Hairy Kneel Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 What if Stecher's shot finds the back of the net tonight and he plays well defensively? Hmm.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted October 25, 2016 Share Posted October 25, 2016 maybe a trade then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobi Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 Stecher before Tryamkin. Doesn't bode well for the Russian bear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 Stecher looked better than any defenseman I've seen play for us this year. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 13 hours ago, gobi said: Stecher before Tryamkin. Doesn't bode well for the Russian bear. Tanev is a right side, puck moving D who normally partnerts with Edler. Who more closely resembles that? Who showed good chemistry with Edler in the preseason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brobidus Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 (edited) A Edler - Stecher Hutton - Gudbranson Tryamkin - Tanev B Edler - Tanev Hutton Gudbranson Sbisa - Larsen These are the pairings I want to see when everyone's healthy again. Stecher has never played 82 games though. So he may need so switching. Play A for two games, then switch to B. Rotate whoever needs to be rotated. Keeps everyone fit. Consistency for some, less for others. Edited October 26, 2016 by Brobidus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 4 hours ago, thejazz97 said: Stecher looked better than any defenseman I've seen play for us this year. Best since Erhoff at a two way game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 42 minutes ago, Brobidus said: A Edler - Stecher Hutton - Gudbranson Tryamkin - Tanev B Edler - Tanev Hutton Gudbranson Sbisa - Larsen These are the pairings I want to see when everyone's healthy again. Stecher has never played 82 games though. So he may need so switching. Play A for two games, then switch to B. Rotate whoever needs to be rotated. Keeps everyone fit. Consistency for some, less for others. I like your Team A but am fully prepared to see Stecher spend another 20 -30 games in Utica. That would give management enough time to evaluate Larsen and give some TOI to Tryamkin. That said he had a very impressive game last night with serious upside. The d-core is the only depth in the org IMHO. As they assess these players I hope that Benning can move one to help the forward group. My concern about whether Tanev can stand up to the physical play he faces. If the decision is that he cannot then Benning has to move him for a significant return while his value is high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 6 minutes ago, Boudrias said: My concern about whether Tanev can stand up to the physical play he faces. If the decision is that he cannot then Benning has to move him for a significant return while his value is high. Tanev needs to get healthy first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicky Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 Larsen-Sbisa pairing was a total cluster* last night and stood out for me on a night where the whole team played poorly. It felt like they were out there way more than their play merited. Miller kept us in it but for me Stecher was the lone bright spot. Hope to see much more of this kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonecoldstevebernier Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 The thing that bugs me the most about Stecher's reassignment the more I think about it is this: management often talks about trying to balance two different goals - to develop young players and to win. Stecher does both of these. He's easily our fifth best defenseman (since Edler, Tanev, Hutton, and Gudbranson are lineup locks) if not higher than that. Based on merit he should be on our team, and I think Willie and JB both know that since he was called up and plugged in right away over Tryamkin and Biega. Do they really think Sbisa or Larsen are better options to play defense for us? If neither Sbisa or Larsen figure into the team's long term plans (and they shouldn't) then there's no point in playing them every game, unless having them in the lineup gives you the best chance of winning every night (and it doesn't). Its the same thing with how they played Bartkowski in 80 games last year even though Benning knew he wasn't going to re-sign him, and they weren't making the playoffs. The AHL time won't hurt Stecher at all because its still valuable playing time. But Willie was willing to give him 22 minutes a night in the NHL right out of the gate, so if he's earned that already based on his play then I think that says a lot about who gives you the best chance to win each night. Especially with such a condensed schedule, it makes even more sense to sit Sbisa and Larsen, occasionally at the very least. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcon45ca Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 21 minutes ago, stonecoldstevebernier said: The thing that bugs me the most about Stecher's reassignment the more I think about it is this: management often talks about trying to balance two different goals - to develop young players and to win. Stecher does both of these. He's easily our fifth best defenseman (since Edler, Tanev, Hutton, and Gudbranson are lineup locks) if not higher than that. Based on merit he should be on our team, and I think Willie and JB both know that since he was called up and plugged in right away over Tryamkin and Biega. Do they really think Sbisa or Larsen are better options to play defense for us? If neither Sbisa or Larsen figure into the team's long term plans (and they shouldn't) then there's no point in playing them every game, unless having them in the lineup gives you the best chance of winning every night (and it doesn't). Its the same thing with how they played Bartkowski in 80 games last year even though Benning knew he wasn't going to re-sign him, and they weren't making the playoffs. The AHL time won't hurt Stecher at all because its still valuable playing time. But Willie was willing to give him 22 minutes a night in the NHL right out of the gate, so if he's earned that already based on his play then I think that says a lot about who gives you the best chance to win each night. Especially with such a condensed schedule, it makes even more sense to sit Sbisa and Larsen, occasionally at the very least. Reassigning Stecher probably has more to do with making sure Sbisa gets enough games in so he can be exposed in the upcoming expansion draft. Sbisa has to play at least 30 games, or he won't be eligible to be exposed. Setter looks great. I highly doubt the management or coaches have missed that, he'll be back soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonecoldstevebernier Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 11 minutes ago, falcon45ca said: Reassigning Stecher probably has more to do with making sure Sbisa gets enough games in so he can be exposed in the upcoming expansion draft. Sbisa has to play at least 30 games, or he won't be eligible to be exposed. Setter looks great. I highly doubt the management or coaches have missed that, he'll be back soon. He only needs 19 games to qualify though, since you need either 40 this year or 70 combined between last year and this one. You could still sit Larsen for Stecher. I'm just thinking that considering how our offense has completely dried up that you want to give ice time to the players who will give you a better chance to score. I agree he'll be back though, its annoying how the expansion draft affects what management can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falcon45ca Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 1 minute ago, stonecoldstevebernier said: He only needs 19 games to qualify though, since you need either 40 this year or 70 combined between last year and this one. You could still sit Larsen for Stecher. I'm just thinking that considering how our offense has completely dried up that you want to give ice time to the players who will give you a better chance to score. I agree he'll be back though, its annoying how the expansion draft affects what management can do. Gotta get those games in now while he's healthy. Who knows what injuries may occur? I don't mind the draft, it's going to be fun to see how different teams strategize around it this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefCon1 Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 On 10/27/2016 at 1:13 AM, Boudrias said: I like your Team A but am fully prepared to see Stecher spend another 20 -30 games in Utica. That would give management enough time to evaluate Larsen and give some TOI to Tryamkin. That said he had a very impressive game last night with serious upside. The d-core is the only depth in the org IMHO. As they assess these players I hope that Benning can move one to help the forward group. My concern about whether Tanev can stand up to the physical play he faces. If the decision is that he cannot then Benning has to move him for a significant return while his value is high. Can the Canucks swap for another D and maybe a small plus on forward side?? Tanev to Jets for Jacob Trouba and a forward prospect. I think that would be a fair value for us and the jets and at the same time we would gain a forward prospect that might make our team. Also we would add a bit more offense with Trouba trading places with Tanev. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeltaSwede Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 8 hours ago, stonecoldstevebernier said: The thing that bugs me the most about Stecher's reassignment the more I think about it is this: management often talks about trying to balance two different goals - to develop young players and to win. Stecher does both of these. He's easily our fifth best defenseman (since Edler, Tanev, Hutton, and Gudbranson are lineup locks) if not higher than that. Based on merit he should be on our team, and I think Willie and JB both know that since he was called up and plugged in right away over Tryamkin and Biega. Do they really think Sbisa or Larsen are better options to play defense for us? If neither Sbisa or Larsen figure into the team's long term plans (and they shouldn't) then there's no point in playing them every game, unless having them in the lineup gives you the best chance of winning every night (and it doesn't). Its the same thing with how they played Bartkowski in 80 games last year even though Benning knew he wasn't going to re-sign him, and they weren't making the playoffs. The AHL time won't hurt Stecher at all because its still valuable playing time. But Willie was willing to give him 22 minutes a night in the NHL right out of the gate, so if he's earned that already based on his play then I think that says a lot about who gives you the best chance to win each night. Especially with such a condensed schedule, it makes even more sense to sit Sbisa and Larsen, occasionally at the very least. Bravo. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Fingers Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 7 hours ago, DefCon1 said: Can the Canucks swap for another D and maybe a small plus on forward side?? Tanev to Jets for Jacob Trouba and a forward prospect. I think that would be a fair value for us and the jets and at the same time we would gain a forward prospect that might make our team. Also we would add a bit more offense with Trouba trading places with Tanev. Tanev, Baer and a 2nd for Trouba..... Doubt it would get the deal done, but worth a kick at the tires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 47 minutes ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said: Tanev, Baer and a 2nd for Trouba..... Doubt it would get the deal done, but worth a kick at the tires. Makes sense for us but not WPG. They want a left D coming back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 9 minutes ago, J.R. said: Makes sense for us but not WPG. They want a left D coming back. I'd swap Tanev with edler but no way he waives for the peg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Fingers Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 2 hours ago, J.R. said: Makes sense for us but not WPG. They want a left D coming back. For Trouba, Edler or Hutton going back as part of a Package is not a problem for me. Unless we can include Sbisa???? Lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now