Confirmed with Link: [VAN/FLA] Canucks acquire Erik Gudbranson, 2016 5th ~ PT2

[WTG]

Continue

Click to read more...

 

[kanucks25]

Yeah. I agree that Kypreos isn't the best Pundit but when we start only selecting opinions that support our opinions...

Well you have to pick the opinions of people that you think actually know what they're talking about.

At the two major Canadian networks, the list is short when it comes to analysts. It's something like Friedman, Marek, McKenzie and Ferraro.

 

[kanucks25]

Don't hate the player (don't love the player either), hate the trade.

Might actually be more upset two days later than initially.

If Benning doesn't trade Sbisa for a draft pick or something now...

 

[VanillaCoke]

Were selecting opinions from qualified people.

 

[iceburg]

Well you have to pick the opinions of people that you think actually know what they're talking about.

At the two major Canadian networks, the list is short when it comes to analysts. It's something like Friedman, Marek, McKenzie and Ferraro.

And McKenzie's is probably the most balanced assessment of this trade that I've heard - just listened to it.

 

[Bad News Benning]

You might be ok with the idea of throwing Hutton to the wolves, but I'm not.

there were plenty of ways to insulate Hutton without throwing away futures. Sign Hamhuis, sign another vet, take another teams veteran cap dump, etc. There was no need for this type of trade and it's really hard to rationalize on any level. I'm fine with insulating young players but there is plenty of ways to do so without giving up future assets in the process. This is simply another case of Benning's poor asset management rearing it's ugly head.

 

[Scygen]

What does that actually mean?

This 'actually' means we had literally NO ONE to play with Hutton. We had a big gaping hole in the right side second pairing. Hamhuis can't play there, Sbisa was a disaster, tryamkin is a rookie. Weber, Larsen, Biega are all 7th or 8th dmen..

 

[kanucks25]

And McKenzie's is probably the most balanced assessment of this trade that I've heard - just listened to it.

That's because he tries his best to tell both sides of the story and not really give his opinion. He tries hard not to disparage anyone; if he actually thought Benning got bent over he wouldn't say it.

IMO McKenzie knows exactly what he's talking about but he'll sit on the fence most of the time.

 

[StupidityKills]

Hoping I wake up in 6.5hrs and this was just a bad dream.

 

[CanaFan]

Don't hate the player (don't love the player either), hate the trade.

Might actually be more upset two days later than initially.

If Benning doesn't trade Sbisa for a draft pick or something now...

Haha, watch it go like this.

"We believe Luca is a top 4 Dman who is still young and improving but there was just no market for a young, improving top 4 D man".

"Jim, can you comment on why you felt it was so urgent to acquire Gudbranson before the draft and give up so many assets for him?"

"Well ah, you see we think Gudbranson is a top 4 Dman who is young and improving and those types of players are almost impossible to get and teams always want a premium for these types of players."

"But Jim... you just said Luca Sbisa ...?"

"Yes, Luca is a top 4 D but like I said before you got me talking about Gudbranson who was so hard to get that there just isn't a market for young top 4 D right now. Am I not being clear here?"

 

[The Drop]

I think those leaked emails of Bob Mac revealed how honest he really is about players during radio hits.

 

[WTG]

Don't hate the player (don't love the player either), hate the trade.

Might actually be more upset two days later than initially.

If Benning doesn't trade Sbisa for a draft pick or something now...

I, myself, started off hating the trade. But the more I look at it the more I'm okay with it. I threw a huge hissy fit on Twitter (as you do of course ) when it was announced. But I think that over time it made me realize that this probably means Luca Sbisa will get traded as you say.

At least we have a actual top 4 now. Instead of having Bartkowski in our top 4. Gudbrason at least is capable of playing big minutes. Looking at his QoCRelCorsi it shows he takes very hard matchups. So moving him away from that probably will benifit his overall corsi. Plus the fact that he won't get that much defensive zone starts in Vancouver. All that suggests his numbers will increase playing here IMO.

Also, I'm super pissed that War-on-ice is pooping out on us right when this trade went down. Opendoor called me out on the QoC stats by using rraw stats and I've been eager to look at the QoC TOI stats which I find to be the most reliable stats when it comes to QoC.

We might have gaven up too much, no argument here. But there is still some excitement of us adding a top 4 defensemen. Even though we are probably still going to suck next year.

 

[hellstick]

Guess Hamhuis is gone now. Should have sold him at the deadline, Benning.

 

[CanaFan]

This 'actually' means we had literally NO ONE to play with Hutton. We had a big gaping hole in the right side second pairing. Hamhuis can't play there, Sbisa was a disaster, tryamkin is a rookie. Weber, Larsen, Biega are all 7th or 8th dmen..

I wouldn't want to see Sbisa with Hutton either but I don't see how that is "throwing him to the wolves" in any sense. Ditto for Tryamkin. Both guys play the same type of game as Gudbranson - not as well but similar role. Is Hutton some special type of NHL D man who needs to be kept safe and insulated from the horrors of having a rookie partner or a guy that gets the yips 2-3 times a game?

I guess I just don't get why this was so necessary to "save" Hutton or whatever. It would be a tougher season for him most likely but not anything he couldn't handle.

 

[Pip]

Bad trade

 

[Bonham]

This 'actually' means we had literally NO ONE to play with Hutton. We had a big gaping hole in the right side second pairing. Hamhuis can't play there, Sbisa was a disaster, tryamkin is a rookie. Weber, Larsen, Biega are all 7th or 8th dmen..

Then you deal with it in other ways as the poster mentioned above. Find a veteran stop gap through trade or free agency that can be had for cheap that fills out the roster for a couple of years. There are holes all over the lineup, not just on the second pairing. The team severely lacks depth after the top line and the more futures traded away, the harder it's going to be to fill these needs long term. Where is the offense going to come from with this current group? You can't rely on every prospect fulfilling expectations it just doesn't work that way.

This just isn't a move a team in the position of the Canuck's should be making. Look at team's like the Leafs and Jets that have ridiculous prospect depth. They refuse to trade away future pieces, return assets from veterans, and continue to load up on picks. Those are two teams that are in a much better situation than the Canuck's long term and they still don't make moves like this. What is this going to accomplish for the Canuck's long term? We stabilize the second or third pairing in exchange for losing two solid young pieces? What's the point? So they can hopefully push themselves further into mediocrity rather than building the team properly from the ground up? The division is only going to get more difficult with these young teams coming up.

What are the plans to compete with this long term? We certainly don't have the talent on the team as it stands right now, and losing value in every trade is only going to widen this gap.

 

[skyo]

This 'actually' means we had literally NO ONE to play with Hutton. We had a big gaping hole in the right side second pairing. Hamhuis can't play there, Sbisa was a disaster, tryamkin is a rookie. Weber, Larsen, Biega are all 7th or 8th dmen..

Correct, we fixed the biggest hole on defense while keeping our 1st rounder.


McCann can be replaced by our 2016 1st rounder with Dubois or Tkachuk.


And we can try to replace that 2nd by trading Hansen for a pick and then signing Eriksson.

Solid deal if that you look it at that way.

McCann is replaceable, along with the 2nd.
Acquiring someone of Gudbranson's ilk is pretty hard these days in the league.

 

[CanaFan]

Everything is a knee jerk reaction with Benning.

Draft Forsling. Decide you need a D now. Trade Forsling for Clendenning. Realize Clendenning can't skate. Throw him into the Bonino trade.


Or how about ...

Trade a top 4 D to Tampa for a 2nd round pick them trade that pick to LA for a nearly-NHL ready scoring centre. Realize the centre is not any good so keep a 19 year old Jared McCann up through training camp. Realize halfway through the season McCann isn't ready so dial back his minutes and recall Vey. Meanwhile trade our best scoring winger in Utica for another bottom 6 centre. Then decide that we have too many centres and no room for McCann so trade him along with a higher 2nd round pick than we got way back for Garrison in order to acquire a badly needed top four D again.

Rinse and repeat.

 

[kanucks25]

I, myself, started off hating the trade. But the more I look at it the more I'm okay with it. I threw a huge hissy fit on Twitter (as you do of course ) when it was announced. But I think that over time it made me realize that this probably means Luca Sbisa will get traded as you say.

At least we have a actual top 4 now. Instead of having Bartkowski in our top 4. Gudbrason at least is capable of playing big minutes. Looking at his QoCRelCorsi it shows he takes very hard matchups. So moving him away from that probably will benifit his overall corsi. Plus the fact that he won't get that much defensive zone starts in Vancouver. All that suggests his numbers will increase playing here IMO.

Also, I'm super pissed that War-on-ice is pooping out on us right when this trade went down. Opendoor called me out on the QoC stats by using rraw stats and I've been eager to look at the QoC TOI stats which I find to be the most reliable stats when it comes to QoC.

We might have gaven up too much, no argument here. But there is still some excitement of us adding a top 4 defensemen. Even though we are probably still going to suck next year.

The problem with this optimistic aspect of the trade is that it gets crapped on by the fact that he needs an extension next summer and he turned down an extremely fair if not generous 4 x 4.5 contract from his original team that drafted him and is trending in the right direction.

Is there any chance he signs for that or less here? A team that he has no reason to be loyal to and does not have a bright future? There's a strong possibility he's going to get paid more than Tanev despite being at least one tier below Tanev lol.

 

[mossey3535]

Then you deal with it in other ways as the poster mentioned above. Find a veteran stop gap through trade or free agency that can be had for cheap that fills out the roster for a couple of years. There are holes all over the lineup, not just on the second pairing. The team severely lacks depth after the top line and the more futures traded away, the harder it's going to be to fill these needs long term. Where is the offense going to come from with this current group? You can't rely on every prospect fulfilling expectations it just doesn't work that way.

This just isn't a move a team in the position of the Canuck's should be making. Look at team's like the Leafs and Jets that have ridiculous prospect depth. They refuse to trade away future pieces, return assets from veterans, and continue to load up on picks. Those are two teams that are in a much better situation than the Canuck's long term and they still don't make moves like this. What is this going to accomplish for the Canuck's long term? We stabilize the second or third pairing in exchange for losing two solid young pieces? What's the point? So they can hopefully push themselves further into mediocrity rather than building the team properly from the ground up? The division is only going to get more difficult with these young teams coming up.

What are the plans to compete with this long term? We certainly don't have the talent on the team as it stands right now, and losing value in every trade is only going to widen this gap.

Exactly. And when it comes to development, you have to take every chance on offensive upside players that you can IMO. Yes d-men are hard to get but not as hard as offensive centers.

AND if you do develop a d-man, the chances are that he is going to be a defensive defenceman.

Again, I like Gudbranson. But I agree with you that he doesn't really fit the needs of the team.

Now, if you manage to jettison Sbisa so he doesn't block Tryamkin or someone similar, then the trade makes a lot more sense.

Or why not wait? Are we seriously going to be Cup contenders next year?

There was a lot of speculation that Gudbranson was going to be gone due to cap crunch and that's why he only got a one year extension. Knowing this, why not wait until next off-season when Florida is really up against it? If some other team massively overpays for Erik in the meantime, you may have dodged a bullet.

Issue is that Benning keeps letting desparation rule his actions.

 

[CanaFan]

Correct, we fixed the biggest hole on defense while keeping our 1st rounder.


McCann can be replaced by our 2016 1st rounder with Dubois or Tkachuk.


And we can try to replace that 2nd by trading Hansen for a pick and then signing Eriksson.

Solid deal if that you look it at that way.

McCann is replaceable, along with the 2nd.
Acquiring someone of Gudbranson's ilk is pretty hard these days in the league.

Everyone is replaceable. But we have to expend more assets to do it. Now instead of adding Tkachuk or Dubois to a core of young talent that includes McCann, they have to "replace" McCann.

And I'd wait to actually get that 2nd for Hansen before saying it can be done. Benning has a habit of wanting 2nds but being bad at actually getting them.

And how did we fix our "biggest hole" on D? I thought our biggest hole was a true #1D man who can play big minutes and run a PP. I didn't realize it was actually an expensive, one-dimensional fringe #4 defenseman.

Maybe then our biggest need when the Sedins retire won't actually be to replace them on the first line but to slightly upgrade our 4th line centre and left winger.

 

[kanucks25]

The problem with this optimistic aspect of the trade is that it gets crapped on by the fact that he needs an extension next summer and he turned down an extremely fair if not generous 4 x 4.5 contract from his original team that drafted him and is trending in the right direction.

Is there any chance he signs for that or less here? A team that he has no reason to be loyal to and does not have a bright future? There's a strong possibility he's going to get paid more than Tanev despite being at least one tier below Tanev lol.

Well, now George Richards has retracted his own rumor, saying that it's been refuted by both Panthers management and Gudbranson's agent.

God I hope that's true.

 

[WTG]

the problem with this optimistic aspect of the trade is that it gets crapped on by the fact that he needs an extension next summer and he turned down an extremely fair if not generous 4 x 4.5 contract from his original team that drafted him and is trending in the right direction.

Is there any chance he signs for that or less here? A team that he has no reason to be loyal to and does not have a bright future? There's a strong possibility he's going to get paid more than tanev despite being at least one tier below tanev lol.

That quote about him turning down that money seems to be a false rumor and has been shot down. So I hope that clears up some of the worry

 

[mossey3535]

Everything is a knee jerk reaction with Benning.

Draft Forsling. Decide you need a D now. Trade Forsling for Clendenning. Realize Clendenning can't skate. Throw him into the Bonino trade.


Or how about ...

Trade a top 4 D to Tampa for a 2nd round pick them trade that pick to LA for a nearly-NHL ready scoring centre. Realize the centre is not any good so keep a 19 year old Jared McCann up through training camp. Realize halfway through the season McCann isn't ready so dial back his minutes and recall Vey. Meanwhile trade our best scoring winger in Utica for another bottom 6 centre. Then decide that we have too many centres and no room for McCann so trade him along with a higher 2nd round pick than we got way back for Garrison in order to acquire a badly needed top four D again.

Rinse and repeat.

Ha I just said this and then saw your post.

You forgot the part where he has to keep Granlund on the team which created the supposed "logjam" for McCann.

 

[me2]

Correct, we fixed the biggest hole on defense while keeping our 1st rounder.


McCann can be replaced by our 2016 1st rounder with Dubois or Tkachuk.


And we can try to replace that 2nd by trading Hansen for a pick and then signing Eriksson.

Solid deal if that you look it at that way.

McCann is replaceable, along with the 2nd.
Acquiring someone of Gudbranson's ilk is pretty hard these days in the league.

I know, Sbisa was such a hard to find piece too.