Vancouver wins this trade IMO. They get a 4/5 RHD who can step into the lineup immediately for a prospect that tops out as a 3rd liner in a few years (if that).

The draft picks dont even matter when we are talking about Vancouver. They will get a very good player with their first pick but have been terrible historically with their draft picks. They are more value to other teams than themselves.

Vancouver wins this trade IMO. They get a 4/5 RHD who can step into the lineup immediately for a prospect that tops out as a 3rd liner in a few years (if that).

The draft picks dont even matter when we are talking about Vancouver. They will get a very good player with their first pick but have been terrible historically with their draft picks. They are more value to other teams than themselves.
- MacPatty

How's he top out as a 3rd liner? the dude pretty much played like a 3rd liner his rookie year (18 pts, 1.11 pts/60 on 5on5 (1.09/60 if zone adjusted). And 2.34 pts/60 on the pp time he was given

Tessier says the Canucks traded a 1st round pick. If we are using that logic, the Canucks got a 3rd overall for a 24th overall and a 2nd round pick.
I'm pretty sure Columbus would laugh at any team picking 24th this year that offered their pick and a 2nd for the 3rd overall.
- Scooby_Doo

Man, I don't see why all the negative on Guddy. I would love so dearly to have Guddy on a 2nd pairing with Gio & let Hamilton & Brodie run wild. 3.5 mill would be perfect. The only problem is if he has a very good year, & there is no reason why he won't come to Van & impress, he is going to get into that 5.5-6.0 mill range for a long term contract. Personally, that will work just fine in Vanc, in Calgary when you have big bucks going to Gio/Brodie/Hamilton, about 3.5 to 4.0 mill is about as much as you can pay for a #4 D. I like the deal for Vanc. Im jealous.

Awful effort at trolling. Read my book, chapter 7 is especially good. Thank me later.
- dshiddy

LOL, no trolling here as I am not a Panther or Canuck fan (though I have been to both places). Gudbranson is an average defence and mcann is young and might not be in the NHL for his career. Seems like when the Leafs, Canucks and Oilers etc make a trade then there are a million threads about it. I love it, but it is sad.

LOL, no trolling here as I am not a Panther or Canuck fan (though I have been to both places). Gudbranson is an average defence and mcann is young and might not be in the NHL for his career. Seems like when the Leafs, Canucks and Oilers etc make a trade then there are a million threads about it. I love it, but it is sad.
- woopstash

Well you did say it was a pretty useless trade. Which isn't true at all, especially if you are a Canucks or panthers fan, even an Oilers fan (who reportedly were after Gudbranson). You then went on to say both players will be average NHL players at best, which is a major troll comment.

Sorry for caring about our hockey teams and having a fan base that supports them when their season is over. I guess you are used to being a kings fan and only supporting your team during the playoffs.

It's a pretty useless trade but it has been great watching fans from all over the place come out of the woodwork to argue about it!

Gudbransonn and Mcann are both going to amount to average at best players. Why is this trade being so scrutinized? You kids should be enjoying late spring weather not bickering about this. Times have changed. When I was a youngster we had respect for eachother and liked to play with eachother.
- woopstash

This could be the case but Gudbranson at 300+ NHL games has shown us he is well above average and a solid top 4 guy logging huge minutes.

McCann is a softer questionable 3rd-4th line center at best right now but is projected for top 6 minutes. Like Shink, if McCann doesn't get top 6 minutes on a regular basis he will be relegated to 3rd and 4th line duties his entire career.

The 2nd round pick can be recovered not a big deal.

So I have to give Van the edge here even though a bit bias. Guddy is legit right now 3rd overall guy where the question marks are flying around McCann. Van is too deep at center to be keeping McCann buried on the 4th line.

Win - Vancouver but the cost was steep.

This could be the case but Gudbranson at 300+ NHL games has shown us he is well above average and a solid top 4 guy logging huge minutes.

McCann is a softer questionable 3rd-4th line center at best right now but is projected for top 6 minutes. Like Shink, if McCann doesn't get top 6 minutes on a regular basis he will be relegated to 3rd and 4th line duties his entire career.

The 2nd round pick can be recovered not a big deal.

So I have to give Van the edge here even though a bit bias. Guddy is legit right now 3rd overall guy where the question marks are flying around McCann. Van is too deep at center to be keeping McCann buried on the 4th line.

Win - Vancouver but the cost was steep.
- LordHumungous

I don't think anyone really believes he has or ever will live up to the 3rd overall billing if that's what you're referring to...

and if you mean as the #3 defenseman, I think that's probably his ceiling

I don't think anyone really believes he has or ever will live up to the 3rd overall billing if that's what you're referring to...

and if you mean as the #3 defenseman, I think that's probably his ceiling
- DeflatedPucks

Not many do and that's life. But you may want to check out some of the comments by Gudbransons ex teammates in FLA after the trade...they aren't happy. Tells us a lot.

This could be the case but Gudbranson at 300+ NHL games has shown us he is well above average and a solid top 4 guy logging huge minutes.

McCann is a softer questionable 3rd-4th line center at best right now but is projected for top 6 minutes. Like Shink, if McCann doesn't get top 6 minutes on a regular basis he will be relegated to 3rd and 4th line duties his entire career.

The 2nd round pick can be recovered not a big deal.

So I have to give Van the edge here even though a bit bias. Guddy is legit right now 3rd overall guy where the question marks are flying around McCann. Van is too deep at center to be keeping McCann buried on the 4th line.

Win - Vancouver but the cost was steep.
- LordHumungous

Saying this is like saying McCann is a solid top-6 two-way C—neither has actually performed to that ability, despite it being their projections.

Gudbranson has had 300 games to prove he could be "solid" in this role, but has proven to be marginal.

McCann hasn't had the opportunity Gudbranson has.

You don't pay that cost for a player who has only proven he can tread water in the role he's been cast. You buy low on that type of player, or don't buy at all.

Not many do and that's life. But you may want to check out some of the comments by Gudbransons ex teammates in FLA after the trade...they aren't happy. Tells us a lot.
- LordHumungous

It has been stated that this trade represents old style GMing vs new style analytics. I don't agree with this. To me it represents the difference between professional GMing and amateur GMing.

The issue that this trade highlites is the most of the world only considers a raw this person vs that person viewpoint. Totally WRONG. If you GM that way you FAIL.

Nowhere in JB thoughts is consideration for is JM or EG a better player now and who will be better down the road. What a true professional GM considers is: "How does having EG impact my team both, now and down the road, as compared to having JM."

When you consider the question from this perspective, it is very clear that JM did not have a unique role within the team. The value that he brought is replaceable both now and down the road with other within the organization. Afterall, his role over and next year or 2 would be AHL. As he grows, so do others. Will he ever crack the top 6? Can he play bottom 6? Does he fill a unique role? Is there even an incremental value to the team by having JM there?

On the other hand, EG does provide a unique skillset that is a net positive incremental value to the team. Putting EG into top 4 means that Sbisa can drop to 5/6 and Weber/Bartkowski etc can be left unsigned or in Utica. Or it can mean that JB now has additional tools to play with. IE he could trade Elder and sign Hamhuis.

Bottom line, Vancouver is a superior team with EG, but losing JM only has a minimal impact.

Good trade for JB when looked at from the GM point of view. I don't know Florida's perspective, but if Willie is to believed, it is WTF? hmmmm....

It has been stated that this trade represents old style GMing vs new style analytics. I don't agree with this. To me it represents the difference between professional GMing and amateur GMing.

The issue that this trade highlites is the most of the world only considers a raw this person vs that person viewpoint. Totally WRONG. If you GM that way you FAIL.

Nowhere in JB thoughts is consideration for is JM or EG a better player now and who will be better down the road. What a true professional GM considers is: "How does having EG impact my team both, now and down the road, as compared to having JM."

When you consider the question from this perspective, it is very clear that JM did not have a unique role within the team. The value that he brought is replaceable both now and down the road with other within the organization. Afterall, his role over and next year or 2 would be AHL. As he grows, so do others. Will he ever crack the top 6? Can he play bottom 6? Does he fill a unique role? Is there even an incremental value to the team by having JM there?

On the other hand, EG does provide a unique skillset that is a net positive incremental value to the team. Putting EG into top 4 means that Sbisa can drop to 5/6 and Weber/Bartkowski etc can be left unsigned or in Utica. Or it can mean that JB now has additional tools to play with. IE he could trade Elder and sign Hamhuis.

Bottom line, Vancouver is a superior team with EG, but losing JM only has a minimal impact.

Good trade for JB when looked at from the GM point of view. I don't know Florida's perspective, but if Willie is to believed, it is WTF? hmmmm....
- Lostinarink

Why not:
- Keep Jared McCann
- Sign Eric Gryba
- Keep the draft pick

Tessier says the Canucks traded a 1st round pick. If we are using that logic, the Canucks got a 3rd overall for a 24th overall and a 2nd round pick.
I'm pretty sure Columbus would laugh at any team picking 24th this year that offered their pick and a 2nd for the 3rd overall.
- Scooby_Doo

I'm glad I wasn't the only one that found that attempted point to be ridiculous.

From what I can see, both teams traded from positions of strength to address perceived needs. Personally, I think the Canucks got the better of this trade because the value of a top-4 defenceman tends to exceed that of a 2nd/3rd line forward, and the Canucks have relatively few high-end prospects on the blueline. If McCann develops into more than a depth scoring line player than maybe the trade looks different in a few years time, but personally I don't see much more than that in his game.

Of course, this trade only further highlights how foolish it was for Benning not to have actively moved the likes of Hamhuis and Vrbata at the trade deadline, when more than enough draft picks could have been returned to offset those lost in a trade like this. For a team in this position to lose such prominent UFA-eligible players for nothing is just terrible asset management.

Why not:
- Keep Jared McCann
- Sign Eric Gryba
- Keep the draft pick
- DeflatedPucks

Because Eric Gryba is barely a 3rd pairing defenceman.

Why not:
- Keep Jared McCann
- Sign Eric Gryba
- Keep the draft pick
- DeflatedPucks

Yeah, and I guess Stamkos will sign with Pittsburg, just because someone thought it would make them a better team.


A GM that plans based on signing a specific person in free agency, is a GM that plans based on winning the draft lottery every year.

Yeah, and I guess Stamkos will sign with Pittsburg, just because someone thought it would make them a better team.


A GM that plans based on signing a specific person in free agency, is a GM that plans based on winning the draft lottery every year.

- Lostinarink

I think we can universally agree Eric Gryba won't exactly be the hottest commodity come free agency

Just saying his stats are very similar to Gudbranson, just without the pedigree


And Peter Chiarelli seems to be doing alright in that regard, right?

Because Eric Gryba is barely a 3rd pairing defenceman.
- khawk

aren't his stats very similar to gudbransons?

I think we can universally agree Eric Gryba won't exactly be the hottest commodity come free agency
Just saying his stats are very similar to Gudbranson, just without the pedigree
- DeflatedPucks

... or the skating, hockey IQ, ability to handle the other team's top line and PP unit, or leadership qualities.

This is what concerns me about people who just bluntly look at numbers... there's no context or appreciation for what's actually happening on the ice.

aren't his stats very similar to gudbransons?
- DeflatedPucks

aren't his stats very similar to gudbransons?
- DeflatedPucks

Naturally your stats can prove that a career 3rd pair, at the peak of his career, can be found equal to a young, still improving stud with his peak still several years in the future, but who is already a 2nd pair, 20+minute player.

Come on now. I had to look up Grbya cause I had never heard of him. Scouting report is far from flattering:
Assets: Has great size and the ability to play a physical game from the back end. Will drop the gloves. Plays a stay-at-home role for the most part.
Flaws: Can get beaten to the outside by quick forwards. Could also stand to improve his overall defensive-zone coverage. Doesn't add much offense.
Career Potential: Physical depth defenseman.

Compare that to:
Assets: Has great size, physicality and leadership qualities. Can play a shutdown role with aplomb. Displays untapped all-around potential, as well, especially because of a good point shot.
Flaws: Needs to prove capable of staying healthy over the long haul, since he's battled both injury and illness during his formative years. Will drop the gloves but needs more work in that area.
Career Potential: Big, talented and physical defender with a little upside.

Yep, they sound EXACTLY the same.

Naturally your stats can prove that a career 3rd pair, at the peak of his career, can be found equal to a young, still improving stud with his peak still several years in the future, but who is already a 2nd pair, 20+minute player.

Come on now. I had to look up Grbya cause I had never heard of him. Scouting report is far from flattering:
Assets: Has great size and the ability to play a physical game from the back end. Will drop the gloves. Plays a stay-at-home role for the most part.
Flaws: Can get beaten to the outside by quick forwards. Could also stand to improve his overall defensive-zone coverage. Doesn't add much offense.
Career Potential: Physical depth defenseman.

Compare that to:
Assets: Has great size, physicality and leadership qualities. Can play a shutdown role with aplomb. Displays untapped all-around potential, as well, especially because of a good point shot.
Flaws: Needs to prove capable of staying healthy over the long haul, since he's battled both injury and illness during his formative years. Will drop the gloves but needs more work in that area.
Career Potential: Big, talented and physical defender with a little upside.

Yep, they sound EXACTLY the same.
- Lostinarink

28/ 6.04 228 lbs
35 pts in 218 games
(0.51,0.72,0.90,0.62 5v5 p/60 zone adjusted)

24/ 6.05 216 lbs
43 in 309
(0.55,0.44,0.59,0.27,0.51 5v5 p/60 zone adjusted)

I haven’t seen Gudbranson play, but I’ve seen a bit of Gryba.

All im saying is the nucks may have overpaid asset wise.

... or the skating, hockey IQ, ability to handle the other team's top line and PP unit, or leadership qualities.

This is what concerns me about people who just bluntly look at numbers... there's no context or appreciation for what's actually happening on the ice.
- khawk

At some point, isn't tangible production on the ice more important than leadership qualities or hockey iq?

At some point, isn't tangible production on the ice more important than leadership qualities or hockey iq?
- DeflatedPucks

That's why you have a team of players that play different roles, and why you can't just bluntly evaluate them all the same way. Hockey has both offensive and defensive elements that are equally important, and not every single player needs to be dedicated to offensive production. There's even a defensive player on each team that wears big clumsy pads who isn't even allowed to skate over the centre ice line.

Gudbranson is underrated. He reminds me a lot of Hamonic.

Gudbranson is underrated. He reminds me a lot of Hamonic.
- rangerdanger94

Similar stats, and Gudbranson doesn't have the baggage that Hamonic has.

Similar stats, and Gudbranson doesn't have the baggage that Hamonic has.
- Scooby_Doo

He's not a #1 defenseman, but I'd compare him to guys like Hamonic, Hjarlmasson, Klein, Greene, Spurgeon, etc.