It’s not a revelation it’s objectivity. If I’m going to point out what a young player struggles with as he develops then I’m going to also praise him when he works past some of those and when his strengths begin to outweigh his weaknesses. This is Brannstrom’s 5th pro season in NA so it hasn’t happened quick. You should take some of your own advice and show that same patience with prospects who are either in their first or second pro seasons or still playing CHL/NCAA.
Traded Erik Brännström - D - Part III
- Thread starter AchtzehnBaby
- Start date
SlapJack
Scum bag Sens
- Dec 6, 2010
- 2,004
- 1,294
Problem there is Sanderson looked good on the PP. I hope they play around with the combos a lot to see what clicks, because I don't think Chabot is that great on the PP and Brannstrom seems to have some chemistry with Stützle. Sanderson was better than I thought he'd be at this stage so there's lots of competition now for the D slot on the PP where there was little before.
I don't care if Chabot is making $8M and been the guy there for years, put out the best lineup. Edmonton has 9.5M Nurse as their 3rd option.
- Jun 3, 2008
- 2,119
- 1,124
Sanderson and Brann should both be on PP2. I don't know why it seems you can't have 2 D on a PP anymore but that is a dumb, made-up rule.
Motte, should not be anywhere near our PP.
If Sanderson can prove to be a scoring threat then sure, and to honest he’s one of two defenders that actually has an NHL slapshot on our team (Hamonic is the other).
Otherwise, no chance. Branstrom can move the puck but can’t shoot to save his life, and you don’t want two guys on the PP who aren’t scoring threats.
Sanderson is already working his shot into his PP time so maybe in time we can work in Branstrom, but I doubt it though. What we need is another net front puck retrieval player.
Motte has 35 goals in almost 300 games and only 27 assists! Its insane he is out with DeBrincat, G and Pinto.
Zero reason he should be on the PP.
If you really want a net front then put Kastelic out there.
Pierre from Orleans
Registered User
- May 9, 2007
- 27,604
- 20,348
KingAlfie11
Registered User
- Nov 3, 2021
- 1,768
- 1,923
Why not try Brann on the PP??? And Motte with 1:43 on PP time per game is insane to me
This seems like a tempest in a teakettle. Sometimes you need to throw out a fresh body to win puck control and battle for space in front of the net. He’s not out there to be the scoring threat.
He is not the reason that we didn’t score. Our top guys weren’t great on the 6 on 5 at all, and Stu made a pretty terrible play to give up the puck. That what I’d be complaining about
I'm not talking about the 6-5, I am talking about the PP and again if you want a net front presence then Kastelic is right there.
I already said I thought Stu was brutal all game but that's beside the point.
You are free to comment about whatever you like, why are you trying to tell me what I should comment on?
Motte on the PP is insane and shows awful judgement from DJ...we have a man advantage and we use it for a guy to get the puck? So then what? We are essentially 4 on 4 because Motte isn't out there to help score?
- Feb 5, 2010
- 20,984
- 9,880
Motte is a better option than Kastelic. Not only is he better at winning the puck, he is better with the puck on his stick. Really good at playing through contact and despite him being on the smaller side uses his body better. He's not going to execute plays at a high rate, neither is Kastelic but he's going to make the right play and support the rest of the group out there. I have no idea what you think Kastelic is but I probably disagree.
Agent Zuuuub
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2015
- 15,372
- 12,811
what kind of stupid rule is that you can't have two d-man on the powerplay anymore?
Good for you to disagree, should probably read up more to have an idea and get the context of the discussion though.
I'm not some super fan of Kastelic, I am a staunchly opposed fan to having Motte near our PP.
I already said I think Brann and Sanderson should be on there with G, Cat and Pinto.
- Feb 5, 2010
- 20,984
- 9,880
I understand you don't want Motte, I did read you say you'd have Kastelic there but I did miss the broader point.
Where are you putting Brannstrom and Sanderson? What is the shape? I really don't see how the PP unit becomes more effective by having both of those guys. There would be more talent but you would have players in positions that wouldn't capitalize on those skill sets.
Very few defensemen have the skill set to play the wall. Even if Brannstrom or Sanderson did, neither one is going to be a better distributor than Giroux or a better trigger than Debrincat. You aren't moving those players. Are you putting the defensemen bumper or net front?
I don’t mind giving Motte a shot on the PP after his hot streak in the preseason. Give him a shot and see if he can keep up the hot hand. That said, it’s highly unlikely that this is a late career jump in development. If/when he comes back down to earth DJ shouldn’t hesitate to switch him out.
KingAlfie11
Registered User
- Nov 3, 2021
- 1,768
- 1,923
Motte is an excellent penalty killer that's he's expertise, DJ needs to put each players in the best situation for them to maximize their potential. DJ's problem is that he has a hard time grasping that concept.
Sweatred
Erase me
- Jan 28, 2019
- 13,408
- 3,326
Motte was getting himself caught on the half wall of the PP -he doesn’t have the hands or creativity to distribute the puck there - we have Debricat on the point and Motte out of position on the half wall. It’s a mess.
I wonder if DBC has ever scored a goal from the point ? I get he can move or rotate but he didn’t.
Brann should play the LD, Cat LW, Claude RW and Pinto can be net front or bumper.
I wonder if DBC has ever scored a goal from the point ? I get he can move or rotate but he didn’t.
Brann should play the LD, Cat LW, Claude RW and Pinto can be net front or bumper.
Yes, you could run the same configuration for the reasons you mentioned above regarding G and Cat and I think Pinto makes for a great bumper so you could run Branny down low for the quick pass or potentially that could be Sanderson if you want more size there.
With Branny clearly more skilled with the puck than Motte I believe it is a better option. Or modify it slightly so PK has to defend 2 different looks.
- Feb 5, 2010
- 20,984
- 9,880
A big part of playing that net front/goal line role is recovering pucks and winning pucks. Putting pressure on the opposition when they go to clear the puck which why I don't mind Motte in that role. Yes, Brannstrom is more skilled but that's such an unfamiliar position for a defensemen that they rarely make the right play. You watch a defensmen join the cycle and when they find themselves lower in the zone, they rarely know how to attack the middle, they generally keep the cycle alive but beyond that, they aren't making a play. I'm not even sure Brannstrom would make better plays than motte from that position.
I would love to see PP2 run 2 defensemen... I see absolutely 0 reason that Motte is averaging 1:43 PPTOI and Brannstrom is averaging 0:00.
Tyler Motte has averaged across his career 6.6 seconds of powerplay time... now with us all of a sudden he's getting 1:43???
Brannstrom has averaged across his career ~1:45 of powerplay time... now this season he's getting 0:00?
I know it's 2 games, and we're giving Sanderson a shot... but Brannstrom is a wayyyyy better option than Tyler freaking Motte...
Tyler Motte has averaged across his career 6.6 seconds of powerplay time... now with us all of a sudden he's getting 1:43???
Brannstrom has averaged across his career ~1:45 of powerplay time... now this season he's getting 0:00?
I know it's 2 games, and we're giving Sanderson a shot... but Brannstrom is a wayyyyy better option than Tyler freaking Motte...
Agent Zuuuub
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2015
- 15,372
- 12,811
People were putting him as the 7th d and having JBD and Thomson ahead of him. Saying stuff like Brann has bad hockey IQ or that he is a bad skater.
I'm sorry but that's not objectivity. Branns strengths have been outplaying his weakness for a long time which is why he was able to step up into a top 4 role and perform.
I've never quite seen a player being shit on like he has been on here even though all he's done is provide positive returns.
DJB
Registered User
The consistency from Brannstrom from game to game has been the best I’ve ever seen from him.
Keep it up Branny!
Keep it up Branny!
ReginKarlssonLehner
Let's Win It All
I re-read my post just to be sure, but nowhere did I tell you what you could comment on.
I mean, I suggested this might not be that big an issue, and that I personally would be worried about other aspects of the PP, but I definitely didn’t tell you not to comment.
As for Motte, the key word is ‘help’ score, not relied on to score. He was being tried out for the open PP spot where we need a battler and a net presence. It’s neither ‘awful’ nor ‘insane’ to try him out in that spot in my opinion.
Kastelic and Joseph are the other guys to try, but I see no reason not to try all three at some point, as none exactly scream PP scoring threats.
There is no rule, it just doesn’t make sense for us because we need a guy down low, not a guy up high or on the half boards. Giroux is the playmaker and Cat is the sniper. Pinto plays bumper and Sanderson or Branstrom distribute. You need a puck retrieval guy who can jam wraparounds, make the bumper pass, and generally battle. Doesn’t really sound like a good spot for one of our D men.
To add, I think Sanderson is our best PP D going forward because he can distribute, but he’s the only guy who is a shit threat. Neither Chabot nor Branstrom seem to be able to shot the puck on net in a threatening way on the PP. Both guys need to work on that.
I’d like to see Brass in that spot when he slots in, then we’d have a legit PP player filling the role.
Last edited:
