Your argument is the trade didn’t really make a difference to the team. Meanwhile the Sutter era has been the worst in team history.
People disagree.
Enjoy the evening. Relax and hydrate.
Player Discussion Brandon Sutter. Defensive Center. One More Year Remaining at $4.375 AAV (w/ M-NTC).
- Thread starter CambieKev
- Start date
People disagree.
Enjoy the evening. Relax and hydrate.
Blue and Green
Out to lunch
- Dec 17, 2017
- 3,468
- 3,479
Sutter has been pulled down by underachieving wingers. I think Sutter himself has done a decent job defensively at even strength and on the PK. Overpaid but his actual play hasn't been that bad this season.
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 22,185
- 14,088
Good. Then hopefully another GM will want him at the coming TDL, and give us a second in return.
Lonny Bohonos
Registered User
Blue and Green
Out to lunch
- Dec 17, 2017
- 3,468
- 3,479
Sutter has been burdened with the likes of Gaudette, Roussel and less frequently Virtanen who aren't scoring goals, aren't setting up their teammates to score goals, and aren't doing a good job defensively. Sutter is the guy who has kept the third line from getting sunk to the bottom of the ocean. Green needs to give MacEwen another chance.
Hit the post
I have your gold medal Zippy!
I think he's just worn down from all the injuries.
Lonny Bohonos
Registered User
On hockeysfuture, when someone doesn't really have much of an argument. They bring up team results. You bring up team results into the argument is ridiculous. You do realize hockey is a team game.
If you disagree, that is fine but you're not showing me anything to prove your point. I killed all your points.
You bring fringe prospects into the conversation. I highly doubt you think those players will make much of an impact.
You keep talking about the 1.9 M. Canucks were not in cap trouble during those two years. Spending that extra few million on Sutter didn't impact them in bringing in another player.
I think you realize now that Bonino can only produce solid numbers if he has middle 6 to second line wingers to play with. With Van he doesn't have that option so if he stay in Vancouver he wouldn't of produce more.
If you look at their ppg since leaving Van. Bonino is at 0.43 ppg which equal to 35 points per 82 game schedule. Suttrt is 0.38 ppg which 31 points per 82 game schedule. Considering Bonino has much better linemates and more pp time. Yet only outscored by 4 points per 82 game schedule.
People make it sound like the Canucks traded a 1st line center.
The trade ended up being a who cares type of trade.
You calling Jarnkrok a 4th line player to help your argument is ridiculous.
Have a nice day.
A 'who cares' type of trade? You trade a better center in Bonino on a cost controlled contract for a guy was worse from the get-go...and you also throw in a second rounder and a d-man. Then the player and his agent bend you over for a $4.3m, four year deal.
If it proved to be just a 'one-off' then you just accept it.....Jimbo whiffed on it but it's only one trade. Sadly Benning was just getting started, and you can see the results today.
Lonny Bohonos
Registered User
Lets also not forget that Benning brought BOTH Bonino and Clandenning in.
Then decided they were too slow of skaters.
Part of me wishes Benning had the doubling down desire hes had with Virtanen with these two guys.
* Too add: I just remembered we traded Forsling who was a decent prospect for Clendening, before flipping Clendening for Sutter 6 months later.
Actually, I think Sutter was better "from the get go" before he went down with an injury. Bonino struggled in Pittsburgh before there was a coaching change and he was paired with speedy wingers in Hagelin and Kessel. You also left out the fact that it was a 2nd for a 3rd (9 spots) and the Dman is Clendenning.
A who cares type of trade to me the end result it didn't impact your team. This trade didn't impact your team
You're trading a D that didn't make it to to the NHL. Who cares.
The 2nd round draft pick for a 3rd pick. The 10 spots between these picks resulted in no high end player. Who cares
The 1.9 M talk, it impacted the owners Wallet but in the end, Canucks didn't lose any players by paying Sutter more. Those two seasons 2016/2018 there weren't in cap issues. So it didn't prevent them from getting another player. Who cares.
You can say Bonino is a better player. You can say Sutter is a better player as well. They are pretty equal to me. Bonino might score more if both playing with good players but Sutter is better player if both are playing with 3rd/4th line players. People are too focus on what he did on Pits. Who cares, he wouldn't of played that way in Van because he wouldn't be playing with the same linemates. Sutter best season is probably 2018 season 61 GP 26 P. If Bonino was playing with Gaunce and Archibald and there is no way Bonino would of had 26 P in 61 games. Sutter 2020 playoff was better than Bonino 2015 playoff.
In Sutter career he doesn't need a specific player to get 30 points. Bonino does, I think Bonino is overrated. Players that need specific linemates to produce, I usually don't value them as high.
Do you remember how horrible Bonino was in the Flames series. That is because there was no winger to carry him.
The Grandlund for Shinkaruk trade. You Think Cal fans are saying man what a bad trade. Shinkaruk didn't make it in the NHL and at least Granlund did. No because Granlund wouldn't even make it to the NHL with the flames. It is a who cares type of trade.
Lonny Bohonos
Registered User
Lets pretend that this is correct.
That Sutter sucking is due to injury. And Bonino doing well is because of his wingers.
At best this was a lateral move. And was done after only one season.
Coupled with Clendening being a 6 month "project" it should have at least raised the questions regarding Bennings ability to a) scout pro guys abilities b) build a f***ing team.
Benning expended a lot of "political capital" defending his trading for Sutter, claiming Sutter was some sort of locker room intangible guy, key to winning.
Nevermind the differences in contracts between Bonino and Sutter.
trade him for a 7th round pick and i'd replace his spot with Gaudette (both no really doing much but more potential and lower salary)
I watched Pittsburgh closely those years. Bonino not only benefitted from playing with two speedy wingers but he greatly benefitted from having a first line caliber player on his line in kessel,while feasting on lesser competition. Pittsburgh is a very unique team in that they have two of the top players in the league, and two that can entirely carry a line, similar to how the sedins could carry a third linemate. But they only need a single player to do that. This allows them to move down very talented players to feast on other team. This is a huge reason they were able to win the cups with a lack of D men. They were so far ahead of other teams in talent throughout their lineup on the front end.
It was a good fit for Bonino, the team didn't really lose huge on that deal, at all. But again, good luck arguing anything on this board with these specific posters who are negative about every single thing. And they feel like they are right because look at his past track record! by default, that means theyre right about Bonino as well.
Bonino was so invisible in those playoffs and they needed change, so somebody who looked like he didn't fit in at all, was giving very little effort and was extremely slow, had to be moved. They went for a faster guy who provides a better all around game. I still don't think it was the best trade, I think Sutter makes his linemates worse. His ability to work off of linemates is one of the worst ive seen in a top 9 player. The guy has enough IQ in other areas that its truly astounding how he works off other players on the ice, this is why he plays with very low iq players, because he is poor at utilizing them and the coach knows this. It's not the other way around
Focusing on such a nothing trade is definitely due to bias. There are clear losses for this management team, that bonino trade isn't one of them. Should have done whatever it takes to pry Theodore from them in the Kesler trade and thats not hindsight, i was screaming for it, I recall some other posters were as well, he was undervalued there, as evident by them trading him for a 3rd or whatever it was, to protect manson. They didn't target the right players due to poor pro scouting and wanting players more ready right that moment. The bonino/sutter deal was nothing to waste a thought about. Him thriving for a while just gave people who already think hes a terrible manager something to bitch more about.
Teams make Bonino/Sutter types of deals all the time. You win some, ya lose some. There was logic behind it, the team didn't like his fit on the team for playoff type of hockey and the perception is clearly clouded by ones clearly better opportunity and the other team overselling a player and him ending up overpaid. They paid a couple million for a player they saw a future on the team, who played faster and more playoff style hockey
Canucks had made the playoffs and werent planning on a rebuild. They underperformed in playoffs and were trying to address the reasons why. I am curious what people's thoughts would be if Sutter had stayed playing with Kessel and Hagelin and Bonino remained here, being a poor fit and went down with the Canucks team. Would it be an equal trade then?
It was a good fit for Bonino, the team didn't really lose huge on that deal, at all. But again, good luck arguing anything on this board with these specific posters who are negative about every single thing. And they feel like they are right because look at his past track record! by default, that means theyre right about Bonino as well.
Bonino was so invisible in those playoffs and they needed change, so somebody who looked like he didn't fit in at all, was giving very little effort and was extremely slow, had to be moved. They went for a faster guy who provides a better all around game. I still don't think it was the best trade, I think Sutter makes his linemates worse. His ability to work off of linemates is one of the worst ive seen in a top 9 player. The guy has enough IQ in other areas that its truly astounding how he works off other players on the ice, this is why he plays with very low iq players, because he is poor at utilizing them and the coach knows this. It's not the other way around
Focusing on such a nothing trade is definitely due to bias. There are clear losses for this management team, that bonino trade isn't one of them. Should have done whatever it takes to pry Theodore from them in the Kesler trade and thats not hindsight, i was screaming for it, I recall some other posters were as well, he was undervalued there, as evident by them trading him for a 3rd or whatever it was, to protect manson. They didn't target the right players due to poor pro scouting and wanting players more ready right that moment. The bonino/sutter deal was nothing to waste a thought about. Him thriving for a while just gave people who already think hes a terrible manager something to bitch more about.
Teams make Bonino/Sutter types of deals all the time. You win some, ya lose some. There was logic behind it, the team didn't like his fit on the team for playoff type of hockey and the perception is clearly clouded by ones clearly better opportunity and the other team overselling a player and him ending up overpaid. They paid a couple million for a player they saw a future on the team, who played faster and more playoff style hockey
Canucks had made the playoffs and werent planning on a rebuild. They underperformed in playoffs and were trying to address the reasons why. I am curious what people's thoughts would be if Sutter had stayed playing with Kessel and Hagelin and Bonino remained here, being a poor fit and went down with the Canucks team. Would it be an equal trade then?
Last edited:
Lonny Bohonos
Registered User
Yeah Bones being seriously talked about in terms of the Conn Smythe was all his wingers.
Has Sutter shown anything resembling being able to play on a top line.
No.
Has Sutter shown anything resembling being able to play on a top line.
No.
How can one read something and take something so entirely different, that's right. When looking at things with such bias.
Nowhere in my posts did I say he sucks or didn't add to his team/line and was a bit part of that specific team. He was a GREAT fit on a dominant 3rd line that featured a highly skilled 1st liner, all of the 3 feasted against lesser competition, due to the unique structure of that team. Why wouldnt he be talked about, he was on that 3rd line that dominated was he not. However Kessel was more deserving of the Conn Smythe over Crosby or Bonino. Bonino wasn't the best player on his line. Anyway if you read my posts, I talked about the perfect opportunity for a player in Pittsburgh and how he was a poor fit here. And how his play on the Canucks got him traded
I think Bonino is more capable of being a complimentary player on a dominant line than Sutter is, alot of lesser players are. Doesn't mean you go around acquiring players like that or they shouldn't be traded if they dont have a place on your team or that they suddenly have more value on the open market (that one nice fit doesn't determine a players true open market value), it's a massive gamble to pickup complimentary type of players, that lack speed, it worked out for pittsburgh. I think Sutter is more capable of pulling his weight regardless of circumstances and plays a better playoff style hockey. There is a reason Bonino was on several teams and on a 2 million dollar contract to begin with, if you followed his career, you would be aware of what type of player Bonino is. But you decide to focus on his perfect fit on a dominant third line that featured a 1st liner and using that as the measuring stick, which should be obvious to anybody that one is reaching a bit
Last edited:
Lonny Bohonos
Registered User
You write a lot of words to say something that can be said in fewer words.
Are you saying Sutter is a better playoff player than Bonino, a guy who was being talked about in Conn Smythe conversations?
If so can you point to something specific Sutter has done to make you say that? Like from this past playoffs.
Also, i repeat, why focus on the Bonino deal when the deal before that was the mistake. They shouldn't have brought in Bonino for Kesler. 
If their asking price for better pieces was too high, up your offer, add to it. But I am quite confident they could have landed Theodore. Sutter was available and Bonino wasn't a fit on the Canucks roster. Do fans here know who else was readily available to be traded anyway? That answered what the Canucks felt was wrong with their team. When your team lacked passion and drive and work ethic, you have to make moves to change the type of game your team plays. Sometimes when you need to make changes, you can't exactly wait around to win the deal, you take the 75 percent return and move forward. There was too much passiveness on the team
If their asking price for better pieces was too high, up your offer, add to it. But I am quite confident they could have landed Theodore. Sutter was available and Bonino wasn't a fit on the Canucks roster. Do fans here know who else was readily available to be traded anyway? That answered what the Canucks felt was wrong with their team. When your team lacked passion and drive and work ethic, you have to make moves to change the type of game your team plays. Sometimes when you need to make changes, you can't exactly wait around to win the deal, you take the 75 percent return and move forward. There was too much passiveness on the teamYou misinterpret what I say, as evident by your responses. So I try to explain it in 4 different ways in order to reduce the chance of confusion
I answered this question already in my post. If you are still answering the question, re read my posts, a few times.
I will leave you with this..
Sutter is a better playoff style player than Bonino (though maybe we should add past tense because we're talking about the past X years). Sutter isn't a better playoff player than Bonino was in his perfect situation, playing on that line with the Penguins unique situation. One could argue they aren't far off from each other if circumstances are equal. Canucks needed a different type of player, Bonino wasn't a fit on the Canucks. There was too much passiveness on the Canucks
If both players played for 5 teams, Sutter would be more beneficial to more teams playoffs chances of going deep, especially if not injured during the years where he was actually more impactful
Sutter would have looked better in that role on that team, than Bonino would have looked here. Fact. Would that line on the penguins been as good with Sutter, probably not, doesn't make him a better player. It would have still been very good though
Bonino is more likely to succeed if placed in a role with top players if thats the one thing you lack
Goldobin is a better fit with Pettersson than Malhotra or Sutter would be, doesn't make goldobin a better player. Regardless if Goldobin has some great chemistry with a top line. If he's a 30 pt player, without speed, that plays a bit of a passive game, and teams have seen that for years, having a great fit on a very good line that is with players that completely makes up for your deficiencies, doesn't change peoples value of you. GMs know they wont get that player on their own team if they acquired him. Sometimes players have more value to a team than a players value on the open market.
It's why teams are hesitant to add a guy like Duclair (i believe, not sure if thats the best example because i haven't watched him too much late). In the right fit, he can add alot. But teams still rather have a reliable guy coming back the other way, especially when making a trade. One that doesn't rely on being in a great fit. Bonino's value was Sutter for the most part and sadly Bonino wasnt a fit here
Last edited:
Lonny Bohonos
Registered User
I understand full well what you are saying.
And again I have asked what you think Sutter has done in the playoffs that make him a better player in the playoffs?
Ignoring the fact that we havent made the playoffs with Sutter bar 1 out of 5 years.
Sometimes you do not need history to know things. I know what it will sound like if i throw this rock against the wall. Its due to experience, evidence, etc - I would have full confidence any coach or GM would poll towards Sutter as who is/was the better all around player and who you would want in a depth role , besides in a scenario where you are playing with highly gifted players, which is rare farther down the lineup, Teams often pure more value in players who are more flexible and reliable.
Sutter is better defensively, he is faster, forechecks harder, he is a better all around player. But I will openly accept that one believes they are close or that Bonino is better even. But to suggest they are far apart enough to complain about , is simply ignoring context and teams needs/fit and open market value as open market value is determined by what they are likely to achieve on your team, where fit is yet unknown
And I want to remind people that I am referring to Sutter, had he been healthy and in his first 5 years. You can't predict injuries. He had no injury history
Last edited:
I can say in full confidence that certain attributes make you more likely to be beneficial in the playoffs (speed, work ethic, etc). More flexibility gives you a higher chance to find a good fit on a team (ability to succeed to a certain level with anybody on your line, not having a complimentary style game). All that gives you better open market value
Lonny Bohonos
Registered User
Who has said they are far apart? Sounds rather strawmanish.
Sutter is the faster player. Bonino is the smarter player.
You keep going back to this "well Sutter just fits" argument but theres no evidence of this.
As for defensive prowess Bonino has been voted into 12th, 13th and 26th place for Selke with the 12 and 13 coming in the last two years. Sutter has been voted into 20th and 24th place all before he came to Vancouver.
Im legit at a loss for some of your arguments here. Seems to center around Sutter is faster and a "better character guy" and Bonino is the worse of the two if hes not playing with Kessel.
Lonny Bohonos
Registered User
I would think the smarter player would be more flexible than the faster player but thats me.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
Speculation: Offseason coaching thread: Should they stay or should they go?
- Latest: MetalheadPenguinsFan
-
-
