Player Discussion What do we have in Erik Gudbranson?

[timbermen]

The overall hits were 17-16 Flames.

I’m also not seeing these “majority of chances” as I speed through the game here. The Flames ran up the shot total in the 3rd period (35-23 overall), after the Canucks had built a comfortable lead and were in protection mode. Flames having 7 PP’s conpared to our 1, *might* have also contributed to this.

Wow,they were playing so good i didn't even realize there was that big of a PP discrepancy. 7-1 That must mean Gudbranson did some good work on the PK because the flames were 0-7. There was that clearing attempt blocked though so he was bad.

 

[M2Beezy]

This is interesting cause we have BOTH players now

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Nope. I already shared my thoughts on his overall game.

But see, you can't even give him credit for a bone-crushing hit which seemed to have an impact on the game without criticizing him. Would you have said the same thing if it was Tanev? Did you say the same thing about Aaron Rome in 2011? I kind of doubt it.

But I digress - back to your dissection. I can't really think of a good parallel without getting into politics, but let's just say that partisans are never hired to positions where neutrality is required.

I have ZERO problem giving credit to players I dislike when they play well.

Like Granlund did that very game. Or like Markstrom played out of his mind.
Nor do I have trouble critiquing players I love, like Boeser this preseason + vs the Flames.

What I value most is that when I say something it is what I actually believe to be true, and that I am someone who is aware of my biases and tries to adjust for them. That is what I want people to think of me.

You are attacking me as a poster instead of what I am posting.


Either tell me where I was wrong or stop spewing this nonsense.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Wow,they were playing so good i didn't even realize there was that big of a PP discrepancy. 7-1 That must mean Gudbranson did some good work on the PK because the flames were 0-7. There was that clearing attempt blocked though so he was bad.

You can go see what he did good on the PK in the post I wrote. Its all there.

edit.

11th shift - PK duty. Loses puck battle at the boards. Positionally decent rest of his short shift.

13th shift - PK duty. Loses puck battle at the boards. Calgary gets to setup. Motte breaks up a pass to relieve pressure. Gudbranson clears the puck to end the CLG PP.

16th shift - PK duty. Can't control a hard dump in at the boards, Calgary gets to setup their PP. Short shift.

19th shift - PK duty. Fails to break up a soft pass, seems to go through his stick. Screens Markström on a Lindholm shot. Granlund clears the resulting rebound from the slot.

21st shift - PK duty. Good job clearing the puck up the boards. Bats the stick off of Backlunds hands in front of the net. Lobs the puck up the ice at the end of the Powerplay. Definitely a decent shift.

 

[MS]

Only the condensed version of it. It's tough for me to watch full games here in Shanghai, but I'll be watching this coming one.

So you're criticizing the opinions of people who watched the game when you didn't and claiming the eye test works in his favour when you didn't even use your eyes to watch. Gotcha.

 

[MS]

I watched it all live and I disagree with you too.

As for your dissection of Gudbranson's game, you began from a position of bias against Gudbranson and that is well reflected in your notes. And no, I am not going to rewatch the game and answer to you point by point. I couldn't do that anyways because I streamed it. I saw a decent game by Gudbranson. In my opinion you saw the old Gudbranson because you chose to see that.

What do you disagree with in his post? What specifically is biased? What good things aren't mentioned?

His post is 100% spot on. Gudbranson was rubbish in the first 40 minutes and then had a solid 3rd. People were just too busy creaming their pants over the fight to actually notice how poor his performance was.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

What do you disagree with in his post? What specifically is biased? What good things aren't mentioned?

His post is 100% spot on. Gudbranson was rubbish in the first 40 minutes and then had a solid 3rd. People were just too busy creaming their pants over the fight to actually notice how poor his performance was.

I think its pretty safe to say we won't get an actual answer.

 

[Horse McHindu]

You could agree more if you actually watched the game.

You not having watched the game kind of limits the amount of agreement you can express.

I watched the game. I only watched the condensed version on the Day of.

I watched the game in its entirety earlier today (which may help answer @Melvin 's query as to why my defense of Gudbranson came 36 hours later).

 

[timbermen]

You can go see what he did good on the PK in the post I wrote. Its all there.

edit.

11th shift - PK duty. Loses puck battle at the boards. Positionally decent rest of his short shift.

13th shift - PK duty. Loses puck battle at the boards. Calgary gets to setup. Motte breaks up a pass to relieve pressure. Gudbranson clears the puck to end the CLG PP.

16th shift - PK duty. Can't control a hard dump in at the boards, Calgary gets to setup their PP. Short shift.

19th shift - PK duty. Fails to break up a soft pass, seems to go through his stick. Screens Markström on a Lindholm shot. Granlund clears the resulting rebound from the slot.

21st shift - PK duty. Good job clearing the puck up the boards. Bats the stick off of Backlunds hands in front of the net. Lobs the puck up the ice at the end of the Powerplay. Definitely a decent shift.

No one's attacking you here, Just saying these things happen to all players but when you iso one player with a bias against, you'll find plenty to gripe about.

 

[MS]

The overall hits were 17-16 Flames.

I’m also not seeing these “majority of chances” as I speed through the game here. The Flames ran up the shot total in the 3rd period (35-23 overall), after the Canucks had built a comfortable lead and were in protection mode. Flames having 7 PP’s conpared to our 1, *might* have also contributed to this.

I meant to say shots and chances but yes, they also out-hit us.

The story of that game was pretty simple. Calgary was the better team at ES and getting the majority of possession and chances, we would be chasing the play and take penalties, and then our PK would be terrific and kill their momentum. And Markstrom was outstanding.

If Calgary could execute on the PP and if Markstrom was only average, we lose that game. There was no 'huge momentum change' after the fight or hit.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

No one's attacking you here, Just saying these things happen to all players but when you iso one player with a bias against, you'll find plenty to gripe about.

I didn't try to find anything to gripe about.

This is ALL that he did. Not just his mistakes, as you can see I listed his positive contributions as well.

 

[Horse McHindu]

So you're criticizing the opinions of people who watched the game when you didn't and claiming the eye test works in his favour when you didn't even use your eyes to watch. Gotcha.

I watched the game in its entirety later on.......not on the day of. On the day of, I only watched the condensed version. I'll take responsibility here for not being clear.

You guys always use advanced stats to attack Gudbranson and yet when the advanced stats back Gudbranson (atleast in that game in question), you guys scramble around trying to use the "eye test" to substantiate your biased personal attacks against Erik Gudbranson, and any other acquisition that Jim Benning has made.

 

[M2Beezy]

Cmon guys lets toner down wow this last part a the thread was NOT worth the read

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I watched the game in its entirety later on.......not on the day of. On the day of, I only watched the condensed version. I'll take responsibility here for not being clear.

With that being said, everything that you, PunchMunchkin, Melvin, etc., is bloody and biased rubbish. Gudbranson had a solid game. Hilarious how you guys always use advanced stats to attack Gudbranson and yet when the advanced stats back Gudbranson (atleast in that game in question), you guys scramble around like a bunch of hyenas trying to use the "eye test" to substantiate your biased personal attacks against Erik Gudbranson, and any other acquisition that Jim Benning has made.

What did I get wrong? I'll go back and fix it.

What needs to be added? I'll go back and add it.

Lets make the most accurate report possible together.

 

[Melvin]

PM takes the time to break down every single one of the player's shifts and instead of rebutting any of the points he has made, all anyone can do is claim "bias" without any evidence. Absolutely pathetic behaviour. Reprehensible. Point out specifically where he was wrong or don't even bother.

 

[SniperHF]

Open.

Here's a picture of a dog:

 

[krutovsdonut]

i thought gudbranson had a good game.

 

[Melvin]

i thought gudbranson had a good game.

I can't wait until game 2!

 

[Megaterio Llamas]

 

[mossey3535]

I would like one of the detractors to use actual hockey concepts in their rebuttal.

"Durr big hit" doesn't count. I don't see angles, gap control, or positioning as the foundation of any of these arguments. It's all stuff someone who isn't watching closely could just get from a highlight pack. Or things that, as much as I love the idea of old school hockey, are debatable such as momentum after fights.

Clearly many of you were not in the GDT since all of these issues were pointed out in REAL TIME.

Finally, I'll just leave this here:

 

[Melvin]

Is it SOP to not credit a hit when the player is penalized with interference? Honestly wondering.

 

[Megaterio Llamas]

Is it SOP to not credit a hit when the player is penalized with interference? Honestly wondering.

^^^Evidently it's not

 

[tyhee]

Is it SOP to not credit a hit when the player is penalized with interference? Honestly wondering.

My understanding is that a hit is a body check on the player with possession of the puck, which obviously would be inconsistent with crediting a hit and being called for interference.

 

[sting101]

1st shift - Knuckle puck of a zone exit that ends up in to the stands off of Erikssons stick,to exit the zone. Followed by the interference hit.

2nd shift - Fights Hamonic

3rd shift:

View attachment 144517

He is out of position as he reads the play wrong and is flat footed and trying to catch up where Pouliot is left on a 2 on 1. (Someone said this was Pouliots fault somehow.)

View attachment 144519

Someone said it should not have been a penalty. Looks like that is true. He catches stick 1st, then the right hand.

4th shift - Zones out a rushing player. Ends up a harmless shot from low% area.

Pinches and puts the puck on net him self, forces a offensive face off.

5th shift - Short shift where he isn't really involved in the play.

6th shift - Short shift where he isn't really involved in the play to end the 1st period.


So 1 good shift in the 1st period.

7th shift - Really short shift. His typical zone exit. Shoots the puck up the boards from behind the net.

8th shift - Really short shift. Works with Tanev to clear the zone against Gudreau et co.

It has been 28mins played here. He has 2½ positive plays. Has given Calgary 4 mins of PP. If they score on one or both of those, the narrative on these boards would be very different.

Is the standard so low for our 4 million dollar man that this level of play constitutes praise?

9th shift - Gets the puck to Pouliot to exit the zone. Loses Backlund alone in front of the net who can't control the pass he recieves. Loses puck battle in the corner that results in a great scoring chance for Calgary.

10th shift - Gets the puck to Pouliot, fail to exit zone. Calgary pressures; He retrieves the puck and banks the puck off the boards and off the ice.

11th shift - PK duty. Loses puck battle at the boards. Positionally decent rest of his short shift.

12th shift - Shot misses the net, maybe was intended as a pass? Works with Pouliot to leave the zone again they don't control the puck leaving the zone, ends up a dump in with no body to pressure the CLG D.

13th shift - PK duty. Loses puck battle at the boards. Calgary gets to setup. Motte breaks up a pass to relieve pressure. Gudbranson clears the puck to end the CLG PP.

14th shift - Loses puck battle at the boards. Flames get posession in nucks zone. Again a zone exit with no control.

**** this is not fun to watch. 1 more period to go.

15th shift - Goldobin sets him up for a decent shot, misses the net. Still they keep control and ends up in the net, Goldobin from EP. Gets the puck to the net from the point to keep the play alive, Lepisic from Beagle. A really solid shift by Guds.

16th shift - PK duty. Can't control a hard dump in at the boards, Calgary gets to setup their PP. Short shift.

That JV goal was really nice. Hope he can keep driving the net like that.

17th shift - Tries to stop zone entry, Calgary gets control after dump in. Short shift.

18th shift - Not really involved in the play. Pouliot tripping penalty.

19th shift - PK duty. Fails to break up a soft pass, seems to go through his stick. Screens Markström on a Lindholm shot. Granlund clears the resulting rebound from the slot.

20th shift - Gets beat outside on zone entry. Teams up with a forward to win a puck battle on the boards.

21st shift - PK duty. Good job clearing the puck up the boards. Bats the stick off of Backlunds hands in front of the net. Lobs the puck up the ice at the end of the Powerplay. Definitely a decent shift.

22nd shift - A few second shift. Does nothing.

I did it boys. I went through every single Gudbranson shift in a game. I'll never do this again, I promise.

Ok. Seriously. Apart from the hit that resulted in Calgary power-play he did nothing remotely physical, unless you want to count him batting the stick off of Backlunds hands. Some people saying was physical all game and played really solid. No. He wasnt, and he didnt play solid. He lost all but 1 puck battles at the boards. They don't exit with control but twice with him on the ice.

He wasn't positionally as bad as I expected. And he played a part in the shift that gave us 2 goals.

He did not have a good game. The sad part is, he wasn't our worst D man. That goes to Del Zotto. With him on the ice Calgary had 5 or 6 chances where a forward was left alone between the hashmarks and the net.

TLDR;

Gudbranson wasn't physical apart from the hit on Dube that resulted in a penalty. (edit, obviously the fight was very much physical)
Everything else he did was his usual play, this time the pucks didn't end in the net.




How could you come to this conclusion?



How could you come to this conclusion?



How could you come to this conclusion?

1st period

1- Contains Monahan in front of net and jumps on loose puck to backhand puck to Eriksson puck rolls and is knocked away into stands by CGY player.
2- Steps up on Dube and blows him up (penalty)
3- Hamonic skates to blueline to challenge EG. Gets badly beaten up.
4- OZone start. won faceoff to EG....passes down low to Motte.
5- A bit of a bad read on boards. Gets caught flat footed....is hard on backcheck Ryan splits the D as Pouliot can't turn fast enough on what should have been an easy 1 on 1. Would have been a non play for a guy like Tanev who would have closed that gap and contained Ryan....whatever. Gudbranson reaches in to knock stick and gets called. IMO this was a easy containment play for a good defensive defenseman (Pouliot is not) He gets called for stopping a potential goal. Not a bad play...but yes his read was a play he does too often. The call was weak.
6- gathers loose puck at C. Banks puck of boards to Granlund. Calgary weak shot at net. Knocks Dube away from Markstrom as he drives net.
7- Slap shot from CGY hashmarks on Smith. whistle
8. retrieves CGY dump. passes to Goldobin at C who passes back. Passes to Pouliot who stretch passses for dump and change
9- Shift against Backlunds line. Passes to Motte in own zone he tips out. Takes pass from Sutter passes to Pouliot period ends.

2nd period

10-Markstrom stops puck behind net for EG. Passes to Eriksson at C who dumps
11- gets puck on backhand from Tanev in VCR corner passes backand Tanev dumps so he can get off
12- gets loose puck at top of VCR hashmarks backhands a clean bank pass to Pouliot who chips to C. EP turnover at blueline looks to support boards CGY gets puck and passes to slot to Backlund who sneaks behind...(a little slow in positional read) Backlund takes puck off skates and loses control. EG gives him a crosscheck and play pushes to corner where Backlund is contained he puts body into him and knocks him to ice.. Puck comes back again to corner where Backlund displaces puck with a well timed stick and body from behind. In review should have been penalized for stick into EG hands. Back to CGY point and shot is stopped and held by Markstrom. long shift and was definitely a bit gassed at end. Strong board work and containment.
13- Dzone start against Neals line. Displaces Neal and chips out. Cgy return dump he gathers and send to Pouliot who gets picked off at C and CGY counters. Play is a bit scrambly . Loose puck gathers in corner goes behind net to bankand is deflected out of play.
14 (PK) gets puck behind net getting double teamed by Czarnik and Tkachuk who displace him and get back to point. Nothing much happening. A couple Cgy zone entries that he's not gonna chase shorthanded and contains... penalty killed
15- Goldobin send him a back pass transitions tape to tape to Pettersson who dumps. short shift as they try to get D pairings back in order as he D paired with MDZ SH
16- (PK) wins loose puck behind net chips to boards where puck is cleared. Ices puck.
17- Dzone start...CGY shot EG on puck behind net is hounded quickly by Lindholm who gets inside position and steals puck. puck gets cleared out and chipped back in. EG gathers and goes to Pouliot who passes back and EG then hits Horvat with pass at C. Cgy turns puck over at blueline and comes back Pouliot with a soft dump to C and change.

3rd period

18- takes pass from Goldobin misses wide puck ends up to pouliot who passes to eriksson for shot and rebound to Pettersson with sick feed to Goldobin for goal. Mostly uninvolved +1
19- still on after goal...Leipsic misses Granlund with pass which goes to point EG takes a quick shot and Beagle deflects and Leipsic scores. 1A +2
20 (pk) non event
21- non event....do have to say that at one point Leipsic goes east west at C ice and tries to give EG a cute backhand pass that gets picked off by Dube and quickly turned the other way. This was completely on Leipsic and created a odd man rush that may have looked like EG was out of position it was not. Pouliot takes penalty in corner on Dube
22- (PK) hounds Gaudreau to outside non event
23- Ryan with speed to outside is able to gain blueline by EG. Nothing happens. Knocks puck off Lindholm to Pettersson who ices puck
24- (PK) MDZ to Gudbranson iced. knocks puck off Neal and puck is iced
25- (EN SH) puck dumped to his corner hits Backlund and takes puck off him whistle for high stick.

end of game

Summary:
If he played like this every game he would be worth his pay. A net positive game and some physical punishment inflicted. No one likes to hang around net after whistles and his passing was pretty on point and in fact as good as i would expect from a big defensive defenseman. The turnstiled narrative is completely untrue and the zone entry complaints are unjust. There was maybe 1 all game by Ryan where he could have gone harder and faster to prevent it. Others were PK drives where him stepping up would have been poor plays. As i said he played good and i dont think your summaries are without prejudice

 

[Horse McHindu]

1st period

1- Contains Monahan in front of net and jumps on loose puck to backhand puck to Eriksson puck rolls and is knocked away into stands by CGY player.
2- Steps up on Dube and blows him up (penalty)
3- Hamonic skates to blueline to challenge EG. Gets badly beaten up.
4- OZone start. won faceoff to EG....passes down low to Motte.
5- A bit of a bad read on boards. Gets caught flat footed....is hard on backcheck Ryan splits the D as Pouliot can't turn fast enough on what should have been an easy 1 on 1. Would have been a non play for a guy like Tanev who would have closed that gap and contained Ryan....whatever. Gudbranson reaches in to knock stick and gets called. IMO this was a easy containment play for a good defensive defenseman (Pouliot is not) He gets called for stopping a potential goal. Not a bad play...but yes his read was a play he does too often. The call was weak.
6- gathers loose puck at C. Banks puck of boards to Granlund. Calgary weak shot at net. Knocks Dube away from Markstrom as he drives net.
7- Slap shot from CGY hashmarks on Smith. whistle
8. retrieves CGY dump. passes to Goldobin at C who passes back. Passes to Pouliot who stretch passses for dump and change
9- Shift against Backlunds line. Passes to Motte in own zone he tips out. Takes pass from Sutter passes to Pouliot period ends.

2nd period

10-Markstrom stops puck behind net for EG. Passes to Eriksson at C who dumps
11- gets puck on backhand from Tanev in VCR corner passes backand Tanev dumps so he can get off
12- gets loose puck at top of VCR hashmarks backhands a clean bank pass to Pouliot who chips to C. EP turnover at blueline looks to support boards CGY gets puck and passes to slot to Backlund who sneaks behind...(a little slow in positional read) Backlund takes puck off skates and loses control. EG gives him a crosscheck and play pushes to corner where Backlund is contained he puts body into him and knocks him to ice.. Puck comes back again to corner where Backlund displaces puck with a well timed stick and body from behind. In review should have been penalized for stick into EG hands. Back to CGY point and shot is stopped and held by Markstrom. long shift and was definitely a bit gassed at end. Strong board work and containment.
13- Dzone start against Neals line. Displaces Neal and chips out. Cgy return dump he gathers and send to Pouliot who gets picked off at C and CGY counters. Play is a bit scrambly . Loose puck gathers in corner goes behind net to bankand is deflected out of play.
14 (PK) gets puck behind net getting double teamed by Czarnik and Tkachuk who displace him and get back to point. Nothing much happening. A couple Cgy zone entries that he's not gonna chase shorthanded and contains... penalty killed
15- Goldobin send him a back pass transitions tape to tape to Pettersson who dumps. short shift as they try to get D pairings back in order as he D paired with MDZ SH
16- (PK) wins loose puck behind net chips to boards where puck is cleared. Ices puck.
17- Dzone start...CGY shot EG on puck behind net is hounded quickly by Lindholm who gets inside position and steals puck. puck gets cleared out and chipped back in. EG gathers and goes to Pouliot who passes back and EG then hits Horvat with pass at C. Cgy turns puck over at blueline and comes back Pouliot with a soft dump to C and change.

3rd period

18- takes pass from Goldobin misses wide puck ends up to pouliot who passes to eriksson for shot and rebound to Pettersson with sick feed to Goldobin for goal. Mostly uninvolved +1
19- still on after goal...Leipsic misses Granlund with pass which goes to point EG takes a quick shot and Beagle deflects and Leipsic scores. 1A +2
20 (pk) non event
21- non event....do have to say that at one point Leipsic goes east west at C ice and tries to give EG a cute backhand pass that gets picked off by Dube and quickly turned the other way. This was completely on Leipsic and created a odd man rush that may have looked like EG was out of position it was not. Pouliot takes penalty in corner on Dube
22- (PK) hounds Gaudreau to outside non event
23- Ryan with speed to outside is able to gain blueline by EG. Nothing happens. Knocks puck off Lindholm to Pettersson who ices puck
24- (PK) MDZ to Gudbranson iced. knocks puck off Neal and puck is iced
25- (EN SH) puck dumped to his corner hits Backlund and takes puck off him whistle for high stick.

end of game

Summary:
If he played like this every game he would be worth his pay. A net positive game and some physical punishment inflicted. No one likes to hang around net after whistles and his passing was pretty on point and in fact as good as i would expect from a big defensive defenseman. The turnstiled narrative is completely untrue and the zone entry complaints are unjust. There was maybe 1 all game by Ryan where he could have gone harder and faster to prevent it. Others were PK drives where him stepping up would have been poor plays. As i said he played good and i dont think your summaries are without prejudice

 

[Fire Benning]

Given that Gudbranson fighting again tonight is pretty much guaranteed, I fully expect seeing a repeat of the last 5 pages again tomorrow. Can't wait.

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

-He was a +3
-He had an assist
-He won a fight and had a huge hit which changed the momentum of the game (even by the admission of many Flame fans on this site)
-CF = 59%

Where did you get he had a 59% corsi?

Erik Gudbranson NHL Advanced Statistics (All) | Hockey-Reference.com

He had a 53.6 cf% which for Gudbranson is amazing but not sustainable.