Canucks Offseason Thread || Sekeres: Canucks shopping Tanev, Sutter

[xtra]

Here’s a question why would we assign him to the AHL is it against the rules to send him to the echl? Is there something prohibiting us from assigning him all the way down there?

 

[Bankerguy]

Edler Tanev Hughes Myers

so you have your four top 4 dmen.....and now you're going to trade one away... wow. Thats garbage.
With three other guys, Tanev wont be needed to play more than 20 minutes a night which would be good for his health. I bet he plays 70 games this year if we dont make any more moves.

 

[Killer Orcas]

This idiot shopping Tanev to over pay for Gardiner now please tell me no.

 

[VanJack]

Speculation is that the longer Hutton stays on the market, the more likely it is they trade Tanev and then re-sign Hutton to a more affordable contract with term.

As far as Sutter is concerned, his contract has negative value. Now that so many teams are cap-strapped as result of their free agent signings and trades, the likelihood of him moving is pretty remote imo.

The guy I'm curios about is Eriksson. I just don't see how they can bring him back.

 

[MS]

Here’s a question why would we assign him to the AHL is it against the rules to send him to the echl? Is there something prohibiting us from assigning him all the way down there?

Yes. Veterans on one-way deals can't be sent to the ECHL without their permission.

 

[DL44]

Speculation is that the longer Hutton stays on the market, the more likely it is they trade Tanev and then re-sign Hutton to a more affordable contract with term.

This wouldn't make sense to me from a positional left/right D standpoint.

Trading Tanev(R) would put Biega into the top 6 on the right side.

Adding Hutton(L) now makes little sense with Edler, Hughes, Benn - Fantenberg (Juolevi) on the left side..

Unless they are comfortable rolling with Hughes on the right like they ended last season....

Edler-Hughes
Hutton-Myers
Benn-Stecher

 

[xtra]

Yes. Veterans on one-way deals can't be sent to the ECHL without their permission.

I assume this would apply to other leagues than the AHL as well ie. shl khl etc

 

[Horse McHindu]

Ignoring cap space issues, if the Canucks signed Jake Gardiner, their defense would pretty much be at their 2010-2012 level/caliber.....or atleast really effing close.

 

[TomWillander1RD]

I always wanted to see us moving Tanev while he had some value. Knowing that we traded away our future 1st round pick, without Tavev, it could turn out to be the worst trade (even worse than Gudbranson one) in JB's tenure.

 

[Melvin]

Good grief.

Once again I am dumb struck and don't even know where to start

Okay.

I have collected my thoughts after reading that tweet again.

1)......no. I still can't. My brain exploded.

 

[Nazzlind]

This wouldn't make sense to me from a positional left/right D standpoint.

Trading Tanev(R) would put Biega into the top 6 on the right side.

Adding Hutton(L) now makes little sense with Edler, Hughes, Benn - Fantenberg (Juolevi) on the left side..

Unless they are comfortable rolling with Hughes on the right like they ended last season....

Edler-Hughes
Hutton-Myers
Benn-Stecher

Benn can play both sides comfortably

 

[Horse McHindu]

This idiot shopping Tanev to over pay for Gardiner now please tell me no.

Link?

So Benn would move to the right side in this hypothetical?

Edler-Myers
Gardiner-Stecher
Hughes-Benn

Given that Tanev’s body is starting to break down, combined with Edler’s age, I actually wouldn’t be opposed to this at all. I would actually welcome a Gardiner/Tanev swap.

In a few years when the Canucks are forced to move on from Edler in order to have money to re-up Pettersson, Markstrom, and Hughes, they’ll need some added depth and security on that left side. I would absolutely welcome a Gardiner/Tanev swap.

 

[Draino]

You would think that they would want to pump up Tanev's value by playing him till the TDL. They can spread out the hard minutes on D. Hopefully the addition of Hughes plus a healthy forward roster will help their possession numbers so that the D isnt hammered and Tanev can stay healthy.

Doesnt make sense to unload him now. They should be looking to move others out if they want to clear cap.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Moving Sutter is a very good move imo, just get what you can for him, move out that salary and call it a day.

In terms of Tanev...I'm not opposed to the idea of trading him although it seems better to wait until the TDL. I'm expecting him to be injured again for at least 30 games so I don't view it as big of a loss as others do. If we use that cap space to overpay some plug of course I'll be pissed, but there are a few players I wouldn't mind - ie Gusev or Ferland. The latter is not popular I realize, but I'd be ok with a 4x4 or something along those lines for him.

 

[Bankerguy]

If we plan on trading Tanev and resigning Hutton then assuming Hughes is the real deal then we'd probably start the season looking like this.
Edler Stecher
Hughes Myers
Hutton Benn

Not a fan of either Hutton or Stecher granted top 4 status... We' look much better keeping Tanev
Edler Tanev
Hughes Myers
Benn Stecher

This is a better top 4. I also think the pairings of Benn / Stecher would work really well chemistry wise.

 

[canucksfan]

Seems like the Sens are the only team that need salary to hit the floor. Do players in the LTIR count towards the cap floor?

 

[Killer Orcas]

Link?

So Benn would move to the right side in this hypothetical?

Edler-Myers
Gardiner-Stecher
Hughes-Benn

Given that Tanev’s body is starting to break down, combined with Edler’s age, I actually wouldn’t be opposed to this at all. I would actually welcome a Gardiner/Tanev swap.

In a few years when the Canucks are forced to move on from Edler in order to have money to re-up Pettersson, Markstrom, and Hughes, they’ll need some added depth and security on that left side. I would absolutely welcome a Gardiner/Tanev swap.

No no just saw he's shopping Tanev from post above and figured Gardiner still unsigned and hes been mentioned before. He must have some hair brained idea to do something silly if he's shopping Tanev though. Again have no link just from reading posts above.

 

[Horse McHindu]

A glimmer of hope for Jake Gardiner.

I know there’s almost zero chance of it happening now, but I think this team still needs Jake Gardiner in order for the team to be *really* secured on the back-end for both the short term and the long term.

Even with Myers, the Canucks still have a lot of questions both short term and long term on D. When Edler moves in a few years, and Tanev continues to break down and/or moves on, our defense will go back to being weak.

The presence of Gardiner would ensure that our left side remains deep AND guys like Juolevi, Tryamkin, Sautner, and even Hughes, etc., aren’t rushed in their development to fill vacant positions (via injury or players moving on).

Edler-Myers
Gardiner-Stecher
Hughes-Benn

Is a defense that would come close to rivaling 2010-2012. Just saying....

 

[Horse McHindu]

No no just saw he's shopping Tanev from post above and figured Gardiner still unsigned and hes been mentioned before. He must have some hair brained idea to do something silly if he's shopping Tanev though. Again have no link just from reading posts above.

Oh ok I see. I’m actually still hoping for Gardiner......so quit playing games with my heart!!! :-p

 

[Killer Orcas]

Edler Tanev
Hughes Myers
Benn Stecher

This is a better top 4. I also think the pairings of Benn / Stecher would work really well chemistry wise.

I'd prefer;
Edler Myers
Hughes Tanev
Benn Stecher

Edler to clean up Myers mistakes and let him concentrate on break out leaving Edler to pick his spots and stay back.
Hughes can roam like a 4th forward and Tanev stays back deep. Stecher has Benn to stay behind and be physical presence letting him roam. I think all pairings compliment each other.

 

[Killer Orcas]

Oh ok I see. I’m actually still hoping for Gardiner......so quit playing games with my heart!!! :-p

I'd prefer we stay away from Gardiner as we've resigned Edler already.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Why would we give up any assets to trade Errikson, when we can send him to Utica? He doesn’t have a No Move Clause like Lucic has and Marleau had. Unless our Owner is more concerned with saving dollars than keeping important assets?

i don't know about prime assets, but i'd pay a goldobin or sautner or lockwood level price to move eriksson and his cap hit out the door.

but then again, if we are going to use the cap space on ferlund i would not.

 

[krutovsdonut]

The funny thing is, the Canucks could possibly give Tanev some very light minutes and wouldn't need to rely on him so much this year that maybe he could get by staying healthy, thus increasing his value by the trade deadline. But instead I expect Benning will sell him for pennies on the dollar.

you and i agree. tanev is in a prime position to play less and stay healthy, and they can split the pk time 3 ways so he blocks less shots. it is a perfect opportunity to have him healthy at the tdl for once and move him.

 

[canucksfan]

you and i agree. tanev is in a prime position to play less and stay healthy, and they can split the pk time 3 ways so he blocks less shots. it is a perfect opportunity to have him healthy at the tdl for once and move him.

If Tanev is on the team and healthy I doubt they move him assuming of course the team is even somewhat close to the playoffs.

 

[MS]

i don't know about prime assets, but i'd pay a goldobin or sautner or lockwood level price to move eriksson and his cap hit out the door.

but then again, if we are going to use the cap space on ferlund i would not.

That won't be nearly enough. Goldobin is worthless and Sautner or Lockwood might be worth a 5th-6th round pick at most.

We'd have to move a Virtanen/Woo/Madden/2nd round pick level asset to get rid of Eriksson. At best.