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

(Waivers) Blues' Ty Rattie and Devils' Reid Boucher


Pears

Recommended Posts

Filing a claim on Rattie makes too much sense. Beyond the obvious Winterhawks connection to Baertschi, Rattie has actually put-up a similar NHL scoring rate, in limited minutes, to what Baertschi had when we acquired him. And they have a very similar AHL scoring rate. They're both top-9 or bust players. 

 

The Baertschi trade was a good gamble that now appears to have really paid off.

 

Getting Rattie for free isn't even a gamble, but it has the potential to yield similar results.

 

Perusing the Blues forums today, I'm seeing many of the same criticisms on Rattie that Flames fans were making when they moved on from Baertschi.

 

And reading Hitchcock's comments from the just before the start of this season reminds me a lot of earlier comments on Baertschi that came out of Calgary.

 

Hitch on Rattie: "He's got NHL skill, he's got NHL top skill. Can he sustain the work ethic and the determination and the focus away from the puck..."

 

http://lkorac10.blogspot.ca/2016/09/rattie-gets-best-crack-to-stick-in-nhl.html?m=1

 

Which to me sounds like a classier version of what Brian Burke said about Baertschi in 2013:

 

"All I’ve seen so far is flashes of brilliance. Flashes of brilliance are fine if you’re working in the university, but they’re not much good to people in an NHL building."

 

"There are three zones in the ice surfaces in this league. I don’t see that he’s learned to play and compete in two of them. He’s got to learn there’s a clock in this league and there’s so many minutes in the game and that you’ve got to compete through all of it."

 

"I see big holes and I see a lack of commitment that’s not going to get him anywhere in my books."

 

When Baertschi was traded, Flamesnation wrote an excellent piece on where the Flames went wrong: http://flamesnation.ca/2015/3/3/when-did-the-flames-go-wrong-with-sven-baertschi

 

Here's a key excerpt:

 

"ALWAYS EARNED, NEVER GIVEN"



 

That was the motto used to justify sending Baertschi down and keeping him there.

 

It's a lie. It always has been, and it always will be. The very nature of professional sports ensures that. There are too many complications regarding contractual status for "always earned, never given" to be true. The phrase is nothing more than an easy copout. After all, you can't prove a player isn't trying hard. All you have to do is say it. And if you're the one in power - if you're Bob Hartley or Brian Burke - your word is law.

 

When looking at Rattie's history in St. Louis, it's hard not to see parallels to Baertschi and Calgary. One could even argue that Rattie has had a rougher ride and less opportunities. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arizona is at 50 contracts, so they can't put a claim in. We are therefore 5th in waiver priority. 

 

So:

1. Colorado

2. Arizona

3. Buffalo

4. Winnipeg

5. NJD

6. Vancouver

 

Of that list, I think Buffalo and Winnipeg would pass, as they're deep with young forwards. Does Rattie get past Colorado? Then New Jersey?

 

It's iffy, but I'd find it difficult to defend Benning if he passes up on Rattie given the chance. He's used picks for players of Rattie's caliber and situation; so i'm not sure why he wouldn't put a claim in here. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Salmonberries said:

Rattie could be a fit here, at least for the year. Utica is in desperate straights, we need depth here.

 

Boucher too, for that matter. The more the merrier right now.

Honestly they're probably both better options than Megna and Chaput. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Ossi Vaananen said:

Arizona is at 50 contracts, so they can't put a claim in. We are therefore 5th in waiver priority. 

 

So:

1. Colorado

2. Arizona

3. Buffalo

4. Winnipeg

5. NJD

6. Vancouver

 

Of that list, I think Buffalo and Winnipeg would pass, as they're deep with young forwards. Does Rattie get past Colorado? Then New Jersey?

 

It's iffy, but I'd find it difficult to defend Benning if he passes up on Rattie given the chance. He's used picks for players of Rattie's caliber and situation; so i'm not sure why he wouldn't put a claim in here. 

 

 

NJ just put Boucher on waivers, I doubt they would pick up rattie.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Salmonberries said:

Rattie could be a fit here, at least for the year. Utica is in desperate straights, we need depth here.

 

Boucher too, for that matter. The more the merrier right now.

 

he can't be sent to Utica without first being offered to the Blues, who can then reclaim him and send him to the Wolves.......I believe that is the way it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stonecoldstevebernier said:

Why claim him when you can trade a draft pick for him?
 

 

I realize that you are being facetious, but would it not be a reasonable idea to trade a late round low value pick for him to avoid getting beaten out on the waiver wire by Colorado or New Jersey?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

he can't be sent to Utica without first being offered to the Blues, who can then reclaim him and send him to the Wolves.......I believe that is the way it works.

 

Ah, but Megna and Chaput and/or Gaunce can, can they not? I know Gaunce can, the statute of limitations may have run out on the call ups status for the other two though, not sure there.

 

Point being, 45 contracts ain't gettin' er done for us over here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, chucky's head said:

 

I realize that you are being facetious, but would it not be a reasonable idea to trade a late round low value pick for him to avoid getting beaten out on the waiver wire by Colorado or New Jersey?

 

 

Sure it could make sense.

 

A second round pick; not so much. I think Steve was referring to the latter scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, chucky's head said:

 

I realize that you are being facetious, but would it not be a reasonable idea to trade a late round low value pick for him to avoid getting beaten out on the waiver wire by Colorado or New Jersey?

 

 

Would think that trading is an option explored before risking the loss of a player.  Benning did as much with Corrado but found no takers.  But perhaps that doesn't always happen, and they may put them on waivers in an attempt to catch other teams unprepared to pick them up on short notice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, coryberg said:

Boucher was just claimed back from Nashville.... why the hell didn't they send him down right away?

 

They couldn't because another team also put in a claim for Boucher so they had to add him to their NHL roster.

 

http://www.nj.com/devils/index.ssf/2017/01/devils_waive_reid_boucher_again_explaining_the_mes.html

The Devils reclaimed the 23-year-old forward in hopes of sending him to Albany to get more playing time, but they were not the only team to claim Boucher on Monday. Had the Devils been the lone NHL team to claim him, he would have been eligible to go directly to the AHL.

But since another team put in a claim, Boucher needed to be added to the NHL roster, per CBA rules. The Devils put Boucher back on waivers Tuesday in another attempt to get him to Albany.

If he clears waivers Wednesday, Boucher will be sent down. If another team claims Boucher, he'll be out of New Jersey once again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd place a claim on a guy like Rattie since the offensive potential is there but knowing Benning, he would probably pass and continue to go with the winning lineup we have going on currently. he would be scratched probably but if it goes downhill, not a bad idea to give him a shot

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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