Sign in to follow this  
-AJ-

Troy Stecher | #51 | D

Recommended Posts

After two really solid games after the TD, he has certainly gone downhill. (Though some can be explained by just really bad luck)

 

With that said, if he is willing to come back at a reduced rate to play for his hometown team, he is clearly a better option for the money than Benn or Oscar. While both started out well, they have been somewhat awful since imo.

 

With 2-4 potential role defensemen soon to be pushing for a roster spot soon, I just don't know if there will be room to keep Stecher unless we lose the two forementioned guys, and/or perhaps don't re-sign Tanev. (Which would make our team that much worse if it happened).

 

I do like Stecher, but he is no more than a third pairing guy imo and needs to be paid accordingly. If he wants more, move on.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I like Stecher but man he has some bad luck. The way the puck launched off his skate was a cruel twist of fate.

He got too cute.

Edited by NaveJoseph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, devil_nuk said:

ok enough is enough time to cut the cord  Stecher  other has the worst lock in the world for helping score on his own team but really that is like 10 helpers that he has got on his own team way to many times should look to send him packing he has no got speed rally makes good decisions and seems to always shot the puck and the guy that is defending against him and has cause more goals against then and other canucks in history

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony Strecher should be kept around. This is a guy they should adapt into a RhD/RW hybrid.

 

Promise him a lengthy career in Canuck duds if he made such a sacrifice. He would likely accept a modest AAV, with NTC.

 

Great commitment from this kid; he'll evolve into an important leader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Tony Strecher should be kept around. This is a guy they should adapt into a RhD/RW hybrid.

 

Promise him a lengthy career in Canuck duds if he made such a sacrifice. He would likely accept a modest AAV, with NTC.

 

Great commitment from this kid; he'll evolve into an important leader.

I don't think we have space to pay Stecher fair value, but if he is willing to take a significant discount below his market value, I would be in favour of re-signing him.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Tony Strecher should be kept around. This is a guy they should adapt into a RhD/RW hybrid.

 

Promise him a lengthy career in Canuck duds if he made such a sacrifice. He would likely accept a modest AAV, with NTC.

 

Great commitment from this kid; he'll evolve into an important leader.

why would you give a 6-7 D 12-13 winger an NTC?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but for me,a defense man that can't hit,clear in front of his own net,walk the blueline to get a shot on the other goalie or pass at the proper time to the proper guys is really not what the Canucks need.Defense is by far our biggest weakness and if we finally get some legit talent(more like our little rookie QUINN),we can once again rise in the ranks of bona fide contenders for the cup.

It will be astounding how great our goalies become when you have NHL caliber defense men to help them.

  • Like 1
  • Huggy Bear 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still have no idea if Stecher is going to be a cap casualty and replaced b a cheaper guy like Rafferty... or if Stecher is going to be signed as a cheap player to fill in the top 4 if we lose Tanev.

 

He has value for sure, but really it is as a high end 6/7 guy who can play some top minutes in case of injury (not many 6/7 guys can do that).

 

Does he agree to term instead of dollars?

 

4 years at $2.25 kind of range?  That seems like a deal that doesn’t come back to hurt the team.  It is actually hard to find enough NHL level D to fill in rosters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Provost said:

I still have no idea if Stecher is going to be a cap casualty and replaced b a cheaper guy like Rafferty... or if Stecher is going to be signed as a cheap player to fill in the top 4 if we lose Tanev.

 

He has value for sure, but really it is as a high end 6/7 guy who can play some top minutes in case of injury (not many 6/7 guys can do that).

 

Does he agree to term instead of dollars?

 

4 years at $2.25 kind of range?  That seems like a deal that doesn’t come back to hurt the team.  It is actually hard to find enough NHL level D to fill in rosters.

Personally, I think Stecher would be fortunate to match his current salary ($2.325M). I think going for term would look like $1.8M or less, given that he's a 5/6 guy on our team right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -AJ- said:

Personally, I think Stecher would be fortunate to match his current salary ($2.325M). I think going for term would look like $1.8M or less, given that he's a 5/6 guy on our team right now.

Makes it seem more likely Stecher won't get qualified so they can offer a little bit less than his base salary.  Stecher doesn't really have much bargaining leverage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

Makes it seem more likely Stecher won't get qualified so they can offer a little bit less than his base salary.  Stecher doesn't really have much bargaining leverage.

Yeah, I don't think we qualify him, but there's a chance we at least re-sign him after he's a UFA if he's willing to go for that cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, -AJ- said:

Personally, I think Stecher would be fortunate to match his current salary ($2.325M). I think going for term would look like $1.8M or less, given that he's a 5/6 guy on our team right now.

When you talk those kind of numbers on a 3 year deal it makes sense. I don't know if Stecher could get that kind of term. The cost is low enough that he could be dealt to another team come TDL. Tanev would have the same TDL appeal but his cost would likely be higher. It will be a tough contract for Tanev to nail down. Value + term for a 

30 year old who plays a style that leads to injury. He has to compete against younger and cheaper alternatives. Does he take a discount to have one more crack at a CUP with a Canuck jersey? Even if he did I would still question it. IMO it isn't about how he plays next year it is about 3 years out. Probably wiser to invest the CAP and TOI in a younger player who will be hitting his prime. 

  • Hydration 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to move on from Stecher. This team won't be competing unless Stecher is not more than a 7th D man. I like him, but he is mediocre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stetcher will be a very interesting decision for Benning and group? As a # 5 D man Stetcher played between 14-16 mins per game RFA wanting 4 x 2.4 mil??

Some people feel Rafferty could fill this spot at 750,000? Will be a interesting summer.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, wildcam said:

Stetcher will be a very interesting decision for Benning and group? As a # 5 D man Stetcher played between 14-16 mins per game RFA wanting 4 x 2.4 mil??

Some people feel Rafferty could fill this spot at 750,000? Will be a interesting summer.

 

We’re in a position now where we have to save every dollar. We can’t be paying our bottom pair D men over 2 mil.

 

I like Stecher but we’re likely going to have to trade him along with Benn. That’s an extra 2+ million savings that can be used to help resign Markstrom, Tanev, or Virtanen. Or to sign Tryamkin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, wildcam said:

Stetcher will be a very interesting decision for Benning and group? As a # 5 D man Stetcher played between 14-16 mins per game RFA wanting 4 x 2.4 mil??

Some people feel Rafferty could fill this spot at 750,000? Will be a interesting summer.

 

Except he played a lot more than that over his last contract.  He has averaged more than 18:30 a game over his time with us, including as a rookie when you would expert him to have less minutes.

 

Each year he started out lower on the depth chart and worked his way up.  In other years he was a 19-20 minute guy,.. this past season he worked his way back to the 1st shut down pairing with Edler again, at the same his early season partner ended up in the press box.  He has also averaged .26 PPG over his career which is great for a D who doesn’t get PP time.

 

He has value as a legit NHL D, he is significantly better than Benn who is fairly paid at $2 million.  On a good defence Stecher is a 3rd pairing guy who can move up in case of injury.

 

We don’t have a good defence.

 

Barring something unusual, we won’t be able to afford a good defence next season.  If we can’t afford Tanev, we can’t afford an equivalent replacement.


Rafferty is only a year younger than Stecher and has played a total of 2 NHL games as a 3rd pairing D, you can’t compare him to a guy that has successfully played 30 minutes a game for long stretches and has been on a 1st pairing against the toughest competition.


If Stecher would take around his current salary (adjusted for whatever happens to league salaries overall), with some term... that provides us good value.

 

 

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Provost said:

Except he played a lot more than that over his last contract.  He has averaged more than 18:30 a game over his time with us, including as a rookie when you would expert him to have less minutes.

 

Each year he started out lower on the depth chart and worked his way up.  In other years he was a 19-20 minute guy,.. this past season he worked his way back to the 1st shut down pairing with Edler again, at the same his early season partner ended up in the press box.  He has also averaged .26 PPG over his career which is great for a D who doesn’t get PP time.

 

He has value as a legit NHL D, he is significantly better than Benn who is fairly paid at $2 million.  On a good defence Stecher is a 3rd pairing guy who can move up in case of injury.

 

We don’t have a good defence.

 

Barring something unusual, we won’t be able to afford a good defence next season.  If we can’t afford Tanev, we can’t afford an equivalent replacement.


Rafferty is only a year younger than Stecher and has played a total of 2 NHL games as a 3rd pairing D, you can’t compare him to a guy that has successfully played 30 minutes a game for long stretches and has been on a 1st pairing against the toughest competition.


If Stecher would take around his current salary (adjusted for whatever happens to league salaries overall), with some term... that provides us good value.

 

 

Agreed. I'd rather see us move Benn and swap in Tryamkin for him than lose Stecher if possible. Hopefully we can convince Troy to re-sign for closer to that $2m mark.

 

That said, it's going to be tight and Jim had his work cutout to squeeze everyone in.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Agreed. I'd rather see us move Benn and swap in Tryamkin for him than lose Stecher if possible. Hopefully we can convince Troy to re-sign for closer to that $2m mark.

 

That said, it's going to be tight and Jim had his work cutout to squeeze everyone in.

I wouldn’t be heartbroken if we found a better solution than Stecher... but we have limited options and money.

 

It is also just unfair to downplay Stecher’s ability.  The guy was picked to for Team Canada for the World Championship just a year ago.  Hockey people outside this market think he is pretty solid.

 

Barring a trade and/or Tanev agreeing to a cheap 1 year deal... I think our best (affordable) bet for a D next year would be:

 

Hughes-Myers

Edler-Stecher

Tryamkin-Rafferty

Benn

 

Not going to win you championships, but at least you can see what you have in Tryamkin and Rafferty.  
 

We will need to expose a D who is under contract and has at least 40 games in the expansion draft... we don’t have anyone except Myers at the moment who fits that category.  If we have Stecher, Tryamkin, Rafferty playing for a full season we can decide who of them to expose (assuming we don’t want to get rid of Myers by then).  We will also have extra protected slots and could possibly remake our D next offseason by picking up guys from other teams who would rather get something back rather than losing a guy for nothing who they can’t protect 

Edited by Provost
  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Provost said:

I wouldn’t be heartbroken if we found a better solution than Stecher... but we have limited options and money.

 

It is also just unfair to downplay Stecher’s ability.  The guy was picked to for Team Canada for the World Championship just a year ago.  Hockey people outside this market think he is pretty solid.

 

Barring a trade and/or Tanev agreeing to a cheap 1 year deal... I think our best (affordable) bet for a D next year would be:

 

Hughes-Myers

Edler-Stecher

Tryamkin-Rafferty

Benn

 

Not going to win you championships, but at least you can see what you have in Tryamkin and Rafferty.  
 

We will need to expose a D who is under contract and has at least 40 games in the expansion draft... we don’t have anyone except Myers at the moment who fits that category.  If we have Stecher, Tryamkin, Rafferty playing for a full season we can decide who of them to expose (assuming we don’t want to get rid of Myers by then).  We will also have extra protected slots and could possibly remake our D next offseason by picking up guys from other teams who would rather get something bald rather than losing a guy for nothing who they can’t protect 

 

All highly dependent on what the league does to relieve the cap issues next season (compliance buyouts etc), but I'm hopeful that instead of losing Tanev, that between those measures and moving other cap (trade Roussel, Benn, regular buyout or 50% retention on Baer etc) that we might be able to retain everyone.

 

Hughes, Tanev

Edler, Myers/Stecher

Tryamkin, Stecher/Myers

 

With 1-2 of Sautner, Brisebois, Rafferty etc as spares.

 

If we re-up Tanev, I'd not be surprised if we actually push Myers as our ED player. Would clear cap and make room for youth. Guessing we extend Edler at 1'ish year increments after as well.

 

Then if kids start making anyone expendable, we can move vets out as required.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, DeNiro said:

We’re in a position now where we have to save every dollar. We can’t be paying our bottom pair D men over 2 mil.

 

I like Stecher but we’re likely going to have to trade him along with Benn. That’s an extra 2+ million savings that can be used to help resign Markstrom, Tanev, or Virtanen. Or to sign Tryamkin.

I don't know about signing Tanev UFA very injury prone to 4 yrs x 4.6 mil lion?? Think its time to more on......

Tryamkin, Canucks can't afford to pay him 2 million?? Listen to sportnet they had hockey guy that watch lots of KHL games..

Said tryamking  skates good, poor defensive IQ , big body to move player away from net? Maybe worth 1.5 million x 2 yrs show me more deal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.