Jack Rathbone | #3 | D

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Just embedding:

 

 

Rathbone is a sleeper for us.  Kid is going to be really good.

Hughes OJ

Woo Bone

 

our future top four.  Oh, and they ALL BRING OFFENCE.  

[RetroCanuck]

27 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Rathbone is a sleeper for us.  Kid is going to be really good.

Hughes OJ

Woo Bone

 

our future top four.  Oh, and they ALL BRING OFFENCE.  

Dream to draft Soderstrom (or Seider)...... or both if Seider falls to our 2nd

 

Hughes-Woo

Juolevi-Soderstrom

Rathbone-Seider

[-Vintage Canuck-]

 

[AV's Coin]

20 hours ago, Alflives said:

Rathbone is a sleeper for us.  Kid is going to be really good.

Hughes OJ

Woo Bone

 

our future top four.  Oh, and they ALL BRING OFFENCE.  

He's out Makar Alf. Skates well and heavy shot

[-Vintage Canuck-]

 

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

Great weekend for Rathbone. Goal last game, and 2 assists tonight. I could easily see him taking over for Fox, as Harvard’s top Dman next season. Tonight, for example, he led the entire team in shot attempts (6), had two blocks (also team leading), and nearly added a goal on the wraparound. Seems to be playing with a lot of confidence right now. His heavy shot is giving goalies trouble and creating lots of rebound chances. And his aggressive offensive zone play makes him a constant threat, both from the point, and moving down, often circling below the goal line, before rotating back up top. 19 points is already an impressive freshman D total, and he still has plenty of time to add to his numbers, as Harvard closes out regular season play, and enters into the tournament stage.

[GoldenAlien]

Makar's freshman season as a 19 year old: 34GP, 5G, 21pts, +9, 0.62 PPG.

Rathbone's freshman season as a 19 year old: 29GP, 6G, 19pts, +9, 0.66 PPG.

 

If Rathbone plays 34 games like Makar did, he'd be: 7G, 22pts, +11.

 

Makar was picked 4th overall.  Rathbone was picked in the 4th round .

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, GoldenAlien said:

Makar's freshman season as a 19 year old: 34GP, 5G, 21pts, +9, 0.62 PPG.

Rathbone's freshman season as a 19 year old: 29GP, 6G, 19pts, +9, 0.66 PPG.

 

If Rathbone plays 34 games like Makar did, he'd be: 7G, 22pts, +11.

 

Makar was picked 4th overall.  Rathbone was picked in the 4th round .

Rathbone will be a more effective NHL player than Makar.  Rathbone plays a physical game, and is really hard on and off pucks.  Makar is Charmin soft.  

[McBackup]

On 3/1/2019 at 7:04 PM, Alflives said:

Rathbone is a sleeper for us.  Kid is going to be really good.

Hughes OJ

Woo Bone

 

our future top four.  Oh, and they ALL BRING OFFENCE.  

Forgot the "West Coast Express" line, I dream of the day I can talk about the "Woobone" pairing.

[Podz92]

11 hours ago, Alflives said:

Rathbone will be a more effective NHL player than Makar.  Rathbone plays a physical game, and is really hard on and off pucks.  Makar is Charmin soft.  

If I remember correctly a lot of people (scouts and analysts) said Rathbone might have been a late 1st or early 2nd round pick if not for his stated intent to play his draft +1 year in high school.

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, JamesBlondage said:

If I remember correctly a lot of people (scouts and analysts) said Rathbone might have been a late 1st or early 2nd round pick if not for his stated intent to play his draft +1 year in high school.

And there are a lot of top D men who come out of the second round.  We got second round value with a laterround pick.  

[Podz92]

So the top 4 teams in ECAC men's hockey receive byes for the first round. Guess we will have to wait to see Rathbone in playoff action...

 

https://mobile.twitter.com/ecachockey/status/1102041842084925440

[Podz92]

5 minutes ago, Alflives said:

And there are a lot of top D men who come out of the second round.  We got second round value with a laterround pick.  

Yep another later round coup for Benning and Brackett. Hope we find a way to keep Brackett in the organization without some other team scooping him to be there GM or something....

[Attila Umbrus]

1 hour ago, JamesBlondage said:

Yep another later round coup for Benning and Brackett. Hope we find a way to keep Brackett in the organization without some other team scooping him to be there GM or something....

I'm guilty myself of heaping praise on Benning and his drafting abilities. But we can't forget how instrumental Brackett has been for our drafting. Him and Benning both seem to see eye to eye. Both seem to like kids coming from the American leagues who are slated to go to college. They've unearthed so many gems. Gaudette, Boeser, Madden, Lockwood, Hughes, Demko, Rathbone, heck even by extension Stetcher too...i'm sure other teams will be trying to poach Brackett, I hope like you we can keep him in the fold somehow...but eventually he will be looking to move up. I hope the Canucks make room for him to expand his role if and when he sees fit to do so.

[Canucks Curse]

3 hours ago, JamesBlondage said:

Yep another later round coup for Benning and Brackett. Hope we find a way to keep Brackett in the organization without some other team scooping him to be there GM or something....

He will get promoted to assistant GM I bet or another high ranking front office position where we he puts his abilities to good use

[Canucks Curse]

13 hours ago, Bitter Melon said:

Forgot the "West Coast Express" line, I dream of the day I can talk about the "Woobone" pairing.

Or dare to dream the Byram-Tryam pairing?

[TGokou]

6 hours ago, Attila Umbrus said:

I'm guilty myself of heaping praise on Benning and his drafting abilities. But we can't forget how instrumental Brackett has been for our drafting. Him and Benning both seem to see eye to eye. Both seem to like kids coming from the American leagues who are slated to go to college. They've unearthed so many gems. Gaudette, Boeser, Madden, Lockwood, Hughes, Demko, Rathbone, heck even by extension Stetcher too...i'm sure other teams will be trying to poach Brackett, I hope like you we can keep him in the fold somehow...but eventually he will be looking to move up. I hope the Canucks make room for him to expand his role if and when he sees fit to do so.

I've never really liked the CHL as a development league. There are way too many good leagues now that give players a better development path for their D+1 and D+2 seasons. Here is my reasoning. If a player is a really good player in the CHL to begin with, in the D+1 and D+2 years they will be competing against players a year or two younger than them. In addition there is not much to improve upon, particularly if you are a power forward. Power forwards can just power through kids with speed or size or both. Look at Jake Virtanen for example, I feel that if he were an NCAA player he would've developed far more than going the WHL route. As a defenceman the same holds true as systems plays are not as developed as professional leagues, and it's also easier to defend against younger players vs men. The only time I feel it's worth to draft a CHL player is if they are so good they can step into the NHL right away or if they are projected to be a 1st/2nd round player but are drafted in the 2nd/3rd round. This usually means they do have room for improvement and can take that next step at a good level for them.

 

I am really starting to come around to the NCAA as a development league, even with the fear of losing players to free agency. It has the perfect balance of competition for aspiring D+1 and D+2 players, whether you are a skill forward, power forward, defenceman OR goalie. It is not too tough like the SHL where many players don't get the required ice time, and it's not too easy where the players stall in development. It is no wonder the Canucks keep going back to this well as they've appeared to have a ton of success in recent and past years. Umberger, Kesler, Bieksa, Stecher, Boeser, Gaudette, Hughes, Madden....how many people have they drafted from the CHL with really good success? Edler? I know I'm missing some (not including top 10 picks like Virtanen, Hodgson and Horvat) but overall it's really bare.

[Attila Umbrus]

11 minutes ago, TGokou said:

I've never really liked the CHL as a development league. There are way too many good leagues now that give players a better development path for their D+1 and D+2 seasons. Here is my reasoning. If a player is a really good player in the CHL to begin with, in the D+1 and D+2 years they will be competing against players a year or two younger than them. In addition there is not much to improve upon, particularly if you are a power forward. Power forwards can just power through kids with speed or size or both. Look at Jake Virtanen for example, I feel that if he were an NCAA player he would've developed far more than going the WHL route. As a defenceman the same holds true as systems plays are not as developed as professional leagues, and it's also easier to defend against younger players vs men. The only time I feel it's worth to draft a CHL player is if they are so good they can step into the NHL right away or if they are projected to be a 1st/2nd round player but are drafted in the 2nd/3rd round. This usually means they do have room for improvement and can take that next step at a good level for them.

 

I am really starting to come around to the NCAA as a development league, even with the fear of losing players to free agency. It has the perfect balance of competition for aspiring D+1 and D+2 players, whether you are a skill forward, power forward, defenceman OR goalie. It is not too tough like the SHL where many players don't get the required ice time, and it's not too easy where the players stall in development. It is no wonder the Canucks keep going back to this well as they've appeared to have a ton of success in recent and past years. Umberger, Kesler, Bieksa, Stecher, Boeser, Gaudette, Hughes, Madden....how many people have they drafted from the CHL with really good success? Edler? I know I'm missing some (not including top 10 picks like Virtanen, Hodgson and Horvat) but overall it's really bare.

You hit a lot of good points there. I think you are correct. And you are seeing it more and more these days where kids are staying in the BCHL or AJHL, etc and plan to go the college route after being drafted. Makar is a good example of this. I think the young players are seeing this as a great option as well.

 

It would be nice if the CHL would allow players to be developed in mens leagues after being drafted. But I also respect the fact they are trying to maintain a profitable business and keeping star players for longer allows them to ice a more competitive product. Most CHL teams are barely keeping their head above water financially, so I get their hesitation on the matter.

[aGENT]

19 hours ago, TGokou said:

I've never really liked the CHL as a development league. There are way too many good leagues now that give players a better development path for their D+1 and D+2 seasons. Here is my reasoning. If a player is a really good player in the CHL to begin with, in the D+1 and D+2 years they will be competing against players a year or two younger than them. In addition there is not much to improve upon, particularly if you are a power forward. Power forwards can just power through kids with speed or size or both. Look at Jake Virtanen for example, I feel that if he were an NCAA player he would've developed far more than going the WHL route. As a defenceman the same holds true as systems plays are not as developed as professional leagues, and it's also easier to defend against younger players vs men. The only time I feel it's worth to draft a CHL player is if they are so good they can step into the NHL right away or if they are projected to be a 1st/2nd round player but are drafted in the 2nd/3rd round. This usually means they do have room for improvement and can take that next step at a good level for them.

 

I am really starting to come around to the NCAA as a development league, even with the fear of losing players to free agency. It has the perfect balance of competition for aspiring D+1 and D+2 players, whether you are a skill forward, power forward, defenceman OR goalie. It is not too tough like the SHL where many players don't get the required ice time, and it's not too easy where the players stall in development. It is no wonder the Canucks keep going back to this well as they've appeared to have a ton of success in recent and past years. Umberger, Kesler, Bieksa, Stecher, Boeser, Gaudette, Hughes, Madden....how many people have they drafted from the CHL with really good success? Edler? I know I'm missing some (not including top 10 picks like Virtanen, Hodgson and Horvat) but overall it's really bare.

It also skips the complicated/problematic 'too young for the AHL/too good for CHL' issue.

[stawns]

19 hours ago, TGokou said:

I've never really liked the CHL as a development league. There are way too many good leagues now that give players a better development path for their D+1 and D+2 seasons. Here is my reasoning. If a player is a really good player in the CHL to begin with, in the D+1 and D+2 years they will be competing against players a year or two younger than them. In addition there is not much to improve upon, particularly if you are a power forward. Power forwards can just power through kids with speed or size or both. Look at Jake Virtanen for example, I feel that if he were an NCAA player he would've developed far more than going the WHL route. As a defenceman the same holds true as systems plays are not as developed as professional leagues, and it's also easier to defend against younger players vs men. The only time I feel it's worth to draft a CHL player is if they are so good they can step into the NHL right away or if they are projected to be a 1st/2nd round player but are drafted in the 2nd/3rd round. This usually means they do have room for improvement and can take that next step at a good level for them.

 

I am really starting to come around to the NCAA as a development league, even with the fear of losing players to free agency. It has the perfect balance of competition for aspiring D+1 and D+2 players, whether you are a skill forward, power forward, defenceman OR goalie. It is not too tough like the SHL where many players don't get the required ice time, and it's not too easy where the players stall in development. It is no wonder the Canucks keep going back to this well as they've appeared to have a ton of success in recent and past years. Umberger, Kesler, Bieksa, Stecher, Boeser, Gaudette, Hughes, Madden....how many people have they drafted from the CHL with really good success? Edler? I know I'm missing some (not including top 10 picks like Virtanen, Hodgson and Horvat) but overall it's really bare.

 I agree and think the CHL really shot themselves in the foot insisting on the 20 year old AHL rule.  Really, it's the draft that should have been modified to a 19 or 20 year old draft, so that plyers could jump right to pro after being drafted and teams could scout with more accuracy regarding projections of players.