It’s not an issue because we aren’t giving up a 1st, or Johnson, or anything else for Tanev.
Proposal: Tampa/Vancouver
- Thread starter olli
- Start date
It’s not an issue because we aren’t giving up a 1st, or Johnson, or anything else for Tanev.
PetterssonSimp
Registered User
- Dec 12, 2008
- 7,374
- 917
You guys say this, but didn’t your team give Sami Salo a multi year contract after he’d been deemed to injury prone by Vancouver?
THE Green Man
Registered User
OP is bad for both honestly. We need pure futures for a Tanev trade. TJ and a 1st is an overpayment already, and Calahan as a throw in isn't enough to bring that together. At this point the only trade that makes sense between the two since Tampa won't move Foote is Calahan and a pick for future considerations. Opening up that salary could be critical to Tampa this year solely to use it more spread around in their bottom 6 to help their PK. Assuming Calahan would waive his NTC; him and Tampa's 2018 2nd? Vancouver could probably find another team to flip him for another 2nd or 3rd round pick if they retained half.
GoodbyeLuongo
Registered User
GoodbyeLuongo
Registered User
Not interested. That first will likely be one of the last picks, and don’t get me wrong, I love Johnson but the peak of his value is in the playoffs which he wouldn’t see in VAN till he’s on the wrong side of 30.
Holy hell that is terrible for Tampa. Take out Johnson and the 1st and it is a bit more acceptable.
THE Green Man
Registered User
Come on, the OP is bad, but your counter is ridiculous the other way. How is Dotchin + a Calahan dump worth Tanev....
You are right, the Canucks don't need Callahan. Just keep it simple, 2019 1st for Tanev. Not sure he is worth that but if the Bolts want to take a chance on his health that seems fair value.
He isn’t, and we don’t. In fact without Callahan going back the other way to cancel out Tanev’s cap hit I wouldn’t take him for free. But it’s a moot point considering Callahan would never put Vancouver on his list of potential destinations.
THE Green Man
Registered User
Canucks wouldn't take that. We would need an additional 2nd + prospect bare minimum. He serves as our debatable top defenceman on an already bad blueline. He is going to groom Juolevi this season which holds tremendous value to our team. Unless someone is giving us what we are asking, he won't be moved. Therefore, we will have at least another 8 months of Tanev threads around here.
God King Fudge
Championship Swag
- Oct 13, 2017
- 6,308
- 6,793
I think he only played two years in TB, and, in the first one, was definitely an upgrade. After that we didn't resign him, he waited for a contract, and eventually retired, if memory serves.
We need one RHD who can move the puck, which would allow us to slot Stralman in by ear. Sometimes he plays well with Hedman, sometimes he can't handle the big assignments anymore. He's still a good defenseman, but it's been a while since he's been a legit top pairing guy.
Canadian Canuck
Hughes4Calder
Lol stop ****** talking like you’re Steve Yzerman and speak on behalf of all Tampa fans.
Tanev’s cap hit is great
Tanev’s cap hit is great
Not for a guy who can’t stay on the ice. If he’s such a great player with such a great cap hit then you guys should keep him and stop making stupid threads that absurdly overrate his value.
And since we’ve had this same thread and same pointless discussion several times now on this forum, let me save us all some time by saying what happens next. Next Canucks fans will make the hilarious argument that if Tanev were on another team where he didn’t have to carry the load, he wouldn’t get injured so often and would be able to play a normal number of games per season. At which point I will say fine, if you’re so confident that Tanev will stay healthy on the Lightning then why don’t you guarantee that by giving us your first round pick every year of his remaining term in which he plays fewer than 72 games? At which point there will be the sound of crickets emanating from the computers of Vancouver fans everywhere.
THE Green Man
Registered User
I get where you're coming from but that's a huge over reaction. If Vancouver were in a re-tool it would be ludicrous, but when they are a perennial bottom feeder there's no way they could gamble with their 1st round picks. You may want to just avoid Tanev threads until after the draft, Juolevi is needing back surgery now. With OJ definitely going to report to the AHL first to recover his game after his surgery, Tanev is even more expendable from our position. The plan basically was to let him groom Juolevi for half a season and see where the value lies at the TDL but now that OJ won't be with the big club for a long time, Tanev should be moved at the draft.
But you guys are so fond of telling us that Tanev isn’t a gamble when trying to get us to agree to a trade. So which is it: is he the top pairing defenseman who can be relied upon to stay on the ice that you insist he is when you guys are talking about how much we should pay for him, or is he the gamble you always switch to saying he is when the tables are turned and suddenly it’s your team that’s on the hook when he misses a large chunk of the season as he has every year of his career?
Thank you for proving my point.
Nucker42
Registered User
- Nov 27, 2011
- 2,541
- 1,800
I want Matthew Peca and Slater Keokeok.
Doesn’t seem to be much room for them in Tbay. Am I wrong there today fans?
What about those two for Tanev and Canucks retain %20?
Doesn’t seem to be much room for them in Tbay. Am I wrong there today fans?
What about those two for Tanev and Canucks retain %20?
I just don't think Tanev is the guy we need anymore. At least not in the coming year, with McDonagh under contract and a new D coach coming in. I'd rather bring in a guy who can put up a few points from the blueline and see how it shakes out in our own end. We've undergone a lot of change, and removing Bowness is probably the biggest one, and the one we have to keep an eye on for a minute.
I think both of those guys, Koekkoek in particular, are very much available. I'm just not sure Tanev is the kind of guy we're targeting.
Koekkoek can probably be had for a middling pick or a problem prospect of your own.
Peca is a little bit trickier because he's a big part of the Syracuse Crunch, but he looks NHL ready, and we don't really have room for another miniature speedster.
You’ve got a good eye for potential, I’ll give you that. Peca’s a UFA that I would like to see us bring back if possible and I have more confidence in Koekkoek developing into a reliable NHL defenseman (if Cooper will actually give him a chance) than I do in Tanev staying healthy. In addition our cap situation will be tight but manageable if we make smart decisions; even at 20% retention we can’t afford to waste that much cap space on a guy who can’t be relied upon. We’ve dealt with too many injury prone players with high cap hits of our own the last few years to have any interest in bringing in another.
