Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
I can live with this one, less injuries (hopefully) will make this a good signing over the next 3 years.
Blobby - how much did we overpay?
He’s 6th in ice time on the leagues shittiest defence. With his shiny new contract he will be in the top 90 for defenceman cap hit. There are 31 teams. Let that sink in.
He's 9 seconds per game behind Pouliot on the season and 1 minute behind press-box Hutton.
He has been gaining in leaps and bounds on those two lately... and will pass them very shortly
... which will make him 4th in minutes per game this year.
Let that sink in.
In the last 6 games he has been 2nd in icetime and looked great in that role.
Let that sink in.
If he had just 10 seconds per game more last season, he would have been 2nd in icetime.
TSN Radio VancouverVerified account @TSN1040 1m1 minute ago
More
.@PierreVLeBrun: The first reaction I got from a GM yesterday (on the Gudbranson contract numbers)...was that he would do that in a heartbeat. And that was a playoff team #canucks
Went on to say that Gudbranson trade value has now increased significantly and even though the Canucks " have taken him off the table" more GMs are inquiring. 3 years at 4m, no trade protection, RHD, a minimum a 1st to get him out of Vancouver.
Sounds like Benning is very active on the phones. Says it's too early to tell what will unfold TDD. He was responding to a question about, now that Gudbranson is re-signed and Tanev is hurt, does he expect to be busy TDD. I expected a no but he seemed to indicate that there is a lot of talk setting the groundwork. Which doesn't necessarily translate into deals I know. But it does indicate that there are players other than Vanek he is considering moving.
He emphasized a couple of things.
1) he likes our depth throughout the organization on D hinting that there is room to trade from strength there.
2) he prefers hockey deals to TDD deals and that is his focus. If he can manage a good hockey deal most players should be considered available.
3) he loves picks and is definitely looking to add picks for this year's draft.
On Tanev, he is shopping him, listed all the reasons he is of value leading with his ability to mentor younger D and making his D partner look better. But, if GMs inquire he will listen. Doesn't believe his injury status necessarily precludes GMs from being interested if it comes to that.
Not as bad as I thought it would be (I thought he’d get between 4.5-5). It’s more than he’s worth, but less than what the market would give him.
Gudbranson wasn’t going to recoup what we gave up for him. And given the choice to re-sign him, or trade him for a 2nd, I’m fine with keeping him. He plays a style I like and a style we desperately lack.
Our D is a bit of a mess, and if we’re going to lose,I’d rather lose while inflicting some punishment. Gudbranson can do that.
theman wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2018 2:31 pm
Yeah, he did sign for less then I thought he would. Love the no trade protection too. Surprised Benning got that.
The truly surprising thing was the back diving real dollars in the final year. Makes no sense over a 3 year term for a player that young.
I mean it makes sense for the team. He becomes much bigger trade bait. I'm just surprised he and his agent were OK with that.
Benning >>>>>>>>>>>> Gillis/Gillman when it comes to contract negotiations where trade protection is concerned. Gillis would have given Gudbranson a modified NTC where he had to provide a list of 5 teams he would accept a trade to or something.
RoyalDude wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2018 7:13 am
Diehard, the Avalanche fixed their defence in one draft - Makar and Timins, and the Duschene trade - Girard. And don't forget the O'Reilly trade, Zadarov is playing good hockey finally. Anyhow, Benning can do a lot for this team's D with a top 10 pick in this draft and a high 2nd round pick. Unlike Cliffy and Nuckles, I'm confident Tryamkin will return, he's too good not to be in the NHL.
That's my point - where do the Nucks go from here? All of their D for next year are now signed, so no room for young guys (Juolevi, Chatfield, draft pick?) or new signings barring trading a D or two. Will they do that? They've shown crazy loyalty to a 'core' that's cruising towards yet another bottom 5 finish so I remain skeptical. Hopefully Tryamkin returns as an improved player if/when he does come back, as he wasn't exactly setting the world on fire when he was here.
I really hope you're right and Benning does focus on D. It's badly needed.
Hockey Widow wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2018 2:21 pm
Sounds like Benning is very active on the phones. Says it's too early to tell what will unfold TDD. He was responding to a question about, now that Gudbranson is re-signed and Tanev is hurt, does he expect to be busy TDD. I expected a no but he seemed to indicate that there is a lot of talk setting the groundwork. Which doesn't necessarily translate into deals I know. But it does indicate that there are players other than Vanek he is considering moving.
He emphasized a couple of things.
1) he likes our depth throughout the organization on D hinting that there is room to trade from strength there.
2) he prefers hockey deals to TDD deals and that is his focus. If he can manage a good hockey deal most players should be considered available.
3) he loves picks and is definitely looking to add picks for this year's draft.
On Tanev, he is shopping him, listed all the reasons he is of value leading with his ability to mentor younger D and making his D partner look better. But, if GMs inquire he will listen. Doesn't believe his injury status necessarily precludes GMs from being interested if it comes to that.
Hockey Widow wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2018 2:21 pm
Sounds like Benning is very active on the phones. Says it's too early to tell what will unfold TDD. He was responding to a question about, now that Gudbranson is re-signed and Tanev is hurt, does he expect to be busy TDD. I expected a no but he seemed to indicate that there is a lot of talk setting the groundwork. Which doesn't necessarily translate into deals I know. But it does indicate that there are players other than Vanek he is considering moving.
He emphasized a couple of things.
1) he likes our depth throughout the organization on D hinting that there is room to trade from strength there.
2) he prefers hockey deals to TDD deals and that is his focus. If he can manage a good hockey deal most players should be considered available.
3) he loves picks and is definitely looking to add picks for this year's draft.
On Tanev, he is shopping him, listed all the reasons he is of value leading with his ability to mentor younger D and making his D partner look better. But, if GMs inquire he will listen. Doesn't believe his injury status necessarily precludes GMs from being interested if it comes to that.
This sounds positive - if the Guddy deal allows him to move somebody else I'm fine with it. I don't mind the contract itself in a vacuum though I'm not a big Guddy fan (pretty meh overall on him) but it's market value. Something needs to be done to change the composition of the D corps because it's proven to be hot garbage the last few years. Depth is fine, quality depth is something else and we don't have it.
I don't really care who they trade of the D, just needs to be some changes and it's probably at least 2 new top 6 that need to come in. One is a player that can score from the backend, and the other is somebody to add some speed back there. If you can find one guy who plays 25 minutes and does both that's great, but those guys don't grow on trees. I suspect a Tanev deal if it happens would be a draft day deal assuming the Nucks pick a D with their 1st rounder, as that may give Benning a bit more flexibility to make a move even if the prospect isn't immediately ready to step in.
