[Discussion] Erik Gudbranson to FLA for 1st Round Pick

[kanucks25]

10 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

But we already "lost" the McCann value in how he's turned out, average, maybe. If we had hung onto him he may be in Utica right now. And the 2nd was in a poor draft year? Don't see Asplund as the game changer either.  I dunno, seems like a good deal to me but I also think most nights Guddy has contributed. 

 

If Jim figured McCann would never reach higher than a 7-9 F (which looks to be pretty accurate today) then it was well worth the risk to try for a guy like Guddy. He's the kind of player tho that needs a good  complimentary partner. When he was with Campbell in FLA e.g., he did his best work. 

I love how McCann and Asplund are already determined to be ordinary prospects that we don't need at 21 and 19 years-old but Gudbranson is "only 26" and still has a lot of "potential".

 

Laughable.

 

(I know you didn't explicitly say that Gudbranson is still developing, but that's usually one of the go-to arguments for his proponents)

[cripplereh]

Guddy has been good and could get us a 1st plus good prospect

 

Me I would keep him another 3 to 5 year deal as going forward we need D men like him to become a winning team

[qwijibo]

1 hour ago, cripplereh said:

Guddy has been good and could get us a 1st plus good prospect

 

Me I would keep him another 3 to 5 year deal as going forward we need D men like him to become a winning team

Based on what? He's been playing 3rd pairing minutes (17:22/game), brings little to no offence, and is a pending UFA. Who would you expect to pay a 1st plus a good prospect for bottom pairing D? 

[flickyoursedin]

If the Canucks are sellers come deadline day I’m sure there’s a lot more people here agreeing. However as it stands shipping out a guy contributing for futures I think is just bad for business. Management would be sending the message to the fans that this season is over and they’re already planning for the next season.

[Drive-By Body Pierce]

This is one of those rare situations where I think BOTH sides give a solid 'No'.

[Hairy Kneel]

They're not even in the playoff race. They'll get a band-aid player cheap from Las Vegas or at the TD. 

I see a playoff team overpaying to make a cup run.

 

 

 

Plus if we can use his money to pay Tryamkin maybe? 

[N7Nucks]

Only reason I'd do their first is cause it might be top 5. Lol. As dumb as it sounds I say no. The value is what you, the seller, make it. If it has 0 chance of being a top 5 pick I say no. Gudbranson brings something literally no one in our lineup brings. He is a leader, young, defensively sound, and physical. Good combination of size and speed (for his size he moves very well). No one in our system brings what he does. And with that skillset he won't be commanding huge dollars. Since points > all the intangibles. I assume they'd also want it top 10 protected. 

[DownUndaCanuck]

I think Gudbranson brings more value to this team at the current state of his play but also will in the future, he'll develop into one of our mentors and really play an important role as a vocal, physical leader on this blueline. Take Guddy away and we not only lose a PKer, 20 minute guy, physical presence etc. but also a leader in the locker-room.

 

The Canucks haven't had a physical defenceman like him since Mitchell/Bieksa and should hold onto him dearly because past Gudbranson, we've got Edler (getting older and less physical), Tanev (isn't physical at all), Stecher (tiny), Hutton (skinny and doesn't play a physical game at all), MDZ (can play physically at times but doesn't fare well against big forwards), Pouliot (not a physical bone in his body) and up-and-comers Chatfield and Juolevi are skinny boys themselves. The only other physical defenceman we have in the system is Wiercioch and he's not getting a sniff at the NHL level any time soon, and Biega who honestly belongs in the AHL.

 

Trading Gudbranson would be one of the bigger mistakes we could make because bringing him over here filled a giant hole not only now but in the future for this team.

[Neutral]

I think we should attempt to give him a contract extension january 1st, as long as his demands are reasonable. If he wants 5m a year I think we need to feel out his trade value.

 

I would hope a 5yr 4.4m per contract would be enough to get his to sign. Give him a modifed ntc for the first 4 years where he submits 10 teams he would not go to.

 

Guddy is a good 2nd pairing D, I really liked his chemistry with MDZ, I know we had some injuries but I wish they would go back to that pairing.

 

As for his trade value, it should be at least 2 2nds or a 1st from a contender and a prospect. If we do move him and get less than that as a return that will hurt

[combover]

First they should try to sign him, I rather they over pay for a guy willing to standup for his team mates and uses his size effectively than a ufa coming off a career year.

if he won’t sign then shop him try to get Ottawa interested and Toronto he’s from ont. use that to put pressure on Florida

 Min return should be a 1st and a prospect. He’s rare a big young dman that plays a tough physical game and can long minutes. 

But they need to act sooner than later. Either get him signed or start shopping.

[Jägermeister]

Why would Florida trade a 1st for him when they could most likely sign him come July?

And to anyone who wouldn't trade Guddy for a 1st, you're overvaluing him big time.  He's a bottom pair D who is going to ask for top 4 money this summer.  We should take what we can get for him at this point.

[Ghostsof1915]

Healthy RHD.

 

Biega

Gudbranson

[ End of discussion ]

 

Make one that's enticing enough to have Edler to willing to be traded. Like somehow make him fit Tampa's cap. 

[JM_]

14 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

I love how McCann and Asplund are already determined to be ordinary prospects that we don't need at 21 and 19 years-old but Gudbranson is "only 26" and still has a lot of "potential".

 

Laughable.

 

(I know you didn't explicitly say that Gudbranson is still developing, but that's usually one of the go-to arguments for his proponents)

why is it laughable? And I did say somewhere on this thread that Guddy does still need some work, but he can get there. 

 

McCann just isn't physical enough - yet - or skilled enough to show he's anything over a top 9. Maybe that will change, but there isn't anything yet to justify him projected higher, unless you have something I haven't seen yet. I also think we have his skill set in the system already so in that sense he's 'redundant' for lack of a better word. 

 

Asplund is projected to be a two-way C, much like Granlund. Again we have a Granlund and as it turns out JB wanted Dahlen over Asplund, and managed to get him anyway.

 

Sure McCann and Aspund may turn into decent players but I don't think anyone is confusing them for elite or that different from other guys we have in the system. 

 

So looking at the whole picture I'd do this trade any day of the week:

 

Gudbranson and Dahlen in trade for Burrows, McCann, Asplund and a 4th. 

 

[EagleShield]

Trade or cut loose. It'd take way less than a first, but it there is anything sparking discussion that has suggested it's on the table, we take it and run to the hills.

 

He is behind Tanev, Edler, Hutton, Stecher, Pouliot and MDZ, with Juolevi hopefully in the mix next year too. He's going to want a contract (and given the small UFA D market this year, he might actually get a contract) in the 5 million for 6+ years range, the most I'd offer a depth guy like that is $5m over 3 years.

 

Cold hard facts:

• Gudbranson is a bad skater in either direction
• He does not clear the front of the net - we give up substantially more shots from that area when he is on the ice than when he is not.
• In fact, we give up substantially more shots from just about everywhere in the zone when Gudbranson is on the ice
• He has questionable defensive hockey sense
• He has bad offensive hockey sense
• He throws a lot of hits
• He punches people occasionally
• He has "intangibles" such as character, leadership and "jam".
• He did not ruin Evgeny Malkin's night
• He is massively overpaid at $3.5m and managing the cap is key to building a competitor (see: Loui Eriksson)

Can back up any of the negative points there with evidence if anyone wants.

 

We had another 3rd overall defenseman here that didn't pan out and we had no hesitation in cutting ties. I think we can sign a D man in free agency that is every bit as useful as Guddy for 1/3 of the price at some point in the next few years (or Tryamkin will come back and be a phyiscal presence and a good hockey player).

[EagleShield]

9 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

why is it laughable? And I did say somewhere on this thread that Guddy does still need some work, but he can get there. 

 

Because there is little precedent for a player of his age going from a bad player to a good player. There is no precedent for it when you factor in just how long he;s been in the league.

 

He has stagnated since being drafted.

[JM_]

15 minutes ago, EagleShield said:

 

• He does not clear the front of the net - we give up substantially more shots from that area when he is on the ice than when he is not.
• In fact, we give up substantially more shots from just about everywhere in the zone when Gudbranson is on the ice
• ]

Can back up any of the negative points there with evidence if anyone wants.

These please, and back it up with actual scoring chances not just weak shots. 

 

 

[Canuck Surfer]

23 hours ago, TheHitman said:

There's no way Florida parts with their pick. Perhaps for a high end prospect like Borgstrom and whatever is remaining of Petrovic's contract.

That package might be worth more than their lottery pick?

 

Borgstrom led Denver to the NCAA title last year. Was their scoring leader all year until the 2knd period of the championship game. When he was passed by, I believe Terry, and finished second. This year, 6'3'' Borgstrom has 11 goals and 17 points over 9 games in his sophomore year.  These are numbers, and a NCAA championship, that are eerily similar to Brock Boeser. Currently a top 20 in the world prospect not in the NHL. Top 10 to some.  And probably a ready to go NHLér next fall.

 

Add to it that Petrovic is very similar to Gudbranson.  LOL, but maybe he has better Corsi?

14 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

I love how McCann and Asplund are already determined to be ordinary prospects that we don't need at 21 and 19 years-old but Gudbranson is "only 26" and still has a lot of "potential".

 

Laughable.

 

(I know you didn't explicitly say that Gudbranson is still developing, but that's usually one of the go-to arguments for his proponents)

How did Asplund get into this?  Isn't he a Buffalo prospect?  @Jimmy McGill

[coastal.view]

14 hours ago, cripplereh said:

Guddy has been good and could get us a 1st plus good prospect

 

Me I would keep him another 3 to 5 year deal as going forward we need D men like him to become a winning team

precisely

which is why he is benched the last 9 minutes of a game in which we are behind and intent on scoring

shows his winning pedigree and his importance to this team

[JM_]

15 minutes ago, EagleShield said:

Because there is little precedent for a player of his age going from a bad player to a good player. There is no precedent for it when you factor in just how long he;s been in the league.

 

He has stagnated since being drafted.

There's lots of late bloomers in the NHL. Giordano, Burr, Mark Streit, Chara and others.

 

No he hasn't "stagnated" per se, he's had to change his style of play. Happens to a lot of 1st rounders, like Gaunce or Travis Green. 

[JM_]

6 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

 

How did Asplund get into this?  Isn't he a Buffalo prospect?  @Jimmy McGill

hes the 2nd round pick in the deal, the pick got traded to Buffalo 

 

I'm just trying to demonstrate that with trades you have to look at the bigger picture, i.e. did we get better and bring in more types of skill or not? I think Jim did exceptionally well to turn Burr, McCann, Asplund/a 2nd and a 4th into Guddy and Dahlen. Guddy is part of a D group, he's got a role others don't have.