Would MG trade Tanev for Del Zotto straight up? The Canucks need an offensive defenseman to run the powerplay. AV would love to have Tanev.mathonwy wrote:I think the trade is a wash (at this point of time) for both teams. You're trading an offensive Dman in MDZ for a defensive DMan in Klein. Big age difference though. Klein is 29 and MDZ is 23.Lancer wrote:Del Zotto traded to Nashville for Klein.
Straight.
Up.
A steal for Nashville, without a doubt. Yeah, Klein is a solid D man but yeesh - I do believe Del Zotto has better upside.
Makes you wonder the rationale behind it because you have to believe Sather had better offers from elsewhere. Makes you also wonder if Nashville is done with its blueline - even if the next moves aren't until after the season.
Of course it doesn't really address the up front deficiencies of Smashville..
Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
Moderator: Referees
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
MG doesn't have the cojones to pull that off.Jovocop wrote: Would MG trade Tanev for Del Zotto straight up? The Canucks need an offensive defenseman to run the powerplay. AV would love to have Tanev.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
Why would you make that trade? Tanev's stats are better than Del Zotto's across the board plus he is far more reliable defensively.
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt "
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
No, but he has the brains not to.SKYO wrote:MG doesn't have the cojones to pull that off.Jovocop wrote: Would MG trade Tanev for Del Zotto straight up? The Canucks need an offensive defenseman to run the powerplay. AV would love to have Tanev.
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
I have no idea why some people are so quick to suggest trading Tanev.
The acquisitions of Tanev and Stanton have been two of Gillis’ most deft moves to date. The fan base cries every day that the cupboards are bare and that the core is getting to old, yet some suggest moving one of our best young assets for a guy with a bunch of question marks. I don’t get it.
Moving forward, Tanev may be the last defenseman I would want to see moved.
The acquisitions of Tanev and Stanton have been two of Gillis’ most deft moves to date. The fan base cries every day that the cupboards are bare and that the core is getting to old, yet some suggest moving one of our best young assets for a guy with a bunch of question marks. I don’t get it.
Moving forward, Tanev may be the last defenseman I would want to see moved.
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
As I mentioned before, the Canucks need an offensive defenseman.Listercat wrote:Why would you make that trade? Tanev's stats are better than Del Zotto's across the board plus he is far more reliable defensively.
Del Zotto, 292GP, 26G (8 of the 26 were powerplay goals), 95A, -4, 0.41ppg
Tanev, 143GP, 7G, 16A, +19, 0.16ppg.
1. Tanev > Zotto defensively but Zotto > Tanev offensively
2. Zotto is younger than Tanev
3. Zotto used to play for Torts
- RyanGinger
- CC Veteran
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:20 pm
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
Traded Hodgson for Kassian, which at the time was pretty crazy.SKYO wrote:MG doesn't have the cojones to pull that off.Jovocop wrote: Would MG trade Tanev for Del Zotto straight up? The Canucks need an offensive defenseman to run the powerplay. AV would love to have Tanev.
Cojones, yes. Brains, not so much.
22-33-17
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
Don't get me wrong, I love Tanev as a player. He is the best young defenseman that the Canucks have. Stanton is good but I doubt his value is not as high as Tanev. To get some help on the powerplay, the Canucks need to give up something for it. Tanev is definitely one of the players that the Rangers would be interested.herb wrote:I have no idea why some people are so quick to suggest trading Tanev.
The acquisitions of Tanev and Stanton have been two of Gillis’ most deft moves to date. The fan base cries every day that the cupboards are bare and that the core is getting to old, yet some suggest moving one of our best young assets for a guy with a bunch of question marks. I don’t get it.
Moving forward, Tanev may be the last defenseman I would want to see moved.
- BladesofSteel
- CC Hall of Fan Member
- Posts: 1852
- Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:29 pm
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
Tanev has more trade value than that of a struggling MDZ who has been known to be on the block for some time now.
Tanev > Klein
Tanev > MDZ
Tanev > Klein
Tanev > MDZ
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
That is a fair assessment.BladesofSteel wrote:Tanev has more trade value than that of a struggling MDZ who has been known to be on the block for some time now.
Tanev > Klein
Tanev > MDZ
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
Torts was the coach of the 2011/12 Rags when Del Zotto had his most productive season of his young career.
It would probably be safe to assume that if MDZ WAS worth it, the Canucks would have pulled the trigger on a trade.
It would probably be safe to assume that if MDZ WAS worth it, the Canucks would have pulled the trigger on a trade.
- Island Nucklehead
- MVP
- Posts: 8392
- Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
- Location: Ottawa
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
Yep. It's not like Del Zotto hasn't been on the trade block for a while. I can't imagine that MG wouldn't approach Torts to get his input on the guy.mathonwy wrote:Torts was the coach of the 2011/12 Rags when Del Zotto had his most productive season of his young career.
It would probably be safe to assume that if MDZ WAS worth it, the Canucks would have pulled the trigger on a trade.
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
Not to me.RyanGinger wrote:Traded Hodgson for Kassian, which at the time was pretty crazy.SKYO wrote:MG doesn't have the cojones to pull that off.Jovocop wrote: Would MG trade Tanev for Del Zotto straight up? The Canucks need an offensive defenseman to run the powerplay. AV would love to have Tanev.
Cojones, yes. Brains, not so much.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
If the Canucks need (another) offensive defenseman, trade Garrison or Edler.Jovocop wrote:As I mentioned before, the Canucks need an offensive defenseman.Listercat wrote:Why would you make that trade? Tanev's stats are better than Del Zotto's across the board plus he is far more reliable defensively.
Del Zotto, 292GP, 26G (8 of the 26 were powerplay goals), 95A, -4, 0.41ppg
Tanev, 143GP, 7G, 16A, +19, 0.16ppg.
1. Tanev > Zotto defensively but Zotto > Tanev offensively
2. Zotto is younger than Tanev
3. Zotto used to play for Torts
In the NHL nowadays you cannot trade your young, cheap useful players and expect to be competitive.
BTW, over the last two seasons Del Zotto has 5 goals, 27 assists and 32 points in 88 games played. Tanev has 7 goals, 13 assists and 20 points in 89 games played, plus he is defensively one of our most consistent players. Tanev’s production is clearly on the upswing, while Del Zotto has been in and out of coach’s doghouses and has seen a massive dip inhis offensive production. Not to mention Tanev is a RHS.
Torts loves Tanev, btw.
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14
Tanev won't be cheap next season with his new contract and imho he will get a crap load of injuries when he's a little older as he's always getting rocked into the boards all the time.
Sell high!
Sell high!
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.