most players actually kinda do majority play like they're on tracks. Rovers don't really follow the tracks at all.

Personally, IMO, if you look at the ozone as a 2 x 2 grid, a rover goes into all 4 zones vs a offensive PMD going into 2 or 3 out of 4. Part of this is that a rover may often enter and exit the ozone in a "U" shape vs a typical offensive minded dman may more habitually go with a "J" shape and go back to his side. You also need a specific skill set to be a rover with no rover capabilities seemingly possible without good skating and offensive acumen/skills.

A rover also is the first to enter the ozone/attempt to enter the ozone in the first wave with the puck with relative frequency as well and often one of the first entering the dzone no matter how deep in the ozone in the play prior to the reverse momentum.

A good d partner has to be able to actively determine the best option for being on the left or right side of the top of the blue line if the rover goes in deep. This is a challenge for a d partner already to cover both left and right ozone exits to reduce the efficacy of an odd man rush in the opposite direction, let alone a full system due to the fluidity of the options and risks that comes with aggressive offense attempts by a rover.

At least that's how I define it in my head.