The Erik "Gudzilla" Gudbranson Thread
- Thread starter Randy Butternubs
- Start date
- Status
It also seems like anytime we go the tough guy route, we get punished by the refs. Since we are "finesse" Penguins. It appears it comes off as retaliatory, and you know how the refs respond to that.
If there was to be an interpretative dance of that whole sequence, it would resemble a Wile E. Coyote best of montage.
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2004
- 34,436
- 19,483
It is what it is. Reaves was the only guy that could actually intimidate other guys like Wilson. They stupidly tossed him away, now he’s having a career year already with 20 games left still.
Someone mentioned Kassian is a UFA... he can play the game well as a fourth liner. He’s not Reaves, but he’s a legit tough guy. Maybe he could be an option instead of using uh, Garrett Wilson.
I guess if it makes anyone feel better, Gudbranson wrecked Tom Wilson last season.
Jaded-Fan
Registered User
Brass's value has sunk so low that he could only get a third round pick in return.
I am just saying that if you are going to crucify for the bad you have to be fair and not ignore the good. It the reverse of those people who come back from Vegas and tell me how they won $5,000 without telling me how they lost more overall.
Gurglesons
Registered User
Gurglesons
Registered User
I’ll put it this way. Toronto, Tampa, Winnipeg and San Jose are seens at the contenders this year.
Toronto -
Zaitsev
Tampa -
Girardi
Coburn
San Jose -
Dillon
Winnipeg -
None.
Still hate the trade and the idea, but if Gudbranson pairs well with Petts I could see him being at least okay.
UnderratedBrooks44
Registered User
I neither agree nor disagree with the above, because sometimes you have to invoke Occam's razor and/or resist the urge to pinpoint a grand plan of any kind when there isn't necessarily one that can be adhered to 100% of the time.
If we look at each of these moves in a vacuum, there are a variety of reasons why they were made:
Sutter/Bones: Sutter was Sutter given that he's too soft and you're probably not going to win anything with a player like him, so we get Bones who can still contribute but is more in the mold of a traditional checking center.
Fehr: He was a depth add with the hope he could also move up the lineup in the event of injuries at wing. Not really a notable skater either way in my opinion.
Plots: A shot in the dark at a Euro/Russian coming over and being good in the NHL. No bearing on anything really.
Daley: The Hawks wanted rid of Daley because it was a bad fit, and they had that ridiculous philosophy where they thought it was a good idea to trade for worse players who happened to be locked into a contract. This deal is pretty much the stars aligning for the Penguins, and Daley happened to be a good skating puck mover.
Hags: Perron was lazy here and wasn't solving anything for us, and obviously you're not getting a consistent scorer for a lazy scorer, so you go for a different ingredient. Plus, it's just a swap of struggling players.
I think you have a general idea of what kind of team you want, but there are also a lot of circumstances that dictate trades, and those trades are not always going to be in line with what you're trying to do. Sometimes, often I would argue, you're just trying to make your team better and picking the best of a small number of trade options you have at each juncture. Who knows what JR's general goals were for the team other than making them better.
Excuse the novel. It's a quiet afternoon
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2004
- 34,436
- 19,483
Gurglesons
Registered User
Issue is he’ll rarely be on the ice against that top line I hope.
Kind of the whole Letang shouldn’t have picked his spot. Dumo would 95% of the time be on the ice with Letang and our top two scorers.
I neither agree nor disagree with the above, because sometimes you have to invoke Occam's razor and/or resist the urge to pinpoint a grand plan of any kind when there isn't necessarily one that can be adhered to 100% of the time.
If we look at each of these moves in a vacuum, there are a variety of reasons why they were made:
Sutter/Bones: Sutter was Sutter given that he's too soft and you're probably not going to win anything with a player like him, so we get Bones who can still contribute but is more in the mold of a traditional checking center.
Fehr: He was a depth add with the hope he could also move up the lineup in the event of injuries at wing. Not really a notable skater either way in my opinion.
Plots: A shot in the dark at a Euro/Russian coming over and being good in the NHL. No bearing on anything really.
Daley: The Hawks wanted rid of Daley because it was a bad fit, and they had that ridiculous philosophy where they thought it was a good idea to trade for worse players who happened to be locked into a contract. This deal is pretty much the stars aligning for the Penguins, and Daley happened to be a good skating puck mover.
Hags: Perron was lazy here and wasn't solving anything for us, and obviously you're not getting a consistent scorer for a lazy scorer, so you go for a different ingredient. Plus, it's just a swap of struggling players.
I think you have a general idea of what kind of team you want, but there are also a lot of circumstances that dictate trades, and those trades are not always going to be in line with what you're trying to do. Sometimes, often I would argue, you're just trying to make your team better and picking the best of a small number of trade options you have at each juncture. Who knows what JR's general goals were for the team other than making them better.
Excuse the novel. It's a quiet afternoon
Iirc - and my memory is very shaky on these details - Rutherford liked Sutter, just he couldn't afford him (praise the Cap!) and he did specifically say he was looking to get quicker to suit Sully's system. I agree that to a certain extent GMs have limited options and can't always stick to plan, but whatever the reasons, Rutherford's trades never really made us faster outside that little window in time. I guess Bjoogs and McCann for Brassard and Sheahan is a small swing back.
I get the whole “tough guy” angle but then again I don’t. Like I’ve said before, I don’t understand how having your team’s tough guy goon fight the other team’s tough guy goon after a big hit really accomplishes anything.
It’s the whole “old time hockey” theater thing that really needs to go from the modern game. And most of that falls on the officials. There should be zero tolerance for sucker punches to the back of the head, cross checks high to the head and neck, slew foots, etc. But as we all know, the NHL still clings to the old time antics...
I don’t see any way to keep other teams from cheap shotting the Pens. Going after the goon or agitator that layed the cheap shot won’t stop them or anybody else from doing it. I’ve said for year, if you’re going to play the eye for an eye game, then go after the opposing teams’ stars, not the agitators.
Unless Gud starts breaking orbital bones of guys like Wilson and Dubinsky and McQuaid and putting them out for weeks, he isn’t going to put an end to the garbage.
It’s the whole “old time hockey” theater thing that really needs to go from the modern game. And most of that falls on the officials. There should be zero tolerance for sucker punches to the back of the head, cross checks high to the head and neck, slew foots, etc. But as we all know, the NHL still clings to the old time antics...
I don’t see any way to keep other teams from cheap shotting the Pens. Going after the goon or agitator that layed the cheap shot won’t stop them or anybody else from doing it. I’ve said for year, if you’re going to play the eye for an eye game, then go after the opposing teams’ stars, not the agitators.
Unless Gud starts breaking orbital bones of guys like Wilson and Dubinsky and McQuaid and putting them out for weeks, he isn’t going to put an end to the garbage.
Kassian would be a good fit here, if they want that toughness up front. He can play the game, skates well, and can be tough when the situation calls for it.
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2004
- 34,436
- 19,483
Best I can say is Wilson won’t be able to skate around all game with his fake tough guy smirk against the Pens, knowing he won’t have to answer the bell agt a legit heavy weight.
Still think ZAR would light Wilson up in a fight, he throws cinder blocks. It’s the one thing I’ve always liked about him.
Gurglesons
Registered User
I honestly don’t think the runs Wilson has taken against us will change at all. They certainly didn’t with Reaves.
Turin
Erik Karlsson is good
- Feb 27, 2018
- 24,026
- 28,456
They won't change.
But - and maybe I'm hoping here - if the stars can look at Gudbranson and say to themselves "Okay, he'll be answered in kind, lets just win the game" rather than "Raaawr! Kill!" - that's a good thing.
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2004
- 34,436
- 19,483
Wilson never took any bad runs when Reaves was a Pen. I’m sure that would have changed in the playoffs, but there was still value in that.
Wilson certainly won’t stop taking dirty cheapshots now with Gudbranson there. I’m just saying he won’t be able to do it all game long and skate past the Pens bench laughing at them because their toughest guy was like, Kunitz and shit.
Now he will have to answer for those hits. Does it matter? A little I guess... better than nothing.
Randy Butternubs
Registurd User
@Empoleon8771
In Mackey's chat today, he did not say that Gudbranson was a "rental" (as you put it).
In Mackey's chat today, he did not say that Gudbranson was a "rental" (as you put it).
Gurglesons
Registered User
I’ve gone from miserable to curious what Gudbranson can bring. I honestly could see him being a Cole like presence with Pettersson and forcing the Penguins forwards to play a tighter game. Will be interesting. Still hate the deal.
Randy Butternubs
Registurd User
I was okay with the deal when I thought Gudbranson was on an expiring contract. . .
Gurglesons
Registered User
If he can play like Pettersson's quotes on him, we'll be laughing
Very telling how Gudbranson referenced the puck support in his first chat with the press here. I feel like if they play tight around him, don't overexpose his puck movement, maybe he'll be okay here.
Gurglesons
Registered User
If he can play like Pettersson's quotes on him, we'll be laughing
Very telling how Gudbranson referenced the puck support in his first chat with the press here. I feel like if they play tight around him, don't overexpose his puck movement, maybe he'll be okay here.
I honestly think a D core of..
Dumo - Letang
Maatta - Schultz
Pettersson - Gudbranson
Is actually pretty solid tbh.
The issue is we will likely see..
Dumo - Letang
Johnson - Schultz
Maatta - Gudbranson
We never needed enforcers to begin with. We won two cups on speed and skill and never should have gotten away from that. JR during that two year run never would have acquired the likes of Gudbranson, Oleksiak, Bjugstad, etc. It was all about speed and skill.
- Status
