SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

Some Stecher items (actually there's a ton of them) from Botchford last night/today (The Province). http://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/canucks-beat-oilers-what-we-learned-with-all-the-stecher-you-can-handle That last one about Stecher's ability to recall past plays really stands out. If he indeed has a "photographic memory" for hockey, his ability to learn from his mistakes (and successes) should prove invaluable to his development as an NHL player.

I don't think it quite works that way. At least not by my reading of the expansion rules. Teams have to expose a minimum of one defenseman and two forwards that are under contract for 2017-18 and who've either played a minimum of 70 games in 2015-16 through 2016-17 or 40 games in 2016-17. And they must expose a goalie either under contract for 2017-18 or who is a pending RFA (no minimum games for goalies however). But that doesn't mean all the exposed players need to meet the above requirements to be eligible for selection in the expansion draft. First and second year professionals and unsigned draft choices are exempt. Everyone else is eligible for selection (other than those players teams choose to place on their protected list or with contract clauses that force them to be protected). First or second year professional status is based on the CBA definition of 10 games minimum/season in the NHL at ages 18 and 19, and any season played in the AHL or NHL at age 20 and above. So Gaunce, Rodin, etc (basically anyone listed here who doesn't appear in the "exempt" column) will be eligible for selection (if they are not protected by the club), regardless of their number of games played this season. Stashing expansion draft eligible players in the minors or the press box and limiting their 2016-17 NHL games played to <40 (or <70 for 2015-16 through 2016-17) will not protect them from selection. Only placing them on the protected list will accomplish this.

Posted this in the "who deserves a spot" thread in CT but I probably should have put it here: Just had a look at the preseason stats: http://www.naturalstattrick.com/playerteams.php?season=20162017&stype=1&team=VAN&sit=5v5&rate=r Interesting to see Stecher leading all Ds (with more than one GP) in CF% Rel, FF% Rel, and SF% Rel: +9.77 CF% Rel (60.53 CF%) +7.13 FF% Rel (56.67 FF%) +7.52 SF% Rel (58.14 SF%) This while also having the second lowest Off. Zone FO% (zonestarts) among Ds (again with >1 GP): 36% Off. Zone FO% (only Edler lower) Sure it's only three games but those are some eye-popping stats. As good as he's looked according to the eye test, those numbers are even more impressive. Especially since he's being given much tougher deployment than I'd realized and has still managed to feast off those minutes and tilt the ice significantly. Just thought I'd share. EDIT: Just another point. If you look at Stecher's relative numbers for corsi/fenwick/shots against, you'll see that he's not just an offensive engine but is also posting some impressive "shot suppression" stats. So he's "feasting" on his defensive deployment almost as much as his offensive opportunities.

I'm curious about the actual targets on conditional pick we gave up on Larsen. Would be funny if the target was just NHL games played (versus NHL games player WITH Vancouver). Imagine a scenario where we waive Larsen, the Oilers claim him, dress him for the required number of games, and end up with both Larsen and a 4th rounder. Highly unlikely as I believe conditional picks generally require the performance targets to be achieved with the acquiring team. EDIT: also unlikely because Larsen kinda hates the Oilers and probably just bolts to the KHL instead of going to back Edmonton In any case, if Stecher can live up to expectations, and that means we don't play Larsen, I won't sweat the loss of a pick, whether a 5th or a 4th, nor the loss of Larsen (if claimed on waivers). But there are still a few games left to play before any final decisions get made.

Thought Vanessa Jang's piece (from Canucks Army) deserved to be posted here: http://canucksarmy.com/2016/10/1/what-they-re-saying-is-brendan-gaunce-the-13th-forward Brendan Gaunce was the first player listed on Iain MacIntyre's "Five guys we noticed at Canucks training camp" article. Macintyre said he "blew people away in fitness testing, then looked stronger and faster on the ice too." In a TSN 1040 radio interview, the compliments only continued. It is evident that this summer has been one to remember for Brendan Gaunce. For four years, the Canucks and Utica Comets have met with him to discuss off-season training plans and improvements. Based on what the media has had to say, he had put all those words into fruition. At 6'2 and 207 lbs, Brendan Gaunce is built like an NHL player. His performance at training camp, as well as the many pre-season games, has put him in serious contention for a bottom-6 roster spot. If you thought the lines were locked up, think again because Gaunce is motivated. If he continues to be an impact player throughout the pre-season, it will be hard not to give him a roster spot. Willie Desjardins and Canucks management have been firm and public in their goal to win this year. They, along with the players, are hungry to prove that last season was simply an anomaly. If they believe that Brendan Gaunce will give the team a better chance of winning over Emerson Etem or Marcus Granlund, do not be surprised to see him in the line-up. The regular reason begins on October 15th vs. Calgary, so the 2012 first-round pick has until then to continue to bolster his case to be one of the 13 forwards on opening night. Sources: TSN 1040, The Province - Iain MacIntyre, The Vancouver Sun - Ben Kuzma

Thanks J.R. I can always count on you to point out any of the "fine print" I miss.

He won't need to. Boeser has been asked point blank about the idea of holding out and going FA and he basically laughed at the suggestion: http://www.twincities.com/2016/04/12/bob-sansevere-qa-north-dakota-hockey-forward-brock-boeser/ There's plan in place. Boeser, his family, UND, and the Canucks are all on the same page. He's coming to Vancouver. Almost certainly next season (2017-18). Every official statement made in recent months, by either Boeser or the Canucks, fits this timeline.

It's going to be very interesting when we get a game where Stecher plays against true NHL level defensive zone coverage (which we didn't really see from that Oilers squad last game). If he's in that type of game environment and can still create time and space and find lanes for open looks, then look out. If Stecher can keep rolling, and Larsen doesn't up his performance dramatically in his next couple outings, I don't think the coaches or management will be facing a tough decision at all. Still lots of hockey to play however. And every player can have good and bad nights. But the Larsen vs. Stecher decision is quickly becoming one of the more fascinating "games within the game" during this exhibition season.

I think both players could end up playing big roles for us, possibly even as a future pairing. Stecher is a play driver and an offensive engine. Juolevi is more like the fuel. His role tends to be less flashy but is still crucially important to keep all the other motors humming.

If the young guys can keep bringing it, this is going to be a fascinating preseason to watch. Last game saw Gaunce and Stecher throwing down the gauntlet. It's going to be up to the others (like Etem and Larsen) to respond. Obviously, the players with more NHL games and who carry waiver risk have a leg up. But those bottom-six/third pairing and spare/extra spots are not written in stone. There is an opportunity to play your way onto this lineup. Competition is a good thing.

Definitely a strong game. He still did all the quiet little plays that make me love his game (based on his high level positioning, vision, and defensive awareness). But he also showed a lot of jump, was engaged physically, and obviously hitting the scoresheet didn't hurt. Gaunce clearly has his mind set on making this team.

Great game for Stecher (following an impressive camp). He's done nothing but look good since arriving here. I'm still keeping my expectations in check, and I still think odds are he'll start in the AHL, but there's no denying he looked NHL ready on several plays tonight. That little fake and then pass on the Rödin goal was high level stuff. Tantalizing skillset with this kid. Definitely looked, tonight at least, like it's not "if" but "when" for Stecher. Still some games to play before the final lineup decision get made (and this was only a preseason game and against the Oilers). And definitely some hurdles to overcome, given roster pressures and waiver risk. But tonight he showed glimpses of being the type of defenseman I've been hoping for years that we could somehow acquire.

Gaunce topped Iain MacIntyre's (Vancouver Sun) list of camp standouts: http://vancouversun.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/five-guys-we-noticed-at-canucks-training-camp

Nice the hear Gaunce singled out by Benning as one of the guys coming to camp in the best shape. Especially given that Gaunce has added 10 lbs and now weighs 217. That added strength should help him be even more effective. Also great to hear positive reviews from his scrimmage play (usual praise for his strong positioning and awareness) and his increased footspeed (at least according to some reports). He's still up against it due to the waiver risk issue. But definitely sounding like Gaunce will do everything in his power to make it a tough decision for Benning. If he wasn't waiver exempt this season, I'd imagine Gaunce would be close to a lock to make the lineup. A guy who can play centre and wing is pretty much the ideal 13th forward. I'm definitely rooting for him, even though his making the team would almost certainly put somebody at waiver risk (unless Rödin goes on a conditioning assignment, which is certainly possible, as @J.R. mentioned above).

If you look at his underlying numbers, it's a very good bet his next 20ish NHL games will see him post much better scoring totals. On my way out the door so I'm going from memory but I believe his teammates only shot 1.85% when he was on the ice last season. That's a terrible shooting percentage and it's almost certain to improve (which would covert into more points for Gaunce). His events differentials (Corsi Rel, etc) were some of best on the team so it's likely his poor raw numbers were almost entirely percentage driven and will improve with more games.

Yeah, I suppose it's more the numbers game of the current roster squeeze than anything else. Hard to fit Gaunce into the lineup without having to waive somebody else 25 or under who also has good upside. So Gaunce has to really kill it IMO (and clearly out perform all the young waiver eligible forwards) for him to overcome his own waiver exemption. But I can see him making the team regardless. I really like what he brings and I do believe he's NHL ready right now. And I'd agree that a year on a "development" 4th line (if he would indeed be deployed that way) could be good for Gaunce. Just not sure (yet) that it's the best choice, given all the factors. I'm still not sure if Gaunce gains more (other than salary) this season by playing on Willie Desjardins' 4th line (even if it's a "development line") than he would in a core player and team leader role on Travis Green's 1st line (or 2nd) in Utica. And even if the NHL role is a better one for Gaunce individually, I'm not sure the benefits outweigh the potential risks from a team perspective (especially as it relates to waiver risk and maintaining maximum player assets). But I'm hoping Gaunce will show enough make the answers to these questions obvious to everyone by the end of preseason.

I'm game if you are. Tell you what, I'll make you the same deal Gillis had with Gilman. If I ever get a GM gig, you'll be my first hire. Consider this post my application for upcoming vacancies. NHL team owners can PM me.

It also depends a lot on the type of player Gaunce potentially displaces. If he played his way into a top-9 spot, I'm sure Benning does whatever is needed to make room for him. But if it's a 4th line role, or "replacement level," then things get tricky. Do you expose another player to waivers that you hope to keep in the system, just to get a marginal upgrade from Gaunce at a 4th line position? And does a 4th line role, (or possibly a spare/13th forward role) help Gaunce more than him playing first or second line in Utica? How much value is there in getting Gaunce minimal NHL minutes for the start of the season? Does this really help him? Does it help the team (versus the risk of losing a decent depth player on waivers)? These are the types of questions Benning will have to answer. That's why he gets paid the big bucks and gets to sit at the head of the management table.

I've really liked Juolevi over two viewings in the tourney. Maybe not always flashy and certainly not perfect, but his quiet game has impressed me. He's very steady, doesn't panic, and just makes good, smart plays. A poster on another board commented on Juolevi being the master of the 3rd assist. I think this fits. He's very quick to advance the puck up ice and get the offense going. He puts his forwards (and D partner--especially with Stecher) in position to succeed. It's not always obvious but I think if you roll back tape on his shifts, you'll more often than not find him making a critical play that started most of the team scoring chances (while Juolevi is on-ice). It's early days yet. But I have a feeling that Green is right that Juolevi's quality will become more apparent as the games become higher level (ie: NHL preseason). I think he'll start to impress some of the doubters as the games becomes more structured and less choppy and the overall quality improves of the players on the ice. But so far, what I've noted (based on my eye test) has been very positive.

I think Hutton is the better all around defenseman. His two-way, three zones, all situations game is just stronger IMO (and of course he's no slouch offensively). But Stecher might very well be the better offensive defensemen. He seems to have his "offense switch" set on "go" at all times (or certainly whenever his team has the puck or is about to gain possession). He's maybe more dynamic than Hutton as a puck carrier on the rush and Stecher seems to naturally take on the QB role in the offensive zone. He's possibly the more creative player of the two and he seems to be more of a direct threat to score. But I'd probably want to see more of Stecher (at the pro level) before vaulting him above Hutton (who's already a top-4 D in the NHL. And last game's 9 shots performance, while certainly encouraging, probably should be taken with a small grain of salt. It did help that Stecher had Juolevi backing him up last game. I won't say Stecher was poor defensively (and he usually has a fairly tidy two-way game), but let's just say he could have been embarrassed a few times if he had been playing with a lesser partner. And he definitely left Juolevi alone "holding the bag" a couple times. It was also the first game of the tournament for every player on the ice. And Stecher is older and more developed than most of his competition at this level. So he should stand out (and was expected to). Hopefully he will continue to stand out when the competition level ramps up through main camp and preseason. And I'd be thrilled if Stecher leapfrogs Hutton at the NHL level. Hutton is a top-4 D and arguably has first pairing upside. If Stecher can surpass that, he'll be this team's best undrafted free agent signing since Chris Tanev.

Yeah, I do get tired of the "came out of nowhere" and "nobody could have predicted" types of comments we constantly see attached to Hutton's name and his success. I'm not going to claim that I predicted Hutton would make the team last year. But at the time, my argument was that the coaches and management would hold him back. I believed he was ready. I just thought he wouldn't get the opportunity (and the earlier Utica stint seemed to support this view). But there were plenty of us that were very high on Hutton and very early on.

I think Jost will be a good NHLer and I'd even wager he clicks well with Boeser. I still wouldn't make a trade for him. Recent first round picks are generally overvalued in the market. You'd have to pay a premium to acquire Jost. I'd rather just draft a comparable player with #1C upside with either our 2017 or 2018 first round pick (or both--can't have too many skilled centremen). Several of next year's class's best C prospects project rather well and look like potential first liners (at least at this early stage). A few of them might even be on a similar timeline to Jost, as far as actually playing in the NHL (as in they might have a trajectory to crack the league the same season as Jost, even though they're younger). None of what I'm saying is meant to undervalue Jost. He's a hell of a prospect and I'd love to have him in our system. I'm just not willing to pay the (likely) price required to acquire him right now.

Hard to say. Those roster sheets are often inaccurate. No way to know when the listed measurements were actually taken. For example, they have Brisebois at 6'2" and 175lbs. But IIRC, Linden was quoted this summer saying Brisebois is now 190lbs and 6'3".

Good interview with Stecher today on Sekeres and Price (TSN 1040): http://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040-i-1410/stecher-my-goal-is-to-make-the-canucks-out-of-camp-1.566234

@AlwaysACanuckFan: thanks for the share ^^ It's not a question of "if" anymore but "when" Gaunce will become a regular NHL player IMO. Hopefully it's soon, hopefully as a Canuck, and hopefully for many years in Vancouver. He's up against a roster crunch this season (and his waivers exemption does him no favours here) but I can't imagine Gaunce not being a mainstay in our bottom six by 2017-18 (unless he's traded).