Traded Erik Brännström - D - Part III

[JD1]

Right but he can only play the minutes he is given and for the most part, he has played quite well all season.

Interested to know what the zone starts actually are? How many times was he actually on for a FO compared to how many times/minutes he is changing on the fly.

His PK minutes picked up quite a bit towards the end it seemed as well. Are the above using 5-5 ice time or all situations?

Natural stat trick has that data

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Right but he can only play the minutes he is given and for the most part, he has played quite well all season.

Interested to know what the zone starts actually are? How many times was he actually on for a FO compared to how many times/minutes he is changing on the fly.

His PK minutes picked up quite a bit towards the end it seemed as well. Are the above using 5-5 ice time or all situations?

Erik Brannstrom - Summary - Natural Stat Trick

They have zone start stats in the On Ice section.
One thing I don't understand when I look at these is see 2022-23
Off. Zone Starts 135 and then Off Zone Faceoffs 325 .. I haven't been able to resolve these counts

edit
looking at the glossary I guess it makes sense .. since you can have 1 start and many face offs that follow for example

• Off. Zone Starts - Number of shifts for the player that started with an offensive zone faceoff.
• Off. Zone Faceoffs - Number of faceoffs in the offensive zone for which the player was on the ice.

 

[Korpse]

Right but he can only play the minutes he is given and for the most part, he has played quite well all season.

Interested to know what the zone starts actually are? How many times was he actually on for a FO compared to how many times/minutes he is changing on the fly.

His PK minutes picked up quite a bit towards the end it seemed as well. Are the above using 5-5 ice time or all situations?

All stats are 5v5.

Didn't look at on the fly starts or NZ starts, just rate of OZ and DZ.

Before All-star
8.54 OZ/60 5.41 DZ/60

He was starting more frequently in both zones to start the season, closer to the middle of the season the frequency decreased in both zones but the % remained relatively consistent.

After All-star
7.75 OZ/60 7.46 DZ/60

First 10 after
3.99 OZ/60 7.98 DZ/60
next 9
7.23 OZ/60 8.19 DZ/60
Last 10
11.56 OZ/60 6.38 DZ/60

I'm not saying Brannstrom didn't manage well, I think for the most part he did but when using stats like xGF% to highlight how good he did you have to consider other aspects like zone starts.

 

[JD1]

Totally true with the up and downs for sure.

But I completely disagree with the opposite side stuff. As he was figuring things out at the NHL level in those early years he would have gotten absolutely clobbered night after night on his off side. I think DJ did very well to insulate him from this.

Not saying you but I don't think people understand how much more physically vulnerable a player is on his off side, especially one like Brannstrom who is small and was not elusive or fast. On the dump and chase you get hit and you get hit hard on your weak side, there isn't an option and I wish people could better understand the X's and O's of this.

Teams would have exploited this and someone like Ryan Reaves would have eventually put him through the boards. It is fundamentally different than playing your strong side. Brannstrom might be ready for it now because his skating and elusiveness have improved. But he was getting hammered playing his strong side, on his weak side there is no question in my mind that his development would have been worse off.

I disagree with you on the dump and chase. It's actually easier. I play both D positions and have for a long time. When the puck is dumped on you and your on your offside, when you pivot 180 to chase, at that point your on your strong side. I'm a right D, on the right side of the ice (when skating towards my goal) going to fetch a puck in the right corner. When I get there, I'm on my forehand and can put my ass between the puck and the chaser. When I'm playing RD and pivot 180, I'm on the left side of the ice. It's harder to protect the puck. It's harder to rim it on your backend.

What's a lot harder playing off side and requires you to be quicker is guys trying to blow by you. Playing the right, when you pivot, your stick is between your body and the goalie. When you play the left and pivot, your on your back hand to try to prevent the drive to the net. That is often not possible. You're footwork is different. You can't gap as well. And you're more vulnerable to the winger cutting to the middle.

Brannstrom was getting hit a lot because he hadn't adapted to the speed of the game imo. I don't think D men get hit harder or more frequently because they're playing off side D.

 

[Micklebot]

I disagree with you on the dump and chase. It's actually easier. I play both D positions and have for a long time. When the puck is dumped on you and your on your offside, when you pivot 180 to chase, at that point your on your strong side. I'm a right D, on the right side of the ice (when skating towards my goal) going to fetch a puck in the right corner. When I get there, I'm on my forehand and can put my ass between the puck and the chaser. When I'm playing RD and pivot 180, I'm on the left side of the ice. It's harder to protect the puck. It's harder to rim it on your backend.

What's a lot harder playing off side and requires you to be quicker is guys trying to blow by you. Playing the right, when you pivot, your stick is between your body and the goalie. When you play the left and pivot, your on your back hand to try to prevent the drive to the net. That is often not possible. You're footwork is different. You can't gap as well. And you're more vulnerable to the winger cutting to the middle.

Brannstrom was getting hit a lot because he hadn't adapted to the speed of the game imo. I don't think D men get hit harder or more frequently because they're playing off side D.

Another big advantage to playing your offside against a dump and chase is if your bringing it behind your net it's on your forehand, if the forecheck isn't right on top of you that adds a layer of potential protection.

 

[JD1]

Ya, I mentioned that. You're on your forehand. On the dump ins I personally find it easier but overall it's harder to play in your end on your off side

Another big advantage to playing your offside against a dump and chase is if your bringing it behind your net it's on your forehand, if the forecheck isn't right on top of you that adds a layer of potential protection.

 

[Micklebot]

Ya, I mentioned that. You're on your forehand. On the dump ins I personally find it easier but overall it's harder to play in your end on your off side

Oops, my bad, I must have glossed over that part, watching the Leafs get scored on can be distracting...

 

[JD1]

Oops, my bad, I must have glossed over that part, watching the Leafs get scored on can be distracting...

Weird. I consider it exciting

 

[PlayersLtd]

I disagree with you on the dump and chase. It's actually easier. I play both D positions and have for a long time. When the puck is dumped on you and your on your offside, when you pivot 180 to chase, at that point your on your strong side. I'm a right D, on the right side of the ice (when skating towards my goal) going to fetch a puck in the right corner. When I get there, I'm on my forehand and can put my ass between the puck and the chaser. When I'm playing RD and pivot 180, I'm on the left side of the ice. It's harder to protect the puck. It's harder to rim it on your backend.

What's a lot harder playing off side and requires you to be quicker is guys trying to blow by you. Playing the right, when you pivot, your stick is between your body and the goalie. When you play the left and pivot, your on your back hand to try to prevent the drive to the net. That is often not possible. You're footwork is different. You can't gap as well. And you're more vulnerable to the winger cutting to the middle.

Brannstrom was getting hit a lot because he hadn't adapted to the speed of the game imo. I don't think D men get hit harder or more frequently because they're playing off side D.

Disagree and I've read about this, played and have observed at the NHL level.

When you are on your off side after your pivot on a properly timed dump in at point of retrieval between the corner and behind the net you do not have the luxury of going high and off the glass (or low) to the strong side with a strong side turn post pivot. On your strong side your pivot can take you into a turn that puts you in a position to immediately advance the puck up that side, or seek the centreman who if back quick enough can provide an outlet.

A left shot on RD is forced to either A/ turn to the weak side and play it out on a backhand. This relies on a good turn otherwise the forechecker will telegraph it and be in a good position to lay a potentially damaging hit. Someone like Chychrun is able to handle this to a better extent because of that quick turn. Not unlike Sanderson he is a good skater that can elude that pressure. That said, it still doesn't allow you to get to the forehand and make a proper exit pass, your still left distributing or clearing from your backhand which is not ideal.

Option B is to swing it around to your D partner and all you're doing there is putting him in an almost equally vulnerable position where the only option is to pretty much keep swinging the puck around and quickly force it out of the zone because the opposing winger is anticipating the pass and closing the gap on the LD just as fast or faster. You're essentially telling your partner to deal with it and that's how weak pairings get hemmed in.

This is all magnified by being small and not a great skater. On the off side you are at a severely disadvantaged position and I'm talking well after the pivot and with a forecheck that has timed it and placed the puck in a way where you're not able to squeeze them out with your backside the way you are saying.

Added to that, you would have coaches that would exploit the matchup and be sending their physical guys in on that play, the Maroons, Wilson's and Reaves of the league. Early in Brannstrom's career I think he would have gotten punished if he was forced to deal with that weak side pressure over and over. These aren't weak hits that are easy to avoid either, these are take a hit to make a play situations, hard squeeze hits or full on plastering.

And yeah, I agree with what you're saying about defending the 1 on 1, entirely, I get that. From a physical standpoint though, it's the dump and chase and the elusiveness it requires to avoid it which Brannstrom didnt have early in his career, or perhaps still doesn't.

 

[PlayersLtd]

Another big advantage to playing your offside against a dump and chase is if your bringing it behind your net it's on your forehand, if the forecheck isn't right on top of you that adds a layer of potential protection.

That's not an advantage, that's an acceptable by product of not being on your forehand when going the other way. The play that you're talking about around the net is relatively safe and easy whether on your forehand or backhand. But those are dump and chase scenarios that have already failed for the forechecking team. You're referencing a play that has the luxury of time and space and yes, some defenders can create that for themselves on many dump in's, Cale Makar is one of the best to ever play the game at this. Brannstrom does not have that ability, although I would no longer say he is below average. But this discussion is about Brannstrom of old who was below average at creating separation at the NHL level.

But I digress, it's not about that play because that's a failed dump and chase. It's the plays when the pressure is causing you to move the puck from your own corner, or between the corner and the back of the net, that's what an effective dump and chase is. The dump is timed in a way where physical contact is initiated at the point of retrieval and it puts the defender in a panic situation, on their heels so to speak. In that case you want to be forehand looking up the boards. Swinging the puck around the net with the benefit of your forehand is when D pairings tend to get hemmed in.

 

[Micklebot]

That's not an advantage, that's an acceptable by product of not being on your forehand when going the other way. The play that you're talking about around the net is relatively safe and easy whether on your forehand or backhand. But those are dump and chase scenarios that have already failed for the forechecking team. You're referencing a play that has the luxury of time and space and yes, some defenders can create that for themselves on many dump in's, Cale Makar is one of the best to ever play the game at this. Brannstrom does not have that ability, although I would no longer say he is below average. But this discussion is about Brannstrom of old who was below average at creating separation at the NHL level.

But I digress, it's not about that play because that's a failed dump and chase. It's the plays when the pressure is causing you to move the puck from your own corner, or between the corner and the back of the net, that's what an effective dump and chase is. The dump is timed in a way where physical contact is initiated at the point of retrieval and it puts the defender in a panic situation, on their heels so to speak. In that case you want to be forehand looking up the boards. Swinging the puck around the net with the benefit of your forehand is when D pairings tend to get hemmed in.

Again, if you're on your forehand to move to puck to your d partner, that's an advantage, it makes it easier to move the puck quickly or to Collect and skate to a safe spot behind the net. Being on your forehand for the most common plays defending against the dump and chase is an advantage. You suggest it's better to be on your forehand to go the other way but that's putting the puck into a more dangerous location, if it's turned over there you have immediate pressure towards the net. When you're moving a puck under duress, having options that put pucks in safe spots should things go wrong is prefered, you might not have the home run stretch pass available but most players can't make that play in the situation discussed

 

[JD1]

I think we need a white board to have these discussions so it's more clear what everyone is talking about.

 

[PlayersLtd]

Again, if you're on your forehand to move to puck to your d partner, that's an advantage, it makes it easier to move the puck quickly or to Collect and skate to a safe spot behind the net. Being on your forehand for the most common plays defending against the dump and chase is an advantage. You suggest it's better to be on your forehand to go the other way but that's putting the puck into a more dangerous location, if it's turned over there you have immediate pressure towards the net. When you're moving a puck under duress, having options that put pucks in safe spots should things go wrong is prefered, you might not have the home run stretch pass available but most players can't make that play in the situation discussed

Again, up the boards is the safe spot not to your D partner who will be under similar duress (in a well executed dump and chase). For example, if your logic prevails and your D partner is similarly on his off side and under pressure then what...someone is trying to advance the puck off their backhand and this is not ideal, right?

I'm not saying that it isn't good to be on your forehand in that situation. I'm saying it's better to be on your forehand going up your own side.

 

[Micklebot]

Again, up the boards is the safe spot not to your D partner who will be under similar duress (in a well executed dump and chase). For example, if your logic prevails and your D partner is similarly on his off side and under pressure then what...someone is trying to advance the puck off their backhand and this is not ideal, right?

I'm not saying that it isn't good to be on your forehand in that situation. I'm saying it's better to be on your forehand going up your own side.

Idk how many sens games you watched this year but up the board was definitely not a safe spot for the sens, we had countless turnovers in that exact scenario that ended badly,

I mean, it really depends on the forcheck you're facing, if it's a stack, you absolutely don't try to go up the wall, if it's a spread, you're going to try and evade the F1 to start the breakout on the strong side either bumping it to the center or up the boards to a wing. The thing is though, behind the net is generally a safer spot than in front of it, if your playing your strong side, you have one forehand option, up the boards, on your offside your d partner and center are both forehand options, with center being riskier of the two.

 

[PlayersLtd]

Idk how many sens games you watched this year but up the board was definitely not a safe spot for the sens, we had countless turnovers in that exact scenario that ended badly,

I mean, it really depends on the forcheck you're facing, if it's a stack, you absolutely don't try to go up the wall, if it's a spread, you're going to try and evade the F1 to start the breakout on the strong side either bumping it to the center or up the boards to a wing. The thing is though, behind the net is generally a safer spot than in front of it, if your playing your strong side, you have one forehand option, up the boards, on your offside your d partner and center are both forehand options, with center being riskier of the two.

It is commonly accepted that beyond just the pivot and 1 v 1 situations a RD is better suited to the right side for all the reasons I've outlined. There isn't a debate here.

 

[Micklebot]

It is commonly accepted that beyond just the pivot and 1 v 1 situations a RD is better suited to the right side for all the reasons I've outlined. There isn't a debate here.

Well no, it's generally accepted that there are advantages and disadvantages to playing your offside, and Defensively the disadvantages tend to outway the advantages, that doesn't mean every situation is at a disadvantage, for example against a stacked dump and chase forcheck, offside is advantageous since the generally accepted way of beeating a stacked dump and chase forcheck is to get the puck over to the weakside D as quickly as possible.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

For the record I have said I think Brannstrom should be extended for next year minimum and I think he is the one guy I'd pen into the bottom pair , to be filled in by Kleven/Hamonic/JBD.

With the playoffs in full swing the debate is back on twitter on Brannstrom. These people are not haters. Lots of the haters lol jumping in and defending Brannstrom...

I think is obvious you want big, strong, tough, mobile, puck movers that can use their physical presence to defend space and win puck battles. The Sens have been missing a quality defense for so long. IMO its as good now as it has been in a long time. Could it be better sure.. but IMO the roster has other priorities at this point.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Not gonna lie, teams would be looking to smush Bran in the playoffs every chance they got. He’s a battler so he’s likely be able to fight through it, but I think Meths point is more that you want your D to do more than just be able to hold their ground, they need to be able to enforce their will in other players and the game in some way.

Since Bran doesn’t play the PP, and doesn’t PK as much as other guys, nor does he put up points, how big of an impact is he having. When the physical play ratchets up in the playoffs what effect will that have in his current abilities?

Just points of interest to me, not arguing against him.

Yost trying to make a point the there isn’t much different between Sandy and Bran is classic. The real lesson here is the limitations of analytics vs actually watching games. I’m not sure there is a single Sens fan out there, Bran fans included, that would argue that those two players are close at all.

 

[OD99]

The larger point is that will our entire D corps be physical and intense enough in a playoff series?

Given the above, Branny should be the least of our worries in that regard. He is agile enough and good enough with the puck to get out of trouble and start the transition but he shouldn't be expected to do anything outside of his capabilities.

Last night in the Avs game Girard made a nice spin move at the offensive blueline, keeping the puck in but got rocked as the Kraken player read his move. Girard picked himself up, took a run at the player a few seconds later when he had the chance then went in deep on a forecheck and hit the D hard.

Both of his hits didn't do much, but showed he wasn't just going to take it and I see Bran in the same vein. Just let him continue to develop and gain confidence. I expect a nice surge in his points next season so people can stop harping on that as well.

 

[Micklebot]

It's kind of weird watching Boston win the president's trophy with both Clifton (5'11 190) and Grzelcyk (5'10 176) playing 17-18 mins a night, with less PK time or PP time than Brannstrom, but we can't find room for Brannstrom 5'10 185) because size is an issue.

I guess Boston pushed Grzelcyk out when they acquired Orlev, but as of right now, Brannstrom is still in our top 6, there is no reason to be moving on from him until that's no longer the case.

 

[OD99]

It's kind of weird watching Boston win the president's trophy with both Clifton (5'11 190) and Grzelcyk (5'10 176) playing 17-18 mins a night, with less PK time or PP time than Brannstrom, but we can't find room for Brannstrom 5'10 185) because size is an issue.

I guess Boston pushed Grzelcyk out when they acquired Orlev, but as of right now, Brannstrom is still in our top 6, there is no reason to be moving on from him until that's no longer the case.

It all goes back to the Stone trade.

People aren't happy with the return so people just want to get rid of him, even if it is a bad decision.

 

[Ice-Tray]

It's kind of weird watching Boston win the president's trophy with both Clifton (5'11 190) and Grzelcyk (5'10 176) playing 17-18 mins a night, with less PK time or PP time than Brannstrom, but we can't find room for Brannstrom 5'10 185) because size is an issue.

I guess Boston pushed Grzelcyk out when they acquired Orlev, but as of right now, Brannstrom is still in our top 6, there is no reason to be moving on from him until that's no longer the case.

I agree that there isn’t a rush, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they would like Kleven to be in that 5 spot and add another guy for the 6 th spot on RD in the future.

Not hating, just musing.

I think the biggest problem with Bran is that he isn’t translating his play into any offense, and so if you have a guy who isn’t producing any offence on then back end, maybe you’re hoping he can add a different element that is noteworthy.

A guy that is absolutely neutral can be totally fine too, especially if cap is an issue though. Hopefully Bran will be able to break out next season and really translates his transition game into some point production, that would seriously inflate his value overall.

 

[bicboi64]

I'd like for us to even make the playoffs before thinking Brannstrom can't handle playoff hockey. Physicality is important, but making sure the puck isn't in our end is important as well. As soon as we get a new coach, Brannstrom should be getting some PP time as well.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Of course Methot is going to highly value defensemen that play like he did, but the criticism of Brannstrom is becoming tiresome.

Brannstrom was great for us down the stretch and should absolutely be kept in the fold for next season.

 

[aragorn]

Of course Methot is going to highly value defensemen that play like he did, but the criticism of Brannstrom is becoming tiresome.

Brannstrom was great for us down the stretch and should absolutely be kept in the fold for next season.

EK didn't play like Method did & he gives him all kinds of props, Mackar gets all kinds of props too for being a great D who doesn't play like Method. Brannstrom is on the 3rd pairing for a reason & as long as the top 4 don't get hurt will stay there. He isn't getting PP time because Chabot, Sanderson & Chychrun will get that time along with their six forwards who lead the team in scoring. Brannstrom is yet to show the offence to be on the top 4 & is still an injury replacement player.

I think it is going to come down to what the team values & think it needs on that 3rd pairing. Kleven brings an element of size & grit that the team need on the backend with Holden likely leaving & Hamonic winding down. It's an element that DJ values & that the team is being built around. Whether Kleven is NHL ready though is another question, but he sure looked comfortable in the few games we watched. JBD is likely also going to be on the team given his waiver ineligibility although I think as a 6th/7th D.

It won't surprise me if Brannstrom is still on the team next season & starts in Ottawa & Kleven in Belleville, but I also won't be surprised if he isn't & Kleven starts in his place. I think it could go either way depending on what happens this summer, I guess we'll see.