Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign defenceman Troy Stecher (post #194, #443)

[MS]

It's not Gillis' fault that AV was allergic to young offensive minded players.

Oh wait yes it was AV should have been fired after The Loss.

The notion that Vigneault was 'allergic to young offensive minded players' is complete and utter BS.

 

[iloveloov*]

The notion that Vigneault was 'allergic to young offensive minded players' is complete and utter BS.

Okay then name one that wasn't driven out of town or turned into a checker.

 

[MS]

Okay then name one that wasn't driven out of town or turned into a checker.

Kesler, Raymond, and Hansen all turned into top-6 two-way players so it's fair to say they were handled pretty damn well.

Hodgson was being handled and developed well and then ran himself out of town because he was greedy for more icetime. Getting away from Vigneault was probably the worst thing to happen to his career.

Grabner was developed well and played well under Vigneault to close out the 09-10 season and was then traded for defensive help. 11 points in 20 games under Vigneault.

Jordan Schroeder was handed the #2 center spot for most of the 12-13 season when Kesler was injured and failed utterly. But it wasn't for lack of opportunity under Vigneault.

That leaves pretty much only Shirokov, a 50-point AHL player at age 25 who we couldn't find room for on one of the deepest teams ever assembled. Big whoop.

It's a complete BS narrative.

We didn't have young forwards breaking into the team because a) our drafting sucked and we simply didn't have many young forwards for Vigneault to work with and b) we were ridiculously deep in veteran forwards on a Cup contending team and sometimes there just wasn't room.

And again, Kesler/Raymond/Hansen were developed perfectly. And in NY, guys like Zuccarello/Kreider/Hayes seem to be doing just fine under AV.

 

[TruGr1t]

Bad news for those hoping Stecher makes the team. Organizational puppet Iain MacIntyre is setting the narrative for him starting in Utica.

Stecher probably best served in Utica; Etem has to be aware of job situation: https://soundcloud.com/tsn-radio-va...n-utica-etem-has-to-be-aware-of-job-situation

 

[bobbyb2009]

Seeing as there's 5 pre-season games left to get a longer read on Stetcher's game I would assume any poster pencilling him into a line up is doing so on the assumption he continues to outplay Pedan, Biega, Larsen over those games. I mean, if he sucks in the next 4 games I don't think people are still going to clamour for him based on the Edmonton game.

But IF he does continue to play at a reasonably high level (not even expecting him to match the Edm game) then what's the fear exactly? That a 22 year old college defenseman can't handle jumping straight to the NHL?

That is a reasonable question/comment and makes for a fair discussion...

I agree, it is possible that he could play his way onto the team. I just think it is both unlikely and unwise.

Your hypothetical, while framed fairly, may or may not have me on side.

First, the fact that you suggest that even if it did not look like the Edmonton game begs the question, "then what does it look like?". Is it consistent/improving in performance game to game, or does it show new challenges and mild to wild swings in performance from good to bad, both from game to game and within games?

For me, even if it was all at an acceptable level or even a little better than Larsen et al., but inconsistent and with question marks, I think it makes sense for him to start in Utica. This would allow him to adapt to the pro game, adapt to the idea of playing the number of games he will play, adapt to a lifestyle of not being looked after by the school infrastructure, while allowing him to work out and eat like a pro to build a pro body, etc..

Unless he forces his way onto the big team by being Huttonesque definitively (and this is the problem, as this is subjective), I also don't want to damage our depth by waiving someone and potentially losing someone from our depth. We are going to need 9 or so defensemen through the year, as always, and giving an asset away doesn't make sense to me when this decision MAY not be in Troy's best interest anyways.

I actually have been really impressed with the kid, but with the number of times it is proven that kids need time to adapt (the list is endless), why not give him that time and see him not get eaten alive by the inevitable struggles young players go through in this transition (fatigue from a full pro season, the grind of travel for the first time, the heavy opponents crushing him into the boards endlessly, the lifestyle changes that come with money, the fan expectations as he struggles inevitably).

Anyways, respectfully just my opinion. But maybe he just kills it and continues right through the year like this. That would be an amazing surprise for me!! However, I, too, have high hopes for his future after watching him over the last 9 months.

 

[iloveloov*]

Kesler, Raymond, and Hansen all turned into top-6 two-way players so it's fair to say they were handled pretty damn well.

Hodgson was being handled and developed well and then ran himself out of town because he was greedy for more icetime. Getting away from Vigneault was probably the worst thing to happen to his career.

Grabner was developed well and played well under Vigneault to close out the 09-10 season and was then traded for defensive help. 11 points in 20 games under Vigneault.

Jordan Schroeder was handed the #2 center spot for most of the 12-13 season when Kesler was injured and failed utterly. But it wasn't for lack of opportunity under Vigneault.

That leaves pretty much only Shirokov, a 50-point AHL player at age 25 who we couldn't find room for on one of the deepest teams ever assembled. Big whoop.

It's a complete BS narrative.

We didn't have young forwards breaking into the team because a) our drafting sucked and we simply didn't have many young forwards for Vigneault to work with and b) we were ridiculously deep in veteran forwards on a Cup contending team and sometimes there just wasn't room.

And again, Kesler/Raymond/Hansen were developed perfectly. And in NY, guys like Zuccarello/Kreider/Hayes seem to be doing just fine under AV.

I asked for one young offensive player who wasn't turned into a checker or chased out of town...

Kesler - checker
Raymond - checker
Hansen - checker
Hodgson - treated like dog ykw by AV from day 1 and jettisoned, respect is a 2-way street
Grabner - jettisoned after 20 games
Schroeder - thown to the wolves and jettisoned
Shirokov - jettisoned the quickest

Zuccarello - played his first full season at the age of 26.. not young
Kreider - stagnanting, looks to be turning into a checker
Hayes - regressing, will probably end up a checker


Poor Shirokov had no chance of cracking a roster Tanner Glass on it. Seriously his love of Glass proves everything I need to say. Deepest team ever? Please. It was so deep with checkers that it scored 5 goals in 7 games when it mattered.

 

[Pip]

Just because someone is good defensively, on top of putting up good offensive numbers, doesn't mean that they've turned into a checker...

 

[DL44]

Bad news for those hoping Stecher makes the team. Organizational puppet Iain MacIntyre is setting the narrative for him starting in Utica.

Stecher probably best served in Utica; Etem has to be aware of job situation: https://soundcloud.com/tsn-radio-va...n-utica-etem-has-to-be-aware-of-job-situation

Well, it is the most likely scenario. we'll see how he does as the preseason starts ramping up with more NHL players littering opposition rosters and competition among roster hopefuls become more desperate.

What Hutton was able to do was, defensively and offensively look like our best one or two dmen in each game that passed in preseason. WD stated than when they were facing a step up NHL competition in gm #4 or 5, they were expecting a drop off from Hutton that never came.. Stecher will have to run the same ramp up in competition and maintain effective in order to stick... the tough part of the evaluation is to come.
Get past the McDavid line last game (Gudbranson-Hutton's responsibility) and Stecher's comp was limited.

 

[CanaFan]

That is a reasonable question/comment and makes for a fair discussion...

I agree, it is possible that he could play his way onto the team. I just think it is both unlikely and unwise.

Your hypothetical, while framed fairly, may or may not have me on side.

First, the fact that you suggest that even if it did not look like the Edmonton game begs the question, "then what does it look like?". Is it consistent/improving in performance game to game, or does it show new challenges and mild to wild swings in performance from good to bad, both from game to game and within games?

For me, even if it was all at an acceptable level or even a little better than Larsen et al., but inconsistent and with question marks, I think it makes sense for him to start in Utica. This would allow him to adapt to the pro game, adapt to the idea of playing the number of games he will play, adapt to a lifestyle of not being looked after by the school infrastructure, while allowing him to work out and eat like a pro to build a pro body, etc..

Unless he forces his way onto the big team by being Huttonesque definitively (and this is the problem, as this is subjective), I also don't want to damage our depth by waiving someone and potentially losing someone from our depth. We are going to need 9 or so defensemen through the year, as always, and giving an asset away doesn't make sense to me when this decision MAY not be in Troy's best interest anyways.

I actually have been really impressed with the kid, but with the number of times it is proven that kids need time to adapt (the list is endless), why not give him that time and see him not get eaten alive by the inevitable struggles young players go through in this transition (fatigue from a full pro season, the grind of travel for the first time, the heavy opponents crushing him into the boards endlessly, the lifestyle changes that come with money, the fan expectations as he struggles inevitably).

Anyways, respectfully just my opinion. But maybe he just kills it and continues right through the year like this. That would be an amazing surprise for me!! However, I, too, have high hopes for his future after watching him over the last 9 months.

Your opinion is totally valid, but bolded is really the key and we have yet to see how it plays out. If Stetcher looks neck-a-neck with Larsen, then for sure you send the kid to Utica and give Larsen a shot with the big club. However if the gap is substantial - and based on the Edmonton game that is at least a possibility - then I don't really think letting Larsen walk is a big enough "loss" to not reward the better performer. Let's not view Larsen as a slam dunk or an established NHLer. TBH, he's almost as much of a question mark as Stetcher at this point regardless of what management may see him as.

Let's let the games play out and revisit this discussion. My only objection is when posters prioritize the waivers issue and de-prioritize actual performance. At the end of the day, if the kid is the best option then he should get the spot and figure out what to do with Larsen, Pedan, et al later. That is the flipside of the "always earned, never given" mantra that gets spouted by this organization.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

Kesler, Raymond, and Hansen all turned into top-6 two-way players so it's fair to say they were handled pretty damn well.

Hodgson was being handled and developed well and then ran himself out of town because he was greedy for more icetime. Getting away from Vigneault was probably the worst thing to happen to his career.

Grabner was developed well and played well under Vigneault to close out the 09-10 season and was then traded for defensive help. 11 points in 20 games under Vigneault.

Jordan Schroeder was handed the #2 center spot for most of the 12-13 season when Kesler was injured and failed utterly. But it wasn't for lack of opportunity under Vigneault.

That leaves pretty much only Shirokov, a 50-point AHL player at age 25 who we couldn't find room for on one of the deepest teams ever assembled. Big whoop.

It's a complete BS narrative.

We didn't have young forwards breaking into the team because a) our drafting sucked and we simply didn't have many young forwards for Vigneault to work with and b) we were ridiculously deep in veteran forwards on a Cup contending team and sometimes there just wasn't room.

And again, Kesler/Raymond/Hansen were developed perfectly. And in NY, guys like Zuccarello/Kreider/Hayes seem to be doing just fine under AV.

I really don't know how you maintain any kind of healthy blood pressure when you have to repeat the same facts over and over again to the same small group of posters. Kudos.

 

[CanaFan]

Well, it is the most likely scenario. we'll see how he does as the preseason starts ramping up with more NHL players littering opposition rosters and competition among roster hopefuls become more desperate.

What Hutton was able to do was, defensively and offensively look like our best one or two dmen in each game that passed in preseason. WD stated than when they were facing a step up NHL competition in gm #4 or 5, they were expecting a drop off from Hutton that never came.. Stecher will have to run the same ramp up in competition and maintain effective in order to stick... the tough part of the evaluation is to come.
Get past the McDavid line last game (Gudbranson-Hutton's responsibility) and Stecher's comp was limited.

For sure but Larsen is going to face the same step up in competition as well so it isn't only Stetcher who is going to have maintain his pace. Now admittedly I haven't *seen* Larsen play yet so he's a bit of blank slate so far, but Willie's reports out of the SJ game weren't particularly good (to be fair no one was good in that game).

 

[MS]

I asked for one young offensive player who wasn't turned into a checker or chased out of town...

Kesler - checker
Raymond - checker
Hansen - checker
Hodgson - treated like dog ykw by AV from day 1 and jettisoned, respect is a 2-way street
Grabner - jettisoned after 20 games
Schroeder - thown to the wolves and jettisoned
Shirokov - jettisoned the quickest

...

Poor Shirokov had no chance of cracking a roster Tanner Glass on it. Seriously his love of Glass proves everything I need to say. Deepest team ever? Please. It was so deep with checkers that it scored 5 goals in 7 games when it mattered.

Hansen, Kesler, and Raymond weren't 'checkers'. They were developed into quality two-way top-6 scorers.

Vigneault didn't trade Grabner. He gave him a good opportunity, Grabner played well ... and then our GM traded him to augment a position of weakness.

Hodgson was handled perfectly in 10-11. The comments about his injury were probably a mistake. But his subsequent career shows how on-the-mark Vigneault was about his two-way play.

And LOL on your comment on Schroeder. 'Vigneault doesn't give young players a chance! Except when he throws poor Schroeder to the wolves by giving him a chance!'

In the case of both Schroeder and Shirokov, they weren't good enough. 50-point AHL players don't become 50-point NHL players and they simply weren't tracking as NHLers at lower levels.

Again, when your team stinks and has no depth, young players get chances. When you're a deep Cup contender ... not so much. This isn't rocket science.

And while I don't agree with the style of 4th line Vigneault employed ... he's far from the only NHL coach to run his team that way at that time and not have room for small one-dimensional skill players on an energy 4th line.

Having said that, Vigneault scratched Glass to play Grabner regularly on the 4th line in the 2010 playoffs. But nobody remembers that.

 

[DL44]

For sure but Larsen is going to face the same step up in competition as well so it isn't only Stetcher who is going to have maintain his pace. Now admittedly I haven't *seen* Larsen play yet so he's a bit of blank slate so far, but Willie's reports out of the SJ game weren't particularly good (to be fair no one was good in that game).

And Tryamkin.. and Pedan.. and Biega...
I was just discussing Stecher's path in the Stecher thread.

He's got to play WELL above the levels of Tryamkin, Larsen, Pedan to justify sending 2 of those dmen down.... like Hutton did last season to Corrado.

Roster#/Waiver/KHL clauses aren't in his favor either.

 

[MS]

And Tryamkin.. and Pedan.. and Biega...
I was just discussing Stecher's path in the Stecher thread.

He's got to play WELL above the levels of Tryamkin, Larsen, Pedan to justify sending 2 of those dmen down.... like Hutton did last season to Corrado.

Roster#/Waiver/KHL clauses aren't in his favor either.

Larsen and Pedan should have ZERO claim on a roster spot if a young player like Stecher outplays them. Same for Sbisa and (much as I love him) Biega.

Tryamkin is more complicated, obviously.

But if Stecher is one of our 6 best defenders in preseason, he should make the team. Anything else is gutless, negative management.

 

[rune74]

Larsen and Pedan should have ZERO claim on a roster spot if a young player like Stecher outplays them. Same for Sbisa and (much as I love him) Biega.

Tryamkin is more complicated, obviously.

But if Stecher is one of our 6 best defenders in preseason, he should make the team. Anything else is gutless, negative management.

I think it really depends on if it's by a large amount or that you can clearly see it will be much better with him in. The issue of course would be waivers and the willingness to let some players go. It has to be worth it for asset management since stretcher obviously doesn't have to clear waivers so it gives them some breathing room.

They proved last year that they had no issue doing that but obviously they have to be aware of the consequences. Remember how bad people freaked out about it last time. That's not to say they have no interest in Stecher, but they have a bit more time to get him play time in the AHL as well if they want and still keep some of our waiver defencmen.

 

[Pip]

I think it really depends on if it's by a large amount or that you can clearly see it will be much better with him in. The issue of course would be waivers and the willingness to let some players go. It has to be worth it for asset management since stretcher obviously doesn't have to clear waivers so it gives them some breathing room.

They proved last year that they had no issue doing that but obviously they have to be aware of the consequences. Remember how bad people freaked out about it last time. That's not to say they have no interest in Stecher, but they have a bit more time to get him play time in the AHL as well if they want and still keep some of our waiver defencmen.

The Corrado situation was different last year because of his injury and the fact that they could have kept him up by throwing someone on LTIR (Burrows? I forget who). A similar situation would be if Rodin has a subpar camp when it might be worth it to stick with him anyway. I do agree that the Corrado situation was overblown to an extent.

If Stecher plays well enough to be on this team then he should have a spot. Especially when his competition is hardly chalked full of established talent. Larsen and Pedan are huge question marks and should have to earn their spots.

 

[rune74]

The Corrado situation was different last year because of his injury and the fact that they could have kept him up by throwing someone on LTIR (Burrows? I forget who). A similar situation would be if Rodin has a subpar camp when it might be worth it to stick with him anyway. I do agree that the Corrado situation was overblown to an extent.

If Stecher plays well enough to be on this team then he should have a spot. Especially when his competition is hardly chalked full of established talent. Larsen and Pedan are huge question marks and should have to earn their spots.

They should, but how much better does stecher have to be to make it worthwhile to the team? If he isn't way ahead of the other players do you cut them lose on waivers or use the waiver protection of stecher?

 

[Pip]

They should, but how much better does stecher have to be to make it worthwhile to the team? If he isn't way ahead of the other players do you cut them lose on waivers or use the waiver protection of stecher?

I agree that it isn't completely black and white. If they're close you probably go with the waiver eligible player.

 

[DL44]

Larsen and Pedan should have ZERO claim on a roster spot if a young player like Stecher outplays them. Same for Sbisa and (much as I love him) Biega.

Tryamkin is more complicated, obviously.

But if Stecher is one of our 6 best defenders in preseason, he should make the team. Anything else is gutless, negative management.

I would have to agree.

Looking forward to how he does defensively vs NHL caliber skilled/sized forwards coming down his wings and battling him in corners and in front of the net.
And how well his decision making with the puck holds up as said NHL caliber increases.
Also if he were to make it I wouldn't expect him to playing on the top pair with Edler either...
So we'll see how he looks along side Sbisa/Tryamkin/Larsen/Pedan in later games.

 

[CanaFan]

And Tryamkin.. and Pedan.. and Biega...
I was just discussing Stecher's path in the Stecher thread.

He's got to play WELL above the levels of Tryamkin, Larsen, Pedan to justify sending 2 of those dmen down.... like Hutton did last season to Corrado.

Roster#/Waiver/KHL clauses aren't in his favor either.

Disagree with Larsen. He's shown nothing at the NHL level and considering he is 26, if he can't outplay a 22 year old rookie then who cares if we lose him? The pick is conditional on Larsen making the team no? So if we keep him, we actually pay more for him.

Makes zero sense.

 

[rune74]

Disagree with Larsen. He's shown nothing at the NHL level and considering he is 26, if he can't outplay a 22 year old rookie then who cares if we lose him? The pick is conditional on Larsen making the team no? So if we keep him, we actually pay more for him.

Makes zero sense.

You are prepared to make that decision after one game each? Makes zero sense.

 

[MS]

They should, but how much better does stecher have to be to make it worthwhile to the team? If he isn't way ahead of the other players do you cut them lose on waivers or use the waiver protection of stecher?

Better is better.

I could care less about waivers. 97% of players clear. You can't make negative decisions because you're worried about a longshot chance of losing an irrelevant player.

Forgetting the Higgins IR stuff, if that option hadn't been available, would anyone right now, even with the hindsight of Corrado being claimed, be saying 'Man, I wish they would have sent Hutton to the AHL so we could have kept Corrado as a #8 defender!' Absolutely not.

You are prepared to make that decision after one game each? Makes zero sense.

The poster said 'if'. We're all speculating on future possibilities.

If Larsen scores 8 points in his next 4 games and Stecher does nothing, obviously Larsen is making the team.

 

[UticaHockey]

Larsen and Pedan should have ZERO claim on a roster spot if a young player like Stecher outplays them. Same for Sbisa and (much as I love him) Biega.

Tryamkin is more complicated, obviously.

But if Stecher is one of our 6 best defenders in preseason, he should make the team. Anything else is gutless, negative management.

Who would you keep so that Tanev and Gudbranson aren't exposed to the NHL expansion draft?

 

[MS]

Who would you keep so that Tanev and Gudbranson aren't exposed to the NHL expansion draft?

Biega will surely play 19 games this year at some point, whether we keep him here or send him to the AHL. Personally I'd keep him here.

Sbisa I'd encase in lead and send on a rocket to outer space if possible.

 

[CanaFan]

You are prepared to make that decision after one game each? Makes zero sense.

There's this thing called the quote feature. Please use it to show where I said exactly that.



Edit: Here's what I did say on the subject prior to the post you quoted out of context:

Your opinion is totally valid, but bolded is really the key and we have yet to see how it plays out. If Stetcher looks neck-a-neck with Larsen, then for sure you send the kid to Utica and give Larsen a shot with the big club. However if the gap is substantial - and based on the Edmonton game that is at least a possibility - then I don't really think letting Larsen walk is a big enough "loss" to not reward the better performer. Let's not view Larsen as a slam dunk or an established NHLer. TBH, he's almost as much of a question mark as Stetcher at this point regardless of what management may see him as.

Let's let the games play out and revisit this discussion. My only objection is when posters prioritize the waivers issue and de-prioritize actual performance. At the end of the day, if the kid is the best option then he should get the spot and figure out what to do with Larsen, Pedan, et al later. That is the flipside of the "always earned, never given" mantra that gets spouted by this organization.