Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 22,108
- 14,030
I guess one of the perks to get the kid to sign with us was a guarantee he would get to play one game, and, therefore, burn a year off his ELC?
Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign D - Brogan Rafferty
- Thread starter petrishriekandgo
- Start date
I guess one of the perks to get the kid to sign with us was a guarantee he would get to play one game, and, therefore, burn a year off his ELC?
I guess you have to defer to the Canucks college scouts for this signing. Rafferty with one relatively pedestrian year in the USHL, followed by a three years at Qinnipiac...the thing that leaps of the page are the point totals....tops out at four goals and 24 points this season. So you're not signing him for any offense.
Are the Canucks more interested in his d-partner at Quinnipiac, Chase Priskie? A ppg, right shooting d-man who was drafted by the Caps but won't sign....becomes a UFA on Aug. 15th
Seems to me that the Canucks are a plethora of the same type of d-man in their system. And if they're active on the UFA market, there's not going to enough room for all these d-men even in Utica.
But I guess when it comes to unearthing d-men, desperate times call for desperate measures. But I suspect there's only one Chris Tanev that comes along every decade.
Are the Canucks more interested in his d-partner at Quinnipiac, Chase Priskie? A ppg, right shooting d-man who was drafted by the Caps but won't sign....becomes a UFA on Aug. 15th
Seems to me that the Canucks are a plethora of the same type of d-man in their system. And if they're active on the UFA market, there's not going to enough room for all these d-men even in Utica.
But I guess when it comes to unearthing d-men, desperate times call for desperate measures. But I suspect there's only one Chris Tanev that comes along every decade.
BeardyCanuck03
@BeardyCanuck03
Game or no game he'd burn a year. And his deal due to his age is only a one year deal anyways. He's getting a new deal in the summer
timbermen
Registered User
- Nov 14, 2017
- 1,332
- 690
BeardyCanuck03
@BeardyCanuck03
Rafferty has promise. He didn't look out of place and had strong possession stats in both games (although he was sheltered a lot). A season in Utica may help him become a good bottom pair dman
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 22,108
- 14,030
The Vasili Jerry
Serenity now!
Thought Raffery had his best game yet against the Blues. Decent positioning and showed some vision coming into the zone late. Hutton isn't the easiest guy to play with and the Blues weren't just playing out a string, but were desperate for points.
He'll go to Utica next year and hopefully have a good development year in the AHL.
He'll go to Utica next year and hopefully have a good development year in the AHL.
Blue and Green
Out to lunch
- Dec 17, 2017
- 3,437
- 3,413
Yes, ELC was burned as soon as they signed for this year. Playing in a game did qualify this as a "professional season" for both Rafferty and Teves, helping them toward Group 6 UFA status two years from now if they have played fewer than 80 NHL games. Their agents surely were aware of that fact.
Rafferty looked alright out there yesterday.
Utica should have a better defensive unit next year. Teves, Rafferty, Brisebois, Sautner, Juolevi, Chatfield.
Brogan Rafferty didn't even enter the Top-20 for Canucks prospect rankings this offseason.
Where does he land now?
Where does he land now?
Disappointed EP40
Registered User
- Jan 13, 2015
- 3,222
- 1,720
His anticipation and hockey IQ when jumping into the play are on a completely different level from any other defender in Utica. With the puck on his stick or joining the play, you can see an NHLer there.
Defensively ... he also relies a ton on anticipation. And he's had games in Utica where he's firing on all cylinders and pushing hard and breaking up plays before they happen and is really effective defensively ... and other games and moments where you really question his defensive fundamentals. Can wander off into weird areas positionally and doesn't engage much at all physically (not sure how he had such high PIM totals in the NCAA last year). Result is that his coverage can get pretty soft if his engagement level drops at all, and there is still substantial room for improvement there.
Defensively ... he also relies a ton on anticipation. And he's had games in Utica where he's firing on all cylinders and pushing hard and breaking up plays before they happen and is really effective defensively ... and other games and moments where you really question his defensive fundamentals. Can wander off into weird areas positionally and doesn't engage much at all physically (not sure how he had such high PIM totals in the NCAA last year). Result is that his coverage can get pretty soft if his engagement level drops at all, and there is still substantial room for improvement there.
Rick Dhaliwal has an article out on the Athletic and he states that Rafferty had several teams after him and it was a phone conversation with Benning that tilted things in Vancouver's favour.
Canadian Canuck
Hughes4Calder
Damn that is surprising
Rafferty has been one of Utica's best dmen this season, the offensive plays he’s making are NHL caliber.Wouldn't be surprise if we trade Stetcher for scoring help to bring this guy up if he continues his play.
Have to concur....unless this guy's play in the first 15 game is some sort of magical illusion, he could be an NHL-caliber after only a year of seasoning in Utica......would be a game-changer for the Canuck blueline. Another right-shot d-man who plays a solid two-way game, and can actually generate some offense--something Stecher really isn't capable of delivering.Damn that is surprising
Rafferty has been one of Utica's best dmen this season, the offensive plays he’s making are NHL caliber.Wouldn't be surprise if we trade Stetcher for scoring help to bring this guy up if he continues his play.
So if he doesn't make Stecher expendable, it might allow them to eventually trade Tanev.
ChilliBilly
Registered User
We have our six dmen andFatenburg, then Brisebois and Suttner. Then we have Juolevi. And Tryamkin probably coming back. woo is not far away. And Rathbone is looking great. Honestly I think we’re going to have a log jam in the D position for a while .
Our organizational defensive depth is still weak. Brisebois and Sautner will never become impact NHL players. Tryamkin’s not exactly making a strong case to be an impact player with his KHL play. We would be lucky if one of Rafferty, Rathbone, Juolevi, Woo become a top 4 defenceman.
Having watched him live on Monday, he definitely looked like he belonged, and I'd agree that his forward puck movement was among the better examples on the team (although that's not saying much). Defensively he was OK for the most part, but like most of the Utica D-men he did get caught flat-flooted a few times as faster (but not crazy-fast) Crunch forwards streamed past.
ChilliBilly
Registered User
Sort of agree. I think Lucky is if one of them (including Tryamkin) becomes a top Dman. out of this group of five I figure 1 6th or seventh and a couple of top fours.
I guess I’m just a little more optimistic
Legitimate 'top-four' d-men are probably the hardest commodity to draft and develop....the only sure way seems to be to draft 'quantity' and give them plenty of time to develop.
Tanev and Edler are living proof of that. One never drafted, the Edler who'll likely go down as the best Canucks d-man ever (with apologies to the potential of Hughes), was drafted in the third round. In fact looking at the current Canuck blueline, other than Hughes, only one guy (Myers) was even a first-round draft pick.
So all you can do is hope that one of Tryamkin, Rathbone, Rafferty, Woo or even Teves, can break out of the mold. But looking at the Canucks drafting record, there's been a string of d-men drafted in later rounds who either flopped or in some cases didn't even earn a contract.
Tanev and Edler are living proof of that. One never drafted, the Edler who'll likely go down as the best Canucks d-man ever (with apologies to the potential of Hughes), was drafted in the third round. In fact looking at the current Canuck blueline, other than Hughes, only one guy (Myers) was even a first-round draft pick.
So all you can do is hope that one of Tryamkin, Rathbone, Rafferty, Woo or even Teves, can break out of the mold. But looking at the Canucks drafting record, there's been a string of d-men drafted in later rounds who either flopped or in some cases didn't even earn a contract.
I think the easiest way is to use premium picks to draft Dmen. Take Nashville who is very good at drafting and developing Dmen. Hamhuis, Suter, Klein, Weber, Josi, Ellis, Jones, Fabbro, and Girard were all top 50 picks. Take out Weber and they are all top 40 picks.
In the same span, the Canucks used top 50 picks on Allen, Koltsov, Bourdon, Ellington, Sauve, Juolevi, Woo, and Hughes. Allen, Bourdon, Juolevi, and Hughes being the only first round picks. If you include 3rd round picks, the Canucks have drafted a bunch of busts but also Edler and Connauton.
Statistically speaking you're more likely to be able to draft top 4 Dmen later in the draft than top 6 forwards. At the same time, if you don't use premium picks to draft Dmen, you have to acquire them other ways which can be difficult. The Blues won the Cup last year with a D corps made largely of guys picked in the first 3 rounds. Washington had some late round/undrafted guys but their main guys were former first round picks.
