Brandon Sutter | #20 | C

[73 Percent]

42 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

Wow. Embraces his unappreciated role. I like it.

[aGENT]

19 minutes ago, 73 Percent said:

Wow. Embraces his unappreciated role. I like it.

He was quoted last year of be excited about having a defined, match up role... and then proceeded to just kill it at that role.

 

That's why I'm not real sure why I keep seeing so many projected lineups with Sutter in an offensive role. I mean I'm sure we'll see him there situationally on occasion, but I HIGHLY doubt that's going to be his default role.

 

The guy's excellent at and enjoys being a match up, dzone, pk'ing guy who can give you +/- 35 points counter punching. Let him do that.

[-AJ-]

4 hours ago, aGENT said:

He was quoted last year of be excited about having a defined, match up role... and then proceeded to just kill it at that role.

 

That's why I'm not real sure why I keep seeing so many projected lineups with Sutter in an offensive role. I mean I'm sure we'll see him there situationally on occasion, but I HIGHLY doubt that's going to be his default role.

 

The guy's excellent at and enjoys being a match up, dzone, pk'ing guy who can give you +/- 35 points counter punching. Let him do that.

I think the only reason is that he's probably our best option at 2nd line centre if Pettersson isn't ready. Still, it would really hurt to take him away from what he did so well last year. I think Pettersson will be given a long and hard look in the top 6.

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

On 2018-08-17 at 7:07 PM, aGENT said:

He was quoted last year of be excited about having a defined, match up role... and then proceeded to just kill it at that role.

 

That's why I'm not real sure why I keep seeing so many projected lineups with Sutter in an offensive role. I mean I'm sure we'll see him there situationally on occasion, but I HIGHLY doubt that's going to be his default role.

 

The guy's excellent at and enjoys being a match up, dzone, pk'ing guy who can give you +/- 35 points counter punching. Let him do that.

Yeah, I don’t quite see the wisdom either in “freeing up” Sutter to play a more offensive role. Personally, I’d rather double down on his usage last season, deploy Beagle similarly, and then free up the easier minutes for the other two lines, with one being Horvat’s and the other built around Pettersson (either at W or C).

 

I just revisited Sutter’s career numbers for a post on Canucks Army (see comments section for this article) and he remains the most effective player in the entire NHL over the last decade in raising his goalies’ Sv% and lowering team rates in goals against at 5v5. He’s done so largely while playing with low quality linemates, against high quality competition, and with extreme defensive deployment.

 

Willie Desjardins tried the whole “free up” Sutter thing in 2016-17 when he asked Sutter to create more offense, play with better linemates (at times anyway), and had less drastic deployment (especially with Willie’s 1-2-3-4).

 

The results? Probably his second best individual offensive season, but not a significant improvement over career average, and certainly not all that impressive based on icetime and per minute scoring rates. And his on-ice (team) numbers just went in the tank, including Sv% and GA/60. Defensively, it was a disastrous season (worst of Sutter’s career IMO), and the modest individual offensive uptick didn’t come close to balancing the scales.

 

Next season, Green came in and slotted Sutter into a defined role as a defensive/shutdown centre. Extreme defensive deployment, lower end linemates, high quality of competition. Fed him arguable the toughest minutes of any forward in the league. And Sutter cleaned his plate and asked for seconds. Finished the year a net positive in GF% and had some of his most marked (positive) impacts on team Sv% and GA/60. 

 

For me, the idea of deploying Sutter more offensively is a step backwards. The addition of Beagle shouldn’t be about “freeing up” Sutter. It should be about adding another line that can shoulder even more of the weight defensively. And allowing both the Horvat line and the Pettersson line (because Elias should not play with Sutter IMO) to feast on Sedin-style offensive deployment while the Sutter and Beagle lines handle all the tough defensive minutes.

[higgyfan]

9 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Yeah, I don’t quite see the wisdom either in “freeing up” Sutter to play a more offensive role. Personally, I’d rather double down on his usage last season, deploy Beagle similarly, and then free up the easier minutes for the other two lines, with one being Horvat’s and the other built around Pettersson (either at W or C).

 

I just revisited Sutter’s career numbers for a post on Canucks Army (see comments section for this article) and he remains the most effective player in the entire NHL over the last decade in raising his goalies’ Sv% and lowering team rates in goals against at 5v5. He’s done so largely while playing with low quality linemates, against high quality competition, and with extreme defensive deployment.

 

Willie Desjardins tried the whole “free up” Sutter thing in 2016-17 when he asked Sutter to create more offense, play with better linemates (at times anyway), and had less drastic deployment (especially with Willie’s 1-2-3-4).

 

The results? Probably his second best individual offensive season, but not a significant improvement over career average, and certainly not all that impressive based on icetime and per minute scoring rates. And his on-ice (team) numbers just went in the tank, including Sv% and GA/60. Defensively, it was a disastrous season (worst of Sutter’s career IMO), and the modest individual offensive uptick didn’t come close to balancing the scales.

 

Next season, Green came in and slotted Sutter into a defined role as a defensive/shutdown centre. Extreme defensive deployment, lower end linemates, high quality of competition. Fed him arguable the toughest minutes of any forward in the league. And Sutter cleaned his plate and asked for seconds. Finished the year a net positive in GF% and had some of his most marked (positive) impacts on team Sv% and GA/60. 

 

For me, the idea of deploying Sutter more offensively is a step backwards. The addition of Beagle shouldn’t be about “freeing up” Sutter. It should be about adding another line that can shoulder even more of the weight defensively. And allowing both the Horvat line and the Pettersson line (because Elias should not play with Sutter IMO) to feast on Sedin-style offensive deployment while the Sutter and Beagle lines handle all the tough defensive minutes.

Sutter is another undervalued player by many of the fans.  I highlighted your comments that point out what a tremendous defensive C he is and what a significant player he is on our team.

 

I also prefer Sutter to continue in his role as the key shutdown guy, despite the addition of Beagle.  I think that Pettersson can play a decent defensive game when required, so he doesn't need the sheltering that Sutter provides.  I would rather see Granlund, Gagner or Gaudette as C (until Pettersson can take over), along with Baer or Eriksson (especially like Loui's defensive game) on the wing.  I have a suspicion that Elias is probably good at taking faceoffs, but will need plenty of time to learn the NHL game as a top 6 C

[Attila Umbrus]

11 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

Sutter is another undervalued player by many of the fans.  I highlighted your comments that point out what a tremendous defensive C he is and what a significant player he is on our team.

 

I also prefer Sutter to continue in his role as the key shutdown guy, despite the addition of Beagle.  I think that Pettersson can play a decent defensive game when required, so he doesn't need the sheltering that Sutter provides.  I would rather see Granlund, Gagner or Gaudette as C (until Pettersson can take over), along with Baer or Eriksson (especially like Loui's defensive game) on the wing.  I have a suspicion that Elias is probably good at taking faceoffs, but will need plenty of time to learn the NHL game as a top 6 C

I have to laugh every time I hear someone (fan or media) knock on Sutter and what he brings to the team. He is invaluable to this club. If you want around the NHL and asked all the players to list their top 10 centers they hate to play against, he would be on it. There are a lot of top line forwards in this league that probably HATE getting matched up against Sutter lol.

[Gaudette Celly]

3 hours ago, Attila Umbrus said:

I have to laugh every time I hear someone (fan or media) knock on Sutter and what he brings to the team. He is invaluable to this club. If you want around the NHL and asked all the players to list their top 10 centers they hate to play against, he would be on it. There are a lot of top line forwards in this league that probably HATE getting matched up against Sutter lol.

Wait 'til you get a load of the latest smArmy hit piece...

[Boudrias]

15 hours ago, higgyfan said:

Sutter is another undervalued player by many of the fans.  I highlighted your comments that point out what a tremendous defensive C he is and what a significant player he is on our team.

 

I also prefer Sutter to continue in his role as the key shutdown guy, despite the addition of Beagle.  I think that Pettersson can play a decent defensive game when required, so he doesn't need the sheltering that Sutter provides.  I would rather see Granlund, Gagner or Gaudette as C (until Pettersson can take over), along with Baer or Eriksson (especially like Loui's defensive game) on the wing.  I have a suspicion that Elias is probably good at taking faceoffs, but will need plenty of time to learn the NHL game as a top 6 C

I agree with you as well. Sid made some good points. Sutter has one of the best FO% in the NHL. That reality mandates a high % of d-zone starts. Just as the Twins were wheeled out on every o-zone FO, Sutter gets the call in the d-zone. IMHO it is more the fact that Horvat will get more ozone starts now that the Twins are gone. Beagle will hopefully take some pressure off Sutter in the d-zone. I see Sutter being a great C to have prospects get their first NHL experience with. He does a great job on both sides of the puck.  

[Attila Umbrus]

14 hours ago, Hutton Wink said:

Wait 'til you get a load of the latest smArmy hit piece...

Yeah I read it, the writer is obviously very pro analytics and his article is slanted in that approach to gauging Sutter as a player. Then goes on to say this (see below) about him in the same article...basically stating that Sutter has dog s**t numbers because he gets put with lesser line mates then breezes on to the rest of his SLAM column on him as if "oh well, the stats can't count that and it would be pure speculation...but the numbers still say he sucks so we'll stick with that"....When really everything they write about analytics wise is ALL pure speculation, which is why they always use terms like "maybe" and "most likely" or "possibly"...they aren't sure themselves LOL.

 

"As such, quality of competition was likely a greater factor for Sutter than it is in most cases. That’s all we can really say though; analysis beyond this scope would be speculative at best.

Edited August 20, 2018 by Attila Umbrus

[canuckledraggin]

On 8/19/2018 at 2:58 PM, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Yeah, I don’t quite see the wisdom either in “freeing up” Sutter to play a more offensive role. Personally, I’d rather double down on his usage last season, deploy Beagle similarly, and then free up the easier minutes for the other two lines, with one being Horvat’s and the other built around Pettersson (either at W or C).

 

I just revisited Sutter’s career numbers for a post on Canucks Army (see comments section for this article) and he remains the most effective player in the entire NHL over the last decade in raising his goalies’ Sv% and lowering team rates in goals against at 5v5. He’s done so largely while playing with low quality linemates, against high quality competition, and with extreme defensive deployment.

 

Willie Desjardins tried the whole “free up” Sutter thing in 2016-17 when he asked Sutter to create more offense, play with better linemates (at times anyway), and had less drastic deployment (especially with Willie’s 1-2-3-4).

 

Now you done it. We have another thread to derail with Alfstonker's Willie love. He won a Calder cup for crying out loud!

[Rick_theRyper]

Too bad Sutter doesnt take his number back from Loui E.. Wasnt the deal that Loui had to score 21 goals? How many does he have now after 3 season. 21 yet? Hmm..

 

Oh god. Its only been 2.. But he did get 10 and 11. 

Edited August 21, 2018 by Rick_theRyper
2 years only? Really?

[Gaudette Celly]

Article yesterday on PassTheBull about how analytics types are starting to downplay quality of competition for quality of teammates, with Sutter again as a posterboy.  Interesting though was this article, which came out before the Canucks signed Beagle:

Jay Beagle shows there is room for players like Brandon Sutter on great teams

The Capitals are on the verge of winning the Stanley Cup with Beagle playing a key role.

Apparently there is plenty of interest around the NHL in Brandon Sutter, with several teams approaching the Canucks to see if Jim Benning is willing to trade the player he once called a “foundational piece.”

 

There are many reasons why teams would be interested in Sutter, but one possible reason for the uptick in interest is that a player much like him has been a key player for the Washington Capitals in their run to the Stanley Cup Final: Jay Beagle.

 

Sutter spent a lot of time in the defensive zone this season, mostly by design. Sutter’s role under head coach Travis Green skewed heavily towards the defensive side of the ice, akin to the type of minutes Manny Malhotra once played under Alain Vigneault. That usage actually makes it difficult to find comparable players for Sutter. Not many teams around the NHL used a centre the way Green used Sutter.

 

Just two forwards this season started a higher percentage of their shifts in the defensive zone than Brandon Sutter and they were both frequent linemates of his: Brendan Gaunce and Darren Archibald. But Jay Beagle came close. In fact, Beagle started a higher rate of his shifts in the defensive zone than Sutter did.

Essentially, Beagle is the closest possible comparison to Sutter in terms of usage this past season. The biggest difference is that Sutter faced tougher competition: he was used more often against first lines than Beagle, who still faced tough competition more than the average fourth-liner.

 

Beagle has continued his skewed usage in the postseason, absorbing defensive zone faceoffs like a sponge. He leads all players in the playoffs in defensive zone starts at 5-on-5, with 142 shifts that started in the defensive zone. Next best is his teammate, T.J. Oshie, with 121. In fact, only one player started a higher rate of his shifts in the defensive zone in the playoffs: Nick Bonino, the player the Canucks traded to acquire Sutter in the first place.

 

When you include the penalty kill, Beagle’s defensive zone starts climb even higher: 217, 60 more than the forward in second, Vegas’s William Karlsson.

 

(Side note: That highlights a key difference in players usage between the Capitals and Golden Knights in the playoffs. The Capitals hand Beagle as many defensive zone starts as possible, freeing up offensive zone starts for their top line. The Golden Knights, on the other hand, simply get their top line of Karlsson, Reilly Smith, and Jonathan Marchessault on the ice as much as possible, no matter where the faceoff is.)

 

Much like Sutter’s defensive usage (and Malhotra’s before him) freed up the Sedins to take more offensive zone faceoffs, Beagle’s usage has allowed Alex Ovechkin and Evgeny Kuznetsov more time in the offensive zone. Those two Capitals lead the playoffs in offensive zone starts.

 

While some in the hockey analytics community suggest the impact of zone starts is minimal, the Capitals clearly believe in getting their stars as many offensive zone faceoffs as possible, and have sacrificed Beagle on the altar of the defensive zone faceoff dot in order to do it. Beagle is certainly not responsible for the incredible playoffs from Ovechkin and Kuznetsov, but he’s contributed as much as he can.

 

We can compare Sutter and Beagle side-by-side from this past season, focussing mainly on their defensive numbers. For those confused by all the abbreviations, I’ve included a glossary at the bottom of the article to help you out.

 

	Brandon Sutter	Jay Beagle
Boxcars
TOI/GP	17.32	12.45
GP	61	79
G	11	7
A	15	15
Pts	26	22
FO%	51.7%	58.5%
5-on-5
TOI/GP	13.28	9.53
CA/60	59.46	63.00
CF%	43.26	39.15
GA/60	1.63	2.15
GF%	52.17	44.90
xGA/60	2.14	2.54
xGF%	43.59	40.02
DZS/60	31.06	36.08
OZS%	22.65%	25.74%
Penalty Kill
TOI/GP	3.08	2.52
FA/60	68.87	90.26
SA/60	50.15	65.29
GA/60	8.25	8.73

For the most part, Sutter comes out ahead of Beagle in most categories, but it’s worth taking a closer look.

 

Let’s start with the traditional “boxcar” statistics: goals, assists, and points. Their offensive production was similar this season, though Beagle admittedly played 18 more games than Sutter. That difference is negligible, however, as Sutter actually played more minutes this season than Beagle.

 

When you look at their scoring rates, which are not included above, the gap narrows even more: Sutter scored 1.48 points per 60 minutes, while Beagle had 1.34. When you look at just 5-on-5 scoring, Beagle actually comes out ahead: 1.35 points per 60 compared to 1.26 for Sutter.

 

Beagle did have a better season in the faceoff circle, but that’s to be expected: Beagle is one of the top faceoff men in the league, with a career 56.4% faceoff percentage.

Their 5-on-5 numbers are intriguing. Since Sutter’s usage was fairly unique this season, it’s hard to really know how well he performed. Judging his season against Beagle’s, however, suggests he did fairly well with the minutes he was given. Sutter was on the ice for fewer shot attempts and goals against and comes out ahead in terms of corsi percentage and goal differential.

 

The two centres also played a comparable amount of time on the penalty kill. Sutter led all NHL forwards in short-handed ice time per game, averaging 3:05 per game. Beagle was not too far behind: he had the eighth most minutes short-handed, at 2:31 per game.

 

Sutter did significantly better in those minutes, allowing far fewer unblocked shot attempts and shots on goal, though the number of goals given up with them on the ice isn’t far apart. Beagle is actually near the bottom of the NHL in shots given up on the penalty kill. This is particularly interesting given Beagle’s penchant for winning faceoffs; apparently winning faceoffs doesn’t matter as much on the penalty kill as you might expect.

 

With all of these similarities, there is one huge difference: ice time. Sutter played significantly more than Beagle this past season.

 

At 5-on-5, Sutter’s ice time was on the high end of what you would expect from a second-line forward, even he was used more like a third-line checker. On the Canucks, only Bo Horvat and Brock Boeser averaged more 5-on-5 ice time per game than Sutter this past season.

 

While Sutter’s usage was ostensibly to shelter young players like Boeser and Goldobin, as well as offensive veterans like the Sedins and Thomas Vanek, you could argue that he actually took a lot of ice time away from those players. While Sutter limited goals against when he was on the ice, players with more offensive upside were given less opportunity to score goals.

 

To be fair, the Canucks clearly don’t have the offensive firepower of a team like the Capitals. Beagle played clear fourth-line minutes with the Capitals — only Alex Chiasson averaged fewer minutes at 5-on-5 — while the team’s top-six forwards were given plenty of ice time to score. That pattern has continued in the playoffs, where Beagle is averaging under 10 minutes of ice time at 5-on-5.

 

While I hesitate to draw too broad a conclusion from looking at just two players, it does suggest that there is room for a player like Sutter on a championship (knock on wood) team, as long as it’s in a smaller role than Sutter has played for the Canucks.

 

Edit -- link to article:
https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/jay-beagle-shows-there-is-room-for-players-like-brandon-sutter-on-great-teams-1.23328528

Edited August 28, 2018 by Hutton Wink

[JM_]

17 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

Article yesterday on PassTheBull about how analytics types are starting to downplay quality of competition for quality of teammates, with Sutter again as a posterboy.  Interesting though was this article, which came out before the Canucks signed Beagle:

Edit -- link to article:
https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/jay-beagle-shows-there-is-room-for-players-like-brandon-sutter-on-great-teams-1.23328528

its funny tho, if the article is correct Sutter is an even better player than we realized. If he's facing above average quality, and has lower than average team mates and he's still leading the league in important areas like SID pointed out above, the stats guys should love Sutter. 

[aGENT]

46 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

the stats guys should love Sutter. 

That would assume they're not not looking at grossly over simplified and cherry picked data to suit a narrative though.

[Rob_Zepp]

On 8/19/2018 at 2:58 PM, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

I just revisited Sutter’s career numbers for a post on Canucks Army (see comments section for this article) and he remains the most effective player in the entire NHL over the last decade in raising his goalies’ Sv% and lowering team rates in goals against at 5v5. He’s done so largely while playing with low quality linemates, against high quality competition, and with extreme defensive deployment.

foun·da·tion·al

founˈdāSH(ə)nəl/

adjective

1. denoting an underlying basis or principle; fundamental.
2. typifying an underappreciated professional ice-hockey player; typically by non-knowledgeable fans.

"the foundational principles of building a winning franchise"

[Gaudette Celly]

...and all these teams want to acquire him because he's like Gudbranson, a "replacement-level player with negligible value."  You know, the ones you can get in free agency for league minimum.

[The_Rocket]

12 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

...and all these teams want to acquire him because he's like Gudbranson, a "replacement-level player with negligible value."  You know, the ones you can get in free agency for league minimum.

Yeah all you have to do is trade a failing D prospect for Nic Dowd and BAM. You have your sutter replacement. Nvm that he is a liability in his own zone and has little offensively abilities at the NHL level. He’s basically as good as sutter!

[JM_]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

That would assume they're not not looking at grossly over simplified and cherry picked data to suit a narrative though.

oh yeah, I forgot. Well there's always Botchford to start locker room problem rumours. 

[Hockey God]

Always believed that you can't go wrong with a hard-working Sutter on your team as a player.  The whole family has a hard-working mindset, and as the team improves, Brandon's value and impact will improve as well.      

[-AJ-]

I thought Sutter looked really good tonight. He stood out among the young kids. He does a lot of little things right; I can see why Green likes him.