Traded Erik Brännström - D - Part III

[Sens of Anarchy]

Sure, just because Provorov, Werenski, Heiskanen, Hughes, Dahlin, Sieder, Byram and Drysdale (seems to be struggling this year so idk) did it and were ready doesn't mean Juolevi, Boqvist and Broberg were ready, but the point was simply that top 10 picks are more likely to be ready at 20 than the average draft pick.

I guess my point was missed . Being drafted higher probably means ready earlier I will agree with that. I was not refuting your point to begin with,

You can't name one player and say because he did something.. then name another player with and say he should be able to .. they are all different and will develop at their own pace. You may be able to graph something by draft position but just because one player did it doesn't mean the next one will.

 

[Micklebot]

I guess my point was missed . Being drafted higher probably means ready earlier I will agree with that. I was not refuting your point to begin with,

You can't name one player and say because he did something.. then name another player with and say he should be able to .. they are all different and will develop at their own pace. You may be able to graph something by draft position but just because one player did it doesn't mean the next one will.

Yeah, I agree with that, in the sens that absent of any other information you can't say since player a did it player b can, but we aren't going in blind.

Draft position is a indication of how talented the player is at a given time. Higher drafted players tend to be closer than lower drafted player, though not always

We can also look at what guys did after getting drafted and compare, if Sanderson dominates college hockey at 18 and 19 in a similar fashion as other players that transitioned smoothly you can infer that he's more likely to transition Smoothly as well, his college play was why I was very vocal that he'd step right into our top 4 this offseason.

Nothing is set in stone, not all players can transition success from a lower level to the next, but pointing out similarities with those that have can be useful in figuring out the odds another play might do the same.

Sanderson has good size, skates immaculately and dominated at lower levels, there was little reason to doubt he'd be ready this year imo.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Yeah, I agree with that, in the sens that absent of any other information you can't say since player a did it player b can, but we aren't going in blind.

Draft position is a indication of how talented the player is at a given time. Higher drafted players tend to be closer than lower drafted player, though not always

We can also look at what guys did after getting drafted and compare, if Sanderson dominates college hockey at 18 and 19 in a similar fashion as other players that transitioned smoothly you can infer that he's more likely to transition Smoothly as well, his college play was why I was very vocal that he'd step right into our top 4 this offseason.

Nothing is set in stone, not all players can transition success from a lower level to the next, but pointing out similarities with those that have can be useful in figuring out the odds another play might do the same.

Sanderson has good size, skates immaculately and dominated at lower levels, there was little reason to doubt he'd be ready this year imo.

I'm a big Sanderson fan... what another player did has no bearing on what he is doing and what he is doing has not bearing on what another player will do.
You are talking about law of averages. I am saying you can't say because Wyatt Johnston can do it .. others drafted where he was or even higher should be able to do it .. You can graph likely hood based on numbers like I said initially. Because Sanderson was able doesn't mean the next top 10 picked D will.
Because Tim Stutzle can be a point a game player at 20 doesn't mean the next top 3 picked forward will

 

[Micklebot]

I'm a big Sanderson fan... what another player did has no bearing on what he is doing and what he is doing has not bearing on what another player will do.
You are talking about law of averages. I am saying you can't say because Wyatt Johnston can do it .. others drafted where he was or even higher should be able to do it .. You can graph likely hood based on numbers like I said initially. Because Sanderson was able doesn't mean the next top 10 picked D will.
Because Tim Stutzle can be a point a game player at 20 doesn't mean the next top 3 picked forward will

No, I'm not at all talking about law of averages, I'm talking about indications that a player is ready. His draft position was based on level of play at that point, along with perceived long term potential, that alone isnt enough to say he will or won't be ready by 20, but if I compare him to Werenski or Hanifan in his final year of college, it's not solely because they were drafted around the same spot, it's looking at their progression after getting drafted, what they looked like in college immediately before making the jump and how it compares to how Sanderson looked at the same stages along the way, it's comparing their skill sets, their strengths and their weaknesses relative to his and making an educated guess on how he'll transition. It's not saying because they did he will, but you can absolutely get a sense for where a prospect needs to be in their development in order to make the jump by looking at historically where players that made the jump were in there development when they did.

I'm not talking about his fate being determined on draft day, that's absurd. I'm talking about whether Sanderson was rushed, he simply wasn't based on where he was, and his progression was on a similar pace to a wide range of guys drafted at the top of the draft. This isn't cherry picking Stützle and suggesting every 3rd OA will progress the same, it's judging Sanderson's progression after being drafted against his peers and using all the info available to judge his readyness

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

No, I'm not at all talking about law of averages, I'm talking about indications that a player is ready. His draft position was based on level of play at that point, along with perceived long term potential, that alone isnt enough to say he will or won't be ready by 20, but if I compare him to Werenski or Hanifan in his final year of college, it's not solely because they were drafted around the same spot, it's looking at their progression after getting drafted, what they looked like in college immediately before making the jump and how it compares to how Sanderson looked at the same stages along the way, it's comparing their skill sets, their strengths and their weaknesses relative to his and making an educated guess on how he'll transition. It's not saying because they did he will, but you can absolutely get a sense for where a prospect needs to be in their development in order to make the jump by looking at historically where players that made the jump were in there development when they did.

I'm not talking about his fate being determined on draft day, that's absurd. I'm talking about whether Sanderson was rushed, he simply wasn't based on where he was, and his progression was on a similar pace to a wide range of guys drafted at the top of the draft. This isn't cherry picking Stützle and suggesting every 3rd OA will progress the same, it's judging Sanderson's progression after being drafted against his peers and using all the info available to judge his readyness

I don't think he was rushed either but I never thought he'd be as good as he is this early ..
on the rest of it .. I'll just leave that where it is.

 

[aragorn]

Rushing is playing guys before they are ready, so you feel Jake wasn't ready?

Besides, 20 isn't particularly quick for D taken in the top 5 of the draft.

There was a time when D weren't considered ready until 24 - 25 yrs old, that has quickly changed. Our D were also in great need of another good D & could still use another.

 

[Masked]

There was a time when D weren't considered ready until 24 - 25 yrs old, that has quickly changed.

When did it change quickly? The 60s?

Assen na yo!

 

[bicboi64]

There was a time when D weren't considered ready until 24 - 25 yrs old, that has quickly changed. Our D were also in great need of another good D & could still use another.

I definitely think younger mobile defenders are valued more and more in the league, but don't think that necessarily means that defenders only "make it" at that point (not that I think you're suggesting it).

The way Brannstrom has been developing, he could hit his potential by then. In the mean time, I think he'd be providing us cheap serviceable bottom pairing defending

 

[Micklebot]

There was a time when D weren't considered ready until 24 - 25 yrs old, that has quickly changed. Our D were also in great need of another good D & could still use another.

Not for top picks though,

Looking at top 7 picks, between 93 and 2014 since I already covered more recent drafts

Pronger, jovanovski, tverdovski, Berard, redden, berg, Phillips, mara, Stuart, vishnovski, klesla, Boumeester, pitkanen, Barker, e.Johnson, Doughty, Bogosian, Schenn, Hedman, ekman-Larsson, Gudbranson, Larson, Lindholm, Reilly, r.Murray, Nurse, Jones, Ekblad,

All played full time in the NHL by 20

Zyuzin, Ric Jackman, Brewer, Allen, Jonsson Komiserek, Whitney, Sutter, J.Johnson, Hickey, Pietrangelo, Reinhardt, Dumba and Fleury

Took a bit longer, often playing full time at 21.

Sanderson took a pretty normal path for a player of his pedigree. He may be outperforming some others on the list, but it is absolutely not unusual for a high pick D to be ready at 20.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Has been excellent this year. Moves the puck very well, makes few mistakes and is generally solid defensively.

Blows my mind that he only has 1 goal and 5 assists in 48 games with how well he advances the puck up ice and jumps into the offense.

 

[L'Aveuglette]

Has been excellent this year. Moves the puck very well, makes few mistakes and is generally solid defensively.

Blows my mind that he only has 1 goal and 5 assists in 48 games with how well he advances the puck up ice and jumps into the offense.

If he got PP time his stats would undoubtedly look much better.

 

[Nova Stutzlia]

Has been excellent this year. Moves the puck very well, makes few mistakes and is generally solid defensively.

Blows my mind that he only has 1 goal and 5 assists in 48 games with how well he advances the puck up ice and jumps into the offense.

Late last year and early this year, I thought that if the league gave 3rd assists, he would have quite a few of them.

 

[Hale The Villain]

If he got PP time his stats would undoubtedly look much better.

That plays a role for sure.

But Holden, Hamonic and Zaitsev all have a higher PPG than Brannstrom and they don't play on the powerplay and handle the puck like a grenade in comparison.

Just been super unlucky with forwards not finishing on his passes.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Just need the flashes to become the norm, but I think we have a guy coming that could be at least a size and play style fit to play with him in a young Kleven.

I’ve been back and forth with him this season, but other than being overpowered in the D zone he’s really putting everything else together.

 

[Wallet Inspector]

Brannstrom is such an enigma to me.

Some games like looks like a slightly worse Spurgeon, other games he looks like Patrick Wiercoch.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Brannstrom is such an enigma to me.

Some games like looks like a slightly worse Spurgeon, other games he looks like Patrick Wiercoch.

And still other times like a TimBit stayed on the ice…

 

[Hun]

Just need the flashes to become the norm, but I think we have a guy coming that could be at least a size and play style fit to play with him in a young Kleven.

I’ve been back and forth with him this season, but other than being overpowered in the D zone he’s really putting everything else together.

He was not overpowered in the D zone. Branny is a better D-zone player than Chabot. Much better.

 

[Ice-Tray]

He was not overpowered in the D zone. Branny is a better D-zone player than Chabot. Much better.

Oh he sure was, especially in Calgary. It’s not his fault, he just can’t contain big forwards and can be shoved off the puck fairly easily. He has to continue to be quick, but obviously it doesn’t always work.

He’s not better in any zone than Chabot, but in the D zone in particular it’s not really a high bar.

We can agree to disagree on that one.

 

[Tuna99]

Branny has 2 points in 3 games. Would be nice to see him get 10+ points(and maybe a few more goals) in the final 29 games with increased ice time and the team winning

 

[bicboi64]

Extending him is going to be cheap and I feel we'll keep him as a back up 2LD. Hope he makes the most out of this additional playing time

 

[Xspyrit]

Extending him is going to be cheap and I feel we'll keep him as a back up 2LD. Hope he makes the most out of this additional playing time

Yeah, keeping him is a no brainer. He provides quality minutes and is cheap, perfect combination and the way you HAVE TO complete your roster if you ever hope to be competitive.

Trade him when his value seem to peak (unless you can afford his next raise and need him at LD)

That plays a role for sure.

But Holden, Hamonic and Zaitsev all have a higher PPG than Brannstrom and they don't play on the powerplay and handle the puck like a grenade in comparison.

Just been super unlucky with forwards not finishing on his passes.

He hit the post vs the Islanders too. NHL.com says he has 2 on the season but probably a few more than that

I checked recently and he had the 10th lowest 5v5 xGA/60 among D-men. lol he's like a defensive specialist

And regarding Holden, Hamonic and Zaitsev all having a higher PPG, it can't be anything else than pure luck. They have very little offensive skill outside of Hamonic shot (and Holden has declined over the years)

Finally, while I was looking at stats, I found that we have 3 guys in the top-7 for Missed Shots Over Net (Batherson 1st, Tkachuk and DeBrincat tied at 7th), Batherson is also 8th for posts. One of the reasons why our GF is much lower than our xGF

And this is ridiculous, we are 22nd in GF/60 (2.97 G/60) but 3rd in xGF/60 (3.51 xG/60)

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

As long as Brannstrom plays towards his foerhand he is pretty good. Whenever he plays towards his backhand .. he is less than half the player., Watch him.. his reach and body type do not give him much leverage on the backhand, Most miscues he has result from moving pucks to his backhand or not moving it quick enough to be forced to try to make a play on his backhand.

 

[Masked]

He's a different player when he's paired with Zub. It was the same thing late last season when Chabot was out. Wonder if they'd ever try pairing Sanderson and Chabot.

Assen na yo!

 

[Nova Stutzlia]

As long as Brannstrom plays towards his foerhand he is pretty good. Whenever he plays towards his backhand .. he is less than half the player., Watch him.. his reach and body type do not give him much leverage on the backhand, Most miscues he has result from moving pucks to his backhand or not moving it quick enough to be forced to try to make a play on his backhand.

Maybe that's partly why he prefers to play the right side (his "wrong" side).

 

[OD99]

As long as Brannstrom plays towards his foerhand he is pretty good. Whenever he plays towards his backhand .. he is less than half the player., Watch him.. his reach and body type do not give him much leverage on the backhand, Most miscues he has result from moving pucks to his backhand or not moving it quick enough to be forced to try to make a play on his backhand.

All players are like that but he really puts himself in bad positions when he goes backhand in the D zone.