Traded Erik Brännström - D - Part III

L'Aveuglette

つ ◕_◕ ༽つ
Jan 8, 2007
48,157
20,273
Montreal
Funny how you demand proof of DJ’s feelings as if that would ever exist, while making assumptions about development that are contradicted by what actually happened during the season.

You say he needed additional development, when did this happen Aragorn?

Was it when he went down and all we could read on here was about his poor performance in the AHL?

Was it in those two games he played in November when we still heard he sucked?

Was it when he missed ~6 weeks to injury?

Or, maybe, was it just that he was finally given a chance at the NHL level after the Sens « switched to development mode » and allowed him to build confidence?

Bingo.
 

aragorn

Do The Right Thing
Aug 8, 2004
29,239
9,903
Funny how you demand proof of DJ’s feelings as if that would ever exist, while making assumptions about development that are contradicted by what actually happened during the season.

You say he needed additional development, when did this happen Aragorn?

Was it when he went down and all we could read on here was about his poor performance in the AHL?

Was it in those two games he played in November when we still heard he sucked?

Was it when he missed ~6 weeks to injury?

Or, maybe, was it just that he was finally given a chance at the NHL level after the Sens « switched to development mode » and allowed him to build confidence?
It was at the beginning of the yr when he wasn't playing well & yes was having a poor performance in the AHL? He had a crappy start to his yr but I also think the fact that he was the only D who was waiver exempt. The combination of those two things made it easy to send him back to Belleville. Add to that the GM had brought in MDZ & probably wanted to see him play to see if he could help the team which again turned out badly for management.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmix

Senator Stanley

Registered User
Dec 11, 2003
8,089
2,498
Visit site
Call me crazy, but I feel like certain media members who would like to see Pierre Dorion fail (Shawn Simpson, Brent Wallace) are having a hard time admitting that Brannstrom might actually be good. I'm not saying it's conscious, but if you wanted to paint Dorion as a failure, Brannstrom being a bust sure helped your case. Now, when he's finally playing and playing well, the commentary has subtly shifted from "Brannstrom can't play at this level" to a dismissive "Whatever, he has no place here long-term so might as well trade him for pucks."

And this is coming from someone who would fire Pierre Dorion tomorrow if I bought the team. How about we let the kid play and see what we have here? He might be really good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Emrasie and H2O

Bileur

Registered User
Jun 15, 2004
18,698
7,528
Ottawa
February 3rd this decision of testing every player every day will finally end. Should really make the season more bearable and watchable, also more fair to players who work so hard to be able to play.

Probably less fair for the Sens who have pretty much all gotten it already
 

The Devilish Buffoon

Registered User
Dec 24, 2018
12,665
11,423
That’s how DJ has been using him so far this season. Mostly on the left with shifts on Chabot’s right when we need some offence
I know, I'm just laughing because there is a multi-page thread lamenting how we mismanaged Brannstrom's development and one of the main premises is that we refused to play him on his so-called "preferred" side (i.e. the right side).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sensinitis

OD99

Registered User
Oct 13, 2012
5,106
4,305
Jeepers.

It's not shocking he would find it easier to defend on his strong side at the NHL level and he is stating the obvious why he prefers being on his off side in the offensive zone.

As a young star he was offensively focused so the right side was more natural which is why he was more comfortable there.

He was jacked around a fair bit and was clearly capable of playing over some of the other D we had prior to this last call up. He was also going to get better from reps wherever he played so progression should have been expected regardless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: L'Aveuglette

aragorn

Do The Right Thing
Aug 8, 2004
29,239
9,903
My guess is that Brannstrom if not traded, should be a full time player next season partering with Holden on the bottom pairing. That would leave Zub & Zaitsev to partner with Chabot & Sanderson. Thomson most likely will be the 7th D & coming in for Brannstrom or Zaitsev whenever needed. Hopefully, they buy out MDZ this yr, if they can't move him & maybe Zaitsev next yr, if his play doesn't improve.

I think Thomson is a better defenceman than Brannstrom which should cause a controversy on here. He is slightly bigger, plays slightly more physical, is a better skater, slightly better defensively, is harder to move off the puck, makes a good first pass & joins in on the rush offensively. Brannstrom has a little more experienced than Thomson, but Thomson is quickly catching up IMO & could pass him next season.

Of course, if Zaitsev has another terrible yr, than Thomson or Brannstrom could end up replacing him & Thomson could get into the lineup that way. And let's not forget that JBD is not that far behind either & he plays a Zub like game. And then there is the possibility that they could draft one of the two top 10 RD coming up in the 2022 draft (Jiricek or Nemec). That could really round out the defence for the next decade.
 

Sweatred

Erase me
Jan 28, 2019
13,408
3,326
My guess is that Brannstrom if not traded, should be a full time player next season partering with Holden on the bottom pairing. That would leave Zub & Zaitsev to partner with Chabot & Sanderson. Thomson most likely will be the 7th D & coming in for Brannstrom or Zaitsev whenever needed. Hopefully, they buy out MDZ this yr, if they can't move him & maybe Zaitsev next yr, if his play doesn't improve.

I think Thomson is a better defenceman than Brannstrom which should cause a controversy on here. He is slightly bigger, plays slightly more physical, is a better skater, slightly better defensively, is harder to move off the puck, makes a good first pass & joins in on the rush offensively. Brannstrom has a little more experienced than Thomson, but Thomson is quickly catching up IMO & could pass him next season.

Of course, if Zaitsev has another terrible yr, than Thomson or Brannstrom could end up replacing him & Thomson could get into the lineup that way. And let's not forget that JBD is not that far behind either & he plays a Zub like game. And then there is the possibility that they could draft one of the two top 10 RD coming up in the 2022 draft (Jiricek or Nemec). That could really round out the defence for the next decade.

Makes sense to me unless someone is moved. Of the 4 young D I think JBD is the most expendable. He moves the puck nicely but he struggles as much physically as Brann and Brann is showing elite puck movement/play making.
 
Last edited:

aragorn

Do The Right Thing
Aug 8, 2004
29,239
9,903
Makes sense to me unless someone is moved. Of the 4 young D I think JBD is the most expendable. He moves the puck nicely but he struggles as much physically as Brann and Brann is showing elite puck movement/play making.
I'm hoping one of them get moved in a package for Lawson Crouse LW if Dorion can get him out of Arz. He would be the Watson replacement for the future who can skate, hit, fight & put up some pts.
 

Sweatred

Erase me
Jan 28, 2019
13,408
3,326
22 years old and on the verge of a top 4 dman driving the offence …

Norris took off this year and is 22, Batherson took off the is year is 23. JBD will be 22 in a few months and isn’t close to taking off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReginKarlssonLehner

Emrasie

Registered User
Mar 13, 2019
452
254
We should really trade Zaitsev this year, with Chabot, Brann, Sanderson, JBD, Zub, Holden, Thomson, the D is full. And you don't pay a 7st D this price.
 

Bileur

Registered User
Jun 15, 2004
18,698
7,528
Ottawa
It can also be true that if he didn't learn to defend on his strong side, he might never crack an NHL roster permanently

Hypothetically, sure, that can be true.

He might still never crack a roster permanently. Very promising signs lately though.
 

JD1

Registered User
Sep 12, 2005
16,209
9,824
Hypothetically, sure, that can be true.

He might still never crack a roster permanently. Very promising signs lately though.

Here's a quote from Dorion in that article

Dorion said. "We both think playing on the left side will be more beneficial for his development, to be the best NHL player he can be. I think once you establish yourself you can go to your weaker side."

Using both, he was referring to himself and DJ. Thing is, that particular thought is almost universally accepted across the hockey world.

It's hard to play on your off side on D. It's not the same as doing it as an F. And Brannstrom being smaller is even less suited for it.
 

Ice-Tray

Registered User
Jan 31, 2006
16,595
8,463
Victoria
I think it makes good sense. He was more comfortable playing the position he used to play (right side), but now he’s more comfortable playing the position the team has made him play (left side).

The team obviously wanted him to be an everyday NHL defender who could be relied on defensively and developed Branstrom to play his strong side and up his defensive game.

Branstrom appears to have done a great job at making the transition, and is a much better defender at the moment, with lots of time to get better.

The beauty of it is that now that he can be trusted to defend in a top 4 role, he can be used as such in the lineup, and, in a pinch can be thrown out on his right side to play in the offensive zone when they need a push.

Because of how he has been developed to date, and due to how diligent he’s been in his development, he has become quite a versatile defender for this team, and has the potential to be that in a more permanent role.

There were lots of people who thought they knew better, and those people were wrong. Not a big deal, that’s how we all do in here, and being wrong usually means something good has happened to the team :)
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad