Player Discussion What do we have in Erik Gudbranson?

Status
Not open for further replies.

PuckMunchkin

Very Nice, Very Evil!
Dec 13, 2006
12,399
10,076
Lapland
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

First. I respect you SO MUCH for actually doing this instead of just calling me a liar.

Im sure you were able to find positive things and I think a couple of negative things that I missed.

Also I missed where he got his assist! So props on catching that.

Your description confirms what I've suspected for a while. He isn't really all that physical a player, apart from highly visible cases, like the fight and the big hit that results in a penalty. He has a reputation of being a physical presence, and he looks like one, and these reputations die hard when you are capable of fights like the one he had here.

I don't agree with everything you are saying here:

- Blowing up players is a lot easier if you do it at a time that gets you penalized. They sure won't be expecting it.

- His 3rd period was one of his best as a Canuck. That we agree on.

- He can't and wont fight more than a couple of times every year. With out the fight his game, with how you describe it, was more bad then good. (To me, he was our 5th best D man. Del Zotto had an even worse game.)

- I feel you missed a bunch of the puck battle situations at the boards that I listed. Or you described them so that I didn't recognize the event.


All in all. Superb work. Awesome to see the game like that from someones point of view!

Now lets never f***in do this again about Gudbranson. Maybe someone like EP or Boeser?


edit. Out of curiosity. Did he have as good a game as you thought, on second viewing?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sting101 and Melvin

sting101

Registered User
Feb 8, 2012
15,920
14,822
First. I respect you SO MUCH for actually doing this instead of just calling me a liar.

Im sure you were able to find positive things and I think a couple of negative things that I missed.

Also I missed where he got his assist! So props on catching that.

Your description confirms what I've suspected for a while. He isn't really all that physical a player, apart from highly visible cases, like the fight and the big hit that results in a penalty. He has a reputation of being a physical presence, and he looks like one, and these reputations die hard when you are capable of fights like the one he had here.

I don't agree with everything you are saying here:

- Blowing up players is a lot easier if you do it at a time that gets you penalized. They sure won't be expecting it.

- His 3rd period was one of his best as a Canuck. That we agree on.

- He can't and wont fight more than a couple of times every year. With out the fight his game, with how you describe it, was more bad then good. (To me, he was our 5th best D man. Del Zotto had an even worse game.)

- I feel you missed a bunch of the puck battle situations at the boards that I listed. Or you described them so that I didn't recognize the event.


All in all. Superb work. Awesome to see the game like that from someones point of view!

Now lets never ****in do this again about Gudbranson. Maybe someone like EP or Boeser?


edit. Out of curiosity. Did he have as good a game as you thought, on second viewing?
i think it was mostly as i remembered it. I usually PVR and watch later so it allows me to back up plays and look at them a couple times if i'm curious.

I don't think any of it was that great but the key point is he was mostly solid, a net positive, plus player and made a nice reaction and shot that gave him an assist. On top of that he made a physical impact that negatively affected the Flames.

He's usually a drain and a bad defenseman and it was the worst move that Benning has made. I agree i dont want to do this ever again...he's not good and i wish they never made that move.

That said the Senators beat the Leafs and a player can have a few good games if you know what i mean. I just want people to be fair in their assessmants not speak from a bias because they dont like someone. Anyways i get it and thank you for taking the time also.
 

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
i think it was mostly as i remembered it. I usually PVR and watch later so it allows me to back up plays and look at them a couple times if i'm curious.

I don't think any of it was that great but the key point is he was mostly solid, a net positive, plus player and made a nice reaction and shot that gave him an assist. On top of that he made a physical impact that negatively affected the Flames.

He's usually a drain and a bad defenseman and it was the worst move that Benning has made. I agree i dont want to do this ever again...he's not good and i wish they never made that move.

That said the Senators beat the Leafs and a player can have a few good games if you know what i mean. I just want people to be fair in their assessmants not speak from a bias because they dont like someone. Anyways i get it and thank you for taking the time also.

I also appreciated your run through (and I honestly predicted that you would do it,) but I think you can make a more persuasive argument by sticking to the assessment of the player and not blindly accusing other posters of "bias" just because you don't agree with their perspective. Your only evidence that PuckMunchkin is "biased" is that you disagree with his take. That is not fair.
 

sting101

Registered User
Feb 8, 2012
15,920
14,822
I also appreciated your run through (and I honestly predicted that you would do it,) but I think you can make a more persuasive argument by sticking to the assessment of the player and not blindly accusing other posters of "bias" just because you don't agree with their perspective. Your only evidence that PuckMunchkin is "biased" is that you disagree with his take. That is not fair.
i wasn't really directing that comment of bias towards him. You can look back if you want and see where i'm coming from. If you disagree then thats your perspective and opinion. I dont think i did anything blindly....the evidence is throughout the pages since game 1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PuckMunchkin

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
i wasn't really directing that comment of bias towards him. You can look back if you want and see where i'm coming from. If you disagree then thats your perspective and opinion. I dont think i did anything blindly....the evidence is throughout the pages since game 1.

OK fair enough, maybe it was other posters who claimed his breakdown was "biased." If so I retract my comment.

In any case, as humans bias is unavoidable. All we can do is be aware of it and try to manage it. I acknowledged this in the very post where I provided my summary. It is not possible to "objectively" assess any player because it is human nature to be biased by our previous perceptions of the player. Anyone who thinks they can do this absolutely is fooling himself in my opinion. This is why human observation and the "eye test" is fraught with error and why objective data is invaluable (but also fraught with different errors :) )
 
  • Like
Reactions: PuckMunchkin
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad