[Proposal]Gudbranson for Garland

[Tank]

Columbus need offence and they have abundant d men.

 

Erik Gudbranson

Defense -- shoots R
Born Jan 7 1992 -- Ottawa, ONT
[31 yrs. ago]
Height 6.05 -- Weight 222 [196 cm/101 kg]

Cap Hit of $4,000,000 to 2025-26 (UFA)

 

 

Conor Garland

Right Wing -- shoots R
Born Mar 11 1996 -- Scituate, MA
[27 yrs. ago]
Height 5.10 -- Weight 165 [178 cm/75 kg]

Cap Hit of $4,950,000 to 2025-26 (UFA)

 

 

get some cap relief too.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 10, 2023 by Tank

[PhillipBlunt]

Do you want the Canucks to just beat the other teams into submission?

 

With Zadorov, Soucy, Cole, Myers, there really isn't a spot for Guddy on the defense, as far as where he'd slot in.

 

He's as tough as they come though. Swapping him out for Myer's would be decent, but you're still hit with a contract that's a bit rich for the player. Might affect space needed to re-sign Zadorov, Hronek, or Pettersson. 

 

The team needs to see if a trade can be made to bring in a player of Pesce or Cernak level capability to cover off the 3-4 spot. 

Edited December 8, 2023 by PhillipBlunt

[The Arrogant Worms]

I didn't know we had a Granland

Edited December 8, 2023 by The Arrogant Worms

[joe-max]

[DixonWard]

Depending on where we, and Carolina, are at approaching the deadline, I think that it would be worth expending some assets to acquire Pesce.  He is as good a Defensive dman that is available and is also better offensively than people realize.  If, through discussions with his agent, we have a chance to re-sign him, he would make us a very strong defense for years. Gudbrandson is more frustrating than Myers and Myers has actually been pretty good this year.

 

Hughes Hronek

Zadorov Pesce

Cole Myers

Soucy

 

This is a defense you could go to Playoff war with.

 

 

[Jeremy Hronek]

9 hours ago, DixonWard said:

Depending on where we, and Carolina, are at approaching the deadline, I think that it would be worth expending some assets to acquire Pesce.  He is as good a Defensive dman that is available and is also better offensively than people realize.  If, through discussions with his agent, we have a chance to re-sign him, he would make us a very strong defense for years. Gudbrandson is more frustrating than Myers and Myers has actually been pretty good this year.

 

Hughes Hronek

Zadorov Pesce

Cole Myers

Soucy

 

This is a defense you could go to Playoff war with.

 

 

 

Why would Carolina trade Pesce?

 

Pesce is also on the wrong side of 30 and will be looking for a long term deal.  

 

I'd rather try and target someone like Rasmus Andersson or Will Borgen.

Edited December 9, 2023 by Jeremy Hronek

[Miss Korea]

Would you rather have this...

 

 

... or this...?

 

Edited December 9, 2023 by Miss Korea

[Alflives]

[DixonWard]

3 hours ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

 

Why would Carolina trade Pesce?

 

Pesce is also on the wrong side of 30 and will be looking for a long term deal.  

 

I'd rather try and target someone like Rasmus Andersson or Will Borgen.

Of course, I, like everyone on this board, have no idea what gm's are thinking.   But Pesce is the 4th highest minutes on a Carolina team that needs scoring.  He is a UFA at the end of the year so may be available.   

 

Can you explain how 29 is the wrong side of 30?

[Jeremy Hronek]

1 hour ago, DixonWard said:

Of course, I, like everyone on this board, have no idea what gm's are thinking.   But Pesce is the 4th highest minutes on a Carolina team that needs scoring.  He is a UFA at the end of the year so may be available.   

 

Can you explain how 29 is the wrong side of 30?

 

Sorry my bad, I thought Pesce was already 30 (and that a hypothetical new contract would kick in at 31).

 

But still - the idea of acquiring Pesce for me makes little sense.  

 

Like you said, acquiring Pesce would cost the Canucks significant assets, and then he could just as easily walk at the end of the year (unless we offered him a contract that would likely be unfavourable in terms of the term and money that we'd likely need to offer him.......and given his age, more than half of that contract would likely be for a past-his-prime Pesce).  

 

So for me, it wouldn't be a very good idea.  

Edited December 9, 2023 by Jeremy Hronek

[Elias Pettersson]

3 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

Would you rather have this...

 

 

... or this...?

 

 

This is a perfect example of these WAR charts being flawed and shouldn't be used in a trade proposal.  Garland shows at 87% with 78% offence, yet he has only scored 2 goals and his shooting % is at 3.5%.  This is absolutely horrific.  Even Gudbranson himself has a better shooting % than Garland at almost 7%.

 

But the funniest part of these WAR charts is this:

 

Total points:

 

Conor Garland - 2 goals, 7 assists, 9 points

Erik Gudbranson - 2 goals, 7 assists, 9 points

 

So, the Dman who has 2 goals and 9 points has a 20% EV offence efficiency, but the forward who also has 2 goals and 9 points has a 78% EV offence efficiency.  Explain that one to me Bob.

 

Also, Gudbranson could really help on the penalty kill.  Garland doesn't even kill penalties.  Gudbranson on the 3rd pairing would actually be better than Myers.  At least he could play Rick Tocchet hockey.  And he could protect the boys.  I'd take him over Garland any day of the week.  Rather have Gudbranson on our 3rd pairing than Garland on the 3rd line doing nothing but pretending to be doing something.

Edited December 9, 2023 by Elias Pettersson

[Jeremy Hronek]

Hughes-Hronek

Cole-Soucy

Zadorov-Gudbranson

 

Would definitely meet the requirement of being big and nasty.  

 

Having said that, I'd probably pass on any Garland-Gudbranson related offers.  

[Miss Korea]

56 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

This is a perfect example of these WAR charts being flawed and shouldn't be used in a trade proposal.  Garland shows at 87% with 78% offence, yet he has only scored 2 goals and his shooting % is at 3.5%.  This is absolutely horrific.  Even Gudbranson himself has a better shooting % than Garland at almost 7%.

 

But the funniest part of these WAR charts is this:

 

Total points:

 

Conor Garland - 2 goals, 7 assists, 9 points

Erik Gudbranson - 2 goals, 7 assists, 9 points

 

So, the Dman who has 2 goals and 9 points has a 20% EV offence efficiency, but the forward who also has 2 goals and 9 points has a 78% EV offence efficiency.  Explain that one to me Bob.

 

Also, Gudbranson could really help on the penalty kill.  Garland doesn't even kill penalties.  Gudbranson on the 3rd pairing would actually be better than Myers.  At least he could play Rick Tocchet hockey.  And he could protect the boys.  I'd take him over Garland any day of the week.  Rather have Gudbranson on our 3rd pairing than Garland on the 3rd line doing nothing but pretending to be doing something.

 

Frankly, I'm a bit surprised I need to explain the basics this late in the game.  I thought you understood how these cards worked.  How were you interpreting them up to now??

 

If I can skate past you or steal the puck off you for a breakaway, my offense goes up and your defense goes down.  Actually scoring is a different metric entirely.  If I create a million scoring chances but zero actual goals, my EV offense is 100% and my finishing is 0%.  On the other hand, if you are Brock Boeser this year, you might not be the best playdriver but everything you touch goes in the net.  It's expected goals versus actual goals.   

 

Look at Myers.  He gets beat all the time because he's so slow and clumsy.  His poor defensive numbers come from each time he gets beat, not every time he gets scored on.  Even if Demko bails him out and stops everything, Myers has negatively impacted the team with his poor defense.  

 

For Gubranson and Garland, look at their finishing metrics.  They're similar.  This accounts for a combination of this season the last, hence 2022-2024.  I can tell you that Garland's finishing has dropped dramatically, while Gudbranson's defending has gone up slightly.  Other than that, no major changes.

 

Ever since his Panthers days, Erik Gudbranson has always represented an old, outdated school of thought in hockey.  He's got the good looks, good size, and good toughness.  And he loves to throw pucks on net.  But underneath all that is a defenceman who can't move the puck in either zone, can't prevent or create scoring chances, and has been consistently deemed one of the most overpaid players on whatever team he's on.  There is a reason he has been shuffled around so many teams.  He tries but just isn't good enough, until another team is willing to take a risk on him.  Why he gets so much money thrown at him is beyond me.  Every team has been happy to move on from him.

 

I assume you are one of the few holdouts who actually thought old Guddy made a positive impact on this team.  If I am to take their word on it, Columbus fans see him as the exact same player as before, but a million times slower.  So you are suggesting we replace Myers with... the guy who initially got replaced in favour of Myers.  He has slightly better positioning and takes less penalties, but he is slow as shit now and can't move the puck for shit.  It would be one of the most lateral, unnecessary trades that would get us stuck with his anchor contract for 3 more years.

[Tusk]

This is Dumb, dumb and dumber. I thought the topic is Gudbranson for Granland

[Tusk]

Just now, Tusk said:

This is Dumb, dumb and dumber. I thought the topic is Gudbranson for Granland

I mean we dont have either of them. Garland, on the other hand, is way undervalued on skill. Maybe over priced on production. But that 3rd and 4th line gets the puck to the Ozone because of him. they might not always score, but if its in the Ozone they are also not giving Demmers a heart attack.

 

[Tusk]

I think anyone who is actually reading this thread should realize that Garlund will eventually be used with JT and Brock, maybe not till we are in the playoffs.

Garlund is the cliff ronning, the morrison, and even the Bo to that line. But do we want, or need to have other teams see that?

 

We kinda played the cards early to play Heronik with Hughes. Now other teams are pre-scouting and they have looked horrible. They were not horrible, but other teams know how to get them stuck defensivly.

 

Demko has been off his post and over eager. I think Desmith should get the next start.

[Elias Pettersson]

8 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Frankly, I'm a bit surprised I need to explain the basics this late in the game.  I thought you understood how these cards worked.  How were you interpreting them up to now??

 

If I can skate past you or steal the puck off you for a breakaway, my offense goes up and your defense goes down.  Actually scoring is a different metric entirely.  If I create a million scoring chances but zero actual goals, my EV offense is 100% and my finishing is 0%.  On the other hand, if you are Brock Boeser this year, you might not be the best playdriver but everything you touch goes in the net.  It's expected goals versus actual goals.   

 

Look at Myers.  He gets beat all the time because he's so slow and clumsy.  His poor defensive numbers come from each time he gets beat, not every time he gets scored on.  Even if Demko bails him out and stops everything, Myers has negatively impacted the team with his poor defense.  

 

For Gubranson and Garland, look at their finishing metrics.  They're similar.  This accounts for a combination of this season the last, hence 2022-2024.  I can tell you that Garland's finishing has dropped dramatically, while Gudbranson's defending has gone up slightly.  Other than that, no major changes.

 

Ever since his Panthers days, Erik Gudbranson has always represented an old, outdated school of thought in hockey.  He's got the good looks, good size, and good toughness.  And he loves to throw pucks on net.  But underneath all that is a defenceman who can't move the puck in either zone, can't prevent or create scoring chances, and has been consistently deemed one of the most overpaid players on whatever team he's on.  There is a reason he has been shuffled around so many teams.  He tries but just isn't good enough, until another team is willing to take a risk on him.  Why he gets so much money thrown at him is beyond me.  Every team has been happy to move on from him.

 

I assume you are one of the few holdouts who actually thought old Guddy made a positive impact on this team.  If I am to take their word on it, Columbus fans see him as the exact same player as before, but a million times slower.  So you are suggesting we replace Myers with... the guy who initially got replaced in favour of Myers.  He has slightly better positioning and takes less penalties, but he is slow as shit now and can't move the puck for shit.  It would be one of the most lateral, unnecessary trades that would get us stuck with his anchor contract for 3 more years.

Yes that is basically how I have been interpreting the cards. Problem is the card for Garland says his finishing is 53%. However he only has 2 goals off of 57 shots. So I’m not sure how he’s 53% in finishing when his shooting % is only 3.5%. 
 

At the end of the day, that WAR card for Garland makes it look like he is a real contributor to the team. Especially offensively. The eye test tells a completely different story however. The eye test tells me that he can’t score to save his life, he’s a terrible shooter, his shots that he does take are very low percentage, which is why he only has scored 2 goals. The puck basically dies on his stick. He plays zig zag with the other team but accomplishes nothing. He is the busiest player in the NHL with the puck who does the least with it. 
 

As for Gudbranson, when he played in Calgary he was a steady influence on the 3rd pairing. He played over 18 minutes a night and had 18 points and well as being the physical presence that he always is. In Columbus, he is chosen over Boqvist and Peeke, who are both better than Myers. He may be slow but on the 3rd pairing playing 15 minutes a night I’d take him over Myers any day of the week. With his physical presence we could add a guy like Sean Walker to the 2nd pairing to give us more offence on the back end. 
 

Hughes    Hronek 

Zadorov   Walker 

Soucy      Gudbranson 

Cole          
 

This is the defence I’d want to see in the playoffs. 

Edited December 9, 2023 by Elias Pettersson

[Miss Korea]

3 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Yes that is basically how I have been interpreting the cards. Problem is the card for Garland says his finishing is 53%. However he only has 2 goals off of 57 shots. So I’m not sure how he’s 53% in finishing when his shooting % is only 3.5%. 
 

At the end of the day, that WAR card for Garland makes it look like he is a real contributor to the team. Especially offensively. The eye test tells a completely different story however. The eye test tells me that he can’t score to save his life, he’s a terrible shooter, his shots that he does take are very low percentage, which is why he only has scored 2 goals. The puck basically dies on his stick. He plays zig zag with the other team but accomplishes nothing. He is the busiest player in the NHL with the puck who does the least with it. 
 

As for Gudbranson, when he played in Calgary he was a steady influence on the 3rd pairing. He played over 18 minutes a night and had 18 points and well as being the physical presence that he always is. In Columbus, he is chosen over Boqvist and Peeke, who are both better than Myers. He may be slow but on the 3rd pairing playing 15 minutes a night I’d take him over Myers any day of the week. With his physical presence we could add a guy like Sean Walker to the 2nd pairing to give us more offence on the back end. 
 

Hughes    Hronek 

Zadorov   Walker 

Soucy      Gudbranson 

Cole          
 

This is the defence I’d want to see in the playoffs. 

 

These graphics might give you a slightly better understanding of how their performance has been quantified this season.  I'll be happy to post the exclusive 23-24 cards once he updates them after the halfway point of the season.

 

 

 

Conor Garland is probably the best playmaking winger we have on this team.  Not glowing praise when you already have a glut of playmakers who are better passers and much better shooters, but I fundamentally disagree with your player assessment of him.  He is a fantastic puck handler who almost never gives up possession, which is huge for maintaining offensive pressure.  When he does give up the puck, he draws a crucial penalty and puts our team up on the power play.  He draws an incredibly high number of penalties (11 already this year) while almost never taking one himself.  His passes are incredibly crisp and it does lead to some very dangerous scoring chances.  But who's receiving those passes?  Teddy Blueger and Dakota Joshua.  It drives me nuts when Garland gives a nice feed to the guy in front and they just try to shove the puck in against the pads.  His defensive play is also incredibly underrated.  His positioning is on point and the opposing D-men are forced to attack other players.  When he has the puck in our own zone, he never fails to clear it because he has such great vision.

 

I thoroughly enjoy watching Conor Garland play and I wish he could perform better with guys like Miller or Pettersson.  Unfortunately, there's no chemistry there (his shot looks bad) so he doesn't have a place on this team.  But to replace him with Gudbranson?  Do you honestly not think the Canucks regret acquiring him the first time?  As a player he goes against everything I believe in.

[Elias Pettersson]

18 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

These graphics might give you a slightly better understanding of how their performance has been quantified this season.  I'll be happy to post the exclusive 23-24 cards once he updates them after the halfway point of the season.

 

 

 

Conor Garland is probably the best playmaking winger we have on this team.  Not glowing praise when you already have a glut of playmakers who are better passers and much better shooters, but I fundamentally disagree with your player assessment of him.  He is a fantastic puck handler who almost never gives up possession, which is huge for maintaining offensive pressure.  When he does give up the puck, he draws a crucial penalty and puts our team up on the power play.  He draws an incredibly high number of penalties (11 already this year) while almost never taking one himself.  His passes are incredibly crisp and it does lead to some very dangerous scoring chances.  But who's receiving those passes?  Teddy Blueger and Dakota Joshua.  It drives me nuts when Garland gives a nice feed to the guy in front and they just try to shove the puck in against the pads.  His defensive play is also incredibly underrated.  His positioning is on point and the opposing D-men are forced to attack other players.  When he has the puck in our own zone, he never fails to clear it because he has such great vision.

 

I thoroughly enjoy watching Conor Garland play and I wish he could perform better with guys like Miller or Pettersson.  Unfortunately, there's no chemistry there (his shot looks bad) so he doesn't have a place on this team.  But to replace him with Gudbranson?  Do you honestly not think the Canucks regret acquiring him the first time?  As a player he goes against everything I believe in.

Garland is definitely a better defensive player than Kuzmenko. However, offensively he doesn’t have the hockey IQ to play in the top 6. We’ve tried him there several times and it doesn’t work. His shot is terrible. It’s one of the worst on this team. He is small and elusive which allows him to get away from defenders and also allows him to draw a lot of penalties. I will give you that. But that crap that he does won’t work in the playoffs. He’s not a north south guy. Like I said the play dies on his stick often when his zigging and zagging doesn’t work. 
 

At $5 million he is massively overpaid for his offensive contributions. Gudbranson is totally fine as a 3rd pairing guy. He’s also overpaid, but we’d actually save $1 million in cap space by trading Garland for Gudbranson. Enough to sign Ethan Bear. 
 

If Gudbranson is so bad then why does he play over Boqvist and Peeke?  Most people feel Peeke is an upgrade on Myers. Yet Peeke is the one who is getting healthy scratched every game. 

Edited December 9, 2023 by Elias Pettersson

[Miss Korea]

16 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Garland is definitely a better defensive player than Kuzmenko. However, offensively he doesn’t have the hockey IQ to play in the top 6. We’ve tried him there several times and it doesn’t work. His shot is terrible. It’s one of the worst on this team. He is small and elusive which allows him to get away from defenders and also allows him to draw a lot of penalties. I will give you that. But that crap that he does won’t work in the playoffs. He’s not a north south guy. Like I said the play dies on his stick often when his zigging and zagging doesn’t work. 
 

At $5 million he is massively overpaid for his offensive contributions. Gudbranson is totally fine as a 3rd pairing guy. He’s also overpaid, but we’d actually save $1 million in cap space by trading Garland for Gudbranson. Enough to sign Ethan Bear. 
 

If Gudbranson is so bad then why does he play over Boqvist and Peeke?  Most people feel Peeke is an upgrade on Myers. Yet Peeke is the one who is getting healthy scratched every game. 

 

The rate of penalty calls increases in the playoffs - keep that in mind.  The play gets dirtier which leads to more calls of course, but a trip is a trip.  

 

As for his hockey IQ, I think you are wrong, and thenstats back it up.  He is indeed a very good playmaker with excellent vision and passing skills.  I have followed him since he was a desert dog and he has consistently put up the points.  His analytics have also been consistently good, which means he has created tons of chances throughout his career.  He is a possession maniac, which means that the Canucks are almost always on the attack when he has the puck. 

 

Does it translate to actual goals?  Not this year, and his poor chemistry with the top six is a problem.  But poor chemistry is something completely different than poor hockey IQ.  I don't get how you or anyone can watch him and think he's a dumb hockey player.

 

As for why Boqvist kept getting benched?  I don't know.  Sometimes a team can make mistakes and favour Reaves over Lafferty, or Virtanen over Toffoli.  Wherever Boq ends up I believe he will do just fine.  Peeke on the other hand... he might just be worse than we all thought.