PhillipBlunt Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 Gudbranson played another solid game. Tried to compensate for Hutton's gaffe.....once again, yet somehow some Canucks faithful want to ditch Gudbranson.... 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-23 Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said: Gudbranson played another solid game. Tried to compensate for Hutton's gaffe.....once again, yet somehow some Canucks faithful want to ditch Gudbranson.... It's all these analytics losers that don't watch the game, they are the ones who want to get rid of him. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinky-Winky Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said: Gudbranson played another solid game. Tried to compensate for Hutton's gaffe.....once again, yet somehow some Canucks faithful want to ditch Gudbranson.... i prefer to get rid of hutton , but the nucks management wont....i like guddy more, but also guddy is worth more in trade value than hutton, why the nuck faithful wanna trade him, we all like guddy, so its nothing cause hes playing bad or good...... just for value wise ..hes our best bang for the buck ( sort of speak ) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 5 minutes ago, J-23 said: It's all these analytics losers that don't watch the game, they are the ones who want to get rid of him. Totally. No idea of what he brings. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-23 Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 5 minutes ago, Dave "The Hammer" Schultz said: i prefer to get rid of hutton , but the nucks management wont....i like guddy more, but also guddy is worth more in trade value than hutton, why the nuck faithful wanna trade him, we all like guddy, so its nothing cause hes playing bad or good...... just for value wise ..hes our best bang for the buck ( sort of speak ) He reminds me so much of Bieksa, such an important player to the team. In a couple of years when we become serious Playoff contenders with a young team, a player like Gudbranson is good to have. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 (edited) 15 hours ago, Dave "The Hammer" Schultz said: i prefer to get rid of hutton , but the nucks management wont....i like guddy more, but also guddy is worth more in trade value than hutton, why the nuck faithful wanna trade him, we all like guddy, so its nothing cause hes playing bad or good...... just for value wise ..hes our best bang for the buck ( sort of speak ) I wouldn't count out Benning's hockey intuition. If he sees Gudbranson for the player he can be in the playoffs, he'll hang on to him. If he sees Hutton as a defensive cornerstone, he's clearly an alcoholic. Edited December 29, 2017 by PhillipBlunt 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinky-Winky Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 Just now, J-23 said: He reminds me so much of Bieksa, such an important player to the team. In a couple of years when we become serious Playoff contenders with a young team, a player like Gudbranson is good to have. Agree 100% , but we could get another great young player for him, esp a team that wants to make a run for the cup .....id hate to lose him, just like i hated losing bieksa ....but only time will tell what will happen and what route the nucks take. of coarse if the nucks keep playing well, and bo and others comeback, we may even make the playoffs, so would be foolish to trade him ....i have faith in benning to make the right decision 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 1 minute ago, J-23 said: He reminds me so much of Bieksa, such an important player to the team. In a couple of years when we become serious Playoff contenders with a young team, a player like Gudbranson is good to have. Not to mention he towers over Bieksa in both stature and strength. I don't ever remember Bieksa making Lucic think twice. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinky-Winky Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 2 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: I wouldn't count out Benning's hockey intuition If he sees Hutton as a defensive cornerstone, he's clearly a alcoholic. So is that what hes drinking up in the booth hehe jk, but ya......personally think benning should trade hutton, maybe he will do better elsewere...and hes still young ( inaway ), so could make a decent bite for another organization .... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-23 Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Dave "The Hammer" Schultz said: Agree 100% , but we could get another great young player for him, esp a team that wants to make a run for the cup .....id hate to lose him, just like i hated losing bieksa ....but only time will tell what will happen and what route the nucks take. of coarse if the nucks keep playing well, and bo and others comeback, we may even make the playoffs, so would be foolish to trade him ....i have faith in benning to make the right decision Agree, JB is a genius. in 2-3 years we will have a young team with skill and grit. I believe we will make the Playoffs this year, I want to make it. Screw tanking, looking at this years World Juniors, there are a lot of good players in the 2nd round and late 1st. Playoffs are exciting, plus I think we'd make it past the 1st round at least. I think we would win the Cup.........and I'm sounding like apollo . 6 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: Not to mention he towers over Bieksa in both stature and strength. I don't ever remember Bieksa making Lucic think twice. Lol, yes sir! Can't believe people wanted Lucic here at one point... Edited December 29, 2017 by J-23 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 6 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said: The way Green answers that question; When he has three right handed D, Pouliot plays the left side. His strong side. And when he is quoted, he is quoted as preferring guys on their strong side. What happens, what he decides in less ideal circumstances is that he may be comfortable with DP there as his best available option? Not his first one... Sure but when all healthy he's still probably going to play his best 6Ds even if Pouliot has to move to the right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 7 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said: I wouldn't count out Benning's hockey intuition. If he sees Gudbranson for the player he can be in the playoffs, he'll hang on to him. If he sees Hutton as a defensive cornerstone, he's clearly a alcoholic. Phil, You have been down on Hutton for quite awhile now. I still caution patience and we look at his game come March. With his increased weight I was expecting a more physical game from him and while his puck battles have improved he is coming up a tad light. His positioning on the 2nd goal last night was a head scratcher. Hutton might fall to numbers if he does not show improvement but that is the way of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 3 hours ago, mll said: Sure but when all healthy he's still probably going to play his best 6Ds even if Pouliot has to move to the right. He sat Hutton when that happened. Played Pouliot on the left & as the lone PP D with a four forward set. Our best 6 are; Edler Stecher MDZ Tanev Pouliot Guddy 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted December 29, 2017 Share Posted December 29, 2017 26 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said: Edler Stecher MDZ Tanev Pouliot Guddy And FTR I don't mean to imply Stecher is our best RHD. That would be Tanev. This is our best ''6'' D as the coach tends to play them, Green like many coaches, also trends to balanced pairs. A PMD with speed and puck skills to an anchor defenceman who's key role is to defend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWMc1 Posted January 1, 2018 Share Posted January 1, 2018 Okay we can re-sign him now. Get it done Benning. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRocket18 Posted January 1, 2018 Share Posted January 1, 2018 Tough call. Hurts to lose the asset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skategal Posted January 1, 2018 Share Posted January 1, 2018 I think most fans agree that Guddy has value for our team, the question is at what price? Is he worth more than Tanev to us? Tanev is making $4.450M per season. If we could resign Guddy for $3.8 - $4M per for a 3 -5 year term, would that be fair value? Would we be able to resign Guddy for that? I doubt it, I expect he may get more on the open market. Derrick and Troy are RFA next season and will need raises (or trades?) At the same time, not sure I'm all in for trading Guddy for picks as we don't have a lot of NHL ready talent in the pipeline, especially given our injury history. Once again, don't know what the answer is...thankfully my thoughts don't have any impact to what the Canucks choose to do 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rekker Posted January 1, 2018 Share Posted January 1, 2018 I can respect what Guds can bring. Seems like a great team guy. I liked the trade when it happened. I just don't see him as anywhere near a four million dollar man. Often injured, zero offensive production, in a league getting faster he is looking slower. I feel he is easily replaced for far less than four million a year. Biega for one would probably be happy to sign for 1 or 1.5. Would miss his size but it is replaceable for far less than four per year. I would offer three a year tops. Trade him otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeanSeanBean Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, rekker said: I can respect what Guds can bring. Seems like a great team guy. I liked the trade when it happened. I just don't see him as anywhere near a four million dollar man. Often injured, zero offensive production, in a league getting faster he is looking slower. I feel he is easily replaced for far less than four million a year. Biega for one would probably be happy to sign for 1 or 1.5. Would miss his size but it is replaceable for far less than four per year. I would offer three a year tops. Trade him otherwise. While he doesn't put up many points, I wouldn't go as far to say zero. One thing I have noted is Guddy gets shots through when he shoots. Not always, but he often gets pucks on net or off the boards looking for rebounds. From time to time he even gets great scoring chances with good positioning when he jumps (not that he jumps up much). I'm not saying he's some offed ice dynamo, but for years the canucks have had issues with the D not getting pucks through. So I appreciate that guddy does more then most of our D core. Edited January 2, 2018 by shayster007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 25 minutes ago, shayster007 said: While he doesn't put up many points, I wouldn't go as far to say zero. One thing I have noted is Guddy gets shots through when he shoots. Not always, but he often gets pucks on net or off the boards looking for rebounds. From time to time he even gets great scoring chances with good positioning when he jumps (not that he jumps up much). I'm not saying he's some offed ice dynamo, but for years the canucks have had issues with the D not getting pucks through. So I appreciate that guddy does more then most of our D core. Interestingly, hockey-reference has statistics on this, a stat they call "Thru%", noting what "percentage of shots taken [that] go on net". Based on this metric alone, Gudbranson is actually second last of all Canuck regulars, ahead of only Stecher. Still, it would be overly simplistic to look at this and say that Gudbranson doesn't create any offense from his shots. A blocked shot or a shot just wide of the net can still create offense; a shot doesn't necessarily have to be on net to create a scoring chance. Hockey-reference also talks about shot attempts, but I was more interested in shot attempts/game, since Guddy has missed a good number of games. After figuring out the information, Gudbranson still sits at 18th out of 21 regular Canucks (Goldobin included, Burmy and Dors excluded). So, unfortunately, the verdict is that Gudbranson doesn't get his shots directly on net and he doesn't try to shoot much to begin with. All that said, the point I made earlier still stands and chances could be coming out of the few shot attempts he does have. He also finally hit the score sheet a while back and again the game after, so maybe he'll get more. Another note is that "offense" isn't limited to shots. Passes create offense too and that's far harder to record and find data on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now