Player Discussion: Erik Gudbranson | Part 4

Status
Not open for further replies.

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,772
9,427
harold says stay at home defencemen are underrated.

SnepstsVancouver1975.png
 

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,000
6,572
I am dreading the upcoming contract for Gudbranson. Giving him 5m+ and term will seriously impede the ability of the next GM to re-work the defense.

That said, if the next GM is Tallon, it would make a lot of sense to ownership to lock him up.

Interesting times.
 

racerjoe

Registered User
Jun 3, 2012
12,154
5,850
Vancouver
I am dreading the upcoming contract for Gudbranson. Giving him 5m+ and term will seriously impede the ability of the next GM to re-work the defense.

That said, if the next GM is Tallon, it would make a lot of sense to ownership to lock him up.

Interesting times.

I know there has been a lot of Smoke around Tallon and the Canucks, but I am not sure he will be the guy. We have gone through Nonis, Gillis and Benning and there seems to be a pattern, we went old boys new thinker, old boys, and with the old boys performing as poorly as they have, I think we may see a forward thinker. Especially when we look around the league and see the trends.
 

m9

m9
Sponsor
Jan 23, 2010
25,107
15,229
I know there has been a lot of Smoke around Tallon and the Canucks, but I am not sure he will be the guy. We have gone through Nonis, Gillis and Benning and there seems to be a pattern, we went old boys new thinker, old boys, and with the old boys performing as poorly as they have, I think we may see a forward thinker. Especially when we look around the league and see the trends.

No way. After seeing a rookie GM flame out so bad they will be going for someone with GM experience.
 

Pavel96

Registered User
Apr 7, 2015
2,452
2,318
I am dreading the upcoming contract for Gudbranson. Giving him 5m+ and term will seriously impede the ability of the next GM to re-work the defense.

That said, if the next GM is Tallon, it would make a lot of sense to ownership to lock him up.

Interesting times.

Giving him 5m plus will probably end up feelings so much worse than the sbisa deal has. And everybody knows how much we thinka our boy Luca!

Wasn't Guds supposed to be our tough force to be reckoned with on the back end? .... Hans't seemed to make nearly the impact physically Trymikin has? And before we cite Tryminkin's size - all I am saying is why did we even bother to bring Guds in? Guds... or duds?
 

Rotting Corpse*

Registered User
Sep 20, 2003
60,153
3
Kelowna, BC
So I'm trying to find the precedent for the 5M figure people keep throwing around. Best I came up with is Danny Dekeyser's 6/30 and Jared Spurgeon's 4/20.75.

Both are similar in that it bought one year of RFA and the rest would have been UFA, which is going to be the case for RealGud's contract.

There is also Tanev 5/22.25 but is 2 RFA/3 UFA, so it's a bit cheaper.

Dekeyser and Spurgeon are both 20-30 point guys whereas RealGud is more of a 10 point guy. Tanev is in the 15-20 range. I'm not knowledgable enough to compare the rest of their games but Dekeyser and Spurgeon are playing 22-23 minutes a game whereas RealGud is more of a second pairing guy here, averaging under 20 minutes/game. If someone wants to offer more knowledgable comparisons of these players I would of course welcome it.

These seem like the best examples of contracts that RealGud's agent can point to if he's asking for 5+M from the Canucks.

Another possible comparable might be Jake Muzzin who signed 5/20, buying 4 years of UFA. Muzzin is clearly a different kind of player but he too is in the 23 minute/game range and putting up 40 points so I think his agent will want to stay away from that one.

Finally, there is Methot, who is really the only comparable that has as low of production as RealGud. He got 4.9x4 as a UFA. So if RealGud were to (just for the sake of argument) take 3.5 again next season and then hit UFA, and get a similar contract to Methot on the UFA market, that would be akin to signing a 5/23 contract today, or 4.6 AAV.

What do you guys think? Do you have any other comparables that I am missing?

I think that I would be okay with something like 5/20 for this player. Much like I said in the Horvat thread, I think 5+ is lunacy and would set a new precedent rather than following any existing ones.
 
Last edited:

racerjoe

Registered User
Jun 3, 2012
12,154
5,850
Vancouver
No way. After seeing a rookie GM flame out so bad they will be going for someone with GM experience.

The last 3 GM's we have had have been rookies, 1 flamed out, one was pushed out in Nonis, and one was the best they have had, probably in franchise history.
 

Nucker101

Foundational Poster
Apr 2, 2013
20,579
15,832
His next contract is gonna suck. I just hope the term is only 3 or 4 years instead of 5 or 6.
 

arttk

Registered User
Feb 16, 2006
17,036
8,753
Los Angeles
So I'm trying to find the precedent for the 5M figure people keep throwing around. Best I came up with is Danny Dekeyser's 6/30 and Jared Spurgeon's 4/20.75.

Both are similar in that it bought one year of RFA and the rest would have been UFA, which is going to be the case for RealGud's contract.

There is also Tanev 5/22.25 but is 2 RFA/3 UFA, so it's a bit cheaper.

Dekeyser and Spurgeon are both 20-30 point guys whereas RealGud is more of a 10 point guy. Tanev is in the 15-20 range. I'm not knowledgable enough to compare the rest of their games but Dekeyser and Spurgeon are playing 22-23 minutes a game whereas RealGud is more of a second pairing guy here, averaging under 20 minutes/game. If someone wants to offer more knowledgable comparisons of these players I would of course welcome it.

These seem like the best examples of contracts that RealGud's agent can point to if he's asking for 5+M from the Canucks.

Another possible comparable might be Jake Muzzin who signed 5/20, buying 4 years of UFA. Muzzin is clearly a different kind of player but he too is in the 23 minute/game range and putting up 40 points so I think his agent will want to stay away from that one.

Finally, there is Methot, who is really the only comparable that has as low of production as RealGud. He got 4.9x4 as a UFA. So if RealGud were to (just for the sake of argument) take 3.5 again next season and then hit UFA, and get a similar contract to Methot on the UFA market, that would be akin to signing a 5/23 contract today, or 4.6 AAV.

What do you guys think? Do you have any other comparables that I am missing?

I think that I would be okay with something like 5/20 for this player. Much like I said in the Horvat thread, I think 5+ is lunacy and would set a new precedent rather than following any existing ones.

I think the rumors is that Gubranson was asking for 5M for his next contract. I don't think there is any precedent for it but then if there is a GM that is good at setting precedent like that, it will be Benning.
 

mossey3535

Registered User
Feb 7, 2011
13,218
9,645
As someone who has been following Guds for his whole career, at this point I wouldn't re-sign him. So to me this extension talk is foolish.

He has to seriously improve over the rest of this season. We harp on Jake all season but Guds has shown almost none of what was advertised besides intangibles. Unfortunately intangibles aren't helping his d-partners play better.

Basically he has shown us that he can't anchor a pair. If Hutton plays poorly, he plays poorly. Considering that Hutton is the type of d-man that has historically played well with Guds, that is unacceptable. ESPECIALLY if we are going to sign him multi-years @ $4M.

RJL might be correct in that 5/20 is ok, but I think that if he's going to plateau at this level he isn't even worth that right now. Breaks my heart, but that's the truth.
 

bossram

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
15,324
14,391
Victoria
So I'm trying to find the precedent for the 5M figure people keep throwing around. Best I came up with is Danny Dekeyser's 6/30 and Jared Spurgeon's 4/20.75.

Both are similar in that it bought one year of RFA and the rest would have been UFA, which is going to be the case for RealGud's contract.

There is also Tanev 5/22.25 but is 2 RFA/3 UFA, so it's a bit cheaper.

Dekeyser and Spurgeon are both 20-30 point guys whereas RealGud is more of a 10 point guy. Tanev is in the 15-20 range. I'm not knowledgable enough to compare the rest of their games but Dekeyser and Spurgeon are playing 22-23 minutes a game whereas RealGud is more of a second pairing guy here, averaging under 20 minutes/game. If someone wants to offer more knowledgable comparisons of these players I would of course welcome it.

These seem like the best examples of contracts that RealGud's agent can point to if he's asking for 5+M from the Canucks.

Another possible comparable might be Jake Muzzin who signed 5/20, buying 4 years of UFA. Muzzin is clearly a different kind of player but he too is in the 23 minute/game range and putting up 40 points so I think his agent will want to stay away from that one.

Finally, there is Methot, who is really the only comparable that has as low of production as RealGud. He got 4.9x4 as a UFA. So if RealGud were to (just for the sake of argument) take 3.5 again next season and then hit UFA, and get a similar contract to Methot on the UFA market, that would be akin to signing a 5/23 contract today, or 4.6 AAV.

What do you guys think? Do you have any other comparables that I am missing?

I think that I would be okay with something like 5/20 for this player. Much like I said in the Horvat thread, I think 5+ is lunacy and would set a new precedent rather than following any existing ones.

I'd agree with you mostly here. There really isn't a precedent for Guddy to get a huge deal.

But it's the Benning factor that worries me. He is a negotiating nightmare. Like, how can anyone really comprehend the Sbisa/Dorsett/Sutter deals? But with Benning it seems somewhat par for the course.

The other thing here is that I don't even want Gudbranson on the team. In terms of actual quality, he's more a third pair guy. But we're going to be playing him top-four minutes, regardless of his impact. And it's near assured he will be paid commensurate of a top-four role. That's not what good teams do.
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
21,049
14,079
A total of 20 games in, and can see why the Panthers deemed Gudbranson expendable....is he a top-four d-man?...maybe in Jimbo's world he is, but the jury is out, and Florida wasn't going to pay him to find out.....so they flipped him for a former first-rounder (McCann) and a high second, along with another pick. They then traded the Canucks second rounder along with Kulikov to the Sabers for d-man Mark Pysyk, another former first rounder who comes in a lot cheaper and who they figure is just as good. And they also got the 38th and 89th picks...a nice haul for Florida....and Jimbo left holding the bag again with a 'foundational piece', who clearly isn't.
 

Rotting Corpse*

Registered User
Sep 20, 2003
60,153
3
Kelowna, BC
I would definitely be shopping him hard if I were GM, don't get me wrong. But losing an asset for nothing is never a good idea. Could qualify him at 3.5M but then he rejects and you have a hold out and bleeuurgh. Better to deal him now or sign him to a contract you can live with (and that you might be able to deal later.)
 

timw33

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 18, 2007
25,709
19,426
Victoria
A total of 20 games in, and can see why the Panthers deemed Gudbranson expendable....is he a top-four d-man?...maybe in Jimbo's world he is, but the jury is out, and Florida wasn't going to pay him to find out.....so they flipped him for a former first-rounder (McCann) and a high second, along with another pick. They then traded the Canucks second rounder along with Kulikov to the Sabres for d-man Mark Pysyk, another former first rounder who comes in a lot cheaper and who they figure is just as good. And they also got the 38th and 89th picks...a nice haul for Florida....and Jimbo left holding the bag again with a 'foundational piece', who clearly isn't.

There was a great article on Florida changing their philosophy to be an advanced stats org and traded away their weak advanced stat players in Kulikov and Gudbranson. They've been making some great moves. See the Marchessault deal.
 

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,000
6,572
I would definitely be shopping him hard if I were GM, don't get me wrong. But losing an asset for nothing is never a good idea. Could qualify him at 3.5M but then he rejects and you have a hold out and bleeuurgh. Better to deal him now or sign him to a contract you can live with (and that you might be able to deal later.)


Agreed. I do not want him locked up here.

FLA made a subtle trade for McIlrath that I think was an astute way of replacing some of the qualities Gudbranson brings to the game.
 

m9

m9
Sponsor
Jan 23, 2010
25,107
15,229
I would definitely be shopping him hard if I were GM, don't get me wrong. But losing an asset for nothing is never a good idea. Could qualify him at 3.5M but then he rejects and you have a hold out and bleeuurgh. Better to deal him now or sign him to a contract you can live with (and that you might be able to deal later.)

But really there should be no way we lose him for nothing. Worst case under a decent GM should be we qualify him and he's dealt at the 2018 deadline for something like a 2nd and a prospect. And that's worst case, barring injury.
 

m9

m9
Sponsor
Jan 23, 2010
25,107
15,229
The last 3 GM's we have had have been rookies, 1 flamed out, one was pushed out in Nonis, and one was the best they have had, probably in franchise history.

I don't think going back that far matters. Current staff with no experience was a failure and in my opinion the ownership group won't do that again.
 

sting101

Registered User
Feb 8, 2012
15,707
14,510
His next contract is gonna suck. I just hope the term is only 3 or 4 years instead of 5 or 6.
yes I'm hoping they just move him for that 20 goal scoring winger they want. Best case scenario is probably a 4 yr deal 3.75-4.0-4.25-4.5- cap hit 4.125

Gudbranson for Boone Jenner
Or
Sutter and Gudbranson for RNH
 

arttk

Registered User
Feb 16, 2006
17,036
8,753
Los Angeles
I don't think going back that far matters. Current staff with no experience was a failure and in my opinion the ownership group won't do that again.

I think the ownership will setup mock tests to make sure the next management team knows what is the cap. Maybe mock negotiation sessions to see if they can negotiate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->