Rumor: Canucks going after Barrie. (+ Hudler)

[Luck 6]

I'm not a fan of trading a young promising C like McCann and the 33rd overall pick for someone who is really more of a number 5 defenseman. I guess understanding how hockey analytics works means I have zero credibility though.

I'm not a huge fan of the trade, but I do understand the trade. It isn't easy to get young RH defensemen who can play in the top 4. Gudbranson is more of a #5D, but he's also 24 years with the potential to get a bit better and be a #3/4 guy in the next couple of years.

McCann potentially could have become a #1b centerman, but more likely he will top out as a #2C. So the trade shakes down like this...

Van gives up a prospect as follows:
40% chance #2C
5% chance #1C
55% chance fringe player (ie: Kyle Wellwood)

Van gets back a definite #5 defenseman with upside as follows:
5% chance to become top pairing
60% chance to get a bit better and become at least a solid #4D (he's 24, he MUST get a touch better as defensemen peak in their late 20s)
35% chance to just stay as a #5D

I had to make some guesses, but even if I'm a bit off with the percentages I think you get my point. Also for mid-tier players we received the player with the more valuable position.

 

[y2kcanucks]

You are definitely hitting on the basics, but let's take it a bit more in depth.
I'm using Tanev and Gud's last year in 2015-16 as my marker.
Gudbranson's fancy stats are hampered by the fact that he is deployed in the Dzone more than almost any other Dman. Him and Tanev are both in the bottom 25 in OZone starts (all stats per http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/):
Tanev: 26.4, 0.59 P/60
Gud: 26.9, 0.47 P/60

Although Gudbranson's offensive stats are lower, he still ranks as a solid 3/4 defenseman in P/60 (with 1k mins) despite his limited O-zone starts whereas Tanev is solidly a #3 dman in terms of offense.

On the defensive side, Gudbranson's CA60 is actually 60th in the league (with 1k mins), or a 3/4D level at 54.4, which is quite good despite the fact he has to start in the defensive zone so much. It has also stayed constant throughout the last few years despite the fact his is being deployed more and more in the dzone against the top lines.

If we want to look at CF% instead, we would expect a normal 3/4 dman to have a 50% CF% assuming all things equal, but since Tanev and Gud have 4-5% less offensive zone starts, i would expect them to have a CF% of 46%. In this case, Tanev excels at 49.4% and Gud is at the 46.7% mark, which is a bit better than what I would expect for a 3/4 defenseman with that type of zone start.

From just an eye test point of view, I think his game will be more suited for the West as it is less open and I think he can be a suitable replacement for Hamhuis in the near future if he continues to develop his game a bit.

Take a look at the Florida's version of Canucks army said here about Erik. He is liked by the fans there.
http://www.litterboxcats.com/2016/5/27/11789054/erik-gudbranson-a-look-back-at-a-player-i-will-miss

How did you come to 1000 minutes as your baseline? Just because someone ranks 60th among players who have played 1000+ minutes doesn't mean he's ranked as a 3/4D level. That's 60 out of 124.

Since there are 30 teams in the league, and we want to look at the top 6 from each team, that's 180 defensemen. The 180th ranked defenseman played just under 750 minutes. Even if we limit the scope to 750+ minutes (based on the limitations from that site you're using) we then see Gudbranson's CA/60 ranks 90th out of 168. Using CF% Gudbranson ranks 140th out of 168.

Gudbranson is a player who needs to improve his game SIGNIFICANTLY if he's going to be a serviceable top 4 defenseman, let alone someone who can be compared to Hamhuis.

 

[y2kcanucks]

I'm not a huge fan of the trade, but I do understand the trade. It isn't easy to get young RH defensemen who can play in the top 4. Gudbranson is more of a #5D, but he's also 24 years with the potential to get a bit better and be a #3/4 guy in the next couple of years.

McCann potentially could have become a #1b centerman, but more likely he will top out as a #2C. So the trade shakes down like this...

Van gives up a prospect as follows:
40% chance #2C
5% chance #1C
55% chance fringe player (ie: Kyle Wellwood)

Van gets back a definite #5 defenseman with upside as follows:
5% chance to become top pairing
60% chance to get a bit better and become at least a solid #4D (he's 24, he MUST get a touch better as defensemen peak in their late 20s)
35% chance to just stay as a #5D

I had to make some guesses, but even if I'm a bit off with the percentages I think you get my point. Also for mid-tier players we received the player with the more valuable position.

Where the hell does this come from?

 

[Gaunce4gm]

I don't really give a crap about Gudbransons fancy stats until this time NEXT year. When he plays for the CANUCKS for a whole season. Players can fit different coaching styles/d partners depending on the team and coach. Look at Ovechkin when they wanted him to be a defensively responsible RW instead of a purely offensive LW. Ehrhoff fell off a cliff after he left Vancouver. Erik Karlsson could come play here and have the worst year of his career.

There is no way you can ACCURATELY bring Gudbransons advanced stats from Florida and plop them in Vancouver and be able to tell anyone what those stats will be.

Gudbranson will probably have LESS pressure than than he did in Florida because Edler and Tanev will
Take the tough competition.

Gudbranson will likely play with a good PMD ie Hutton.

Gudbranson will likely get some PP time purely because he is RHS and that will give him at least a couple more goals.


There are infinite variables for each player on each team you can't just say "look at his corsi over the last 4 years for that team with that D partner and that coach! 5/6 D at best!!!" When literally every variable that could change will change in the next season.

People did this with Virtanen vs Ehlers all year long. Let's see what Virtanen does playing on Winnipegs 1st line with Sceifele, little, Ladd, Byfuglien, wheeler etc.

Let's also see Ehlers playing 11mins a night off and on while playing with Cracknell, Vey, Dorsett and Prust.

 

[James Underbuss*]

I don't really give a crap about Gudbransons fancy stats until this time NEXT year. When he plays for the CANUCKS for a whole season. Players can fit different coaching styles/d partners depending on the team and coach. Look at Ovechkin when they wanted him to be a defensively responsible RW instead of a purely offensive LW. Ehrhoff fell off a cliff after he left Vancouver. Erik Karlsson could come play here and have the worst year of his career.

There is no way you can ACCURATELY bring Gudbransons advanced stats from Florida and plop them in Vancouver and be able to tell anyone what those stats will be.

Gudbranson will probably have LESS pressure than than he did in Florida because Edler and Tanev will
Take the tough competition.

Gudbranson will likely play with a good PMD ie Hutton.

Gudbranson will likely get some PP time purely because he is RHS and that will give him at least a couple more goals.


There are infinite variables for each player on each team you can't just say "look at his corsi over the last 4 years for that team with that D partner and that coach! 5/6 D at best!!!" When literally every variable that could change will change in the next season.

People did this with Virtanen vs Ehlers all year long. Let's see what Virtanen does playing on Winnipegs 1st line with Sceifele, little, Ladd, Byfuglien, wheeler etc.

Let's also see Ehlers playing 11mins a night off and on while playing with Cracknell, Vey, Dorsett and Prust.

 

[coldsteel79]

I don't really give a crap about Gudbransons fancy stats until this time NEXT year. When he plays for the CANUCKS for a whole season. Players can fit different coaching styles/d partners depending on the team and coach. Look at Ovechkin when they wanted him to be a defensively responsible RW instead of a purely offensive LW. Ehrhoff fell off a cliff after he left Vancouver. Erik Karlsson could come play here and have the worst year of his career.

There is no way you can ACCURATELY bring Gudbransons advanced stats from Florida and plop them in Vancouver and be able to tell anyone what those stats will be.

Gudbranson will probably have LESS pressure than than he did in Florida because Edler and Tanev will
Take the tough competition.

Gudbranson will likely play with a good PMD ie Hutton.

Gudbranson will likely get some PP time purely because he is RHS and that will give him at least a couple more goals.


There are infinite variables for each player on each team you can't just say "look at his corsi over the last 4 years for that team with that D partner and that coach! 5/6 D at best!!!" When literally every variable that could change will change in the next season.

People did this with Virtanen vs Ehlers all year long. Let's see what Virtanen does playing on Winnipegs 1st line with Sceifele, little, Ladd, Byfuglien, wheeler etc.

Let's also see Ehlers playing 11mins a night off and on while playing with Cracknell, Vey, Dorsett and Prust.

Well said

 

[Jabba The Hutton]

How did you come to 1000 minutes as your baseline? Just because someone ranks 60th among players who have played 1000+ minutes doesn't mean he's ranked as a 3/4D level. That's 60 out of 124.

Since there are 30 teams in the league, and we want to look at the top 6 from each team, that's 180 defensemen. The 180th ranked defenseman played just under 750 minutes. Even if we limit the scope to 750+ minutes (based on the limitations from that site you're using) we then see Gudbranson's CA/60 ranks 90th out of 168. Using CF% Gudbranson ranks 140th out of 168.

Gudbranson is a player who needs to improve his game SIGNIFICANTLY if he's going to be a serviceable top 4 defenseman, let alone someone who can be compared to Hamhuis.

I agree it would be better to look at it compared to 180 regular defenseman or 750 minutes.

So going on your numbers for the CA/60 (which i can replicate), would that not make Gudbranson a #3/4D in that rank if he is 90th out of 168 regular defensemen?

I'm ok with the CF% being low given that fact it is not adjusted for zone starts. When I adjust it for Zone Starts myself by taking the ratio of the % of non-off zone starts per the average of the 168 Dmen, I get 49.91 CF% for Gudbranson, which is 89th out of 168. Again, seems like #3/4D defensive material. Tanev is 22nd in this measure btw with Vlasic and Lindholm at 1 and 2.

 

[opendoor]

You are definitely hitting on the basics, but let's take it a bit more in depth.
I'm using Tanev and Gud's last year in 2015-16 as my marker.
Gudbranson's fancy stats are hampered by the fact that he is deployed in the Dzone more than almost any other Dman. Him and Tanev are both in the bottom 25 in OZone starts (all stats per http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/):
Tanev: 26.4, 0.59 P/60
Gud: 26.9, 0.47 P/60

Although Gudbranson's offensive stats are lower, he still ranks as a solid 3/4 defenseman in P/60 (with 1k mins) despite his limited O-zone starts whereas Tanev is solidly a #3 dman in terms of offense.

On the defensive side, Gudbranson's CA60 is actually 60th in the league (with 1k mins), or a 3/4D level at 54.4, which is quite good despite the fact he has to start in the defensive zone so much. It has also stayed constant throughout the last few years despite the fact his is being deployed more and more in the dzone against the top lines.

If we want to look at CF% instead, we would expect a normal 3/4 dman to have a 50% CF% assuming all things equal, but since Tanev and Gud have 4-5% less offensive zone starts, i would expect them to have a CF% of 46%. In this case, Tanev excels at 49.4% and Gud is at the 46.7% mark, which is a bit better than what I would expect for a 3/4 defenseman with that type of zone start.

Zone start adjusted stats exist though, and they paint a pretty disparate picture between a guy like Gudbranson and a guy like Tanev. You're also not considering the quality of the teams they each played for when you compare their numbers straight across.

Anyway, if you use Zone start adjusted stats (where the first 10 seconds after a faceoff is eliminated) and take the 188 defensemen with 500+ minutes of that, here's where each ranks:


Tanev:

CF%: 79th
CF% relative to teammates: 14th
CA/60: 39th
CA/60 relative to teammates: 7th


Gudbranson:

CF%: 154th
CF% relative to teammates: 148th
CA/60: 96th
CA/60 relative to teammates: 169th


Tanev absolutely kills it when you consider how he compares to his teammates. He's a great defenseman on a terrible team. Gudbranson's numbers show the opposite; his numbers are amongst the worst in the league compared to his teammates.

 

[The Extrapolater]

I don't really give a crap about Gudbransons fancy stats until this time NEXT year. When he plays for the CANUCKS for a whole season. Players can fit different coaching styles/d partners depending on the team and coach. Look at Ovechkin when they wanted him to be a defensively responsible RW instead of a purely offensive LW. Ehrhoff fell off a cliff after he left Vancouver. Erik Karlsson could come play here and have the worst year of his career.

There is no way you can ACCURATELY bring Gudbransons advanced stats from Florida and plop them in Vancouver and be able to tell anyone what those stats will be.

Gudbranson will probably have LESS pressure than than he did in Florida because Edler and Tanev will
Take the tough competition.

Gudbranson will likely play with a good PMD ie Hutton.

Gudbranson will likely get some PP time purely because he is RHS and that will give him at least a couple more goals.


There are infinite variables for each player on each team you can't just say "look at his corsi over the last 4 years for that team with that D partner and that coach! 5/6 D at best!!!" When literally every variable that could change will change in the next season.

People did this with Virtanen vs Ehlers all year long. Let's see what Virtanen does playing on Winnipegs 1st line with Sceifele, little, Ladd, Byfuglien, wheeler etc.

Let's also see Ehlers playing 11mins a night off and on while playing with Cracknell, Vey, Dorsett and Prust.

There aren't 'infinite variables'. Past performance is usually the best indicator of future performance, even stretching back to junior hockey.

And there is nothing, absolutely nothing, in Gudbranson's history to suggest he'll ever 'break out'. He is what he is. A poor scorer. A decent defender.

Furthermore, Gudbranson played about half of his games last season with Brian Campbell, a player the likes of which the Canucks don't currently have on their roster. And Gudbranson still only scored three even strength points while playing with Campbell. That's, simply put, awful. You shouldn't be scoring only three points while playing with one of the better scoring defensemen in the league.

It's easy enough to predict Gudbranson's performance. He'll score about ten points. And have a CF% of about 49%.

Hutton might become a player as good as Campbell, but it's not likely to going to be while playing with Gudbranson. Gudbranson will act more as an anchor or a drag on Hutton, holding him back rather than setting him free.

 

[NYVanfan]

i am waiting to see Grubs in action before i jump on this train either way.
The analytics and the opinions of some who dont like this hold sway. And he's not a rookie.
On the other hand, he's not old (could evolve), was a very high pick, many Fla fans hated losing him, and he (in theory) represents a big need for the team.
So I am cautiously optimistic.

as for overall, ive said this before -- there is no deliberate tanking, noone does that. You're either an 'internal cap team' (which we're not) or incompetent, like the Oil and Leafs (which we may be)

Im fine with signing UFAs as long as they dont steal jobs from young talent pushing up -- we dont have tons of that, and the kids are in the lineup.

My biggest complaint is having only 2 picks in the top 120 (or whatever) .. that's awful for a rebuilding / retooling / rewhatevering team.

What I wish we'd done is move Vrbata for something (anything ..still cant believe some PO team wouldnt have given a 5th for him.) Move Edler and Hansen for 1st & 2nd, and then signed UFAs to replace them. The deal Hamhuis signed in Dallas would've been perfect -- we save $ on Edler's cap. Deals like Colbourne, even Matthias or Stewart wouldve been fine ... serviceable short-term UFAs...

On-ice product would be no worse this year and we would've had a handful of good picks; possibly another top-15 for Edler...

 

[banme*]

Now adjust for quality of linemates.

 

[Mal Reynolds]

Goes right back to the excuse "oh at least we're not as bad as....". A number of those teams are run badly - just because this team isn't as badly enough shouldn't mean they get a 'pass'. Or least from my perspective; or maybe my standards are too high?

Oh I agree. That part of my post was simply meant to be an objective analysis of how many bottom feeder teams had a low percentage of picks. As in, a presentation of pure facts.

I suppose I didn't make that very clear... no, I too am on the "Wanting to see the Canucks making as many picks as possible" bandwagon

 

[Scurr]

Zone start adjusted stats exist though, and they paint a pretty disparate picture between a guy like Gudbranson and a guy like Tanev. You're also not considering the quality of the teams they each played for when you compare their numbers straight across.

Anyway, if you use Zone start adjusted stats (where the first 10 seconds after a faceoff is eliminated) and take the 188 defensemen with 500+ minutes of that, here's where each ranks:


Tanev:

CF%: 79th
CF% relative to teammates: 14th
CA/60: 39th
CA/60 relative to teammates: 7th


Gudbranson:

CF%: 154th
CF% relative to teammates: 148th
CA/60: 96th
CA/60 relative to teammates: 169th


Tanev absolutely kills it when you consider how he compares to his teammates. He's a great defenseman on a terrible team. Gudbranson's numbers show the opposite; his numbers are amongst the worst in the league compared to his teammates.

Have you vetted that zs adjustment? Verv asked me about it a while ago and I've quit using them since. I'm not sure whether he knows something about it or was just being an *******.

Why would strength of team matter more than QOT?

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=1446&withagainst=true&season=2015-16&sit=5v5

Tanev played 64% of his ice-time with Edler -1st pairing defenseman?

Gudbranson played 36% of his ice-time with Campbell -1st pairing defenseman?

And he played 32% of his ice-time with Willie Mitchell -2nd pairing defenseman?

 

[brokenhole]

I don't really give a crap about Gudbransons fancy stats until this time NEXT year. When he plays for the CANUCKS for a whole season. Players can fit different coaching styles/d partners depending on the team and coach. Look at Ovechkin when they wanted him to be a defensively responsible RW instead of a purely offensive LW. Ehrhoff fell off a cliff after he left Vancouver. Erik Karlsson could come play here and have the worst year of his career.

There is no way you can ACCURATELY bring Gudbransons advanced stats from Florida and plop them in Vancouver and be able to tell anyone what those stats will be.

Gudbranson will probably have LESS pressure than than he did in Florida because Edler and Tanev will
Take the tough competition.

Gudbranson will likely play with a good PMD ie Hutton.

Gudbranson will likely get some PP time purely because he is RHS and that will give him at least a couple more goals.


There are infinite variables for each player on each team you can't just say "look at his corsi over the last 4 years for that team with that D partner and that coach! 5/6 D at best!!!" When literally every variable that could change will change in the next season.

People did this with Virtanen vs Ehlers all year long. Let's see what Virtanen does playing on Winnipegs 1st line with Sceifele, little, Ladd, Byfuglien, wheeler etc.

Let's also see Ehlers playing 11mins a night off and on while playing with Cracknell, Vey, Dorsett and Prust.

Virtanen played with 2 of the best thinkers in the game named Sedin..it lasted for a period before he was sent back to the 3rd line. What makes you think he would do any better on Winnipeg's 1st line.

 

[Gaunce4gm]

Virtanen played with 2 of the best thinkers in the game named Sedin..it lasted for a period before he was sent back to the 3rd line. What makes you think he would do any better on Winnipeg's 1st line.

How many Even strength minutes and 1st PP minutes did Virtanen get with the Sedins?

I was at the game against TBL the first time back from the WJCs when coach Willie "put virtanen on the first line to show him the team had confidence in him" it was literally the opening face off, and that's it. Virtanen played very well and was probably the most dangerous player on the ice... With Vey and Higgins.

 

[CherryToke]

i am waiting to see Grubs in action before i jump on this train either way.

Same here. I prefer the wait and see for yourself approach vs the wannabe nostradamus approach.

 

[pitseleh]

If you're assessing the decision based on when it was made, the information before and after the decision are both relevant to whether it was a good decision. No one should have a 100% confident opinion on things, but that doesn't mean you can't have a strong and reasoned opinion now.

 

[DadBod]

The only people who are knocking the Gudbranson trade are uneducated spectators who solely "paper scout" through fancy stats...no acknowledging that these stats inheretedly don't favour "stay at home" defensemen. Theres a reason why hockey people who evaluate with other metrics than fancy stats LOVE Gudbranson, especially teammates.

 

[pitseleh]

The only people who are knocking the Gudbranson trade are uneducated spectators who solely "paper scout" through fancy stats...no acknowledging that these stats inheretedly don't favour "stay at home" defensemen. Theres a reason why hockey people who evaluate with other metrics than fancy stats LOVE Gudbranson, especially teammates.

There is literally no argument in there about why "stay at home" defencemen have value.

It's not like the stats are rigged against "stay at home" defenders either. Players like Rob Scuderi, Dan Girardi, Cory Sarich, Barret Jackman, and Willie Mitchell have had excellent runs as defensive defenders according to the numbers. It's just a lame excuse for Gudbranson.

 

[racerjoe]

Same here. I prefer the wait and see for yourself approach vs the wannabe nostradamus approach.

The problem with being wait and see, is it is reactionary. You will thus always be behind. It is also not like we are seeing some unkown. We have a large sample of HNL work.

Prime example is Sbisa. Let's wait and see if he is going to be good.--> Players underperforms

Well now lets see if he can grow into top 4 --> Player underperforms.

Thus we lose Hamhuis for free, and have Sbisa signed at a terrible cap hit. When really if anyone watched you should have known Sbisa was not good. Just ask the Ana fans.

 

[CherryToke]

The problem with being wait and see, is it is reactionary. You will thus always be behind. It is also not like we are seeing some unkown. We have a large sample of HNL work.

Prime example is Sbisa. Let's wait and see if he is going to be good.--> Players underperforms

Well now lets see if he can grow into top 4 --> Player underperforms.

Thus we lose Hamhuis for free, and have Sbisa signed at a terrible cap hit. When really if anyone watched you should have known Sbisa was not good. Just ask the Ana fans.

Always be behind what? Fans have no say in what happens so being reactionary means nothing in terms of on ice product. If you're talking about management I agree, reactionary is bad.

Edit: I remember a certain poster telling me Richardson was complete garbage that doesn't belong in the NHL. Two years later he was calling management dumb for not re-signing him... Maybe he should have watched him play before making such a bold prediction?

 

[Proto]

I don't really give a crap about Gudbransons fancy stats until this time NEXT year. When he plays for the CANUCKS for a whole season. Players can fit different coaching styles/d partners depending on the team and coach. Look at Ovechkin when they wanted him to be a defensively responsible RW instead of a purely offensive LW. Ehrhoff fell off a cliff after he left Vancouver. Erik Karlsson could come play here and have the worst year of his career.

There is no way you can ACCURATELY bring Gudbransons advanced stats from Florida and plop them in Vancouver and be able to tell anyone what those stats will be.

Gudbranson will probably have LESS pressure than than he did in Florida because Edler and Tanev will
Take the tough competition.

Gudbranson will likely play with a good PMD ie Hutton.

Gudbranson will likely get some PP time purely because he is RHS and that will give him at least a couple more goals.


There are infinite variables for each player on each team you can't just say "look at his corsi over the last 4 years for that team with that D partner and that coach! 5/6 D at best!!!" When literally every variable that could change will change in the next season.

People did this with Virtanen vs Ehlers all year long. Let's see what Virtanen does playing on Winnipegs 1st line with Sceifele, little, Ladd, Byfuglien, wheeler etc.

Let's also see Ehlers playing 11mins a night off and on while playing with Cracknell, Vey, Dorsett and Prust.

/fast forward 12 months

'guys I don't care what the stats say about Gudbranson THIS YEAR because he was ADJUSTING TO A NEW TEAM in a NEW CITY with a NEW COACHING STAFF and DIFFERENT PAIRINGS ON DEFENCE. let's wait another 12 months before the stats mean anything. 7 years of playing hockey is meaningless. you can't just make conclusions based on that'

 

[rune74]

/fast forward 12 months

'guys I don't care what the stats say about Gudbranson THIS YEAR because he was ADJUSTING TO A NEW TEAM in a NEW CITY with a NEW COACHING STAFF and DIFFERENT PAIRINGS ON DEFENCE. let's wait another 12 months before the stats mean anything. 7 years of playing hockey is meaningless. you can't just make conclusions based on that'

And if he does well, what will be the narrative then? Silly conjectures work both ways.

 

[Proto]

And if he does well, what will be the narrative then? Silly conjectures work both ways.

Uh, then the narrative will be that he played well and improved as a hockey player?

 

[y2kcanucks]

And if he does well, what will be the narrative then? Silly conjectures work both ways.

Don't worry, he won't.

He might have some success if paired with Edler. Would be a downgrade on Tanev, but Edler might be able to salvage Gudbranson similar to how Campbell helped salvage him. But since Edler himself isn't elite like Campbell is at driving puck possession even that may not help too much.