Jack Rathbone | #3 | D

[Dixon Ward]

4 hours ago, Bure_Pavel said:

I dont really get your reasoning, the d core listed is not championship level and there are still major question marks. Woo, OJ and Rathbone havent played a NHL game yet and two of them have not played an professional hockey game. Hughes and stetcher are great but they are also on the smaller side and will need help handling the physicality of the playoffs. Canucks need to keep drafting Dmen as it is still the glaring weakness of this team, although improved from last year due to UFA signings.  

 

The number of possible top 6 forwards are: Madden, Gaudette, Lind, Hoglander, Podkolzin, Virtanen, and Goldobin. With Boeser, Horvat, and Petey already locking down three spots. and we also have Miller, Ferland, and Baertchi on the Roster.

 

On Defence we have on OJ, Woo, and Rathbone as potential top 4 players. And only Hughes as a sure thing top 4 Dman for the future. 

You need 15-17 nhl forwards to have a strong team, due to injury.  You need 8-9 defencemen.  However, 4 of those dmen play 21-25 min, this leaves only 10-14 minutes for the 5-7 dmen.  I am simply saying that we have 2 top 4 pieces long term plus Meyers and Stecher.  The rest of our pool has Tryamkin, Woo, Rathbone, and others who can take spots.  I just think that they looked at the pool and said they like the depth of d more than forwards and after the second round, they didn't see anybody better than the 7-10 prospects they are already working on.

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Dixon Ward said:

You need 15-17 nhl forwards to have a strong team, due to injury.  You need 8-9 defencemen.  However, 4 of those dmen play 21-25 min, this leaves only 10-14 minutes for the 5-7 dmen.  I am simply saying that we have 2 top 4 pieces long term plus Meyers and Stecher.  The rest of our pool has Tryamkin, Woo, Rathbone, and others who can take spots.  I just think that they looked at the pool and said they like the depth of d more than forwards and after the second round, they didn't see anybody better than the 7-10 prospects they are already working on.

I don’t disagree, but it’s looking like Utanen is going to be a player.  

[Dixon Ward]

Just now, Alflives said:

I don’t disagree, but it’s looking like Utanen is going to be a player.  

I forgot to mention him.  I think he, Rafferty, Brisebois, Sautner, and Teves are also potential 4-7th dmen.  My point was just that we have a lot of depth and I understand why they didn't take any d this year, if they didn't think they were better than what they had.

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, Dixon Ward said:

I forgot to mention him.  I think he, Rafferty, Brisebois, Sautner, and Teves are also potential 4-7th dmen.  My point was just that we have a lot of depth and I understand why they didn't take any d this year, if they didn't think they were better than what they had.

From what Benning has been saying he thinks we have the depth in our prospects at all positions to move forward with trading picks to fill holes.  (Like the Miller trade.). I’m pretty sure JB said he plans on replacing support players, who age out or coast too much, with our prospects.  I wish we had more top end D man prospects too.  

[Bure_Pavel]

14 minutes ago, Dixon Ward said:

I forgot to mention him.  I think he, Rafferty, Brisebois, Sautner, and Teves are also potential 4-7th dmen.  My point was just that we have a lot of depth and I understand why they didn't take any d this year, if they didn't think they were better than what they had.

I hear what you are saying but I still think the forward depth is better than defense depth, just my opinion though. 

 

Forward depth (likely NHL Players) under 27 years old : Petey, Bo, Brock, Podkolzin, JT Miller, Leivo, Goldobin, Baertchi, Motte, MacEwan, Lind, Gaudette, Madden, Hoglander, Virtanen

 

*Pearson and Ferland are both 27 years old

Edited August 30, 2019 by Bure_Pavel

[Nuxfanabroad]

Signing some college FA's & overage jr's ain't such a bad strategy. Hard to get a read on 18 yo draft-eligible D anywhoo.

 

There seems so much turnover in NHL rosters today(mostly cap era) can't see the point of stressing about 3-5 yr out-deficiencies. Lots of clubs have a shortage of rightys, for example. A timely trade might even sort any issue.

 

JB/scouts will likely have this all balanced nicely, by about Fall 2020. In just over one yr I'm impressed with the overall prospect-depth we've added.

[TGokou]

I personally love the D depth that we currently have but for sure there's room for improvement. The main question is whether we have another guy to fill in top pairing defenseman alongside Hughes. I think one of Woo or Juolevi could potentially be that guy but if not they are most certainly going to be 2nd pairing guys. Myers is still projected to be with us for the long haul and whether or not he is able to maintain 2nd pairing defenseman over the years is in question but for now he is either 1st pairing or 2nd pairing. I don't expect Tanev or Edler to be here long term so I won't really include them in our depth chart 2 years out. Stecher has been a really serviceable player for us that can move up and down the lineup but he is minimum 2nd pairing. I really think Rathbone can be a good solid player for us, whether that is on 2nd pairing or 3rd pairing d man but I definitely have a lot of faith that he will be an NHL player. The rest of our D depth can be serviceable 3rd pairing D men plus we have a glut of 2nd pairing d-men so I really am not too worried about our third pairing depth.

 

Going back to the matter at hand, like I've already mentioned we need a top pairing D-man that can fill in once Tanev and Edler retire or move on. If Woo or Juolevi can't be that guy then we potentially have a problem down the road. Luckily we most likely won't have a problem for the next 2-3 years as Edler or Myers can likely take those minutes but we will need to address having another top pairing potential D-man in the system (I'm talking 1st round draft pick) probably next season.

[Kanukfanatic]

3 hours ago, Dixon Ward said:

You need 15-17 nhl forwards to have a strong team, due to injury.  You need 8-9 defencemen.  However, 4 of those dmen play 21-25 min, this leaves only 10-14 minutes for the 5-7 dmen.  I am simply saying that we have 2 top 4 pieces long term plus Meyers and Stecher.  The rest of our pool has Tryamkin, Woo, Rathbone, and others who can take spots.  I just think that they looked at the pool and said they like the depth of d more than forwards and after the second round, they didn't see anybody better than the 7-10 prospects they are already working on.

Please Dixon Ward........Myers......Myers.....Myers.......

 

 

lol

[Kanukfanatic]

2 minutes ago, TGokou said:

I personally love the D depth that we currently have but for sure there's room for improvement. The main question is whether we have another guy to fill in top pairing defenseman alongside Hughes. I think one of Woo or Juolevi could potentially be that guy but if not they are most certainly going to be 2nd pairing guys. Myers is still projected to be with us for the long haul and whether or not he is able to maintain 2nd pairing defenseman over the years is in question but for now he is either 1st pairing or 2nd pairing. I don't expect Tanev or Edler to be here long term so I won't really include them in our depth chart 2 years out. Stecher has been a really serviceable player for us that can move up and down the lineup but he is minimum 2nd pairing. I really think Rathbone can be a good solid player for us, whether that is on 2nd pairing or 3rd pairing d man but I definitely have a lot of faith that he will be an NHL player. The rest of our D depth can be serviceable 3rd pairing D men plus we have a glut of 2nd pairing d-men so I really am not too worried about our third pairing depth.

 

Going back to the matter at hand, like I've already mentioned we need a top pairing D-man that can fill in once Tanev and Edler retire or move on. If Woo or Juolevi can't be that guy then we potentially have a problem down the road. Luckily we most likely won't have a problem for the next 2-3 years as Edler or Myers can likely take those minutes but we will need to address having another top pairing potential D-man in the system (I'm talking 1st round draft pick) probably next season.

There was a lot of talk at the draft this year that Barrie may want to come home next summer.

 

I don't know if it would be possible cap wise as we have a lot of guys that will be getting big paydays. But if we did get Barrie that would be crazy. Him and Hughes as the O guys with Woo and Tryamkin as the big guys. And OJ.....and a bunch of other possibilities like you have mentioned.

[WeneedLumme]

2 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Signing some college FA's & overage jr's ain't such a bad strategy. Hard to get a read on 18 yo draft-eligible D anywhoo.

 

There seems so much turnover in NHL rosters today(mostly cap era) can't see the point of stressing about 3-5 yr out-deficiencies. Lots of clubs have a shortage of rightys, for example. A timely trade might even sort any issue.

 

JB/scouts will likely have this all balanced nicely, by about Fall 2020. In just over one yr I'm impressed with the overall prospect-depth we've added.

Exactly. Any Dman drafted outside of the early first round can't realistically be expected to get a sniff of NHL time, let alone make a meaningful contribution any sooner than that. Worrying about a situation that might happen several years down the road seems a bit neurotic.

[TGokou]

14 minutes ago, Kanukfanatic said:

There was a lot of talk at the draft this year that Barrie may want to come home next summer.

 

I don't know if it would be possible cap wise as we have a lot of guys that will be getting big paydays. But if we did get Barrie that would be crazy. Him and Hughes as the O guys with Woo and Tryamkin as the big guys. And OJ.....and a bunch of other possibilities like you have mentioned.

As much as I would love that I am not sure if we have the cap room after signing Pettersson and possibly bringing Tryamkin back into the fold. Definitely would need to rid ourselves of Tanev at the very least.

[aGENT]

17 hours ago, TGokou said:

As much as I would love that I am not sure if we have the cap room after signing Pettersson and possibly bringing Tryamkin back into the fold. Definitely would need to rid ourselves of Tanev at the very least.

Tanev is as good as gone IMO.

[AK_19]

23 hours ago, Bure_Pavel said:

I hear what you are saying but I still think the forward depth is better than defense depth, just my opinion though. 

 

Forward depth (likely NHL Players) under 27 years old : Petey, Bo, Brock, Podkolzin, JT Miller, Leivo, Goldobin, Baertchi, Motte, MacEwan, Lind, Gaudette, Madden, Hoglander, Virtanen

 

*Pearson and Ferland are both 27 years old

Way too early to consider Lind, Hoglander, Madden, MacEwan, Goldobin, and even Podkolzin "likely NHL Players". In past years you would have considered Shinkaruk, Schroeder, Gaunce, Jensen, Cassels, and Fox "likely NHL players". Lets not count our chickens before they even hatch. 

Edited August 31, 2019 by AK_19

[Ihatetomatoes]

21 hours ago, Kanukfanatic said:

There was a lot of talk at the draft this year that Barrie may want to come home next summer.

 

I don't know if it would be possible cap wise as we have a lot of guys that will be getting big paydays. But if we did get Barrie that would be crazy. Him and Hughes as the O guys with Woo and Tryamkin as the big guys. And OJ.....and a bunch of other possibilities like you have mentioned.

Ya I don't see us getting Barrie. Unless we can get rid of Sutter and Erikssons contracts there's no way we'll have the cap room. 

[VIC_CITY]

9 hours ago, aGENT said:

Tanev is as good as gone IMO.

Tough to say now that we're actually trying to compete. If Tanev has a good (healthy) season, it will go a long way towards a playoff spot. Obviously that's a big if and many other factors would come into play, but how about this hypothetical: We're holding down 3rd place in the division at the TDL. Tanev has been healthy and had a productive year as a top 4 defenseman. Do you trade him? Do you let him walk as a UFA? Do you offer him an extension? All 3 decisions carry a lot of risk 

[aGENT]

59 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said:

Tough to say now that we're actually trying to compete. If Tanev has a good (healthy) season, it will go a long way towards a playoff spot. Obviously that's a big if and many other factors would come into play, but how about this hypothetical: We're holding down 3rd place in the division at the TDL. Tanev has been healthy and had a productive year as a top 4 defenseman. Do you trade him? Do you let him walk as a UFA? Do you offer him an extension? All 3 decisions carry a lot of risk 

If you're asking me, I'd trade him. Well have to wait and see what Benning would do.

[VIC_CITY]

31 minutes ago, aGENT said:

If you're asking me, I'd trade him. Well have to wait and see what Benning would do.

Probably one of the other options if you ask me. It seems like ownership is only concerned with the playoffs at the moment. So a lot would have to go wrong before we became sellers IMO.

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said:

Probably one of the other options if you ask me. It seems like ownership is only concerned with the playoffs at the moment. So a lot would have to go wrong before we became sellers IMO.

Benn (and Hughes) can play both sides, we have Juolevi likely coming in later this year, Tryamkin coming back, Fantenburg more than capable in a 3rd pair role when other guys bump up and a slew of guys in Utica for depth.

 

Oft injured Tanev's on an expiring deal and I don't see him as part of the future here. If he's healthy, the depth is there and there's a market, I'd move him. YMMV.

[Elias Pettersson]

Hughes       Myers

Juolevi        Woo

Tryamkin     Stecher

Rathbone    Rafferty

Brisebois    Chatfield

Sautner

 

We have lots of size and mobility in our prospects.  Our D looks set for the next decade.  Of course some of those guys may not pan out but that's why we have a draft every year and also free agency.  I don't see many holes in our future D right now.  Maybe an upgrade on the right side so Benning can draft a couple of right sided D next year or he can make a trade for one.

[VIC_CITY]

14 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Benn (and Hughes) can play both sides, we have Juolevi likely coming in later this year, Tryamkin coming back, Fantenburg more than capable in a 3rd pair role when other guys bump up and a slew of guys in Utica for depth.

 

Oft injured Tanev's on an expiring deal and I don't see him as part of the future here. If he's healthy, the depth is there and there's a market, I'd move him. YMMV.

Ya I mean, those are definitely valid points. We'll see how the season goes. I just have a hard time seeing Benning trade a healthy, productive Tanev if we're in the playoff hunt (again, hypothetical). That would be a bold move and Benning most definitely has not been bold!

 

He'll have a number of hard decisions coming up with soon to be RFAs and UFAs. Players like Virtanen, Demko, Markstrom, Tanev, Leivo, etc. 

 

Benning also needs to think about the bonuses on Hughes and Pettersson's ELC contracts as well. We're already getting dinged for Luongo and Spooner. If we're constantly operating at the cap ceiling, those bonuses will always come out of our cap the next year. Once EP and QH's ELCs are up in 2 years, we won't be able to afford to have those bonuses roll forward like that. So Benning will need to do some cap maneuvering moving forward.