Skip to content
Join our Newsletter
  1. Home
  2. Courier Archive
  3. News

Ask it to Bulis: What is Gudbranson worth, Pettersson vs Forsberg, and Demko’s future

Also: the impossibility of buying out Loui Eriksson; Seattle team names; roundabouts.
Daniel Wagner
Erik Gudbranson skates up ice at Canucks practice
Dan Toulgoet / Vancouver Courier

It’s time for another round of Ask it to Bulis!

I put out the call for questions on the Twitter machine and got some good ones. I also got some evil questions, but to those I simply said, “Not today, Satan,” and cast them into the netherworld.

So, without further ado, here are your questions and also some answers.

 

 

This is the question that made me want to do an Ask it to Bulis post for today. It’s an intriguing question because it’s really two questions: what is Erik Gudbranson worth in a trade and do these three teams have the right pieces to make that deal?

What is Gudbranson worth? Two years ago, the Canucks decided he was worth a 20-year-old former first-round pick, who played in a position of organizational need, and a second-round pick. He’s definitely not worth that now.

We could look at a recent trade of a player of similar caliber to Gudbranson: Luke Schenn. Like Gudbranson, Schenn has pedigree as a former top-five draft pick and is known for his physical, defensive play, while suffering when subjected to fancy-stat scrutiny. Schenn was traded during the 2015-16 season at the age of 26, same age as Gudbranson.

The Philadelphia Flyers packaged Schenn with an about-to-retire Vincent Lecavalier and traded them to the Los Angeles Kings for 23-year-old Jordan Weal and a third-round pick.

Weal had put up good numbers in the AHL, but had played just 10 NHL games at the time of the trade, with his lack of size keeping him from breaking through. He’s stuck with the Flyers this season and has played reasonably well in a third-line role, but at the time he was a lower-tier prospect, on the verge of not being a prospect at all.

So, that sets a pretty reasonable asking price for Gudbranson. The Canucks don’t have an old Lecavalier lying around to package with him, but a lower-tier prospect and a third-round pick would make sense.

The three teams mentioned are from my article about which teams are currently using defencemen who are definitively worse than Gudbranson. Other teams besides those three might see value in him, but let’s look at one of those teams in particular: the New Jersey Devils.

I feel like the Devils have the biggest need for an upgrade on defence, but will they be looking to make a splash at the trade deadline? They’ve missed the playoffs in five straight seasons, so it’ll be interesting to see how they approach the deadline: will they make big moves because they’re eager to get back into the postseason or will they take a more measured approach because they’re finishing up their rebuild and don’t want to overreact to one good season?

Acquiring Gudbranson could be a smaller move they might make to give them a small boost without raiding the prospect cupboards. The issue is that they don’t really have those lower-tier prospects that haven’t been given a chance in the NHL, namely because they’ve been bad enough for the last several years that they’ve been given a chance. Josh Jacobs, maybe?

 

 

Unless both Jacob Markstrom and Anders Nilsson get injured, I’m not expecting to see Thatcher Demko up with the Canucks this season. I think they want to keep Demko in the AHL all year to give him a full season as a number one goaltender.

I expect him to be given the opportunity to beat Nilsson for the backup job at training camp next season, at which point it will be up to him and how he performs. Best case scenario for him, he wins the backup job out of camp, becomes a 1B with Markstrom, then steals the starting job during the season.

 

 

As has been well-documented here on PITB, Elias Pettersson is having the best season by an under-20 play in the SHL since Peter Forsberg. I don’t have any actual adjusted numbers for the SHL, but I can look at a bit of context for Forsberg’s statistics.

Forsberg’s 19-year-old season came in his second year after being drafted in 1992-93. He put up 23 goals and 48 points in 39 games, for a point-per-game average of 1.23. At this time, Pettersson is averaging 1.24 points per game.

Forsberg finished second in the SHL in both goals and points behind the great Håkan Loob. Forsberg was one of six players that season who averaged at least a point per game, including his teammate, 19-year-old Markus Naslund.

That brings up Forsberg’s teammates, as he was part of a high-powered first line on MODO. Forsberg finished 9 points clear of Naslund and Lars Bystrom for first on MODO in scoring.

Pettersson, on the other hand, is currently tied for sixth in the SHL in points and 17th in goals, with the World Juniors setting him back a bit. He’s still second in points-per-game, having been overtaken by Joakim Lindstrom for first. There are currently eight players averaging at least a point per game.

Pettersson is currently six points clear of his next best teammate for first on the Växjö Lakers in scoring.

Obviously Forsberg and Pettersson are very different players. Adding in the context makes Forsberg’s accomplishments at 19 look slightly better, mainly because he and Loob were several points clear of the next best players in the league and fewer players put up better than a point per game. But, Forsberg also had the benefit of Naslund on his wing, giving him a bona fide sniper to feed the puck.

 

 

I can say with near 100% certainty that Loui Eriksson will not get his contract bought out.

How can I be so certain? Because Eriksson’s contract is nigh-unbuyoutable. The vast majority of Eriksson’s contract comes in the form of signing bonuses, which are guaranteed. His actual “salary” is $1 million per season until the final year of his contract, when it goes up to $3 million.

When it comes to a buyout, teams don’t get any relief from the signing bonuses. The Canucks would still have to pay the entirety of Eriksson’s signing bonuses and they would continue to count against the cap. If the Canucks tried to buy out the remaining $20 million of his contract this off-season, they would save a grand total of $2 million in actual money and he would still take up $5.5 million of the salary cap for the next three seasons and $3.5 million in the fourth season.

All that is to say, Eriksson’s contract is even worse than you think it is.

 

 

Here’s the thing: roundabouts are great. They prevent dangerous collisions and more efficiently move traffic through intersections than any other type of traffic control.

It might be a controversial opinion, but I firmly believe that almost every controlled intersection should be a roundabout. Someday I will run for political office and this will be my only platform.

 

 

Ooh, fun question!

Let’s run down some rookies that have at least a remote possibility of playing for the Canucks next year: Elias Pettersson, Olli Juolevi, Thatcher Demko, Adam Gaudette, Jonathan Dahlen, Kole Lind, Jonah Gadjovich, Philip Holm, and Guillaume Brisebois. That’s about it, barring a big surprise from someone like Cole Cassels or Petrus Palmu.

Of those, I think the rookies most likely to make the Canucks out of camp are Pettersson, Juolevi, Demko, Gaudette, and Dahlen. Five rookies is a lot and I doubt all five would make the team out of camp, but I could see three rookies in the Canucks starting lineup on opening night, most likely Pettersson, Juolevi, and Gaudette.

Of course, if the Canucks draft Rasmus Dahlin first overall, that changes everything.

 

I’d love to do more Breakdowning, but that feature requires a couple things: a cool or interesting goal to break down and time. There has been a shortage of the former this season and a shortage of the latter more recently thanks to the flu sweeping through my house. But Breakdowning will definitely return.

I think Spitballin’ is done for the time being. I might bring it back, but the truth is that it was one of the least-read features on the blog. I’d rather put my energy into writing a full article about a topic rather than writing a few paragraphs about multiple topics. You know, like I’m doing right now. Wait a minute…

 

 

Here are a couple quick ideas:

  • Seattle Metropolitans - A throwback to the first American team to win the Stanley Cup
  • Seattle Kraken - I’m picturing a Cthulhu-inspired logo.
  • Seattle Grunge - Makes the in-arena music choices much simpler.
  • Seattle Pilots - Former name of a Seattle baseball team and pays tribute to the history of aviation in the area.
  • Seattle Breakers - The former name of the Seattle Thunderbirds fits a coastal city.

Of the above, I’m partial to the Kraken. It’s a cool name with a long history, but is still in the pop culture consciousness thanks to the Pirates of the Caribbean movies. It fits a coastal city and lends itself well to unique imagery.

 

 

For the last question, I went with one that was asked in various ways by multiple people: should the Canucks go with the best player available in the upcoming draft or take organizational needs into account?

This is a topic I’ve written about before, but the simple answer is that “best player available” is, apart from very specific situations, a myth. Sure, sometimes there is a clear best overall player — Rasmus Dahlin in the upcoming draft — or some delineation between tiers, but it often becomes clear over time that the “best player available” wasn’t the best after all.

The Canucks thought they had the best player available when they picked Cody Hodgson, but Erik Karlsson, arguably the best defenceman in the NHL, went a few picks later. They weren't the only team that missed out on the best player available, of course.

Some might say that you should take the “consensus” best player, but there is very rarely any consensus at all. Every team has a different draft board and rate different players higher or lower than other teams, often by significant margins. Just look at the 2017 draft, when Jim Benning famously said, “Why isn’t anyone taking Kole Lind?” as he slid out of the first round to where the Canucks were waiting at 33rd overall. They clearly had Lind a lot higher on their board than many other teams.

All that said, what do the Canucks need most? Defence certainly jumps out, but the Canucks don’t have great depth at centre, even with Elias Pettersson and Adam Gaudette. Their depth on the wing isn’t great either: as much as fans should be optimistic about Dahlen, Lind, and Gadjovich, management needs to be realistic and know that none of those three are guarantees to make the NHL and be top-six forwards.

The truth is, the Canucks need more blue-chip prospects at forward and on defence. The need might be greater right now on defence, but if the Canucks and their scouting staff have a forward higher on their list, they should go with the player they believe in more. Besides, great defencemen are often taken later in the draft and the Canucks could look to snag some sleepers in the second round or later.

Thanks for the questions, everyone! If I didn’t get to your question, I apologize. Some of them were simply too difficult to answer without some significant research and time, so perhaps they will inspire future articles.