The Two Stromes
- Thread starter RemoAZ
- Start date
rt
The Kinder, Gentler Version
Where are you getting those numbers? I think you’re looking at his PIMs. He had 34 PIMs in 36 AHL games last year. He had 19 points. He’s not 0.50ppg this season either. He’s .67 with 8pts in 12gp.
azcanuck
Registered User
I agree. Good hockey I.Q. He's got that good sense of when to pass. Good vision on the ice like a lot of great ones do.
Problem is he's not even average in so many areas. Compete level is so weak it's ridiculous. Weak as hell on the puck.
BUX7PHX
Registered User
- Jul 7, 2011
- 5,581
- 1,350
I think this also speaks to some differences in Chayka vs Maloney as well. I think Maloney kept looking at the picture of... we have waited so long for a good C, and so we have to take him, intangibles or other factors that may not bode well for him be damned.
Then look at Chayka in talking about drafting Keller. If I recall, Chayka had mentioned that he took Keller out to dinner, and one thing that Keller kept doing was his eyes would drift away from the table. Eventually Chayka had to ask what was going on, and he saw that a hockey game (like an IIHF game) was on the TV behind Chayka and that was what Keller was watching intently the entire time. Chayka actually liked him more, b/c he wanted players that couldn't take their eyes off of how the game is played and would be the type to use video and other resources to discover improvements in their game or find holes in the opposition.
While I am guessing that not one of us knows either player personally, just knowing what we know about the players on a 50,000 foot view, do you see Strome being the type who would have his eyes glued on to hockey in the offseason, and representing that "gym rat" type of mentality? Or does he seem like the type of person who kind of knows what to do but hasn't properly gotten all the steps down to figure out how he needs to adjust? That will do what he needs to do, but hasn't done the "more" that can separate him yet?
Ultimately, I think that even though Chayka was a part of the organization, I am not 100% convinced that he or others in the room were as sold on Strome. As has been mentioned before, Chayka has always been about the idea of finding a consensus among he and the scouts, coaches, etc. I doubt that we had that true "consensus" on the day we took Strome, and maybe that is why Maloney was let go after the year. Too many decisions made only on his terms and not big picture enough.
Anyhow, I think that we are going to find ourselves actually continuing to pluck good prospects in the draft and while it may not mean them ever playing for us (see Entwhistle, Mackenzie), they will be used as a means to add in talent like Oesterle and Hinostroza, both of whom I have good feelings about.
Then look at Chayka in talking about drafting Keller. If I recall, Chayka had mentioned that he took Keller out to dinner, and one thing that Keller kept doing was his eyes would drift away from the table. Eventually Chayka had to ask what was going on, and he saw that a hockey game (like an IIHF game) was on the TV behind Chayka and that was what Keller was watching intently the entire time. Chayka actually liked him more, b/c he wanted players that couldn't take their eyes off of how the game is played and would be the type to use video and other resources to discover improvements in their game or find holes in the opposition.
While I am guessing that not one of us knows either player personally, just knowing what we know about the players on a 50,000 foot view, do you see Strome being the type who would have his eyes glued on to hockey in the offseason, and representing that "gym rat" type of mentality? Or does he seem like the type of person who kind of knows what to do but hasn't properly gotten all the steps down to figure out how he needs to adjust? That will do what he needs to do, but hasn't done the "more" that can separate him yet?
Ultimately, I think that even though Chayka was a part of the organization, I am not 100% convinced that he or others in the room were as sold on Strome. As has been mentioned before, Chayka has always been about the idea of finding a consensus among he and the scouts, coaches, etc. I doubt that we had that true "consensus" on the day we took Strome, and maybe that is why Maloney was let go after the year. Too many decisions made only on his terms and not big picture enough.
Anyhow, I think that we are going to find ourselves actually continuing to pluck good prospects in the draft and while it may not mean them ever playing for us (see Entwhistle, Mackenzie), they will be used as a means to add in talent like Oesterle and Hinostroza, both of whom I have good feelings about.
Strome 45 NHL games, 15 pts.
Perlini 150 games 56 pts.
Fischer 105 games 41 pts.
All three have to get to the next step, but they are not that far off if they can ramp it up the next 60 games. I expected all three to be in the 30-40 pt. range this year and any more was gravy. These are young kids trying to find their way, some do it earlier and some do it later. Trading any of these kids now is crazy. We have seen them play some good games, they are just lacking consistency. Even Keller is having consistency problems this year.
Fischer's numbers are actually still in a pretty good range. He could have a completely down season this year and I wouldn't be too worried about it. He's had a slow start this season (and a slow end of last season) but overall he's one of the more successful 2nd round picks we've ever had. Which is hilariously sad but still true nonetheless.
BUX7PHX
Registered User
- Jul 7, 2011
- 5,581
- 1,350
But Jake, it is concerning when the players listed after him were taken 12th and 32nd overall, respectively. When someone is taken 3rd overall, there should be a much greater urgency for that player to produce. Thus far, if we put game tape of all three players on, and said one of them was taken 3rd OA, one was taken in the mid-1st, and the other taken in the early 2nd round, two questions would be asked:
#1: Why would any one of these players be considered for the 3rd OA; and
#2: How could Strome not be the one that looks like he was taken in the 2nd round?
I think that we have seen Perlini and seen Fischer ramp it up some in their time here. It isn't consistent, but we have seen Fischer at his finest driving the net and we have seen the Perlini that we need to see weaving his way on the outside with the puck and using that shot to his advantage. I haven't seen Strome ramp anything up, and it may be time to realize that he may never ramp it up.
The smart GMs are the ones that see some deficiencies and are able to get that player out of the team so that it can be someone else's issue to deal with. Think of our pickups of David Rundblad or our trading away of Conor Murphy. We added Rundblad in an attempt to get additional value for Turris, but we were traded a deficient player who looked the part but didn't show it consistently. Likewise, we traded away a good player in Murphy, but he also had some extreme deficiencies that we turned into someone else's problem. Would you want Murphy back in place of Hjalmarsson at all?
This is why I think some of us have been frustrated - we continue to give chances to players with enough deficiencies and it doesn't appear that they get that much closer to getting it together. Instead of trading Strome away last year or the previous year (when he still could have had some value as someone who could be deemed closer to a #3 OA pick), we have now watched that progress at a slow enough pace to where his value certainly hasn't increased, and at best, has stayed flat. Since we haven't had a lot of pieces to develop, maybe we have been a little gun shy to deals, but since we have added players like Keller, Chychrun, and others that have made the team in far less time than it took Strome to, we now need to figure out a way to make Strome "not our problem anymore."
rt
The Kinder, Gentler Version
No worries! I was just confused and thought I was missing something at first. Ultimately we were just agreeing with each other; if Strome must be traded, Kunin would be an interesting return.
RemoAZ
Let it burn
But is he a premium individual with a likable personality, is easy to coach and not in need of much development? It seems we need a specific set of qualities to thrive as a young player here. It's either that or you have to be a sticky, defensively responsible vet.
I expected much more from Strome than what he has shown thus far. I blame Strome for the most part because we have seen him play pretty good hockey, but he is so f------ inconsistent, but at the same time I still believe there is a lot of untapped talent that we have not seen at this level. At the first part of the season when Strome was playing good, Chayka was heaping praise about his play and were happy with his off season. What happened?
he had two or three bad games and got banished. Kills confidence, tries to constantly make the perfect, play, as a result looks indecisive
I wouldn't say heaping praise. Happy with off season and saw improvement as I recall. What else is he going to say?
azcanuck
Registered User
i'm not advocating trading any of these kids. Let them develop.
But they are different players. Fischer doesn't have to put up big point totals and he wont. He's a grinder with skill . He's very valuable.
Strome brings nothing if he's not creating offense. He's the type of player who SHOULD make those around him more productive. Wait and see approach for now.
perlini , I've called him a young Jeff Carter. Has it all size , speed and a very heavy shot. But he's another guy who needs to mature because he looks like another kid who doesn't compete.
Yup, that is what happened, but he has to do more and I think he will given the opportunity.
BUX7PHX
Registered User
- Jul 7, 2011
- 5,581
- 1,350
The limitation right now is that because of some other deficiencies, the only way that he can look the part and continue to do so is to make the perfect play. If he doesn't make the perfect play, he doesn't bring enough on the physicality, skating, or other areas of the game that we need to see positives out of.
Plus, I thought this was the coach who wasn't going to punish players for mistakes. All players make mistakes, the question is how does the player respond? Domi made plenty of mistakes, but he wasn't sat b/c he was usually able to find some sort of correction or he would contribute in other ways (not always the smartest ways, mind you). I just haven't seen the idea that Strome is correcting the mistakes well enough for our coach's liking, and I am sure that would be the case for many different coaches.
