(Rumour) Maple Leafs Have Interest In Erik Gudbranson

[VIC_CITY]

2 hours ago, Silky mitts said:

Wouldn't pay him more than 4

I think that's more than fair. You're paying $4M strictly for a physical presence. you're not paying for anything else. That's a lot of money. Anything above that is pretty steep just for a physical presence. Think about the toughest players in the NHL over the last 10 years, they didn't even make half of that. Yes, Gudbranson can play a bit too but he's basically replacement level when you take the toughness out of the equation.

[guntrix]

5 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Remember when we let Mitchell go because the team was worried about his concussion and he took more money? 

Guess who had the last laugh. Maybe having a stay at home defenceman with some grit is worth paying for? 

You're comparing two different players. Mitchell was actually sound defensively and could be mostly relied on to get through his shift without any complications. Sort of like the feeling Tanev gives you nowadays.

[VIC_CITY]

Just now, guntrix said:

You're comparing two different players. Mitchell was actually sound defensively and could be mostly relied on to get through his shift without any complications. Sort of like the feeling Tanev gives you nowadays.

Mitchell also had respectable offensive stats.

[PhillipBlunt]

58 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said:

I said other than his physical presence.

 

As far as the advanced stats vs the Flyers go, I haven't looked into them but that's good if that's the case. If he can do that over a sustained period of time, that will go along way  in changing a lot of people's minds about him. I have my doubts though, as he has yet to do that over any sustained amount of time.

Fair enough, VIC. Fair enough.

[PhillipBlunt]

56 minutes ago, guntrix said:

lol, is this real life. You can't bring up advanced stats when they flatter Gud and dismiss them when they don't. You can't have it both ways.

I've never dismissed stats, merely the posters and bloggers who view them as the be all and end all, aka the analytics only crew. You being a prime example of that.

 

Clearly it vexes you that SID's post spoke to Gudbranson improving in that regard, which totally f's with the tired narrative you keep on spewing. Oh well.

 

[shiznak]

6 hours ago, Canadian Clay said:

Boeser could cool off to a .60 ppg pace (that’s what horvat had last season) and he will still finish with more points than marner did in his rookie year. Boeser also has shown he has a strong 200 foot game and he’s the main driver of offence on the top line. Marner has been bounced throughout the leafs lineup this year because he can’t find consistancey. 

 

And yeah, Pettersson is insanely talented. Every vaxjo game I’ve watched this year he’s done something amazing, and he’s carried his team to first in shl standings. Ryan biech showed a graphic based in petterssons style of play and point production at the shl the suggests his expected point production at the nhl in his prime will be over 90 points per season. 

 

Once again I’m not saying marner is bad. He’s a fantastic hockey player and I’d love to acquire him, but he’s not Austin Matthews. I even think nylander is a bit better but that could be argued. 

I wouldn't say Boeser has a strong defensive game, he's average. There's a reason why Green only deploys him when they're in an offensive situation (60% offensive zone start time). People like to presume Marner is a defensive liability or doesn't possess a 200 foot game, but that's all presumption by the media. He primarily plays on a line with the two weakest defensive players on the team, but it's always Marner who is hustling back to break the odd man rush. His consistency earlier in the season, might have to do with him putting on muscle over the summer and his body not being able to adapt to it quick enough. It's the same ordeal OJ had to deal with, during training camp. I've notice he seem a tad slower than last year, where he would usually beat a guy with his speed. It's only recently, he's been getting use to it and we've been seeing the Marner of last season.

 

7 hours ago, aGENT said:

You also have to remember Boeser is still adapting to the smaller amounts of time and space he has to do those things in the NHL. 

 

Go back and look at Marner's first 20'ish games and I bet you see a lot of the same. 

I don't know, during his first 50 games, he was practically the Leafs MVP, and even outscoring Matthews.

[aGENT]

7 minutes ago, shiznak said:

I don't know, during his first 50 games, he was practically the Leafs MVP, and even outscoring Matthews.

And Boeser is....

[shiznak]

12 minutes ago, aGENT said:

And Boeser is....

Well, it's not hard to be the MVP of a team, when there is little expectation going into a season and with no real star power on the team.

 

Marner was the MVP for the majority of the Leafs' season, that consist of Matthews, Nylander, JVR, Kadri, and Rielly.

[guntrix]

1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I've never dismissed stats, merely the posters and bloggers who view them as the be all and end all, aka the analytics only crew. You being a prime example of that.

 

Clearly it vexes you that SID's post spoke to Gudbranson improving in that regard, which totally f's with the tired narrative you keep on spewing. Oh well.

 

Except for the fact that SID's post was based on one game. One. For someone so focused on wholesome analysis, you're using the most narrow-minded argument ever.

 

But hey, anything goes if it flatters Gud amiright.

[aGENT]

26 minutes ago, shiznak said:

Well, it's not hard to be the MVP of a team, when there is little expectation going into a season and with no real star power on the team.

 

Marner was the MVP for the majority of the Leafs' season, that consist of Matthews, Nylander, JVR, Kadri, and Rielly.

Yeah, you're right, he's probably terrible.

 

Just like Gudbranson! 

[PhillipBlunt]

9 minutes ago, guntrix said:

Except for the fact that SID's post was based on one game. One.

Of course it was. What's your point, outside of your obsession with deriding Gudbranson?

9 minutes ago, guntrix said:

 For someone so focused on wholesome analysis, you're using the most narrow-minded argument ever.

You're the one with a real focus on analysis, once again to the point of obsession.

9 minutes ago, guntrix said:

But hey, anything goes if it flatters Gud amiright.

Again, you seem really obsessed with the guy.

 

Gudbranson is one player in an entire team. His size, physical capabilities, and leadership qualities are what his selling points are, and why Benning traded for him.

 

You see, Benning has actual valid experience in the NHL drafting and managing, which gives his choices a hell of a lot more, if not 100% more, credence than your continuous ragging on a player that you and the rest of the analytics only community have some obsession with. 

 

Various posters have pointed out before that analytics don't really effectively gauge defensemen as accurately as forwards. Those precious stats don't reflect in-game situational play (to quote Torts) and therefore aren't the only tool GMs and coaches use to track player performance and production.

 

But go on with your continuous Canucks Army disciple bashing of a player that has helped make the Canucks a better team. His contribution may not be on the scoreboard or in your calculator, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Takes all types of players to build a team, not just the darlings of stats junkies.

 

 

[guntrix]

1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Of course it was. What's your point, outside of your obsession with deriding Gudbranson?

You're the one with a real focus on analysis, once again to the point of obsession.

Again, you seem really obsessed with the guy.

 

Gudbranson is one player in an entire team. His size, physical capabilities, and leadership qualities are what his selling points are, and why Benning traded for him.

 

You see, Benning has actual valid experience in the NHL drafting and managing, which gives his choices a hell of a lot more, if not 100% more, credence than your continuous ragging on a player that you and the rest of the analytics only community have some obsession with. 

 

Various posters have pointed out before that analytics don't really effectively gauge defensemen as accurately as forwards. Those precious stats don't reflect in-game situational play (to quote Torts) and therefore aren't the only tool GMs and coaches use to track player performance and production.

 

But go on with your continuous Canucks Army disciple bashing of a player that has helped make the Canucks a better team. His contribution may not be on the scoreboard or in your calculator, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Takes all types of players to build a team, not just the darlings of stats junkies.

 

 

You've gotten so caught up on all your white-knighting that you're actually okay with signing a #6 defenseman with no outstanding attributes other than being a physical presence to a large contract. 

 

The Canucks are a bubble team and even we have Tanev, Stetcher, Edler, Pouliot, Hutton and MDZ who are better than him and offer a more multifaceted game. Not to mention the fact that we have Juolevi waiting for a spot and the high possibility that we sign a defenseman from the incoming 2018 defense-heavy draft. 

 

As for your anti-analytics argument, Gud hasn't even been passing the eye test lately. No point in bringing up the analytics vs. eye test when he hasn't been passing either. 

 

And yes, Benning has actual experience, but that doesn't mean he isn't human. Not even Yzerman is human. He's had good moves but he's also been responsible for bad ones as well. I'm all for signing Gud to a contract reflective of what he brings to the table as a bottom pairing defenseman. Anything more and we'd be mortgaging our future salary cap with a contract akin to that of Russell's with the Oilers. 

[SilentSam]

6 hours ago, guntrix said:

lol, is this real life. You can't bring up advanced stats when they flatter Gud and dismiss them when they don't. You can't have it both ways.

 

So you post a video of Gudbranson fighting to show that he's worth 5.5 mil? You do know that it's possible in this day and age to obtain players with a physical edge who aren't total liabilities in the game of hockey right? 

 

Once Tanev and Stetcher come back, Gud will be a third pairing guy. You're saying you want to spend 5.5 on a #5/6 defenceman on a fringe playoff team?

Better yet,let's spend the money we do or more  on Tanev and Edler who are each injured for 25-30% of the season.

Gudbranson wanted nothing to do with Wilson in that Video, as a matter of fact Wilson took the instigator..  it has nothing to do with fighting..  it has to do with presence, corner work, and crease coverage. Gudbranson knows his strengths, and a solid controlled demeanour is one of them.

He can look after himself, and looks after his teammates by just being there.. Tanev and Edler do neither.

i never said how much money I'm willing to spend on him, I just know he is needed on this team now, and into its future.

EG will know his worth when the line is signed.

ps. I've brought up no stats.  Your all over that crap.

[shiznak]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

Yeah, you're right, he's probably terrible.

 

Just like Gudbranson! 

Again, never said Brock was terrible, but I'm not going to sit here and say he doesn't have any flaws to his game, like he's above everyone else.

 

As of now, whether you like to admit it or not, he's pretty one dimenisonal.  

[VIC_CITY]

46 minutes ago, guntrix said:

You've gotten so caught up on all your white-knighting that you're actually okay with signing a #6 defenseman with no outstanding attributes other than being a physical presence to a large contract. 

 

The Canucks are a bubble team and even we have Tanev, Stetcher, Edler, Pouliot, Hutton and MDZ who are better than him and offer a more multifaceted game. Not to mention the fact that we have Juolevi waiting for a spot and the high possibility that we sign a defenseman from the incoming 2018 defense-heavy draft. 

U

As for your anti-analytics argument, Gud hasn't even been passing the eye test lately. No point in bringing up the analytics vs. eye test when he hasn't been passing either. 

 

And yes, Benning has actual experience, but that doesn't mean he isn't human. Not even Yzerman is human. He's had good moves but he's also been responsible for bad ones as well. I'm all for signing Gud to a contract reflective of what he brings to the table as a bottom pairing defenseman. Anything more and we'd be mortgaging our future salary cap with a contract akin to that of Russell's with the Oilers. 

Some very good points here. I think this whole debate has been mis-cast as the pro Guddy crowd vs the anti-Guddy crowd but I think it's more so the pro Guddy crowd vs the not at that price crowd. There just isn't enough bang for buck. If Gudbranson had a more well rounded game and was a sure fire #3, there would be no debate. But the reality is he's our # 5 defenseman and he isn't exactly trending upwards. Like Guntrix said, he hasn't been passing the eye test lately.  

 

Matt Martin signed a 4 year $10M contract just over a year ago. He's averaged 10+ fights and 300+ hits 4 years in a row. He can also take a shift and score 5-10 goals a year. That's pretty much the ceiling financially for a physical player that can play a little. The fact that Gudbranson is a defenseman and was drafted so high, it raises his perceived value and cap hit. But does it actually make him more valuable? Not at all. Martin is out there hitting, fighting and making his presence felt night in, night out, chipping in with a little offense all while making significantly less money than Gudbranson will surely be asking for. So what makes Gudbranson worth $4.5M or whatever the number ends up being? Because of the position he plays? Regardless of how well he plays it?

 

Benning may have traded for Gudbranson but that doesn't mean he's willing to meet Gudbranson's contract demands, whatever they may be. I think we can all agree that we expected more out of Gudbranson than what we've seen to date. There's a term used in poker - pot committed. Basically meaning you're past the point of no return. JB is not at that point. He can still get assets back for Gudbranson and choose to spend his money elsewhere and unless Gudbranson is willing to sign a hometown discount, it's the smart thing to do.

[J-Dizzle]

9 hours ago, VIC_CITY said:

Mitchell also had respectable offensive stats.

Wait, what? 

[VIC_CITY]

55 minutes ago, J-Dizzle said:

Wait, what? 

In his last 2 seasons with us he scored 23 points and then 12 points in 48 games. Nothing special but respectable for a stay at home defenseman. Whereas EG has 6 points in 51 games with us.

 

Edit: Maybe it's unfair comparing Willie at that point if his career to EG. In Willie's 7th NHL season (also his 1st with Vancouver), he scored 11 points in 62 games. So he was scoring at a higher clip, albeit still pretty low, but showed more of an offensive improvement later in his career. 

[Drakrami]

16 hours ago, coryberg said:

 

Well I was trying to word is generously; because I like Gudbranson's character. The fact is, hes a third pairing D. 

[Sweathog]

With the size and physicality that teams in our division such as the Oilers, Ducks, and the Kings bring. I'm worried that even with Guddy and Dorsett in the lineup, we might not have enough toughness to stand up to those teams in the playoffs. Being Canuck fans, we know that we can't rely on the refs to call the games properly, so it will likely be up to the Canucks to stand up to those teams physically, should these games get ugly. It's highly likely that we'll have to go through at least one of those teams (When we're ready to contend) to get out of our division in the playoffs. 

 

Guddy is a top 4 dman that can take on the heavyweights and clear the crease, these guys don't come around very often. Having Guddy in the lineup allows JB to ice the 4th line he wants, rather than having to sign an enforcer with the sole purpose of protecting his team. His advanced stats may not be stellar, but he doesn't hurt the team and that's what's important. He provides no offense, but he's a stay at home D so who really cares? 

 

Only if Gudbranson is adamant about playing elsewhere next season, should the Canucks look to trade him this deadline. Otherwise we should sign him, even if he wants 5-5.5M per year. Not only is he worth it, but we have 14 million freed up next year with the twins retiring, along with the cap going up virtually every year. Resigning him is vitally important to building a well balanced playoff team, and we can easily afford it. 

[J-Dizzle]

12 hours ago, VIC_CITY said:

In his last 2 seasons with us he scored 23 points and then 12 points in 48 games. Nothing special but respectable for a stay at home defenseman. Whereas EG has 6 points in 51 games with us.

 

Edit: Maybe it's unfair comparing Willie at that point if his career to EG. In Willie's 7th NHL season (also his 1st with Vancouver), he scored 11 points in 62 games. So he was scoring at a higher clip, albeit still pretty low, but showed more of an offensive improvement later in his career. 

Yeah those numbers are not great but better than I remember... I just remember a mean single of a gun with a stick about as long as a javelin pole