Player Discussion Brandon Sutter. Defensive Center. One More Year Remaining at $4.375 AAV (w/ M-NTC).

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
Wow...there are some weird takes in this thread...

I would say the following is indisputable:

-Bonino ended up being the better value

-Sutter’s extension did end up costing NHL assets. It was one of a series of bad contracts that culminated in losing Tanev, Markstrom, Stecher, and Tofolli this past summer not to mention impacting many decision along the way because lack of cap flexibility.

-only now, with weeks left, is his contract potentially tradable.

Maybe I’m blind but I can’t really see any credible arguments to the contrary.


And for those who don’t think moving down 10 slots out of the second round is significant....see Nils Hoglander.

It doesn't matter what the 2019 draft looked like. What matter was the 2016 draft. The 10 players picked between the two picks has no Hoglander. That year trading down made no impact.

I guess you can say Myers Edler Rousell Beagle Virtanen Eriksson costed the team Tanev Markstrom Toffoli and stecher as well

Markstrom Tanev was about term, schmidt and Holtby salary those two. Benning was too busy going after OLE, then Barrie to speak to Stecher. These players leaving have nothing to do with Sutter.

With toffoli, it was reported from TheAtheltic that they could of moved Sutter with 50% retained and trade Virtanen to resign Toffoli but they decided not too. A season ago Bothford reported that 3 or 4 teams were interested in Sutter. If they couldn't get rid of the contract. Sure you can blame the contract but they decided not too.
 

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,640
24,984
It doesn't matter what the 2019 draft looked like. What matter was the 2016 draft. The 10 players picked between the two picks has no Hoglander. That year trading down made no impact.

I guess you can say Myers Edler Rousell Beagle Virtanen Eriksson costed the team Tanev Markstrom Toffoli and stecher as well

Markstrom Tanev was about term, schmidt and Holtby salary those two. Benning was too busy going after OLE, then Barrie to speak to Stecher. These players leaving have nothing to do with Sutter.

With toffoli, it was reported from TheAtheltic that they could of moved Sutter with 50% retained and trade Virtanen to resign Toffoli but they decided not too. A season ago Bothford reported that 3 or 4 teams were interested in Sutter. If they couldn't rid of the contract. Sure you can blame the contract but they decided not too.
I think Sutter was a worse mistake than all the guys mentioned except Beagle. I've never liked Sutter because he's tunnel visioned and makes players around him worse. They gave him a huge deal before they even saw if he was a fit. It just made no sense man. I think MS always says that it's the biggest contract ever given to a guy who's never hit 40 points.

Also think it's unfair that you mentioned Edler before Holtby, Ferland, Gagner, Luongo, and Baertschi.

Agree on the bolded.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Luckylarry

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
This fact should make a difference to some people.

Gillis was offered Despres Sutter and 1st for Kesler. Gillis wanted Pouliot instead of Despres and Pit Decline. Gillis didn't directly say Sutter is a 2nd line center but I think it's fair to assume since you're trading an impact player like Kesler, Gillis didn't think Sutter was just a third line center, he thought of him as more than a 3rd line center.

Gillis the greatest gm in Canucks history and the worst gm in Canucks history both thought highly of Sutter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pastor Of Muppetz

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,640
24,984
This fact should make a difference to some people.

Gillis was offered Despres Sutter and 1st for Kesler. Gillis wanted Pouliot instead of Despres and Pit Decline. Gillis didn't directly say Sutter is a 2nd line center but I think it's fair to assume since you're trading an impact player like Kesler, Gillis didn't think Sutter was just a third line center, he thought of him as more than a 3rd line center.

Gillis the greatest gm in Canucks history and the worst gm in Canucks history both thought highly of Sutter.
Yes, the Gillis link goes past just the Kesler trade. I think Sutter was one of the guys mentioned as a potential return for Kassian as well.
 

rypper

21-12-05 it's finally over.
Dec 22, 2006
16,200
19,946
I can't believe anyone would want to re-sign him. Let the experiment die.

Even if he was substantially cheaper, he's proven to be injury prone. You can't depend on his groin to hold up a full season. He's a helicopter center and provides little offense himself. Plays with little edge besides the edginess of calling out teammates.

There will be cheaper and better options available.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vanuck and Peen

RobertKron

Registered User
Sep 1, 2007
15,413
8,500
This fact should make a difference to some people.

Gillis was offered Despres Sutter and 1st for Kesler. Gillis wanted Pouliot instead of Despres and Pit Decline. Gillis didn't directly say Sutter is a 2nd line center but I think it's fair to assume since you're trading an impact player like Kesler, Gillis didn't think Sutter was just a third line center, he thought of him as more than a 3rd line center.

Gillis the greatest gm in Canucks history and the worst gm in Canucks history both thought highly of Sutter.

what.

You’re not going to get a legit, solid young 2C, a high-end D prospect, and a first rounder for a high end 2C going on 30. It’s certainly not fair to say that Gillis thought that.
 

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,640
24,984
He's insinuating that lots of people thought of Sutter as a viable option in the top nine.

The problem is he's ignoring the context that Sutter would have had a very defined role behind Kesler and Henrik and the canucks had a strict cap structure. Benning saw him as a 2nd line center and gave him a huge deal.
 

RobertKron

Registered User
Sep 1, 2007
15,413
8,500
He's insinuating that lots of people thought of Sutter as a viable option in the top nine.

The problem is he's ignoring the context that Sutter would have had a very defined role behind Kesler and Henrik and the canucks had a strict cap structure. Benning saw him as a 2nd line center and gave him a huge deal.

If Gillis thought that Sutter was a viable replacement for a malcontented Kesler, he wouldn’t have been demanding more in that deal.
 

4Twenty

Registered User
Dec 18, 2018
9,987
11,831
Yup. Guys terrible. His trade, contract and sunk cost for 6 seasons absolutely hurt the team.

Could’ve had 3 scoring lines but no. Had to have a foundational Sutter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VancouverJagger

VancouverJagger

Not trying to fit in
Feb 26, 2017
2,213
2,025
Vancouver - Coal Harbour
Yup. Guys terrible. His trade, contract and sunk cost for 6 seasons absolutely hurt the team.

Could’ve had 3 scoring lines but no. Had to have a foundational Sutter.

Yeah he was overpaid from Day#1 - ZERO REASON to give him the contract he was given. If it was a 1.5 or even a mill less I might have been ok with it but this was a ridiculous overpayment for this guy. I'm hoping we are wayyyy out of the playoff race by the time the TDL comes around and we can somehow flip him for a 3rd. That would be considered a big win for me.
 

Izzy Goodenough

Registered User
Oct 11, 2020
2,514
2,425
Retain 50% at the Trade deadline and they should get a bite from the old school guys otherwise let him leave as UFA for nothing as so many others have done in this 7 year reign of terror.
 

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
what.

You’re not going to get a legit, solid young 2C, a high-end D prospect, and a first rounder for a high end 2C going on 30. It’s certainly not fair to say that Gillis thought that.

Why not? Theodore was on the table with Benning. 1st round pick and a middle 6 center in Bonino was available for Kesler. It is definitely possible, an impact center like Kesler, Gillis wanted to make a deal and get no current NHL top 4 D/top 6 F back? Really.

Also when Hodgson was traded for Kassian. It was reported that Gillis was willing to trade Hodgson for 4 or 5 other young players. Sutter was one of them. I think we can both agree at that time Hodgson had at least 2nd line center upside. Gillis was willing to trade a 2nd line center for a third line center in Sutter? Really

Gillis is really demanding in trade talks. Look at some of the past reports when he try to trade an impact player
Gillis wanted Bozak, Gardiner and a 1st for Luongo. Trade got decline.

Edler, Wings offered Tatar 1st round pick and there was a young D as well. Forgot who he was. Gillis wanted a 4th piece and deal died.

Knowing Gillis, I highly doubt he thought Sutter was just a third line center.
 

4Twenty

Registered User
Dec 18, 2018
9,987
11,831
Why not? Theodore was on the table with Benning. 1st round pick and a middle 6 center in Bonino was available for Kesler. It is definitely possible, an impact center like Kesler, Gillis wanted to make a deal and get no current NHL top 4 D/top 6 F back? Really.

Also when Hodgson was traded for Kassian. It was reported that Gillis was willing to trade Hodgson for 4 or 5 other young players. Sutter was one of them. I think we can both agree at that time Hodgson had at least 2nd line center upside. Gillis was willing to trade a 2nd line center for a third line center in Sutter? Really

Gillis is really demanding in trade talks. Look at some of the past reports when he try to trade an impact player
Gillis wanted Bozak, Gardiner and a 1st for Luongo. Trade got decline.

Edler, Wings offered Tatar 1st round pick and there was a young D as well. Forgot who he was. Gillis wanted a 4th piece and deal died.

Knowing Gillis, I highly doubt he thought Sutter was just a third line center.
Why would he view a guy who doesn’t produce as a 2C. Very much was looking like a young Malhotra replacement In 2012 when Hodgson was dealt.


Really weird reach going on here. First that 2C’s or 3c’s who produce with good players are worse than 3C’s who produce modestly with good and bad players and now that thus 3C who is better than a 2C was probably thought of as a 2C because...reasons.

thankfully the games about to start.
 

Lonny Bohonos

Registered User
Apr 4, 2010
15,645
2,060
Middle East
Yes, the pro scouting has clearly been bad. How much of that is individual scouts recommending bad players or the GM fixating on bad targets or a combination of both is pretty tough to determine, but it’s worth noting that the team’s “scouting” of its own personnel hasn’t necessarily been very good either.
I think also considering that unlike amateur scouting there is *always* the contractual components of pro player acquisition, that the GM is by natute more invovled or at least should be when it comes to pro scouting.
 

RobertKron

Registered User
Sep 1, 2007
15,413
8,500
Why not? Theodore was on the table with Benning. 1st round pick and a middle 6 center in Bonino was available for Kesler. It is definitely possible, an impact center like Kesler, Gillis wanted to make a deal and get no current NHL top 4 D/top 6 F back? Really.

Also when Hodgson was traded for Kassian. It was reported that Gillis was willing to trade Hodgson for 4 or 5 other young players. Sutter was one of them. I think we can both agree at that time Hodgson had at least 2nd line center upside. Gillis was willing to trade a 2nd line center for a third line center in Sutter? Really

Gillis is really demanding in trade talks. Look at some of the past reports when he try to trade an impact player
Gillis wanted Bozak, Gardiner and a 1st for Luongo. Trade got decline.

Edler, Wings offered Tatar 1st round pick and there was a young D as well. Forgot who he was. Gillis wanted a 4th piece and deal died.

Knowing Gillis, I highly doubt he thought Sutter was just a third line center.

Sutter in 11-12 and Sutter in 2015 aren’t the same player. You keep making these claims about players while ignoring the concept of time.
 

Lonny Bohonos

Registered User
Apr 4, 2010
15,645
2,060
Middle East
Why would he view a guy who doesn’t produce as a 2C. Very much was looking like a young Malhotra replacement In 2012 when Hodgson was dealt.


Really weird reach going on here. First that 2C’s or 3c’s who produce with good players are worse than 3C’s who produce modestly with good and bad players and now that thus 3C who is better than a 2C was probably thought of as a 2C because...reasons.

thankfully the games about to start.
Its maybe a fair question but MG was looking at Sutter who was a couple of years into his career vs Benning in which Sutter was several more.

In both cases I think the thought was Sutter had more to offer.

Ignoring team make up at the times.
 

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
Sutter in 11-12 and Sutter in 2015 aren’t the same player. You keep making these claims about players while ignoring the concept of time.

You mean 2013/2014. Explain how is Sutter different from 2011/2012 vs 2013/2014?

What difference does that make? The point is Gillis was willing to trade Hodgson for Sutter which prove that he thought Sutter was more than a third line center.

Gillis made some mistake Benning made by thinking Sutter was a second line center which he wasn't.
 

4Twenty

Registered User
Dec 18, 2018
9,987
11,831
You mean 2013/2014. Explain how is Sutter different from 2011/2012 vs 2013/2014?

What difference does that make? The point is Gillis was willing to trade Hodgson for Sutter which prove that he thought Sutter was more than a third line center.

Gillis made some mistake Benning made by thinking Sutter was a second line center which he wasn't.
It doesn’t prove anything. Sorry.

have a nice night.
 

RobertKron

Registered User
Sep 1, 2007
15,413
8,500
You mean 2013/2014. Explain how is Sutter different from 2011/2012 vs 2013/2014?

What difference does that make? The point is Gillis was willing to trade Hodgson for Sutter which prove that he thought Sutter was more than a third line center.

Gillis made some mistake Benning made by thinking Sutter was a second line center which he wasn't.

Is this a real question?

It's however many years on and the player hasn't taken the next step. That completely changes any evaluation of the player.

It's not the "same mistake" if you're reasonably high on Brad Isbister at 22 as it is being high on him at 25.

I honestly don't even know how to begin to explain the concept of time and age.

Time is measured in units known as minutes, hours, days, years. As a person exists for more of those units, there is a process known as aging. As someone undergoes this process, their body and mind changes due to the experience. As a result - both physically and mentally - of the experience of time, a person is different than they were at an earlier time.

Another example is that earlier on this evening, the Canucks had scored more goals in the game than the Jets. Now, the Jets have scored the same number of goals as the Canucks. Because time is experienced in only one direction, it means that the Canucks aren't winning the game anymore. The experiences of time - in this case, the Jets scoring goals - have meant that the evaluation of the status of the game is different now than it was before, just like the experiences of time have meant that Brandon Sutter in 2012 was not the same as he was later, in 2015.
 
Last edited:

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
Is this a real question?

It's however many years on and the player hasn't taken the next step. That completely changes any evaluation of the player.

It's not the "same mistake" if you're reasonably high on Brad Isbister at 22 as it is being high on him at 25.

I honestly don't even know how to begin to explain the concept of time and age.

Time is measured in units known as minutes, hours, days, years. As a person exists for more of those units, there is a process known as aging. As someone undergoes this process, their body and mind changes due to the experience. As a result - both physically and mentally - of the experience of time, a person is different than they were at an earlier time.

Another example is that earlier on this evening, the Canucks had scored more goals in the game than the Jets. Now, the Jets have scored the same number of goals as the Canucks. Because time is experienced in only one direction, it means that the Canucks aren't winning the game anymore. The experiences of time - in this case, the Jets scoring goals - have meant that the evaluation of the status of the game is different now than it was before, just like the experiences of time have meant that Brandon Sutter in 2012 was not the same as he was later, in 2015.

I get what you're saying but Sutter wasn't some prospect or rookie in 2012. It is a completely valid argument If Sutter was still a prospect in 2012 but he wasn't. Sutter in 2012 was 23 and already had 4 seasons under his belt. 2015 Sutter had 7. By age 23 with 4 seasons, you're pretty much the player you're. Trying to stickhandle out of this by giving me this ridiculous argument.

Do you feel better if I break it down and say Gillis was wrong on Sutter when he was 23 and had 4 seasons under his Belt. Benning was wrong on Sutter when he was 26 and 7 seasons under his belt. So Benning was more wrong?

Both were wrong on Sutter. Both 2012 and 2015 they were established NHL and peaked already.

It's kind of like when Benning trades a draft pick for a 23 year reclamation player, most don't like those trades because by age 23 you're pretty much who you are as a player.

Have a great night
 
Last edited:

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
21,047
14,079
Sutter with a good effort tonight.....and this is the point where Benning has to cast the net wide to get some assets for him on an expiring contract. Right now, Sutter could be a big boon to a playoff bound team.

Is it even remotely possible that this GM will finally maximize and asset on an expiring contract? The track record doesn't give you much confidence.
 

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,629
5,893
Why not? Theodore was on the table with Benning. 1st round pick and a middle 6 center in Bonino was available for Kesler. It is definitely possible, an impact center like Kesler, Gillis wanted to make a deal and get no current NHL top 4 D/top 6 F back? Really.

Also when Hodgson was traded for Kassian. It was reported that Gillis was willing to trade Hodgson for 4 or 5 other young players. Sutter was one of them. I think we can both agree at that time Hodgson had at least 2nd line center upside. Gillis was willing to trade a 2nd line center for a third line center in Sutter? Really

Gillis is really demanding in trade talks. Look at some of the past reports when he try to trade an impact player
Gillis wanted Bozak, Gardiner and a 1st for Luongo. Trade got decline.

Edler, Wings offered Tatar 1st round pick and there was a young D as well. Forgot who he was. Gillis wanted a 4th piece and deal died.

Knowing Gillis, I highly doubt he thought Sutter was just a third line center.

A lot of people just point to the GM and ignore the pro scouts. Of the 6 players that Gillis was reportedly willing to trade Hodgson for, two of them were Sutter (whom Gillis targeted again in the Kessler trade) and Gudbranson.
 

Lonny Bohonos

Registered User
Apr 4, 2010
15,645
2,060
Middle East
A lot of people just point to the GM and ignore the pro scouts. Of the 6 players that Gillis was reportedly willing to trade Hodgson for, two of them were Sutter (whom Gillis targeted again in the Kessler trade) and Gudbranson.
Once again for the people in the back: when they were younger and only a few years under their belt.

Not after 4-5 years


Your whataboutism is ridiculous.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->