[Signing] Flames sign Chris Tanev (4 years, $4.5 million AAV)

[868904]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

That's the point, though. I'd rather just keep Ryan because he's gone after next year and him leaving will free space for the kids. Tanev is IMO a worse player on a worse contract and he's probably going to be on the books for at least the next four years.

But I would happily be wrong about this. What number is he going to wear? Will Valimaki give up #8?

But there was a need for a top 4 right side defensemen. Flames don’t have any prospects knocking in that door. By the time Kinvall or Boltmann or Poolman are ready for top 4 minutes, Tanev will be long gone. And that’s assuming any of those guys even make the NHL.

Flames desperately needed to replace what was lost in Brodie and they did.

If you take the best of Brodie and the best of Hamonic, and merge it together, you get Tanev. Smooth skating, heart and soul defensive defenseman.

Look at the other UFA options available, there isn’t a better defender out there for the same or even lower price.

Would we be happy with Trevor Van Reimsdyk? Sami Vatanen? Troy Stecher? Gustafsson?

Pietrangelo was not going to happen, this was the best option unless they were going to trade assets for David Savard.

[Husky]

Injuries...technically his last season he played basically the full season. Adds a solid presence. Just 1 year too much and 0.5mm too high.

[Wood]

Originally Posted by Red

Outside of the games played this sounds like Robyn Regher. What a bum.

Hamonic is of the same breed and has obviously left a lot of fans bitter, so I'm not really surprised by some of the reactions in this thread

For me, there's always a place on my team for a player like Regehr, Warrener, Sarich, Engelland, Vlasic, Hjalmarsson, Pesce or Tanev

This is pretty much exactly the type of contract I expected to see Tanev get whether it was the Flames or another team. I see the fit here, so I'm happy with the deal and am excited to have a solid defensive warrior on our side

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by theinfinitejar

If I were an NHL GM I would simply not sign/trade for aging declining players with lots of money and/or term.

Veteran defensemen are different from veteran forwards.

Hal Gill played until he was 64 years old.

The last three years of Willie Mitchell’s career, his big stick was a cane.

Brooks Orpik was winning his 2nd title at age 38, and as a contributor.

Adrian Aucoin did what all rich white people in Calgary do, he retired to Arizona. Then he kept playing NHL hockey until he was like 39.

Crafty players can carve out a nice long career making a mess of picturesque offensive gameplans.

Tanev has been a Plus player every year but one for his career.

He is what he is. He’s not going to hit his Norris bonus.

But he can get you to the next shift, and he can play mistake free hockey.

That’s valuable.

[Lanny_McDonald]

I think it's safe to say we know who the team's new whipping boy is going to be!

[TornBetween2Pucks]

Pros -
He is an elite defensive defenceman. His awareness allows his partners a lot of room to improvise.
The puck does not die on his stick. Good first pass.
His skating is not a weakness. It will be good enough for the length of the deal.
He is popular among his teammates, and, if any of you watched Kris Draper on Sportsnet today, highly respected around the league.

Cons -
The biggest, by far, is that he has a lot of trouble staying healthy. He plays on the edge, is fearless, takes hits, blocks shots, and it costs him games every year.
His abilities to defend make him a legitimate second pair defenceman but he squelched his offensive instincts a long time ago.

[AustinL_NHL]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I think that top pair succeeded largely in spite of him... Hughes' numbers were far better when he wasn't paired with Tanev

CF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 49.46%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 57.70%
Change: +8.24%

FF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 49.65%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 56.02%
Change: +6.37%

SF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 48.03%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 55.56%
Change: +7.53%

SCF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 47.52%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 57.35%
Change: +9.83%

HDCF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 49.64%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 56.79%
Change: +7.15%

GF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 46.03%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 59.18%
Change: +13.15%

xGF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 50.22%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 57.22%
Change: +7.00%

Hughes w/ Tanev = below average defenseman
Hughes w/o Tanev = elite #1 defenseman

Holy f*** what an awful signing

[timbit]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Good signing, but wasted as a 4th liner. So he’s probably not value for money at this stage.

If 4th liners play a little more than 14 minutes a game, I guess you’re right.

Actually, nope, you’re wrong.

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by timbit

It is incomprehensible to me that people do not understand that UFAs get more money/ salary than restricted players.

Ryan was an excellent signing at exactly what he got.

Literally, there was NO acquisition cost. 35 points a season, great PKer, very good defensively.

So because I don't agree I don't get it? And I never criticized the signing.

Yes, there was 0 acquisition cost. Yes, he has averaged 35 points. Yes, he's a very good PKer. But $3,125,000 for that is not a great contract, it is an average contract. But if Ryan is going to be relegated to the 4th line in favor of Bennett, that contract value declines.

[oldschoolcalgary]

seems like most Vancouver fans on HF like Tanev, and thought he was really solid...

Big concerns with his injuries and possibly skating being a bit worse that it was 4 years ago...

again, wouldn't have been my first choice as a veteran defenseman to sign, but not the worst signing either...

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by AustinL_NHL

CF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 49.46%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 57.70%
Change: +8.24%

FF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 49.65%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 56.02%
Change: +6.37%

SF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 48.03%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 55.56%
Change: +7.53%

SCF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 47.52%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 57.35%
Change: +9.83%

HDCF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 49.64%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 56.79%
Change: +7.15%

GF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 46.03%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 59.18%
Change: +13.15%

xGF%:
Hughes w/ Tanev: 50.22%
Hughes w/o Tanev: 57.22%
Change: +7.00%

Hughes w/ Tanev = below average defenseman
Hughes w/o Tanev = elite #1 defenseman

Holy f*** what an awful signing

It's !@#$ing Troy Brouwer all over again. I'm going to have nightmares about this !@#$ing contract. Why the hell did we sign it?

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Itse

Well, obviously.

If a guy is useless offensively, he's not going to get a lot of offensive zone starts.

Do you get mad when your plumber doesn’t know how to slow cook a brisket, or are you just happy he unclogged the pipes?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by timbit

If 4th liners play a little more than 14 minutes a game, I guess you’re right.

Actually, nope, you’re wrong.

Ryan was used a lot as a 3rd liner though, right? I considered him, Lucic an Dube the 3rd line. But now he’s going to be moved down.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by timbit

It is incomprehensible to me that people do not understand that UFAs get more money/ salary than restricted players.

Ryan was an excellent signing at exactly what he got.

Literally, there was NO acquisition cost. 35 points a season, great PKer, very good defensively.

If he wasn't playing on the 4th line, I would agree. But $3M+ for a 4th liner is ridiculous. That is something the Flames have to stop doing. Maybe the problem isn't Ryan and his contract, maybe the problem is Backlund and his contract?

[Wood]

Originally Posted by Husky

Just 1 year too much and 0.5mm too high.

Which is the best you can hope for in free agency, so pretty much exactly what was to be expected

Everyone knows the risks of free agent signings, but when you only have 1 RHD on your NHL roster you either have to sign someone or trade assets to acquire somebody

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

I think that top pair succeeded largely in spite of him... Hughes' numbers were far better when he wasn't paired with Tanev

This is why I get concerned with BT's trades. Haven't we learned from the Neal/Brouwer mistakes. Too much term for an aging player has the potential to handicap the team.

We have known for sometime that both defensmen might be on the move yet here we are making moves out of necessity.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Itse

Well, obviously.

If a guy is useless offensively, he's not going to get a lot of offensive zone starts.

Guy gets deployed in defensive zone starts more because he’s the team’s best defensive defenceman.

Why didn’t Brad just sign that 40 goal 90 pt Robyn Regher 2.0 dman for 3x$3M that’s available every year?!

[Red]

Originally Posted by Itse

First of all, that games played is pretty damned big difference. He has missed on average almost 30 games in the last four years. He's barely above 50 games per year in his whole career.

Second, Tanev is no Regehr defensively, and Regehr played in a pretty different era. These days, d-men need to bring offense.

Been there, done that. Defensemen need to defend first. Our groups lately couldn't. But they were great at scoring points.

So you may be right, but it's hard to tell. Just look what guys like Cole and Zadorov did to our team. Especially the top line. Regher used to do that to others. Good defense is important.

Tanev is no Reggie. But the Flames need a good defensive guy, a guy that blocks shots and goes all out every shift. Tanev is pretty good at that

[Prufrock]

I like it. Flames needed a bottom 4 RD, got a bottom 4 RD. Term's maybe a year long, but it's free agency.

I love Brodie, he signed one of my jerseys and complimented my horrible mustache, but his offense never really tipped the scales for me. He skated well and had a good stick (settle down, Pierre), he will be missed.
I'm happy enough to have more of a shutdown, good team guy and try to let Hanafin, Valimaki, Andersson etc., blossom more offensively.

[dino7c]

Tanev and Brodie are the same age so any criticism of a 4 year deal for a "player that age" should be the same for both