Tanev recalled

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Jovocop
CC Legend
Posts: 3779
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:18 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Jovocop » Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:14 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
damonberryman wrote: So was Kesler's last good shift with one or two small exceptions. He has tremendous value percieved AT THIS POINT IN TIME. As near as I can tell it is going down like an Italian cruise ship. Weber will take us over the hump. If Kes comes back to his potential it might take us over the hump.

Are you saying that Kesler may not get back to his form from last year?

I find that notion to be ridiculous.

Every single NHL player goes through slumps, Keslers poor start was predictable given his injury and his recent slide is also fairly normal.

As for Weber, love to have him, but if we can get to game 7 of a cup final with out him we can also win the dam cup with out him.

I would "not" trade Ryan Keslers and his long term 5 mill contract for Weber and his soon to expire contract.

Personally I though Ryan Suter was the better defenseman in the Preds Series last year.
Weber could be a hothead at times taking stupid penalties while Suter is much composed.

User avatar
Orcasfan
CC Veteran
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 8:28 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Orcasfan » Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:32 pm

It's interesting how so many of these threads end up at the same place - "what about Weber or Suter?" :lol: And, it's understandable. Ever since that first playoff loss to Chicago, our D has been under the microscope. And, to be fair to Gillis, it has improved since then. But, unfortunately, good young D men often take time to develop to their full potential. So, while we wait for Edler to reach his true apex of skill, it looks like we need yet another solid, dependable top 4 D man. I do believe, by the way, that Edler will continue improving - he's 25 (nearly 26), has blossomed as an offensive D man (he did last year too, despite his injury), and we already know he can really lay on some huge hits. He's still a little erratic, and he does not have a mean streak, but, otherwise, every other team in the league would love to have him in their top 4!

Unfortunately, Bieksa continues to be his erratic self. :( You just can't rely on the guy to be rock-solid defensively. Maybe he will find last year's form in time for the playoffs. Hammer has been great, but at times somewhat tentative. I think that's understandable, given his injuries last year and off-season surgery. And then there's Salo...

I would love to see Tanev step up and be a real top 4 guy. I just don't think he is ready for that leap yet. I hope he proves me wrong! If he is not ready, then I think there is a good case for Gillis to go out and try to acquire someone who can be put in confidently at that 4th or 5th/6th on the right side. Ideally, of course, Suter would be a great addition. But he is a left-shooter, so probably plays on that left side too. It seems that a lot of teams have a dearth of "righties", including the Canucks! (Weber, of course is a rightie!). Another reason why we miss Salo so much. It seems that this factor is more significant than we realize in determining just who gets to play where on our D. By the way, Tanev is a rightie! :)

Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Potatoe1 » Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:43 pm

Jovocop wrote:
Weber could be a hothead at times taking stupid penalties while Suter is much composed.
It wasnt that so much as it was Kesler blowing by him several times in the series last year.

Weber did a nice job against the Sedins, but against a better skating forward with similar size and strength i though he was exposed.

Sutter was just an absolute rock in that series.

Dont get me wrong Weber is a physical beast with a rocket point shot, but I don't think he skates that well and his outlet passing isn't that great either.

He's a great player and I would love to have him but I think Canuck fans in particular over rate him a tad.

Like I said, I though Sutter was the better player in that series and is rarely talked about at all.

User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by coco_canuck » Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:11 pm

Potatoe1 wrote: Like I said, I though Sutter was the better player in that series and is rarely talked about at all.
I think Weber is a better fit because he brings the element of size and toughness the D could use, he plays the right side, and replaces Salo's point-shot on the PP.

Having said that, Suter is the better defensive player by a fair margin. I could see Weber's speed being less of an issue in Vancouver if he's paired with Edler. Although Salo is a smooth skater, he's not as fast as he used to be, but by playing good a good positional game, and having Edler as the main offensive catalyst, Salo's speed is never a concern.

It really comes down to what side they play the best, and right now the Canucks need is on the right side.

I really don't see either ending up here. Weber may have Vancouver on the top of his list, but I can't imagine Poile trading him here as long as they're in the same conference. I also don't think Weber will turn down an opportunity to sign with a team like Philadelphia, or any other solid market and contender in the East or even West.

The word on Weber is that he really wants to win a Cup, and any contender that gets him will have a legitimate chance of winning the Cup with him in the line-up.

The most likely way Weber would end up in Vancouver is if he somehow get to RFA status next year as a Pred, or if he walks as UFA, unlikely it gets to that point unless he's traded to a non-contender or if the Preds are dumb enough to let him walk.

wienerdog
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by wienerdog » Mon Jan 23, 2012 1:19 pm

To add to the Suter vs Weber speculations:

While I agree that I'd much rather have Suter - even NAS fans on HFBoards claim that it's Suts that makes Weber look better than he really is - I remember reading that Suter isn't keen on playing in Canada. He's American and wants to stay South of the border.

If Suter is a no-go, hey, I'd still love to have Weber on this team, but the cost is going to be thermonuclear to get him.

I think we'd be better off by simply targeting a lesser defenseman that fits our mold better than what we have - ie. replace Ballard with a guy that can play the right side. A blueline budget spread over 5 guys of similar calibre is a great way to go, it's just that Ballard has been a poor fit due to his struggles on the off-side.

Really, this problem is easily solved by trading one of Alberts or Rome for an equivalent guy that comfortably plays the right side. It's not fucking rocket science and I don't get why this hasn't been done already. Should have been so in the off-season.

User avatar
Hank
CC Legend
Posts: 3946
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:33 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Hank » Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:36 pm

Tanev sent down.

Waffle
CC Veteran
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:38 am

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Waffle » Mon Jan 23, 2012 5:42 pm

Wienerdog, getting a right sided right shooting defenceman at a reasonable cap hit without giving up a good roster player to a team that doesn’t mind being a trading partner does seem almost like rocket science.

Were there any right sided D-men free agents in the summer that could have been signed at a cap hit that would have fit the team? If there were, then you are right, the Canucks screwed up.

Looking around teams in the NHL, I don’t see any teams looking for a left sided D-man like Alberts, and it is hard to find any teams that have depth on the right side. I think it is very unlikey Vancouver can make the kind of trade you suggest. The teams who might have #4/#5/#6 right D-man types available because they have someone in the system who can take that spot seem to be looking for scoring help up front, not left sided D-men. Who would you give up? I think that is why there has been trade talk about Mason Raymond, but do you really want to give him up for a 5/6 D-man?

User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8354
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Island Nucklehead » Mon Jan 23, 2012 6:34 pm

Hank wrote:Tanev sent down.
Must mean Salo is almost ready to return?

Edit: Yup

wienerdog
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by wienerdog » Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:11 am

Waffle wrote:Wienerdog, getting a right sided right shooting defenceman at a reasonable cap hit without giving up a good roster player to a team that doesn’t mind being a trading partner does seem almost like rocket science.

Were there any right sided D-men free agents in the summer that could have been signed at a cap hit that would have fit the team? If there were, then you are right, the Canucks screwed up.

Looking around teams in the NHL, I don’t see any teams looking for a left sided D-man like Alberts, and it is hard to find any teams that have depth on the right side. I think it is very unlikey Vancouver can make the kind of trade you suggest. The teams who might have #4/#5/#6 right D-man types available because they have someone in the system who can take that spot seem to be looking for scoring help up front, not left sided D-men. Who would you give up? I think that is why there has been trade talk about Mason Raymond, but do you really want to give him up for a 5/6 D-man?
Fair enough, Waffle, that's partly frustration speaking. Making the move mid-season is tougher, but hey, that's the price a guy pays for not cleaning up his mess when he had the chance.

I really like the guy and all, and he's made a ton of great moves, but Gillis should have addressed this in the off-season. This one is really is a glaring fuck-up IMO.

The entire known universe knew that Ballard playing the right side was already a failed experiment last season.

Thus moving forward with the same mix of guys - ie. Rome and Alberts, more left side guys - as #6 pairings with KB4 was a recipe for disaster. Adding Sulzer didnt help - he can't play the right side for shit either.

How does the saying go? Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

It's 4 AM and I'm not going to go looking for the FA's are that could have been signed, but the bottom line is that this current left-side overload on D is not a new problem. Perhaps it meant that KB4 - a $4.2M #5 dman - should have been dealt in the off-season, but that Gillis was too stubborn to do so. Or maybe he couldn't get a decent return for him. It doesn't matter, because if he was going to stay under any circumstance, we needed another right-side guy.

This should have been a double priority considering one of our only two RH shots is Salo. The reserve is Tanev. Not exactly models of durability, especially come playoff time.

All I know is that the blueline is the glaring weakness of this team now; it was when we started the season; it was going into Free Agency.

I'm sorry, but managing to trade for or sign a decent RH shot #6 guy in the off-season is not the tallest order a GM would face.

If there was nothing available in an acceptable salary range, well, that's also on MG b/c of the pricetag on Ballard to begin with. This is the one glaring imbalance he's created here.

We are now witnessing what the love-in for Rome, the re-signing of Alberts, the loss of Ehrhoff and the orginal trade for KB4 all combine into. A mess on the bottom pairing when the T4D are healthy, and a clusterfuck up and down the rotations if Salo or Bieksa go down. If you do add Tanev into the mix, we still have no Plan B if any right-siders get injured.

This is this team's Achilles heel, and I'm calling it: it will bite us in the playoffs if it's not addressed by the deadline. There's no way Salo can shoulder that kind of load and not get injured.

Benjo
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 844
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 9:39 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Benjo » Tue Jan 24, 2012 10:27 am

I'm actually pretty happy that Gillis stayed away from free agency for the most part this offseason and locked up a few returnees instead. This past free agent frenzy was flooded with terrible contracts on terrible terms, I can't wait for Gillis to pry valuable pieces away from those teams thanks to all of those awful, immovable contracts they handed out. Seeing 3rd and 4th liners get 3-5 year contracts (Ward, Talbot) was enough for me to give a big NO THANK YOU and that is without mentioning the Leino / Ehrhoff contracts.

damonberryman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1084
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 9:07 am

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by damonberryman » Tue Jan 24, 2012 11:14 am

coco_canuck wrote:
Blob Mckenzie wrote: That doesn't worry me too much right now Fred. MG can always make some cap room and the Italians have shown they aren't afraid to dine on a contract or two if he can't find takers for guys like Alberts or Ballard.
Unless another contender makes huge additions, I wouldn't be too concerned about the deadline acquisitions of other teams.

This current Canucks squad is a stage where they control their own fate. When they're clicking, no team can beat them, and that's not a homer exaggeration.

It comes down to the Canucks being relatively healthy and performing at their best.

I would be more concerned about this team avoiding serious injuries, and Gillis adding another role player or two by the deadline, than the cap space of other teams.
Absofreakinglutely. Bang on. Like you say and what you said. Hallelujah! You speak with the tongue of Angels. Could not agree more plus I love the picture that comes with your posts. Are you married? Is that really you? How do feel about older men with criminal pasts and little money. Ooooooo. Maybe I should rephrase that?

Fred
CC Legend
Posts: 3434
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Fred » Tue Jan 24, 2012 11:39 am

The chance of teams making it to the SC healthy is a long shot, bit of a fantasy really IMO. That's why EVERY team carries black aces and they are allowed a larger roster during the play-offs. Some teams are built for the physical demands and play in a manner that controls the physicality rather than be the target, the ole hammer or the nail. To me the style and build of the Vcr team is to muck aligned to being the nail and that's why we suffer a disproportionate number of injuries.

So the wise GM tries to cover his risks factor by bringing in players that would be duplicated in the regular season. Where the Canucks would be without Lapierre or Higgins last year God only knows. Where we do have an advantage this season is we have three scoring lines ( if you include the Sedin line :D ....only joking ) which we never had last season, Malhotra even if he had played was no Sidney Crosby :D We had 2 scoring lines and two checking line fundamentally.

IMO this team more than most need insurance players more than most. There's only so many players you can carry and so you need as best quality replacements in your farm system that you can and I'm afraid that might be our undoing
cheers

User avatar
Tciso
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1854
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:44 am

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Tciso » Tue Jan 24, 2012 11:42 am

Blob Mckenzie wrote:
griz wrote:I think Rome is great to have on the team. He's one of our tougher players.

That's more of an indictment of how this team is constructed than an endorsement of Aaron Rome's toughness.

I have no problem with Rome as a 7 or 8 guy whatsoever. When he is being asked to play on the top two pairings it looks like a Chinese fire drill out there. He's way out of his element playing 20 minutes a night.
Funny how most #5/6 d-men are :) Rome is a great fit with the team in the 5 or 6 spot, and may be a top 4 some day. Given his price, and our injury woes, we kinda need to keep him. Tanev, however, might be a good fit for 20 minutes if we need another top 4 due to injuries.
The Cup is soooooo ours!!!!!!!

ESQ
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2579
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by ESQ » Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:30 pm

wienerdog wrote:All I know is that the blueline is the glaring weakness of this team now; it was when we started the season; it was going into Free Agency.
...This is this team's Achilles heel, and I'm calling it: it will bite us in the playoffs if it's not addressed by the deadline. There's no way Salo can shoulder that kind of load and not get injured.
I agree with most of your points, but I don't think I'd call it our "glaring weakness". The Canucks still have one of the better d-corps in the league.

I think the problem in the off-season was there was only one Dman available who perfectly fit our needs, and that was Ehroff. Unfortunately for him, we were the one team that perfectly complemented his abilities and made him look better than he is. Getting that kind of dman was so difficult this off-season that Ehroff became the highest-paid Dman in the league, so I can't fault GMMG too much for that. Look at Chicago - I guarantee they envisioned an upgrade when they traded Campbell, but there was none to be had, and unless they thought they were doing "addition by subtraction," they made their team worse.

I went back to previous Cup winners because I thought most of them had the big-minute, big-production #1 dman, but I was wrong. These four Dmen put up huge minutes when they won: Duncan Keith 28:11, Lidstrom 26:49, Pronger 30:11, Chara 27:39, Niedermayer 29:51.

But what was more interesting was that the "#1 dmen" usually played far more minutes the year after they won, when they couldn't repeat. This includes Lidstrom (30 min plus in 06 and 07 playoffs), Dan Boyle (from 21:24 to 25:56 the next year, up to 28 min with Sharks), Kris Letang (though I don't know if he was truly the #1 when they won, but he's up from 19:18 to 26:33 last postseason). In the Avalanche/Devils/Wings years, they all had 25+ minute defensemen, though I can't find icetime stats from pre-2000.

So the conclusion I've drawn is that Cup champions typically platoon their D-corps, and teams that don't have the horses to go all the way end up riding their #1 guy harder but can't advance. The only players that I looked at whose minutes peaked a championship team was Duncan Keith and Pronger/Niedermayer. Though Niedermayer logged 28+ minutes on non-championship teams throughout his postseason career.

So even if you have that bona-fide #1 dman, if you're riding him 30 minutes a game, chances are you're not going deep because the rest of your d-corps is too weak. Most championship teams have two top-pairs, who play around 23-27 minutes a game

wienerdog
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 370
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by wienerdog » Tue Jan 24, 2012 3:37 pm

ESQ wrote:
wienerdog wrote:All I know is that the blueline is the glaring weakness of this team now; it was when we started the season; it was going into Free Agency.
...This is this team's Achilles heel, and I'm calling it: it will bite us in the playoffs if it's not addressed by the deadline. There's no way Salo can shoulder that kind of load and not get injured.
I agree with most of your points, but I don't think I'd call it our "glaring weakness". The Canucks still have one of the better d-corps in the league.

I think the problem in the off-season was there was only one Dman available who perfectly fit our needs, and that was Ehroff. Unfortunately for him, we were the one team that perfectly complemented his abilities and made him look better than he is. Getting that kind of dman was so difficult this off-season that Ehroff became the highest-paid Dman in the league, so I can't fault GMMG too much for that. Look at Chicago - I guarantee they envisioned an upgrade when they traded Campbell, but there was none to be had, and unless they thought they were doing "addition by subtraction," they made their team worse.

I went back to previous Cup winners because I thought most of them had the big-minute, big-production #1 dman, but I was wrong. These four Dmen put up huge minutes when they won: Duncan Keith 28:11, Lidstrom 26:49, Pronger 30:11, Chara 27:39, Niedermayer 29:51.

But what was more interesting was that the "#1 dmen" usually played far more minutes the year after they won, when they couldn't repeat. This includes Lidstrom (30 min plus in 06 and 07 playoffs), Dan Boyle (from 21:24 to 25:56 the next year, up to 28 min with Sharks), Kris Letang (though I don't know if he was truly the #1 when they won, but he's up from 19:18 to 26:33 last postseason). In the Avalanche/Devils/Wings years, they all had 25+ minute defensemen, though I can't find icetime stats from pre-2000.

So the conclusion I've drawn is that Cup champions typically platoon their D-corps, and teams that don't have the horses to go all the way end up riding their #1 guy harder but can't advance. The only players that I looked at whose minutes peaked a championship team was Duncan Keith and Pronger/Niedermayer. Though Niedermayer logged 28+ minutes on non-championship teams throughout his postseason career.

So even if you have that bona-fide #1 dman, if you're riding him 30 minutes a game, chances are you're not going deep because the rest of your d-corps is too weak. Most championship teams have two top-pairs, who play around 23-27 minutes a game
Good response, ESQ. A couple of points:

- You're absolutely right when you say that we have one of the better bluelines in the League, but it's still the glaring weakness of this team. When you're a Contender, you're weakest link is still pretty damn good, but it bloody well has to be to match up against the other powerhouses in the NHL. IMO, our blueline needs to improve.

- It's not weak because of personnel per se - Hamhuis, Bieksa, Edler, Salo, and Ballard are a pretty damn good T5. It's weak b/c of the poor balance that has resulted in a left-side overload. It should've been addressable and MG has the $$ allocations for defense right, so there should have been room to maneuver. It's a funky mix - it was a problem last year and it's still a problem this year.

- I don't agree that the guy to fix this problem was Ehrhoff - we really miss his departure now, but we don't need another $5M guy on our bottom pairing. This problem is addressed with a $1.5M guy that can steady out KB4's play. Hell, if Rome could play the right side, we'd not be having this discussion (well, ok maybe we would because he can't move up the lineup for shit). Which is why I keep harping on the fact that a $1.5M #6 guy shouldn't have been too hard to negotiate for in the off season.

- I agree that a playoff d-line should be platooned, and not lean heavily on one guy. Gillis had this right from the get go. The problem again is the makeup of said d-corps - he had a poor fit in KB4 last year, and he decided to keep him without making the adjustments to make AV comfortable using him. It seems pretty clear that the caoch still doesn't trust him, and I will have an aneurysm if the guy is on the bench again in clutch playoff games while rookies take the ice. The fix should have been either a) parlay Ballard into two better-than-Alberts-and/or-Rome #5-6 guys or b) get a RH dman that can play with him on the bottom pairing. That would result in more balanced ice-time for everyone.

- I'm not sure if it got lost in the mix, but I'm not advocating a Weber-like player. I'm talking about one solid RH #6 guy to balance our blueline. Not a $7M+ #1 dman.

Post Reply