SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 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 More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 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 More sharing options...
Salmonberries Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted January 3, 2017 Author Share Posted January 3, 2017 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 More sharing options...
Canada Hockey Place Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 1 hour ago, RRypien37 said: Lazar doesn't have to clear waivers this year. a skater who signs their entry-level contract at 18 will become exempt after playing 160 NHL games, or after 5 seasons (whichever comes first). CBA Reference 13.4 He literally just hit 160. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 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 More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 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 More sharing options...
VforVasili Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 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 More sharing options...
Salmonberries Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 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 More sharing options...
Salmonberries Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 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 More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 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 More sharing options...
mll Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 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 More sharing options...
ShakyWalton Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 2 hours ago, coryberg said: Kind of shocked nobody on here has suggested the old "claim him and send him to Utica" spiel yet. claim him and send SOMEBODY to Utica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beary Sweet Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 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 More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 16 minutes ago, ShakyWalton said: claim him and send SOMEBODY to Utica. Does Rodin require waivers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bur14Kes17 Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 3 hours ago, oldnews said: Parenteau and his 11 goals might want in the conversation. Paranteaus also not 23 though. Rattie is like a free prospect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShakyWalton Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 10 minutes ago, Alflives said: Does Rodin require waivers? I think so...he was down on a conditioning stint before...not sure..but I think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 1 minute ago, ShakyWalton said: I think so...he was down on a conditioning stint before...not sure..but I think so. Claim Rattie and waive Rodin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canada Hockey Place Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 Rodin is 26. Waiver exemption only applies up to 25. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 Dont think Rattie will make it down to Vancouver and even then they are set with Megna and Chaput as projects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.