73
Photo Credit: © Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports

Canucks Army Year In Review: Chris Tanev

Since establishing himself as an NHL regular in 2013-14, Chris Tanev has become the new industry standard for defensive defensemen. As the NHL has gotten younger, faster, and more skilled; big, lumbering, physical defensemen have gone the way of the dinosaur. Some would argue the best defense is a good offence, but there’s still a place in the game for players who don’t necessarily offer much in the offensive zone, but can effectively break up passes or zone entries and get the play moving in the other direction. For the past few, Tanev’s made a name for himself doing just that.

Unfortunately, things fell a bit off the rails during the 2017-18 season. He played just 42 games, during which he failed to produce the underlying results that had made him a defensive stalwart in years prior.

Player GP G A P CF% FF%
Chris Tanev 42 2 9 11 47.6% 46.7%

When looking at basic underlying shot metrics, Tanev actually saw minor improvements in both on-ice shot differential (Corsi) and unblocked shot differential (Fenwick), but were still poor enough to be the second-worst performance by each metric of his career. Perhaps more startlingly, the once-heralded Edler-Tanev pairing went completely off the rails, posting an on-ice shot-differential of 39.6%.

This was actually something of a trend for Tanev last season – all three of his regular D partners performed better way from Tanev than Tanev did away from them. While Tanev has traditionally always been a drag on his teams shot-generation, he’s generally made up for it by suppressing enough of the opponent’s shots to make up for the difference. That wasn’t the case in 2017-18, as Tanev posted the worst unblocked shots against rate of his entire career. One possibility for this is that Tanev went from playing under Willie Desjardins to Travis Green. Desjardins infamously relied on rolling four lines regardless of which zone shifts were starting in, and hated line-matching. Travis Green has been his opposite in almost every way, using some of the most extreme zone deployment techniques in the league (at least as far as we can measure).

What’s really concerning however is the differences in year-to-year microstatistics, the little plays that go on to make up or influence underlying shot metrics. Harman Dayal made the point quite eloquently in a recent piece for the Daily Hive:

It appears as if injuries are starting to take a toll on Chris Tanev.

After dominating with his neutral zone defence and puck moving abilities in 2016-17, Chris Tanev took a definitive step back last season.

Particularly surprising was the deterioration of his typically excellent entry defence. In this regard, I’d imagine injuries – he missed 40 games last season – hurt Tanev’s mobility for closing gaps.

On the flipside, one area of tangible improvement was the rate at which Tanev led offensive zone entries.

This makes sense as it was apparent from day one that new head coach Travis Green wanted defenders like Tanev to play a more active role in transition offence.

The data Harman is referencing comes from Corey Snazjder’s tracking project, conveniently visualized by CJ Turturo in this player comparison tool. The data is reflected in percentiles: the higher the number, the more elite company the player in question is keeping.

As you can see, Tanev’s zone entry rate improved significantly under Travis Green, but the rest of his game deteriorated. Uncharacteristically, Tanev finished below league average in shot contributions, controlled zone exits, and entry defense. The difference from year-to-year is stark, to say the least. In just a single season, his rate of controlled entries allowed plummeted from the 94th percentile to the 8th.

The other obvious explanation for Tanev’s poor play is the injury bug. He played just 42 games in 2017-18, making it the third consecutive season in which he’s made fewer appearances than the last. That’s a concerning trend, to say the least.

The Canucks find themselves at a crossroads with Tanev. From a trade perspective, he’s arguably their most valuable moveable asset. He’s also nearing the end of his contract and it’s unclear if he’ll re-sign. What puts the Canucks in a tough spot is that his value is much lower after his poor performance and injury-plagued season than it’s been in quite some time. The team has a choice to make: they could move him sooner rather than later at a significant discount, or gamble on an improved performance and a boost in trade value next season. The latter would come with significant risk. Tanev’s not getting any younger, and there’s a mounting pile of evidence that his play may already be declining.

Of course, this all relies on the assumption that the team is interested in moving him at all. Recent events suggest the team may be dead set on competing for a playoff spot as soon as next season. It’s early yet, but the Canucks need to be prepared to explore all options. Tanev will be a free agent in 2020, and if the Canucks don’t trade him, they may risk losing him for nothing. Especially if he wants to win now.

It’s not as if the Canucks have been doing much of that recently.

  • Burnabybob

    I don’t understand why Benning didn’t trade Tanev before his limited no trade clause took effect last year. His trade value was higher before he suffered this rash of injuries, and Benning could have traded him to any team in the league. What have the Canucks really gotten for Tanev’s services since then? As this article has pointed out, he hasn’t played very well, and even if he had, he wouldn’t have gotten them to the playoffs single handedly. I hope they can deal him at the deadline. He could still be valuable for someone like Toronto trying to add depth for the playoffs.

    • Probably because Tanev is one of the few legit Top 4 defencemen on the team. Depending on what Tanev wants as a UFA, if it’s reasonable, then I’d want to keep him and try to resign him into his early 30’s. We don’t have any Top 4 RHD prospects except for Woo and he’s years away becoming a regular. Stecher is a good but isn’t top pairing material and a Tryamkin return is too much of a question mark.

      • Burnabybob

        The chances of Tanev still being a top four d-man 3-4 years from now when Boeser, Pettersson, Hughes and others are entering their prime is pretty dicey. To me, it would have made far more sense to get a pick or prospect for him who is going to help the team 3-4 years down the road. That’s where management’s focus should be, not on players who are going to make the team only marginally less crappy in the short term.

      • Puck Viking

        If Tanev was traded when Bob said he could have brought back a top RHD prospect in a deal. That prospect would now be battling for a spot on the team. This has been the frustration with Benning all along. Since then what have the Canucks accomplished with Tanev in the line up? The answer is absolutely nothing, tanev now has very little value and the Canucks will continue to do nothing and are years away from making the playoffs.

        So yes had Tanev been moved when he had value the team would be better off.

    • tyhee

      This is a good point. Keeping Tanev illustrates the difference between the retool that Aquilini is rumoured to have wanted and Canucks’ management has tried to accomplish and a classic style tear down and rebuild.

      At the end of the 2015-16 season Chris Tanev had just finished consecutive seasons where he had a FF%Rel of +4.5 and then + 6.2, which are outstanding. By any measure he was a premiere defensive defenceman and he played for Canada in the World Championships, where he distinguished himself and drew considerable notice.

      Otoh, he was already showing signs of being injury prone and had never played more than 70 regular season games in any NHL season. He played a style where he blocked shots and absorbed more hits than almost any other defender. There was every reason to worry about whether his injury problems would continue or even get worse and every reason to worry about whether he’d have quicker age related decline than many due to his style of play.

      The Canucks were coming off a dismal season, their second of the past three (at the time) and there were few, other than optimistic loyal fans, who predicted they were going to be a playoff team any time soon. Further, as Burnabybob points out, he wasn’t all that far from having his ntc kick in.

      So he may have been Canucks’ highest valued asset for trades, while being at a high risk of losing value going forward. He was a prime asset for winning immediately but being a risk to keep in the long term because of the chances of him losing value.

      So the choices were:

      1. Try to make the playoffs in 2016-17 and every season going forward. Tanev was the team’s best defenceman and trading him would hurt their immediate chances of making the playoffs.

      2. Tear down and rebuild. Tanev was arguably the Canuck with the highest trade value in the summer of 2016 and could have commanded a substantial return from a contending team looking for a RHD, largely in future assets.

      The Canucks chose to try to make the playoffs for 2016-17, keeping their prime trade assets and signing Loui Eriksson to a long-term deal. They took a risk. So far it hasn’t panned out.

      • liqueur des fenetres

        They didn’t just take a risk, they stuck with your Option 1 which is a retool instead of going with your Option 2, the rebuild.

        Try imagining the roster if by some miracle they had landed Tavares and Karlsson. They’d look like a solid wild card team with plenty of stable vets in the line up plus a few stars. Benning didn’t sign mentors as the team already had enough of those, he hired depth for a play off push.

        • Defenceman Factory

          Completely wrong. The team can’t score and has a weak defence.In what world do 4th line players get that team to the playoffs? Only an idiot would believe Benning thought he had a reasonable chance of landing Tavares or Karlsson never mind both of them.

          • liqueur des fenetres

            I agree with your comments about the likelihood of signing both of them, but calling Benning an idiot does nothing to further this conversation. You can’t deny that Benning made a pitch for Tavares, the evidence out there is overwhelming, with even the window lickers in agreement. Once JT’s signature was on paper trading Hughes/Juolevi, a conditional first and a roster D would have gotten EK easily. Mission Accomplished!

          • liqueur des fenetres

            Just because you don’t believe it doesn’t make it false or gossip. Someone outed Benning to Friedman on the JT interest. All teams would have received an RFP as JT was hitting the market since his agent is trying to maximize value. Benning replied and someone told Friedman.

            But what don’t you explain what you posted below: “There is a very good chance Tanev would have been traded last deadline if he had not been injured.” Where’s your evidence to support this, especially given the fact that a healthy Tanev is still on the roster.

        • Puck Viking

          The Canucks are one of the worst 3 teams in the NHL. If they did somehow sign Tavares and trade for Karlson they still would not be in the playoffs and with them it would be a miracle if they did make it. You are also leaving out that the assets needed for Karlson would destroy any future this team has.

          This team is 3 to 5 years away from making a trade like that, you know because thats how long it will take for this team to be relevant again.

    • LTFan

      Tanev hasn’t been traded because what is being offered is too low. CA bloggers and commentators would be howling if the Canucks didn’t get a high draft pick or some good prospects in return. That isn’t going to happen.

    • Jim "Dumpster Fire" Benning

      Because he’s a terrible GM who should be head of scouting and no more. He has ZERO ability to comprehend “value” in players. I think he’s also a bear quite frankly, as he has a big propensity to go to sleep for the winter months of the season, and wakes up on trade deadline day to offer his ‘golden’ quotes of how teams simply weren’t offering him anything of substance for his “valuable” trade chips.

  • Tanev is an important member of the Vancouver Canucks, although you wouldn’t know that from reading this article. Yes, injuries are concerning, but he’s not alone. The whole team has been struggling with injuries over the last three years. It’s been bad.

    Now back to Tanev. Canucks need him and trading him is out of the question. The minute he’s gone, Jim Benning has to start working the phones looking for a replacement.

    • Goon

      Can you explain why you think the Canucks need Tanev?

      They’re not making the playoffs this year. They’re probably not making the playoffs next year, and after that, Tanev’s deal is expired and he’s on the wrong side of 30.

      The Canucks won’t be competing for a cup until Tanev’s over 30 and possibly signed elsewhere as a UFA. So why do they need him?

      • Dahlenfan

        I honestly think we need tanev. If we don’t have tanev then our rightside dmen are stecher gudbranson poliot and Biega. Ouch. I get that tanev was our most tradeable asset. And I’m sure benning has tested the market on him. But with his injury history lately he probably only fetches a 2nd an b or c prospect. His value to the team out weighs the return. They are never gonna get fair value for him unless he has a bounce back year and trade him at tdl. Then maybe a contender is willing to pay more. But I think tanev is worth more than what he would get the canucks in return now. Assets depreciate with time and injuries. If you know that car your looking at broke down 3 times last year your gonna look at a different car unless you can get a sweet deal

        • Goon

          Again, to what end though? The Canucks are almost certainly going to be a bottom-5 team this year regardless of whether they have Tanev in the lineup or not. Yes, a right side of Stetcher Gudbranson Pouliot Biega is ghastly, but what’s the goal here? If the goal is to win a Stanley Cup, Tanev isn’t helping the team do that any time soon. Heck, even if the goal is just making the playoffs, Tanev isn’t likely to help on that front before his contract expires.

          Of course the Canucks are going to be *even worse* without Tanev, but if he’s the difference between finishing 27th overall and 29th overall, and trading him could net the team another first round pick or NHL-ready prospect, what’s the logic in keeping him for the remainder of his contract?

          • Puck Viking

            This exactly. Maybe moving him gets us in last place and gets us Hughes with the first overall.

            With Tanev we will be one of the worst 3 teams in the NHL so what the hell is the point in keeping him.

        • speering major

          Tanev will most likely be on the low side of his value to start the season. If someone steps in and is willing to pay, great. What will likely happen is that if Tanev is healthy at the deadline, he will be moved. The Canucks can certainly live without him for the remaining games as they will also be in tank mode.

          The team and marketing department already understand that tickets are being sold on seeing the future. They aren’t even trying to sell the fan base on a competitive team. Shipping out Tanev at the deadline will have no impact on ticket sales or the fan base. Demko getting a start will sell more tickets by a long shot

        • Puck Viking

          They could have addressed the defense in free agency if tanev was moved in any of the last few years instead of handing out multi million multi year deals for plugs.

      • @ goon

        Canucks still have to ice an NHL caliber team. Burn it to the ground and let the kids play only sounds good in theory. It doesn’t work, Oilers proved it.

        Also, there was talk of Tanev fetching a 2nd round pick. Really? I would never, ever, give him up for that.
        Keep him and let him help in developing the next generation.

        • Goon

          The only thing the Oilers proved is the incompetence of the Oilers management group.

          The Canucks’ young players have had plenty of veteran leadership. They will continue to have that next season. Chris Tanev alone doesn’t mean the difference between an NHL-caliber roster and an AHL roster, nor is Tanev the only player with NHL experience on the team.

          • Dahlenfan

            I agree with you goon. Canucks need to move tanev but they need him to have a good season and trade him at tdl. Trading him b4 that they wont get value. 2 summers ago was when they should of traded him after the world championships. Him and Reilly looked great together. Right now is not the time to trade him

    • Jim "Dumpster Fire" Benning

      Cant be too hard to unearth another useless pylon like Eric Gudbransson to fill out the ranks! In all honesty though I agree with you about Tanev simply because his value to the team is immeasurable compared to gis value anywhere else. He’s a top pairing D here but is a 2nd/3rd pairing D on most other teams.

  • Doodly Doot

    To me Tanev seems to have more value playing for the team than he has as a trade piece. Except perhaps this season’s trade deadline. Trade. Deadline. Picks please!

  • speering major

    I think Tryamkin leaving was probably the reason Benning didn’t pull the trigger. He should have moved him anyway. I don’t know if people are just leaf obsessed but the talk of them being a partner for Tanev just adds to the regret. Liljegren + could be Canucks right now. Then Dobson and Bouchard dropped to 10+ this draft. It seems like some opportunities to get a top RHD have been blown. Tanev needs to go. He isn’t a fit for a rebuilding team and by all accounts his return (if healthy) should be high. The team would be so much further ahead in the rebuild with any one of those three in the system

    • Goon

      My understanding of the potential Leafs trade was that it was the Canucks’ insistence on receiving Liljegren and a pick back that torpedo’d it. I’ve read that the Leafs were ready to do either Liljegren or picks, but balked when the Canucks insisted on both.

      That’s what some fairly reliable people in the Leafs’ media were reporting, anyway. Who knows how much truth there is to it.

      • truthseeker

        If that’s true then kudos to Benning. Liljegren on his own would have been a massive rip off on the canucks. You don’t trade one of the best defensive D men in the league, even if he had a bad season, for a single prospect that’s never played an NHL game and who’s numbers in the AHL were nothing special.

      • Puck Viking

        Lilegrin would now be top 4 on this team already and on the team for the next 10 years where as tanev will be gone in 2 and bring nothing back at all.

        • truthseeker

          lol…nonsense….It’s not like Toronto has a good D. At this point Lilegrin is basically a slightly worse version of Pouliot at the same time period after one AHL season. He’s proven nothing and he’s nothing more than a question mark prospect.

          I know you feel the need to be a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian, but when you say stuff like that, it only makes you look stupid.

  • Defenceman Factory

    There is a very good chance Tanev would have been traded last deadline if he had not been injured. The Canucks hadn’t considered him trading him prior largely because of Linden’s desire to stay competitive while the Sedins were still playing. Remember it was Linden that said a full rebuild wouldn’t be fair to the Sedins.

    Tanev should still be traded even if the return isn’t what it once would have been. The main reason is that Green’s systems do not match well with Tanev’s strengths. It isn’t a coincidence his stats drop off with Green becoming the coach. His stats won’t ever be what they were if playing under Green so there is no reason to suspect his value in a trade will return to what it was a few years ago even if he can stay healthy. Get the pick or prospect that could become the next top 4 RD.

    And finally Jackson upon what events do you base this statement “Recent events suggest the team may be dead set on competing for a playoff spot as soon as next season”? CanucksArmy has gone to considerable length to describe how bad the 2018 UFA signings are and why they will not make the team significantly better. Benning has explained these signing weren’t about making the playoffs. So Jackson what are the recent events? I hope you can cite better sources than the 3rd hand rumours or Friedman tweet most of the Vancouver media fixates then claims to read Benning’s mind or are you just another gossiper?

      • Defenceman Factory

        One should never answer yes or no to a question they don’t know the answer to.

        Benning never commented on Linden leaving other than to say he didn’t know why. Ownership said it was amicable.

        I have no idea if it was amicable or not and just because ownership said it was doesn’t make it so. I have not read information from a single credible source on why Linden left. I’ve read a lot of innuendo and journalist/blogger theories which I consider nothing more than gossip. If Benning had signed Taveres or traded for Karlsson and signed free agents that look anything like he was determined to make the playoffs the gossip would be a bit more believable.

        • liqueur des fenetres

          Here’s what Ed Willes had to say in a newspaper that relies on Aquilini advertising: “It was, in fact, the opposite of amicable and if you believe the howler the Canucks have tried to spin, you are either naive, gullible or some combination of both.”

          Has Linden been seen or interviewed since he parted amicably? I’m sure you’re more comfortable answering yes or no to this one.

          • Defenceman Factory

            Willes said a lot of things, all of which was second hand speculation supplemented with his own fabrication and none of which was credible.

            Linden and ownership have obviously had a disagreement. Don’t know if either party is upset about it. The speculation by Willes and others about what the disagreement was about comes across as just gossip. Why would Linden be the least bit interested in discussing the nature of the disagreement with the media? It could have no positive impact on anything.

    • tyhee

      This is a great question. My answer would be no.

      The Canucks have numbers on defence. The Comets have numbers on defence.

      Neither team has quality on defence. To me signing another 3rd pair or depth NHL defenceman is pretty much pointless. I’d rather see them sign a GOOD AHL defenceman to help the Comets or somehow acquire a good young NHL defenceman.

      I don’t imagine Sbisa would agree to be an AHL defenceman at this stage of his career. Accordingly he isn’t the quality that I think would help the Canucks and he isn’t young enough or good enough to help the Canucks if they get competitive in a couple of seasons.

  • argoleas

    Can’t wait to see Tanev’s new kevlar armour.

    If Canucks are at all interested in moving Tanev, then they will wait for him to have a better season; to showcase that he is not over the hill or a walking wreck.

    • Locust

      Tanev needs to put in 50 uninjured games and return to playing at a much higher level before anyone would give anything of value for him. Too many pundits here just think “trade him for a first rounder” and it magically happens.

  • TheRealRusty

    The bigger question is why 4 years into JB’s tenure we still have nobody in sight that can remotely take over for what Tanev brings to the RH side….

    • argoleas

      We could have drafted one in Dobson, but Benning picked LHD Hughes. One can hope that Woo can turn into a top-4 defensive Dman (or, even better, a 2-way Dman). Or we get to a point of having a surplus in other positions that can be parlayed into such a Dman. Perhaps next summer Benning can see about solving Winnipeg’s Trouba problem.

    • Defenceman Factory

      It’s not really that difficult a question. The Canucks incorrectly delayed rebuilding this team. Many here like to solely blame Benning for that but I find it very difficult to believe Linden and ownership allowed Benning to set that retool on the fly strategy all on his own.

      Benning has top quality young players or prospects and some depth at every position except RD. A top quality prospect at RD needs to be added this year.

      • Macksonious

        “The Canucks incorrectly delayed rebuilding this team. Many here like to solely blame Benning for that but I find it very difficult to believe Linden and ownership allowed Benning to set that retool on the fly strategy all on his own.”
        ~ Defenceman Factory

        Agreed…. and I’ll take that a step further. Ownership set that strategy and then, Linden/Benning followed through on it.

  • Hockey Bunker

    Tanev is a great yardstick to measure how far the Canucks are from being a cup contender. On a contender Tanev is a 3rd pairing defenseman. On the Canucks he’s a top pair shutdown dman. It’s why he hasn’t been tradeable. He’s over valued by our team. In reality a contender doesn’t need him. Edler would be a different story. He’s by far the Canucks best defenseman and would have a lot more value but likes his life in Vancouver. Can’t blame him, hockey is his job, his life for his family is way more important than that. So it should be for all of us, work is just work, the rest is your life.

    • Beer Can Boyd

      At his peak, he was a solid shut down guy. Mostly due to his injury history, those days are behind him. If he has a decent year, they have to trade him at the deadline, but the expectations need to be realistic. I would say that a high second rounder would be fair. I agree that Canucks management and the fan base here totally overrate his current value.

      • Sandpaper

        If it were a high 2nd, more than likely the pick would be coming from another non-playoff team, so a mid to low 2nd plus another pick, 3rd or 4th, would be realistic return from a playoff team.

        • argoleas

          It really depends on how well he plays this season. Lots of his injuries were situational, not chronic. Also, he would not be a rental. Finally, if the team buying him has major cap issues, Canucks can retain part of his salary. All these factors will affect his price.

    • argoleas

      Edler will likely be back next season, and probably a few after that, to be the Edler statesman for the emerging young core.

      But he could do something very valuable for the team he wants to stay with for another 3-5 years, and that is allow himself to be rented out for the playoffs before returning as a UFA in the summer. He could fetch a lot, and his family would not even need to move.

      Now imagine that by the end of this season, any combination of Baertschi, Tanev, Edler, and Sutter would be moved for picks (and some prospects). Could make for a very enjoyable home draft! Hope Benning et al have exactly this in mind.

      • Beer Can Boyd

        Yes he is, but given his injury history over the last 2 years, he’s still not worth more than a 2nd round pick. If by some miracle he stays healthy all year, perhaps a team heading to the playoffs would give up a late 1st rounder, hoping he could make a difference.

  • Nuck16

    The way I see it, if management does things right over the next 2 seasons, we should be able to start making the playoffs again. Until that time, we need to see what we have in Hughes and Olli, but more than likely for us to make the playoffs in 2 years we will need to trade a prospect and a 1st round pick for a #1 Dman.
    As for Tanev, I agree with those that say we need to wait until his value is higher before trading him…which means a long stretch without injuries. No point in trading him if we don’t get value in return. I also think he has more offensive upside that is being wasted. I still recall back in the finals in his rookie season having enough poise for a fake shot/slap pass to a wide open Tanner Glass at the side of the net…Tanner of course missed the yawning onion bag, since he had no poise an panicked.
    If we can’t get value for Tanev in a trade, in 2 years when we should be a playoff team, Tanev would still be very useful for us. At that time, If we do acquire a #1 Dman, plus Olli, Hughes, Tanev…then I’m sure from within our current organization we would have no problem finding a sold 3rd pairing, we could be set…

    • Doodly Doot

      Respectfully disagree. A prospect and a 1st round pick for a #1 D? Who would that be? The Canucks need to keep their picks in order to correctly ‘continually’ build a deep organization full of internally developed players. It’s very rare to complete an expensive trade for an established player and have it be a ‘net gain’. It’s common knowledge (I think) that most teams overpay for D. Draft and develop or perhaps swap prospect for prospect. Otherwise stay away.

      While I do see keeping Tanev as a potential value proposition, he has always played hard minutes and his body seems to be aging beyond it’s years. If he’s healthy, then it’s a temptation to keep him. Also, it’s a temptation to trade him. Remember, Sautner, Brisebois, and Chatfield are all plausible serviceable bottom 4 in the next several years. And Woo is not far behind.

      • Nuck16

        Hopefully we develop a #1 D internally by then, but if not, and that’s the only thing holding us back, then we should make a trade. Remember, teams will be trying to made trades before the expansion draft, so prices will be low.

  • Macksonious

    Since there’s 2 years left on Tanev’s deal, no need to rush a trade unless they receive a strong offer. Also, they are thin on right side D. Subtract him from the current mix… scary.

    • Dahlenfan

      The draft is in Vancouver next year. From what I can discern aquaman loves money and publicity. I think they see the draft next year as a great way to gain back the fans. And to do that we need a future. I think at the tdl we have an open house and anyone we can get rid of goes. They only have 1 extra pick next draft and I believe it’s a 6th rounder from Washington. We need picks for the draft in our house. I see a lot of movement at the tdl.

      • argoleas

        I certainly hope ownership looks at it that way. Having a ton of picks will indeed make a very good impression on the fans, and buy (back?) a lot of goodwill.

      • Jim "Dumpster Fire" Benning

        I respectfully see yet another TDL come and go with Benning going back to his tried and true go to statements of “nobody offered us any picks” and “picks are gold Jerry, gold!”, while we once again see record picks make the rounds around the league….just not in Vancouver. Cost of having a head of scouting masquerading as a GM/President.

  • Jim "Dumpster Fire" Benning

    “As the NHL has gotten younger, faster, and more skilled; big, lumbering, physical defensemen have gone the way of the dinosaur” Not in Canuckland, where dinosaur management who should be Head of Scouting and not GM/President go after the likes of Eric Gudbransson in 2016, then resign him to a 3 year extension at more money when he is already hurt and has absolutely zero trade value due to his ability to absolutely dominate categories such as “slowest pylon”, “worst defenceman”, “most overrated defenceman”, “worst ability to read the play”, ect…

    • Lemmy Kilmister

      Ya but you “Win” with “heart & soul fundamental” players such as Gudbranson…. who really needs young players such as McCann and a 2nd rounder (Debrincat perhaps) when we have good old Guddy