clunk
Registered User
I'd take Lappy back over most of the trash on this team, tbh.We should try to sign Maxim Lapierre, Linden Vey, Andrew Ebbett, Derek Roy, Mason Raymond, and Gragnini. I bet you they make us a more competitive team
I'd take Lappy back over most of the trash on this team, tbh.We should try to sign Maxim Lapierre, Linden Vey, Andrew Ebbett, Derek Roy, Mason Raymond, and Gragnini. I bet you they make us a more competitive team
For as bad as people want to trade Guddy,,just remember how bad the rest of the garbage that will b left playing defence.And our best one is injury riddled and brittle.All of this falls on Benning.We need to be looking at moving all of them not just point fingers at 1 and say he is the worst.
Thanks for pointing that out,,,im saying they all suck,,not just him.Except he is the worst. You can make a pretty strong case that taking him out of the lineup improves our team.
TSN analyst Mike Johnson came on our show Thursday and suggested the assets would be significant.
“He would get great value. There would be large demand for Chris Tanev and his services around the NHL, that's for sure,” Johnson said. “He's a first-rounder [in return]. From a good team that's going to pick 28th or 29th, at the bottom of the first round? I think so.
“Or maybe not the best prospect, but the third or fourth best prospect in an organization.”
That high bar was first established in June, when Sportsnet's Elliotte Friedman laid out the following after a few teams inquired about prying Tanev out of Vancouver.
“The one thing I've heard is other GMs who say they've reached out to Vancouver have been told this is no guarantee and if Chris Tanev is going anywhere, the price is going to be very high for him,” Friedman said. “He's got three more years under contract. He's a good player at a good price.
“I don't think Vancouver is looking to do this unless it's a great deal.”
Mike Halford wrote a piece about trading Tanev on the athletic, and something funny caught my eye.
Why the time is right for the Canucks to shop Chris Tanev (paywall)
A very late 1st and a good (not great) prospect..."significant"
What people seem to ignore when they bring up Hamonic is that he has also missed a decent number of games in the past four seasons.Toronto media. Figures.
Hamonic deal sets the expectation. Injuries or not. Tanev is better than Hamonic. Would not even entertain moving him unless it was a mid first +. It makes no sense. a 50/50 shot of landing a regular NHL player four years from now for a rhd in his prime that is a posession monster. They can **** off.
The Canucks are an excellent example. Who does this team have to show for that Kesler trade?What people seem to ignore when they bring up Hamonic is that he has also missed a decent number of games in the past four seasons.
I've said this a million times already, don't trade him for quantity. Teams that trade for quantity usually end up with very little in the end. You need to get a very high-end piece in return for him, and I'm not talking about a mid 1st round pick.
Yup, spot on. If a team like LA wants him I want Vilardi, enought with these bogus 1st + mid tier prospect proposals that usually result in junk for the team trading away the good piece. Also enough with Kasperi Kapanen who's the most overrated asset on this forum, he doesn't have much value for f***s sakes.What people seem to ignore when they bring up Hamonic is that he has also missed a decent number of games in the past four seasons.
I've said this a million times already, don't trade him for quantity. Teams that trade for quantity usually end up with very little in the end. You need to get a very high-end piece in return for him, and I'm not talking about a mid 1st round pick.
Yup, spot on. If a team like LA wants him I want Vilardi, enought with these bogus 1st + mid tier prospect proposals that usually result in junk for the team trading away the good piece. Also enough with Kasperi Kapanen who's the most overrated asset on this forum, he doesn't have much value for ****s sakes.
I would take Foote for sureWhat about something like Taylor Raddysh, Callan Foote, and a 2nd round pick for Chris Tanev?
This is the kind of quantity trade I'd stay away from. Raddysh and Foote are very good prospects, but we need something high-end. I know Foote was taken 14th overall last draft, but I personally wouldn't have taken him there.What about something like Taylor Raddysh, Callan Foote, and a 2nd round pick for Chris Tanev?
This is the kind of quantity trade I'd stay away from. Raddysh and Foote are very good prospects, but we need something high-end. I know Foote was taken 14th overall last draft, but I personally wouldn't have taken him there.
No way Tanev goes for a top end prospect, I'd say a late first rounder or a very solid prospect.
No way Tanev goes for a top end prospect, I'd say a late first rounder or a very solid prospect.
Nobody is trading players of that quality for glass tanev. And def not point level young stars.Yup exactly. Vilardi, Chytil, Sergachev, Chabot level assets in a one-for-one swap would be preferred. If Benning needs an earlier dividend than a teenager, go for someone like Anthony Mantha. Otherwise just sit tight.
Nobody is trading players of that quality for glass tanev. And def not point level young stars.
No way Tanev goes for a top end prospect, I'd say a late first rounder or a very solid prospect.
I frankly don't care what you think, he's significantly better than the guy your GM traded for this summer.No way Tanev goes for a top end prospect, I'd say a late first rounder or a very solid prospect.
There has been lots of talk of us no longer having a ton to sell off, that it is basically Tanev, but do we trade him, will this team be good when he is still around. So with this mind, I thought I would through this out for funsies. So with NHL Prime ages being 25-29, if you don't think this team will be good for atleast 5 years. Would you trade Bo for a for a draft pick in the 5-8 range?
I would say no because if we do suck for that long if we hold onto him we may get more then.