Confirmed with Link: [VAN/FLA] Canucks acquire Erik Gudbranson, 2016 5th ~ PT 3

[ahmon]

Vey has very pedestrian skill. Just because he's slow, soft, and weak doesn't make him skilled by default.

McCann was drafted with skill. Traded him away.

Forsling was drafted with skill. Traded him away.

Shinkaruk had skill. Traded him away.

Bonino had skill (not speed though). Traded him away.

Look at his other acquisitions. Dorsett, Prust, Sutter, Granlund, Gudbranson, Sbisa, Pedan. There is a notable dearth of skill in that group.

It is what it is. You can argue he's prioritizing character, or depth, or defensive prowess or whatever you want but you are flat out being dishonest if you characterize the majority of Benning's acquisitions as being focussed on speed and skill. It's just not there.

Vey is a skill-first player. He didn't score a ton of points in junior and score ppg in the Ahl because of his character, or defensive prowess.

I would argue even Granlund is more of a skill based player. He's not making the NHL because he's stronger, more physical or better defensively than other players.
He was drafted because teams thought he had a chance to be a top 6 forward.

And while Pedan fits the category of big and physical. He's anything from "defensive prowess", that's probably his biggest hurdle from being a regular in the NHL. He struggles with defensive consistency.

 

[CanaFan]

Vey is a skill-first player. He didn't score a ton of points in junior and score ppg in the Ahl because of his character, or defensive prowess.

I would argue even Granlund is more of a skill based player. He's not making the NHL because he's stronger, more physical or better defensively than other players.
He was drafted because teams thought he had a chance to be a top 6 forward.

And while Pedan fits the category of big and physical. He's anything from "defensive prowess", that's probably his biggest hurdle from being a regular in the NHL. He struggles with defensive consistency.

Skill-based doesn't mean skilled. It just means there isn't anything else to call them. Vey has very average puck skills, vision, and passing. He plays a very mechanical offensive game that is more "taught" than instinctual. He skates and passes in fairly safe, predictable patterns. He lacks any real creativity or high end puck skills. You can say he is "skill-based" but the measure of his skill was answered when he cleared waivers earlier this year.

Granlund falls exactly into the Vey category as well. He has some skill but I still wouldn't say he is "skilled", at least at the NHL level.

Pedan is more of the same. Great size, decent skill but not overly so. I mean if Pedan, Vey, and Granlund meet your criteria of "acquiring skill" then we clearly have different expectations of what "skill" is. I'm talking about guys who have above average NHL skill, not above average AHL skill, which is all any of those 3 have shown to-date. And let's not forget these aren't 19 or 20 year olds like Virtanen and Horvat. Vey is turning 25, Granlund is 23, Pedan is almost 23. There are guys younger than them who are top line players in the league. These guys are pretty close to being what they are, which is borderline NHL talents.

 

[ahmon]

Skill-based doesn't mean skilled. It just means there isn't anything else to call them. Vey has very average puck skills, vision, and passing. He plays a very mechanical offensive game that is more "taught" than instinctual. He skates and passes in fairly safe, predictable patterns. He lacks any real creativity or high end puck skills. You can say he is "skill-based" but the measure of his skill was answered when he cleared waivers earlier this year.

The point of my post wasn't about "how" good Vey is.

Its whether when Benning acquired him, it was with the intention to acquire a skill player or did he prioritize acquiring a player because of "defensive prowess" and physicality.

Granlund falls exactly into the Vey category as well. He has some skill but I still wouldn't say he is "skilled", at least at the NHL level.

Again, there are many skilled players who couldn't translate their games fully into the NHL, that doesn't make them players who were acquired for their defensive game or physicality.

If Benning tomorrow acquires another Brandon Reid or Steve Kariya. These guys couldn't carve out a career in the NHL, you wouldnt' say Benning prioritize physicality and defensive prowess right?

Pedan is more of the same. Great size, decent skill but not overly so. I mean if Pedan, Vey, and Granlund meet your criteria of "acquiring skill" then we clearly have different expectations of what "skill" is. I'm talking about guys who have above average NHL skill, not above average AHL skill, which is all any of those 3 have shown to-date. And let's not forget these aren't 19 or 20 year olds like Virtanen and Horvat. Vey is turning 25, Granlund is 23, Pedan is almost 23. There are guys younger than them who are top line players in the league. These guys are pretty close to being what they are, which is borderline NHL talents.

I think you are changing your argument..

Initially, you said Benning favours players with defensive prowess and character. That's a very different argument than Vey and Granlund lacking enough skill to be top 6 players in the NHL.

 

[CanaFan]

The point of my post wasn't about "how" good Vey is.

Its whether when Benning acquired him, it was with the intention to acquire a skill player or did he prioritize acquiring a player because of "defensive prowess" and physicality.





Again, there are many skilled players who couldn't translate their games fully into the NHL, that doesn't make them players who were acquired for their defensive game or physicality.

If Benning tomorrow acquires another Brandon Reid or Steve Kariya. These guys couldn't carve out a career in the NHL, you wouldnt' say Benning prioritize physicality and defensive prowess right?



I think you are changing your argument..

Initially, you said Benning favours players with defensive prowess and character. That's a very different argument than Vey and Granlund lacking enough skill to be top 6 players in the NHL.

Well he does. Gudbranson, Dorsett, Prust, Sutter, Pedan, Sbisa. Those players were all brought in under the auspices of "character", "grit", or "defensive play". Those make up a significant portion of Benning's transactions and can't simply be ignored in this discussion.

You've centred your argument around Vey and Granlund as evidence that Benning doesn't always favour the above but also favours skill. Except the absence of defense, character, and grit doesn't by default make Vey skilled. He is actually none of those things, which makes him all the more puzzling as an acquisition. So did he target Vey for his "skill" (which he doesn't have)? Maybe. Or maybe he targeted Vey for any of his other characteristics that he doesn't have either. Maybe he thought Vey would have more grit, character, or physical play than he does? Since Vey has none of them it is hard to know what Benning was actually targeting.

Pretty much the same applies to Granlund though I will give that he has some defensive prowess to his game. Which merely places him firmly in the first group above, along with Sutter as a player drafted more for their defensive game than their offensive skills.

In the totality of Benning's acquisitions I can only view Baertschi and Vrbata as cases where Benning clearly prioritized skill as the players defining characteristic and was at least somewhat accurate in his assessment. That's what, 2 out of 10 transactions, 11 if you add in Etem who is another player that I can't really figure out "what" he is.

That makes targeting skill the outlier in Benning's MO so far, not the trend.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Different system, different partner, yeah I think we can expect some differences. Hopefully for the better

Some differences? Sure. A significantly better player than what he's shown to be? Very optimistic.

Considering he made massive strides last season yeah I think he can continue to trend upwards

Progression isn't linear, and I would contest "massive strides". He was given more opportunity, yes. Is he a significantly better player in those opportunities. I would say no.

 

[Verviticus]

A 24 yr old Dman is in the peak of his career?

You haven't been paying enough attention.

defencemen rarely significantly improve after 24

 

[VanillaCoke]

Sounds like we got a steal on a top pair #1 defenseman...

 

[Raistlin]

Absolutely not, I think if you haven't grown much as a player in 6 years you won't suddenly now. 22-24 tend to be prove it years for prospects, if they don't turn a corner now they never will. He's still a 3rd pairing D-man on most teams, the same position as 3 years ago.

I don't know where you are getting your misinformation, he's anything but a third pairing guy on the Panthers, he had the most ice time in their playoff run. A really good young team in the East.

24 is the beginning of his peak years, he turned such corner last year and is relied upon at the most important moments. We are getting him at the right time, and only because his game does not mesh well with the analytics heavy focus of the Panthers. Defencemen peak anywhere from 25-29, see Giordano, according to many reports, google defencemen peak.

I am not concerned with best assets for most pressing needs argument, If Colorado is not interested in McCann, we are not getting Barrie. We need to fill the other holes in the meantime, Gudbranson is well regarded with the players, and if he performs the same way he did with Florida, we will be much tougher to play against, hole filled.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Wow. Just wow.

 

[F A N]

defencemen rarely significantly improve after 24

I hear this a lot. Gudbranson doesn't need to significantly improve. He's good already. He's a defensive defenseman, and for defensive defensemen they come into their own and do get better with experience. Take Tanev for example, he's improved every year and I think he will get even better. The fact is that Gudbranson has taken significant steps the past two seasons. Last season, he was a bonafide top 4 shutdown Dman from start to finish. If he keeps refining his game and becomes even more consistent you have a really reliable shutdown Dman.

 

[biturbo19]

Well he does. Gudbranson, Dorsett, Prust, Sutter, Pedan, Sbisa. Those players were all brought in under the auspices of "character", "grit", or "defensive play". Those make up a significant portion of Benning's transactions and can't simply be ignored in this discussion.

You've centred your argument around Vey and Granlund as evidence that Benning doesn't always favour the above but also favours skill. Except the absence of defense, character, and grit doesn't by default make Vey skilled. He is actually none of those things, which makes him all the more puzzling as an acquisition. So did he target Vey for his "skill" (which he doesn't have)? Maybe. Or maybe he targeted Vey for any of his other characteristics that he doesn't have either. Maybe he thought Vey would have more grit, character, or physical play than he does? Since Vey has none of them it is hard to know what Benning was actually targeting.

Pretty much the same applies to Granlund though I will give that he has some defensive prowess to his game. Which merely places him firmly in the first group above, along with Sutter as a player drafted more for their defensive game than their offensive skills.

In the totality of Benning's acquisitions I can only view Baertschi and Vrbata as cases where Benning clearly prioritized skill as the players defining characteristic and was at least somewhat accurate in his assessment. That's what, 2 out of 10 transactions, 11 if you add in Etem who is another player that I can't really figure out "what" he is.

That makes targeting skill the outlier in Benning's MO so far, not the trend.

I very strongly dislike the way you are trying to break every player in the NHL down into two categories of "skill" or "grit".

It's absurdly simplistic. Most players are a varied mix of the two, both elements on a spectrum.


But even then, to call a guy like Vey anything other than a primarily "skill player", is highly disconnected from the reality of what he had been to date of acquisition (and even afterwards). It just so happens that like a Cody Hodgson or Jordan Schroeder, Vey lacks some of the physical tools to be an effective NHL "skill player". Vey's game is all about skill and distributing the puck with vision...it's what led him to be an AHL scoring leader, a WHL scoring leader, etc. That he lacks the physical tools to make good on that skill at the NHL level, is really more of a warning post on the value of "skill" and "vision" without the requisite physical tools.

You can win a WHL scoring title with skill, be an AHL scoring leader...but if you don't have the elusiveness or physical strength to fend off a defenceman like Gudbranson...you ain't doing squat offensively in the National Hockey League.

 

[F A N]

I very strongly dislike the way you are trying to break every player in the NHL down into two categories of "skill" or "grit".

It's absurdly simplistic. Most players are a varied mix of the two, both elements on a spectrum.


But even then, to call a guy like Vey anything other than a primarily "skill player", is highly disconnected from the reality of what he had been to date of acquisition (and even afterwards). It just so happens that like a Cody Hodgson or Jordan Schroeder, Vey lacks some of the physical tools to be an effective NHL "skill player". Vey's game is all about skill and distributing the puck with vision...it's what led him to be an AHL scoring leader, a WHL scoring leader, etc. That he lacks the physical tools to make good on that skill at the NHL level, is really more of a warning post on the value of "skill" and "vision" without the requisite physical tools.

You can win a WHL scoring title with skill, be an AHL scoring leader...but if you don't have the elusiveness or physical strength to fend off a defenceman like Gudbranson...you ain't doing squat offensively in the National Hockey League.

 

[The Extrapolater]

I hear this a lot. Gudbranson doesn't need to significantly improve. He's good already. He's a defensive defenseman, and for defensive defensemen they come into their own and do get better with experience. Take Tanev for example, he's improved every year and I think he will get even better. The fact is that Gudbranson has taken significant steps the past two seasons. Last season, he was a bonafide top 4 shutdown Dman from start to finish. If he keeps refining his game and becomes even more consistent you have a really reliable shutdown Dman.

Gudbranson needs to significantly improve to even be mentioned in the same sentence as Chris Tanev. Tanev's an effective d-man, because he's highly intelligent, and he can play with the puck on his stick. He can pass and skate in stride with the puck. He can also play off the puck just as well as with it, which means he can play alongside anybody, if and when necessary. If he had either a better shot, or could somehow become a faster skater, then he'd probably be the best defense-man in the league.

Gudbranson, on the other hand, been miscast his entire pro career. He was drafted third overall, despite never putting up numbers in junior, because he was mean, could skate well for his size, and was huge. Pro scouts hoped he would 'grow into his frame'. However, he's still below average with the puck, and that's a huge liability. The book on players like Gudbranson is simple. Stuff the puck down their throats. You don't need to worry about them in the neutral zone if you turn them around. Make them face the boards, and work their weakness at puck retrieval all game long. Make him feel like he's on an abandoned island whenever he's on the ice. You'll get your chances, and a whole lot of them, if you do that.

 

[Tobi Wan Kenobi]

Some differences? Sure. A significantly better player than what he's shown to be? Very optimistic.





Progression isn't linear, and I would contest "massive strides". He was given more opportunity, yes. Is he a significantly better player in those opportunities. I would say no.

FFS fine I'll take your word for it and not all Florida fans, Gudbranson himself and management. I bet you watched him more right? lol

 

[tantalum]

Florida management spoke loud and clear on what bang for the buck they felt Gudbranson brought.

They traded him for future assets.

That isn't to say he is a bad player but like the Pens with respect to Sutter, they felt they are better off spending that current and future cap hit somewhere else. The Pens were correct. Time will tell if the Panthers are but there was very much an element of cap dump (or cap rearrangement may be better) for the Panthers in this move. Wanting more skill in the organization and up front was a primary reason for the Panthers making the move along with wanting to free up money for the Trochek extension, re-signing Campbell and being a significant player on the UFA market.

The Panthers at time of acquisition said they believe with McCann's speed, shot and skill they can easily transition him to the wing. Skill....there's that word again.

 

[CanaFan]

I very strongly dislike the way you are trying to break every player in the NHL down into two categories of "skill" or "grit".

It's absurdly simplistic. Most players are a varied mix of the two, both elements on a spectrum.


But even then, to call a guy like Vey anything other than a primarily "skill player", is highly disconnected from the reality of what he had been to date of acquisition (and even afterwards). It just so happens that like a Cody Hodgson or Jordan Schroeder, Vey lacks some of the physical tools to be an effective NHL "skill player". Vey's game is all about skill and distributing the puck with vision...it's what led him to be an AHL scoring leader, a WHL scoring leader, etc. That he lacks the physical tools to make good on that skill at the NHL level, is really more of a warning post on the value of "skill" and "vision" without the requisite physical tools.

You can win a WHL scoring title with skill, be an AHL scoring leader...but if you don't have the elusiveness or physical strength to fend off a defenceman like Gudbranson...you ain't doing squat offensively in the National Hockey League.

You may not like it but that's the conversation I was asked to have. Of course players are a mix, but we are discussing what that mix is and how it fits into the larger scheme of what type of team Benning has been building. Obviously Gudbranson has *some* skill, but I don't think I'm being intellectually dishonest or simplistic by describing him as something other than a "skill player". It is a reduction to be sure but in NHL terms (and not compared to my beer league team) it is a fair one.

And in that same vein Vey is not "skilled", at least not at the level that people mean when they generally talk about "a skilled player" at the NHL level. His puck skills, shot, skating are all "average-to-below-average" at the NHL level. His passing may be slightly above average but that's about it. So please explain to me how Linden Vey fits into a larger MO of Benning "acquiring skill players" when his skill is at best average and he recently cleared waivers.

Because if you legitimately want to include Vey in your mental accounting of "skill pieces" Benning has acquired then that is your right, but I would strongly suggest you are setting the bar far to low.

 

[biturbo19]

Gudbranson needs to significantly improve to even be mentioned in the same sentence as Chris Tanev. Tanev's an effective d-man, because he's highly intelligent, and he can play with the puck on his stick. He can pass and skate in stride with the puck. He can also play off the puck just as well as with it, which means he can play alongside anybody, if and when necessary. If he had either a better shot, or could somehow become a faster skater, then he'd probably be the best defense-man in the league.

Gudbranson, on the other hand, been miscast his entire pro career. He was drafted third overall, despite never putting up numbers in junior, because he was mean, could skate well for his size, and was huge. Pro scouts hoped he would 'grow into his frame'. However, he's still below average with the puck, and that's a huge liability. The book on players like Gudbranson is simple. Stuff the puck down their throats. You don't need to worry about them in the neutral zone if you turn them around. Make them face the boards, and work their weakness at puck retrieval all game long. Make him feel like he's on an abandoned island whenever he's on the ice. You'll get your chances, and a whole lot of them, if you do that.

Puck retrieval is definitely not a weakness for Gudbranson though. He's not some hopeless immobile lump. He's a big guy who can skate. With at least some functional puck skills. If anything, he's the guy who you do not want coming in to the corner with you on a dump in.

Where Gudbranson is less adept, is the free puck with space where you want a home-run stretch pass or one-man breakout. That's not what he's gonna do for you. But if teams want to dump pucks into Gudbranson's corner all day, let them. He's going to win most of those 50/50 battles and at least shove the puck up the boards to a winger, or around the boards to his partner Hutton who is all about that puck-moving creativity.

It's something we saw with Hutton and Sbisa...the latter being the gopher who heads into the corner to dislodge pucks off a dump in and off the cycle alike. Gudbranson is better in pretty much every way. But the same principle applies. Gudbranson can be that player who keeps Hutton from getting pasted to the end boards, while move pucks to areas where the real puck-mover can make hay.


That's not to characterize Gudbranson as a completely inept puck-mover, because he's not. He's very capable of making a solid safe outlet himself as well. He's just not going to be a guy who is rushing up ice to join the play much and pinch in offensively like Bobby Orr.

 

[biturbo19]

You may not like it but that's the conversation I was asked to have.

And I'm sorry but Vey is not "skilled", at least not at the level that people mean when they generally talk about "a skilled player" at the NHL level. His puck skills, shot, skating are all "average-to-below-average" at the NHL level. His passing may be slightly above average but that's about it. So please explain to me how Linden Vey fits into a larger MO of Benning "acquiring skill players" when his skill is at best average and he recently cleared waivers.

Because if you legitimately want to include Vey in your mental accounting of "skill pieces" Benning has acquired then that is your right, but I would strongly suggest you are setting the bar far to low.

I'm not sure what else you're accounting Linden Vey as. He's pretty much a classic "AHL Tweener Skill guy" who just doesn't have the physical tools to make anything of it at the highest level. In the AHL, he's a top-line skilled center. In the NHL, he's...well...he doesn't really have a role because he's a skill player who can't hack it in the Top-6, and doesn't offer anything of real substance in a bottom-6 role. Skill is the primary attribute of Vey. That it cannot be translated to NHL success is about his lack of physical tools as much as anything. He just cannot skate well enough, or physically stand up to the pressure of NHL defensive play. He still has skill...it's just impotent skill.

 

[CanaFan]

I'm not sure what else you're accounting Linden Vey as. He's pretty much a classic "AHL Tweener Skill guy" who just doesn't have the physical tools to make anything of it at the highest level. In the AHL, he's a top-line skilled center. In the NHL, he's...well...he doesn't really have a role because he's a skill player who can't hack it in the Top-6, and doesn't offer anything of real substance in a bottom-6 role. Skill is the primary attribute of Vey. That it cannot be translated to NHL success is about his lack of physical tools as much as anything. He just cannot skate well enough, or physically stand up to the pressure of NHL defensive play. He still has skill...it's just impotent skill.

So Vey is a ... skill guy with no transferable skill?

Ok. Let's say I accept this. What does that say about Benning's vision for this team then?

Can I qualify his MO so far as targeting mainly "grit", "character", and "defensive prowess" in the majority of his acquisitions? Sutter, Sbisa, Gud, Prust, Granlund, Dorsett, Pedan fit this mould.

I then would put Baertschi and Vrbata in "mainly skill" bucket.

And Vey, Etem, and Bartowski in the "I don't have a clue what these players are or bring to an NHL team" bucket.

Fair?


If so, please tell me what "type" of an NHL team these moves would indicate Benning is building? Does it seem like he is trying to build a "fast, skilled team" as was asserted several pages ago?

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I'm not sure what else you're accounting Linden Vey as. He's pretty much a classic "AHL Tweener Skill guy" who just doesn't have the physical tools to make anything of it at the highest level. In the AHL, he's a top-line skilled center. In the NHL, he's...well...he doesn't really have a role because he's a skill player who can't hack it in the Top-6, and doesn't offer anything of real substance in a bottom-6 role. Skill is the primary attribute of Vey. That it cannot be translated to NHL success is about his lack of physical tools as much as anything. He just cannot skate well enough, or physically stand up to the pressure of NHL defensive play. He still has skill...it's just impotent skill.

Vey is a good example of why often maligned concepts like "tools" or "size" or "grit" are not as nebulous or worthless as the all skill all the time lobby would argue. A forward lineup of a dozen Wellwoods might be the most skilled the NHL ever saw, but I question how effective they would be. Ideally you want a mix, but if a player is too deficient in any one area it can seriously hamper a career. Vey's puck skill and vision seem to be perfectly fine, he's just not "toolsy" enough to produce with regularity at an NHL level. Give the guy Etem's frame and motor and he'd probably be a hell of a hockey player.

Alas, the technology for genetically splicing our hockey players is decades away at best, to say nothing of the legal morass involved.

 

[Bankerguy]

I like this trade. Gives the Canucks a player who's a no.5 or no.4 guy now...and is still young enough to become a top pairing guy. He's only 24.... imagine after 4 more years of developing and learning the game..he'll only be 28 and better than he is now.

Overall the Canucks D is getting pretty big!.
Edler 6'3
Hutton 6'3
Tryamkin 6'7
Gudbranon 6'5
Tanev 6'2

All we need is that 5'11, puck moving, speedy transition 40 pts a year Dman to ignite the offense....Boy would Yandle look nice skating alongside Chris Tanev. Both very smart players.
Yandle Tanev
Edler Hudbranson
Hutton/Hamhuis Tryamkin

imho, that D would be top 10 in the league.

 

[HankNDank]

defencemen rarely significantly improve after 24

Great, guess we have already seen peak Hutton than. I thought he was still developing, but I have been proven wrong with your fact based argument. Great analysis and charting to help prove your point.

 

[CanaFan]

Great, guess we have already seen peak Hutton than. I thought he was still developing, but I have been proven wrong with your fact based argument. Great analysis and charting to help prove your point.

Apr 20 1993

 

[iloveloov*]

So Vey is a ... skill guy with no transferable skill?

Ok. Let's say I accept this. What does that say about Benning's vision for this team then?

Can I qualify his MO so far as targeting mainly "grit", "character", and "defensive prowess" in the majority of his acquisitions? Sutter, Sbisa, Gud, Prust, Granlund, Dorsett, Pedan fit this mould.

I then would put Baertschi and Vrbata in "mainly skill" bucket.

And Vey, Etem, and Bartowski in the "I don't have a clue what these players are or bring to an NHL team" bucket.

Fair?


If so, please tell me what "type" of an NHL team these moves would indicate Benning is building? Does it seem like he is trying to build a "fast, skilled team" as was asserted several pages ago?

I like how you created a new category for players that undermine your argument

Vey, Etem, Granlund, Vrbata, Baertschi, Weber are skill players... that's 6 players.

Sutter, Sbisa, Gud, Prust, Dorsett, Pedan are gritty or defensive... that's also 6 players.

Benning has targetted both pretty much equally, even with his draft picks. He picked skill guys like Boeser, McCann, Gaudette, Zhukenov, and Forsling. Your argument doesn't have a leg to stand on.

 

[biturbo19]

So Vey is a ... skill guy with no transferable skill?

Ok. Let's say I accept this. What does that say about Benning's vision for this team then?

Can I qualify his MO so far as targeting mainly "grit", "character", and "defensive prowess" in the majority of his acquisitions? Sutter, Sbisa, Gud, Prust, Granlund, Dorsett, Pedan fit this mould.

I then would put Baertschi and Vrbata in "mainly skill" bucket.

And Vey, Etem, and Bartowski in the "I don't have a clue what these players are or bring to an NHL team" bucket.

Fair?


If so, please tell me what "type" of an NHL team these moves would indicate Benning is building? Does it seem like he is trying to build a "fast, skilled team" as was asserted several pages ago?

You're still trying to sort everything into two buckets. Which isn't the way the reality works. Nothing is quite so black and white.

Benning has acquired guys with "character" he believes in pretty exclusively. But that's pretty much the only blanket characteristic i've seen. Everything else about his acquisitions has been a completely mixed bag.

Vey is a guy who has a lot of "skill" and Benning bet on him being able to overcome some "tools" deficiencies. Didn't work out. Vey just cannot physically execute the plays he makes all day in the AHL. Sucks, but it's a case where skill doesn't amount to much without tools.

He's also bet on a guy like Baertschi with no shortage of skill who appears to have overcome a size and intensity problem, and could be on his way to being a very solid young Top-6 winger.

He's also bet on a guy like Pedan who was all tools, and who really knows what he turns out to be, but he's shown signs of being a lot more than he was when he was acquired at least.

The examples could go on and on in layer after layer...but i just don't see any pattern that suggests Benning is doing anything other than trying to find players where he can, with a winning mix of traits and talents.



He's not assembling purely a team of big dumb lugs. He's not assembling a team of purely waterbug perimeter delicate butterflies. He's trying to build a team with varied skillsets that competes hard and can play with the speed and physicality of today's NHL.


Gudbranson is a defenceman who may not light up the scoreboard...but he's a big physical presence who can skate in today's NHL and make some acceptable puck plays. A young, contributing NHL player.