[Trade] Canucks trade Erik Gudbranson to Penguins for Tanner Pearson

[steviewonder20]

2 hours ago, rekker said:

This. One hundred percent. Imagine if we signed EK and everyone shuffled down a spot in ice time. Would help immensely. 

Absolutely. Now throw in a first line LW and a second line RW, Hughes living up to the hype, OJ doing the same, Gaudette as third line C and we would be looking pretty good.

[aGENT]

On 3/2/2019 at 6:40 PM, rekker said:

Amazing how much better a dman can look on a team that has constant puck possession.

 

On 3/2/2019 at 6:54 PM, Toyotasfan said:

Gudbranson had himself a good game today, 1 assist, +3 , just over 20 minutes ice time. 

He’ll do just fine in Pittsburgh.

 

Replacement level 

[Where'd Luongo?]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

 

 

Replacement level 

Starting to think you were right about Guddy and that perhaps it's our coaching that is killing our D. How could all of our D really be THAT bad and suddenly play good as soon as they go to a different system if not for coaching?

[JM_]

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

 

Replacement level 

the two games coming up this week with CBJ and the Pens should be fun to watch, with CBJ fighting for his playoff life. We should see a preview of "playoff Guddy" during those two games I suspect. 

[Gurn]

7 minutes ago, Where'd Luongo? said:

Starting to think you were right about Guddy and that perhaps it's our coaching that is killing our D. How could all of our D really be THAT bad and suddenly play good as soon as they go to a different system if not for coaching?

Relax, in a few more games Guddy will revert to his norm, as the adrenaline of being on a new team wears off.

[aGENT]

Just now, Where'd Luongo? said:

Starting to think you were right about Guddy and that perhaps it's our coaching that is killing our D. How could all of our D really be THAT bad and suddenly play good as soon as they go to a different system if not for coaching?

Systems incompatible with (young) personnel (I think this may be by design), incompatible partners, young forward core (#rebuild) that doesn't support the puck as well as contending vets/can be wildly inconsistent, multiple injuries with guys playing over their heads on an already mediocre D core even when healthy...

 

It's really not that hard to figure out.

 

Yet this is the context that constantly had posters (like yourself  ) pointing and laughing at me.

 

As I said in the thread numerous times, Guddy was not the problem.

[10pavelbure96]

Just now, gurn said:

Relax, in a few more games Guddy will revert to his norm, as the adrenaline of being on a new team wears off.

No kidding. Everyone loved guddy when he first got here

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, gurn said:

Relax, in a few more games Guddy will revert to his norm, as the adrenaline of being on a new team wears off.

 

1 minute ago, 10pavelbure96 said:

No kidding. Everyone loved guddy when he first got here

Well, and just look at how much better the Canucks have been since moving him. Addition by subtraction.

[Gurn]

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

Well, and just look at how much better the Canucks have been since moving him. Addition by subtraction.

 

7 minutes ago, gurn said:

 

Relax, in a few more games the team will revert to their norm as the disappointment of the Guddy trade wears off

[Dazzle]

29 minutes ago, gurn said:

 

Relax, in a few more games the team will revert to their norm as the disappointment of the Guddy trade wears off

We could've used Guddy in our last game /sarcasm

 

Actually, from what I've read so far, Pitts fans were never happy about the Guddy trade. Sad.

[oldnews]

On 3/2/2019 at 6:54 PM, Toyotasfan said:

Gudbranson had himself a good game today, 1 assist, +3 , just over 20 minutes ice time. 

He’ll do just fine in Pittsburgh.

lead their team in dzone starts = 12x  / 29% - and was +3 in the process...

 

clearly they're learning in a hurry how bad he is.

[oldnews]

On 2/27/2019 at 8:20 PM, Toews said:

@oldnews maybe? 

I posted my thoughts on this deal (which clearly you're welcome to respond to) - so no need for a smarmy question mark.

 

If you want the Coles Notes/twitter generation version - no, it's not my favorite deal of Benning's tenure.

 

 

[Toews]

2 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I posted my thoughts on this deal (which clearly you're welcome to respond to) - so no need for a smarmy question mark.

 

If you want the Coles Notes/twitter generation version - no, it's not my favorite deal of Benning's tenure.

 

 

Gudbranson himself admitted he did not play very well during his tenure here.

 

Travis Yost 1 oldnews 0 

[oldnews]

36 minutes ago, Toews said:

Gudbranson himself admitted he did not play very well during his tenure here.

 

Travis Yost 1 oldnews 0 

not surprised you're in the Travis Yost fanclub.

good job (again) of responding to my comments on the trade - not surprised that smarm is all you've got.  correction: add lots of Liberal fluff to that smarm.

 

propping yourself up on Yost's 'authority'.... the burn.

 

Edited March 4, 2019 by oldnews

[Maniwaki Canuck]

1 hour ago, Where'd Luongo? said:

Starting to think you were right about Guddy and that perhaps it's our coaching that is killing our D. How could all of our D really be THAT bad and suddenly play good as soon as they go to a different system if not for coaching?

Yeah, puts me in mind of an early interview after Guddy was traded to Pit in which he praised the defensive system there, saying that there were always several options for a first pass.  Maybe it's time to admit that some players are not so much good or bad in themselves, but relative to a style of play.  He clearly didn't fit our system very well, but might be alright in Pit's.  While I'm not going to condemn our defensive system the way some people condemned Guddy, it definitely is a variable in the mix, and hasn't exactly made our personnel shine.  Since the system has stayed and Guddy has gone, we might want to turn our attention to it.

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

 

Actually, from what I've read so far, Pitts fans were never happy about the Guddy trade. Sad.

Who is "Pitts fans"? and how long is "never"?

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, gurn said:

 

Relax, in a few more games the team will revert to their norm as the disappointment of the Guddy trade wears off

Schenn is better anyway.  

 

You need guys that can skate, retrieve pucks and make that first pass before the forecheck closes on them.  Addition by subtractionz!

 

 

That said (on a more serious note) - there are only a handful of teams with fewer points than the Canucks at this point - and as usual, the key veteran stabilizers (and tradeable assets) on this roster were injured heading into the deadline...

And they're hosting the draft.....

Results at this point are relatively unimportant / expecting them was entirely unrealistic.  If they enhance their draft position down the stretch, so be it.

 

Edited March 4, 2019 by oldnews

[oldnews]

59 minutes ago, Maniwaki Canuck said:

Yeah, puts me in mind of an early interview after Guddy was traded to Pit in which he praised the defensive system there, saying that there were always several options for a first pass.  Maybe it's time to admit that some players are not so much good or bad in themselves, but relative to a style of play.  He clearly didn't fit our system very well, but might be alright in Pit's.  While I'm not going to condemn our defensive system the way some people condemned Guddy, it definitely is a variable in the mix, and hasn't exactly made our personnel shine.  Since the system has stayed and Guddy has gone, we might want to turn our attention to it.

I think ideally Gudbranson is paired with another shutdown defenseman and able to play the role he's suited for.  Here, that would be an Edler/Gud hard minutes pairing - with Edler eating some other two-way and pp minutes - otherwise, not really the right LHD partner imo.

But the problems were that you rarely, if ever, had Edler, Tanev and Gudbranson healthy at the same time.  A struggling Pouliot, and a struggling Hutton last year certainly did not make for the kind of context/pairings you want to utilize Gudbranson in imo - as good as it may have been in theory to project Hutton as a partner Gudbranson could stabilize, unfortunately Hutton was nowhere near up to task last year - and likewise, Pouliot has struggled considerably this season - and both of those young guys ideally would not have been handling the kind of workload they had to under the circumstances (not just Edler/Tanev injuries, but also injuries to their key shutdown centers).    That just did not work out well.

 

I think it's been patently obvious how signficant the differences are when you're missing Sutter, Beagle, Edler, Tanev types = the team goes from relatively competitive to a lottery pick team - regardless of how much this fanboard whiffs on the value of veteran players like this.

 

I think Green has had to patch work lineups together on a consistent basis - with a lot of youth in challenging situations - so I'm not really prepared to question the systems either - I think, like WD, at times coaches are forced into harm reduction game-planning and this team simply is in no position to apply the kind of 200ft puck pressure - or even start with the puck anywhere near as consistently as they are with guys like Sutter, Beagle etc providing the opportunity the young forwards need to flourish.  Is it really that hard to understand why a young guy like EP is producing 2 pts in his last 6 games - as opposed to what a relative force he can be when the team is healthy and able to balance or even dictate play and possession when it's on all cylinders?

 

I think the team was pretty intent on dealing one of their veteran defensemen at the deadline - and in the end, Edler wasn't interested and Tanev was not a moveable deadline piece (no one shops for injured D at the deadline)....  I'm not really a fan of this move - which is not to say I don't like Pearson or don't see the potential fit - but at the same time there is an approaching bottleneck of young defensemen to audition - Hughes, Juolevi, Sautner, Brisebois - and a couple guys like Woo and Chatfield (both RHD) that many of us really like.   Meanwhile Stecher is killing it - making the right side look considerably healthier, particularly if Tanev is part of the future (hard to tell what the intent was where he's concerned when he'd unshoppable at the deadline).

 

I don't see the problem with taking a step backwards in competitiveness in circumstances like this - when the team is legitimately decimated, and has no real chance of competing in the shorter term - but I also have to wonder what an Edler Gudbranson pairing looks like (they were damn good together in the limited time we did see them) - and additionally, that pairing enables Tanev to avoid the heavy load he tends to deal with (I think he'd make a great partner to ease Juolevi in in secondary minutes).   However - again, the landscape changes as the team looks for the right partner for Hughes - so as much as I like what Gudbranson potentially brings, there remains the challenge of finding the room and the right fits with those incoming young pieces.... I do think that from Pitts' end, this is a really good move and fit for them in a group that Gud rounds out nicely.   I don't really care for that team and don't really want to see them succeed any more than they already have, but I'd love to see Gudbranson himself succeed.

Edited March 4, 2019 by oldnews

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, Maniwaki Canuck said:

Yeah, puts me in mind of an early interview after Guddy was traded to Pit in which he praised the defensive system there, saying that there were always several options for a first pass.  Maybe it's time to admit that some players are not so much good or bad in themselves, but relative to a style of play.  He clearly didn't fit our system very well, but might be alright in Pit's.  While I'm not going to condemn our defensive system the way some people condemned Guddy, it definitely is a variable in the mix, and hasn't exactly made our personnel shine.  Since the system has stayed and Guddy has gone, we might want to turn our attention to it.

The thing is I believe the coaching staff is trying to develop their players to play a support game. Pittsburgh is more advanced because of the vets they have that understand the support game. This is why we can simply play only young players and dump all the vets as some seem to want. Our young guys are learning to play at the NHL level. People criticize Green for being hard on Goldobin, but perhaps he isn't supporting his defense, etc. It's not simply one mistake made and he's benched, perhaps he's not playing in a consistent way to help the team advance or whatever. Virtanen had to go through a learning curve and has improved. Or on the other hand, this is why guys like Eriksson is liked because although his offense has dried up and he isn't worth his contract, he does the "little things" that make an effective team.

 

So to me this is moreso a rebuild thing than perhaps a coaching/systens problem which I'm sure some will start jumping on. We have seen what this team can do when firing on all cylinders and they can be dangerous, but it's a long grind and with injuries and just mental exhaustion, it's understandable that there are inconsistencies while transitioning young players.

 

This also extends to the Dahlen situation where maybe that's where the Canucks felt he wasn't ready yet. If Dahlen doesn't want to put in the effort to make it in the NHL level, we will see how far along he gets even with all the talent in the world. Now everyone has the effort level like a Pettersson. Boeser has been getting away with a lot because he's been a go to offensive player, but he needs to work on supporting his teammates.

[shad0w4life]

15 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

If Dahlen doesn't want to put in the effort to make it in the NHL level, we will see how far along he gets even with all the talent in the world. Now everyone has the effort level like a Pettersson. Boeser has been getting away with a lot because he's been a go to offensive player, but he needs to work on supporting his teammates.

Dhalen: "I'm bad and need to get better, I asked coach if we can tweak my development as I don't feel like I'm developing into a proper player"

Response was Cull told him to ask for a trade if he didn't like how he was developing.....How was JD not putting in the effort, he was our best rookie putting up numbers.

 

Guddy putting up great numbers play with a new team, maybe our coaches should take note.

Edited March 4, 2019 by shad0w4life