Proposal: Toronto - Vancouver

gianni

Registered User
Apr 8, 2014
1,173
332
Oh I totally agree. Someone in the media (Botchford I think) pointed out that he was playing so much more confidently. Bert wasn’t exactly dominant at Jakes age either.

In addition to that, Jake Virtanen played a bottom-6 role this past season, and had the lowest atoi team (when compared w/ regulars whom more than half the games). He definitely still has Chris Kreider potential if he has better linemates; at the same age, Kreider had 3pts in 23 GP.


Did we actually settle on a fair price? Or is it just ridiculousness....

Borgman and 1 was my offer.
Would also do Brown instead.
Or 1, 2,3 probably.

Nah, most reasonable Canucks fans haven't replied to this thread. Chris Tanev would be kept around even if the Nucks were lucky enough to draft Rasmus Dahlin in June -- a team can never have enough good d-men.

Historically, the #25 pick has a 90% failure rate; esp if it's for a top-pairing RHD:
Jiri Fischer
Mikhail Kuleshov
Steve Ott
Alexander Perezhogin
Cam Ward
Anthony Stewart
Rob Schremp
Andrew Cogliano
Patrik Berglund
Patrick White
Greg Nemisz
Jordan Caron
Quinton Howden
Stuart Percy
Jordan Schmaltz
Michael McCarron
David Pastrnak
Jack Roslovic
Riley Tufte
Ryan Poehling
 

TARS

Registered User
May 3, 2009
2,129
68
Vancouver
I mean we first off aren’t the leagues worst team. Second off we actually have a pretty good collection of young players and a lot of cap space. He’s made his mistakes, but Benning has made some really good moves and made some really good picks. And before you bring up Virtanen, that was one pick

We may have never had the good fortune of finishing last, but over the past 3 seasons, the Canucks have the fewest points in the NHL.

So depending on the sample size you pick, you could say the Canucks are, in fact, the worst team in the league that went on a hot streak at the worst possible time this year.
 

GoodbyeLuongo

Registered User
Jun 8, 2012
1,927
638
Seattle
We may have never had the good fortune of finishing last, but over the past 3 seasons, the Canucks have the fewest points in the NHL.

So depending on the sample size you pick, you could say the Canucks are, in fact, the worst team in the league that went on a hot streak at the worst possible time this year.

Fair point
 

Frankie Blueberries

Allergic to draft picks
Jan 27, 2016
9,096
10,545
So why does he spend so much time on the IR ?

He blocks a lot of shots. I think at least half, if not the majority of his injuries come from shot blocking. Also, our blue line sucks so he ends up playing big minutes and is probably relied on far too much. Part of it could be his biology and whatnot but some of it is definitely circumstantial.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GoodbyeLuongo

GoodbyeLuongo

Registered User
Jun 8, 2012
1,927
638
Seattle
So why does he spend so much time on the IR ?

He logs big minutes and blocks a ton of shots. He's also had some pretty brutal luck (the measles, taking a shot to the teeth). He's not an iron man by any means, but he's not just getting stick checked and breaking bones. It's because of the way he plays and the amount he plays. Plus I think he probably has a herniated disc from carrying the Canucks defense on his back the past few years
 
  • Like
Reactions: 50 Sheas of Grey

Ziggdiezan

Registered User
Apr 10, 2015
10,847
5,676
The deal breaker was how high their 1st turned out to be. If they tracked like they had hoped, the deal would have been fair (mid/late 1st).
The difference is Tanev last 4 seasons he has played 70, 69, 53 and 42 games. He won't return a 1st and 2 2nds I personally think.

Also any team trading for him is likely going to use him in the same way. Lots of shot blocking and defensive play so those injuries likely only occur more as he ages.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orpheus66

LEAFANFORLIFE23

Registered User
Jun 17, 2010
45,387
14,255
I will never understand why Leaf fans want a guy that has missed a total of 69 games over the past 2 seasons and has never played above 70 games.

give me a real D man, one that you can depend on to actually play
 

Canuck Luck

Registered User
Jun 15, 2008
5,568
1,966
Vancouver
The difference is Tanev last 4 seasons he has played 70, 69, 53 and 42 games. He won't return a 1st and 2 2nds I personally think.

Also any team trading for him is likely going to use him in the same way. Lots of shot blocking and defensive play so those injuries likely only occur more as he ages.
Hamonic's last 4 seasons are pretty comparable, 71, 72, 49, 74. That averages out to about 10 games more a season over 4 years. Lets not forget Tanev is also a much better player than Hamonic.

I'd do TOR's 1st + SJ's 2nd + a conditional 2019 2nd*





*75 games played minimum next season. Any less and the pick disappears.
I would not do that. only 46% of d-men played 75+ games this season. Thats calculated by 6 d-men per 31 teams. that means that 54% of d-men would not meet that requirement. Over the last 3 seasons, the average is only 41% of d-men can play 75+ games.
 

Canuck Luck

Registered User
Jun 15, 2008
5,568
1,966
Vancouver
I will never understand why Leaf fans want a guy that has missed a total of 69 games over the past 2 seasons and has never played above 70 games.

give me a real D man, one that you can depend on to actually play
I guess almost 50% of d-men in the NHL are not "real" since thats how many failed to play 71+ games this season. If Hamonic, whom in your books is not a real d-man since he averages less than 71 games a season over his career, can fetch a 1st + 2 2nds, I wonder how much a "real" d-man costs
 
Last edited:

Brock Radunske

안양종합운동장 빙상장
Aug 8, 2012
16,787
4,701
Hamonic's last 4 seasons are pretty comparable, 71, 72, 49, 74. That averages out to about 10 games more a season over 4 years. Lets not forget Tanev is also a much better player than Hamonic.


I would not do that. only 46% of d-men played 75+ games this season. Thats calculated by 6 d-men per 31 teams. that means that 54% of d-men would not meet that requirement. Over the last 3 seasons, the average is only 41% of d-men can play 75+ games.

Fair enough. 70 games would work too, though that's still close to his career high, No?
Any less than that and he's a sunk asset
 

Brock Radunske

안양종합운동장 빙상장
Aug 8, 2012
16,787
4,701
I guess almost 50% of d-men in the NHL are not "real" since thats how many failed to play 71+ games this season. If Hamonic, whom in your books is not a real d-man since he averages less than 71 games a season over his career, can fetch a 1st + 2 2nds, I wonder how much a "real" d-man costs
If you're talking averages, best run those numbers again for Tanev.
He runs more risk than any defenseman I can think of so that need to be considered.
 

Canuck Luck

Registered User
Jun 15, 2008
5,568
1,966
Vancouver
Fair enough. 70 games would work too, though that's still close to his career high, No?
Any less than that and he's a sunk asset
70 is a fair number. However given that he is a much better player than Hamonic, that condition means there should be more value coming back than what Hamonic got. The reason I valued him similarly to Hamonic is due to the fact you're likely to get 60-65 games a year not 70. If we are going to hold him to the 70 games you're likely to get with Hamonic, then the condition should then allow for compensation to Tanev's full value which IMO is moderately above Hamonic.

I would do a SJ 2nd this year + Leafs 1st next year + SJ 2nd next year for Tanev with no condition. If the 70 game condition is added, I would want it to be Leafs 1st this year SJ 2nd this year + swap of Leafs 1st for the Canucks 2nd next year if tanev plays 70 or more games.

You guys can either give up a late 2nd and run the risk Tanev will stay healthy. Other option is bet against his health and potentially downgrade from a 1st (probably late) to a 2nd (probably early) or save yourselves a late 2nd if the conditon goes unmet
 
Last edited:

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->