Trade Proposal- Boston & Vancouver

[kenhodgejr]

RD Erik Gudbranson (replace chara) for

 

LW (offensive prospect) Jake DeBrusk 

[Angry Goose]

His pops is pretty good on SN

[canuktravella]

not a chance in hell maybe if they threw in 2 first on top. guddy is a legit top 4  dman  for a prospect no way in hell would benning ever go for that  we gave a second and a good young forward  for him, Hes not being traded 

[Aircool]

1 minute ago, canuktravella said:

not a chance in hell maybe if they threw in 2 first on top. guddy is a legit top 4  dman  for a prospect no way in hell would benning ever go for that  we gave a second and a good young forward  for him, Hes not being traded 

 

LOL Legit Top-4 Dman.... k.

[canuktravella]

26 minutes ago, Aircool said:

 

LOL Legit Top-4 Dman.... k.

 ya hes looked great not sure what your complaining about 

[cripplereh]

we would need more and RH D's that are big are hard to get so I agree maybe that plus their best young forward and a 1st at very least

[timberz21]

Might have well just kept McCann instead.  As of now, it's pretty much impossible to tell who of McCann and Debrusk will be the better player.

[ice orca]

4 hours ago, canuktravella said:

not a chance in hell maybe if they threw in 2 first on top. guddy is a legit top 4  dman  for a prospect no way in hell would benning ever go for that  we gave a second and a good young forward  for him, Hes not being traded 

Lol in what universe is Gudbranson worth 2 first round picks?

[HorvatToBaertschi]

4 hours ago, Aircool said:

 

LOL Legit Top-4 Dman.... k.

Youre kidding right ? hes been excellent.

[Jtutino]

I wouldnt call -12 in 23 games excellent. Im not suprised its taking some time to adjust to his new surroundings, but the kid was drafted 3rd overall for a reason. Thats not nearly enough to give up on the kid.

[Sygvard]

Yeah I came in here to defend Guddy, but "excellent" is definitely way too far. I'm not a big fan of plus minus, but there is no denying that he has haemorrhaged shots against without creative offensive chances. He has had visible problems finding chemistry with Hutton, leading to positional errors on the ice and frustrated comments off the ice. 

 

BUT. I think it is just that. Chemistry and frustration. He has the tools, and should get better as the figures things out with Hutton and with the team. He isn't what is wrong with the team. 

[Ojibwa72]

8 minutes ago, Sygvard said:

BUT. I think it is just that. Chemistry and frustration. He has the tools, and should get better as the figures things out with Hutton and with the team. He isn't what is wrong with the team. 

You said it and yes it is the coaches job to find the best fit for players in the lineup.

[ABNuck]

9 minutes ago, Jtutino said:

I wouldnt call -12 in 23 games excellent. Im not suprised its taking some time to adjust to his new surroundings, but the kid was drafted 3rd overall for a reason. Thats not nearly enough to give up on the kid.

Agreed...as a team we are a net -16

TJ Brodie is in a similar situation (-14 on a team that is net -17)

 

Hamonic is -11 (NYI is net -11)

Barrie is -10 (COL is net -16)

Leddy -9 (NYI again is -11)

Goligoski -9 (ARI -14)

Pietrangelo -9 (STL -1)

Klingberg -8 (DAL -18)

even Ekblad is -8 (FLA -2)

etc etc etc

I think if the GM's of all those teams were smart they'd dump all those bums for sure and instead pick up some of these studs:

Carlo +11

Holden +11

Yannick Weber is +8 (Oh why did we let him go? He's a defensive "giant" out there!)

My personal fave is Alex Petrovic...+8 on the same FLA team where Ekblad is -8 (I'm tellin' ya...that Ekblad kid is all washed up! A bust for sure!)

 

Anyone who says to trade Gudbranson after we just acquired him should have their CDC membership revoked. He will be just fine in the league and will be in the top 75 of Dmen one day...a solid #3 guy on any contending team.

[Aircool]

1 hour ago, Sygvard said:

Yeah I came in here to defend Guddy, but "excellent" is definitely way too far. I'm not a big fan of plus minus, but there is no denying that he has haemorrhaged shots against without creative offensive chances. He has had visible problems finding chemistry with Hutton, leading to positional errors on the ice and frustrated comments off the ice. 

 

BUT. I think it is just that. Chemistry and frustration. He has the tools, and should get better as the figures things out with Hutton and with the team. He isn't what is wrong with the team. 

 

I honestly think even this is too complimentary... Gudbranson is so overrated. People give him FAR too much credit for being big, which is ironic given that we have Tanev on this team. He is barely half the defender Tanev is, and well honestly, Tanev might also be better offensively.... Nothing suggests he is a good defender, not his analytics, not the Canucks record, nothing.... Except his size and draft position (and everyone knows that him at #3 was a complete stretch. Everyone in hockey was like "wuh?")

[Aircool]

50 minutes ago, ABNuck said:

Agreed...as a team we are a net -16

TJ Brodie is in a similar situation (-14 on a team that is net -17)

 

Hamonic is -11 (NYI is net -11)

Barrie is -10 (COL is net -16)

Leddy -9 (NYI again is -11)

Goligoski -9 (ARI -14)

Pietrangelo -9 (STL -1)

Klingberg -8 (DAL -18)

even Ekblad is -8 (FLA -2)

etc etc etc

I think if the GM's of all those teams were smart they'd dump all those bums for sure and instead pick up some of these studs:

Carlo +11

Holden +11

Yannick Weber is +8 (Oh why did we let him go? He's a defensive "giant" out there!)

My personal fave is Alex Petrovic...+8 on the same FLA team where Ekblad is -8 (I'm tellin' ya...that Ekblad kid is all washed up! A bust for sure!)

 

Anyone who says to trade Gudbranson after we just acquired him should have their CDC membership revoked. He will be just fine in the league and will be in the top 75 of Dmen one day...a solid #3 guy on any contending team.

 

I mean your evidence for why plus minus sucks is horrible, but plus minus does suck.. The reason it sucks is because it doesn't take into account how the player is utilized and the quality of competition... Which is a MUCH better argument against it than, well Ekblad is -8 and Petrovic is +8... The whole point of analytics is to attempt to see what's really happening out on the ice, and quantifying the impact of a player... Which means you have to go into it with some flexibility about how good you think some players are, because Gudbranson is a prime example of this, he's a big guy and he can skate well for his size and he knows how to hit... And he sucks at defense.

 

[Beeekz37]

This is almost as dumb as the "Lets trade Loui!". We're just barely a 1/4 of the way through the first season on this team for these guys and we are already wanting to ship them out of town? No wonder we are one of the biggest jokes around the leagues in terms of prospect pool/development and player mismanagement with our "fans" wanting to give up on our new players. At least give them a full season to see what they may be before you give up on them. I'm giving my minus for the day on this solely for suggesting trading new players.

[ABNuck]

9 hours ago, Aircool said:

 

I mean your evidence for why plus minus sucks is horrible, but plus minus does suck.. The reason it sucks is because it doesn't take into account how the player is utilized and the quality of competition... Which is a MUCH better argument against it than, well Ekblad is -8 and Petrovic is +8... The whole point of analytics is to attempt to see what's really happening out on the ice, and quantifying the impact of a player... Which means you have to go into it with some flexibility about how good you think some players are, because Gudbranson is a prime example of this, he's a big guy and he can skate well for his size and he knows how to hit... And he sucks at defense.

 

 

Isn't that what the game is for? Actually playing the game? See what the score was? That's a pretty good indicator of what's REALLY going on out on the ice. Despite what the "analytics" say, good teams lose, bad teams win. Good players have bad nights, weeks, months, seasons...and bad players have good seasons (again again again...Andrew McDonald...tells you everything you need to know about the value of analytics).

 

What analytics don't tell you: players dealing with injury recovery, new home/city/teammates, death in family, birth of children, new romances, fears (ie/ flying), new food allergies, new equipment etc etc etc. Nor does it cover linemates that are dealing with these things that may affect how they react or what play they may make that is out of the ordinary and thus affect other players...call it the "team sport dominoe effect" if you will.

 

Stats are good to compile...THEY are a direct indicator of what happened on the ice. The analysis of those stats (analytics) is 100% interpretive and thus subject to influencing factor (ie/ we should trade Gudbranson cause the stats say we should - and besides that he was brought here to be our defensive saviour and he isn't doing that yet - so he obviously sucks and should be dumped for a 2nd)...complete garbage and hogwash. Trust me, Florida is a worse team right now for having fired a hockey guy and replacing him with an analytics guy...that team will suffer in the long run...and will probably need to install a turnstile as a locker room door.

[Aircool]

29 minutes ago, ABNuck said:

 

Isn't that what the game is for? Actually playing the game? See what the score was? That's a pretty good indicator of what's REALLY going on out on the ice. Despite what the "analytics" say, good teams lose, bad teams win. Good players have bad nights, weeks, months, seasons...and bad players have good seasons (again again again...Andrew McDonald...tells you everything you need to know about the value of analytics).

 

What analytics don't tell you: players dealing with injury recovery, new home/city/teammates, death in family, birth of children, new romances, fears (ie/ flying), new food allergies, new equipment etc etc etc. Nor does it cover linemates that are dealing with these things that may affect how they react or what play they may make that is out of the ordinary and thus affect other players...call it the "team sport dominoe effect" if you will.

 

Stats are good to compile...THEY are a direct indicator of what happened on the ice. The analysis of those stats (analytics) is 100% interpretive and thus subject to influencing factor (ie/ we should trade Gudbranson cause the stats say we should - and besides that he was brought here to be our defensive saviour and he isn't doing that yet - so he obviously sucks and should be dumped for a 2nd)...complete garbage and hogwash. Trust me, Florida is a worse team right now for having fired a hockey guy and replacing him with an analytics guy...that team will suffer in the long run...and will probably need to install a turnstile as a locker room door.

 

Look the result matters, a lot, but analytics is used to try and help you decide why the result happened. Not to say that player X is garbage despite the fact he always wins... But to try and to explain why he always wins, and to try and identify what factors really result most in winning, and so you can then prioritize these factors. It's not an attempt to contradict popular hockey knowledge, but in fact an attempt to order popular hockey knowledge in such a way that you can figure out what has the biggest impact. We all know possession doesn't always win you a game, but it can... What other factors can reverse the effects of possession? How can you utilize these factors to counter teams with players who are better at retaining/moving the puck... This is the goal of analytics... This is how you try to use it to get a leg up.

 

All players get injured, that's part of a player's skill.. Can he play injured, can he avoid injury, how well does he recover.. You don't get participation Stanley Cups if you get injured a lot, you just lose and don't get them... Injury is a sad excuse in sports. This is a completely irrelevant point. Over a large sample size, either a player is constantly hurt, or his stats will level out despite his injuries. Every gets injured.

 

Your viewpoint is ridiculous, it's so unintelligent it's just not funny. Analytics are not interpretive at all... Statistics are in no way subjective, by definition. I won't even bother trying to explain something as basic as that to someone as closed-minded as you... Live in your bubble. That's fine. I never advocated dumping Gudbranson for pathetic value, I just don't rate him as a player... I think he is average at best, and probably worse... The reality is Florida overperformed last year on the back of Luongo... Their defense is definitely more possession and offensive minded, but their team structure clearly has issues if putting defenseman like Yandle on their blueline turns them into scrubs... Either Gallant is overrated, or that team was just NEVER really good. Analytics suggest they were never really good.

 

Statistics are not their to replace the gameplay, they are there to help explain the impact of certain actions, and players, and styles of play, to help you predict your success in future games, and use those predictions to improve... They are a tool for coaching more so than player acquisition I would say, but as we often see in hockey, the players are frankly stupid, and can't adjust their games... These "old-school" players who play the game one way, and can't do it another way, are hopefully and seemingly going the way of the dinosaur for new smarter, faster, and yes smaller players.

[Vinny in Vancouver]

11 hours ago, Sygvard said:

Yeah I came in here to defend Guddy, but "excellent" is definitely way too far. I'm not a big fan of plus minus, but there is no denying that he has haemorrhaged shots against without creative offensive chances. He has had visible problems finding chemistry with Hutton, leading to positional errors on the ice and frustrated comments off the ice. 

 

BUT. I think it is just that. Chemistry and frustration. He has the tools, and should get better as the figures things out with Hutton and with the team. He isn't what is wrong with the team. 

From a lot of the games I've seen, I can't just blame it on Gudbranson as Hutton has actually been out of position. It may just be tendencies, but Gudbranson may be a better fit with the more conservative Tanev.

[ABNuck]

34 minutes ago, Aircool said:

 

Look the result matters, a lot, but analytics is used to try and help you decide why the result happened. Not to say that player X is garbage despite the fact he always wins... But to try and to explain why he always wins, and to try and identify what factors really result most in winning, and so you can then prioritize these factors. It's not an attempt to contradict popular hockey knowledge, but in fact an attempt to order popular hockey knowledge in such a way that you can figure out what has the biggest impact. We all know possession doesn't always win you a game, but it can... What other factors can reverse the effects of possession? How can you utilize these factors to counter teams with players who are better at retaining/moving the puck... This is the goal of analytics... This is how you try to use it to get a leg up.

 

All players get injured, that's part of a player's skill.. Can he play injured, can he avoid injury, how well does he recover.. You don't get participation Stanley Cups if you get injured a lot, you just lose and don't get them... Injury is a sad excuse in sports. This is a completely irrelevant point. Over a large sample size, either a player is constantly hurt, or his stats will level out despite his injuries. Every gets injured.

 

Your viewpoint is ridiculous, it's so unintelligent it's just not funny. Analytics are not interpretive at all... Statistics are in no way subjective, by definition. I won't even bother trying to explain something as basic as that to someone as closed-minded as you... Live in your bubble. That's fine. I never advocated dumping Gudbranson for pathetic value, I just don't rate him as a player... I think he is average at best, and probably worse... The reality is Florida overperformed last year on the back of Luongo... Their defense is definitely more possession and offensive minded, but their team structure clearly has issues if putting defenseman like Yandle on their blueline turns them into scrubs... Either Gallant is overrated, or that team was just NEVER really good. Analytics suggest they were never really good.

 

Statistics are not their to replace the gameplay, they are there to help explain the impact of certain actions, and players, and styles of play, to help you predict your success in future games, and use those predictions to improve... They are a tool for coaching more so than player acquisition I would say, but as we often see in hockey, the players are frankly stupid, and can't adjust their games... These "old-school" players who play the game one way, and can't do it another way, are hopefully and seemingly going the way of the dinosaur for new smarter, faster, and yes smaller players.

 

You know what's really funny? You calling me unintelligent (when in fact you don't know me, so...there's that)...besides pointing out the fact that you don't seem to know the difference between statistics and analytics...now THAT is what I call unintelligent. The league has been compiling stats for more than a century, and as I stated in my post, THEY are the real and true indication of what happened on the ice (ie/ player A appears to play better with Player B as the stats prove that the two working together have better corsi, +/-, or whatever). Analytics is the breakdown of those stats as they are used to try and predict how a player might play in certain situations (ie/ 3rd period offensive draw on the right side while the opposing team has players X,Y,Z stacked on the net side with goaltender W in net after facing more than 30 shots on a night where he just played 48 hours earlier and faced 35 shots in that game blah blah blah blah). What analytics won't tell you is that while the STATS support throwing out player A and player B in that situation, there's no record of what happened between periods 2 and 3 when player A found out that player B slept with his wife a week ago...and his dog died...and he just sold his house...and his best friend from high school was in a car accident...blah blah blah blah. GET IT NOW??? So throwing Player A and B out there might get you the same result as throwing Player C and D out there...if the coach knows what the heck he's doing (actually played the game and understands players...something a number crunching geek-bag has no clue about). But just as a number crunching geek-bag doesn't expect a "dumb jock" to understand analytics, I don't expect a number crunching geek-bag to understand hockey. So I guess there's that too.