Jack Rathbone | #3 | D

[Captain Canuck #12]

5 hours ago, -AJ- said:

My gut feeling tells me that Rathbone is gonna earn a spot at camp this year and force some very hard decisions.

You mean like to send Brad Hunt to Abbotsford??

[-AJ-]

43 minutes ago, Captain Canuck #12 said:

You mean like to send Brad Hunt to Abbotsford??

If he performs like my gut says, someone's going somewhere that's not Vancouver, but I don't know our defensive depth enough to know who.

[Elias Pettersson]

29 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

If he performs like my gut says, someone's going somewhere that's not Vancouver, but I don't know our defensive depth enough to know who.

If Rathbone makes the big club then one of 3 things will happen:

 

1. Juolevi will be put on waivers

2. Schenn will be put on waivers

3. Vancouevr will go with 13 F and 8 D

 

Cap space will be a big factor in their decision as they may want to only keep 22 players on the active roster so they may be forced to go with 7 D which means it would be one of the first 2 scenarios if Rathbone sticks.  My gut tells me they don't want to risk losing either Juolevi or Schenn and the easy route is to send Rathbone down and let him dominate the AHL with Jett Woo for a year.

[-AJ-]

3 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

If Rathbone makes the big club then one of 3 things will happen:

 

1. Juolevi will be put on waivers

2. Schenn will be put on waivers

3. Vancouevr will go with 13 F and 8 D

 

Cap space will be a big factor in their decision as they may want to only keep 22 players on the active roster so they may be forced to go with 7 D which means it would be one of the first 2 scenarios if Rathbone sticks.  My gut tells me they don't want to risk losing either Juolevi or Schenn and the easy route is to send Rathbone down and let him dominate the AHL with Jett Woo for a year.

I would agree, but Green has set a precedent of letting guys steal jobs and forcing tough decisions (Motte comes to mind most prominently). 

[Elias Pettersson]

23 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

I would agree, but Green has set a precedent of letting guys steal jobs and forcing tough decisions (Motte comes to mind most prominently). 

True that.  But is Benning going to have the balls to put Juolevi on waivers?  I don't think he will do that personally.  I think Juolevi will have a good camp and will "earn" a spot on the team.  Schenn signed a 2 year deal, just came off winning 2 Cups, and is one of the more physical guys on the team, so I can't see any scenario where they put him on waivers.  

[-AJ-]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

True that.  But is Benning going to have the balls to put Juolevi on waivers?  I don't think he will do that personally.  I think Juolevi will have a good camp and will "earn" a spot on the team.  Schenn signed a 2 year deal, just came off winning 2 Cups, and is one of the more physical guys on the team, so I can't see any scenario where they put him on waivers.  

They put Baertsch on waivers, which was insane to me, but he actually made it through. That said, Baertschi did have a 3.3M cap hit, so that probably helped. Juolevi is still very cheap, so he'd be more likely to be taken.

[Googlie]

Realistically, though, how many players get claimed off waivers in the week of training camp and exhibitions?  Every team is trimming rosters, and for every player a team claims, they either have to demote a young waiver exempt player of their own, or risk losing a veteran themselves to waivers (for example, if Seattle were to waive Lind, we really couldn't afford to pick him up as that would mean another player we wanted to keep would need to be waived  -  or Lind, and risk Seattle just claiming him back as happened a couple of seasons ago with the goalie we claimed)

 

A question for those better informed than I am.  ..... if a player is sent down for a conditioning stint, does he still count against the roster and the cap?

[Where's Wellwood]

10 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

True that.  But is Benning going to have the balls to put Juolevi on waivers?  I don't think he will do that personally.  I think Juolevi will have a good camp and will "earn" a spot on the team.  Schenn signed a 2 year deal, just came off winning 2 Cups, and is one of the more physical guys on the team, so I can't see any scenario where they put him on waivers.  

I would put Juolevi on waivers in a heart beat if we first claimed some other team's not injury prone, and preferably right-side equivalent to Juolevi

[EternalCanuckFan]

14 minutes ago, Where's Wellwood said:

I would put Juolevi on waivers in a heart beat if we first claimed some other team's not injury prone, and preferably right-side equivalent to Juolevi

As much as I want Juolevi to succeed, it will be interesting to see if teams view Juolevi in a similar way with Julius Honka (formerly DAL) when he gradually fell out of favor.

 

I'm pretty sure Honka cleared waivers at least one season despite having previously been a highly touted prospect (drafted 14th overall in 2014).  IIRC, this would have been unthinkable earlier in his career.

 

Honka has played more NHL games, was not re-signed by DAL and is still an UFA.

[aGENT]

11 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

If Rathbone makes the big club then one of 3 things will happen:

 

1. Juolevi will be put on waivers

2. Schenn will be put on waivers

3. Vancouevr will go with 13 F and 8 D

 

Cap space will be a big factor in their decision as they may want to only keep 22 players on the active roster so they may be forced to go with 7 D which means it would be one of the first 2 scenarios if Rathbone sticks.  My gut tells me they don't want to risk losing either Juolevi or Schenn and the easy route is to send Rathbone down and let him dominate the AHL with Jett Woo for a year.

They could also trade someone.

 

As for the bolded, Rathbone could also stand to continue working on his defensive play in Abbotsford. With OEL and Hughes ahead of him, he wouldn't get the offensive opportunity here, given his current state of development, that he'd need to flourish IMO.

 

The team needs a secondary PK/defensive zone D right now more than it needs a 4th PP, offensive zone option. That's likely Juolevi... as resistant as much of CDC will be to that fact.

Edited September 1, 2021 by aGENT

[4petesake]

1 hour ago, Googlie said:

Realistically, though, how many players get claimed off waivers in the week of training camp and exhibitions?  Every team is trimming rosters, and for every player a team claims, they either have to demote a young waiver exempt player of their own, or risk losing a veteran themselves to waivers (for example, if Seattle were to waive Lind, we really couldn't afford to pick him up as that would mean another player we wanted to keep would need to be waived  -  or Lind, and risk Seattle just claiming him back as happened a couple of seasons ago with the goalie we claimed)

 

A question for those better informed than I am.  ..... if a player is sent down for a conditioning stint, does he still count against the roster and the cap?

I can’t find anything official but players sent down under normal waiver rules do not count against the roster or cap but the maximum allowable is 14 days. The team also has to prove that it is genuine for rehab or conditioning and the player has to agree to being sent down. Waiver rules were designed to keep teams from stashing players in the minors.

 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

They could also trade someone.

 

As for the bolded, Rathbone could also stand to continue working on his defensive play in Abbotsford. With OEL and Hughes ahead of him, he wouldn't get the offensive opportunity here, given his current state of development, that he'd need to flourish IMO.

 

The team needs a secondary PK/defensive zone D right now more than it needs a 4th PP, offensive zone option. That's likely Juolevi... as resistant as much of CDC will be to that fact.

Agreed.  I'm not sure what Rathbone will be able to accomplish on the 3rd pairing playing 10-12 minutes a night.  Juolevi has a better defensive game at this point and will be a PK option.  Same with Schenn.  With Hughes and OEL Rathbone isn't going to get a lot of opportunities on the PP so he's better off going to Abby and dominating that league for a year.  

 

Next year we can re-evaluate where Rathbone can fit it.  Maybe one of OEL, Hughes or Rathbone plays the right side.  With the D we have right now I'm not sure I can see all 3 playing at the same time in the top 6.

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Agreed.  I'm not sure what Rathbone will be able to accomplish on the 3rd pairing playing 10-12 minutes a night.  Juolevi has a better defensive game at this point and will be a PK option.  Same with Schenn.  With Hughes and OEL Rathbone isn't going to get a lot of opportunities on the PP so he's better off going to Abby and dominating that league for a year.  

 

Next year we can re-evaluate where Rathbone can fit it.  Maybe one of OEL, Hughes or Rathbone plays the right side.  With the D we have right now I'm not sure I can see all 3 playing at the same time in the top 6.

Eventually, I could actually see Juolevi-Rathbone as a very good, complementary, 2nd pair (if Rathbone moves to the right).

 

At some point though, something is likely going to have to give. My guess is we end up packaging one for a big, top pair, RD. Perhaps with Myers to make cap etc work.

[Elias Pettersson]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

Eventually, I could actually see Juolevi-Rathbone as a very good, complementary, 2nd pair (if Rathbone moves to the right).

 

At some point though, something is likely going to have to give. My guess is we end up packaging one for a big, top pair, RD. Perhaps with Myers to make cap etc work.

At $7.26 million OEL is going to be in the top 4 for a long time.  I don't see any way you can get both Juolevi and Rathbone in the top 4 with Hughes and OEL on the roster.

 

Something will have to give.  If Rathbone blossoms into a top 4 D then you are probably looking at a Hughes trade.  OEL cannot be moved because of his contract.  If we are packaging for a big top pair RHD then most likely either Hughes or Rathbone is going the other way.

[aGENT]

13 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

At $7.26 million OEL is going to be in the top 4 for a long time.  I don't see any way you can get both Juolevi and Rathbone in the top 4 with Hughes and OEL on the roster.

 

Something will have to give.  If Rathbone blossoms into a top 4 D then you are probably looking at a Hughes trade.  OEL cannot be moved because of his contract.  If we are packaging for a big top pair RHD then most likely either Hughes or Rathbone is going the other way.

Myers + OJ for an expiring RD that's not going to re-sign?.. Certainly possible.

[4petesake]

16 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

At $7.26 million OEL is going to be in the top 4 for a long time.  I don't see any way you can get both Juolevi and Rathbone in the top 4 with Hughes and OEL on the roster.

 

Something will have to give.  If Rathbone blossoms into a top 4 D then you are probably looking at a Hughes trade.  OEL cannot be moved because of his contract.  If we are packaging for a big top pair RHD then most likely either Hughes or Rathbone is going the other way.

Sounds like we are becoming a team with some first-world problems. I like it!

[Comeback_Kings]

When the Canucks need a goal I think we'll see Hughes line up at RHD.  

 

OEL   Hughes

[Elias Pettersson]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

Myers + OJ for an expiring RD that's not going to re-sign?.. Certainly possible.

Parayko?

 

Haha, didn't realize he re-signed...  

Edited September 1, 2021 by Elias Pettersson

[GB5]

3 hours ago, aGENT said:

They could also trade someone.

 

As for the bolded, Rathbone could also stand to continue working on his defensive play in Abbotsford. With OEL and Hughes ahead of him, he wouldn't get the offensive opportunity here, given his current state of development, that he'd need to flourish IMO.

 

The team needs a secondary PK/defensive zone D right now more than it needs a 4th PP, offensive zone option. That's likely Juolevi... as resistant as much of CDC will be to that fact.

Ya, we get a bit excited about our shiny new toys but unless Rathbone really does something special and everyone else really stinks it up I see no point in rushing him to the V. Canucks. The left side is full of puck movers and PP specialists so a full year in the AHL would be a big benefit to this youngster right now.

 

[NHL'er]

9 hours ago, GarthButcher5 said:

Ya, we get a bit excited about our shiny new toys but unless Rathbone really does something special and everyone else really stinks it up I see no point in rushing him to the V. Canucks. The left side is full of puck movers and PP specialists so a full year in the AHL would be a big benefit to this youngster right now.

 

Have him and Woo build up that chemistry