Player Discussion The Bad Granlund Phenomenon Part 4 (mod warning post #393)

[DL44]

The Canucks rank 25th in the NHL in goals per game, but sure, I guess there’s no problem with the guy who leads our forwards in ice-time at even strength having 3 points in 12 games. A pathetic 20 point pace over 82 games, but hey, if it weren’t for the big bad goalies stopping the puck he would have more points so maybe we should cut him a break.

I TOLD YOU SO!

So raw numbers are ok to use this yr, but not last yr?

Boy its hard to keep up to which scale you use for different players.

 

[Hit the post]

So raw numbers are ok to use this yr, but not last yr?

Maybe his wrist is still injured?

 

[y2kcanucks]

So raw numbers are ok to use this yr, but not last yr?

Boy its hard to keep up to which scale you use for different players.

Well his puck possession metrics haven’t been good. And I’m not sure you want to use his GF/60 because that further strengthens my argument, so....

 

[y2kcanucks]

Maybe his wrist is still injured?

What's funny is 3 months ago I predicted someone would use this as an excuse.

 

[TruGr1t]

Not much surprising here. Granlund is streaky as hell. He could still hit 12-15 goals so I don't think his PPG pace is much of a bellwether. It could change on a week-to-week basis.

But he's the player we all thought he was ... good two-way play, but very soft with limited offensive upside. I think he'll always be a nice complimentary winger in a 3rd/4th line role.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Well his puck possession metrics haven’t been good. And I’m not sure you want to use his GF/60 because that further strengthens my argument, so....

who cares about made up stats. they really have no bearing or influence on the ice.

Not much surprising here. Granlund is streaky as hell. He could still hit 12-15 goals so I don't think his PPG pace is much of a bellwether. It could change on a week-to-week basis.

But he's the player we all thought he was ... good two-way play, but very soft with limited offensive upside. I think he'll always be a nice complimentary winger in a 3rd/4th line role.

for $900,000 he is a great value player. how he is deployed by the coach is just nit picking and not even directed at the right person. if some posters feel Granlund shouldnt be the team leader in F ice time, thats an issue to take up with the coach, not denigrate the player over.

 

[y2kcanucks]

who cares about made up stats. they really have no bearing or influence on the ice.




for $900,000 he is a great value player. how he is deployed by the coach is just nit picking and not even directed at the right person. if some posters feel Granlund shouldnt be the team leader in F ice time, thats an issue to take up with the coach, not denigrate the player over.

Just because you don't understand them doesn't mean they're made up. And they are a reflection of his performance on the ice.

 

[The Extrapolater]

Granlund, eh? He is what he is. He's not a liability, but he also doesn't really drive play. He can score a little, but there's better goal scorers out there. He can defend well enough, but there's better defensive forwards out there, too. He plays hard, but most players who make the NHL play just as hard. He can play both LW and C, but at both positions there are three players better than him: LW: Eriksson, Sedin, and Baertschi; C: Horvat, Sedin, and Sutter.

Honestly, when both Eriksson and Gaunce are back in the lineup, and hopefully there aren't any other injuries on the left side of the offense (knock on wood), Granlund's probably rotated in and out of the lineup (competing with Baertschi and Gaunce for those spots on the third and fourth lines) as needed, which makes him a replacement-level player.

 

[sting101]

Granlund, eh? He is what he is. He's not a liability, but he also doesn't really drive play. He can score a little, but there's better goal scorers out there. He can defend well enough, but there's better defensive forwards out there, too. He plays hard, but most players who make the NHL play just as hard. He can play both LW and C, but at both positions there are three players better than him: LW: Eriksson, Sedin, and Baertschi; C: Horvat, Sedin, and Sutter.

Honestly, when both Eriksson and Gaunce are back in the lineup, and hopefully there aren't any other injuries on the left side of the offense (knock on wood), Granlund's probably rotated in and out of the lineup (competing with Baertschi and Gaunce for those spots on the third and fourth lines) as needed, which makes him a replacement-level player.

Strange prediction considering Travis Green has him 2nd in ATOI next to Horvat.

 

[y2kcanucks]

I remember last year every time Granlund would score a goal or get a point this thread would be bumped with a lot of support for Benning, this trade, and huge overhype for Granlund. It's a lot quieter this year.

13 games
2 goals
1 assist
3 points
47.57 CF% (231 of 355 forwards with a minimum of 75 ES minutes)
-4.58 RelCF%
45.45 GF% (226 of 355 forwards)
Worst GF% on the Canucks
46.67% SC% (scoring chances) (256 of 355 forwards)

Only 19 shots on goal in 13 games, though he has a 10.5% SH%. Hmm it's almost as if his SH% from last year was unsustainable. Kinda like what I said.

He's on pace for 18 points this season despite leading the Canucks forwards in even strength ice-time, and averaging just under 18 minutes per game.

It is a small sample size so far, but so far he's been pretty much as I expected. A far cry from those 20+ goal, 45-50 point expectations some people here had for him.

 

[DL44]

I remember last year every time Granlund would score a goal or get a point this thread would be bumped with a lot of support for Benning, this trade, and huge overhype for Granlund. It's a lot quieter this year.

13 games
2 goals
1 assist
3 points
47.57 CF% (231 of 355 forwards with a minimum of 75 ES minutes)
-4.58 RelCF%
45.45 GF% (226 of 355 forwards)
Worst GF% on the Canucks
46.67% SC% (scoring chances) (256 of 355 forwards)

Only 19 shots on goal in 13 games, though he has a 10.5% SH%. Hmm it's almost as if his SH% from last year was unsustainable. Kinda like what I said.

He's on pace for 18 points this season despite leading the Canucks forwards in even strength ice-time, and averaging just under 18 minutes per game.

It is a small sample size so far, but so far he's been pretty much as I expected. A far cry from those 20+ goal, 45-50 point expectations some people here had for him.

5on5 : 5 GF and 6 GA...
Considering his who his line has been responsible for playing against... those are some fantastic numbers if you ask me.

 

[y2kcanucks]

5on5 : 5 GF and 6 GA...
Considering his who his line has been responsible for playing against... those are some fantastic numbers if you ask me.

Ignoring literally everything else? Interesting.

 

[Ryan Miller*]

DL44 you're arguing with a poster who likely hasn't watched a single game all season as part of his protest of Jim Benning.

His posts are just running on pure bias.

Why engage?

 

[y2kcanucks]

DL44 you're arguing with a poster who likely hasn't watched a single game all season as part of his protest of Jim Benning.

His posts are just running on pure bias.

Why engage?

When the stats don't align with the reality you want to be true, just ignore them, right?

 

[DL44]

Ignoring literally everything else? Interesting.

Raw numbers are a little more powerful then percentages this early in the season.

You ignore context and scream..45.45 GF% (226 of 355 forwards), Worst GF% on the Canucks

But the reality you are talking about 5/11.. or 5 GF and 6 GA.

Keep on going tho... It's something you can cling to during this good start for the team. Pretty sure most can see how transparent this attempt is.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Raw numbers are a little more powerful then percentages this early in the season.

You ignore context and scream..45.45 GF% (226 of 355 forwards), Worst GF% on the Canucks

But the reality you are talking about 5/11.. or 5 GF and 6 GA.

Keep on going tho... It's something you can cling to during this good start for the team. Pretty sure most can see how transparent this attempt is.

Funny how you accuse me of ignoring context while pointing out a line in which I give the context of that number.

Also funny how you blatantly ignore that I stated it was a small sample size. I assumed you, and others, could conclude that there would be some volatility with these numbers with a small sample size. Maybe that's on me for assuming too much.

Again, keep ignoring the stats when they don't line up with what you want to be true.

 

[DL44]

Funny how you accuse me of ignoring context while pointing out a line in which I give the context of that number.

Also funny how you blatantly ignore that I stated it was a small sample size. I assumed you, and others, could conclude that there would be some volatility with these numbers with a small sample size. Maybe that's on me for assuming too much.

Again, keep ignoring the stats when they don't line up with what you want to be true.

Nope.. been consistent about rate stats.
Surprised you didn't pull out some /60 stats.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Nope.. been consistent about rate stats.
Surprised you didn't pull out some /60 stats.

So pretty much what I said.

I could post /60 stats if you like. Would be more of the same story though.

But hey, you keep thinking that someone who leads our forwards in ice-time with only 3 points in 13 games is good for the team.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Still quiet on the Granlund front.

15 games
2 goals
1 assist
16 point/82gp pace
9.1% SH%
2.0 xG
45% CF%
17:26 minutes/game.

 

[krutovsdonut]

they moved him to another line and to centre to try and get him going and to put gaunce on the checking line where he theoretically fits better. it did not work for either line.

 

[TruGr1t]

Why is there even such an argument over a player that is clearly so mediocre? Eye test, advanced stats. Use whatever metric you want. He's a replacement level talent. There are hundreds of Granlunds in, and sniffing a chance at, the NHL.

He's one of several non-descript bottom sixers that cycle through NHL rosters every year.

If you're just projecting the meta Benning debate there are far more colourful/polarising players to use.

 

[Hit the post]

What's funny is 3 months ago I predicted someone would use this as an excuse.

Maybe it's his other wrist that is injured this time.

Same mysterious injury that is affecting the play of Guds.

 

[Shareefruck]

for $900,000 he is a great value player. how he is deployed by the coach is just nit picking and not even directed at the right person. if some posters feel Granlund shouldnt be the team leader in F ice time, thats an issue to take up with the coach, not denigrate the player over.

To be fair, following the same logic, how much salary he's taking up is also whatever the positive version of nitpicking is, and not directed at the right person. If some posters feel that he's a great value, that's praise that should be given to the manager, not the player.

 

[Nuckles]

ayy

 

[Melvin]

That crow we were supposed to eat is going bad. Should probably throw it out.