Traded Erik Brännström - D - Part III

[KevinRedkey]

I agree that Brannstrom's play hasn't shown us he is more qualified than Sanderson, Chabot, Zub, or Chychrun in the top-4. that said, it isn't that we brought in too many high-quality players and prevented a clear top-4 defenseman from showing his stuff. He simply hasn't shown he is worth those minutes with his play. Do you honestly believe Brannstrom is a top-4 defenseman on a playoff team? Unless you believe that, he's not blocked, he's actually being supported by having good players around him and appropriate matchups and icetime

His minutes are fine. Of guys who have actually played this season (20+ games), he's #176 which is where he should be as a bottom pairing defenseman without a lot of special teams minutes. The guys around him are all the ones I posted earlier. Guys like Stecher, Schenn, Burroughs, Klague, Xhekaj, Lybushkin, Mahura, Cal Foote, CDH, Borgen, Fabbro, Valimaki, Addison, Lauzon, Soucy, Barron, Schneider, Rosen, Lundkvist. Bottom pairing guys. He isn't being healthy scratched, he isn't being relegated 10 10minutes a game like Andreas Englund

"shifts with offensive players." Are you talking about offensive zone time with the top line? Why the heck would we juice a bottom pairing defenseman's opportunities when he's struggling offensively? It makes no sense for us OR for Brannstrom. You seem to have this idea that we can simply deliver easy minutes to Brannstrom on a silver platter, unearned, and he will suddenly become a better player. That's not how it works. Not on Ottawa, and not anywhere else. You might be able to get him for points that way, but that won't make him a better player. What experience in a role are you expecting Brannstrom to have? Is this really just about not being able to offer him powerplay time? As I mentioned, that opportunity might increase now that we have Chychrun, not decrease. Nothing is stopping him from getting better expect his ability to capitalize on those opportunities.

Until a few days ago, the best partner we could offer him was Holden. That is not Brannstrom's fault and he did the best of it. He's pretty typical of what you'll see on bottom pairings around the NHL.

I want to ask again, is Brannstrom RIGHT NOW, to you, a top-4 NHL defenseman being played on the bottom pairing or is he a bottom pairing NHL defenseman?


Weird that the eye test, the coach, the GM, and every metric availavble disagrees with you

The coach disagrees with me? Lol.. that's why he's out 6th D I guess? And he gets sat for Holden (who sucks) sometimes.

Marc Methot agrees with me. I won't be surprised when Brann is traded. You will be apparently. See if I care...

 

[Micklebot]

He’s thriving and growing in his current role. If he played PP his points would be fine. He and Sanderson have similar EV point.

I think a part of why he's been able to grow is because of the opportunity he got when Chabot and Sanderson missed games, with Chychrun in the mix he won't get the the same opportunity imo.

He also isn't getting PP time here anytime soon

 

[Icelevel]

I found it odd when Methot questioned if he would kill penalties, Brannstrom has been killing penalties...

Not a fan of meth like most here. Could do without his takes.

 

[Mark Stones Spleen]

Brannstrom looks great every time he plays with a competent D partner. Looked very good with Zub, he'll look good with Chychrun, and it won't even matter what side he plays on.

He just hasn't had the regular opportunity to play with someone decent. Chabot looks like shit with Zaitsev too.

Branny probably isn't good enough to make up for a shit partner, but he won't make a top 3 dman look bad either.

 

[PlayersLtd]

Chychrun needs to eventually move to the R and everything is solved. Brannstrom sticks to 3rd pairing LD and we pair him with a big reliable although not flashy stay at home RD, hopefully Hamonic on a discount.

That would be the ideal situation as it builds injury replacements right into the lineup with both Hamonic and Brannstrom being more than capable of sliding up the roster when inevitably someone goes down. It also buys time for Kleven.

One thing we need to factor with Brannstrom is that he is only going to get better. His development has been slow and steady but when you measure up the strides and how he has taken them I think we are just scratching the surface. If he takes one more step in his progression next year we will have a great expendable trade chip on our hands for when Kleven or JBD force us to shuffle the deck.

One thing is for sure, you don't give up on him at the very moment when he is proving himself and ready to sign a value contract that may be attractive league wide. In general, PD now needs to move into managing assets in a way that maximizes returns for tooling this team into a true contender. If Brannstrom isn't part of the long term plans at the very least he could be a valuable trade chip and we need to play our cards accordingly. That to me means waiting until about this time next year before being conclusive about his future with the team.

 

[guyzeur]

Not a fan of meth like most here. Could do without his takes.

Since you disagree with his takes then I have to put you in the hater category.

 

[OD99]

We have a different definition of success. He's poor defensively, slow, and small.

The only thing you have correct here is that he is small.

All other available evidence shows that he is not poor defensively (getting beat physically every once in a while is no different than the bigger guys getting beat with speed and finesse).

His best asset is his offense and he has barely produced at the NHL level.

Originally the thought was his best asset would be his offense but he has worked at his game and is now a good defender. He transitions the puck as well or better than any other D we have. He has had incredibly bad puck luck to not have more points.

Even with injuries, we dont need him at all. He will be gone in the summer for these reasons.

If we don't get a good return that would be incredibly poor asset management. He is cost controlled, excelling in the bottom pair and has lots of room for improvement. Giving him up because of a tape measure would be brutal.

 

[Ice-Tray]

No need to hate on our own players. I see Kleven and Bran being a theoretical solid third pairing. Have a vet as #7 and we’re good to go.

 

[Keli]

Bran is the perfect young third pairing puck moving D for us. If he’s willing to accept that role with the sens, we should keep him. If he wants an opportunity to be more than that (top 4) elsewhere, we should try to trade him and give him that option.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Given a top 4 of
Chabot
Sanderson
Chychrun
Zub


Brannstrom can fit here as a 5/6 no question. Not going to argue 5 or 6. He can move up when needed as well.
I think most can agree with that.

Him staying or going comes down to the coaching staff and management on how you want to construct the bottom pair. He is good enough to play there. Good hockey people will weigh in on one side or the other as to what that pair should ideally look like. Then it comes down to availability, price and ability. What you gain and what you lose.

You can argue numbers for Brannstrom but if they want a big mean mfer there the numbers won't save him here.
A year ago he had very little trade value .. I think he has upped that (guess)
I'd like to keep him. Injuries always happen and he plugs in really well.

I don't think there is an argument to be made. Its preference in the roster construction given that top 4 of which he is not a part.

 

[KevinRedkey]

The only thing you have correct here is that he is small.

All other available evidence shows that he is not poor defensively (getting beat physically every once in a while is no different than the bigger guys getting beat with speed and finesse).

Originally the thought was his best asset would be his offense but he has worked at his game and is now a good defender. He transitions the puck as well or better than any other D we have. He has had incredibly bad puck luck to not have more points.

If we don't get a good return that would be incredibly poor asset management. He is cost controlled, excelling in the bottom pair and has lots of room for improvement. Giving him up because of a tape measure would be brutal.

I've stated (earlier and I don't expect you to read dozens of pages here) I would only trade him if he has some value. If he's worthless, then of course we keep him.

I think he has some value and could land us a defenceman better suited to the role. That's really all I've been saying

 

[Tuna99]

BrannStone

 

[Loach]

I've stated (earlier and I don't expect you to read dozens of pages here) I would only trade him if he has some value. If he's worthless, then of course we keep him.

I think he has some value and could land us a defenceman better suited to the role. That's really all I've been saying

He does what he's told to do. Third pair, pk, move up when needed, sit when needed, play on the right side (now). Guy just goes to work everyday. If any young guy on this team has grown on this team in the last 3 years it's him. Perfect 3rd pair guy. And the little fckr can get blown up and bounces right back. Fearless. I would say he is tough...not in a fighting way, in a durability, mental way. He just gets a little better all the time. Keep him. We kept looking for somebody to play with Chabot and support him. Branny just plays with whoever DJ tells him to. That is perfect.

 

[PlayersLtd]

We have a different definition of success. He's poor defensively, slow, and small. His best asset is his offense and he has barely produced at the NHL level. Even with injuries, we dont need him at all. He will be gone in the summer for these reasons.

To say that his best asset is his offence is narrow sighted. His best asset is his ability to move the puck in transition, whether that is skating or passing from the D zone into and through the neutral zone.

Sure, this level of puck handling / passing is an offensive trait but it benefits the SENS specifically in transition when we have A / been very poor at this for the past 5 years and B / Have third and fourth lines at the moment that aren't particularly good at it. Brannstrom's transition game helps those bottom lines establish Ozone time that our trademarked dump and chase (for lack of better options) doesn't achieve. The value of this can't be understated and as our 3rd line becomes more offensively gifted it's going to help that much more.

I wouldn't expect near the same efficiency from any other option we have on the third pair- whether Kleven, JBD or Hamonic. Lassi is next in line in this regard but we all know he isn't ready in other areas. Durzi would have been a nice add for this role (and a RD) but that's unlikely after getting a far superior player in Chychrun.

Anyway, Brannstrom to me is a really nice fit on the third pair next year and we have come this far with him that it would be really dumb to give up now right as he's on the cusp of building his value back up.

 

[Ice-Tray]

We definitely aren’t in a position to trade a D man regardless.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

 

[HSF]

With Chychrun, Chabot, and Sanderson - we don't need a dman that needs to be sheltered in the bottom pairing role.

Trading him for someone like Jeremy Lauzon would be ideal as he would pair well in a defensive role with Harmonic next year. That, or maybe Kleven will be ready.

He's just wasted talent in Ottawa that's all

ew Lauzon?

Branny is not wasted here. It is okay to have depth. Was Serge a waste on the 3rd pair for Tampa?

 

[KevinRedkey]

ew Lauzon?

Branny is not wasted here. It is okay to have depth. Was Serge a waste on the 3rd pair for Tampa?

Lauzon was traded for more than what Brannstrom is currently worth. If he's "ew" then Brannstrom is gross.

 

[HSF]

Lauzon was traded for more than what Brannstrom is currently worth. If he's "ew" then Brannstrom is gross.

a 2nd in a weak draft? Branny gets that easy

 

[DaveMatthew]

With Chychrun, Chabot, and Sanderson - we don't need a dman that needs to be sheltered in the bottom pairing role.

Trading him for someone like Jeremy Lauzon would be ideal as he would pair well in a defensive role with Harmonic next year. That, or maybe Kleven will be ready.

He's just wasted talent in Ottawa that's all

I mean... Jeremy Lauzon should also be sheltered on the 3rd pair. Just for different reasons.

Do people think we're going to be able to replace Brannstrom, for less than $1.5M AAV, with a defenseman who doesn't have deficiencies?

Sure, Brannstrom's size means he can sometimes struggle behind and in front of the net. So you can go out and get a 3rd pairing guy who's bigger. But while that guy may be better in front of and behind the net, he'll probably struggle against the rush and at getting the puck out of the zone.

Would we be much better if we swapped Brannstrom with Mark Borowiecki? The 3rd pairing would definitely be different. And it might be better in some matchups, but it'd also be worse in others.

 

[Sun God Nika]

With Sanderson, Chychrun, Chabot and Pierre calling Kleven an untouchable have to think the clock is ticking on Branny.

Not a bad problem to have Branny proved me wrong and he clearly looks like he belongs in the NHL despite being a smaller d-man he has improved in masking his weaknesses by using his strengths.

I'll say he is gonna be on our roster until next years trade deadline or he gets moved in the offseason if he is looking for a higher AAV due to how tight the cap situation looks might also be an opportunity to recoup some draft picks.

 

[Max McBolt]

1. Brannstrom isn't being sheltered, he just isn't noticeably displacing anyone in the top- older and a different style

Yes, he is.

Lowest quality of competition & highest offensive zone deployment among all Ottawa Senators (D).

That’s as sheltered as a defenseman can be.

 

[bicboi64]

I think Kleven will provide something for us on the backend that we haven't had in a while, but at the same time, right now Brannstrom is by far the best candidate for our 3rd pairing. Not betting on Kleven stepping in and being able to replace him. Maybe mid next season but too many good dmen will be a good problem for us to have

 

[OD99]

Yes, he is.

Lowest quality of competition & highest offensive zone deployment among all Ottawa Senators (D).

That’s as sheltered as a defenseman can be.

View attachment 664056

View attachment 664057

I find the OZ vs DZ starts a little overblown. Most shifts are on the fly, icing plays a part, winning or losing the FO negates the zone start, etc...

All Brannstrom can do is play the minutes he is given with the players he is on the ice with/against.

However he is being deployed he is doing a tremendous job so what more can anyone ask?

 

[IranCondraAffair]

Yes, he is.

Lowest quality of competition & highest offensive zone deployment among all Ottawa Senators (D).

That’s as sheltered as a defenseman can be.

View attachment 664056

View attachment 664057

Those are manipulative stats. For instance, it has him above around 55% in OZ starts, but that is "even strength" or "5v5" only. hockeyreference has him at 52% all-in. You're excluding all his PK time which lowers it. You're basically taking away all his difficult minutes. All-in, he's right in the middle of our current defenseive group. Less than Chabot and Chychrun, but more than Sanderson, Hamonic, and Zub. Same goes for quality of competition, if you exclude all the difficult situation he is put in, of course it looks worse.

I see you also ignore the part of the graph that indicated he was effective in the minutes he played.