I'll quote how I see fit, just as you'll post as you see fit. If anyone wanted context, they can view your post, which outside of the good looks bullet, was pretty succinct.
I can see Gudbranson's marketability being based on his size, character, physical play, GAA, GFA, and a flurry of intangibles, such as the way the team plays with a noticeable uptick in confidence when his skates hit the ice.
That's something that's been sorely lacking on the team and throughout it's culture since Bieksa was traded. As well, while Gudbranson is, for all intents and purposes, a man of pulchritude, he was noticeably absent at the media availability scrum at the beginning of the year, and hasn't factored very much into the post game video much, except before the Buffalo game, for obvious reasons. On the flip-side of that, I see you're point in how the Canucks did market him in the Pepsi commercial, what with him speaking about the proposal from the girl with the sign, so I could see it being offered up as a bargaining point, although a very minute one.
It would be a worthwhile exercise for those interested in compiling statistics, to attend a game and determine based on the name on the back of the jersey being worn in the stands, which players are preferred, how demographics break down based on each player.
I personally don't see looks factoring a huge amount in to a hockey player's new contract, not nearly as much as say an actor or even a basketball or soccer player, where helmets and padding wouldn't be a factor in obscuring the individual.