Should the Canucks trade Tanev?

[Frankie Blueberries]

That’s what they tried to do with Hamhuis.

VERY different situations. To make that analogy is quite the leap in logic.
First off, they weren't looking at re-signing Hamhuis, so that makes the situations completely different to begin with. This was purely a UFA TDL deal, nothing more or less.

Secondly, it involved owners butting heads (Gaglardi and Aquilini). You had the issue of Dallas preferring Calgary's offer over Vancouver's. Yes, it is on Benning/Linden for not at least getting something for Hamhuis. But none of this relates to the keep/trade Tanev debate. I really don't see the connection you're trying to make to these two situations...

 

[CanaFan]

VERY different situations. To make that analogy is quite the leap in logic.
First off, they weren't looking at re-signing Hamhuis, so that makes the situations completely different to begin with. This was purely a UFA TDL deal, nothing more or less.

Secondly, it involved owners butting heads (Gaglardi and Aquilini). You had the issue of Dallas preferring Calgary's offer over Vancouver's. Yes, it is on Benning/Linden for not at least getting something for Hamhuis. But none of this relates to the keep/trade Tanev debate. I really don't see the connection you're trying to make to these two situations...

Part of the issue was they hadn’t decided if they wanted to resign Hamhuis or not, hence the waffling leading up to the TDL.

And yes, the owners personal squabble impacted the actual details of the discussions with Dallas but that was only an issue because Benning waited until the final week before deciding to actively shop Hamhuis. By that time he’d lost Chicago as a suitor and was left with only Dallas as a buyer, something Dallas knew and used to squeeze Benning as much as possible.

Anyway, it’s not meant to illustrate that waiting until the TDL can’t go right. Certainly it can. But it is illustrative of the perils that can come with waiting, esp if you are only doing so based on the intentions of the player to resign with you or not.

Ultimately what is to be gained by waiting so late? Trading Tanev with 3 months on his contract vs 15 months on his contract can make an immense difference to his trade value. Does it really matter that much to the long term outcomes of the team? I don’t see it.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Part of the issue was they hadn’t decided if they wanted to resign Hamhuis or not, hence the waffling leading up to the TDL.

And yes, the owners personal squabble impacted the actual details of the discussions with Dallas but that was only an issue because Benning waited until the final week before deciding to actively shop Hamhuis. By that time he’d lost Chicago as a suitor and was left with only Dallas as a buyer, something Dallas knew and used to squeeze Benning as much as possible.

Anyway, it’s not meant to illustrate that waiting until the TDL can’t go right. Certainly it can. But it is illustrative of the perils that can come with waiting, esp if you are only doing so based on the intentions of the player to resign with you or not.

Ultimately what is to be gained by waiting so late? Trading Tanev with 3 months on his contract vs 15 months on his contract can make an immense difference to his trade value. Does it really matter that much to the long term outcomes of the team? I don’t see it.

Please provide a link from a credible source to back that up.
Otherwise, the scenarios are entirely different (never mind the age difference and value difference) and comparing them makes no sense.

 

[Cupless44]

One thing is for certain...the Vancouver Canucks never know exactly when to execute a rebuild and they never know how to maximize assets.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

One thing is for certain...the Vancouver Canucks never know exactly when to execute a rebuild and they never know how to maximize assets.

Nope. I honestly can't think of the last good rebuild move, outside of the Hansen/Burrows/Bieksa deals. Bertuzzi for Luongo?

 

[CanaFan]

Please provide a link from a credible source to back that up.
Otherwise, the scenarios are entirely different (never mind the age difference and value difference) and comparing them makes no sense.

Hamhuis said he hasn’t decided what he will do if Benning asks him to waive his NTC.
“There’s a lot of factors … that could affect our decision,” Hamhuis said. “But right now, we hope to stay.”

Iain MacIntyre: Jim Benning’s trade troubles

Article dated Feb 16. TDL was Feb 29. 13 days before the TDL Benning hadn’t approached Hamhuis about waiving his NTC.


Also this:

Regardless, Hamhuis and the Canucks team are on the hot seat in regards to GM Jim Benning. Jim is going to watch this team closely and if they are going to fail leading up to the NHL Trade Deadline in 3 weeks then he is quite likely gonna pull the trigger on his trade gun. Benning recently talked about his plans with TSN 1040, where he said that teams are going to be watching him, but that Hammer is an important part of this team. However, he said that he'll wait and see over the next 3 weeks before making a decision. An important part of the team.

Article dated Feb 5
Canucks Trade Rumors: Hamhuis Likely To Return On Saturday

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Iain MacIntyre: Jim Benning’s trade troubles

Article dated Feb 16. TDL was Feb 29. 13 days before the TDL Benning hadn’t approached Hamhuis about waiving his NTC.

That doesn't mean that Benning was thinking of extending Hamhuis, just that he hadn't approached Hamhuis about trade talks to waive his NTC 13 days before the deadline.

 

[CanaFan]

That doesn't mean that Benning was thinking of extending Hamhuis, just that he hadn't approached Hamhuis about trade talks to waive his NTC 13 days before the deadline.

Fair enough, I should have said they hadn’t decided if they wanted to trade Hamhuis 2 weeks before the TDL. The reasons were never articulated by Benning.

 

[racerjoe]

It is pretty simple... I don't understand why some people don't seem to get it. You don't trade Tanev without getting great value back. Sure let others scoff at what we want. I don't mind keeping Tanev. Having said that I absolutely would be making sure that people know he is available, but much like Duchesne wait if you have to.

 

[CanaFan]

It is pretty simple... I don't understand why some people don't seem to get it. You don't trade Tanev without getting great value back. Sure let others scoff at what we want. I don't mind keeping Tanev. Having said that I absolutely would be making sure that people know he is available, but much like Duchesne wait if you have to.

I’m in agreement with this. I’d never suggest to give him away for poor value, but merely to be open to trading him for good+ value. He isn’t “off limits” as some people have been arguing. It goes without saying that we aren’t trading him for no good reason either.

 

[BeardyCanuck03]

I’m in agreement with this. I’d never suggest to give him away for poor value, but merely to be open to trading him for good+ value. He isn’t “off limits” as some people have been arguing. It goes without saying that we aren’t trading him for no good reason either.

Tanev shouldn't be off limits but he's not someone you actively shop.

As I've posted before, I really like the idea of pairing Juolevi with Tanev. I think that pairing would a) be really good possession wise and b) be very good for Juolevi's development.

 

[CanaFan]

Tanev shouldn't be off limits but he's not someone you actively shop.

As I've posted before, I really like the idea of pairing Juolevi with Tanev. I think that pairing would a) be really good possession wise and b) be very good for Juolevi's development.

Listen or actively shop makes no difference. It’s only what you ultimately do that matters. They should be looking for opportunities to recoup value for Tanev, but not trading him unless that value presents itself.

 

[StreetHawk]

It is pretty simple... I don't understand why some people don't seem to get it. You don't trade Tanev without getting great value back. Sure let others scoff at what we want. I don't mind keeping Tanev. Having said that I absolutely would be making sure that people know he is available, but much like Duchesne wait if you have to.

Agreed. It has to be for a big price.
Not just kapenen from the leafs.

This isn't Edler with a full ntc. Benning has tanev's 8 team no trade list as it is required of all players at the start of the season. So, he is free to take calls on tanev.

 

[racerjoe]

Agreed. It has to be for a big price.
Not just kapenen from the leafs.

This isn't Edler with a full ntc. Benning has tanev's 8 team no trade list as it is required of all players at the start of the season. So, he is free to take calls on tanev.

I would be calling teams too, I just wouldn't trade him unless it was a big price.

 

[CanaFan]

Agreed. It has to be for a big price.
Not just kapenen from the leafs.

This isn't Edler with a full ntc. Benning has tanev's 8 team no trade list as it is required of all players at the start of the season. So, he is free to take calls on tanev.

Agreed. Kapanen or a similar-value piece is of no interest.

 

[Horse McHindu]

An alternative idea: to trading Chris Tanev

The idea of trading Chris Tanev has been beaten to death. Here is an alternative idea that I had:

Assuming Chris Tanev’s body holds up, and assuming that Chris Tanev has the type of game that ages well, why not keep Chris Tanev until his 36 or 37 years old..........and play him with Ben Hutton for the rest of his career on a 3rd pairing?

A few things are achieved by this:

1) it allows the Canucks to have an excellent 3rd pairing.

2) Ben Hutton, alongside Tanev, goes back to being an elite 3rd pairing defenseman.

3) Tanev still provides leadership to the team.

Canucks defense in the future.

Hughes-####
Juolevi-Tryamkin
Hutton-Tanev

OR - you can do the following:

Juolevi-####
Hughes-Tryamkin (strong 2nd pairing)
Hutton-Tanev (elite 3rd pairing)

If the ##### is an alpha superstar defenseman of some kind that can carry Juolevi a little, then the Canucks defense would be set for years.

Bottom line? If Tanev has the type of game that will age well, then I can’t help but wonder if Hutton and Tanev, paired together, would be able to form an excellent 3rd pairing D for next 7-8 years.

 

[brokenhole]

An alternative idea: to trading Chris Tanev

The idea of trading Chris Tanev has been beaten to death. Here is an alternative idea that I had:

Assuming Chris Tanev’s body holds up, and assuming that Chris Tanev has the type of game that ages well, why not keep Chris Tanev until his 36 or 37 years old..........and play him with Ben Hutton for the rest of his career on a 3rd pairing?

A few things are achieved by this:

1) it allows the Canucks to have an excellent 3rd pairing.

2) Ben Hutton, alongside Tanev, goes back to being an elite 3rd pairing defenseman.

3) Tanev still provides leadership to the team.

Canucks defense in the future.

Hughes-####
Juolevi-Tryamkin
Hutton-Tanev

OR - you can do the following:

Juolevi-####
Hughes-Tryamkin (strong 2nd pairing)
Hutton-Tanev (elite 3rd pairing)

If the ##### is an alpha superstar defenseman of some kind that can carry Juolevi a little, then the Canucks defense would be set for years.

Bottom line? If Tanev has the type of game that will age well, then I can’t help but wonder if Hutton and Tanev, paired together, would be able to form an excellent 3rd pairing D for next 7-8.

Keep Tanev and put him with Hughes to develop Hughes. So far the trade rumors have come up with zilch, it's obvious that the offers have been crap for Tanev.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Keep Tanev and put him with Hughes to develop Hughes. So far the trade rumors have come up with zilch, it's obvious that the offers have been crap for Tanev.

For the short term, definitely.

I was thinking more long term where as Tanev ages, he can go back to playing with Hutton where the two of them could be a very very good 3rd pairing.

 

[Motte and Bailey]

WHY trade Tavey? Who will shelter Huey and Juoi? I refuse to let Benning throw those kids the the wolves like that. Keep Taney and sign Alzner. Make the defense great again!

 

[StreetHawk]

Part of the issue was they hadn’t decided if they wanted to resign Hamhuis or not, hence the waffling leading up to the TDL.

And yes, the owners personal squabble impacted the actual details of the discussions with Dallas but that was only an issue because Benning waited until the final week before deciding to actively shop Hamhuis. By that time he’d lost Chicago as a suitor and was left with only Dallas as a buyer, something Dallas knew and used to squeeze Benning as much as possible.

Anyway, it’s not meant to illustrate that waiting until the TDL can’t go right. Certainly it can. But it is illustrative of the perils that can come with waiting, esp if you are only doing so based on the intentions of the player to resign with you or not.

Ultimately what is to be gained by waiting so late? Trading Tanev with 3 months on his contract vs 15 months on his contract can make an immense difference to his trade value. Does it really matter that much to the long term outcomes of the team? I don’t see it.

Main difference is the NTC clause. Hammer had a full NTC. Tanev, only a list of 8 teams he can't be traded to. So, plenty of options available to JB.

That and the Canucks couldn't make up their freaking minds about what was more important. Playoffs or draft picks. had to make a call and they blew it on both counts. Way too hard in the NHL to make up even 4 points at the TDL when you lose 2 vets in Edler and Sutter. Easy decision in my mind. And they left it to the last minute. Should have had a full week to figure it out.

 

[settinguptheplay]

If Tanev stays healthy you trade him at the next deadline. Consider retaining some salary to maximize his value. Set cost at 1st, 2nd and quality prospect. Go into the '19 draft with a bushel of early picks.

Or

Everything goes right and the Canucks are serious contenders for a playoff spot. Then you keep him.

So basically, option number 1.

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

He should be traded at the TDL to maximize value.

I expect him to be traded at the draft at his lowest value since Benning and Co will want more picks "for the fans".

 

[Horse McHindu]

Another question:

In a potential Tanev for Liljegren deal......

1) Which side would have to add?
2) What would they have to add?

I’m thinking that the Canucks would have to add due to Tanev’s injuries in recent years, but I think I’d be willing to do it. The question is.......what?

 

[PuckMunchkin]

If Tanev stays healthy you trade him at the next deadline. Consider retaining some salary to maximize his value. Set cost at 1st, 2nd and quality prospect. Go into the '19 draft with a bushel of early picks.

Or

Everything goes right and the Canucks are serious contenders for a playoff spot. Then you keep him.

So basically, option number 1.

With his injury history the days of Tanev bringing 1. + 2. + A quality prospect are long gone.

 

[Bobby Digital]

With his injury history the days of Tanev bringing 1. + 2. + A quality prospect are long gone.

Disagree, if Tanev can stay healthy until the TDL and play at his usual high level some team will pay a premium for him.