Pavel96
Registered User
- Apr 7, 2015
- 2,452
- 2,318
Player Discussion Erik Gudbranson - To trade or extend?
- Thread starter Bleach Clean
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, you're most likely right with regards to Gudbranson. I just don't know how angry I can get with this move when it doesn't necessarily do anything to make things worse going forward, relative to what our goals are (to lose and to lose lots of games).
Melvin
21/12/05
Not that I am surprised, but you did not answer any of my questions.
Is his skating so much better than Goober that he's worth 2M less? HAve you watched Goober get turnstiled on a regular basis like I have?
DL44
Status quo
Melvin
21/12/05
I think I have said everything I have to say. I really dislike this player. It infuriates me to watch him attempt to play hockey, and I am absolutely baffled that anyone could watch him lumber around the ice for the past two seasons and want to sign him to an extension. He is just awful at virtually everything except killing penalties and being tall and handsome. I hate watching him play and I hate the persona he carries, beaking off to the media about how tough and important he is. I can't stand him. I can't stand him! Trading him for any f***ing draft pick should have been the easiest thing in the world to do; I want to say that I can't believe we are here right now except, well, of course we are. The guys who watched Luca Sbisa for a year and thought he was worth 3.6M are still in charge, and this team is not going to be any good until they are not.
Alright, no more posts from me in the thread.
Ideally Benning manages to bring back Tryamkin.
I am still hoping that Benning trades him, but as I said previously, I'm not opposed to re-signing Gudbranson on a short 2-3 year deal. I highly doubt he's going to re-sign at the same salary or less so something like $3.8M or under is probably a reasonable expectation should Gubranson be re-signed, but I think that a good deal would be for him to make Girardi and Del Zotto money.
I think one issue is that Benning sees a need to have a Dman like Gudbranson in the lineup rather than a relatively homogeneous group of smallish Dmen and there is a shortage of RHD out there. Pouliot has spent a lot of time playing right D on this team but if he stays with the Canucks, I'm not sure if that is his ideal side. The Canucks' don't have a lot of option on the right side especially if Biega isn't brought back and it's not like Biega has been used as a regular anyways.
I am still hoping that Benning trades him, but as I said previously, I'm not opposed to re-signing Gudbranson on a short 2-3 year deal. I highly doubt he's going to re-sign at the same salary or less so something like $3.8M or under is probably a reasonable expectation should Gubranson be re-signed, but I think that a good deal would be for him to make Girardi and Del Zotto money.
I think one issue is that Benning sees a need to have a Dman like Gudbranson in the lineup rather than a relatively homogeneous group of smallish Dmen and there is a shortage of RHD out there. Pouliot has spent a lot of time playing right D on this team but if he stays with the Canucks, I'm not sure if that is his ideal side. The Canucks' don't have a lot of option on the right side especially if Biega isn't brought back and it's not like Biega has been used as a regular anyways.
Bleach Clean
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2006
- 27,055
- 6,624
No stones. If he's not now, what makes you think he will be later? Note: Development is not the right answer.
You thought they would attempt to re-sign him? After they all but traded him for Demers? I didn't see this argument made in any great frequency.
The opportunities to spend cap wisely are directly tied to the wisdom of the individual spending cap space. In other words, it doesn't matter at all that FAs will not want to sign here. Don't chase big money FAs. Make Vanek type deals instead. Meaning, there is no pressure on Benning to spend cap space unwisely.
Development at 26 years of age = highly, highly improbable. When you see players excel beyond this stage it's more a function of utility than development. Like the Sedins finding art ross form later in their careers. They were that good already, it's just that their utility (max Ozone starts, Kesler on the PP, Ehrhoff etc...) wasn't maximized.
Tanking isn't Benning's agenda. So if the team is worse off by re-signing Gudbranson, it means that Benning is that much worse at executing his retool plan. Great for team tank, as this will inadvertently make the team worse, but it does not reflect well on the direction of the team outside Gudbranson. What you are talking about is the best of a bad situation. -- I'd prefer the situation not to be bad/as bad as it is.
I think Guddy has had a couple of bad years. He's not what Benning thought he would be but he is better than he has shown so far in Vancouver. Bottom pairing but invaluable in the playoffs. He's the kind of guy who can maul other teams when the rules soften. Of course the team need to get there...
Bleach Clean
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2006
- 27,055
- 6,624
I don't value this type of player at all because other Dmen will have to do all the heavy lifting at ES, as in the run of the play, for him to be effective between the whistles. He's just not a valued commodity in terms of where the NHL is headed. Better elsewhere.
I've seen some of his work in FLA, he wasn't great there either. Gallant's penchant to play him does not determine his effectiveness in the minutes played. He played a lot, but he was barely holding his head above water in those minutes.
This guy needs to go. It's only Benning's ego and trade optics that is pushing him to stay. If they had gotten a Demers type of defenseman in return, he would already be gone, IMO.
Fair enough. You might be right. I am just concerned that, if they let him go for peanuts, they will regret it in a year or two. And, while 3,5M is probably right (or a little over paid), $4M isn't going to break the bank if one considers that $3.5M+ half a D-8 = $4M.
TruKnyte
On the wagon
Foundational Player
Benning the Incompetent
Bob Mackenzie reporting that a Gudbranson extension could be signed today.
"Stupid is as stupid does."
The only positive being that "Guddy" makes the backend worse which should translate to more wins moving forward. But like many fans would have preferred he be moved for future assets.
But as we all know its all about the playoff push. Team must remain competitive right now, who gives a damn about 4 years down the line.
What a time to be alive Canuck fans!!
"Stupid is as stupid does."
The only positive being that "Guddy" makes the backend worse which should translate to more wins moving forward. But like many fans would have preferred he be moved for future assets.
But as we all know its all about the playoff push. Team must remain competitive right now, who gives a damn about 4 years down the line.
What a time to be alive Canuck fans!!
Egghead1999
Registered User
- Nov 9, 2007
- 3,168
- 864
Foundational Player
Benning the Incompetent
Just hear it in the radio: it is 4x4
One of the best contract negotiators in the entire NHL. Way to go Jim Benning!!! No need for an individual like Laurence Gilman in the fold, what does he know anyway?
This extension is well deserved.
For Benning supporters
For Benning supporters
Of course it's about making the playoffs, thats been the message from this management group. Linden almost chocked out the R word last year in his arrogant Loew-esk reply to fans that were wanting to know if it was an actual rebuild or a soft retool. I expect them to trade for some big past prime so called tough guy and try to sign and overpay some other big past prime so called tough guy as a free agent next year. Next year they will play good for the first 20 games and Linbenning will say the same old tired crap they have been spewing the last 3 years and around february next year they will roll out the injury excuse...same .... different pile.
Diamonddog01
Diamond in the rough
Just hear it in the radio: it is 4x4
Is that confirmed? Disgusting if true.
Egghead1999
Registered User
- Nov 9, 2007
- 3,168
- 864
NHL denotes the league average salary is $3.1 million
Gudbranson could be potentially signed for $4 million
ZOMG cap management bad contract so terrible much death famine burn it down omg drama drama drama be dramatic wave my arms it's possibly less than a million over the NHL league average salary
Gudbranson could be potentially signed for $4 million
ZOMG cap management bad contract so terrible much death famine burn it down omg drama drama drama be dramatic wave my arms it's possibly less than a million over the NHL league average salary
Canucks direct comparable for a contract negotiation are Tanev at 4.5 million and Edler at 5 million, Guddy doesn't even touch either in terms of talent and nor should he even be in their value in terms of a contract.
He's not. though. $4 million isn't $4.5 million is it? If the league average is $3.1 million and he gets $4 million and it's such an over-payment than by extension applying that exact same metric we can say he's on an average contract where as Edler and Tanev are on brilliant contracts no?
But then, Tanev signed that contract under Benning and Benning can't do anything right I keep reading.
Pavel96
Registered User
- Apr 7, 2015
- 2,452
- 2,318
Pavel96
Registered User
- Apr 7, 2015
- 2,452
- 2,318
Erik Gudbranson
Rumour: Dhaliwal also reports that the Canucks are close to re-signing defenceman Erik Gudbranson. TSN’s Bob McKenzie confirmed that report and gave some contract parameters for the deal with the AAV being at around $4 million per year.
Analysis: Gudbranson is one of the most maligned players in the hockey analytics community, and a contract of over $4 million per year for a player of his skill set seems crazy. He’s an old-school defensive defenceman, with little offence. The game seems to have passed by this type of player, and this contract is not something I would recommend.
Rumour: Dhaliwal also reports that the Canucks are close to re-signing defenceman Erik Gudbranson. TSN’s Bob McKenzie confirmed that report and gave some contract parameters for the deal with the AAV being at around $4 million per year.
Analysis: Gudbranson is one of the most maligned players in the hockey analytics community, and a contract of over $4 million per year for a player of his skill set seems crazy. He’s an old-school defensive defenceman, with little offence. The game seems to have passed by this type of player, and this contract is not something I would recommend.
- Status
