[Rumour] Gostisbehere to MTL?

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, N7Nucks said:

Yeah those 9 hits he had on Ghost really give Hutton the physical edge. 

Physicality is not just about hits.  It's about taking hits to make plays,  It's about (especially for D) playing a heavier game.  Look at the playoffs!  How good does Jay Bowmeester look?  Does he put up big numbers?  No, because that's not part of his game, and the Blues have other D to do that.  (And we do too, with both Hughes and OJ) Some D, must play D.  There are very few D who can do both, and they get paid HUGE dollars.  

We don't need Ghost, especially not at the cost of Jake.  

[rekker]

4 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Physicality is not just about hits.  It's about taking hits to make plays,  It's about (especially for D) playing a heavier game.  Look at the playoffs!  How good does Jay Bowmeester look?  Does he put up big numbers?  No, because that's not part of his game, and the Blues have other D to do that.  (And we do too, with both Hughes and OJ) Some D, must play D.  There are very few D who can do both, and they get paid HUGE dollars.  

We don't need Ghost, especially not at the cost of Jake.  

I agree that Ghost doesn't fill an immediate need but I would consider him an upgrade over Hutton. If there was a deal on the table involving Ghost and Hutton I would look into it. But ya, we need a Parayko type addition over a Ghost addition if Hutton is still here.

[AV.]

Undersized player to MTL?  Par the course.

 

His 65 point season he's only a season removed from should still garner a good package that goes beyond Shaw and Byron.

 

#14 should be part of this deal and maybe a good prospect like Teasdale or Romanov.

[D-Money]

3 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Defending is part of a defense-man's job, no?  Hutton plays a far heavier game than the Ghost.

Ghost gets exposed defensively too often because he plays a very light game.  Is his offence needed on our team when we have Hughes now, and OJ coming?  Is his cost worth Jake?

Factoring in all these points into the equation, it's difficult to accept JB would make this move.  

Hey look!  No insulting emoji.  

Here are some excerpts from a fantastic article breaking down all the strengths and weaknesses of Hutton's game: https://theathletic.com/895576/2019/03/29/why-the-canucks-should-sell-high-on-ben-hutton/

(I have excluded over half of it, including graphs, pictures, and video clips. If you want the whole thing, subscribe - this article alone was worth at least a month's subscription price.)

 

Quote

Why the Canucks should sell high on Ben Hutton

By Harman Dayal Mar 29, 2019                 

 

The perception surrounding Ben Hutton hasn’t been this positive since his rookie season.

The 25-year-old defenceman worked hard to lean out in the summer, is back as a regular in the lineup playing in a top-4 role and was set to match his career high in points before a recent foot injury.

But there’s a lot more than meets the eye with Hutton and it reveals critical indicators applying not only to this season, but his entire career that would suggest he’s not as effective as the narrative might lead one to believe...

 

A deeper look at Hutton’s career arc and on-ice value

A key component in selling high on Hutton has to be to effectively market his redeemable qualities and, objectively, it lies within his transitional game.

For starters, moving the puck out of the defensive zone is one of the most important traits for a defenceman in the modern game and in this respect Hutton’s been the team’s best at facilitating breakouts while limiting turnovers.

*Alex Biega doesn’t have a large enough tracking sample

 

...Hutton has the second highest possession exit percentage behind Chris Tanev, though the former gets the overall edge because Tanev’s behind only Gudbranson and Pouliot as far as failed exits.

Not only is Hutton’s poise and deception in creating lanes an asset on breakouts, but as Darryl Keeping outlined in a piece for CanucksArmy he’s the team’s best neutral zone defender as far as forcing dump-ins — a critical skill given that we know that dump-ins are roughly half as likely to produce shots and goals compared to possession entries.

These traits are important as early research into these microstats indicates they could be better at predicting future performance than shot metrics like Corsi, but the problem is that you often miss the forest for the trees with this type of analysis. In other words, instead of looking at the player’s overall impact, you place too much value into a few parts of it.

Recognizing this and striking a balance is important as with Hutton there’s been very little exploration into what his net impact is. Part of this is because judging his performance objectively has been a challenge as he’s shown to be a completely different defenceman when playing with and without the recently traded Erik Gudbranson.

When Hutton played with Gudbranson, the Canucks were outshot and outchanced by significant margins while getting outscored by roughly a 2:1 ratio. On the other hand, Hutton’s posted decent results away from Gudbranson — coming close to break even in controlling shots and scoring chances...

 

…Hutton has yet to finish a season with a positive impact on either shots or expected goals (which are really similar to scoring chances).

Looking at last season, Hutton saw a sheltered role on the third pair and wasn’t far off from having a neutral impact.

Plaudits have been handed out this season for Hutton’s resurgence, but the data suggests he’s struggled mightily in a top-4 role this year...

 

...Hutton’s had a negative impact in bleeding shots and scoring chances against while failing to generate enough offensively and it’s reflected on the scoresheet in the form of goals as well.

To me, this would suggest that many of us underrated Hutton’s part in the failure of his pairing with Erik Gudbranson.

On the flipside, this begs another important question — if Hutton struggles in driving play why is that he’s held his own when away from Gudbranson?

Just like we’ve perhaps underrated Hutton’s part in the failure of his Gudbranson pairing, I think we’ve overestimated his contribution on other pairings.

Hutton’s most common defence partners since 2016-17

• Erik Gudbranson: 1225 minutes
• Troy Stecher: 684 minutes
• Chris Tanev: 391 minutes
• Nikita Tryamkin: 378 minutes
• Alex Biega: 249 minutes

Aside from Gudbranson, Hutton’s been put in a favourable deployment situation over the last three seasons. Troy Stecher is at this point the team’s second-best defenceman, Tanev’s play has been outstanding up until this season and if not with those guys, he’s played in a sheltered role.

The Hutton-Stecher pairing, for example, has been reasonably successful and most generally view both players in a similar vein, when the shot metrics would suggest that that line of thinking couldn’t be further from the truth.

 

Stecher is a solid two-way play driver and provides a night and day difference defensively. In this context, we’re likely looking at a situation where Hutton’s more or less being carried by a far superior defenceman and it’s reflected in the fact that Stecher’s controlled shots, scoring chances and goals better when without Hutton...

 

...Hutton’s redeemable qualities as a puck mover and strong neutral zone defender made him the best fit for Tanev among an extremely shallow group of left-handed defencemen, but as it was with Stecher, it was likely Tanev doing the bulk of the lifting for the pair’s success...

 

...After stripping away the pivotal contextual factors, we can see that Hutton’s had a decisively negative impact on his team’s ability to control shots and scoring chances.

This impact has translated to a wins above replacement (WAR) value that ranks last among Canucks defencemen and ninth worst among all NHL blueliners since Hutton stepped into the league.

*WAR data courtesy Evolving Hockey

*Data via Evolving Hockey, minimum 2000 minutes

The Evolving Hockey WAR model places a fair bit of credence into goal metrics and whether your team outscores the opposition when said player is on the ice. This reflects poorly on Hutton as he owns the third worst on-ice goals for percentage of all NHL defencemen (ahead of only Mark Borowiecki and Gudbranson) since entering the league.

It isn’t just a matter of poor luck either — Hutton owns the sixth worst expected goal share (xGF%) during that span.

There’s debate once again to be had on how significantly Gudbranson could have impacted those results, but at the bare minimum it’s clear that Hutton isn’t anywhere close to being a good top-4 defenceman.

 

The importance of selling now

Selling Hutton this summer should be a priority because of his pending RFA status. By all indications, the soon to be 26-year-old will come at a hefty cost.

“Hutton is arbitration eligible this season and his agent is going to argue he has proven himself as a legitimate top four defenceman. In fact, the 22:33 minutes per game he averages puts him in the NHL’s top 40,” said colleague Jason Botchford.

“It means the Canucks have deployed him like a top pairing defenceman and his agent will argue that a contract in the $4 million range is a bargain for a top pair defenceman. Arbitration cases are interesting because the sides are limited in the number of stats which can be presented. The two most important are average ice time and points-per-game.

“Hutton’s 0.31 points per game puts him in the top 100 in the NHL and if I’m him I’m using the Mike Matheson extension as a comparable. “The Canucks signed Erik Gudbranson last year to $4 million-per-year extension and Hutton’s camp will argue his role has been bigger. They won’t be wrong.”

I can see the value in Hutton as a potential bottom pairing defenceman with the right partner, but it’d be unwise to pay anything close to the $4-million range based on his struggles in the top-4 this year...

 

...Why does Hutton struggle as a play driver?

In my mind, analysis is never complete without a qualitative element and in Hutton’s case it’s trying to find the weaknesses that make him a poor play driver in spite of some transitional strengths.

There are concrete issues as far as his defensive zone play is concerned.

*Viz by Micah McCurdy

To me, while Hutton might not make a lot of the egregious mistakes that you might have seen someone like Gudbranson make, there are issues that prevent the team from suppressing high danger chances with the former on the ice.

Shots against on the right serves as a proxy for time spent in the defensive zone. The more time you spend pinned in your own end, the more opportunities you’d expect to have to breakup plays from your own zone.

It’s concerning then to see that Gudbranson and Hutton spent such significant time in the defensive zone and were also among the bottom as far as being able to break plays up and block dangerous passes to the slot...

 

...The bigger issue is that when the puck is sent back to the point after the original shot attempt, Hutton loses concentration and fails to lock his hip to net front guy and tie him up — leaving Niederreiter in the perfect position for a potential tip.

As the rebound emerges, Hutton’s inability to close the space and tie up his man means the Canes regain possession and continue the cycle again...

 

...In the clip above, Hutton inexplicably creeps up the wall toward Kasperi Kapanen. This part is strange, but even worse is that he hasn’t communicated this to Bo Horvat which means that Nazem Kadri is free in front of the net to pounce on the rebound.

 

 

...Conclusion

There’s a narrative that’s been created as far as Hutton’s bounce back season, but in reality he’s struggled mightily in a top-4 role. No matter what way you slice it — shots, scoring chances, or actual goals — Hutton’s isolated impact has been far worse than we may be led to believe and it’s something that’s been consistent through his career.

Hutton has tangible qualities with respect to his ability to facilitate breakouts and play a strong gap in the neutral zone, but the net impact remains largely negative due to indifferent defensive zone play.

Hutton doesn’t read the play quickly enough to identify and decisively take away the primary off-the-puck threat and is too lackadaisical as far as moving his feet to maintain good gaps — leading to a situation where he ranks last among Canucks’ defenceman in defensive zone breakups+blocked slot passes per hour.

I think Hutton can be just fine as a bottom pairing defenceman with the right partner, but with a price tag likely checking in at the $4-million range as well as a potentially higher perceived value, the Canucks would be wise to explore the trade market.

It's kind of funny how you have the impression Hutton plays a "heavy" game, while others categorize him as frustratingly indifferent in the defensive zone. Maybe you just notice him throwing more hits, since the other team has the puck so much. But the data clearly shows he's not a quality top-4 D-man.

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, D-Money said:

Here are some excerpts from a fantastic article breaking down all the strengths and weaknesses of Hutton's game: https://theathletic.com/895576/2019/03/29/why-the-canucks-should-sell-high-on-ben-hutton/

(I have excluded over half of it, including graphs, pictures, and video clips. If you want the whole thing, subscribe - this article alone was worth at least a month's subscription price.)

 

It's kind of funny how you have the impression Hutton plays a "heavy" game, while others categorize him as frustratingly indifferent in the defensive zone. Maybe you just notice him throwing more hits, since the other team has the puck so much. But the data clearly shows he's not a quality top-4 D-man.

Fancy stats are used as a tool but not as the end all and be all.  And it's not "kind of funny" how my opinion differs from yours.  Ghost is a soft player, and we don't need that on our team at the cost of Jake.

We have Hughes and OJ coming, there is no need for Ghost.  Hutton is learning (now) his role as more of a heavier body on the back end.

 

[D-Money]

Just now, Alflives said:

Fancy stats are used as a tool but not as the end all and be all.  And it's not "kind of funny" how my opinion differs from yours.  Ghost is a soft player, and we don't need that on our team at the cost of Jake.

We have Hughes and OJ coming, there is no need for Ghost.  Hutton is learning (now) his role as more of a heavier body on the back end.

 

Is he though? "Fancy stats" are much more useful than unsubstantiated statements of what a player is supposedly learning.

 

There are a number of pics and clips in the article of actual gameplay showing Hutton going out of position, leaving his man open and unobstructed, and/or slacking off when he has to catch/engage someone.

 

Ghostbear isn't necessarily better defensively, but he's miles and miles better with the puck.

[Odjick29willkillyou]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

Is the Ghost really that much of an upgrade on Hutton we’d give up Jake?

Hutton can lay body; ghost disappears 

I see what you did there 

[theo5789]

Gostisbehere would be nice if we didn't have Hughes. Honestly Hughes looks like he will have a career more similar to Gostisbehere. I mean if he could be had for a Sutter and Motte, then sure I'd make the deal, but not at the cost of Virtanen.

 

Hard to compare Hutton and Gostisbehere. Ghost is a top 4 offensive guy while Hutton is more a bottom 4 guy that plays a more of a rounded game. Ghost's value in the league is higher than Hutton for sure, but I'd say our team at this point may need Hutton more than a Gostisbehere (because we have Hughes).

 

I am curious if this deal does happen, would that take them out of the EK sweepstakes considering that EK is hoping they make an offer. I can't see Ottawa making an offer unless EK takes a big discount. NYR might be the only team left on his list that could make an offer though.

Edited June 12, 2019 by theo5789

[JeremyCuddles]

49 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Physicality is not just about hits.  It's about taking hits to make plays,  It's about (especially for D) playing a heavier game.  Look at the playoffs!  How good does Jay Bowmeester look?  Does he put up big numbers?  No, because that's not part of his game, and the Blues have other D to do that.  (And we do too, with both Hughes and OJ) Some D, must play D.  There are very few D who can do both, and they get paid HUGE dollars.  

We don't need Ghost, especially not at the cost of Jake.  

Tanev takes hits to make plays all the time and gets injured for it. Ghost is an upgrade on Hutton. Ghost and Hughes gives us two really good point options on the PP. If getting Ghost only costs us a 3rd liner I say take the shot. Especially if Edler leaves this offseason. Hutton can fill the defensive shoes of Edler and Ghost can fill the offensive shoes. This also allows the team to slowly bring Juolevi into the field. I am not entirely sure but I also think Ghost can play RD if need be. So if Edler does stick around we have a new Erhoff for Edler to play with. Jake is not a huge loss. Green doesn't trust him on the PP or the PK or even in OT. Let him go succeed somewhere else, cause we sure as hell aren't using him other than to play on the 3rd line.

[D-Money]

Anyways, back to the original rumour...

 

Ghost-bear to MTL makes all kinds of sense. They have 2 solid 2-way RHD in Weber and Petry, but no LHD remotely close to their skills, and no one with exceptional puck-moving ability. Shayne would be great with Shea, and each of their strengths would cover the others' weaknesses.

[Provost]

That Hutton Athletic article was excellent.

 

I felt for a while that we should sell on Hutton after this season as I think it is his high water mark.

 

It is interesting to see the numbers show how bad Gudbranson was and how good Stecher is.

 

If we could get in on that Philly reshaping their D action... Maybe they see value in Hutton and/or Tanev.

Edited June 12, 2019 by Provost

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

5 hours ago, rekker said:

Lol, Ghost disappears. 

[Pears]

2 hours ago, D-Money said:

Anyways, back to the original rumour...

 

Ghost-bear to MTL makes all kinds of sense. They have 2 solid 2-way RHD in Weber and Petry, but no LHD remotely close to their skills, and no one with exceptional puck-moving ability. Shayne would be great with Shea, and each of their strengths would cover the others' weaknesses.

Gostisbehere - Weber

Mete - Petry

Benn - Juulsen

 

That’s a good defense

[D-Money]

8 minutes ago, Pears said:

Gostisbehere - Weber

Mete - Petry

Benn - Juulsen

 

That’s a good defense

Benn is a UFA, and Kulak was solid for them, so it will probably be Kulak - Juulsen on the bottom pairing, and Folin as #7.

 

But yeah, that is solid. Petry is quite underrated. And Josh Brook is going pro, and may not be too far from being ready to handle injury call-ups.

[JM_]

4 hours ago, Alflives said:

Physicality is not just about hits.  It's about taking hits to make plays,  It's about (especially for D) playing a heavier game.  Look at the playoffs!  How good does Jay Bowmeester look?  Does he put up big numbers?  No, because that's not part of his game, and the Blues have other D to do that.  (And we do too, with both Hughes and OJ) Some D, must play D.  There are very few D who can do both, and they get paid HUGE dollars.  

We don't need Ghost, especially not at the cost of Jake.  

seems like fair value to me, you have to pay a lot for d that can score. I think it would be Jake +.  The biggest job for this team is to transform the d group and I don't know how that gets done without losing some F talent. 

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

seems like fair value to me, you have to pay a lot for d that can score. I think it would be Jake +.  The biggest job for this team is to transform the d group and I don't know how that gets done without losing some F talent. 

We have Hughes and OJ coming.  

 

[D-Money]

9 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

seems like fair value to me, you have to pay a lot for d that can score. I think it would be Jake +.  The biggest job for this team is to transform the d group and I don't know how that gets done without losing some F talent. 

 

[JM_]

19 minutes ago, Alflives said:

We have Hughes and OJ coming.  

Great, but is that enough? 

[Alflives]

20 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Great, but is that enough? 

No, but we need guys who play a heavier game to balance with the guys who don't.  I see Hutton as a guy who is learning he needs to play a heavier game to be the best he can be. 

Ideally we would have a great number one, who could play both roles, but those guys are 10 million and up.  Ghost, to me, is a guy we don't need.   

[JeremyCuddles]

55 minutes ago, Alflives said:

No, but we need guys who play a heavier game to balance with the guys who don't.  I see Hutton as a guy who is learning he needs to play a heavier game to be the best he can be. 

Ideally we would have a great number one, who could play both roles, but those guys are 10 million and up.  Ghost, to me, is a guy we don't need.   

Why do you keep making stuff up about Hutton? Lol.