Jack Rathbone | #3 | D

[Gurn]

8 hours ago, Alienhuggyflow said:

Chatfield is garbage and Raff is 25? and still can't crack the roster.

He has 9 NHL games, how many do you have?

Also 142 AHL games, do you have any of those?

Edited February 28, 2021 by gurn

[Kootenay Gold]

9 hours ago, Alienhuggyflow said:

Chatfield is garbage and Raff is 25? and still can't crack the roster.

Calling Chatfield, a developing prospect, "garbage" says a lot more about you than it does about him. He is not a Rathbone, Quinn or Juolevi type player but more aligned in the Tanev mould. I fully expect that he will continue to refine his game and will be back in the big show at some point going forward.

 

 

Edited February 28, 2021 by Kootenay Gold

[stawns]

23 minutes ago, BarnBurner said:

What is most impressive about that play is, not only did he throw a solid body check on the forward, but he also gained control of the puck and moved it up ice quickly. 

further to that point, he didn't take himself out of the play in the process.  It was a very surgical play

[Hogs & Podz]

7 hours ago, filthycanuck said:

How so? What, you're already sold after 2 games? LOL

Not about being sold.... But Jordan Subban is smaller and doesn't have the hockey IQ Rathbone has.  Will Rathbone  be a top 4 defencemen?... We'll see but I do believe he'll be a nhl defencemen for years to come.  

Edited February 28, 2021 by Hogs & Podz

[hammertime]

14 hours ago, Maniwaki Canuck said:

Seems inevitable, I mean look at what was going on here several pages back.  CDC may have its mind in the gutter, but you can't count on the team to be any better.

Mr Bone Jangles.

[aGENT]

11 hours ago, Alienhuggyflow said:

Chatfield is garbage and Raff is 25? and still can't crack the roster.

The goal was to make the playoffs, not relying on 3-4 rookies on D.

Rathbone is right where he needs to be. No point in rushing him.

To be fair, 'garbage' is a bit harsh. But both Chatfield and Rafferty have likely at best, bottom pair, to spare pair, ceilings. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Good teams need solid depth players. It's a hell of a lot better than the NHL careers of most CDC posters 

 

They're not really directly competing with the likes of Rathbone or Juolevi though, who both have top 4 ceilings. They're solid, largely developed depth players, not developing current/future top 4 players.

 

I think it's quite funny how many people on CDC can't grasp that difference.

[aGENT]

29 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Mr Bone Jangles.

*Dangles

[hammertime]

6 minutes ago, aGENT said:

To be fair, 'garbage' is a bit harsh. But both Chatfield and Rafferty have likely at best, bottom pair, to spare pair, ceilings. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Good teams need solid depth players. It's a hell of a lot better than the NHL careers of most CDC posters 

 

They're not really directly competing with the likes of Rathbone or Juolevi though, who both have top 4 ceilings. They're solid, largely developed depth players, not developing current/future top 4 players.

 

I think it's quite funny how many people on CDC can't grasp that difference.

[Fred65]

18 hours ago, wildcam said:

Hamonic was a good signing he has been injured only played 3 games and had 1 practice with team before his first game...Deal is great 1.25 million..

 

Benn -- Playing good this year and will be traded at trade deadline to playoff team ---- 4th rounder in return....

 

Hamonic, Myers, Benn add grit and toughness on the defence....

 

I understand your point but you can't wait until this year to decide if they're going to play or not and besides that... how's that working out we're way way down the standing so they've been difference makers ?? Either management screwed up with their assesment of how Vcr would play or they have no plan for introducing younger players into the system, which is it. Harmonic as i recall refused to enter the bubble to play for Calgary in the play-offs, Benn was poor last season  and Myers  is a JB signing at a heavy cost. I personally do'nt see a lot of difference between Chatfield and or Harmonic and Benn ... and what's more chnaces are he'll be around in the future not Harmonic or Benn ... lack of planning IMHO

[Gurn]

 

 

45 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

I personally do'nt see a lot of difference between Chatfield and or Harmonic and Benn ..

Well, 2 are NHL veterans and 1 is just trying to start his NHL career.   

Edited February 28, 2021 by gurn

[Ray_Cathode]

13 hours ago, filthycanuck said:

Im tempering my expectations here unlike some of the little overzealous CDCers here hoping for an all rookie D corps next year. Jordan Subban was pretty good in the A and he didn't turn out too well. Good to see Rathbone is doing well

Subban was entirely one dimensional in the A, he couldn’t/wouldn’t defend to save his life, definitely not enough to save his career. He was totally over-rated by most of CDC who overlooked his massive defensive deficiencies. The coaches never gave Subban the kind of defensive responsibility given to Woo and Rathbone almost immediately. Woo gets lots of PK time, and Rathbone none yet, but Rathbone and Woo were thrown out in the last minute to protect a one goal lead. They break out immediately and it’s Baertschi from Lind for the open netter.
 

This was Rathbone’s second game, and yes, it is only his second game. Other teams will pick up on his tendencies, and we have yet to see how he adjusts.  But his defensive play has already adjusted from his first game to his second game. In his second game he began anticipating passes to players advancing through the neutral zone and he took advantage of players looking back to step up on them. The first winger, he hit hard, and the second two he took the puck and immediately transitioned the play. Of the defencemen on the Canucks, I have only seen Edler do this - but this edition of Edler is older and slower to close than the Edler who used to blow wingers up in the neutral zone - now he is often on time only to hold, trip, hook or stumble backwards when the forward blows by. The play is still in Edler’s head, but the body doesn’t manage to execute as it did. Wingers will start to look for a 5’11” 190 lb train on their tracks and adjust, and some of those wingers will be very big - I hope Rathbone knows how to use his hip.

[granpappy]

6 hours ago, Kootenay Gold said:

Calling Chatfield, a developing prospect, "garbage" says a lot more about you than it does about him. He is not a Rathbone, Quinn or Juolevi type player but more aligned in the Tanev mould. I fully expect that he will continue to refine his game and will be back in the big show at some point going forward.

 

 

tanev could play from day one. he didn't make any mistakes moving the puck and was a very effective checker. i don't think chatfield has those exact qualities. it does look like rathbone is in the tanev mould, that being a very dependable, consistent player that, while not being a bruiser, does use body leverage to control the puck. the big difference between rathbone and tanev is what will likely be rathbone's point totals over the years. chatfield, at best, will put on the weight and become a defensive workhorse 

[Kootenay Gold]

1 hour ago, granpappy said:

tanev could play from day one. he didn't make any mistakes moving the puck and was a very effective checker. i don't think chatfield has those exact qualities. it does look like rathbone is in the tanev mould, that being a very dependable, consistent player that, while not being a bruiser, does use body leverage to control the puck. the big difference between rathbone and tanev is what will likely be rathbone's point totals over the years. chatfield, at best, will put on the weight and become a defensive workhorse 

Tanev was back and forth between the AHL and Vancouver for 3 years before staying on full time with the Canucks. He was not gifted with much offensive abilities and was more of a defensive specialist.

 

I see Chatfield in the same mould as Tanev as a defensive specialist but one who has not finished refining his game at the NHL level. Rathbone is not in the same conversation as Chatfield and Tanev. He is far more skilled offensively and looks like he could be more of a blend of Juolevi and Quinn in his development curve. I project he will be a solid two way D man.

[granpappy]

1 hour ago, Kootenay Gold said:

Tanev was back and forth between the AHL and Vancouver for 3 years before staying on full time with the Canucks. He was not gifted with much offensive abilities and was more of a defensive specialist.

 

I see Chatfield in the same mould as Tanev as a defensive specialist but one who has not finished refining his game at the NHL level. Rathbone is not in the same conversation as Chatfield and Tanev. He is far more skilled offensively and looks like he could be more of a blend of Juolevi and Quinn in his development curve. I project he will be a solid two way D man.

i was watching back then and do recall with some certainty that tanev, while he may have bounced back and forth, was noted to have some of the so called hockey iq right away; that is he made good consistent good plays. i'm not looking up the roster but i think they were fairly set on the back-end then and tanev had to work his way onto the roster. i don't see chatfield quite as reliable as tanev by any stretch; he gets to running around in his own end and believe me, i'm not comparing tanev to rathbone, just saying they both play the game much better than chatfield 

[Kootenay Gold]

22 minutes ago, granpappy said:

i don't see chatfield quite as reliable as tanev by any stretch; he gets to running around in his own end

I will agree Chatfield is not nearly as far along or as reliable as Tanev but he is still young and a work in progress.

 

[ShawnAntoski]

4 hours ago, Kootenay Gold said:

I will agree Chatfield is not nearly as far along or as reliable as Tanev but he is still young and a work in progress.

 

I would add, that hopefully his few games early on gave him some indication of what he would need to work on in the NHL level.

[Ray_Cathode]

15 hours ago, BarnBurner said:

What is most impressive about that play is, not only did he throw a solid body check on the forward, but he also gained control of the puck and moved it up ice quickly. 

6 hours ago, granpappy said:

i was watching back then and do recall with some certainty that tanev, while he may have bounced back and forth, was noted to have some of the so called hockey iq right away; that is he made good consistent good plays. i'm not looking up the roster but i think they were fairly set on the back-end then and tanev had to work his way onto the roster. i don't see chatfield quite as reliable as tanev by any stretch; he gets to running around in his own end and believe me, i'm not comparing tanev to rathbone, just saying they both play the game much better than chatfield 

There was a good reason Tanev could not make the 2010/11 team: ahead of him were:

Ehrhoff,Edler, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Ballard, Salo, Alberts, and Rome. Alberts and Rome alternated in the lineup because they provided toughness. Tanev got in for 25 games because Salo was hurt - there was nothing wrong with his play, Edler, Ehrhoff, Hamhuis, Bieksa, and Ballard were ahead of him and he only got in because Salo was hurt.  He was a worthy replacement. Similar story in 2011/12 -we lost Ehrhoff, but Salo was healthy for most of the season, only missing a dozen or so games. No room for Tanev - again, nothing wrong with Tanev. In the 2012/13 shortened season, Tanev played in most of the Vancouver games. 
 

In my opinion, Chatfield is not in Tanev’s league even when Tanev was breaking in. Tanev had to fight his way through a terrific defence. Our current defence is Swiss Cheese by comparison and Chatfield can’t crack the line up - he is too erratic, j7mps out of position, and makes bad judgements. That was his story in the AHL and it continues here. We have a far better RD prospect than Chatfield in Rafferty, but Green is not comfortable with him. Green is comfortable with Roussel, Eriksson, Beagle  - essentially talentless, expensive has beens. It’s good politics - can’t let that 12.5 million look like it is wasted money by the guy in control of firing him.

 

 

[appleboy]

Rathbone was on the taxi squad and spent a lot of time being coached. It sounds like it did him a lot of good.

Chatfield just got 9 games and now has the opportunity to work with the trainers and coaches. Those 9 games will have given him a lot better understanding of what it will take to become a full time NHL'er.   Chatfield is not a guy who will put up a ton of numbers. Fans see that as garbage as most fans just look at stats. They did it with Tanev for years. There is always space for a solid defensive D man. Someone who can kill penalties. The guys that you use once the team gets a lead. The shut down players who you use at the end of games. I think he will end up with a solid NHL career.

[Fred65]

Quote

Green is comfortable with Roussel, Eriksson, Beagle  - essentially talentless, expensive has been's. It’s good politics - can’t let that 12.5 million look like it is wasted money by the guy in control of firing him.

I suspect there's a lot of truth in that statement, and beside the cost of popcorn has gone up LOL

[Ray_Cathode]

On 2/28/2021 at 12:18 PM, aGENT said:

To be fair, 'garbage' is a bit harsh. But both Chatfield and Rafferty have likely at best, bottom pair, to spare pair, ceilings. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Good teams need solid depth players. It's a hell of a lot better than the NHL careers of most CDC posters 

 

They're not really directly competing with the likes of Rathbone or Juolevi though, who both have top 4 ceilings. They're solid, largely developed depth players, not developing current/future top 4 players.

 

I think it's quite funny how many people on CDC can't grasp that difference.

That may be true of Chatfield, but certainly not of Rafferty. Rafferty, after all, was last year’s a Rathbone.