Absolute nonsense.
1) Who gives a **** about right side/left side when the team as a whole sucks. (It's like worrying about windshield wipers on a car that doesn't run)
Ummmm.........defensemen that predominantly play the left side, and defensemen that predominantly play the right side. You realize that’s an actual important thing right?
2) It's common knowledge at this point one should always draft BPA, never for a position, and even less so for a such a specific one. It takes the low % of getting a great player even lower. It's stupid.
I agree with this line of thought for the most part, but again......take a look at the Canucks right defense outside of Tanev. Guds (who will likely get moved), along with Stecher and Biega who are barely NHL caliber defensemen.....if that. If you move Tanev and Gudbranson, do you really want Troy Stecher on your top pairing? And if he goes down with injury? Biega? Let’s not check our brains at the door.
3) Almost all of your posts you cite EDMONTON OILERS! EMEGERB, IF WE DO THAT WE"LL BE THE OILERS!!!!!1!!!1! No. Their **** show is a miraculous piece of work. Trading Tanev would not do this.
It’s not just the Oilers. They are the worst case scenario. There are numerous teams and examples out there that never seem to get ahead primarily due to the following reason:
They rush their kids and place them into positions that they are too green for, without adequate veteran support.
If you move Tanev and Gudbranson like many on here suggest, it would impact ALL of Stecher, Hutton, Juolevi, Demko, etc.,......and likely not in a positive way. Al of a sudden, our young defense get placed into roles that they either aren’t good enough for or are too green for.
All of a sudden, you bring up Demko and expect him to develop behind what would be the weakest defense corps in the NHL.
THAT IS NOT HOW YOU DEVELOP YOUR EXISITING PROSPECTS. Period.
Could the Canucks trade Tanev for a guy like Liljegren and could it work out? Possibly.....but the likelier case is that it wouldn’t.
Keeping Tanev and Edler is imperative for this organization, as it allows our young defensemen in the system to grow comfortably in 2nd and 3rd pairing roles, while Edler and Tanev shoulder the main responsibilities.
When the kids prove themselves ready for higher duty (which if we’re being honest, they haven’t), THEN you look at moving Edler and/or Tanev.
Trading Tanev would be a disservice to our prospects in the system and would likely set us back even further.
A guy like Juolevi needs time to develop on the 3rd pairing. Stecher shouldn’t be playing any higher than a 3rd pairing D. Hutton should only play on a 2nd pairing if he’s playing with a solid top 4 guy like Tanev. Anything above and beyond for an extended period of time will lead to trouble for his team.