Obviously I'm paraphrasing negatively to make a point. But that's basically what he said.
The pairing was struggling and Gudbranson was the bigger problem of the two (and indeed, as soon as he got hurt, Hutton magically became good again). All he has to do is own it, or at worse give a banal cliche hockey-talk response.
Instead, he argues that he's not making mistakes and he's 'only out of position because someone else made a mistake' completely not owning any of the struggles of the pairing. Then he points out that Hutton might 'defend well' after 300 games, pretty clearly implying that he thinks he defends well because he's played that many games.
Yeah, he gives some lip service to Hutton being a good player eventually. But the gist of the interview is that he thinks he's playing great and not the problem, and that Hutton is the problem. Completely threw a teammate under the bus. And every time I see him interviewed, I feel that same reek of arrogance off him.
And that's the thing that pisses me off most about Gudbranson and Sutter - both are below-average players who were once top-10 picks and have been treated/played/paid like foundational players for years even though they're marginal guys who should be fighting to stay in lineups, and carry themselves like they're stars when in fact they're amongst the biggest problems on the team. It's one thing to watch a losing team. It's another thing to watch a losing team where some of the worst players think they're really great and continue to have wads of icetime shoved undeservedly down their throats by the coach while better players without their 'pedigree' watch from the bench or pressbox.