The Gudbranson dilemma

[Provost]

3 minutes ago, stawns said:

I suspect that common sense will prevail, as it usually does.  However, one thing is certain, he's going to get one of the money or the term he is asking for.  That's where he is at in his career and JB, rightfully, isn't going to risk losing him.

 

According to NHL Numbers he is an RFA after this year and not UFA (as I had assumed for some reason)..

 

That definitely impacts his leverage and how much of a backbone a GM can have.  After a sub-par season he wouldn't get a lot in arbitration, so at this point a qualifying offer would probably be close to what he would get awarded.

 

A 1 year deal at $4 million or under wouldn't be entirely unreasonable to see if he works out.  If he wants a little more, then he has to sign to more term.  In that case we are buying some UFA years and he is getting certainty.  In any case, shouldn't be approaching $5 million per year.

$4.25-$4.75 on a 3 year term sounds about right.  Gets a decent sample size and he is right at peak age to cash in as a UFA if he plays well.

[WeneedLumme]

2 hours ago, darkpoet said:

The only people "questioning my intelligence" are you and a couple of your buddies.

Like I said, hardly a consensus. 

I don't give a rip what he might make anywhere else. I'm saying making a guy the highest paid Dman on your team for no other reason than "he'd make it somewhere else" is a stupid reason to give him that much money.

There are other players on our defence who are - currently - better players. Now if you believe for some reason, he's going to surpass them and suddenly start contributing something resembling offence or otherwise driving offensive play - or turn into a defensive stalwart akin to Tanev, sure go right ahead. Pay him $5M. 
Be sure though.

I'm not. I just don't see it.
My opinion. It's a fart in the wind, just like yours. lol

 

Actually, pretty well everyone reading your mindless drivel is questioning your intelligence. However, the fact that you choose to ignore the facts that are pointed out to you which refute your position makes it clear to me that you are not as stupid as you seem to be. You are not actually the simpleton that you purport to be, you are evidently a dishonest person who likes to be a troll. On to the ignore list with you.

[smithers joe]

9 hours ago, Matt_T83 said:

For anyone that missed this article that came out just before Christmas, JD Burke posted a nice analysis of the Gudbranson situation on the Canucks Army website.
Link: http://canucksarmy.com/2016/12/22/should-the-canucks-extend-erik-gudbranson-s-contract

 

He points out that Gudbranson rejected a 4-year, 16M deal the Panther's offered him just before being traded to the Canucks. He suggests that Gudbranson will be demanding 5M+ per year, on a long term deal. However, JD's analytics also suggest that Gudbranson is underperforming for the 3.5-5M/year range.

 

Given how stubborn Benning is, and the price he paid to acquire Gudbranson, I am genuinely worried that we will shell out 4.5-5M per year, for 5-6 years, to extend Guddy. If the analytics are right, we could be stuck with a 5M/year 3rd pairing defenseman for years to come. Now, some people may say we are rebuilding and it doesn't matter, but rebuilding teams NEED cap space. Why? One of the best things you can do as a rebuilding team is have cap space to take bad contracts. You can negotiate deals with contending teams to trade a decent player (say Hansen) in exchange for prospects/picks, and take a bad contract in return. Taking that bad contract can garner an extra late round pick or a better prospect. But if you have no cap space, you can't do that.

 

The dilemma: Do we re-sign him and just give him what he wants? Or do we take him to arbitration? At arbitration we could get him at 3.5M/year, but probably only for 2-3 years. If we put him in that spot, he will certainly hate us and leave the team ASAP. 

that is why benning gets the big bucks. he will do what's best for the team. i don't think he will put it to a vote on cdc. what ever way he goes, he will be called an idiot by somebody.

[coastal.view]

i'd be ok with gud being offered the identical contract tanev signed last year

5 years for $22,250

first 2 years at 3.5 million per

and slowly increasing to just over 5 million in the 5th year

he'd remain 2 years behind tanev in terms of when he receives his raises

 

[aGENT]

3 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

i'd be ok with gud being offered the identical contract tanev signed last year

5 years for $22,250

first 2 years at 3.5 million per

and slowly increasing to just over 5 million in the 5th year

he'd remain 2 years behind tanev in terms of when he receives his raises

 

He'll probably end up with something similar (considering inflation). $4.5m +/-

[hammertime]

26 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

i'd be ok with gud being offered the identical contract tanev signed last year

5 years for $22,250

first 2 years at 3.5 million per

and slowly increasing to just over 5 million in the 5th year

he'd remain 2 years behind tanev in terms of when he receives his raises

 

Fully agree! But I would bet he gets the 5m x4. Hope your right though

[bohoforpresident]

5 hours ago, darkpoet said:

Yeah that gets mentioned, but then he says he's "just now getting back on the bike" etc... you only need one hand to hold you on a bike... indicates he'll be seeing the specialist in "another month to see where he's at" 

Maybe it's just the way he came off but it sounded like it was more than his wrist.

You're not supposed to do any kind of strenuous workout or exercise after most surgery's as it can hinder the healing process. Very normal. 

[189lb enforcers?]

He's this team's next captain.

Thats worth something more than the geeks and their Clio boards can measure. 

[MJDDawg]

5 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

He's this team's next captain.

Thats worth something more than the geeks and their Clio boards can measure. 

 

Bo will be captain.

[189lb enforcers?]

Just now, MJDDawg said:

 

Bo will be captain.

Of the fans. 

[Toews]

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

Sbisa is such an interesting comparison for this Gudbranson discussion. He's two years older than Guddy. And two years ago, he's played roughly the same number of games as Gudbranson has to-date. At the time, analytics bloggers said Sbisa's underlying numbers defined him as a fringe NHLer. And they said that based on the number of games he'd already played, his ceiling was already locked in. 300+ NHL games. What you see is what you get. Or so they said.

 

Benning had a different view. He saw Sbisa as a player with a strong set of tools who could develop into a solid top-4 D and who came with a wealth of "intangibles" that can not be measured by analytics.

 

Today, we see Sbisa posting his second consecutive season with some of the best on-ice goals metrics in the league among NHL defensemen. The analytics bloggers have had to scramble to revise their positions on this player.

 

Who's to say we won't see a similar trajectory from Guddy? Benning's eye test appears to have won out over the numbers with Sbisa. And I'd be willing to bet on JB being proven right again with Gudbranson.

 

Regardless of what the hero charts say.

144 out of 178, FA60 Rel Team (300es minutes)
141 out of 178 CA60 Rel Team (300es minutes)

 

Analytics still isn't a fan of Sbisa. He has a high PDO as well which most analytics guys will point to as a sign that regression could be coming.

[PhillipBlunt]

7 hours ago, darkpoet said:

Cantankerous

i thought maybe there was a hidden triple-entendre there

 

Can-tank-er-ous: difficult or irritating to deal with.

 

I don't believe in tanking at all. 

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, coastal.view said:

i'd be ok with gud being offered the identical contract tanev signed last year

5 years for $22,250

first 2 years at 3.5 million per

and slowly increasing to just over 5 million in the 5th year

he'd remain 2 years behind tanev in terms of when he receives his raises

 

I was looking at the same thing earlier and think that could be ideal - I imagine that may be the approach management takes into the negotiation.

Would I be comfortable committing 5 or 5+ million to Gudbranson?  Yes.  Would I prefer to bridge to that in the same deal?  Yes. This is a concession on both sides - the Canucks buy some UFA years, get a dual bridge and term structure - and Gudbranson gets term and an escalating salary to account for development.

I think that structure might be the answer in the circumstances.

[Crabcakes]

6 hours ago, darkpoet said:

Have any of you see this? Just posted on canucks/facebook (not sure if link will show here) 

Guddy talking about his injury and that is was "lingering" and "towards the end of November it was decided to see a specialist".... so this guy could likely have had something going on with him almost the entire season - likely the entirety of November anyway.

If his sub par play is due to some lingering injury none of us knew about and he comes back healthy and strong playing the way he should be, i'll glad eat all my words here. I wonder what it is. He doesn't say. 

https://www.facebook.com/Canucks/videos/10154844984162145/

Thank you Dark Poet.  I heard this on the radio today and didn't catch the whole thing.

 

It gives us a great deal of context as to Gudbranson's play (and performance) this year.  For those of you who have been arguing round and round in circles about analytics etc it is all rendered meaningless by this interview imo

 

Unfortunately, it is short on specifics and long on innuendo.  Just what is going on with Guddy?

 

1.  Wrist injury, operated on, has pins in his wrist etc......we all knew this

 

2.  There is more.  Just what has been a gradual thing that got to the point in November when he began "contemplating his options" and seeing specialists that he's referring to?  What was it that was going to have to be dealt with sooner or later?  What took a turn for the worse in the New Jersey game in November?  If you think he's talking about his wrist, why has he been sitting around for a month and only just in to ride a bike today and he has no idea when he'll be able to skate?  If it was just a wrist, no reason why he couldn't have been on a bike.

 

It sounds to me that there is a 2nd injury that had been nagging but not serious enough to miss time that is finally getting treated because he can't play due to his wrist.  

 

Guddy says he'll be evaluated in a month.

 

 

 

[Ghostsof1915]

Maybe instead of putting the cart before the horse we should just try and firm up our defence before trading it away? There's no rush. The Canucks just got through having it's top 2 players hurt. Unless someone offers a crazy good trade at the deadline, why make the move? See what happens after expansion.

 

CDC.

 

Canucks Drama Central. 

 

 

[Phat Fingers]

22 minutes ago, Toews said:

144 out of 178, FA60 Rel Team (300es minutes)
141 out of 178 CA60 Rel Team (300es minutes)

 

Analytics still isn't a fan of Sbisa. He has a high PDO as well which most analytics guys will point to as a sign that regression could be coming.

 

 

Guess we can ignore our lying eyes. He has been solid and reliable this season. 

 

something tells me that corsi is a decent stat poorly used in defensive defensemen. Analytics is really good at metrics surrounding scoring, but seems to have problems assessing defending. 

 

Like trying to prove a negative. 

 

He has the best plus minus on the roster, I know poor stat. But in this case it is surprising as he is playing 20 plus minutes s night and he is not being used to generate offense. 

 

 

 

[oldnews]

31 minutes ago, Toews said:

144 out of 178, FA60 Rel Team (300es minutes)
141 out of 178 CA60 Rel Team (300es minutes)

 

Analyticzzzz still isn't a fan of Sbisa.

[Dion Phaneuf]

Give him a 1 or 2 year deal at a higher cap hit (4-5 M range) if he won't settle for his real value (around 3.5 M).  Gudbranson does not deserve a longer term deal nor should he receive one based on his "potential".  He will be likely paid by Benning for his size and toughness, not for his puck skills.

[Phat Fingers]

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

Sbisa is such an interesting comparison for this Gudbranson discussion. He's two years older than Guddy. And two years ago, he's played roughly the same number of games as Gudbranson has to-date. At the time, analytics bloggers said Sbisa's underlying numbers defined him as a fringe NHLer. And they said that based on the number of games he'd already played, his ceiling was already locked in. 300+ NHL games. What you see is what you get. Or so they said.

 

Benning had a different view. He saw Sbisa as a player with a strong set of tools who could develop into a solid top-4 D and who came with a wealth of "intangibles" that can not be measured by analytics.

 

Today, we see Sbisa posting his second consecutive season with some of the best on-ice goals metrics in the league among NHL defensemen. The analytics bloggers have had to scramble to revise their positions on this player.

 

Who's to say we won't see a similar trajectory from Guddy? Benning's eye test appears to have won out over the numbers with Sbisa. And I'd be willing to bet on JB being proven right again with Gudbranson.

 

Regardless of what the hero charts say.

 

 

Gotta think the naysayers just need someone to hate, this year it's Guddy. 

 

No real reason to hate Sbisa's play. JB may have actually done something right, but now Guddy can take his place. Injury or not, he us the whipping boy of the CDC. 

 

Not worried about his contract. If it is similar to Sbisa's structure and we pay bit now for a guy that can improve like Sbisa, sign me up. 

 

We have space and need leaders in the new core. 

 

 

Anslytics vs JB.  It is entertainment for the CDC. 

[westcoast]

Be thankful the Canucks have a young D man and a young forward Virt ,who will be hammering guys steady in playoff games when the team rises again.Focus more on where they will aquire some high end scorers in the next few years.