Confirmed with Link: [VAN/FLA] Canucks acquire Erik Gudbranson, 2016 5th for McCann, 2016 2nd, 2016 4th

[iceburg]

You really need a link to Sportsnet and TSN?

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/analyzing-canucks-questionable-move-erik-gudbranson/

First paragraph from the article:

"To say it’s been a rough year for the Vancouver Canucks would be an understatement. And although their on-ice season ended more than a month ago, they managed to sneak one more loss into the 2015-2016 campaign with a highly questionable trade Wednesday night."

More of the same on the TSN article. I trust that you will be able to find your way there.

You really should listen to the links you provide. They're emphasizing the benefit to the Canucks and being critical of Florida for moving Gud.

 

[Harold]

You really should listen to the links you provide. They're emphasizing the benefit to the Canucks and being critical of Florida for moving Gud.

Did you seriously read the words on the TSN and Sportsnet articles? They literally say the exact opposite of what you are saying above. They also prove you 100% wrong when you say that no media criticized the trade from Vancouver's end. Go read the words of both articles.

 

[iceburg]

Did you seriously read the words on the TSN and Sportsnet articles? They literally say the exact opposite of what you are saying above. They also prove you 100% wrong when you say that no media criticized the trade from Vancouver's end. Go read the words of both articles.

If you actually read my post you'll see that I'm not wrong. But you're just looking for a fight rather than actually having a discussion so lets just move on.

 

[Megaterio Llamas]

Nothing connects with the fans like rebuilding towards a team that racks losses but hits. We should offersheet Ferland $5m x 5. Wonder if the flames would take that softie Boeser for him.

We'd have to offer sheet Ferland to get such a deal. No way the Flames give up a character prairie guy for an American college student. If there's two things that don't mix it's the game of hockey and book learnin'. Kid can't even make up his mind he wants to be a hockey player. For all we know he gives up hockey and becomes a librarian. I'm sure everyone will agree we don't need any male librarians in the dressing room.

If I know Jim Benning like I think I do that kid never puts on the whale jersey.

 

[Harold]

If you actually read my post you'll see that I'm not wrong. But you're just looking for a fight rather than actually having a discussion so lets just move on.

I don't know how to make it any clearer:

You: "I have not heard one media Pundit say the Gudbranson trade was bad for the Canucks"

Me: "Here are two written articles where media pundits have said the trade was bad for the Canucks"

You: "But look at these two [completely different] videos"

Can you just admit that you were wrong? I clearly showed you two media pundits who said the trade was bad for the Canucks (on two of the most popular sports websites in Canada no less), but you refuse to admit that.

 

[Scygen]

Did you forget that we have Chris Tanev?

No.. but he's pretty locked in on his pairing with Edler, don't you think?

I know we paid a high cost.. but it was the going price.. Hard to argue that..

If Gudbranson lives up to his potential we have our top 4 D good to go for the next 4-5 years.

 

[VanillaCoke]

You really should listen to the links you provide. They're emphasizing the benefit to the Canucks and being critical of Florida for moving Gud.

Are you srs

 

[Megaterio Llamas]

I don't see Benning offer sheeting Ferland though, much as i'm sure he'd love to have that kid. He's too much of a straight shooter to ever resort to the offer sheet. That's more of a Gillis move.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Can you just admit that you were wrong? I clearly showed you two media pundits who said the trade was bad for the Canucks (on two of the most popular sports websites in Canada no less), but you refuse to admit that.

I don't really care which one of you wins this appeal to authority slap fight (I imagine you'll both perceive yourselves as having "won"), but are you really going to hold up TSN and Sportsnet as some kind of quality benchmark for sports punditry? Have some dignity, sir.

You: "But look at these two [completely different] videos"

The video he's directing you to is the one attached to the article you linked. It's actually at the top of the page, preceding the article in question. It's relevant to your link.

That said, "they" are not really "emphasizing a benefit to the Canucks". They're doing a very standard point/counterpoint, with Kypreos taking a pro Canucks stance and then passing it off for a pro-Florida stance. As analysis, it borders on the worthless, and likely isn't a genuine reflection of what anyone involved actually thinks. Which is pretty much true of Sportsnet in general, including the article, which is click-baity as hell.

 

[iceburg]

I don't really care which one of you wins this appeal to authority slap fight (I imagine you'll both perceive yourselves as having "won"), but are you really going to hold up TSN and Sportsnet as some kind of quality benchmark for sports punditry? Have some dignity, sir.

hahaha...good point

 

[Canucks LB]

Can people stop kidding themselves, nobody gives a crap about mccann in the deal, everybody is raving how we lost because the 2nd rounder was added.

I can bet your ass if it was Gudbranson vs McCann only in the trade, 90% of the people would say vancouver won.

 

[Bad News Benning]

No.. but he's pretty locked in on his pairing with Edler, don't you think?

I know we paid a high cost.. but it was the going price.. Hard to argue that..

If Gudbranson lives up to his potential we have our top 4 D good to go for the next 4-5 years.

We have a Top 4 but it's nowhere near good enough to contend with.

Gudbranson would be fine if he was a puck moving defenseman that could help this team score some goals. Hell he would've been fine to compliment a team with a number of offensive defenseman already in place.

How the **** are we going to acquire the puck moving defenseman we badly need if we keep trading away picks/prospects for marginal upgrades?

 

[CanadianPirate]

I don't really care which one of you wins this appeal to authority slap fight (I imagine you'll both perceive yourselves as having "won"), but are you really going to hold up TSN and Sportsnet as some kind of quality benchmark for sports punditry? Have some dignity, sir.

hahaha...good point

...Wait what? Iceburg said this "I have not heard one media Pundit say the Gudbranson trade was bad for the Canucks ( a sample of probably 12). Yet, the overwhelming reaction on these boards was that it was horrible. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark..."

And Harold provided two pundits that said "the Gudbranson trade was bad for the Canucks". Harold wasn't holding up sportsnet or tsn up as a quality benchmark for sports punditry. Just proving to iceburg that his argument that only hf boards Canucks fans don't like the trade is wrong.

 

[me2]

You need more than one puck mover to create offense. Way too much pressure to expect Hutton to the main point producer on the back end. Last year we couldn't generate offense largely because the lack of puck movers on the back end. Same problem a team like Edmonton deals with.

Gudbranson doesn't solve the biggest issue with this defense. It solves the lack of grit but that grit isn't going to help us generate offense. If you keep trading draft picks and young assets away I don't know how exactly Benning expects to find the offensive defenseman this club needs.

Exactly. The only way to make sense of this is they are planning on ending the Sbisa experiment (buyout maybe) or atleast demoting him to a spare and letting Hamhuis walk for nothing. Shifting Tryamkin to LS and creating a spot for Larsen

Edler Tanev
Hutton gudbranson
Tryamkin Larsen

 

[skyo]

No.. but he's pretty locked in on his pairing with Edler, don't you think?

I know we paid a high cost.. but it was the going price.. Hard to argue that..

If Gudbranson lives up to his potential we have our top 4 D good to go for the next 4-5 years.

Yup, defense wins championships, he'll be our Boychuk type whom with his brute grit and defensive skills helped Boston win their cup.

Kings are well known to have a big heavy defense.

Blackhawks with Seabrook, Guds won't be as skilled as Seabrook, but he'll provide that nastiness and defensive skills that Seabrook has.

Gudbranson all of a sudden becomes our defacto big beast defensive dman,

that we haven't really had since the young Bieksa but juice wasn't as big as this fella.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

And Harold provided two pundits that said "the Gudbranson trade was bad for the Canucks". Harold wasn't holding up sportsnet or tsn up as a quality benchmark for sports punditry. Just proving to iceburg that his argument that only hf boards Canucks fans don't like the trade is wrong.

He took an aside to point out their popularity. The implied suggestion was that their popularity made them superior sources.

It would be like holding up a rebuttal for climate change and chasing it with "And from Fox news, no less!". Yeah, you found a click-baity article on Sportsnet. Quelle surprise.

I'd point out how this is a nice working example of confirmation bias, with a pro-trade person seeing only a point-counterpoint video and interpreting it as "pro Canuck" while ignoring the inflammatory article following it, and an anti-trade person seeing only the article, believing the video that preceded it was from "something else entirely", and not noticing that the auto-starting video begins by suggesting the Canucks won the trade. Alas, no one really cares to have their confirmation bias pointed out, the majority of people think they're immune, and confirmation bias being what it is having it shoved under their nose likely won't even register at all.

 

[iceburg]

...Wait what? Iceburg said this "I have not heard one media Pundit say the Gudbranson trade was bad for the Canucks ( a sample of probably 12). Yet, the overwhelming reaction on these boards was that it was horrible. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark..."

And Harold provided two pundits that said "the Gudbranson trade was bad for the Canucks". Harold wasn't holding up sportsnet or tsn up as a quality benchmark for sports punditry. Just proving to iceburg that his argument that only hf boards Canucks fans don't like the trade is wrong.

I never said that only hf boards Canucks fans don't like the trade. Just that I had heard about a dozen pundits supporting the trade in favour of the Canucks and none being critical of the Canucks. This is absolutely the truth. No, I didn't specifically search for additional anti-Canuck opinions but that wasn't my point. My point was that the hf Boards response was overwhelmingly disparate from those outside the community. This point still holds.

 

[Megaterio Llamas]

Can people stop kidding themselves, nobody gives a crap about mccann in the deal, everybody is raving how we lost because the 2nd rounder was added.

I can bet your ass if it was Gudbranson vs McCann only in the trade, 90% of the people would say vancouver won.

That's probably why Benning threw in a couple of picks as well. He wanted the fans in Florida to feel like winners too.

He's just that good of a guy.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

Travis Yost is a credible source? Yikes...

 

[iceburg]

He took an aside to point out their popularity. The implied suggestion was that their popularity made them superior sources.

It would be like holding up a rebuttal for climate change and chasing it with "And from Fox news, no less!". Yeah, you found a click-baity article on Sportsnet. Quelle surprise.

I'd point out how this is a nice working example of confirmation bias, with a pro-trade person seeing only a point-counterpoint video and interpreting it as "pro Canuck" while ignoring the inflammatory article following it, and an anti-trade person seeing only the article, believing the video that preceded it was from "something else entirely", and not noticing that the auto-starting video begins by suggesting the Canucks won the trade. Alas, no one really cares to have their confirmation bias pointed out, the majority of people think they're immune, and confirmation bias being what it is having it shoved under their nose likely won't even register at all.

I must say this is a pretty accurate assessment...

 

[VanillaCoke]

I never said that only hf boards Canucks fans don't like the trade. Just that I had heard about a dozen pundits supporting the trade in favour of the Canucks and none being critical of the Canucks. This is absolutely the truth. No, I didn't specifically search for additional anti-Canuck opinions but that wasn't my point. My point was that the hf Boards response was overwhelmingly disparate from those outside the community. This point still holds.

No it doesn't at all

 

[David71]

Bob McKenzie: "If you asked FLA players, they're upset. Gudbranson was believed to be a future captain. He was a core member of the team."
12 retweets 22 likes

 

[Butcher]

Bob McKenzie: "If you asked FLA players, they're upset. Gudbranson was believed to be a future captain. He was a core member of the team."
12 retweets 22 likes

I see nothing in that which says he is a good hockey player.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Actually doesn't it mean he is a #1D and better than Ekblad? If his TOI says he played the most then he must be the best D on the team, no?

If your going to use TOI to define the player then don't be stingy, go all the way.

Exactly. It's amazing that more people don't recognize this. If Sbisa gets top4 ice, is he a top4 Dman? TOI is just one marker to determine the quality of a player. There are others like quality of competition, QoT, GA20, CorsiRel etc...

Gudbranson is a good #4 Dman who can play shut down minutes.

How are you determining this?

He was a fringe bottom pairing guy his first couple seasons, and is now a solid top-four guy.

And he became this way because he became more efficient at what he does, or he was just given top4 ice? Please read CanaFan's comment above.

Reading back a bit, it seems that you (along with many others) were very intrigued by him 3 years ago when the Luongo rumors were around. What's changed?

You are completely off on this Detroit thing. They gave Quincey a nice contract and paid a first to get him back. High draft pick on Smith. Big contracts for the others. Clearly they pay for and value this type of defenseman.

Again, this 'need' thing is so vague. Bottom line, they needed a top-four RHD. There is no way around that.

There's nothing vague about it: They needed a top4 Right-Side D (not necessarily a Right shot D) and Gudbranson has not performed like a top4 right side D. This would be an easier discussion if you placed anything in possession metrics.

What changed? We're not talking about trading Luongo's contract (what it was made out to be by the league) for an ELC D prospect.

The point about DET is that they pay their premium contracts to players that generate points first and foremost. Kronwall and Green. Benning is just about to make Gudbranson the highest paid Dman here, hence, the contrast.

 

[Vancouver_2010]

Bob McKenzie: "If you asked FLA players, they're upset. Gudbranson was believed to be a future captain. He was a core member of the team."
12 retweets 22 likes

I don't believe why he would said that, Gudbranson wasn't even their best player, how can he be their captain?