Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 22,186
- 14,088
I have Griffen Molino level hype.
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 have Griffen Molino level hype.
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 summerI 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 have Griffen Molino level hype.
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
Especially on the right sideWe definitely need depth for our D. Guy looks like a player
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
Damn that is surprisingRick 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.
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.
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.
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 .
How is rafferty defensively?
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.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.
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.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.
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.