vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2007
- 28,850
- 16,337
Brandon Sutter -- Save Us GranBranSen || Part 4
- Thread starter Oliewud
- Start date
- Status
They're just dead-set on hammering that square peg into a round hole. OFFENSIVE PLAYER!
Again, he's a solid player and should have good value to this team if used properly in a defensive role, but he's just hopelessly miscast as a #1 unit PP guy and simply doesn't have the vision or puck skills to play there.
This is a player with 2 primary assists since 2014, and one of those was an accidental bounce off his foot.
DL44
Status quo
He essentially is tho.... he's almost exclusively in the slot in a shooting position.
MS must be preferring Larsen in the spot Daniel is currently occupying (Vrbata's old spot on the left circle)
So maybe... get Sutter off the PP, move Larsen where Daniel is, Eriksson go where Sutter occupies, get Daniel back to his original spot to behind the net/low right circle, with Hutton moving to the top of the umbrella where Larsen currently is.
Cupless44
Registered User
- Jun 25, 2014
- 7,154
- 3,298
When did hockey become all about fancy stats and not enjoying watching the game anyways?
Because when I watch the Canucks, and Sutter is in the line- up, more often then not he makes an impact. Like he has in both games so far this year.
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 16,883
- 9,563
his last full season he scored 21 and he was on track to do it again last year. that is an offensive player on our club. i agree he's not a passer but why wouldn't you put him the vicinity of the sedins on the power play? with eriksson and larsen out there they don't need another passer, and he'd definitely be wasted on the second unit. and how does pp time interfere with his 5 on 5 minutes?
i don't disagree with the canucks treating sutter like a goal scorer until it is proven futile. sutter was turned into a defensive guy in pittsburgh where he was always going to be at least 3rd on the depth charge. he still got goals in pittsburgh and if you look back in time he scored early and often in carolina.
What if he started twice as many of his shifts in the defensive zone than he did the offensive zone? Then a GF/GA of 1.62/1.68 would be insanely good. Come on, use your common sense I don't even like using fancy stats but if I did I'd be embarrassed by how you misuse them.
Chris Higgins has a much better NHL goalscoring record than Brandon Sutter and nobody here even wanted him anywhere the #2 unit. Because his skillset didn't fit.
Brandon Sutter simply isn't a guy who belongs on a #1 PP. He's a poor passer, lacks creativity, and is poor along the boards and at puck retrieval. We have other guys who are better and should be in this spot.
Play to your players' strengths. Sutter at 3-on-3 with his speed/shot? Absolutely, he should be one of the first guys over the boards.
Nucker101
Foundational Poster
- Apr 2, 2013
- 21,156
- 16,627
Canucks LB
My Favourite, Gone too soon, RIP Luc, We miss you
- Oct 12, 2008
- 76,817
- 29,454
NO ONE HATES SUTTER. Hell half a page back the very poster you replied to stated the same thing.
Gee, I must have completely misread the tone of the last Sutter thread. I must have misunderstood all those comments where posters suggested he be waived, that he was a mediocre below average 3C.........
Literally 1 person was saying this, and everyone on both sides of the equation disagrees with him.
I think that is a large part of it. Another part could be he still defends when tired. Maybe because of his frame I have never seen him completely worn out on the ice. Where for example last year it happened to Bo all the time. Many goals are scored against tired players who cannot move so if Sutter is better in this area it might enable him to protect the slot better.
Sutter is definitely letting his shot go. He led the team with 5 shots against the Blues tonight. I believe this leads the team 3 games into the season.
I think with Eriksson on the first PP unit, we may be better off having Edler/Hutton on the first unit PP alongside Larsen. Eriksson is pretty good standing in front of the net.
When will the Manny comparisons stop? Manny was not always an elite shutdown C. Maybe starting from his last year with Columbus to the eye injury? Before that he was a deployed more as a top 6 player who put up very average offensive numbers. That 2010-2011 Canucks team was an amazing team that should have won the Cup. Pretty much everyone on that roster had amazing stats. That season Malhotra had is considered one of a kind. Trying to acquire a Manny Malhotra type who can put up the numbers he did in 2010-2011 is about as hard as finding Henrik's replacement.
I think with Eriksson on the first PP unit, we may be better off having Edler/Hutton on the first unit PP alongside Larsen. Eriksson is pretty good standing in front of the net.
When will the Manny comparisons stop? Manny was not always an elite shutdown C. Maybe starting from his last year with Columbus to the eye injury? Before that he was a deployed more as a top 6 player who put up very average offensive numbers. That 2010-2011 Canucks team was an amazing team that should have won the Cup. Pretty much everyone on that roster had amazing stats. That season Malhotra had is considered one of a kind. Trying to acquire a Manny Malhotra type who can put up the numbers he did in 2010-2011 is about as hard as finding Henrik's replacement.
Bleach Clean
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2006
- 27,056
- 6,627
That doesn't make sense: He's 3rd line capable and deserves to be waived? If your team is good enough to be able to waive 3rd line players outright, that team has top tier depth.
Anyways, agree with you and others about taking Sutter off the #1 PP. Does not belong. I know they have him there due to his right shot, but Vrbata was a far better passer and even he flamed out there. Reason: Can't be predictable. If all he is expected to do is shoot, teams can easily plan against that weak side option.
ultimate stat is Canucks have twice as many wins than losses with Sutter in the lineup.
I think people are having difficulty separating Brandon Sutter the player from Dim Jim's trade to acquire him and subsequently sign him to a big, long contract before he stepped onto the ice.
IMO - the Bonino - Sutter trade was mostly a win (I didn't like the swap of draft picks). On a team with a ton of speed and extremely deep scoring on their top 2 lines - such as Pittsburgh last season, Bones is a good fit on the 3rd line. But the Canucks needed either a play making C for the 2nd line (Horvat was a rookie at the time) or a shutdown, match up C for the 3rd line. For the 2nd line role, Bones wasn't a good enough skater and tends to go through very extended scoring slumps or 10, 15 or 20 games with no points at all. For the 3rd line role, he's not big, strong or fast enough to match up against the big C's in our own division (Kopitar, Getzlaf, Kesler, Thornton, etc.).
Sutter is not ideal for either of these roles, but he's much better suited than Bonino. He plays the game at a far higher pace. He's better in the face-off circle, better defensively and while not overly physical, strong enough to match up against big physical players. While his career point totals are similar, he's more of a natural scorer, but it should also be noted that Bonino put up his numbers, mostly while trying to be used as a 2nd line C. Sutter has been behind 2 elite Cs for most of his career. Fortunately Horvat is emerging as a more offensive option for the 2C role and Granlund is looking like a player as well.
Sutter isn't ideal on the 1st unit PP, but right now, there are not a lot of options. Granlund and Horvat are both LH shots. Longer term perhaps Virtanen, but he's not there yet. We could use some patience with a new PP setup as it takes some time for a PP to click. But I think the bigger problem on the PP is the positioning of Henrik and Daniel. If there is anyone in the league who can find a passing lane and feed a 60 foot saucer pass through 3 other players it's Henrik, but it's not going to happen with consistency.
IMO - the Bonino - Sutter trade was mostly a win (I didn't like the swap of draft picks). On a team with a ton of speed and extremely deep scoring on their top 2 lines - such as Pittsburgh last season, Bones is a good fit on the 3rd line. But the Canucks needed either a play making C for the 2nd line (Horvat was a rookie at the time) or a shutdown, match up C for the 3rd line. For the 2nd line role, Bones wasn't a good enough skater and tends to go through very extended scoring slumps or 10, 15 or 20 games with no points at all. For the 3rd line role, he's not big, strong or fast enough to match up against the big C's in our own division (Kopitar, Getzlaf, Kesler, Thornton, etc.).
Sutter is not ideal for either of these roles, but he's much better suited than Bonino. He plays the game at a far higher pace. He's better in the face-off circle, better defensively and while not overly physical, strong enough to match up against big physical players. While his career point totals are similar, he's more of a natural scorer, but it should also be noted that Bonino put up his numbers, mostly while trying to be used as a 2nd line C. Sutter has been behind 2 elite Cs for most of his career. Fortunately Horvat is emerging as a more offensive option for the 2C role and Granlund is looking like a player as well.
Sutter isn't ideal on the 1st unit PP, but right now, there are not a lot of options. Granlund and Horvat are both LH shots. Longer term perhaps Virtanen, but he's not there yet. We could use some patience with a new PP setup as it takes some time for a PP to click. But I think the bigger problem on the PP is the positioning of Henrik and Daniel. If there is anyone in the league who can find a passing lane and feed a 60 foot saucer pass through 3 other players it's Henrik, but it's not going to happen with consistency.
What do you mean by generate little offense? So far he has been generating turnovers with his speed on the forecheck, making plays with his underrated vision, and sniping goals with his high end wrist shot. You seem to be implying that a good puck possession playstyle is the only way to generate offense which just isn't true. He's paid foundational player salary because he has foundational intangibles, full stop, period and next year the contract will look like an absolute steal.
Are you referring to this post I made?
Because if you are it's not unlikely at all, it happened. Sutter actually did start twice as many shifts in the Dzone than Ozone for several seasons in both Carolina and Pittsburgh. Even in his 20 year old, 21 goal season he only started 27% of his shifts in the Ozone. Then the next year it went down to 25% and 20% the following year.
opendoor
Registered User
- Dec 12, 2006
- 11,719
- 1,403
By generate little offense I mean being 323rd among 348 forwards in GF/60 over the last 5 seasons. And being 335th if you measure him relative to his teammates. Outside of goons and a few 4th liners, no regular forwards have generated less on-ice offense than Sutter has over the last half decade.
If people are going to use his excellent GA/60 numbers over his career to tout his shutdown abilities, then it's fair to use his horrid GF/60 numbers to discuss his abilities as well.
Only in one of those years (2011-2012) did he start twice as many shifts in the defensive zone as the offensive zone. And even in that year, it was more due to a lack of offensive starts than a heavy number of defensive ones. His percentage of defensive zone starts (40%) was basically identical to what Horvat did last season.
I was reffering to these two posts.
so yes.
And opendoor hit the nail on the head...
Good post.- Status
