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

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

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Potatoe1 »

wienerdog wrote: - 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.
Full agreement, if we stay healthy we are fine, but with an injury to the top4 we are much worse. Last season we could survive one injury to the top4 and we still had a very good group.

That IMO is going to be what breaks our back this post season should it not be addressed.

On the positive side our forwards look much better. Adding a big gritty forward to the second line is huge and Hodgson is one of the most productive 3rd liners in the league.

Our 4th line also looks a lot better and is fully capable of playing a defensive role against the best players in the league.

I would still like a 3/4 with some toughness who can bump Weise and move into the top9 if there is an injury, but that is not a significant piece.

And yeah when our defense is healthy we are the best team in the league IMO, but 1 injury changes a lot.

- 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.
You are assuming that Ballard can move up into the top4 if he plays on the left side, I'm not sure that's the case.

- 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.
If we had dumped Ballard and signed Ehrhoff, there is just no discussion here. Ehrhoff plays both sides, and both special teams. He would likely drop Salo to the 3rd pairing and second unit power play which would be ideal.

He is pretty much exactly what we are missing.

I know people want a player with more grit, but a gritty version of Ehrhoff simply isn't available at a price we could afford.

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 »

Potatoe1 wrote: I know people want a player with more grit, but a gritty version of Ehrhoff simply isn't available at a price we could afford.
Losing Hoff really hurts when a player like Salo gets injured.

Maybe I'm overvaluing Tanev, but I don't think we're as fucked as some think if one of the top 4 gets injured. We saw how the Canucks deployed Tanev against San Jose, and he did well stabilizing the 2nd pair and allowed the 1st and 3rd pairing to play within their means.

Also, I think Salo's absence was further compounded by the emotional letdown after the Boston game along with physical fatigue after the most challenging stretch of the season for the Canucks.

Things don't get any easier in the playoffs, but the fact that Tanev played in the Cup Final, and how Rome moved into the top 4 during various points of the post-season, I think there's enough internal depth and experience to overcome a big injury to the defence.

Where it gets dicey is if two top guys go down.

Gillis runs the team because he sees and understands things that we as fans simply don't, but I don't see an available top-4 defenceman that would give us an appreciably better chance of winning.

Casting aside the Suter and Webers, the top defenceman available is Tim Gleason. I like Gleason, but me thinks he's coming with a very expensive price-tag.

Considering teams like Philly and Boston that are desperate for another top 4 d-man, Gillis will have to seriously overpay to get Gleason, which is something I'm not sure he will do.

Visnovksi is also a player I like, but not only does he have another year left on his deal at a significant cap-hit, but he will also be someone Gillis would have to overpay to get.

The rest of the available d-men are the likes of Gill, Schultz and possibly Oduya, who are 3rd pairing D-men, and in the case of Gill, I really doubt he can be effective on a skating team like the Canucks.

Having said that, I would certainly take either Schultz or Oduya as depth players for the run, but neither is really going to be the guy we're really looking for, and if a top guy goes down, the most likely candidates to replace an injured player will be either Rome or Tanev.

wienerdog
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by wienerdog »

Potatoe1 wrote:If we had dumped Ballard and signed Ehrhoff, there is just no discussion here. Ehrhoff plays both sides, and both special teams. He would likely drop Salo to the 3rd pairing and second unit power play which would be ideal.

He is pretty much exactly what we are missing.

I know people want a player with more grit, but a gritty version of Ehrhoff simply isn't available at a price we could afford.
100% agreed on Ehrhoff over Ballard, pot, but I guess there came a point in the contract negotiations where we knew that wasn't going to happen. Mistake #1? It's scary to think how well balanced this team would be - right through the entire lineup - with Ehrhoff on the roster.

*pauses to wipe drool off keyboard*

Moving on, looking at the situation now that Ehrhoff is gone: Mistake #2 is having a blueline that is now out of whack, even when healthy. I'm also not convinced that KB4 can fill in if Edler or Hammer go down either, but I know Rome and Alberts can't.

MG's made a grave mistake with KB4. And before S_C or RD jump on this, the mistake is not in last year, it's in this season. As pot already pointed out, Ehrhoff made the Ballard problem a relative non-issue; Ballard was an insurance policy that didn't really pan out. But Gillis should have dealt with this in the off-season. Even if it meant taking a bath to fix the problem. Ballard is a really, really bad fit here on many different levels.

I just don't see another trip to the Finals w/o some personnel changes, let alone a Cup.

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

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Potatoe1 »

wienerdog wrote:
100% agreed on Ehrhoff over Ballard, pot, but I guess there came a point in the contract negotiations where we knew that wasn't going to happen. Mistake #1? It's scary to think how well balanced this team would be - right through the entire lineup - with Ehrhoff on the roster.

*pauses to wipe drool off keyboard*

Moving on, looking at the situation now that Ehrhoff is gone: Mistake #2 is having a blueline that is now out of whack, even when healthy. I'm also not convinced that KB4 can fill in if Edler or Hammer go down either, but I know Rome and Alberts can't.

MG's made a grave mistake with KB4. And before S_C or RD jump on this, the mistake is not in last year, it's in this season. As pot already pointed out, Ehrhoff made the Ballard problem a relative non-issue; Ballard was an insurance policy that didn't really pan out. But Gillis should have dealt with this in the off-season. Even if it meant taking a bath to fix the problem. Ballard is a really, really bad fit here on many different levels.

I just don't see another trip to the Finals w/o some personnel changes, let alone a Cup.

I dont have much of a problem with the Ballard trade. We gave up a lot but Gillis is at the mercy of his pro scouts and I understand that these things do happen.

Every GM fucks up, but when you fuck up admit it and fix it.

I don't care how or why it happened but when you have a 4.25 mill defenseman and the coaching staff deems him unplayable in the most important game in the history of the franchise, you need to do everything possible to move that player.

Not only does it seem as though Gillis didn't try to move him, but he seems to have kept the player at the expense of another defenseman who seemed to be an almost perfect fit for this team.

I like Mike Gillis, but if the Canucks go into the playoffs with the current group and are booted because of injuries to the top4, I really don't know how I will feel.

To basically lose out on a year where the team seems so close, over such an obvious mistake just seems inexcusable to me.

wienerdog
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by wienerdog »

Potatoe1 wrote:
wienerdog wrote:
100% agreed on Ehrhoff over Ballard, pot, but I guess there came a point in the contract negotiations where we knew that wasn't going to happen. Mistake #1? It's scary to think how well balanced this team would be - right through the entire lineup - with Ehrhoff on the roster.

*pauses to wipe drool off keyboard*

Moving on, looking at the situation now that Ehrhoff is gone: Mistake #2 is having a blueline that is now out of whack, even when healthy. I'm also not convinced that KB4 can fill in if Edler or Hammer go down either, but I know Rome and Alberts can't.

MG's made a grave mistake with KB4. And before S_C or RD jump on this, the mistake is not in last year, it's in this season. As pot already pointed out, Ehrhoff made the Ballard problem a relative non-issue; Ballard was an insurance policy that didn't really pan out. But Gillis should have dealt with this in the off-season. Even if it meant taking a bath to fix the problem. Ballard is a really, really bad fit here on many different levels.

I just don't see another trip to the Finals w/o some personnel changes, let alone a Cup.

I dont have much of a problem with the Ballard trade. We gave up a lot but Gillis is at the mercy of his pro scouts and I understand that these things do happen.

Every GM fucks up, but when you fuck up admit it and fix it.

I don't care how or why it happened but when you have a 4.25 mill defenseman and the coaching staff deems him unplayable in the most important game in the history of the franchise, you need to do everything possible to move that player.

Not only does it seem as though Gillis didn't try to move him, but he seems to have kept the player at the expense of another defenseman who seemed to be an almost perfect fit for this team.

I like Mike Gillis, but if the Canucks go into the playoffs with the current group and are booted because of injuries to the top4, I really don't know how I will feel.

To basically lose out on a year where the team seems so close, over such an obvious mistake just seems inexcusable to me.
Bingo. We're on exactly the same page. You've summed it up exactly for me.

No problem with the KB4 trade at the time, huge problem with it now.

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

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Fred »

And at some time I think MG has to man up realize and confront his mistake, make a black mark in Lorne Henning ledger and don't compound this by using up valuable Cap Space when we're this close.

To be truthful I remembered Ballard from his days with the Coyotes and admired his game..I thought it was a good trade but it hasn't worked out so move on and forget the loss of space and a draft pick
cheers

ESQ
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2835
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by ESQ »

When I've watched Ballard the last few months, I've seen a guy who can skate end-to-end through an entire team. His skating and puckhandling are his biggest strengths, and I'm not surprised at all that he won the fastest skater competition.

But what happens after his glorious rushes is he has no support from his teammates, the puck gets turned over and out of the offensive zone in a hurry with Ballard still deep.

To me, it looks like Ballard isn't being allowed to play to his strengths. If the team were to practice what to do on a DMan rush and how to support the puck on that kind of zone entry, then you're not seeing as many turnovers by Ballard. He's also perhaps making smarter plays in his own end, because he has the confidence to go to his go-to play and skate the puck out himself.

The last time the Canucks have had a defenseman who skates with the puck like Ballard would have to be Jovanovski, and he did the same thing all the time - skate the puck end-to-end, lose it deep in the offensive zone, no puck support and now he's caught deep with the puck going the other way.

Properly utilized, Ballard can be a key player. Imagine adding his zone entry to the arsenal on the powerplay, particularly now that everyone is on to the red-line drop pass.

Looking at his skill set - great skater, physical, some offense, (used to be) durable - I'm not surprised at all Gillis went after him. Unfortunately, its turned out to be a square peg round hole situation, whereas Erhoff was a greased-up round peg that fit right up in there perfectly. Unfortunately, Erhoff wasn't going to be a $5 million player on this team, unless we gave him a 10 year deal too, he was looking for $6 million-plus, which makes it easier to swallow.

ESQ
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2835
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by ESQ »

Also, after having my head swimming in RH/LH defensemen all week in this thread, I laughed when I heard Kuzma on the pre-game show yesterday saying "I don't really believe in that right-side/left-side stuff". Oh, how I wish we had a Shark Circle in our local media :scowl:

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

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Fred »

ESQ wrote:Also, after having my head swimming in RH/LH defensemen all week in this thread, I laughed when I heard Kuzma on the pre-game show yesterday saying "I don't really believe in that right-side/left-side stuff". Oh, how I wish we had a Shark Circle in our local media :scowl:
Kinda puts an asterisk beside future Kuzma comments
cheers

damonberryman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1123
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 9:07 am

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by damonberryman »

I think the reason we focus on Weber is due to the reports coming out of Nashville that says Vancouver is at the top of his list. This makes sense given he is a local boy and like most local boys who leave, he wants to come home. Same as Hamhuis and from the team so there are good reasons for the focus but it is probably being beat into the ground. I had never considered Suter as 'better' than Weber. I see them as playing different but complementary styles. Sort of like Seidenberg and the big ape. Those pairs are probably two of the best I have seen.

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 »

damonberryman wrote:I think the reason we focus on Weber is due to the reports coming out of Nashville that says Vancouver is at the top of his list.
\

What reports out of Nashville?

If you have any links, please share them.

I've heard read on hockey boards from supposed friends of Weber who suggest Vancouver is on top of his list, but I haven't seen anything official about that. If I or someone else missed it, we'd like to see it.

damonberryman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1123
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 9:07 am

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by damonberryman »

It was here in this forum I read the report where Weber indicated his first choice was Van and this report goes back to the start of the season. Sorry I cannot put my fingers on it but it was there.

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 »

Potatoe1 wrote: If we had dumped Ballard and signed Ehrhoff, there is just no discussion here. Ehrhoff plays both sides, and both special teams. He would likely drop Salo to the 3rd pairing and second unit power play which would be ideal.
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive.

I don't think MG made a decision between Ballard and Ehrhoff.

I wish I could find the link, but it was radio or TV interview where Gillis said they were not going to give Ehrhoff close to the money he was demanding because it would be unfair for the players on this team that have taken pay cuts to play here. He was basically saying he couldn't justify giving Hoff the same yearly salary or higher than Kesler, nor would he be willing to give him one of those long-term deals when he rejected the same notion for the twins a few years ago.

From his standpoint as GM and former agent, he certainly seems to believe that players do care about the type of deals their teammates sign, especially if they took less to be on a certain team. There is a distinction between signing your own player and adding UFA's from other teams, because those on the free market with no real loyalty to this team can't as easily be expected to take less to come here, but even that has been the case with the likes of Hamhuis.

You can certainly disagree with that philosophy, but again, I don't think it had anything to do with Ballard. If Gillis was prepared to pay Ehrhoff, he would have found a way to make it work, and that may have included moving Ballard.

Ballard wasn't going to bring much value in return this summer anyways, and if they want to add another top d-man, they can still find a way to make it work. Ballard doesn't bring great value for his salary, but he's still a capable and fairly solid d-man that adds to the depth of this team, and just dumping him doesn't really benefit the Canucks.

If Gillis had dumped Ballard in the summer without replacing him with a better player, our defensive depth would have suffered. While I agree that Ballard's role hasn't really changed much under this coaching staff, but I think it's too premature to say that he'll be sitting in big playoff games. He certainly won't be in the top 4 during the playoffs, but he could have a regular role on the 3rd pair.

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

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by Orcasfan »

Well, I'm not so sold on Erhoff being worth his salary as some are. :look: He had his strengths and weaknesses. Anyway, that's water under the bridge...As far as Ballard goes, I was also calling for his trade early on, but I understand why MG balked, and committed to him this season. And, now, I have no idea who could be acquired that would be an upgrade! I think one of the requirements would be for a D who could be comfortable playing right or left.

In some ways, Ballard has made improvements, but his crucial (especially in the playoffs!) weakness is his turn-over rate.:cry: Slotting him in at the 3rd pairing does minimize the potential damage, while adding a fast skating D man to that pairing. One interesting development recently is Ballard stepping up as fighter. I think he is show-casing his "grit" because he desperately wants to be a regular on this team, even if it's only #5/6 D, and even if it takes a willingness to fight! That I applaud! :D

nuckster
MVP
MVP
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Tanev recalled

Post by nuckster »

Potatoe1 wrote:
wienerdog wrote:
I just don't see another trip to the Finals w/o some personnel changes, let alone a Cup.

I dont have much of a problem with the Ballard trade. We gave up a lot but Gillis is at the mercy of his pro scouts and I understand that these things do happen.

Every GM fucks up, but when you fuck up admit it and fix it.

I don't care how or why it happened but when you have a 4.25 mill defenseman and the coaching staff deems him unplayable in the most important game in the history of the franchise, you need to do everything possible to move that player.

Not only does it seem as though Gillis didn't try to move him, but he seems to have kept the player at the expense of another defenseman who seemed to be an almost perfect fit for this team.

I like Mike Gillis, but if the Canucks go into the playoffs with the current group and are booted because of injuries to the top4, I really don't know how I will feel.

To basically lose out on a year where the team seems so close, over such an obvious mistake just seems inexcusable to me.
For what it's worth, i agree totally with this post by Pots
cc oldtimer

Post Reply