Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Frenzy Part XX

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Signing Gudbranson makes little to no sense

As it is we have

Lindgren Fox
Miller Trouba
Nemeth Lundkvist
Tinordi
Jones
Bitetto
Hajek

All with NHL experience (sans Nils) Maybe they want a right handed option?
 
  • Like
Reactions: egelband
Mikachu93 said:
Signing Gudbranson makes little to no sense

As it is we have

Lindgren Fox
Miller Trouba
Nemeth Lundkvist
Tinordi
Jones
Bitetto
Hajek

All with NHL experience (sans Nils) Maybe they want a right handed option?
Click to expand...

I was thinking more along the lines of replacing HAjek with Gudbranson as I don't think Hajek will be here and yes, that gives them a RH option.
 
Gudbranson was awful even a few years back on the Canucks, Luke Schenn was miles better. Gudbranson is one of the worst dmen I've seen play for the Canucks & he has some serious competition. Not everyone was Ed Jovanovski. Only thing I could see wanting him for is if they plan to just ice a goon lineup in the season opener against the Caps, let Lundkvist work his way in in an easier game than the first game against the Caps lol

Lindgren - Fox
Nemeth - Trouba
Tinordi - Gudbranson
 
So if you look at Gudbranson's stats for the last (2) years they aren't THAT Bad really.


2019-2020
44gp
20:02 of average TOI
9 points
91 PIM's
-3% corsi rel
-1.8% FF rel
60.4% defensive zone start percentage

2020-2021
45 games played
17:55 average TOI
4 points
59 PIM's
-8.1% corsi rel
-9.6% FF rel
62.7% defensive zone start percentage


His point totals look bad but if you weigh in his defensive zone start percentage you can see one of the reasons he is out-shot on the ice. His year in Anaheim (2019-2020) was low-key a solid year for a depth d-man playing above his head in terms of minutes it appears.

Again, he shouldn't come in and be a top-6 Game 1 guy, but in terms of a depth signing? I'm game.

To put this in perspective, Gudbranson is significantly better than Tinordi and it's not really close.
 
NYR Viper said:
So if you look at Gudbranson's stats for the last (2) years they aren't THAT Bad really.


2019-2020
44gp
20:02 of average TOI
9 points
91 PIM's
-3% corsi rel
-1.8% FF rel
60.4% defensive zone start percentage

2020-2021
45 games played
17:55 average TOI
4 points
59 PIM's
-8.1% corsi rel
-9.6% FF rel
62.7% defensive zone start percentage


His point totals look bad but if you weigh in his defensive zone start percentage you can see one of the reasons he is out-shot on the ice. His year in Anaheim (2019-2020) was low-key a solid year for a depth d-man playing above his head in terms of minutes it appears.

Again, he shouldn't come in and be a top-6 Game 1 guy, but in terms of a depth signing? I'm game.

To put this in perspective, Gudbranson is significantly better than Tinordi and it's not really close.
Click to expand...

those 2020-21 numbers are HORRIBLE if you're just using corsi/ff.

zone starts shouldn't impact your numbers that much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDirtyH
NYR Viper said:
And that's true but if we look at who is going to be down there it's Schneider, Reunanen, Robertson. I think Schneider and Robertson probably need to actually stay and play big minutes. Throwing them in to the NHL wouldn't be ideal if they are struggling at the level which is possible for rookies.
Click to expand...
Sure. But Jones and tinori probably slot in first before those call ups. So 4 defensemen would have to be hurt. If the Rangers were in that scenario it most likely wouldn't be until the kids squad has gotten some big minutes in hartford.
 
SA16 said:
Gudbranson is extremely bad. We can try and sign a cheap depth dman who is not extremely bad. Like Demers, or Hutton, or Koekkoek
Click to expand...

uhhhhhh because none of those guys can beat the piss out of Tom Wilson obviously. And Gudbranson can.

Im just picturing an opening night starting lineup of Reaves Tinordi Gudbranson Goodrow and they will probably call up Geertsen too then send him back down after the first period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EdJovanovski
smoneil said:
He was 32. He was just about a PPG player before the last concussion. That doesn't sound very "last legs" to me. As for the concussions, he was cleared by personal and team neurologists as being A-OK good to go. If they were comfortable that he was going to be back to a "healthy LaFontaine" they why should WE question it?

You countered with a player who was misdiagnosed, didn't want experimental surgery, and was treated with a shot. Literally, there is nothing at all similar between the Crosby and Eichel cases except for their ages. The ONLY difference between the LaFontaine and Eichel cases is their ages (and, as you pointed out, the different price tags). The second Pittsburgh knew that Crosby's problem wasn't PCS and was something that could be cured with a shot, he never would have been available. So your whole premise is based on the idea that we should trade for Eichel and hope that we'll learn that his neck doesn't need major surgery, and all he has to do is take a couple Flintstone vitamins to go back to the healthiest version of himself. It's an asinine comparison, but you buy into it because it confirms what YOU want to believe. I'd rather be over here in reality, where players with major spinal necks surgery almost always come out of it with mobility and range of motion issues.
Click to expand...
The last let's comment was based on his brain. If that wasn't the case do you think you'd land a point per game center for a 2nd round pick?

As for Crosby, I figured it is common sense to understand I wasn't bring him up in 5he context of after they knew he needed a shot to be healthy, I was bringing him up prior as in with his health uncertainty and seemingly everyone thinking the issues were from concussions IF he had been available would you have taken a risk in acquiring him, bc it would've been the only time/opportunity to land a talent like that at his age.

You're a smart person but youre just trying to be argumentative and continue to avoid the root question which is in 2012 before they knew what was actually wrong w Crosby would you have taken a calculated risk to acquire him if he was somehow available?
 
Gudbranson is bad. He is just another tough guy that can’t play hockey well.

I understand the Rangers want to get tougher but they are also getting worse. They are trading too much off because they are ONLY looking at tough tough guys. They can get better and tougher just by being smarter.

For example, Friedman said the Reaves trade took the Rangers out of signing Ritchie. Does anyone think Reaves is better than Ritchie?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Off Sides, rangers1314 and EdJovanovski
Savant said:
Gudbranson is bad. He is just another tough guy that can’t play hockey well.

I understand the Rangers want to get tougher but they are also getting worse. They are trading too much off because they are ONLY looking at tough tough guys. They can get better and tougher just by being smarter.

For example, Friedman said the Reaves trade took the Rangers out of signing Ritchie. Does anyone think Reaves is better than Ritchie?
Click to expand...

I think Ritchie is overrated honestly. People look at his stats and see him as a difference maker but he is a complete liability on the defensive end of the rink. Look at his offensive zone start percentage last year with the Bruins. It's 71.2%!!

His corsi rel is +9.3% and FF rel is +9.1%.

So his point totals and shot differential stats look nice but that's because he is force-fed offensive situations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDirtyH
Corsi and FF are kind of outdated these days as there are better stats now, but those numbers aren't just bad, they're atrocious.

He's a right handed Marc Staal who punches people in the face.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDirtyH
Savant said:
Gudbranson is bad. He is just another tough guy that can’t play hockey well.

I understand the Rangers want to get tougher but they are also getting worse. They are trading too much off because they are ONLY looking at tough tough guys. They can get better and tougher just by being smarter.

For example, Friedman said the Reaves trade took the Rangers out of signing Ritchie. Does anyone think Reaves is better than Ritchie?
Click to expand...
Ritchie had a ton of bad reviews from Boston fans. Not saying I favor one or the other, but for the money and role I could see the argument for Reaves.

With that said, I agree that the toughness thing is borderline excessive at this point. From a holistic organization perspective, it was 100% our biggest need coming into this offseason. But how much can you add? Goodrow, Blais, Tinordi, Reaves...hell even Nemeth plays a rough and tumble game from what I've seen. There's only so many spots on the roster for it.

On the flip side, if they really feel like the depth is necessary then I'm going to reserve judgement until I see how it's deployed. My inclination is if those 5 plus Gudbranson are all seeing significant ice time, it's either because the lineup composition is actually working or we're in a bad spot with injuries. Trying to remain optimistic...
 
NYR Viper said:
I think Ritchie is overrated honestly. People look at his stats and see him as a difference maker but he is a complete liability on the defensive end of the rink. Look at his offensive zone start percentage last year with the Bruins. It's 71.2%!!

His corsi rel is +9.3% and FF rel is +9.1%.

So his point totals and shot differential stats look nice but that's because he is force-fed offensive situations.
Click to expand...
But is he better than Reaves?
 
MarkMessyay11 said:
Ritchie had a ton of bad reviews from Boston fans. Not saying I favor one or the other, but for the money and role I could see the argument for Reaves.

With that said, I agree that the toughness thing is borderline excessive at this point. From a holistic organization perspective, it was 100% our biggest need coming into this offseason. But how much can you add? Goodrow, Blais, Tinordi, Reaves...hell even Nemeth plays a rough and tumble game from what I've seen. There's only so many spots on the roster for it.

On the flip side, if they really feel like the depth is necessary then I'm going to reserve judgement until I see how it's deployed. My inclination is if those 5 plus Gudbranson are all seeing significant ice time, it's either because the lineup composition is actually working or we're in a bad spot with injuries. Trying to remain optimistic...
Click to expand...
Ritchie does everything that Reaves does and he brings some offense. Absolutely terrorized the Rangers last year too. Of course they needed to get tougher but the asset management to get there has been horrendous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkMessyay11


Not that the front office cares about this stuff anymore. But this is a waste of a roster spot. No one can tell me that he passes the eye test either. But toughness.
 
Just say no to Jack or anyone else who is damaged goods. two strong drafts coming up. Would rather not give up both of those firsts, plus a top prospect like Schneider plus a Kravtsov or Chytil. Pass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Let him go west.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smoneil and skipmowerman
Dr. Ogrodnick said:
Sure. But Jones and tinori probably slot in first before those call ups. So 4 defensemen would have to be hurt. If the Rangers were in that scenario it most likely wouldn't be until the kids squad has gotten some big minutes in hartford.
Click to expand...
Jones being able to play both RD/LD and having played games well last season for the rangers certainly makes him a likely candidate.
I’m wondering what happens if Schneider has an absolutely lights out camp, what do they do? Do then send him to the AHL anyway? Seems most likely. But it’s not out of the realm of possibility
 
Savant said:
Gudbranson is bad. He is just another tough guy that can’t play hockey well.

I understand the Rangers want to get tougher but they are also getting worse. They are trading too much off because they are ONLY looking at tough tough guys. They can get better and tougher just by being smarter.

For example, Friedman said the Reaves trade took the Rangers out of signing Ritchie. Does anyone think Reaves is better than Ritchie?
Click to expand...

Getting worse how? Blais and Goodrow can play and Ill take Blais, Goodrow, Nemeth, and sometimes Reaves over Hajek, Howden, Richie, Blackmen any day.
 
Savant said:


Not that the front office cares about this stuff anymore. But this is a waste of a roster spot. No one can tell me that he passes the eye test either. But toughness.
Click to expand...


All of these guys would be fine on $800k-$1m short term deals as a depth d-man though.

I think that's the point
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom