Player Discussion Erik Gudbranson - To trade or extend?

[y2kcanucks]

Extended for 3 years

 

[black ace]

3 years 12 mill

 

[Undrafted]

$4m per. No NTC either.

 

[MS]

Ideally Benning manages to bring back Tryamkin.

Benning re-signing has probably killed any hopes of getting Tryamkin back in the next 3 years. He pretty clearly wanted nothing to do with this administration.

 

[MS]

I think Guddy has had a couple of bad years. He's not what Benning thought he would be but he is better than he has shown so far in Vancouver. Bottom pairing but invaluable in the playoffs. He's the kind of guy who can maul other teams when the rules soften. Of course the team need to get there...

This is the kind of player that generally gets exposed in the playoffs when the pace ramps up. As happened with Sbisa and Alberts, who were both basically unplayable in the postseason because of how slowly they processed the game.

 

[MS]

Extended for 3 years

The symbolism of this idiot being chained to this anchor for the exact same length of time is actually mildly satisfying.

 

[rune74]

Hmm I am a bit surprised they did resign him. Do like the fact of their not being a NTC though.

Would be interesting if this was a sign then trade, though I think Benning doesn't like doing that.

 

[Warh1ppy]

except you can probably find an erik gudbranson type player on every SHL, KHL, Liiga, NLA, AHL, etc. team in the world.

Trading a replaceable player for a 3rd is a win

How many RHD does the current roster of the Vancouver Canucks have? At all?

There is a reason he's not being shuffled out of the door and it is almost painful people fail to see why

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

He absolutely has leverage. It’s called “pending UFA”. The only reason Gudbranson would skip going to UFA is because he wants stability i.e. to stay in Vancouver and not go to a new team. And if he wants to stay in Vancouver then he’s going to want ... ta da! an NTC/NMC.

As for whether Benning has learned anything or not, I doubt it. He was an AGM in Boston for years so it’s not like the concept of NTC/NMC is a new one to him. He’s just bad at his job, plain and simple.

Looks like he didn’t get a no trade and at 4 million for 3 years I’d say his value just went up.

 

[krutovsdonut]

I love this.

I mean that without a hint if irony. I know your shtick is basically extreme hyperliteralism as a distraction tool from sensible arguments by means of narrowing focus on the most pointless of minutiae, but this is absolutely terrific. Well done.

my schtick is to mantain perspective and try to reign in hyperbole. i am slower than some of you to form opinions or draw inferences, and i am extremely skeptical of strong opinions about hockey players formed here based on median expectations, because in my experience hockey teams emerge from players exceeding expectations.

so in this case, i do not want gudbranson back, but i am not going to cry about it if he is back, and i intend to try and keep the fact he is back in a reasonable perspective.

 

[Warh1ppy]

3 years, $4 million. With no NTC and no NMC.

Had it been a 4 year deal it would have brought the AAV down to almost $3.75 million.

I am sure that there will be no histrionics or dramatic statements made in light of this signing.

Right?

 

[CanaFan]

Looks like he didn’t get a no trade and at 4 million for 3 years I’d say his value just went up.

Looks like I was wrong. I’m stunned that he took a deal without any movement protection.

 

[opendoor]

3 years, $4 million. With no NTC and no NMC.

Had it been a 4 year deal it would have brought the AAV down to almost $3.75 million.

I am sure that there will be no histrionics or dramatic statements made in light of this signing.

Right?

How many teams sign their #6 in TOI/G (#7 in EV TOI/G) to a $4M deal?

 

[rune74]

Looks like I was wrong. I’m stunned that he took a deal without any movement protection.

I am too, which makes me think they may be still looking to move him...who knows.

 

[CanaFan]

3 years, $4 million. With no NTC and no NMC.

Had it been a 4 year deal it would have brought the AAV down to almost $3.75 million.

I am sure that there will be no histrionics or dramatic statements made in light of this signing.

Right?

It’s a $2M overpay for a bottom pair D that we paid a 19 y/o C and high 2nd for. The beat goes on for the worst GM in the league.

Is that histrionics enough for you?

 

[CanaFan]

I am too, which makes me think they may be still looking to move him...who knows.

Technically they can but that doesn’t seem Jimmies style. He likes Gudbranson and likes the type of things a D like Gudbranson brings. I can’t say he definitely won’t trade him but I’d be very surprised if he does.

 

[Warh1ppy]

Technically they can but that doesn’t seem Jimmies style. He likes Gudbranson and likes the type of things a D like Gudbranson brings. I can’t say he definitely won’t trade him but I’d be very surprised if he does.

It's the PERFECT contract to trade and the lack of an NTC and NMC also gives him the ability to expose him in Seattles upcoming expansion draft.

I might add that Boqvist, Dobson and Bouchard are all RHD in the upcoming draft and each of them will need a season + before entering the league. We don't have a glut of RHD in the org so it's a solid contract for future options.

Just wish people would look past the stats sheets today to see that fact

 

[CanaFan]

It's the PERFECT contract to trade and the lack of an NTC and NMC also gives him the ability to expose him in Seattles upcoming expansion draft.

I might add that Boqvist, Dobson and Bouchard are all RHD in the upcoming draft and each of them will need a season + before entering the league. We don't have a glut of RHD in the org so it's a solid contract for future options.

Just wish people would look past the stats sheets today to see that fact

I agree it’s tradeable. I don’t agree he will be traded. Benning liked him enough to overpay for him in the first place and I would expect he sees Gudbranson as part of this team’s next core. The issue isn’t whether he *can* be traded, it’s whether our current GM *will*. I don’t think he will.

 

[The Drop]

82

If Bennning dumped Gudbranson for a 3rd and a player the caliber of O'Gara he'd be flamed regardless. It's the epitome of a cannot win situation.

OMG a late pick and an AHL player that's it!

Fire the management

For that return it's better keeping him

He put himself in this situation by acquiring said Trash.

OMG he’s a genuis!!!! Another win!!!

 

[arttk]

Benning re-signing has probably killed any hopes of getting Tryamkin back in the next 3 years. He pretty clearly wanted nothing to do with this administration.

Not to mention there is this thing called the salary cap.
We are spending 15M combined on Sutter, Eriksson and Realgud.

 

[Warh1ppy]

I agree it’s tradeable. I don’t agree he will be traded. Benning liked him enough to overpay for him in the first place and I would expect he sees Gudbranson as part of this team’s next core. The issue isn’t whether he *can* be traded, it’s whether our current GM *will*. I don’t think he will.

One thing Benning hasn't been afraid to do in his tenure is cut his losses with players. If there's a trade that makes sense or he is under-performing in year 2 of his new contract I don't doubt he's gone

 

[krutovsdonut]

Let’s watch Krutov spend another page trying to redefine a commonly understand term into some weird warped version that somehow makes Benning look better... in his head.

aha, so here is the source of the hyperliteralism accusation.

to recap: i say they are trying to "salvage value", and somebody corrects me and says "effectively they are doubling down". i come back and say, no it's not a double down, it's less than that, and i am accused of being too literal and pedantic?

i mean who is being too literal here? if roe meant to say chasing losses when he said double down, why did he answer my post at all? did he think i disputed they were chasing their losses when i said they were trying to salvage value?

he was obviously intending to imply i was understating the cost of re-signing gudbranson.

so i answered his point.

 

[CanaFan]

One thing Benning hasn't been afraid to do in his tenure is cut his losses with players. If there's a trade that makes sense or he is under-performing in year 2 of his new contract I don't doubt he's gone

Then why did he just re-sign and overpay a guy who’s been underperforming for the past year and a half?

 

[Warh1ppy]

Then why did he just re-sign and overpay a guy who’s been underperforming for the past year and a half?

A guy who has played less than half the season both years he's been in vancouver to date? Who knows. Maybe Benning sees something we don't. Maybe him and Eagle are money together. Maybe Benning knows that free agency can kill a team (cough eriksson) and wanted to avoid those July 1st prices

 

[Hit the post]

A guy who has played less than half the season both years he's been in vancouver to date?

Actually that's my biggest problem with the player (other than he's a bad fit for the club - he's better than he's shown but given the present makeup of the blueline, I don't expect his performance to change much).