Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Brendan Gaunce | C/LW


b3.

Recommended Posts

he seems to over balance a lot in board battles. I wonder if needs a bit more time to grow into his frame or something. he seems so smart with his positioning and stick placement though. a bit more speed (first few steps) and some confidence he could be dangerous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

The fact he's still even on plus/minus this season despite his meagre offensive production speaks to how well he's played defensively. And as you note, the fancy stats back this up:

 

-1.05 GA60RelTM (best on team among players with 15+ GP)

 

-3.95 CA60RelTM (2nd best on team among players with 15+ GP)

 

Gaunce is definitely taking care of his own end of the ice. But it would be nice to see him getting a little better results at the other end.

 

His usage isn't helping him much, as far as him getting offensive opportunities. Nor is the fact his on-ice teammates are posting team worst rates for Sh% and CSh%. And Gaunce remains at a zero individual Sh%, despite him getting shots off at a fairly decent rate (his individual shots/minute isn't far behind guys like Horvat, Eriksson, Hansen, and Granlund).

 

But his defensive game is what's keeping him in the NHL right now and might be what he earns his living on should he have a decent length of career in this league. He definitely doesn't hurt the team and, given the usage he's getting, his results (from a team perspective) are pretty good.

 

I'm still hoping he can get a few bounces in the second half and finish with more respectable scoring totals than he's currently projected at for the season. He definitely has he ability. He just needs a little luck and maybe some better opportunities from the coach (in terms of his minutes, linemates, and overall deployment).

I wish he was getting 8 -10 minutes a game. To a degree I think he is being sheltered but also learning the NHL game from the d-side. When you consider how much stronger this club is than when Horvat first came the evolution hits home. There is no hurry with Gaunce. As you suggested an injury could increase his role this spring. I wanted him to get at least 40 games this year and he should do that. This kid has no trouble adjusting his game, he did it in Utica, and next fall will be a better time for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

I wish he was getting 8 -10 minutes a game. To a degree I think he is being sheltered but also learning the NHL game from the d-side. When you consider how much stronger this club is than when Horvat first came the evolution hits home. There is no hurry with Gaunce. As you suggested an injury could increase his role this spring. I wanted him to get at least 40 games this year and he should do that. This kid has no trouble adjusting his game, he did it in Utica, and next fall will be a better time for him.

Having Malholtra around is really good for a guy like Gaunce.  Manny was a top pick, and had to change his game to play defensive to get back a spot.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Alflives said:

Having Malholtra around is really good for a guy like Gaunce.  Manny was a top pick, and had to change his game to play defensive to get back a spot.  


Interesting thing about Gaunce is he is an even player with an even Corsi - which is relatively one of the best on the team. He also has 51 offense zone starts to 81 defensive zone starts. He is not gift wrapped easy minutes. 

One way to look at it, is that he plugs minutes - Gaunce over a season neutralizes the game when he is on the ice. At a high level, he is one of the best performing Canucks this season when looking strictly at goals for, goals against, and driving play since our team isn't very good. Gaunce, then, can be considered a league "average" player making a far below average salary. However, when you consider his minutes played and special teams his salary is appropriate. 


This leads me to my hockey "money ball" ideas. An NHL team has a set number of roster spots and a set salary cap. What if all of the regular stats (moreso production per minute), advanced stats (corsi, quality of competition), age, and salary cap could be thrown into a formula to create a player's moneyball score? Each measure could be active. You could also throw in bonuses for things like special teams performance (or evaluate special teams players with a completely different set of metrics) 

For example, if we use "1" as the average, at $1.75 M Sven Baertschi might have a moneyball score of 1.4, but at $4.5 M his moneyball score drops to .8 meaning he would not be a good value at that salary. 

Not looking at extra spots, if you filled forward spots 5-12 and D spots 4-6 with "Brendan Gaunces" IE neutral players at a cheap price, it would leave money to go out and buy players who might not have a good moneyball score but will give the team an overall edge. 

Brendan Gaunce is very good defensively, but weak offensively. On the flip side of Gaunce we have Baertschi. Now like Gaunce, Baertschi has been one of the better performers this year and is a steal at his salary. While he has been good offensively, his defensive game has been mediocre. He has the same "average" contribution, but more weighted to offensive performance. 
 

So in conclusion, bump up Gaunce's minutes and see how he does. 
 

Edited by canucklehead44
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/1/2017 at 2:41 AM, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

The fact he's still even on plus/minus this season despite his meagre offensive production speaks to how well he's played defensively. And as you note, the fancy stats back this up:

 

-1.05 GA60RelTM (best on team among players with 15+ GP)

 

-3.95 CA60RelTM (2nd best on team among players with 15+ GP)

 

Gaunce is definitely taking care of his own end of the ice. But it would be nice to see him getting a little better results at the other end.

 

His usage isn't helping him much, as far as him getting offensive opportunities. Nor is the fact his on-ice teammates are posting team worst rates for Sh% and CSh%. And Gaunce remains at a zero individual Sh%, despite him getting shots off at a fairly decent rate (his individual shots/minute isn't far behind guys like Horvat, Eriksson, Hansen, and Granlund).

 

But his defensive game is what's keeping him in the NHL right now and might be what he earns his living on should he have a decent length of career in this league. He definitely doesn't hurt the team and, given the usage he's getting, his results (from a team perspective) are pretty good.

 

I'm still hoping he can get a few bounces in the second half and finish with more respectable scoring totals than he's currently projected at for the season. He definitely has he ability. He just needs a little luck and maybe some better opportunities from the coach (in terms of his minutes, linemates, and overall deployment).


Great post! Somehow I missed this. 

You need to score goals to win games, and prevent goals to not lose them. We don't win a lot of games, but we aren't losing games because of Gaunce either. If Gaunce were as good offensively as he is defensively and vice versa, fans would be a lot more amped about him with the net result is the same. 

If he has a two goal night like Skille and Megna did against Tampa immediately his offensive numbers would almost immediately turn around. 

One thing I found interesting is that when the team is leading Gaunce is the worst forward on the team at driving play. When the team is behind Gaunce is the second best forward on the team at driving play (only a tiny bit behind Eriksson). When the team is tied he is right smack dab in the middle. Baertschi is the opposite, whereas his corsi leads forwards with the Canucks are winning, but is the bottom when they are behind.  

 

Edited by canucklehead44
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, canucklehead44 said:


Interesting thing about Gaunce is he is an even player with an even Corsi - which is relatively one of the best on the team. He also has 51 offense zone starts to 81 defensive zone starts. He is not gift wrapped easy minutes. 

One way to look at it, is that he plugs minutes - Gaunce over a season neutralizes the game when he is on the ice. At a high level, he is one of the best performing Canucks this season when looking strictly at goals for, goals against, and driving play since our team isn't very good. Gaunce, then, can be considered a league "average" player making a far below average salary. However, when you consider his minutes played and special teams his salary is appropriate. 


This leads me to my hockey "money ball" ideas. An NHL team has a set number of roster spots and a set salary cap. What if all of the regular stats (moreso production per minute), advanced stats (corsi, quality of competition), age, and salary cap could be thrown into a formula to create a player's moneyball score? Each measure could be active. You could also throw in bonuses for things like special teams performance (or evaluate special teams players with a completely different set of metrics) 

For example, if we use "1" as the average, at $1.75 M Sven Baertschi might have a moneyball score of 1.4, but at $4.5 M his moneyball score drops to .8 meaning he would not be a good value at that salary. 

Not looking at extra spots, if you filled forward spots 5-12 and D spots 4-6 with "Brendan Gaunces" IE neutral players at a cheap price, it would leave money to go out and buy players who might not have a good moneyball score but will give the team an overall edge. 

Brendan Gaunce is very good defensively, but weak offensively. On the flip side of Gaunce we have Baertschi. Now like Gaunce, Baertschi has been one of the better performers this year and is a steal at his salary. While he has been good offensively, his defensive game has been mediocre. He has the same "average" contribution, but more weighted to offensive performance. 
 

So in conclusion, bump up Gaunce's minutes and see how he does. 
 

Super interesting.  In a hard Capped league the concept of "money ball" makes the most sense, because their is no spending over the 

Cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Super interesting.  In a hard Capped league the concept of "money ball" makes the most sense, because their is no spending over the 

Cap.


For sure. The problem is though, I think coaching style, "chemistry", opportunity etc. impact a player's performance. That said, while not a perfect measure, I think there is some validity.

So lets say as a GM we are managing a cap-tight Canucks team. Knowing that Sutter might switch to wing, we have two top 9 centres in Henrik and Horvat and a lack of depth. With Horvat expected to play against team's top lines, we need someone who can chip in points in a "2nd scoring line" type of role at a good price (lets say under 4 million). Special teams contribution are a bonus, but not really required. Essentially a replacement for Linden Vey. 

Here are some options:

Shawn Matthias - ($2.125 M)
Jonathan Marchessault - ($750K)
Eric Staal - ($3.5M)
Joe Colborne ($2.5M)
Sam Gagner ($650K)
Antoine Vermette - ($1.75K)

Based on "productivity" in 2015-2016 (points per minute) they rank as follows: 1. Colborne 2. Marchessault 3. Vermette 4. Matthias 5. Staal 6. Gagner. Now interestingly enough if you go back one more season Staal was first followed by Gagner. 

Vermette is VERY consistent year over year. In fact, last season was his most productive since 2010-2011. What you see is what you get and Vermette is a "safe" pick, or lower risk lower reward. 

Matthias, since 2011-2012 has almost matched Vermette's production EXACTLY. Less minutes. I'd take Vermette or Matthias given they are almost exactly even. 

Red is Matthias, Blue is Vermette

Screen Shot 2017-01-02 at 12.17.44 PM.png

Staal and Gagner are the both two veterans who were productive players but have fallen on hard times. Gagner is Blue, Staal is Red:

Screen Shot 2017-01-02 at 12.17.13 PM.png

Colborne has been around for awhile, but had a one-off amazing season. Marchessault was a bit of an unknown, who produced at lower levels. I would say these would be the riskier picks you slip into the lineup and hope for the best. Red is Marchessault, Blue is Colborne.

Screen Shot 2017-01-02 at 12.24.28 PM.png

 

So you take the low risk, low reward choice of Vermette/Matthias. Gamble on a bounce back year of Staal/Gagner. Or take the gamble on the unkown in Marchessault or Colborne. 

Considering the price, risk, and upside, Marchessault would have been my first choice followed by Gagner, Staal, then Colborne. Due to the price, I would have been willing to give Marchessault multiple (2) years. Staal / Gagner / Colborne would have been more ideal on 1 year contracts. 

Edited by canucklehead44
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

 

 

2 hours ago, canucklehead44 said:


Great post! Somehow I missed this. 

You need to score goals to win games, and prevent goals to not lose them. We don't win a lot of games, but we aren't losing games because of Gaunce either. If Gaunce were as good offensively as he is defensively and vice versa, fans would be a lot more amped about him with the net result is the same. 

If he has a two goal night like Skille and Megna did against Tampa immediately his offensive numbers would almost immediately turn around. 

One thing I found interesting is that when the team is leading Gaunce is the worst forward on the team at driving play. When the team is behind Gaunce is the second best forward on the team at driving play (only a tiny bit behind Eriksson). When the team is tied he is right smack dab in the middle. Baertschi is the opposite, whereas his corsi leads forwards with the Canucks are winning, but is the bottom when they are behind.  

 

Couple of real good posts 'canucklehead'.

I do not have a lot of concern for Gaunce's ppg stats. It should all be about his TOI and NHl game development. Your stats suggest that he is adapting to the NHL game. I am hoping he evolves into a solid 3C or 4C on a serious CUP contending Canuck team.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

 

Couple of real good posts 'canucklehead'.

I do not have a lot of concern for Gaunce's ppg stats. It should all be about his TOI and NHl game development. Your stats suggest that he is adapting to the NHL game. I am hoping he evolves into a solid 3C or 4C on a serious CUP contending Canuck team.

 

Agreed. I think when average fans look at his stat line they think he is a waste of roster space. In Vey's first year in Vancouver I compared him to mould, as he is even worse below the surface and was really hurting the team. We have the perfect situation with Gaunce. We can let him simmer, and he isn't hurting us in any way. The fourth line is really the best spot for him to learn how to become a solid 3C centre. Also based on his performance this is really where he will excel. He also achieved what he could at the AHL level. 

McCann and Virtanen on the other hand were a huge mistake to leave in the lineup last year. McCann needed to build strength, and Virtanen needed to work on his skill. Both are sucking in the AHL this year - a result of shattered confidence?  

Horvat came into the league as such a well-round player I think management thought McCann and Virtanen could have similar success. 
 

Edited by canucklehead44
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said:


For sure. The problem is though, I think coaching style, "chemistry", opportunity etc. impact a player's performance. That said, while not a perfect measure, I think there is some validity.

So lets say as a GM we are managing a cap-tight Canucks team. Knowing that Sutter might switch to wing, we have two top 9 centres in Henrik and Horvat and a lack of depth. With Horvat expected to play against team's top lines, we need someone who can chip in points in a "2nd scoring line" type of role at a good price (lets say under 4 million). Special teams contribution are a bonus, but not really required. Essentially a replacement for Linden Vey. 

Here are some options:

Shawn Matthias - ($2.125 M)
Jonathan Marchessault - ($750K)
Eric Staal - ($3.5M)
Joe Colborne ($2.5M)
Sam Gagner ($650K)
Antoine Vermette - ($1.75K)

Based on "productivity" in 2015-2016 (points per minute) they rank as follows: 1. Colborne 2. Marchessault 3. Vermette 4. Matthias 5. Staal 6. Gagner. Now interestingly enough if you go back one more season Staal was first followed by Gagner. 

Vermette is VERY consistent year over year. In fact, last season was his most productive since 2010-2011. What you see is what you get and Vermette is a "safe" pick, or lower risk lower reward. 

Matthias, since 2011-2012 has almost matched Vermette's production EXACTLY. Less minutes. I'd take Vermette or Matthias given they are almost exactly even. 

Red is Matthias, Blue is Vermette

Screen Shot 2017-01-02 at 12.17.44 PM.png

Staal and Gagner are the both two veterans who were productive players but have fallen on hard times. Gagner is Blue, Staal is Red:

Screen Shot 2017-01-02 at 12.17.13 PM.png

Colborne has been around for awhile, but had a one-off amazing season. Marchessault was a bit of an unknown, who produced at lower levels. I would say these would be the riskier picks you slip into the lineup and hope for the best. Red is Marchessault, Blue is Colborne.

Screen Shot 2017-01-02 at 12.24.28 PM.png

 

So you take the low risk, low reward choice of Vermette/Matthias. Gamble on a bounce back year of Staal/Gagner. Or take the gamble on the unkown in Marchessault or Colborne. 

Considering the price, risk, and upside, Marchessault would have been my first choice followed by Gagner, Staal, then Colborne. Due to the price, I would have been willing to give Marchessault multiple (2) years. Staal / Gagner / Colborne would have been more ideal on 1 year contracts. 

You should make a proposal to the Canucks.  As our young guys start to earn bigger contracts the line up will need to be filled out with best use of remaining funds, and it appears your metric helps determine that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Alflives said:

You should make a proposal to the Canucks.  As our young guys start to earn bigger contracts the line up will need to be filled out with best use of remaining funds, and it appears your metric helps determine that.


Thanks! I do have a lot of fun playing armchair GM. Mike Gillis was actually the embodiment of this style of thinking and I wouldn't be surprised if he did have a formula. Jim Benning is much more of an "old school hockey guy", so I guess in a way they've already tried this. 

Gillis was the first to jump on the analytics bandwagon and he used analytics to guide decisions. He was also the one to bring the "Moneyball" term into hockey.

Gillis used "hacks" or alternative methods for an advantage like hiring a sleep therapist, dieticians and chefs

Gillis hired a "capologist" before it was mainstream

I think part of the problem is that the analytics-based approach is based mostly on regular season performance. In the playoffs, the game seems to change so much. There is less data to work with, more irregularities, and the way the game is played and even reffed is so different. This is perhaps why the Canucks had more regular season success. I also believe that Torts was not Gillis' hire - he just does not seem to fit that mindset. 

Around prospects I think one of his most underrated moves is getting a team controlled farm club. This, and his signing of some free agents like Lack and Tanev, showed that he did have some plan in mind for keeping the club competitive. 
 

Love him or hate him, you can't deny we had a very good team under Mike Gillis. He lost his way at the end, but in his ERA from the Stanley cup finals prior he was very highly regarded but remembered for his blunders. 

Edited by canucklehead44
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/2/2017 at 10:17 AM, canucklehead44 said:


Thanks! I do have a lot of fun playing armchair GM. Mike Gillis was actually the embodiment of this style of thinking and I wouldn't be surprised if he did have a formula. Jim Benning is much more of an "old school hockey guy", so I guess in a way they've already tried this. 

Gillis was the first to jump on the analytics bandwagon and he used analytics to guide decisions. He was also the one to bring the "Moneyball" term into hockey.

Gillis used "hacks" or alternative methods for an advantage like hiring a sleep therapist, dieticians and chefs

Gillis hired a "capologist" before it was mainstream

I think part of the problem is that the analytics-based approach is based mostly on regular season performance. In the playoffs, the game seems to change so much. There is less data to work with, more irregularities, and the way the game is played and even reffed is so different. This is perhaps why the Canucks had more regular season success. I also believe that Torts was not Gillis' hire - he just does not seem to fit that mindset. 

Around prospects I think one of his most underrated moves is getting a team controlled farm club. This, and his signing of some free agents like Lack and Tanev, showed that he did have some plan in mind for keeping the club competitive. 
 

Love him or hate him, you can't deny we had a very good team under Mike Gillis. He lost his way at the end, but in his ERA from the Stanley cup finals prior he was very highly regarded but remembered for his blunders. 

This is Brendan Gaunce talk, not Mike Gillis talk. 

Edited by Horvats_Big_Head
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see Gaunce down in Utica working hard developing his game. Hre has shown himself to be a dedicated worker, and there is more work to do before he becomes an every day NHL player in my opinion.

 

Besides, Utica is starved for decent forwards right now, Gaunce could make a difference there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest I'd like to see the Canucks try Gaunce with the Sedins. Reasons:

 

1) Megna sucked, cannot finish, he's an AHL player through and through. Let him work out how to score on a 3rd or 4th line, not the top line.

2) Eriksson had some success but not as much chemistry as everyone thought with the twins. He's been great with Sutter and Granlund though, leave those guys together as a good checking line with top end skill

3) The Sedins are SLOW right now and need a young guy. Gaunce isn't the fastest but he can skate and skate HARD through guys along the boards.

4) The twins are too old and losing physical puck battles now. IMO Gaunce is one of the best on this team at winning board battles.

5) Gaunce is a big physical body, not so much to protect the twins anymore, but to create space for them to work. 

6) Gaunce can be used as a big crease/net presence to screen shots from the twins or point men

7) Most importantly, Gaunce is pretty darn solid defensively and the twins need someone who is defensively aware because they get lazy sometimes

8) Gaunce has shown instant chemistry with the Sedins in the past when put on their line, scoring goals almost immediately with them (I remember something like 3 in 2 games a few years ago)

 

 

Give it a go WD. I know he never will, he's far too stubborn, but what do you have to lose? The Sedins offence has completely dried up this year, they're 2nd/3rd line players right now, give Gaunce a shot.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

To be honest I'd like to see the Canucks try Gaunce with the Sedins. Reasons:

 

1) Megna sucked, cannot finish, he's an AHL player through and through. Let him work out how to score on a 3rd or 4th line, not the top line.

2) Eriksson had some success but not as much chemistry as everyone thought with the twins. He's been great with Sutter and Granlund though, leave those guys together as a good checking line with top end skill

3) The Sedins are SLOW right now and need a young guy. Gaunce isn't the fastest but he can skate and skate HARD through guys along the boards.

4) The twins are too old and losing physical puck battles now. IMO Gaunce is one of the best on this team at winning board battles.

5) Gaunce is a big physical body, not so much to protect the twins anymore, but to create space for them to work. 

6) Gaunce can be used as a big crease/net presence to screen shots from the twins or point men

7) Most importantly, Gaunce is pretty darn solid defensively and the twins need someone who is defensively aware because they get lazy sometimes

8) Gaunce has shown instant chemistry with the Sedins in the past when put on their line, scoring goals almost immediately with them (I remember something like 3 in 2 games a few years ago)

 

 

Give it a go WD. I know he never will, he's far too stubborn, but what do you have to lose? The Sedins offence has completely dried up this year, they're 2nd/3rd line players right now, give Gaunce a shot.

Frankly, I'd be willing to see Gaunce over Megna. I wouldn't have high expectations, but if he can finish in the AHL, I could see him finishing in the NHL with golden passes from the twins. He plays a style somewhat similar to Burrows so I could see it working somewhat.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

To be honest I'd like to see the Canucks try Gaunce with the Sedins. Reasons:

 

1) Megna sucked, cannot finish, he's an AHL player through and through. Let him work out how to score on a 3rd or 4th line, not the top line.

2) Eriksson had some success but not as much chemistry as everyone thought with the twins. He's been great with Sutter and Granlund though, leave those guys together as a good checking line with top end skill

3) The Sedins are SLOW right now and need a young guy. Gaunce isn't the fastest but he can skate and skate HARD through guys along the boards.

4) The twins are too old and losing physical puck battles now. IMO Gaunce is one of the best on this team at winning board battles.

5) Gaunce is a big physical body, not so much to protect the twins anymore, but to create space for them to work. 

6) Gaunce can be used as a big crease/net presence to screen shots from the twins or point men

7) Most importantly, Gaunce is pretty darn solid defensively and the twins need someone who is defensively aware because they get lazy sometimes

8) Gaunce has shown instant chemistry with the Sedins in the past when put on their line, scoring goals almost immediately with them (I remember something like 3 in 2 games a few years ago)

 

 

Give it a go WD. I know he never will, he's far too stubborn, but what do you have to lose? The Sedins offence has completely dried up this year, they're 2nd/3rd line players right now, give Gaunce a shot.

Not to mention Megna called the Twins "Sedin sisters" or something like that on Twitter not too long ago.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Green⌃Arrow said:

Not to mention Megna called the Twins "Sedin sisters" or something like that on Twitter not too long ago.

Pretty sure that was about 6 years ago during the 2011 playoffs. I'd say it was a while ago.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Green⌃Arrow said:

Not to mention Megna called the Twins "Sedin sisters" or something like that on Twitter not too long ago.

We have several AHL players in our forwards, because we don't have any young guys who are ready.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I do like is when he battles for the puck, he has the size and strength to compete with anyone.  He did mess up a little against Calgary leading up to a goal against, but I do see good things in his game. 

 

Usually once per game or once every 2nd game he gets a grade A scoring chance, like somehow coming up with the puck around the net or a screen/tip in front.  That's pretty good for a 4th line guy with limited minutes.  The Plus/Minus is not an accurate stat, but he's at 0, so he's defensively reliable on an offensively challenged team.  

 

His biggest weaknesses when drafted are foot speed, offence and physical level.  Being a bigger guy and in the NHL, he will need to keep his feet moving more.  His positioning is great, but when defenders like Doughty and Keith can just quickly pass or skate up with the puck quickly, you need to be either check them out of the play or get back quick.  Offence.... from a young guy in a defense-first role, I'm not too worried.  Most of his goals will most likely be coming up in front of the net.... he's already instinctively heading there.  His physical level of play does leave a bit to be desired, as he's probably the biggest forward on the team (Skille is heavier), so he should be pasting guys a bit more.  Of course, being a younger guy and not wanting to be out of position may play a role.

 

All in all, he's doing a lot of the little things right.  I just certainly hopes that he keeps practicing on his face-off and keeps his feet moving, coaches love that.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...