The Gudbranson dilemma

[189lb enforcers?]

4 hours ago, oldnews said:

I'm still waiting for you to explain what the 189lb enforcers? refers to.

 

Let me guess.  Is it a shot at Dorsett?

No, Dorsett is one of my favorites.

This team has had a long run over undersized fighters. Guys like The Brabarian, for instance.

The guys weigh-in in September, and shed as the year goes. 189lbs is a big guy on the Canucks. 189lb enforcers is literally what they have to take on Peluso.

[clutesi]

On January 5, 2017 at 11:43 AM, Warhippy said:

What dilemma?

 

ANAL-ytics say he's doing this, his play says he's doing that.  He won't be making more than 4-4.5 million

 

So what's the issue?

 

He might only accept a deal that takes him to UFA and walk?  Oh how terrible.  So he gets signed and traded or he gets signed long term to a middling deal

 

The only dilemma is the one that CDC fabricates for themselves.

 

The bigger dilemma is trying to force Edler to waive before he's completely valueless or we're stuck signing him through retirement

I think you should be our manager!

[iBlueGreen]

I think his value has dropped given his hand injury, and that it may affect his ability to pass the puck, punch faces or take a splap shots.  He'll have to prove that he is healthy enough and pass a physical before a contract is set in front of him.  Is it just me, or are the Canucks playing better without him in the lineup?

[the harry]

I have to admit that I didn't like how Gudbranson tried mentoring Hutton. His you have to stay here, have to go there and this and that only confused Hutton. Both better concentrate on their own game, because neither was that stellar at all.

[aGENT]

22 minutes ago, iBlueGreen said:

I think his value has dropped given his hand injury, and that it may affect his ability to pass the puck, punch faces or take a splap shots.  He'll have to prove that he is healthy enough and pass a physical before a contract is set in front of him.  Is it just me, or are the Canucks playing better without him in the lineup?

 

They're playing better without Hansen too. What does that tell you? 

[Hockey101 class]

On 1/5/2017 at 9:52 AM, Warhippy said:

He's 24 years old.  Big decent skater.  Hits like a truck.  Has a decent first pass.

 

If we get stuck with a top 4 defenseman how terrible.  If he "hates us" than in a year or two trade him at the TDL for big return.

 

Again, the ONLY dilemma here is the ones that CDC seem to fabricate out of nothing

Have you watched him play this year, he's not even close to a top four d-man in fact he's been awful I hope Benning admits he's wrong and moves him protecting Sbisa who has a reasonable contract allowing us to keep and sign players like trymakin and Horvat in future.

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, Hockey101 class said:

Have you watched him play this year, he's not even close to a top four d-man in fact he's been awful I hope Benning admits he's wrong and moves him protecting Sbisa who has a reasonable contract allowing us to keep and sign players like trymakin and Horvat in future.

 

New team, new coaches, new systems, new conference, small sample size, playing injured for part of that small sample size, playing over his head with top 2 D out for that small sample size, partnered with sophomore slumping Hutton who was also playing over his head for that small sample size all on a decidedly mediocre team.

 

Clearly, drawing firm conclusions as to his value for the next say 6 years based on those circumstances is of dubious value.

[Hockey101 class]

19 hours ago, J.R. said:

 

New team, new coaches, new systems, new conference, small sample size, playing injured for part of that small sample size, playing over his head with top 2 D out for that small sample size, partnered with sophomore slumping Hutton who was also playing over his head for that small sample size all on a decidedly mediocre team.

 

Clearly, drawing firm conclusions as to his value for the next say 6 years based on those circumstances is of dubious value.

So your ok with Jb signing him at 5mill 6 years. Im sorry Gud cant process the game fast enough to keep up.You can make all the excuses you need the fact is he's 5/6 dman who gonna make 5 mill if Benneing resigns him but what scares me more is WD's love affair and is gonna playhim 2/3.Listen to all the people complaining about Edler's contract thats 5 mill.

[stawns]

1 hour ago, Hockey101 class said:

So your ok with Jb signing him at 5mill 6 years. Im sorry Gud cant process the game fast enough to keep up.You can make all the excuses you need the fact is he's 5/6 dman who gonna make 5 mill if Benneing resigns him but what scares me more is WD's love affair and is gonna playhim 2/3.Listen to all the people complaining about Edler's contract thats 5 mill.

clearly you are auditing Hockey 101

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Hockey101 class said:

So your ok with Jb signing him at 5mill 6 years. Im sorry Gud cant process the game fast enough to keep up.You can make all the excuses you need the fact is he's 5/6 dman who gonna make 5 mill if Benneing resigns him but what scares me more is WD's love affair and is gonna playhim 2/3.Listen to all the people complaining about Edler's contract thats 5 mill.

 

I wish I didn't have to listen to any of you actually. Clearly none of you have any idea what you're talking about! 

 

Guddy is a solid #3D and will likely get +/- around what Tanev is making. Edler's on an excellent contract FWIW.

[Boudrias]

12 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

I wish I didn't have to listen to any of you actually. Clearly none of you have any idea what you're talking about! 

 

Guddy is a solid #3D and will likely get +/- around what Tanev is making. Edler's on an excellent contract FWIW.

It is glaringly obvious that Gudbranson's physical play is sorely missed right now. I am not worried about his play to date and resigning him at a Tanev comparable would be a fair deal. Players like EG get taken for granted until the real season begins, PLAYOFFS. Canuck d-core has decent size now but the forwards do not come close.

[Hockey101 class]

2 hours ago, J.R. said:

 

I wish I didn't have to listen to any of you actually. Clearly none of you have any idea what you're talking about! 

 

Guddy is a solid #3D and will likely get +/- around what Tanev is making. Edler's on an excellent contract FWIW.

 Gubranson's not Edler not even close. If he signs for 4 mill like Tanev id be ok but he already turned that down in Fla. 

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, Hockey101 class said:

 Gubranson's not Edler not even close. If he signs for 4 mill like Tanev id be ok but he already turned that down in Fla. 

 

Who said Gudbranson was Edler? I'm not even sure how you would get that from my post? 

 

FLA refuted the rumour of him turning down $4m FWIW. It never happened.

[Honky Cat]

On 1/7/2017 at 10:45 AM, iBlueGreen said:

I think his value has dropped given his hand injury, and that it may affect his ability to pass the puck, punch faces or take a splap shots.  He'll have to prove that he is healthy enough and pass a physical before a contract is set in front of him.  Is it just me, or are the Canucks playing better without him in the lineup?

Watching the back to back against the Flames only reaffirmed to me how valuable he is to the team...Watching Giordano,Hathaway and Ferland take liberties on our players without any reply was nauseating.....He's a good player,and a player you want on your side.

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, J.R. said:

 

Who said Gudbranson was Edler? I'm not even sure how you would get that from my post? 

 

Actually, he himself did....

 

6 hours ago, Hockey101 class said:

So your ok with Jb signing him at 5mill 6 years. Im sorry Gud cant process the game fast enough to keep up.You can make all the excuses you need the fact is he's 5/6 dman who gonna make 5 mill if Benneing resigns him but what scares me more is WD's love affair and is gonna playhim 2/3.Listen to all the people complaining about Edler's contract thats 5 mill.

[PhillipBlunt]

29 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

Watching the back to back against the Flames only reaffirmed to me how valuable he is to the team...Watching Giordano,Hathaway and Ferland take liberties on our players without any reply was nauseating.....He's a good player,and a player you want on your side.

The no reply has been par for the course for sometime now. The veteran leadership (outside of Burrows and Hansen) have preferred to let their one ice play do the talking. 

 

However not sticking up for themselves or their teammates has created an air of permissiveness and a pushover mentality that other teams have been more than happy to exploit. Gudbranson is a step in the opposite direction. His size and toughness are sorely lacking in the present roster.

[Me_]

On 1/5/2017 at 0:39 PM, 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. 

Did you know that before analytics...

 

...there also was hockey.

[IBatch]

On 05/01/2017 at 0:54 PM, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Everyone cried about Sbisa getting 3.6 and he's turned out to be worth that value.

 

I wouldn't worry about the contract Guddy gets, he's worth it.  Analytic's don't tell the whole story and should be taken with a grain of salt not something that should be the basis of reasoning.

 

 

Exactly..Like Sutter there is no analytics for clutch...For Guddy it's leadership toughness and even fighting ability considering without him and Tryamkin our team gets much much softer.   He isn't in his prime yet I would be surprised if it turns out he isn't worth 5 mill at six years.  Bigger defenseman usually take a year or two longer to peak we haven't seen the best yet from Guddy and we could do a lot worse waiting for prospects of overpaying an over the hill UFA to fill the second pairing.

[nux_win]

On 2017-01-05 at 9:39 AM, 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. 

There's no dilemma in my mind.  Let him heal, sign him and put him back in the line-up.  We need players like him (and we can afford him).  If you want to talk "asset management" (a phrase that is way over-used and abused here on CDC but what the heck...) then the best management of this asset is to put him on the ice - for OUR team.  GCG!

[aGENT]

On 1/5/2017 at 9:39 AM, Matt_T83 said:

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.

 

On 1/5/2017 at 10:42 AM, WHL rocks said:

I don't think there is any way possible he signs for under 4 mill. That is not going to happen. If he wanted to do that he would have done so in FLD and lived in a city with no state tax and beautiful weather. He's going to want close to 5 mill. JB will have to pay 4.5 mill to sign him.

 

On 1/5/2017 at 10:51 AM, apollo said:

Rejected 4 years 16 mill... oh boy. Package him with another asset or two and land a guy like Duchene. 

 

On 1/5/2017 at 1:19 PM, vancan2233 said:

All we have is a rumor of what he was asking in Florida.

 

On 1/5/2017 at 3:58 PM, kloubek said:

Personally, given his stats, I would not be comfortable with Benning handing out a long term, high number contract.  But I believe given what he rejected in Florida, that's exactly what he is looking for.

 

2 hours ago, Hockey101 class said:

 Gubranson's not Edler not even close. If he signs for 4 mill like Tanev id be ok but he already turned that down in Fla. 

 

Apologies if I missed anyone.

 

Original tweet you're all basing this (mis) information on:

 

 

 

Later tweet retracting original statement: