Brandon Sutter -- Save Us GranBranSen || Part 4

[Oliewud]

I'd rather have a 27 year old Kesler than a 32 year old Sutter.

thats why i said right now

Click to read more...

 

[y2kcanucks]

Me too.

While I appreciate Manny's intangibles and solid 2011 season hid god like status is more than a little carried away on here.

He is great on face offs and carved out a decent career as a defensive forward...but that was also after he failed to live up to his first round draft pick status, bounced around the league and has a career high of 14 goals in a season which he did once.

Sutter is a more skilled hockey player.

Manny Malhotra in his prime was an 11 goal, 30 point elite shutdown C.

Brandon Sutter is a 15ish goal, 30 point C who doesn't really shut anyone down.

 

[Likwit19]

BranGranHans000 aka Hans-ousand

 

[MS]

Y2K is

What are your thoughts on him so far MS? Personally, I've been really impressed with his ability to close gaps and actively use his reach to disrupt the oppositions puck control, especially on the rush. Though Corsi may not be to his side, his defensive IQ and work on the back check is impressive.

Paired with an effective Granlund, 20+ goals and 40+ points may not be very surprising this year, especially with his great shot. Though on the PP, having him in the middle of the ice on the Sedin unit seems to mitigate his talents.

He's been skating well and has been good defensively and on the forecheck. Agree with your comments on his motor/puck pressure skills - but that's always been his biggest strength.

I thought he was brutal offensively in the Calgary game and that the play died on his stick in the offensive zone nearly every time he touched it, and that his SO winner kind of overshadowed that. In the 2nd half of the Carolina game, he was very good and looked as dangerous as we've seen him in a Canuck uniform - that game was absolutely a positive for him. Conversely, he's looked lost and out-of-place on the #1 PP unit.

What I see, still, is a good #3 center whose shot and counter-attacking skills on the rush might allow him to push 20 goals, but whose hockey sense and contained offensive play is very lacking.

If they leave him on the #1 PP unit, I wouldn't be surprised to see him touch 40 points ... but that wouldn't be a great result given his icetime/usage.

 

[ahmon]

Manny Malhotra in his prime was an 11 goal, 30 point elite shutdown C.

Brandon Sutter is a 15ish goal, 30 point C who doesn't really shut anyone down.

Manny Malhotra "entire" career playoffs stats:

35 games, 2 goals, 0 assists, 2 points.

He was an offensive blackhole come playoff time.

Selected top 10, never lived up to his draft status. Journeyman who was traded from New York to Dallas, then to Columbus. Then to SJ, then to us later in his career.

Still remember when he couldn't even get a contract in the summer and skated with the canucks then signed a 1 year under 1 million contract with the Sharks.

He never really elevated his play and had a good playoff run where he was "matched up" against the other teams top line/stars and "shut them down" and win the matchups - like the John Maddens, Dave Bollands, Sammy Pahlsson, Jordan Staal etc..

Malhotra was a good skater, with very good defensive awareness, and elite faceoff C, but I feel his offense is overrated. And its hard to label him a true "shutdown C" when he never really proved it (partly because he was never really used in that role) when it mattered.

 

[Scurr]

Manny spent 1 season as one of the premier defensive players in the league. He was more of a punter than a shutdown center, though, as his job was primarily to change field position, not matchup against top players. Calling him an "elite shutdown center" is romanticizing his career to a large degree.

 

[topheavyhookjaw]

Manny spent 1 season as one of the premier defensive players in the league. He was more of a punter than a shutdown center, though, as his job was primarily to change field position, not matchup against top players. Calling him an "elite shutdown center" is romanticizing his career to a large degree.

Also played with excellent teammates for a 3rd line role, Hansen and Torres, for most of that season. Absolutely helped him in that shut down role here at that time.

 

[topheavyhookjaw]

He's been skating well and has been good defensively and on the forecheck. Agree with your comments on his motor/puck pressure skills - but that's always been his biggest strength.

I thought he was brutal offensively in the Calgary game and that the play died on his stick in the offensive zone nearly every time he touched it, and that his SO winner kind of overshadowed that. In the 2nd half of the Carolina game, he was very good and looked as dangerous as we've seen him in a Canuck uniform - that game was absolutely a positive for him. Conversely, he's looked lost and out-of-place on the #1 PP unit.

What I see, still, is a good #3 center whose shot and counter-attacking skills on the rush might allow him to push 20 goals, but whose hockey sense and contained offensive play is very lacking.

If they leave him on the #1 PP unit, I wouldn't be surprised to see him touch 40 points ... but that wouldn't be a great result given his icetime/usage.

I don't get him on the #1 unit, they have a winger that scored at a great rate with the Sedins last year, is a RHS and good in traffic that makes much more sense to put in that role.

 

[MS]

Manny spent 1 season as one of the premier defensive players in the league. He was more of a punter than a shutdown center, though, as his job was primarily to change field position, not matchup against top players. Calling him an "elite shutdown center" is romanticizing his career to a large degree.

Yeah, he was a fine player for us but due to the nature of his short time here (and the success we had during it) and the unfortunate circumstances that ruined his career, I think he gets mythologized a bit.

 

[MS]

I don't get him on the #1 unit, they have a winger that scored at a great rate with the Sedins last year, is a RHS and good in traffic that makes much more sense to put in that role.

I'd put Larsen in Sutters spot as the RH shooter on the left side and put Hutton on the point at the top of the PP. Have 5 players out there who actually have creativity and puck-movement skills.

 

[thepuckmonster]

I'd put Larsen in Sutters spot as the RH shooter on the left side and put Hutton on the point at the top of the PP. Have 5 players out there who actually have creativity and puck-movement skills.

I think we need Hutton on the 2PP more but I like your thought process

 

[Cupless44]

Manny Malhotra "entire" career playoffs stats:

35 games, 2 goals, 0 assists, 2 points.

He was an offensive blackhole come playoff time.

Selected top 10, never lived up to his draft status. Journeyman who was traded from New York to Dallas, then to Columbus. Then to SJ, then to us later in his career.

Still remember when he couldn't even get a contract in the summer and skated with the canucks then signed a 1 year under 1 million contract with the Sharks.

He never really elevated his play and had a good playoff run where he was "matched up" against the other teams top line/stars and "shut them down" and win the matchups - like the John Maddens, Dave Bollands, Sammy Pahlsson, Jordan Staal etc..

Malhotra was a good skater, with very good defensive awareness, and elite faceoff C, but I feel his offense is overrated. And its hard to label him a true "shutdown C" when he never really proved it (partly because he was never really used in that role) when it mattered.

Thank you for some context on the reality of Manny's career.

 

[StrictlyCommercial]

I'd put Larsen in Sutters spot as the RH shooter on the left side and put Hutton on the point at the top of the PP. Have 5 players out there who actually have creativity and puck-movement skills.

Yes. Allows Daniel to play the cycle down low instead of just being the guy feeding Larsen.

 

[Iceberg Slim]

Manny Malhotra in his prime was an 11 goal, 30 point elite shutdown C.

Brandon Sutter is a 15ish goal, 30 point C who doesn't really shut anyone down.

Sutter's "shutdown ability" is a very curious thing. When you look at typical underlying numbers (shooting events related), he looks fairly ordinary (maybe even poor). He's certainly not suppressing shots. But when you look at the goals data, some strange things come to light.

If you were to define "shutdown ability" as the ability to consistently prevent goals against, Sutter actually fits the definition quite well. And when you start looking at very large samples (where goals data becomes a much better indicator), Sutter's "shutdown" quality becomes quite intriguing.

Consider his career on-ice goals against numbers viewed against the rest of the NHL since the start of the "Behind the Net era" in 2007 (when fancy stats first became publicly available). To remove some of the noise from the goals data, let's examine Sutter against other NHL players with 4000+ minutes of 5v5 since 2007-08 (the results here are going to appear a bit cherry-picked but I honestly chose this grouping in an attempt to produce meaningful sample sizes): http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...0&teamid=0&type=goals&sort=SvPct&sortdir=DESC

Sutter looks pretty impressive here.

His 1.79 5v5 GA60 is 7th. So since 2007-08, only six NHL players with 4000+ minutes of 5v5 have allowed fewer goals against per sixty minutes of 5v5.

Sutter's -0.53 GA60 RelTM is 1st. So since 2007-08, no player (with 4000+ minutes 5v5) in the NHL has produced a lower goals against per sixty rate (5v5), relative to his teammates, than Brandon Sutter.

What's the deal here?

He doesn't suppress shots. His events metrics are kinda crappy (Corsi, Fenwick, etc) but Sutter sure seems to "suppress" goals against.

Is this a "shutdown" player?

Maybe not a typical one. But the results are sure interesting.

Also interesting is what Sutter's goaltenders have managed to achieve over his career. Among that same group of 4000+ minutes 5v5 players since 2007-08, Sutter ranks 2nd in on-ice Sv% (93.96). Ah, so "percentage driven" right? He's just been lucky. But can a player really be that lucky over 6215:45 5v5TOI? Six thousand odd minutes played in front of 12 different goaltenders on three different teams and over 8 NHL seasons. Was it really the goalies? Or does Sutter do something that helps goalies make more saves? And if he does make his goalies "better" then do his shots based underlying numbers matter as much?

Especially when the goals based numbers are so strong (in terms of goals against--we're talking "shutdown" ability here--his goals for numbers aren't great and his diffentials are fairly average).

But Sutter prevents goals against when he's on the ice (both relative to his teammates and relative to players around the league). Those numbers just don't lie. And stopping the other team from scoring (or at least significantly limiting their ability to do so) seems like what a "shutdown" player is supposed to do.

I would agree that Sutter's overall statistical profile is something of an enigma. And I'm really not sure how to explain it.

From watching him play, a couple things do stand out. He seems to be excellent on the backcheck with high end pursuit ability in tracking down and disrupting puck carriers in the neutral zone or forcing them into hurrying shots if they gain the offensive zone. This might explain part of his "shutdown" ability. He's not physical or grinding but he is fairly disruptive and seems to have a good stick defensively. He's also very successful in drawing penalties while not taking many (which sometimes can suggest a larger net positive on-ice effect that other indicators might be missing)--Sutter has had a positive penalties drawn-taken/60 every season he's played and has been +0.5/60 or better in all but one season of his career.

Those are all good things.

But if I'm being honest, I don't know why Sutter prevents goals against. His shots metrics say it shouldn't happen. And the sheer size of the career sample suggests it's not just a statistical quirk. Something is happening in those six thousand odd minutes where Brandon Sutter has kept more pucks out of his team's own nets than nearly any other player of similar minutes played during the same
period of time.

So maybe not a typical shutdown forward. But maybe a highly effective one nonetheless?

 

[DL44]

^ nice breakdown.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Sutter's "shutdown ability" is a very curious thing. When you look at typical underlying numbers (shooting events related), he looks fairly ordinary (maybe even poor). He's certainly not suppressing shots. But when you look at the goals data, some strange things come to light.

If you were to define "shutdown ability" as the ability to consistently prevent goals against, Sutter actually fits the definition quite well. And when you start looking at very large samples (where goals data becomes a much better indicator), Sutter's "shutdown" quality becomes quite intriguing.

Consider his career on-ice goals against numbers viewed against the rest of the NHL since the start of the "Behind the Net era" in 2007 (when fancy stats first became publicly available). To remove some of the noise from the goals data, let's examine Sutter against other NHL players with 4000+ minutes of 5v5 since 2007-08 (the results here are going to appear a bit cherry-picked but I honestly chose this grouping in an attempt to produce meaningful sample sizes): http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...0&teamid=0&type=goals&sort=SvPct&sortdir=DESC

Sutter looks pretty impressive here.

His 1.79 5v5 GA60 is 7th. So since 2007-08, only six NHL players with 4000+ minutes of 5v5 have allowed fewer goals against per sixty minutes of 5v5.

Sutter's -0.53 GA60 RelTM is 1st. So since 2007-08, no player (with 4000+ minutes 5v5) in the NHL has produced a lower goals against per sixty rate (5v5), relative to his teammates, than Brandon Sutter.

What's the deal here?

He doesn't suppress shots. His events metrics are kinda crappy (Corsi, Fenwick, etc) but Sutter sure seems to "suppress" goals against.

Is this a "shutdown" player?

Maybe not a typical one. But the results are sure interesting.

Also interesting is what Sutter's goaltenders have managed to achieve over his career. Among that same group of 4000+ minutes 5v5 players since 2007-08, Sutter ranks 2nd in on-ice Sv% (93.96). Ah, so "percentage driven" right? He's just been lucky. But can a player really be that lucky over 6215:45 5v5TOI? Six thousand odd minutes played in front of 12 different goaltenders on three different teams and over 8 NHL seasons. Was it really the goalies? Or does Sutter do something that helps goalies make more saves? And if he does make his goalies "better" then do his shots based underlying numbers matter as much?

Especially when the goals based numbers are so strong (in terms of goals against--we're talking "shutdown" ability here--his goals for numbers aren't great and his diffentials are fairly average).

But Sutter prevents goals against when he's on the ice (both relative to his teammates and relative to players around the league). Those numbers just don't lie. And stopping the other team from scoring (or at least significantly limiting their ability to do so) seems like what a "shutdown" player is supposed to do.

I would agree that Sutter's overall statistical profile is something of an enigma. And I'm really not sure how to explain it.

From watching him play, a couple things do stand out. He seems to be excellent on the backcheck with high end pursuit ability in tracking down and disrupting puck carriers in the neutral zone or forcing them into hurrying shots if they gain the offensive zone. This might explain part of his "shutdown" ability. He's not physical or grinding but he is fairly disruptive and seems to have a good stick defensively. He's also very successful in drawing penalties while not taking many (which sometimes can suggest a larger net positive on-ice effect that other indicators might be missing)--Sutter has had a positive penalties drawn-taken/60 every season he's played and has been +0.5/60 or better in all but one season of his career.

Those are all good things.

But if I'm being honest, I don't know why Sutter prevents goals against. His shots metrics say it shouldn't happen. And the sheer size of the career sample suggests it's not just a statistical quirk. Something is happening in those six thousand odd minutes where Brandon Sutter has kept more pucks out of his team's own nets than nearly any other player of similar minutes played during the same
period of time.

So maybe not a typical shutdown forward. But maybe a highly effective one nonetheless?

Excellent post and one that lays it out extremely well.

I can't explain those numbers either. Perhaps Sutter is that extreme statistical outlier that defies what one would expect? It's possible.

All I can say though, is that despite his strong GA/60, his GF/60 is incredibly weak. Is it better (throwing out random numbers) to have someone who has a GA/60 of 1, but a GF/60 of 0.5 or to have someone with a GA/60 of 1.5, but a GF/60 of 2? I know which one I'm choosing.

 

[StrictlyCommercial]

I would bet the quality of shots is the missing piece. Keep them to the outside, don't lose your man in the slot, don't allow odd man rushes, and you'll see the quality of chances against decline.

It shows he's a bad possession player, but a great defensive player. I'd say his on-ice performance mirrors that (bad stickhandling, poor passing vision, great shot, great motor, excellent defensive reads).

 

[I am toxic]

Sutter's "shutdown ability" is a very curious thing. When you look at typical underlying numbers (shooting events related), he looks fairly ordinary (maybe even poor). He's certainly not suppressing shots. But when you look at the goals data, some strange things come to light.

If you were to define "shutdown ability" as the ability to consistently prevent goals against, Sutter actually fits the definition quite well. And when you start looking at very large samples (where goals data becomes a much better indicator), Sutter's "shutdown" quality becomes quite intriguing.

Consider his career on-ice goals against numbers viewed against the rest of the NHL since the start of the "Behind the Net era" in 2007 (when fancy stats first became publicly available). To remove some of the noise from the goals data, let's examine Sutter against other NHL players with 4000+ minutes of 5v5 since 2007-08 (the results here are going to appear a bit cherry-picked but I honestly chose this grouping in an attempt to produce meaningful sample sizes): http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...0&teamid=0&type=goals&sort=SvPct&sortdir=DESC

Sutter looks pretty impressive here.

His 1.79 5v5 GA60 is 7th. So since 2007-08, only six NHL players with 4000+ minutes of 5v5 have allowed fewer goals against per sixty minutes of 5v5.

Sutter's -0.53 GA60 RelTM is 1st. So since 2007-08, no player (with 4000+ minutes 5v5) in the NHL has produced a lower goals against per sixty rate (5v5), relative to his teammates, than Brandon Sutter.

What's the deal here?

He doesn't suppress shots. His events metrics are kinda crappy (Corsi, Fenwick, etc) but Sutter sure seems to "suppress" goals against.

Is this a "shutdown" player?

Maybe not a typical one. But the results are sure interesting.

Also interesting is what Sutter's goaltenders have managed to achieve over his career. Among that same group of 4000+ minutes 5v5 players since 2007-08, Sutter ranks 2nd in on-ice Sv% (93.96). Ah, so "percentage driven" right? He's just been lucky. But can a player really be that lucky over 6215:45 5v5TOI? Six thousand odd minutes played in front of 12 different goaltenders on three different teams and over 8 NHL seasons. Was it really the goalies? Or does Sutter do something that helps goalies make more saves? And if he does make his goalies "better" then do his shots based underlying numbers matter as much?

Especially when the goals based numbers are so strong (in terms of goals against--we're talking "shutdown" ability here--his goals for numbers aren't great and his diffentials are fairly average).

But Sutter prevents goals against when he's on the ice (both relative to his teammates and relative to players around the league). Those numbers just don't lie. And stopping the other team from scoring (or at least significantly limiting their ability to do so) seems like what a "shutdown" player is supposed to do.

I would agree that Sutter's overall statistical profile is something of an enigma. And I'm really not sure how to explain it.

From watching him play, a couple things do stand out. He seems to be excellent on the backcheck with high end pursuit ability in tracking down and disrupting puck carriers in the neutral zone or forcing them into hurrying shots if they gain the offensive zone. This might explain part of his "shutdown" ability. He's not physical or grinding but he is fairly disruptive and seems to have a good stick defensively. He's also very successful in drawing penalties while not taking many (which sometimes can suggest a larger net positive on-ice effect that other indicators might be missing)--Sutter has had a positive penalties drawn-taken/60 every season he's played and has been +0.5/60 or better in all but one season of his career.

Those are all good things.

But if I'm being honest, I don't know why Sutter prevents goals against. His shots metrics say it shouldn't happen. And the sheer size of the career sample suggests it's not just a statistical quirk. Something is happening in those six thousand odd minutes where Brandon Sutter has kept more pucks out of his team's own nets than nearly any other player of similar minutes played during the same
period of time.

So maybe not a typical shutdown forward. But maybe a highly effective one nonetheless?

This. Excellent post, and I would hilite the bolded.

I also think this ties in with the Boston/Vancouver 2011 SCF corsi thread currently going on in the main forum .

And his name is Steel Cut - mods, try to get the thread title right. What are we paying you for, anyway?

 

[Nick Lang]

Great breakdown. Just shows why fancy stats don't tell the whole story though. At the end of the day you're trying to keep the puck out of your net. You don't get points or wins as a direct result of possession, and shots combined with ice time. Perhaps he simply doesn't care if the other team gets weak shot and he gets it back on the face-off.

 

[opendoor]

I don't find Sutter's numbers odd at all; they make perfect sense when you consider his playing style.

Look at what happens when teams play with a lead. Their save percentage and GA/60 improve while their possession numbers, scoring chances, and GF tend to plummet. This is because they're playing conservative hockey and trying not to get scored on. Giving up offense and puck possession in return for fewer GA is a good trade off if you're trying to to temporarily hold a lead, but you'd never want to play that way all the time because you'll get outscored in the aggregate.

But Sutter does pretty much play that way all the time which explains why he can shut down the opposition but generate very little offense. That type of player can have value if you hard match him against other teams' top lines, but that's not really how the Canucks are using him and you don't really need to pay foundational player salary for that.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Great breakdown. Just shows why fancy stats don't tell the whole story though. At the end of the day you're trying to keep the puck out of your net. You don't get points or wins as a direct result of possession, and shots combined with ice time. Perhaps he simply doesn't care if the other team gets weak shot and he gets it back on the face-off.

Fine. If you don't understand and like advanced analytics (what you call "fancy stats"), and all you want to look at are goals for and against, then Sutter over the past 5 years has a GF/60 of 1.62, and a GA/60 of 1.68. So he gives up more goals against when he's on the ice than he produces.

I prefer players who generate more offense than they give up.

 

[Pip]

Great breakdown. Just shows why fancy stats don't tell the whole story though. At the end of the day you're trying to keep the puck out of your net. You don't get points or wins as a direct result of possession, and shots combined with ice time. Perhaps he simply doesn't care if the other team gets weak shot and he gets it back on the face-off.

There's always room for error, but in this case they seem to paint a pretty clear picture which opendoor described above.

 

[MS]

I don't find Sutter's numbers odd at all; they make perfect sense when you consider his playing style.

Look at what happens when teams play with a lead. Their save percentage and GA/60 improve while their possession numbers, scoring chances, and GF tend to plummet. This is because they're playing conservative hockey and trying not to get scored on. Giving up offense and puck possession in return for fewer GA is a good trade off if you're trying to to temporarily hold a lead, but you'd never want to play that way all the time because you'll get outscored in the aggregate.

But Sutter does pretty much play that way all the time which explains why he can shut down the opposition but generate very little offense. That type of player can have value if you hard match him against other teams' top lines, but that's not really how the Canucks are using him and you don't really need to pay foundational player salary for that.

Yup. This is basically it in a nutshell.

 

[Lindgren]

I don't find Sutter's numbers odd at all; they make perfect sense when you consider his playing style.

Look at what happens when teams play with a lead. Their save percentage and GA/60 improve while their possession numbers, scoring chances, and GF tend to plummet. This is because they're playing conservative hockey and trying not to get scored on. Giving up offense and puck possession in return for fewer GA is a good trade off if you're trying to to temporarily hold a lead, but you'd never want to play that way all the time because you'll get outscored in the aggregate.

But Sutter does pretty much play that way all the time which explains why he can shut down the opposition but generate very little offense. That type of player can have value if you hard match him against other teams' top lines, but that's not really how the Canucks are using him and you don't really need to pay foundational player salary for that.

Great post. It really makes the point clear, translating numbers into a useful explanation.

I'd be interested to know what a similar analysis of Gudbranson would come up with.

 

[DL44]

I don't find Sutter's numbers odd at all; they make perfect sense when you consider his playing style.

Look at what happens when teams play with a lead. Their save percentage and GA/60 improve while their possession numbers, scoring chances, and GF tend to plummt. This is because they're playing conservative hockey and trying not to get scored on. Giving up offense and puck possession in return for fewer GA is a good trade off if you're trying to to temporarily hold a lead, but you'd never want to play that way all the time because you'll get outscored in the aggregate.

But Sutter does pretty much play that way all the time which explains why he can shut down the opposition but generate very little offense. That type of player can have value if you hard match him against other teams' top lines, but that's not really how the Canucks are using him and you don't really need to pay foundational player salary for that.

Doesn't seem like it in a Canuck jersey.
Will be interesting to see how his numbers change this season relative to his pre-Canuck career numbers.

As you and everyone has observed... he's being used differently and plays different than how you describe his numbers suggest or describe him.