Troy Stecher | #51 | D

[elvis15]

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

Rathbone will replace Stech.

There's the lefty/righty part of that, so it won't be that close a replacement.

[MrCanuck94]

I think it's safe to say the Canucks' best move going forward will be to cut ties with Tony. Amazing person, local guy and works his a** off, but just not good enough to have when it matters. We either need to use that 3RD spot as a cap relief with an ELC or find a #5 Dman that has more size and the ability to step up and play temporary top 4 minutes against top teams.

[elvis15]

16 minutes ago, MrCanuck94 said:

I think it's safe to say the Canucks' best move going forward will be to cut ties with Tony. Amazing person, local guy and works his a** off, but just not good enough to have when it matters. We either need to use that 3RD spot as a cap relief with an ELC or find a #5 Dman that has more size and the ability to step up and play temporary top 4 minutes against top teams.

It'll all depend on if he'll take less. If not, he'll have to find a market elsewhere.

[MrCanuck94]

On 8/19/2020 at 6:17 PM, elvis15 said:

It'll all depend on if he'll take less. If not, he'll have to find a market elsewhere.

How much less though? If we have someone like Rafferty ready to jump at 700k, might be worth to take the risk there rather than re-sign him.

Edited August 21, 2020 by MrCanuck94

[Provost]

29 minutes ago, MrCanuck94 said:

I think it's safe to say the Canucks' best move going forward will be to cut ties with Tony. Amazing person, local guy and works his a** off, but just not good enough to have when it matters. We either need to use that 3RD spot as a cap relief with an ELC or find a #5 Dman that has more size and the ability to step up and play temporary top 4 minutes against top teams.

I don’t think that is particularly true at all.  Over the past few years he has had really good defensive numbers, some of the best on the team.

 

He has also shown that he can play up and down the lineup and even play top pairing minutes without being buried.  He also has years of being in his prime left.

 

If you gave him some term and avoided a big AAV number... maybe $2-2.5 million then you have a very cost effective player.

 

Tanev has been great for us, but there is no question he is getting worse as he gets older.  There is far more danger in signing Tanev than there is Stecher, unless Tanev is willing to rake a huge discount in dollars and most especially term.

 

 

[KirkSave]

11 minutes ago, Provost said:

17 minutes ago, Provost said:

 

He has also shown that he can play up and down the lineup and even play top pairing minutes without being buried

 

I love the heart and drive that Stecher plays with but I don't see the Canucks backend being a force over the coming years if Stecher is in our top 4, even if it is at a reasonable cap hit. Even though he would be cost effective at 2 to 2.5 per, he doesn't fit the bill as a playoff performer.

 

The last 2 games, Edler and Stecher have been a disaster as a pair. Yes, Stecher is young and versatile in terms of being able to hold a top pairing spot for a short period of time. Maybe we sign him for a few more years if possible but I would prefer Tanev for a few more years over Stecher, despite the fact outside of this season, Tanev misses substantial time due to injury.

[Gurn]

18 minutes ago, KirkSave said:

The last 2 games, Edler and Stecher have been a disaster as a pair.

Against the defending Stanley Cup Champions.

Paired up only because Meyers is injured.

[higgyfan]

25 minutes ago, KirkSave said:

I love the heart and drive that Stecher plays with but I don't see the Canucks backend being a force over the coming years if Stecher is in our top 4, even if it is at a reasonable cap hit. Even though he would be cost effective at 2 to 2.5 per, he doesn't fit the bill as a playoff performer.

 

The last 2 games, Edler and Stecher have been a disaster as a pair. Yes, Stecher is young and versatile in terms of being able to hold a top pairing spot for a short period of time. Maybe we sign him for a few more years if possible but I would prefer Tanev for a few more years over Stecher, despite the fact outside of this season, Tanev misses substantial time due to injury.

To be fair, Stech was not supposed to be a top 4 guy.  As I recall, Myers and Tanev were the top 2RDs.  He would be just fine playing alongside Fanta.  Some folks are even suggesting that Rafferty could replace Troy.  What has Raff proven in the NHL.  He's played in 2 games, whilst Stech has completed his 4th year.  Let's give credit where it's due.

[elvis15]

3 hours ago, MrCanuck94 said:

How much less though? If we have someone like Rafferty ready to jump at 900k, might be worth to take the risk there rather than re-sign him.

I'd pay him more than Rafferty, but not as much as Provost is suggesting. We have to either qualify him at a bit more, or not and negotiate a lower deal. With a flat cap he may take a bit less, hopefully under $2 with a short term deal.

 

2 hours ago, higgyfan said:

To be fair, Stech was not supposed to be a top 4 guy.  As I recall, Myers and Tanev were the top 2RDs.  He would be just fine playing alongside Fanta.  Some folks are even suggesting that Rafferty could replace Troy.  What has Raff proven in the NHL.  He's played in 2 games, whilst Stech has completed his 4th year.  Let's give credit where it's due.

Exactly. Stecher isn't a replacement level player, he's better than that and he can move up as a short term injury replacement. Rafferty has done well in the AHL, but hasn't proven he won't be a liability - something you absolutely need from your depth defencemen - in the NHL.

 

What we decide to do with our cap (and I think Tanev is more important than Stecher if it comes to it, but what will he take?) will be a big factor in how this all plays out, no matter what Stecher will accept.

[Junkyard Dog]

2 minutes ago, elvis15 said:

I'd pay him more than Rafferty, but not as much as Provost is suggesting. We have to either qualify him at a bit more, or not and negotiate a lower deal. With a flat cap he may take a bit less, hopefully under $2 with a short term deal.

 

Exactly. Stecher isn't a replacement level player, he's better than that and he can move up as a short term injury replacement. Rafferty has done well in the AHL, but hasn't proven he won't be a liability - something you absolutely need from your depth defencemen - in the NHL.

 

What we decide to do with our cap (and I think Tanev is more important than Stecher if it comes to it, but what will he take?) will be a big factor in how this all plays out, no matter what Stecher will accept.

Stech's qualifying offer is 2.325M If he takes less than 2.5M than sure, move Benn then sign him. We could have Tanev and Stecher back in that sort of scenario.

[MrCanuck94]

6 hours ago, Provost said:

I don’t think that is particularly true at all.  Over the past few years he has had really good defensive numbers, some of the best on the team.

 

He has also shown that he can play up and down the lineup and even play top pairing minutes without being buried.  He also has years of being in his prime left.

 

If you gave him some term and avoided a big AAV number... maybe $2-2.5 million then you have a very cost effective player.

 

Tanev has been great for us, but there is no question he is getting worse as he gets older.  There is far more danger in signing Tanev than there is Stecher, unless Tanev is willing to rake a huge discount in dollars and most especially term.

 

 

He played big minutes when our team was bare defensively and we were a bottom 10 team. There's a reason he's not used much when we are a healthy line up now.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the kid's heart and would keep him around but I think there are other options that can benefit us either financially (saving 1-1.5 mill by taking a risk with Rafferty) or as a team (acquiring a third pair RHD that is stronger defensively and has more size).

[N4ZZY]

3 hours ago, elvis15 said:

I'd pay him more than Rafferty, but not as much as Provost is suggesting. We have to either qualify him at a bit more, or not and negotiate a lower deal. With a flat cap he may take a bit less, hopefully under $2 with a short term deal.

 

Exactly. Stecher isn't a replacement level player, he's better than that and he can move up as a short term injury replacement. Rafferty has done well in the AHL, but hasn't proven he won't be a liability - something you absolutely need from your depth defencemen - in the NHL.

 

What we decide to do with our cap (and I think Tanev is more important than Stecher if it comes to it, but what will he take?) will be a big factor in how this all plays out, no matter what Stecher will accept.

I think also, as much as I like Rafferty, he's still very much a wild card at this stage of his career. Hasn't played in any meaningful NHL games, and we don't even know what he can be, yet. What's Stetcher's QO? I think if Stetch takes 2-2.5 million over 2-3 years, then that's golden, IMO. Flat cap the next year or two, means that a lot of players aren't going to get deals they would like. It's just the reality in a pandemic like we're in. Even if he's asking for more, I'm not sure other teams in the league are going to be able to offer him what he's looking/asking for. The Cap is the Cap for every single team in the league. 

 

[wildcam]

14 hours ago, Provost said:

I don’t think that is particularly true at all.  Over the past few years he has had really good defensive numbers, some of the best on the team.

 

He has also shown that he can play up and down the lineup and even play top pairing minutes without being buried.  He also has years of being in his prime left.

 

If you gave him some term and avoided a big AAV number... maybe $2-2.5 million then you have a very cost effective player.

 

Tanev has been great for us, but there is no question he is getting worse as he gets older.  There is far more danger in signing Tanev than there is Stecher, unless Tanev is willing to rake a huge discount in dollars and most especially term.

 

 

I really like the way Benning and group are putting the puzzles in place....

Like we have said Edler is a key guy for this team and he is 34 years old. We need to balance his ice time more next season..

We still need a young guy to play with Hughes, 24--26 mins - Might have to trade a roster player to get this #3 D man under 26 year old..

Tanev will be a very interesting  31 yrs old in December.. His body has been through some serious injuries...

UFA this October will demand  4 yrs X 4.5 -- 5 million?  Not sure will  we resign him..

Big decisions to be made this off season.. 

Cap and uncertain times will hold back crazy spending for  all NHL  teams for next 2 - 3 years.

1. Marky 5.2 - 5.8 million X4 yrs?

2. Taffoli - 5.0 X 4 yrs --  Will be interesting sign or walk? IF they trade a Boeser they have to sign Taffloi ?

3. Virtanen - 1.7 - 2.5 million X 2 years ?  Show me more

4. Stetcher RFA  #5 guy can move up? 3 yrs X 2.6 million - Or replace with Rafert 700,000 ?

5. MacEwen RFA -  1.2 million X 2 yrs one way deal - show us more

6. Fantenberg 29  UFA plays solid will be replace with younger guy Juolevi, Rafferty, Rathbone all knocking door down..

7 Benn 33 - one year left tough body could be moved..

8. Leivo - 27 - like his style good 3rd line guy can move into top 6 with injuries.. 2 x 1.7 show us more..

[CanuckCup2022]

17 hours ago, MrCanuck94 said:

I think it's safe to say the Canucks' best move going forward will be to cut ties with Tony. Amazing person, local guy and works his a** off, but just not good enough to have when it matters. We either need to use that 3RD spot as a cap relief with an ELC or find a #5 Dman that has more size and the ability to step up and play temporary top 4 minutes against top teams.

Not really sure how you say Stecher does not play good enough but replace him with Rafferty when Rafferty has barely ever played an NHL game.  Weird reasoning as no one has clearly ever seen Rafferty step anything up. Stecher has been a solid #6 guy....it is just too bad he was not bigger but if he was he would be making a lot more money.

[N4ZZY]

5 hours ago, wildcam said:

I really like the way Benning and group are putting the puzzles in place....

Like we have said Edler is a key guy for this team and he is 34 years old. We need to balance his ice time more next season..

We still need a young guy to play with Hughes, 24--26 mins - Might have to trade a roster player to get this #3 D man under 26 year old..

Tanev will be a very interesting  31 yrs old in December.. His body has been through some serious injuries...

UFA this October will demand  4 yrs X 4.5 -- 5 million?  Not sure will  we resign him..

Big decisions to be made this off season.. 

Cap and uncertain times will hold back crazy spending for  all NHL  teams for next 2 - 3 years.

1. Marky 5.2 - 5.8 million X4 yrs?

2. Taffoli - 5.0 X 4 yrs --  Will be interesting sign or walk? IF they trade a Boeser they have to sign Taffloi ?

3. Virtanen - 1.7 - 2.5 million X 2 years ?  Show me more

4. Stetcher RFA  #5 guy can move up? 3 yrs X 2.6 million - Or replace with Rafert 700,000 ?

5. MacEwen RFA -  1.2 million X 2 yrs one way deal - show us more

6. Fantenberg 29  UFA plays solid will be replace with younger guy Juolevi, Rafferty, Rathbone all knocking door down..

7 Benn 33 - one year left tough body could be moved..

8. Leivo - 27 - like his style good 3rd line guy can move into top 6 with injuries.. 2 x 1.7 show us more..

Interesting numbers thrown out there for sure. 

 

Edler definitely will need his minutes spread out if he's going to avoid injury through the year. Assuming we have an NHL season to begin with. 

 

I think management might need to sign a solid, but not a spectacular name, UFA defenseman. 

 

Tanev at 31 years old - he either comes in at a discounted price, or we don't sign him to long term. 2-3 years at 4-4.5 million is reasonable. At the end of that contract, he would be 34 years old, and I don't expect his body to hold up much more from the abuse he's already taken. Injuries seem to be getting to him too, as he was outworked the other night by several Blues players. Is that just a one time thing, or is it an indication that his play is already starting to decline now. 

 

Flat Cap means that everyone will be taking discounts. Can't see teams going crazy this off-season with the cap remaining where it'll be moving forward. 

 

1. Markström I think has to be signed. I say 4 years at 5.5 million. I think the max we go is 6 million, but no other team is going to offer more than that with the flat cap. 

2. Toffoli unfortunately could be cap casualty. Would love to retain his services, but if he's asking for 5 million for 4 years, then we need to pass. If he's asking for 4-4.5 million for 3-4 years? Could be doable. Don't give into that extra year. 

3. Virtanen I think should come for cheap. He still has a lot to prove in terms of his consistency. I think 1.75-2.5 million is a reasonable amount for 2 years. 

4. Stetcher is a depth defenseman IMO. I don't think he'll cost a ton to retain, but it depends on management and what they see in Stetcher. If he can be had for 3.5-3.75 million per season, for the next 2-3 years. I'd sign him. 

5. MacEwen RFA - he'll come at cheap. Maybe even less than 1.2 million to be honest. 

6. Fantenberg will be gone. Juolevi for sure. Rafferty to a lesser extent (maybe first call up, or seventh defenseman). Rathbone I think is maybe a year or two away from making the line up. I hope I'm wrong on that front though. Would be fantastic if he made the roster next season. 

7. Benn - depth D. Maybe moved for a pick or a depth prospect. 

8. Leivo - I like the player. Not sure if he's going to be the player he was prior to his knee injury. I say 1.5 million for 2 years. 

 

[N4ZZY]

2 hours ago, CanuckCup2022 said:

Not really sure how you say Stecher does not play good enough but replace him with Rafferty when Rafferty has barely ever played an NHL game.  Weird reasoning as no one has clearly ever seen Rafferty step anything up. Stecher has been a solid #6 guy....it is just too bad he was not bigger but if he was he would be making a lot more money.

I think it's the highlights of Rafferty that has people excited about him. But yea, your right, he's not a sure thing in the NHL, where Stetcher is proven at the NHL level. You know what you're getting out of Troy.

 

If Stetcher comes relatively cheap, I'd sign him. He's a good guy, and a decent player for the team. 

 

[Tre Mac]

You re-sign Stech on the cheap and give him term.  With his size and numbers he'll never get what his underlying numbers show he deserves - which makes him a cheap and very efficient signing.

[MrCanuck94]

11 hours ago, CanuckCup2022 said:

Not really sure how you say Stecher does not play good enough but replace him with Rafferty when Rafferty has barely ever played an NHL game.  Weird reasoning as no one has clearly ever seen Rafferty step anything up. Stecher has been a solid #6 guy....it is just too bad he was not bigger but if he was he would be making a lot more money.

It's a risk but it comes with financial benefit. Paying 700k instead of 2.5 mill or more.

 

8 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

4. Stetcher is a depth defenseman IMO. I don't think he'll cost a ton to retain, but it depends on management and what they see in Stetcher. If he can be had for 3.5-3.75 million per season, for the next 2-3 years. I'd sign him. 

Depth dmen should not cost more than 1-2 mill like a Fanta/Benn.

[CanuckCup2022]

12 hours ago, MrCanuck94 said:

It's a risk but it comes with financial benefit. Paying 700k instead of 2.5 mill or more.

 

Depth dmen should not cost more than 1-2 mill like a Fanta/Benn.

The Canucks paying depth D men more (Fanta & Benn) is one of the reasons the Canucks depth is so darn good this year. They don't have ahl level crap d men like in the last 8 years.

[MrCanuck94]

10 hours ago, CanuckCup2022 said:

The Canucks paying depth D men more (Fanta & Benn) is one of the reasons the Canucks depth is so darn good this year. They don't have ahl level crap d men like in the last 8 years.

I was saying that's how much we should pay, not 3.5-3.75 mill.