Having Tanev back would be ideal. But we have no cap room. So he’s going to have to take less than he’s currently getting to stay.For those that want Tanev back.... what type of deal are you offering him to stay?
We can afford Tanev. But you will have to pick 2 of the 3 big UFAs with Tryamkin at 2.3Having Tanev back would be ideal. But we have no cap room. So he’s going to have to take less than he’s currently getting to stay.
Tanev at 4.5 or Stecher, Rafferty, and (perhaps?) Tryamkin together for 3.5 to 5.5
Could we afford Tanev at 4.5 if we have Tryamkin at 2, Rafferty at 1, and Rathbone at 1?
Really you think it will be bad? Why and what should we do? I'm curious about the negativity
No matter what kind of an NHL d-man Tryamkin becomes, it's hardly climbing out on a flimsy limb to predict that he'll be light years better in a depth role than guys like Fantenberg or Benn.....and certainly a big upgrade over the Utica bubble players who comprise the rest of the blueline depth chart.
I know I'll get flamed for suggesting it, but if comes down to a choice of signing Tryamkin at somewhere around $2.5m a season versus Tanev at anywhere from $5.5m to $6.5m, I'd go for the big Russian.
He doesn't bring much offense to the table, but then neither does Tanev. But Tryamkin is five years younger, and I doubt that he'll ever be as injury-prone.
Tryamkin can play either side and in terms of puck battles in his zone, it sometimes looks like opposing forwards are hitting a cement truck.
So in terms of performance, are they worse off with Tryamkin instead of Tanev going forward? Possibly. But not enough to justify a $3m-$4m difference in cap space.
I guess that happens once the new CBA is ratified. Tryamkin at 2.5 million for a two year term? Too bad Benning signed Benn to two years. That cap dollar could go directly to Tryamkin.
Even 2.5 is bad value, and with a flat cap the next few seasons is pretty much immediately a bad contract. Anything over 2 years or 2m isn't a great idea.
I have no idea what the numbers will be but I'm expecting a bigger number than is seemingly warranted.
I'm hoping for ~1.5mil over 2 years, but if Dhaliwal is right he'll get ~2mil
That’s his preferred, and most often played side.Anyone remember if Tryamkin can play the right side?
Baffled by this. It's not just me saying they were bad.....Canucks Army delved into their analytics and zone time. Canucks were crushed whenever Benn and Fantenberg were out there. And the Fantenberg-Myers pairing was one of the worst as Benning's $6m d-man Myers was basically dragged down trying to anchor that pairing.Why are you so sure about it? Have you seen him play in the KHL? What he did 3 years ago was certainly not light years better than Benn and Fantenberg this season.
That’s his preferred, and most often played side.
Baffled by this. It's not just me saying they were bad.....Canucks Army delved into their analytics and zone time. Canucks were crushed whenever Benn and Fantenberg were out there. And the Fantenberg-Myers pairing was one of the worst as Benning's $6m d-man Myers was basically dragged down trying to anchor that pairing.
These two 'depth' d-men tied up close to $3m under the cap, and they're stuck with Benn for another season.
So yes, Tryamkin is clearly a better option than either guy both in performance and cap-wise.
Maybe, but things like his wife not liking Vancouver and wanting to be closer to family and friends in Russia are probably still true. Then there's a handful of other minor issues that might add up, like him not liking our couching staff (it has changed since he left, but it might have left a bad impression on him regarding the organization) and showing him videos of Pronger (expecting him to play the same way), his limited ice time (which won't change if he re-signs, he's still likely a bottom pairing dman), and him complaining about everything smelling like weed (dumb, but maybe it's a cultural thing where cannabis is seen as immoral).
Based on the issues he reported the last time around, I don't see how the majority of them will change if he re-signs. My guess is he just wants to get his foot back into the NHL to further his career, eventually with a different team.
Edler, Hughes, Myers, Tanev, Tryamkin.... who takes the 6th spot for next season? Benn?[/QUO!
Maybe, but Rafferty and Juiolevi are under 1 million against the cap players. Really too bad Benning signed Benn to that second year.
Signing Tryamkin means Tanev is gone.
Tanev is likely gone regardless, but this would confirm it.
I think the wife stuff can be chalked up to age, they were pretty young to be here on their own, it might just be Nik and spouse needed to grow up a little and realize how good of an opportunity this is for their lives. A 3 year deal and they're set for life in Russia.
I have a hard time agreeing with his dislike of Willie D. He's a nice man (I actually met him once in the Olympic Village) but he was far out of his skill set here. It sounds like Nik already likes Greens approach.
So I do think there's reason to think a lot has changed, but we'll see. We're taking about a 5/6 d man here so either way its not a huge issue, just a 'nice to have' if it doesn't work out. He also might be good for a trade, there has to be another GM that would love to give him a shot if he really can't stand it in Vancouver.
Yeah, agreed. It makes sense from a career point of view to sign with the Canucks and establish himself as an NHLer again. Hopefully things go better for him if he ends up re-signing.
I don't disagree with Willie D being a nice guy, but everything about his NHL coaching career indicates that he doesn't like Russian players. We saw it with Goldobin (benched after his 1st goal as a Canuck) and again with Kovalchuk (4th line minutes, even though he had the most points on the team). And if I recall correctly, it was reported that Tryamkin complained about the coaching staff here. So every single Russian that has played under Willie D as a regular has had bad experiences, seems like more than just a coincidence to me.
6m x 2For those that want Tanev back.... what type of deal are you offering him to stay?