Post-Game Talk: Canucks 2, Ducks 1: Southern California gets trolled

[y2kcanucks]

He's on pace for 22 goals and he makes 900k/year. You get a player who is scoring 22 goals a year (on pace) for that rate... you take it and run.

There isn't a GM in the league that doesn't take this player at that clip. He's the #6 forward on the team in terms of TOI. He should, and has for most of the year, been playing on the third line. However he has shown the ability to play up the lineup with the Sedins at times when Hansen was out. Otherwise he's been stapled to the third line with Sutter.

He's a 23 year old forward making 900k for this year and next. We stole this player from Calgary. Shinkaruk isn't even scoring at the same clip at the AHL level and doesn't look at all like he's going to be an effective professional player.

Does the guy make some defensive errors, yes. But he's a young guy who is improving. If he can be a 20 goal guy and tighten up defensively, then we got a great deal with this guy.

That's nice. 22 goals (with an unsustainably high SH%) and 30 points while receiving the ice-time he's received, and being a defensive liability in that role, isn't a useful player. It's a player who you can perhaps try to sell high on if you can find another GM who is uninformed and is mesmerized by the goal total; however, given what Brandon Pirri went for at last year's deadline I highly doubt you'll find someone who will pay much for Granlund.

No, Granlund has not been playing on the 3rd line for most of the year. He's been firmly on the 2nd line, and is lately playing on the first line. The Sutter line has always been treated as the 2nd line this year, with Horvat being on the 3rd line.

Cite his salary all you want, that doesn't change anything. Granlund is like a Pirri clone, and considering we traded our leading scorer in the AHL who still had 2 years of waiver exempt status for this player, when Pirri went for a 6th round pick, I find it very much a stretch to call him a steal.

 

[thepoeticgoblin]

*Watches box score*

Trade Marky.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Okay. There's something to be said for actually converting occasionally on the chances you generate, but I have nothing against Gaunce getting more minutes. There are a few players who could stand to have their minutes reduced before Granlund, though.

Gaunce has been our best puck possession player. Defensively he's been very good, offensively he hasn't been good at all. How much of that is due to his pathetic linemates? Tough to say, but like you suggest you would expect more than 0 goals.

Given where this team is at right now I would like to see Gaunce bumped up into a 3rd line checking role. In fact, I think a line of Granlund-Gaunce-Boucher might be worth trying out.

Roll with these lines:

Baertschi-Horvat-Eriksson (injury reportedly not serious)
Sedin-Sedin-Goldobin
Granlund-Gaunce-Boucher
Cramarossa/Chaput-Sutter-Megna

 

[Huggy]

That's nice. 22 goals (with an unsustainably high SH%) and 30 points while receiving the ice-time he's received, and being a defensive liability in that role, isn't a useful player. It's a player who you can perhaps try to sell high on if you can find another GM who is uninformed and is mesmerized by the goal total; however, given what Brandon Pirri went for at last year's deadline I highly doubt you'll find someone who will pay much for Granlund.

No, Granlund has not been playing on the 3rd line for most of the year. He's been firmly on the 2nd line, and is lately playing on the first line. The Sutter line has always been treated as the 2nd line this year, with Horvat being on the 3rd line.

Cite his salary all you want, that doesn't change anything. Granlund is like a Pirri clone, and considering we traded our leading scorer in the AHL who still had 2 years of waiver exempt status for this player, when Pirri went for a 6th round pick, I find it very much a stretch to call him a steal.

you forgot to address how a 22 nhl goal scorer is worse than someone in the ahl with less ppg

 

[TruGr1t]

you forgot to address how a 22 nhl goal scorer is worse than someone in the ahl with less ppg

That's not really the argument. The fact is Shinkaruk was tracking similarly to Goldobin when we traded him. The question is whether we received full value at the time of the deal.

 

[y2kcanucks]

That's not really the argument. The fact is Shinkaruk was tracking similarly to Goldobin when we traded him. The question is whether we received full value at the time of the deal.

Do you think Shinkaruk at the time was only worth a 6th round pick? Or should we have been able to get more for him?

Or even at that valuation...does it make sense to trade him for a 6th round pick or just keep him and see what he can develop into?

I use the 6th round pick as an example since that's what Brandon Pirri went for, who is a very good comparable for Granlund.

 

[TruGr1t]

Do you think Shinkaruk at the time was only worth a 6th round pick? Or should we have been able to get more for him?

Or even at that valuation...does it make sense to trade him for a 6th round pick or just keep him and see what he can develop into?

I use the 6th round pick as an example since that's what Brandon Pirri went for, who is a very good comparable for Granlund.

No, that's the core argument. Shinkaruk's value at the time can probably be roughly equated to Goldobin's right now. At the time of the Granlund/Shinkaruk trade it was widely viewed that Calgary was the winner since many people viewed Granlund as a complete bust at the NHL level.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

It's just that the situation is symptomatic of the wider problems with the organization that triggers people, I'd think. Granlund is a fine player who is tracking well, though it's impossible not to link his production to the fact he's been playing nearly first-line ice time for a lot of the year. And he's not bringing much to the table outside the goals (though on this team that's a big deal obviously); his advanced stats aren't good, he's a -17, and has less assists than all-star playmaker Sutter.

It's not hard to figure that this team is bad because a lot of these players are getting "generous minutes." Gralund, Sbisa, Megna ... pick your poison. If management just straight up used the term "rebuild" that would make sense, because having a guy like Granlund on your top line should only ever happen if you're rebuilding.

All fair points, but as you say, we are rebuilding. He's young, cheap and putting some pucks in the net. We could do a whole lot worse for a player in that role (exhibit A: Jayson Megna).

The deal to acquire him and the cost paid is a different kettle of fish, but right now, I'm just surprised that he's such a big target. We have far bigger issues (bad contracts to bad veteran players, with potentially more coming up) whereas Granlund seems like a necessary and reasonably priced piece for a rebuilding team.

 

[VancouverJagger]

That's not really the argument. The fact is Shinkaruk was tracking similarly to Goldobin when we traded him. The question is whether we received full value at the time of the deal.

Please stop - you seem to argue for the sake of arguing - geezus - that was a good trade for us - regardless of whether or not you think Granlund sucks (as he sure doesn't suck as bad as Shinkaruk).


Get over it - Jimbo actually made a solid trade here - soo many negative Nelly's & armchair warriors around here who have nothing better to do then try to knock any and everything.

 

[TruGr1t]

Please stop - you seem to argue for the sake of arguing - geezus - that was a good trade for us - regardless of whether or not you think Granlund sucks (as he sure doesn't suck as bad as Shinkaruk).


Get over it - Jimbo actually made a solid trade here - soo many negative Nelly's & armchair warriors around here who have nothing better to do then try to knock any and everything.

It's called a discussion. No need to get all triggered about it.

 

[Shareefruck]

Okay. There's something to be said for actually converting occasionally on the chances you generate, but I have nothing against Gaunce getting more minutes. There are a few players who could stand to have their minutes reduced before Granlund, though.

Sure, but even without that ability, he's still doing other things that are making him more effective than Granlund. A Gaunce who is as effective as he currently is but also capitalizes on his chances would only widen the gap further.

And yes, Granlund is in the company of a number of worse guilty offenders, but nobody disputes that fact with those other guys. Nobody other than maybe Benning himself argues that Jason Megna or Chaput are actually effective players more deserving of that icetime. It's only natural that this would be brought up more often.

 

[m9]

I tried to find Granlund's ES p/60 last week, but couldn't find anything. Would be interested in those numbers. I expect him to be producing like an average third-liner, which I think is a good development as last year he looked like an NHL/AHL tweener to me.

 

[rune74]

It's called a discussion. No need to get all triggered about it.

It's only a discussion if you agree he sucks, otherwise you get accused of trolling or being a blind defender etc. I don't think you can call it a discussion if when someone comments on his scoring a goal creates 6 pages of angst about how much he sucks.

Not saying you did that, but that is generally what happens.

 

[Tryforthekingdom]

I tried to find Granlund's ES p/60 last week, but couldn't find anything. Would be interested in those numbers. I expect him to be producing like an average third-liner, which I think is a good development as last year he looked like an NHL/AHL tweener to me.

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...ters&minutes=500&disp=1&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

Here. 230th in the league.

 

[M2Beezy]

Missed the game really suprised about Bachman playing so well but how did the following guys do if anyone has time

Stecher
Hutton
Goldy

 

[M2Beezy]

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...ters&minutes=500&disp=1&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

Here. 230th in the league.

Its pretty much right in the middle of third line production. Not so bad i guess. I missed the last two weeks and see hes still putting up points. I was one of the most vocal against this trade but gotta say maybe it was an overreaction hes not AS bad as we thought he was. Still needs more time before we make a conclusion about this trade

 

[vancityluongo]

Its pretty much right in the middle of third line production. Not so bad i guess. I missed the last two weeks and see hes still putting up points. I was one of the most vocal against this trade but gotta say maybe it was an overreaction hes not AS bad as we thought he was. Still needs more time before we make a conclusion about this trade

Please change your username back.

 

[m9]

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...ters&minutes=500&disp=1&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

Here. 230th in the league.

Thanks. 224th among forwards, actually. Which is generally what I thought, 3rd line production. That's among forwards with 500+ minutes.. if you lower it to 300 he dips to 247. Still, 3rd line production.

Baertschi (42) Horvat (66) Henrik (178) Daniel (193) Sutter (252) Eriksson (267) are some of the others based on 500+ minutes.

Our 4th liners (Gaunce, Megna, Chaput) have some of the worst production in the league.

 

[Tinhorn1]

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...ters&minutes=500&disp=1&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

Here. 230th in the league.

Thanks. So a third line rate. About what I expected.

 

[Shareefruck]

For the record, I'd be fine with his production if he were solid defensively. But to me, a guy with third line production who hurts the team as much as he does defensively essentially IS an NHLer/AHLer tweener.

Still better than last year, so continued improvement is certainly possible. But still reasonable to be down on his play.

 

[Tryforthekingdom]

For the record, I'd be fine with his production if he were solid defensively. But to me, a guy with third line production who hurts the team as much as he does defensively essentially IS an NHLer/AHLer tweener.

Still better than last year, so continued improvement is certainly possible. But still reasonable to be down on his play.

I agree. Lots of players in the AHL or Europe that if given top six minutes on an NHL and powerplay time could put up 30-35 points while not providing much else.

 

[tantalum]

Thanks. So a third line rate. About what I expected.

That's true and while I have no idea on average icetime, his total icetime ranks him 75th 5-on-5 in the NHL (among forwards). Being first line icetime producing mid to lower end third line stats isn't great.

And that's the issue in a nutshell for this team. Players are not producing the results at a rate a team actually needs to be successful on the ice. You have too many players being played with first and second line icetime producing at second and third line rates. Essentially almost everyone needs to be pushed down a line.

And it isn't just him of course...Eriksson and Sutter rank ahead of Granlund in 5-on-5 icetime and have worse production.

 

[m9]

That's true and while I have no idea on average icetime, his total icetime ranks him 75th 5-on-5 in the NHL. Being first line icetime producing mid to lower end third line stats isn't great.

And that's the issue in a nutshell for this team. Players are not producing the results at a rate a team actually needs to be successful on the ice. You have too many players being played win first and second line icetime producing at second and third line rates.

And it isn't just him of course...Eriksson and Sutter rank ahead of Granlund in 5-on-5 icetime and have worse production.

That was ES 5on5 points/60, so average icetime was accounted for.

But yeah, you can see pretty easily on that list who hasn't been doing the job this year. It does give a glimmer of hope that Horvat and Baertschi can be our first line. Wouldn't surprise me to see a new coach come in and roll with those two and Eriksson as the defacto 1st line starting next year.

 

[tantalum]

That was ES 5on5 points/60, so average icetime was accounted for.

<smacks forehead with hand> Thanks!

But yeah, you can see pretty easily on that list who hasn't been doing the job this year. It does give a glimmer of hope that Horvat and Baertschi can be our first line. Wouldn't surprise me to see a new coach come in and roll with those two and Eriksson as the defacto 1st line starting next year.

It does and it's why I have an inability to get excited over Granlund at all. Just as I can't get excited about Sutter or Eriksson (who is getting outproduced by Cramarossa by rate!). Is granlund as useless as Megna or Chaput? Of course not. But using a likely unfair benchmark of the Stanley Cup champs...Granlund would rank 14th among among the forwards on that team playing more than 300 minutes 5-on-5. Be a little more fair and take a bubble team like Calgary...10th. Even on equally inept offensive teams like the Devils and Canes he's in that 8-10 range. As I said it prevents me from getting excited. But, it is a start for him. The telling thing is whether he can fight off competition when other wingers (hopefully) emerge in the next 12-18 months.

 

[VanJack]

I know many posters have lamented the defensive prowess of Granlund, and if so, it's even more surprising he's survived on the line with Daniel and Henrik....because let's face it, the twins are morphing into huge defensive liabilities, particularly in their own zone.

Has Granlund improved at all on the defensive side of the puck?....and if not, why does Willie like him on that line?....because in years gone by it was Hansen and Burrows who did the heavy lifting defensively on that line.