Player Discussion: Erik Gudbranson | Part 4

[Ryp37]

but if you do that he is going to be a UFA the next summer

What makes you say that?

We've taken guys like Hansen to arbitration and he's still here.

 

[kanucks25]

Not being sarcastic... Gudbranson is really good at shooting low for rebounds. This doesn't sound like a unique skill but you'd be surprised at how many players can't/won't do it properly.

Would very happily give Gudbranson a QO and nothing more. Would gladly go to arbitration—IMO he has zero leverage because the arbitrator isn't going to value "intangibles, big physical player, leadership". They are going to look at comparables and raw statistics, of which he has nothing.


This is a player you need to play hardball with.

Here's why you're wrong:

You're using sound logic whereas Benning does not have that in his repertoire.

Looking forward to that 6 x 4.75M deal.

"Erik is a core member of our organization and already a top-4 D-man at a young age. We believe he still has a lot of room to improve so it was important for us to get him locked up long-term."

 

[racerjoe]

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 know I didn't say it here, but I said it in another thread, I actually want and envision us doing more of a leafs like example. Not sure who our Shanny would be, but I also don't think Tallon would want to be our Lou, as thats kind of what he is now in Florida.

 

[yvrtojfk]

I can see 4MM for 4 years with no NTC or NMC and I can live with that. Will make it easier to trade when the new regime is here.

 

[m9]

I know I didn't say it here, but I said it in another thread, I actually want and envision us doing more of a leafs like example. Not sure who our Shanny would be, but I also don't think Tallon would want to be our Lou, as thats kind of what he is now in Florida.

Yeah, I could see that. I think there will be an ex-GM in some role in that front office.

 

[timw33]

I can see 4MM for 4 years with no NTC or NMC and I can live with that. Will make it easier to trade when the new regime is here.

Yeah, I still think it will be hard to trade him if he's making $4MM and producing like 8-12 points a year.


To those who pointed out the arbitration rule w/r/t not being able to select between 1 and 2 in the final RFA year, appreciate the clarification—that makes a lot of sense. Too bad though.

But yeah if you sign him for a 1 year deal and he's going to be UFA maybe you get most value at the deadline next year?

 

[PetterssonSimp]

Imho I'd offer him 5 years 20 million because I like what he brings, but yeah if the price reaches the 5 million mark I'd just as soon go to arbitration. Settle for one more season and look at who would replace him. Rather via trade or free agent signing.
I think you go full NTC for 2 and limited 14 team NTC for 3 you get that long term 4 million AAV. Not completely hampering, in year 3 you're at least open to playoff teams as trade partners.

 

[Nick Lang]

I love the way this guy plays. If we can sign him for $4-$4.5 I would be in for any term ... the longer the better. Great defender.

 

[racerjoe]

I love the way this guy plays. If we can sign him for $4-$4.5 I would be in for any term ... the longer the better. Great defender.

So you think he is equal value to Tanev?

 

[Samzilla]

Results don't matter they hired young managers that know advanced stats, that means they are smart. Everyone else is dumb. There is little to no evidence that advanced stats were used in building any winners in the NHl. Information is good but this dogmatic approach to how to build a team using stats first and philosophy second is misguided. First decide what type of team you want to be then use information to build that team. Do not go with we are going to get the best 20 players available based on individual advanced stats. What type of team shoes Florida or Phonix want to be ? Are they boston L.a. Or Chicago Pittsburgh?

Y'know, except for Chicago saying they have their own proprietary advanced stats and use them to good effect.

 

[Evolu7ion]

Results don't matter they hired young managers that know advanced stats, that means they are smart. Everyone else is dumb. There is little to no evidence that advanced stats were used in building any winners in the NHl. Information is good but this dogmatic approach to how to build a team using stats first and philosophy second is misguided. First decide what type of team you want to be then use information to build that team. Do not go with we are going to get the best 20 players available based on individual advanced stats. What type of team shoes Florida or Phonix want to be ? Are they boston L.a. Or Chicago Pittsburgh?

Why on earth would any smart successful team reveal details of the advanced analytics it's using to gain a competitive advantage? These aren't the Jim Bennings of the league we are talking about here.

 

[Pavel96]

Not being sarcastic... Gudbranson is really good at shooting low for rebounds. This doesn't sound like a unique skill but you'd be surprised at how many players can't/won't do it properly.



Here's why you're wrong:

You're using sound logic whereas Benning does not have that in his repertoire.

Looking forward to that 6 x 4.75M deal.

"Erik is a core member of our organization and already a top-4 D-man at a young age. We believe he still has a lot of room to improve so it was important for us to get him locked up long-term."

Yeah its either something like you said at 6 x just under 5 mil or 4 x 5.5. Either way it will be followed by a narrow minded and miscalculated, self serving quote.

Aka -"We traded more picks and prospects for him so we have to lock him up. To do so we will overpay - because that's what we do with guys we trade for. We trade away picks and young players - then we overpay to keep them.

It truly feels like a lose - lose situation.

 

[Hollywood Burrows]

Y'know, except for Chicago saying they have their own proprietary advanced stats and use them to good effect.

Pens coach Mike Sullivan is a big proponent and speaks about fancy stats in the sort of measured way that indicates (to me) that he's taken time to consider them seriously and incorporate them into his thinking, without becoming an obsessive ideologue about it. Rare!

 

[Mad Brills*]

5 x 4.5 coming up

 

[James Underbuss*]

Lotsa butt hurt coming up, no matter the money and term.

 

[CanaFan]

Well looks like he's a top pair D now. Should boost his contract to $6-7m given how firmly Benning negotiates

 

[krutovsdonut]

Pens coach Mike Sullivan is a big proponent and speaks about fancy stats in the sort of measured way that indicates (to me) that he's taken time to consider them seriously and incorporate them into his thinking, without becoming an obsessive ideologue about it. Rare!

given that hockey fancy stats are nowhere near as sophisticated or as predictive as baseball fancy stats, and given that even in baseball after a longer period of use, fancy stats are still just a tool, this is the right way to approach things.

 

[m9]

I still like what he brings and have no problem giving him 4 or 5 years at 4 million per. I don't want six of him on the blueline, but I want one of him.

I don't really see how he deserves more than that, though. If he does, you qualify him and go from there. Worst-case is you qualify him next year and trade him at the 2018 deadline for a couple picks.

 

[racerjoe]

given that hockey fancy stats are nowhere near as sophisticated or as predictive as baseball fancy stats, and given that even in baseball after a longer period of use, fancy stats are still just a tool, this is the right way to approach things.

Truth is we the general public have no idea what fancy stats are being used. Most teams don't release them, as they believe it is their competitive, edge. It's why you won't hear what Chicago really does, or LA. You can hear this even when listening to guys like Kevin Woodley.

Yes stats are just a tool, but they are a tool like say a hammer, trying to hammer a nail, we are not using a hammer, we are using our hand and trying to push the nail into the piece of wood...

 

[krutovsdonut]

i am very interested to see what they do with gudbranson with edler out. so far as a canuck he has steered clear of puck carrying duties or anything but basic neutral and offensive zone activity. it seems to me this injury has coincided with willie trying to coax more out of him. putting him on the power play against the coyotes was pretty underwhelming but it is also baby steps.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Truth is we the general public have no idea what fancy stats are being used. Most teams don't release them, as they believe it is their competitive, edge. It's why you won't hear what Chicago really does, or LA. You can hear this even when listening to guys like Kevin Woodley.

Yes stats are just a tool, but they are a tool like say a hammer, trying to hammer a nail, we are not using a hammer, we are using our hand and trying to push the nail into the piece of wood...

yeah, no. it might be a hammer in baseball. in hockey it's more like a rafter square. very useful but not always needed to cut a 2x4.

i think we can know that fancy stats in hockey are not as predictive as they are in baseball. the nature of the two sports dictates that. so we can look at the experience in baseball and compare. 15 years after the revolution, the best coaches in baseball are still the guys who can get in players' heads and motivate, not the guys who play the correct percentage in every situation.

 

[racerjoe]

yeah, no. it might be a hammer in baseball. in hockey it's more like a rafter square. very useful but not always needed to cut a 2x4.

i think we can know that fancy stats in hockey are not as predictive as they are in baseball. the nature of the two sports dictates that. so we can look at the experience in baseball and compare. 15 years after the revolution, the best coaches in baseball are still the guys who can get in players' heads and motivate, not the guys who play the correct percentage in every situation.

Yet some of them are pretty damn good, and that is just the ones we know.

Look at Corsi, which is admittedly one of the weaker fancy stats, and thats probably why it is one of the best known. It also is a great predictor of who the good teams will be. I don't remember what the exact stats were, but teams with the best Corsi in the league are generally also the top of the league.

And that is one of the more basic stats. I agree they don't tell the entire story, but they should be used. I would actually compare it to watching a foreign movie, if you don't watch it with the sound on, and just read the subtitles you are going to miss a lot, like context, mood, reflection and emotion in what the characters are saying.

 

[tantalum]

Yet some of them are pretty damn good, and that is just the ones we know.

Look at Corsi, which is admittedly one of the weaker fancy stats, and thats probably why it is one of the best known. It also is a great predictor of who the good teams will be. I don't remember what the exact stats were, but teams with the best Corsi in the league are generally also the top of the league.

And that is one of the more basic stats. I agree they don't tell the entire story, but they should be used. I would actually compare it to watching a foreign movie, if you don't watch it with the sound on, and just read the subtitles you are going to miss a lot, like context, mood, reflection and emotion in what the characters are saying.

Fancy stats are simply trying to find a way to make what has historically qualitative into something quantitative. Using your Corsi example...this is nothing more that quantifying what every kid was coached growing up "Limit the shots against and get the puck to the net".

It's almost an accepted inherent truth that in the long run if you are giving up less shots you are also giving up less scoring chances because you are a good defensive team. Corsi is an extension of this as you include all the shot attempts and get some aspect of possession involved (i.e. if you have the puck more you are likely to be directing more pucks at net)...over the long run. You now have a quantifiable statistic to go by instead of some gut feel or eye test.

But it's a piece of data and most proponents of advanced stats recognize it is a piece of data that needs to be analysed in the whole with the other chunks of data. In a simple example you had Toronto near the top of the standings a couple seasons ago at this time. Advanced stats guys were saying it wasn't going to last as they were getting massively outplayed. That should trigger a discussion as to why are they defying the odds so to speak. Had that happened the discussion would have been around the Leafs unsustainably high shooting percentage as a team and individuals as well as the 0.960 SV% Bernier was sporting. Neither were likely to last. However more often than not it was just an advanced stats rule vs advanced stats mean nothing argument.

They are a tool. A tool that can be used to dig into things. When you are the Habs and see unfavourable 5-on-5 possession stats you may say hey we can put up with this because we legitimately have the best goaltender in the world and he is capable of "beating" those possession numbers for us so we are going to concentrate on improving some other aspect (perhaps PP or PK specialists to improve the special teams).

It works the other way as well. I imagine the canucks have reasonable corsi numbers this year yet are near the bottom of the standings. This should trigger the question "why?" rather than things will turn around look at the possession numbers! The why may simply be that they were constantly giving up early leads and allowing teams to sit back and take the easy points. So you break it down further...how is the possession with the lead, tied and losing? dissect dissect dissect until you find a full understanding. And that isn't trivial to do. You have to find the right combo of things and that is what clubs that use such statistics heavily keep proprietary.

So they don't tell you how exactly you should build your team but it can inform the areas where you can take an advanced stats hit by improving some other area so you come out ahead in the end. You can go out and acquire a guy who is far from an advanced stats darling if he has a history of, say, putting the puck in the net at a 12-13% efficiency compared to a 8 or 9% player. If you need the offense. etc

 

[racerjoe]

Fancy stats are simply trying to find a way to make what has historically qualitative into something quantitative. Using your Corsi example...this is nothing more that quantifying what every kid was coached growing up "Limit the shots against and get the puck to the net".

It's almost an accepted inherent truth that in the long run if you are giving up less shots you are also giving up less scoring chances because you are a good defensive team. Corsi is an extension of this as you include all the shot attempts and get some aspect of possession involved (i.e. if you have the puck more you are likely to be directing more pucks at net)...over the long run. You now have a quantifiable statistic to go by instead of some gut feel or eye test.

But it's a piece of data and most proponents of advanced stats recognize it is a piece of data that needs to be analysed in the whole with the other chunks of data. In a simple example you had Toronto near the top of the standings a couple seasons ago at this time. Advanced stats guys were saying it wasn't going to last as they were getting massively outplayed. That should trigger a discussion as to why are they defying the odds so to speak. Had that happened the discussion would have been around the Leafs unsustainably high shooting percentage as a team and individuals as well as the 0.960 SV% Bernier was sporting. Neither were likely to last. However more often than not it was just an advanced stats rule vs advanced stats mean nothing argument.

They are a tool. A tool that can be used to dig into things. When you are the Habs and see unfavourable 5-on-5 possession stats you may say hey we can put up with this because we legitimately have the best goaltender in the world and he is capable of "beating" those possession numbers for us so we are going to concentrate on improving some other aspect (perhaps PP or PK specialists to improve the special teams).

It works the other way as well. I imagine the canucks have reasonable corsi numbers this year yet are near the bottom of the standings. This should trigger the question "why?" rather than things will turn around look at the possession numbers! The why may simply be that they were constantly giving up early leads and allowing teams to sit back and take the easy points. So you break it down further...how is the possession with the lead, tied and losing? dissect dissect dissect until you find a full understanding. And that isn't trivial to do. You have to find the right combo of things and that is what clubs that use such statistics heavily keep proprietary.

So they don't tell you how exactly you should build your team but it can inform the areas where you can take an advanced stats hit by improving some other area.

True, but in the argument I was having with Kurt, to put a nail in the wood, you don't have to use a hammer, or your bare hands. Other tools will help to.

I look at it as the stats we know are management uses, and it's not just basic, it doesn't use what you were alluding to. The were using goals as a reason to bring in a few players, but they didn't add in the goals out that they were losing, or why this player was successful.

It's like right now with the twins, since they have lost a step, we realize they need a good forchecker, and a guy with speed on their line. It's not using reasoning.

 

[Street Hawk]

Well looks like he's a top pair D now. Should boost his contract to $6-7m given how firmly Benning negotiates

He's their top guy now until tanev returns. It should give the management team a good chance to see how he fairs handling the opposition's best players. But, I don't expect much from him.

He's what he is. 2nd pairing dman. Solid, but not spectacular in terms of seeing that real physical presence.

Contract wise, the canucks can't pay him more than tanev. No justification for it. He's in the same position tanev was in when he got his deal, in terms of years away from Ufa. $4 million or $4.25 should be the max. You can hand out a limited ntc only. A list of 6-8 team he can be moved to. no full NTC.