IBatch Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 On 7/9/2016 at 6:01 PM, SILLY GOOSE said: So what are your opinions on him? Could he be a future #1 C? I've always liked him as a player, and he might slot in nicely in front of Sutter and Horvat. Eriksson Schenn Boesner as a potential scoring line? PHI has Giroux, Couturier, and Laughton. He is probably in the ballpark of somewhere in the 6million range for a new contract. Perhaps Schenn isn't in their future plans anymore? What would it take to get him, if PHI is even interested in letting him go? Had a great year and could be on his way to living up to his lofty expectations. I would love to have him in our line-up, with him and one other very good forward we could possibly move the Sedins down a line. With more ice time and juicy PP minutes this guy could really burn things up as long as he keeps progressing like he did last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted July 14, 2016 Author Share Posted July 14, 2016 15 hours ago, IBatch said: Had a great year and could be on his way to living up to his lofty expectations. I would love to have him in our line-up, with him and one other very good forward we could possibly move the Sedins down a line. With more ice time and juicy PP minutes this guy could really burn things up as long as he keeps progressing like he did last season. It's a pipe dream I'm sure, but then again Gudbranson was one too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 7 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said: It's a pipe dream I'm sure, but then again Gudbranson was one too! Quote You bet...maybe we trade Virtanen and a 2nd for Doughty next...oh wait I hate Doughty forget I said that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal1 Posted July 15, 2016 Share Posted July 15, 2016 On 2016-07-09 at 3:20 PM, brian42 said: He would be a perfect fit IMO. Tanev for him? Yes that makes perfect sense. Let's suggest Tanev to an organization overloaded with young defencemen. I am sure they will jump at the offer since we offer them something they don't need and ask for something they want to keep. I like your thinking outside the box! That might just be crazy enough to work??? Or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal1 Posted July 15, 2016 Share Posted July 15, 2016 On 2016-07-14 at 0:28 PM, SILLY GOOSE said: It's a pipe dream I'm sure, but then again Gudbranson was one too! Let me get this straight here. A slow moving, unidimensional, puck possession disaster defenceman was a pipe dream to you? Is the NHL going back to the 70s and I missed the memo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted July 15, 2016 Author Share Posted July 15, 2016 3 hours ago, coastal1 said: Let me get this straight here. A slow moving, unidimensional, puck possession disaster defenceman was a pipe dream to you? Is the NHL going back to the 70s and I missed the memo? I'm getting the feeling you have never watched Gudbranson play....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billabong Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 He was a wrecking ball in the playoffs against the caps. Huge/dangerous hits being dealt out it would take tanev to pry him outta philly, but we need tanev to trade for landeskog and Barrie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal1 Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 2 hours ago, SILLY GOOSE said: I'm getting the feeling you have never watched Gudbranson play....... Never is wrong, but rarely is correct, simply becaue i rarely watched Florida games. i presume you watched Florida lot. Anyways, there is endless stats on players these days, so you don't really need to watch them a lot to know how they are doing. This is a summary analysis of Erik's stats: What it really seems to mean is that Gudbranson just doesn’t have much offence to his game. His shifts were long enough that he could have had an impact at the offensive end of the ice, but he just didn’t. There’s room for that type of player, of course. Chris Tanev, for instance, is not offensively inclined and we like him just fine. The difference between Tanev and Gudbranson, however, is that Tanev is elite when it comes to shot suppression. He led all NHL defencemen in shots against per 60 minutes relative to his team, meaning that compared to the rest of the Canucks, Tanev was absolutely incredible. Sure, you could argue that the lousiness of some of his teammates make his relative numbers look better, but it’s still clear that Tanev is brilliant at preventing shots. Gudbranson, on the other hand, is at the other end of the spectrum. Among defencemen who played at least 400 minutes last season, Gudbranson was eighth worst in shots against per 60 minutes relative to his team. Now of course, if you want a nasty player who will figth, he is perfect. The problem is that there is no need for someone like this anymore. Well of course, except in Edmonton, but is this really the model we want to follow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missioncanucksfan Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 On Saturday, July 09, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Nex is my ex said: Not tanev They don't want D in return. They would want a somewhat similar player in return or the typical package of youth and picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.