• Announcements

    • StealthNuck

      Forum-specific Rules   07/11/2017

      These are board specific rules for the Trades and Rumors forum designed to provide organization and a better experience for everyone. Please review these rules before posting new threads. 
        THREAD ETIQUETTE   1. Please search for an existing thread before posting. This forum can be very fast moving, so it's understandable if redundant threads are inadvertently posted. In such a case, please use the report feature to request removal of redundant threads.    2. Provide a clearly identifiable topic title so that users can readily understand the content. The title should include any and all teams involved, as well as player names or other personnel involved as appropriate.   3. All trades, signings, rumors and other news MUST include a linkable source. Simply posting the name of the source is not enough. Effort should also be made to copy and paste the full article, or at the very least the relevant portion of text from the source to the first post of the thread. Moderators may remove low-quality threads in favour of high-quality threads. 

      Affixed to the front of your title should be a label that identifies the type of transaction that is taking place. For all trades use [TRADE]. For all signings use [SIGNING]. For all waiver-wire transactions use [WAIVERS]. For all rumours use [RUMOUR].
      For articles or news items that don't fit into the above categories, affix an appropriate label of your choice such as [NEWS], [ARTICLE] or [MISC].   4. When the status of a thread changes a new thread can be created. The new thread should reflect the change and help focus the discussion on current events. e.g. Someone may create a new thread when a rumor becomes a trades. The old thread will be locked by the moderating team.    5. Do not misrepresent the contents of your thread or post false trades or rumors. Trolling will result in a permanent suspension. 

      SOURCES   The following source types are considered INVALID. Any links to posts or threads on other message boards Any links to personal blogs Any news heard on the radio that does not have a link to an audio vault or podcast Any news seen on television that does not have a link to online video Any news spread by word of mouth
      Additionally, certain sources may be be blacklisted due to poor credentials, clear traffic-mongering etc. Blacklisted sources will be posted here. 
      Thank you for your co-operation and please PM the Administrator or Moderators if you have any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding this forum.
CRAZY_4_NAZZY

[Speculation/Rumor] Canucks on the twins future and Gudbranson

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, SingleThorn said:

Gudbranson WILL be overpaid. The Canucks, or elsewhere. He has most criteria working on his behalf.

 

--UFA

--Right hand shot

--Tough, character player that can give a team 18+ minutes in a 3rd pairing and move up to 2nd pairing on occasion.

--Loyal to team mates. Can, and will, stand up to the 'bully boys' of the NHL.

 

In my mind he signs around 4.5 mil with a 4 year deal.

You gotta think he doesn't have much ground to stand on.

Gudbranson has NEVER played a full NHL season at age 26 (Close, but never 82)

Over the last 3 seasons he has played 126 games, not exactly an ironman.

 

I see more of a 'prove it' deal coming up after this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SingleThorn said:

Had to drive to the 'big smoke' this morning, as in Sechelt on the Sunshine Coast. Radio reception is very limited here. AM650 has a good signal, so I had the pleasure of listening to Satiar and Jawn. Three times during that 1/2 hour they mentioned  that the Demers for Gudbranson deal was a fact. If anyone has a link to this 'fact', please post the link. The trading of Demers was true. The inclusion of Gudbranson in that story has not been confirmed (....or has it ? ) Am I missing something ? I expect Pratt to blurt out non facts, but I don't know this pair well enough to have a bias.

Unless they can provide the source for their "truth" it's just another case of desperate, misinformed radio hacks trying to stay relevant in a sports market that's starved for news.

Edited by PhillipBlunt
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Also:

 

PK's, second highest Dzone starts on D, second highest PDO on D.

 

Also '18+ minutes' isn't '3rd' pairing minutes'. That's 2nd pair territory. 1st pair is generally/roughly 22-28 minutes, 2nd is 16-22, 3rd is 16 and under. You also can't simply look at his ATOI as he's had a few games due to penalty, injury etc where he played very few minutes that is skewing a rather small sample size.

Agree with everything you've said. It may not have been obvious, but I'm 100% pro Gudbranson (....and Gaunce, and Edler etc, etc. ) I'm all for re-signing him, but I know we  will will have to pay top dollar to avoid him going the UFA route.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, qwijibo said:

He’s not going to take a cut.  That’s just a ridiculous ask 

Then trade him.  He's a pylon, horrible possession stats.  Can't make a breakout pass if his life depended on it - his go to is up and off the boards every time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I think Benning has a far greater grasp on what the team needs than Linden. Jim is the architect, while Linden is really just the real estate agent.

I disagree as they dropped the ball collectively on not seeing the direction the game was going.   2015, 3 on 3 was initiated and penalty rule changes which made smaller skilled players a more important role in the league.  They still thought bigger tougher was the direction and passed on highly skilled players that were available.    now they are playing catch up. and this is not in hindsight as we discussed this at length when the changes to the game were being initiated.

Edited by chilliwiggins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do pure defensive d-men get paid a lot?

 

Tanev is an example of such d-men, and he's making less than 4.5 (cap hit) a year with no limitations.

 

Can't see Gudbranson getting more than 5M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, chilliwiggins said:

I disagree as they dropped the ball collectively on not seeing the direction the game was going.   2015, 3 on 3 was initiated and penalty rule changes which made smaller skilled players a more important role in the league.  They still thought bigger tougher was the direction and passed on highly skilled players that were available.    now they are playing catch up. and this is not in hindsight as we discussed this at length when the changes to the game were being initiated.

That direction changes every few years regardless. Skill and speed have taken an upswing, but remind me, is Matthews a small player?

 

It's easy to be a revisionist and use that as ammunition for an argument though. I assume you're alluding to Virtanen in the "they still thought bigger tougher was the direction" comment, which in and of itself is funny, as he's probably one of the faster skaters on the team. Sure, he hasn't made the same impact as Ehlers and Nylander, but he isn't exactly a seasoned vet either.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

That direction changes every few years regardless. Skill and speed have taken an upswing, but remind me, is Matthews a small player?

 

It's easy to be a revisionist and use that as ammunition for an argument though. I assume you're alluding to Virtanen in the "they still thought bigger tougher was the direction" comment, which in and of itself is funny, as he's probably one of the faster skaters on the team. Sure, he hasn't made the same impact as Ehlers and Nylander, but he isn't exactly a seasoned vet either.

Like I said not in hindsight as we discussed this here as the game changes were being initiated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, c00kies said:

Do pure defensive d-men get paid a lot?

 

Tanev is an example of such d-men, and he's making less than 4.5 (cap hit) a year with no limitations.

 

Can't see Gudbranson getting more than 5M.

Methot gets almost 5 million a year. Methot had proven himself worthy while paired with Karlsson. With Dallas, I'm not too sure.

 

IMO, he shouldn't be getting more than Tanev. If he wants to sign long term 4+ years, then I would give him max 4.75 a year. But I think it would be more beneficial to the team and probably to him after these last couple of seasons to sign a 2 year 4 million per year deal. If he wants significantly more, then we will have to just trade him unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I think Benning has a far greater grasp on what the team needs than Linden. Jim is the architect, while Linden is really just the real estate agent.

This post explains my point of view on the matter, with perfect accuracy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we can't trade him for a boatload of assets, then I suggest a short contract for Gudbranson. We may regret anything over three years down the road.

 

3 x 5 million per year.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SingleThorn said:

Had to drive to the 'big smoke' this morning, as in Sechelt on the Sunshine Coast. Radio reception is very limited here. AM650 has a good signal, so I had the pleasure of listening to Satiar and Jawn. Three times during that 1/2 hour they mentioned  that the Demers for Gudbranson deal was a fact. If anyone has a link to this 'fact', please post the link. The trading of Demers was true. The inclusion of Gudbranson in that story has not been confirmed (....or has it ? ) Am I missing something ? I expect Pratt to blurt out non facts, but I don't know this pair well enough to have a bias.

Welcome to the big hole as we like to call it or smoke or whatever it is these days lol...its home haha.

 

I still have not found anything to support the Gudbranson involvement. May just be rumour.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Me_ said:

This post explains my point of view on the matter, with perfect accuracy.

Thank you, Me_.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bitter Melon said:

Gudbranson does bring more to the team than just toughness. He clears the crease and makes any opposing player second guess trying to take the puck to the net. That may seem like splitting hairs to some but imo it's an entirely different skill set and one worth having.

 

That being said it's not one you break the bank for.

i 100% agree.  gudbranson brings element to his game the team could severely use but he has to come in at the right price tag.  hes a guy that reminds me ben hutton a bit.  he had his game figured out and was playing well around the age of 22-23 but has somehow lost what made him so effective. 

 

perhaps its a combination of past nux coaching and being battered with injuries. if anyone can fix gudbransons game i would say its green and baumer.  he showed glimpses of his former self the final game b4 the break.  lets hope they can make the most out of his next few games and see if that was a 1 off or if he can showup and play his game.  hes still a very young player who has lots of room to grow.  

 

i would like to see him workout.  fingerw crossed because we could really use a willie Mitchell / Chara type.   perhaps losing willie as a  affected him too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Patterson interviewed Gudbranson today regarding the passive response to Lewis' hit on Boeser, to which Gudbranson said:

 

"I'm not the only guy that should do it on this team. I think there should have been a pushback. That's something that I bring & had I been on the ice there would have been something done a little differently."      

 

Couldn't agree more Guddy.

Edited by PhillipBlunt
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Patterson interviewed Gudbranson today regarding the passive response to Lewis' hit on Boeser, to which Gudbranson said:

 

"I'm not the only guy that should do it on this team. I think there should have been a pushback. That's something that I bring & had I been on the ice there would have been something done a little differently."      

 

Couldn't agree more Guddy.

Cough virtanen cough. My god virt has been disappointing when it comes to physicality.... The main reason we drafted him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Patterson interviewed Gudbranson today regarding the passive response to Lewis' hit on Boeser, to which Gudbranson said:

 

"I'm not the only guy that should do it on this team. I think there should have been a pushback. That's something that I bring & had I been on the ice there would have been something done a little differently."      

 

Couldn't agree more Guddy.

I think Linden alluded to who was on the ice at the time -- Sedins and Edler, the latter whom gave him a little skate-up tap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Nicklas Bo Hunter said:

Cough virtanen cough. My god virt has been disappointing when it comes to physicality.... The main reason we drafted him. 

I didn't see it/wasn't paying attention but apparently Virt did hit him later that game. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Nicklas Bo Hunter said:

Cough virtanen cough. My god virt has been disappointing when it comes to physicality.... The main reason we drafted him. 

Virtanen did staple Lewis to the boards later on in the game, so he did do something.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.