Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Troy Stecher | #51 | D


Gstank29

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Gooseberries said:

Someone on here went to school with him and said he was blowing smoke. Big avs fan apparently. Still happy to have him. 

In case my sig didn't give it away.... I used to be a pretty big Avs fan too. Forsberg, Sakic, Roy etc...they were a damn good and entertaining team.

 

I was always a Canucks fan first though.

 

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

You think Hamhuis should be resigned. I don't agree as I see a real fight for TOI next year. The d-vets being Edler, Tanev, Hutton and Sbisa. 

If we re-sign Hamhuis, IMO we need to move one of Edler or Sbisa.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, J.R. said:

In case my sig didn't give it away.... I used to be a pretty big Avs fan too. Forsberg, Sakic, Roy etc...they were a damn good and entertaining team.

 

I was always a Canucks fan first though.

 

If we re-sign Hamhuis, IMO we need to move one of Edler or Sbisa.

So true.  If you grew up on hockey in the late 90s you were probably either a red wings or Avs fan.  and if not a fan of one, you definitely picked sides in that battle.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wshdrvvn said:

So true.  If you grew up on hockey in the late 90s you were probably either a red wings or Avs fan.  and if not a fan of one, you definitely picked sides in that battle.

Scary how good both of those rosters look in hindsight. You won't ever see teams like that again in the salary cap era.

Hard to vote against Yzerman and co. but I think the Avs were the best. Sakic, Forsberg, Roy.

Legendary stuff, really.

 

9 minutes ago, cabinessence said:

Just the signing we need! We've had so much success with small defencemen!

How could anyone possibly swing this signing as a bad thing? shake my goddamn head tbh fam

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wrecken said:

I would rather see Hammer here at a discount, and Pedan sent down and used for injuries/depth.

Pedan wouldn't clear. He'll likely get another two-way deal on his next contract, so Biega with his age and one way contract is more likely to clear.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, J.R. said:

...

If we re-sign Hamhuis, IMO we need to move one of Edler or Sbisa.

I'd happily move Sbisa at his contract if someone would take him. Tryamkin and Pedan bring size in the bottom two pairings, and as much as Edler isn't a physical force as much any more, he still uses the body and is a big minute guy for us. Unless it is a move based on positional requirements or the offers are that much different, moving Sbisa would be fine with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, thejazz97 said:

Is that Stecher in your pic? That's really cool.

In the Bure jersey, yeah. The fact that he owns one should be proof enough he was still a Canucks fan even if he liked the Avs as well.

Edited by elvis15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

Should be, but look at our depth on the right side in the future in terms of true RHD:

 

NOW: Tanev > Weber > Biega > Fedun > Subban

FUTURE: Tanev (for how long?) > Stecher > Subban (will he be NHL-size and tough enough?) > Fedun

 

We have a lot of big holes at the right side, and because of that Stecher jumps pretty fast up the "depth" chart.

 

We need a stud top pairing RHD and have needed one since Ehrhoff left.

Tanev, Tryamkin and Larson are expected to be right side D next season, with Biega as depth. Sbisa is acceptable on the right side as well (played on Hutton's right for much of the start of the year). Fedun probably won't be here long term but Stecher and Subban will be fighting it out to be the next full time NHL'er on that side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, nergish said:

Scary how good both of those rosters look in hindsight. You won't ever see teams like that again in the salary cap era.

Hard to vote against Yzerman and co. but I think the Avs were the best. Sakic, Forsberg, Roy.

Legendary stuff, really.

 

How could anyone possibly swing this signing as a bad thing? shake my goddamn head tbh fam

To answer your question, please read my comment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, cabinessence said:

To answer your question, please read my comment. 

I did.

Great username btw. Brian Wilson is a genius.

What 'non-success' were you referring to?

Weber? Lead our Dman in goals one year. But was never very highly regarded to begin with.
Raphael Diaz? 
Jordan Subban, who lead our AHL defensemen in scoring? Again, not a high pick. Any success he has is just gravy for us.

Those players haven't been all that great because... they were never really expected to be. If a highly promising collegiate athlete comes into the fold, his height is pretty much irrelevant. We don't have a height requirement on our team. Although Jimbo does seem a tad more adamant about it than some others have been.


 

Edited by nergish
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DIBdaQUIB said:

Define "small"?

 

He is and inch or two shorter than ideal but I have seen him listed in the 192-195lb range.

Tanev is 185

Bartkowski 196

Hutton 183

Sbisa  198

..and Duncan Keith is 6'0" and 192lbs.  pretty much the same size (maybe lighter) as Stecher.

 

If it is true that he is above average in skating, puck handling, compete level etc...it doesn't seem his size should be an issue./

Under 6 feet for am NHL defenceman is considered small. Will he make it difficult for opposing forwards to crash the crease? Keith is either 6"1" or 6"2"  How successful has Vancouver been with d mean under 6"0"? If you consider Biega a success story then ok. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, nergish said:

I did.

Great username btw. Brian Wilson is a genius.

What 'non-success' were you referring to?

Weber? Lead our Dman in goals one year. But was never very highly regarded to begin with.
Raphael Diaz? 
Jordan Subban, who lead our AHL defensemen in scoring? Again, not a high pick. Any success he has is just gravy for us.

Those players haven't been all that great because... they were never really expected to be. If a highly promising collegiate athlete comes into the fold, his height is pretty much irrelevant. We don't have a height requirement on our team. Although Jimbo does seem a tad more adamant about it than some others have been.


 

Great song too! I like Biega, but in all honesty, if he is on your team, your defence isn't that deep. Weber did have a good year last season, but ultimately he was too soft to make the team much better when it came to the playoffs Diaz didn't pan out so well. Remember the highly touted college free agent Ian Kidd?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, cabinessence said:

Under 6 feet for am NHL defenceman is considered small. Will he make it difficult for opposing forwards to crash the crease? Keith is either 6"1" or 6"2"  How successful has Vancouver been with d mean under 6"0"? If you consider Biega a success story then ok. 

 

 

Kids can still grow an inch until they are 24/25 years old.

 

I bet he turns out close to, if not 6'0" and 202 lbs

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This kid reminds me of Scott Niedermayer a lot. They are different but similar players. They are the same when it comes to compete and tenaciousness. Their style is somewhat similar as well as their size. Scott was 6'1" and 200lbs. Scott used his brains tho instead of just using brute body force. Not unlike our boy Stecher!

 

He definitely has the personality and mental composition to be a real good player.

 

His BCHL coach says he just "makes things happen" and wont be surprised to see him pull a Hutton and crack the opening roster. Says once he sets his sights on something he just makes it happen! Kid definitely has the skill to go along with his strong sights and personality.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, cabinessence said:

Under 6 feet for am NHL defenceman is considered small. Will he make it difficult for opposing forwards to crash the crease? Keith is either 6"1" or 6"2"  How successful has Vancouver been with d mean under 6"0"? If you consider Biega a success story then ok. 

 

 

As I posted...Keith is listed at 6' and 192lbs.  By your logic, Chicago should never have given him a shot at the NHL.

How about Eric Karlsson?  Listed at 5'11" - 6'0", and 190lbs.  Same size as Stecher.  He's obviously not an NHL caliber player by your standards either.

 

I never mentioned Biega and for you to is just an weak attempt at deflecting the discussion away form the fact that your "standard" does not hold water in the real world.

 

Size is always good but Stecher has other attributes that are highly valued in the NHL game and is not s "small" that he stands no chance of making the NHL.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, cabinessence said:

Under 6 feet for am NHL defenceman is considered small. Will he make it difficult for opposing forwards to crash the crease? Keith is either 6"1" or 6"2"  How successful has Vancouver been with d mean under 6"0"? If you consider Biega a success story then ok. 

 

 

Crash the crease is good and all but if you can't create offence from your Dmen you won't win. Stretcher is all about that.

 

Its been 5 years and people are still clamouring for an Ehrhoff type. How many times did he clear the crease?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

As I posted...Keith is listed at 6' and 192lbs.  By your logic, Chicago should never have given him a shot at the NHL.

How about Eric Karlsson?  Listed at 5'11" - 6'0", and 190lbs.  Same size as Stecher.  He's obviously not an NHL caliber player by your standards either.

 

I never mentioned Biega and for you to is just an weak attempt at deflecting the discussion away form the fact that your "standard" does not hold water in the real world.

 

Size is always good but Stecher has other attributes that are highly valued in the NHL game and is not s "small" that he stands no chance of making the NHL.

 

Besides you add Stecher to a team who already has 2 or 3 D-men who are gigantosaurs and his size doesn't even become an issue if it ever was in the first place!

 

I can totally see the Canucks D in 2 or 3 years with the Giant Tryamkin, 2 gigantosaurs in Hutton and Pedan, an Edler, and both Subban and Stecher.

 

That would be an awesome back end if they all pan out like we hope :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...