[Discussion] Erik Gudbranson to FLA for 1st Round Pick

[J.I.A.H.N]

Just want to add that the red area on the left Dman's spot.....needs to be addressed! if I was the coach, I sure the hell won't want my right Dman so out of position as to doing the left Dmans work on a regular basis.......

 

one guy out of position is bad, 2 guys out of position is worse........3 guys out of position creates chaos!  and so on!

[kanucks25]

8 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

The shots you're complaining about haven't hurt the team most nights

Go back to what I said about Ovechkin.

 

8 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

go back again and look at the team shots against, we've very good this year.

Despite Gudbranson's incompetence. The team has put up decent numbers in spite of Gudbranson. It's like saying Gretzky and I have amazing combined stats in the NHL together. I've obviously made no contributions to that number, but when you lump us together, it makes me look great.

 

8 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

What I find really funny ( I won't be arrogant and say "obtuse") is the complete disregard for what Guddy's team mates say, his coaches and most management other than the stats-darlings. 

Once again, and I don't understand why I have to keep repeating myself here, I understand Gudbranson's value when it comes the intangible human side of things (like... I have Captain Intangible in my sig and he's been my favorite player for about 7 years now). My point has always been that although that aspect is important, we can't pay a player double+ what he's worth for it. If our prospect pool actually turns out at the NHL level, we'll need all the cap-space we can muster for players that are actually good at hockey, and hope to find toughness on the cheap.

[kanucks25]

8 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Sorry are your feelings hurt there or something?

Nope. Nothing personal in this discussion

 

8 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Nowhere did I say stats don't matter and nowhere did I say anything about stats nerds so let's not go down that strawman road, it's lazy.

Nowhere did I suggest you did say that, so again, you've doubled down on the strawman.

 

8 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Simply put, our record with Gudbranson in the line up is better than without. 

Are you sure? 'Cause the one game he missed this year was one of our best.

 

8 hours ago, Warhippy said:

When I watch him play I watch forwards shy away from him, I watch them go in to the corners a shade more hesitantly and the opposing net front presence is diminished.  Again inarguable facts when you watch him play.

Funny, 'cause I see players attack him on the rush 'cause everyone knows he has trouble pivoting and I see players attack him on the fore-check 'cause everyone knows he has trouble passing. And you can push the "crease clearing" narrative all you want but that shot-chart shows that the complete opposite is true: other players have a field day in our crease when Gudbranson is on the ice.

 

8 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Painting a picture of a value less Gudbranson is nothing more than hating on an asset because this forum needs a new whipping boy every week.

I have no reason to "hate" Gudbranson, and I don't require a "whipping boy". I just dislike bad and/or overpaid players, and this discussion is important because of Gudbranson's contract status. Why don't I rag on players like Tanev or Horvat or Boeser or Baertschi or Stecher? Because they perform well, especially when you consider their respective costs.

 

This is nothing personal against Gudbranson as much as some people here might think it is. I don't know him or anything other Canuck personally, and by all accounts he's a "good guy", so there is no reason to "hate" him. All I'm doing is evaluating the player with my brain instead of my heart like some of us here have a difficult time doing.

[kanucks25]

5 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

I find it hard to understand how these charts explain GUDS neutral plus minus,(which is exactly the same as Edlers and Stechers, or the clarity of vision, Gud provides the goalie on those shots, or the traffic allowed or not allowed in front of his crease to provide the proper vision for the goalie.....his side

Small sample size, and no context. This is why even "traditional" hockey fans are shying away from +/- as a legit stat. Over the course of the year, Gudbranson's +/- will inevitably drop if he continues to be poor defensively like he has been. Right now he's the beneficiary of a very high save % by our goalies when he's on the ice (hockey is sometimes very much affected by luck, as we know

 

5 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

Also....when you look closely at the 2 charts, you will notice that the slot area with Gud there is blue on his side, while it is pink when Gud in not there on his side.....both those areas are prime scoring areas......shots from the sides or further out are of lesser concern, if there is no traffic in front.

That one blue area with Gudbranson is on the ice is pretty much where he stands in his regular defensive position (in front of our goalie, a little to the right as he's a RD). However, every other area in the home-plate area (AKA the high-danger area) is dark red. This suggests Gudbranson does a good job of standing still, defending one small area, but it leads to the other team getting a ton of chances from everywhere else including all the other high-danger areas. In other words, when Gudbranson is on the ice, the team has a lot of trouble defending the entire D-zone and getting the puck out successfully.

 

5 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

Just want to add that the red area on the left Dman's spot.....needs to be addressed! if I was the coach, I sure the hell won't want my right Dman so out of position as to doing the left Dmans work on a regular basis.......

 

one guy out of position is bad, 2 guys out of position is worse........3 guys out of position creates chaos!  and so on!

 

Left D-men don't seem to have a problem whatsoever when Gudbranson isn't on the ice. As you can see on the second chart (which is with Gudbranson on the bench) the left D-men are performing very well.

[JM_]

1 hour ago, kanucks25 said:

Go back to what I said about Ovechkin.

 

Despite Gudbranson's incompetence. The team has put up decent numbers in spite of Gudbranson. It's like saying Gretzky and I have amazing combined stats in the NHL together. I've obviously made no contributions to that number, but when you lump us together, it makes me look great.

 

Once again, and I don't understand why I have to keep repeating myself here, I understand Gudbranson's value when it comes the intangible human side of things (like... I have Captain Intangible in my sig and he's been my favorite player for about 7 years now). My point has always been that although that aspect is important, we can't pay a player double+ what he's worth for it. If our prospect pool actually turns out at the NHL level, we'll need all the cap-space we can muster for players that are actually good at hockey, and hope to find toughness on the cheap.

respectfully I'm just not buying what you're selling, its simply not playing out in terms of how the d group is doing and we simply disagree on the value of his physical presence in the lineup. I think we are at detente comrade 

[ashlynnbrookefan]

Overpaying for a physical, bottom pairing D man will hurt the organization going forward. Save the money and trade him, people seem to love him in this thread but he's really just not that good, very meat and potatoes. He could probably be effective in the clutch and grab era but where skating is so important now he just isn't in the same league as most of the NHL. This team needs to realize it needs to rebuild. Trading Guddy won't get us back what we gave up in capital but that's because it wasnt a smart trade initially, JB needs to get us what he can for EG and move a couple other players while he's at it. I'd like to actually see a championship team one day. 

[J.I.A.H.N]

Hi guys

 

Can anyone post actual goals against even strength for all our dmen.........

 

or a stat that actually shows that per 60 minutes for each player.................

 

I can't seem to find it............