Erik Gudbranson | #44 | D

[Boudrias]

Just now, RetroCanuck said:

I like how your opinion is based on one stat and that stat is the worst of them all

Suggest you reread. 

[SilentSam]

On 2017-11-26 at 4:51 PM, Isam said:

But he brings nothing else to the table. He gives up an extreme amount of shots and generates absolutely no offense. Toughness can only get you so far. In todays game you need to be able to balance that toughness with the ability to transition the puck to your fowards. If you can't do that then your a detriment to the team.

So then take Gudbranson out of the equation, who on the Canucks do you put out against Lucic, Kassian, Maroon, Ferland, Tkchuck, Byfuglien, and Reaves on a Western swing, every second night..

and those players mentioned are capable of scoring.

Gudbranson has already been missed these past few games.

[Isam]

1 hour ago, SilentSam said:

So then take Gudbranson out of the equation, who on the Canucks do you put out against Lucic, Kassian, Maroon, Ferland, Tkchuck, Byfuglien, and Reaves on a Western swing, every second night..

and those players mentioned are capable of scoring.

Gudbranson has already been missed these past few games.

Fair enough. To tell you truth im tired of arguing about guddy. Theres going to be so called stats nerds like me who think hes dragging the d down and theres going to be guys like you who argue that his physicality opens spots for the more skilled player.  Both sides probably arent going to agree anytime soon so yeah and stuff.

[Isam]

Both sides 

1 hour ago, SilentSam said:

So then take Gudbranson out of the equation, who on the Canucks do you put out against Lucic, Kassian, Maroon, Ferland, Tkchuck, Byfuglien, and Reaves on a Western swing, every second night..

and those players mentioned are capable of scoring.

Gudbranson has already been missed these past few games.

Im going to ask a question. Is gudbranson so intimidating that he alters these guys playing style? To me no. Maybe it does to you

[PhillipBlunt]

36 minutes ago, Isam said:

Fair enough. To tell you truth im tired of arguing about guddy. Theres going to be so called stats nerds like me who think hes dragging the d down and theres going to be guys like you who argue that his physicality opens spots for the more skilled player.  Both sides probably arent going to agree anytime soon so yeah and stuff.

I think both have very valid points to make. What I've noticed though is that the more analytics leaning crowd tends to make statements alluding to Gudbranson being "good at nothing" or his absence being "addition by subtraction". 

 

Those seemingly embittered statements are reductive and usually speak to a less than rounded knowledge and perception of the game. 

 

It's not surprising though as blogs like the Provies and Canucks Army seem rife with that type of ignorance, and crap seemingly always flows downhill. 

Edited November 29, 2017 by PhillipBlunt

[Isam]

But im going to leave this topic alone and will try to watch guddy from your guy's view and see if i learn something. 

[PhillipBlunt]

8 minutes ago, Isam said:

Both sides 

Im going to ask a question. Is gudbranson so intimidating that he alters these guys playing style? To me no. Maybe it does to you

Watch the season opener against Edmonton. He made an impact. 

[Isam]

2 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I think both have valid points to make. What I've noticed though is that the more analytics leaning crowd tends to make statements alluding to Gudbranson being "good at nothing" or his absence being "addition by subtraction". 

 

Those seemingly embittered statements are reductive and usually speak to a less than rounded knowledge and perception of the game. 

 

It's not surprising though as blogs like the Provies and Canucks Army seem rife with that type of ignorance, and crap seemingly always flows downhill. 

I think there is value in the pk dept with guddy. I remember the analytics backing that up

[Isam]

2 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Watch the season opener against Edmonton. He made an impact. 

You can make a case for the philly game also.

[Isam]

See, I can say nice things about guddy too. The issue i have with guddy is does the good things outweigh the bad. 

[PhillipBlunt]

Just now, Isam said:

You can make a case for the philly game also.

I remember after the hit Gudbranson laid on Lucic, that Milan didn't make his usual beeline to the player who hit him to engage in fisticuffs. 

 

That very well could be a concious decision made by Lucic to focus more on other aspects of the game and less on truculence, but it was noticeable none the less. 

[PhillipBlunt]

4 minutes ago, Isam said:

See, I can say nice things about guddy too. The issue i have with guddy is does the good things outweigh the bad. 

And I can state obvious things lacking in Guddy's game as well. 

 

He has zero offense, and doesn't seem to be too eager to generate much. 

 

He can be somewhat sloppy in his own end, although when he's paired with different players and not left to generate more chemistry with MDZ, it has an effect. 

 

It would also be interesting to know what instruction he's being given by Baumgartner, (and for that matter, how all of the defense is being instructed) seeing as how the defense on a whole can go from being extremely effective to a tirefire within the span of a couple of games. 

[SilentSam]

24 minutes ago, Isam said:

SioBoth sides 

Im going to ask a question. Is gudbranson so intimidating that he alters these guys playing style? To me no. Maybe it does to you

Gudranson does not nessisarily play an intimidating style.. but I know it is in his tool box. I have seen it..  I believe he is trying to play the game to the rules, and actually frustrates the hell out of the bigger power forwards he plays against.

The last fight I saw him in was against T Wilson, Wilson tried to wallpaper EG into the boards but, EG dropped his shoulder, ready for it, flooring TW.

TW chased him all over the ice wanting to fight. 

At that point, to me EG has done his job, taken the player off his game, distracted the offensive oppression.

EG drew the instigator penalty out of TW, and handled himself well in what ensued.

I think when EG is up against the bigger power forwards he gets them expending a lot of energy, some have seen and know his fight card.. and just don’t want to go there with him,  maybe it’s mutual on some level at times?

But EG is doing a job that our skilled D men can not do.. and doing it in a manner that keeps him out of the penalty box and away from suspensions..

[Isam]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

And I can state obvious things lacking in Guddy's game as well. 

 

He has zero offense, and doesn't seem to be too eager to generate much. 

 

He can be somewhat sloppy in his own end, although when he's paired with different players and not left to generate more chemistry with MDZ, it has an effect. 

 

It would also be interesting to know what instruction he's being given by Baumgartner, (and for that matter, how all of the defense is being instructed) seeing as how the defense on a whole can go from being extremely effective to a tirefire within the span of a couple of games. 

I totally agree. Jesus, they can be bad. Edler being the most noticeable

[PhillipBlunt]

3 minutes ago, Isam said:

I totally agree. Jesus, they can be bad. Edler being the most noticeable

Considering the years Edler has under his belt, it's mind-numbing the mistakes he makes. 

[SilentSam]

14 minutes ago, Isam said:

I totally agree. Jesus, they can be bad. Edler being the most noticeable

Isam,  to add let’s not forget that Gudbranson IS young, and IS still working on his game..

there is the potential of a better player than the one he is at this moment.

[aGENT]

36 minutes ago, Isam said:

See, I can say nice things about guddy too. The issue i have with guddy is does the good things outweigh the bad. 

The 'bad' is that he doesn't create offense and he's more of an 'opposition player mover' than a 'puck mover'. But that's not really what he's being paid to do.  He's paid to go out their and help create the time and space for the guys who do move the pucks, to do so. And take it away from the opposition. That and keep larger opposition players honest/from taking liberties.

 

Don't get me wrong, nobody's going to complain if he manages to add even a bit of those elements to his game (and he's still young enough to keep improving) but it's not his main thrust.

 

You also have to look at his 'bad' stats in the context of his usage, QOC, zone starts etc. It's no different than the war against Sutter and his 'poor' advanced stats. They're only relatively 'poor' when compared to a sheltered player getting ozone starts, against lesser QOC and with PP time.

 

A 2nd pairing guy playing the hard minutes, higher Dzone starts, PK'ing  etc and against the better opposition players is not going to have pretty looking advanced stats. If he did, he'd be a first pairing guy and we'd be sitting here talking about paying him $8m+, not $4.5m+/-.

 

This false narrative that he brings 'nothing but toughness' is asinine though. He's a solid 18-20 minute 2nd pair D and one who's game is made for playoff hockey.

 

Do I want 6 Gudbranson's on our back end? No.

 

We do need guys who can also move the puck, create offense etc but you also need a guy or two like Guddy on your team (at F and D) if you want to make it anywhere through 82 games and 4 rounds of playoffs.

[Goal:thecup]

On 10/25/2017 at 4:36 PM, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Interesting that @kanucks25 hasn't been seen in this thread in a while 

Please don't ever post anything like this again.

 

Last time we got 10 pages of crap.

[Isam]

40 minutes ago, aGENT said:

The 'bad' is that he doesn't create offense and he's more of an 'opposition player mover' than a 'puck mover'. But that's not really what he's being paid to do.  He's paid to go out their and help create the time and space for the guys who do move the pucks, to do so. And take it away from the opposition. That and keep larger opposition players honest/from taking liberties.

 

Don't get me wrong, nobody's going to complain if he manages to add even a bit of those elements to his game (and he's still young enough to keep improving) but it's not his main thrust.

 

You also have to look at his 'bad' stats in the context of his usage, QOC, zone starts etc. It's no different than the war against Sutter and his 'poor' advanced stats. They're only relatively 'poor' when compared to a sheltered player getting ozone starts, against lesser QOC and with PP time.

 

A 2nd pairing guy playing the hard minutes, higher Dzone starts, PK'ing  etc and against the better opposition players is not going to have pretty looking advanced stats. If he did, he'd be a first pairing guy and we'd be sitting here talking about paying him $8m+, not $4.5m+/-.

 

This false narrative that he brings 'nothing but toughness' is asinine though. He's a solid 18-20 minute 2nd pair D and one who's game is made for playoff hockey.

 

Do I want 6 Gudbranson's on our back end? No.

 

We do need guys who can also move the puck, create offense etc but you also need a guy or two like Guddy on your team (at F and D) if you want to make it anywhere through 82 games and 4 rounds of playoffs.

Hes not worth 4.5 million though. Too me hes good third pairing guy worth maybe around 2.5 to 3 million

[Isam]

4.5 million is bigger cap hit then vlasic or ekholm.