Value of: Erik Brannstrom in various scenarios

[The Devilish Buffoon]

After a pretty solid season last year (albeit disrupted by injury & COVID), Brannstrom has struggled to take a real step forward this season. I think he can have a nice, positive impact as a sheltered #5D and there is no rush for Ottawa to move on from him, but there are certain scenarios in which I could see us moving on from him, which I will outline below in order of likelihood.

The point of this thread is for you, the rival fan, to identify which of the scenarios would be palatable/interesting to your team (if any) and then to determine what you think is a fair price to pay in that scenario.

With no further ado:
1) Brannstrom in a package for a top 6 forward (more likely) or top 4 D (less likely)
2) Brannstrom straight up for an established solid 3rd line forward/3rd pair D in his mid-20s (similar to the Bear for Foegele trade)
3) Brannstrom as sweetener to dump Zaitsev's contract (2yrs x 4.5m)
4) Brannstrom for a younger prospect or pick

If you think your team would have no interest in him whatsoever, no need to say so. If you would have interest in a different deal than one of the above scenarios, feel free to chime in.

Click to read more...

 

[HockeyVirus]

I don't think he holds enough value to be more than a throw in piece. He is on a Michael Del Zotto career path.

 

[Sens in Process]

I don't think he holds enough value to be more than a throw in piece. He is on a Michael Del Zotto career path.

Probably not as good though. Delly is crafty as a mofo.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

this is an odd one he was so good at the end of last season
I feel like change of scenery could do him some good but I dunno
I wouldnt wanna give up on him just yet he has alot of potential still

 

[Chainshot]

He seemed like he was turning a corner at the end of January/beginning of February - he was playing well, Smith seemed to trust him to put him on the ice, etc... What happened?

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

this is an odd one he was so good at the end of last season
I feel like change of scenery could do him some good but I dunno
I wouldnt wanna give up on him just yet he has alot of potential still

I wouldn't give up on him, but would move him if we could add a relatively young player who can fill a defined role. Trading him for a mid 2nd doesn't do much for us.

He seemed like he was turning a corner at the end of January/beginning of February - he was playing well, Smith seemed to trust him to put him on the ice, etc... What happened?

He hasn't been awful or even bad or anything... he's playing a lot and looks like an NHL D. I just think he is expendable if we are making a move for a good player, and I have doubts about him finding his game as a top 4 D here. Also, his offensive game has not progressed as most of us expected & hoped... in fact, his PP play and ability to get shots through has probably regressed from last season. He's been good the last 3-4 games through.

 

[DaveMatthew]

Is Brannstrom, at this point in his career, a guy you'd want in your top 6 for the playoffs? No.

But is Brannstrom, at this point in his career, a guy that's good enough to play in the top 6 for Ottawa, a team that's trying to go from bottom-5 in the league to having .500-.550 winning percentage? Yes.

He won't have a ton of value around the league (probably a 2nd rounder), but he's more than good enough to play on this team right now.

There's no reason to trade him. Maybe he improves and becomes valuable. If not, they can cut ties once Bernard-Docker, Thomson and/or Kleven show they're ready. They'll probably be able to get a 2nd or 3rd then, too.

It's time to stop judging him as if he's the top prospect who was traded for Stone and significantly lower expectations. That was a terrible trade by a terrible GM.

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

Is Brannstrom, at this point in his career, a guy you'd want in your top 6 for the playoffs? No.

But is Brannstrom, at this point in his career, a guy that's good enough to play in the top 6 for Ottawa, a team that's trying to go from bottom-5 in the league to having .500-.550 winning percentage? Yes.

He won't have a ton of value around the league (probably a 2nd rounder), but he's more than good enough to play on this team right now.

There's no reason to trade him. Maybe he improves and becomes valuable. If not, they can cut ties once Bernard-Docker, Thomson and/or Kleven show they're ready. They'll probably be able to get a 2nd or 3rd then, too.

It's time to stop judging him as if he's the top prospect who was traded for Stone and significantly lower expectations. That was a terrible trade by a terrible GM.

Feels like you completely missed the point of the thread/are focusing on, at most, 50% of it.

If Brannstrom can be used to get a better player, or traded for a player who suits our needs better, that's very different than dumping him for a pick. I agree, if all we can get is a 2nd or 3rd, there's no point in dealing him. If we can trade him for a Foegele-type player? Or use him in a package for a better player? That is something we should 100% explore.

It's not about getting rid of Brannstrom, it's about figuring out whether we can parlay him into something that we need more than we need Brannstrom.

 

[TFHockey]

I don't see a 5-6 guy, basically a bottom pairing D, being worth a top six forward. At one time I thought Brannstrom could be worth that but i don't see anything from him this year to support this.

He might be in a change of scenery type deal, with the player coming back also having some question marks.

 

[DaveMatthew]

Feels like you completely missed the point of the thread/are focusing on, at most, 50% of it.

If Brannstrom can be used to get a better player, or traded for a player who suits our needs better, that's very different than dumping him for a pick. I agree, if all we can get is a 2nd or 3rd, there's no point in dealing him. If we can trade him for a Foegele-type player? Or use him in a package for a better player? That is something we should 100% explore.

It's not about getting rid of Brannstrom, it's about figuring out whether we can parlay him into something that we need more than we need Brannstrom.

The thing is, Ottawa doesn't need anymore bottom-6 players or bottom-pairing defenseman. We have plenty of those, and plenty of young ELC guys ready to take on those roles.

We can certainly use a bottom-pairing, puck-moving defenseman who can play 20 minutes a night if there are injuries more than another offensively limited, responsible 3rd/4th line winger.

What Ottawa really needs is a top-end offensive winger - someone like Ehlers or Fiala - but you're not getting a guy like that for Brannstrom.

So my point is, Brannstrom doesn't have enough value to get Ottawa anything they need, and anything else (a Foegele type acquisition) wouldn't really plug any holes.

We're better off just keeping him.

 

[Djp]

I wouldn't give up on him, but would move him if we could add a relatively young player who can fill a defined role. Trading him for a mid 2nd doesn't do much for us.



He hasn't been awful or even bad or anything... he's playing a lot and looks like an NHL D. I just think he is expendable if we are making a move for a good player, and I have doubts about him finding his game as a top 4 D here. Also, his offensive game has not progressed as most of us expected & hoped... in fact, his PP play and ability to get shots through has probably regressed from last season. He's been good the last 3-4 games through.

yet you want to trade him for something that meets what probably is his best scenario in development.

i don’t know who even does that. He’s more of an add in in a much larger trade or you find a similar change of scenery player around the same age.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Brannstrom may have been able to get a 2nd in the off-season when he was coming off of a 13P/35GP half season in the NHL, but with bad production this year and no longer being able to go through waivers next year, he probably doesn't have more value than a mid-round pick.

Dorion should have traded him in the off-season after adding Holden and MDZ. Missed his chance.

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

yet you want to trade him for something that meets what probably is his best scenario in development.

i don’t know who even does that. He’s more of an add in in a much larger trade or you find a similar change of scenery player around the same age.

This thread is asking what his value is in various scenarios. I completely agree that his value is probably maximized in a change of scenery trade or as a piece in a larger trade, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

 

[Djp]

This thread is asking what his value is in various scenarios. I completely agree that his value is probably maximized in a change of scenery trade or as a piece in a larger trade, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

your ask was;

1) Brannstrom in a package for a top 6 forward (more likely) or top 4 D (less likely)
2) Brannstrom straight up for an established solid 3rd line forward/3rd pair D in his mid-20s (similar to the Bear for Foegele trade)
3) Brannstrom as sweetener to dump Zaitsev's contract (2yrs x 4.5m)
4) Brannstrom for a younger prospect or pick

Neither 2 or 4 is valid.

anyone U25 playing 3rd line/3rd pair is likely going to advance to a higher role in the future after the older vet on the team moves on.

Brannstrom was drafted in 2017. For CHL players, this is the last season for them on ELCs. A team isnt going to give up a prospect with potential for him. If they need to a fill a hole as a bridge for a not ready propsect they sign a veteran to fill such a role.

hes more likely to get traded for a similar player who is at the end of their ELC who also might need a change of scenery or is stuck behind other prospects who were drafted higher than them.

he was acquired by trade and not "their guy" so he can get the back seat in getting chances.

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

your ask was;

1) Brannstrom in a package for a top 6 forward (more likely) or top 4 D (less likely)
2) Brannstrom straight up for an established solid 3rd line forward/3rd pair D in his mid-20s (similar to the Bear for Foegele trade)
3) Brannstrom as sweetener to dump Zaitsev's contract (2yrs x 4.5m)
4) Brannstrom for a younger prospect or pick

Neither 2 or 4 is valid.

anyone U25 playing 3rd line/3rd pair is likely going to advance to a higher role in the future after the older vet on the team moves on.

Brannstrom was drafted in 2017. For CHL players, this is the last season for them on ELCs. A team isnt going to give up a prospect with potential for him. If they need to a fill a hole as a bridge for a not ready propsect they sign a veteran to fill such a role.

hes more likely to get traded for a similar player who is at the end of their ELC who also might need a change of scenery or is stuck behind other prospects who were drafted higher than them.

he was acquired by trade and not "their guy" so he can get the back seat in getting chances.

I didn't "ask" anything. I outlined four scenarios. The whole point of this thread is to figure out if anyone would offer any of those things for Brannstrom/how they value him in any given scenario.

 

[Neiler]

I'm not a rival fan so I can't really play along.

I could see an Arizona deal to take him with Zaitsev, probably plus a pick.

As for a straight swap, maybe in Detroit for Rasmussen or Veleno? I also used to believe a deal with LA for Vilardi would be a great fit for both sides but LA fans were insistent he was transitioning to wing and there would be no interest. Both teams probably keep their guys honestly.

I got nothin.

 

[KevinRedkey]

I don't think he holds enough value to be more than a throw in piece. He is on a Michael Del Zotto career path.

MDZ had a better rookie year than Brann has had a career.

 

[Voodoo Glow Skulls]

I'm not a rival fan so I can't really play along.

I could see an Arizona deal to take him with Zaitsev, probably plus a pick.

As for a straight swap, maybe in Detroit for Rasmussen or Veleno? I also used to believe a deal with LA for Vilardi would be a great fit for both sides but LA fans were insistent he was transitioning to wing and there would be no interest. Both teams probably keep their guys honestly.

I got nothin.

Neither of those Detroit guys are moving for Brannstrom.

 

[Boud]

Brannstrom is a Troy Stecher type defensemen. You can get these 3rd pairing puck movers for cheap, like Wideman for example who's playing for .750K a year and has 25 pts in 50 games.

Unfortunately not good enough to warrant a team taking Zaitsev, it would take more than that I'm pretty sure. Brannstrom's likely worth something similar to Dermott (a 3rd), but I wouldn't be surprised at all if many teams wouldn't consider trading for him altogether because of his size and average speed. He's an easy player to exploit on the backend and that's why DJ Smith didn't trust him much in previous years and I anticipate he will be in and out of the lineup next season when Sanderson is here full time. Might very well split games with Holden and Im sure Smith prefers Holden. He works hard and he has good vision but he'll never be anything more than a puck moving 3rd pairing guy IMO.

I could see him being added to a deal as a throw in to complete a trade.

Or maybe the most likely scenario, traded for another prospect who's in a similar situation with another team. A Juolevi for Juulsen type trade.

 

[Cogburn]

After a pretty solid season last year (albeit disrupted by injury & COVID), Brannstrom has struggled to take a real step forward this season. I think he can have a nice, positive impact as a sheltered #5D and there is no rush for Ottawa to move on from him, but there are certain scenarios in which I could see us moving on from him, which I will outline below in order of likelihood.

The point of this thread is for you, the rival fan, to identify which of the scenarios would be palatable/interesting to your team (if any) and then to determine what you think is a fair price to pay in that scenario.

With no further ado:
1) Brannstrom in a package for a top 6 forward (more likely) or top 4 D (less likely)
2) Brannstrom straight up for an established solid 3rd line forward/3rd pair D in his mid-20s (similar to the Bear for Foegele trade)
3) Brannstrom as sweetener to dump Zaitsev's contract (2yrs x 4.5m)
4) Brannstrom for a younger prospect or pick

If you think your team would have no interest in him whatsoever, no need to say so. If you would have interest in a different deal than one of the above scenarios, feel free to chime in.

What does a the third scenario look like? I don't feel Brannstrom is super valuable at this point, but I also don't feel Zaitsev is awful enough to need a huge value sweetener.

 

[Mrfenn92]

Brannstrom to the hawks for Nicolas Beaudin?

 

[Kevin Musto]

Brannstrom to the hawks for Nicolas Beaudin?

Throw in Dominik Kubalik. Chicago won't re-sign him.

 

[Mrfenn92]

Throw in Dominik Kubalik. Chicago won't re-sign him.

Then he’ll just go unqualified

 

[PAZ]

I didn't "ask" anything. I outlined four scenarios. The whole point of this thread is to figure out if anyone would offer any of those things for Brannstrom/how they value him in any given scenario.

I don't think it's that difficult, his value will be more or less the same in any scenario, i.e. a player/pick/prospect with an equivalent value of a mid-late 2nd or 3rd.

Brannstrom doesn't look like he had top 4 potential anymore, and nobody wants an undersized PMD on their 3rd pairing. There are maybe two teams in the league that may have interest in Brannstrom - NYI and Arizona. Outside of those two, I don't see any team having interest in Brannstrom for even a 2nd/3rd since they have their own prospects/PMD to fill that role.

For reference, Jake Bean returned a 2nd who is basically a bigger, better version of Brannstrom.

 

[Jumptheshark]

I do mot see him having much value