Senators Off-Season Discussion 2024 Mega Thread

[HoweHullOrr]

I applied cap hits to your roster.

I had to make a few minor adjustments as follows:

1. You had a 21-player roster, so I added a 7D to get you to a 22 player roster
2. You forgot White’s buyout which is actually a cap “credit” next season.

Your roster was cap compliant. $86,125,714

If you pull in the players under contract for next year from CapFriendly, the players not under contract becomes redundant/unnecessary info.

View attachment 862095

The format used is good. It's clear, provides all the necessary details & is accurate. Much better than the text style alternatives.

 

[PlayOn]

If I had to remove one of the three though and replace with an experienced bottom 6 guy, it would be Kleven. Let him marinate some more in the AHL, and besides, WHEN Chabot gets injured he'll be called up anyway. Depth is a good thing to have.

Sanderson - Zub
Chabot - DeMelo
Brannstrom - DeMelo Jr.
JBD

In any case, I was replying to someone who was worried about Brann's salary, that's why I only added DeMelo initially. I still think it's good enough (to make the playoffs, not much more than that), as long as we have better goaltending, we get neutral luck with health and we continue the better defensive play that we saw under Jacques.

I don’t know if we have the money for Brannstrom and DeMelo Jr (haha). I think it’s essentially either/or when you crunch the numbers - even one of them is tough to squeeze in.

 

[Big Muddy]

I don’t know if we have the money for Brannstrom and DeMelo Jr (haha). I think it’s essentially either/or when you crunch the numbers - even one of them is tough to squeeze in.

22 or 23 player rosters with salaries (including buyouts/retained salary) provides all the necessary detail needed to evaluate whether a roster theory or a partial roster is actually “feasible”. As they say, the devil is in the details.

We also have more than one thread that provides posts and info on this topic now. The Free Agency & Trade Proposals thread used to be the home for this.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

So we alledgedly don’t block shots cuz we’re not built well and don’t have a tough top four RD.

We alledgedly give up way too many slot shots because….we’re not built well enough and don’t have a tough top 4 RD.

And we give up way too many scoring chances because…. You know what I’m gonna say.


But also not true ?

This is an average hockey team with ATROCIOUS goaltending. And that atrocity likely makes us play worse than we actually are.

 

[Senscore]

So we alledgedly don’t block shots cuz we’re not built well and don’t have a tough top four RD.

We alledgedly give up way too many slot shots because….we’re not built well enough and don’t have a tough top 4 RD.

And we give up way too many scoring chances because…. You know what I’m gonna say.


But also not true ?

This is an average hockey team with ATROCIOUS goaltending. And that atrocity likely makes us play worse than we actually are.

I think it was the Vancouver game that broke me.


Just watching shot after shot go in that not even the early 2000s Devils defense could have done anything about.

Just absolutely shit goaltending

 

[Burrowsaurus]

I think it was the Vancouver game that broke me.


Just watching shot after shot go in that not even the early 2000s Devils defense could have done anything about.

Just absolutely shit goaltending

Many games like this.

If our goalies played well. We sneak in or just miss the playoffs and the narrative is probably “chabot bounce back year”. “Chychrun adapting well to right side”. “We finally have a top 4 that works and a solid bottom pair”. “Forwarda finally buying in”

BUT DJ is likely still coach lol

 

[Alf Silfversson]

Talk about missing the forest for the trees.

All this talk about role ignores that he's pretty effective at what he does, which is being a safe defenseman who moves the puck up ice well and doesn't make many mistakes at even strength.

We'll probably trade him or just let him walk because Kleven is a gamer and should be considered a lock for the 3rd pairing LD spot, but if Kleven weren't around then it would be an easy decision to keep Brannstrom.

Agreed. People seem to talk like replacing Brannstrom with Kleven will make this team so much better.

Kleven is a prospect that needs to be phased into the lineup but making a swap of those two likely results in a step back next year.

In short Brannstrom provided good value at $2M this year and is actually pretty close to the least of our worries moving forward.

 

[PlayOn]

Many games like this.

If our goalies played well. We sneak in or just miss the playoffs and the narrative is probably “chabot bounce back year”. “Chychrun adapting well to right side”. “We finally have a top 4 that works and a solid bottom pair”. “Forwarda finally buying in”

BUT DJ is likely still coach lol

Do narratives matter? They are skewed heavily by emotions, so yes, when you do well it trends positive and when you do poorly it trends negative.

But removing the emotion here, Chabot wasn’t good enough this year, Chychrun sucks on the right side and the forwards need to be better defensively and at forechecking if we want to accomplish anything. All of this, if ignored because we’re a bubble team, would’ve become the narrative the moment we reached the playoffs and got exposed.

Good goaltending could’ve covered it up. They’re still real flaws.

 

[Dionysus]

So we alledgedly don’t block shots cuz we’re not built well and don’t have a tough top four RD.

We alledgedly give up way too many slot shots because….we’re not built well enough and don’t have a tough top 4 RD.

And we give up way too many scoring chances because…. You know what I’m gonna say.


But also not true ?

This is an average hockey team with ATROCIOUS goaltending. And that atrocity likely makes us play worse than we actually are.

What stands out to me is how good they are on the rush, while at the same time limiting the other teams rush opportunities.

That lines up with the stretches when the team was playing good hockey. Around the Dallas game in particular. They were snuffing out rushes coming at them and transitioning quickly into rush offense.

If They can add more cycle offense and defense, they could really dominate games.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Do narratives matter? They are skewed heavily by emotions, so yes, when you do well it trends positive and when you do poorly it trends negative.

But removing the emotion here, Chabot wasn’t good enough this year, Chychrun sucks on the right side and the forwards need to be better defensively and at forechecking if we want to accomplish anything. All of this, if ignored because we’re a bubble team, would’ve become the narrative the moment we reached the playoffs and got exposed.

Good goaltending could’ve covered it up. They’re still real flaws.

No I didn’t say that narrative was right or wrong. But goaltending has swung this narrative very far.

They’re real flaws if you want to be a contender. But I mean we aren’t leaking scoring chances. We are blocking shots. And we’re protecting our slot quite well. I posted the numbers right there.

This team is average. Should we be better than average year 6 of the rebuild? Probably yes but that’s not my argument

There’s no emotion in those numbers. Our team defence is NOT some abomination relative to the rest of the NHL.

What stands out to me is how good they are on the rush, while at the same time limiting the other teams rush opportunities.

That lines up with the stretches when the team was playing good hockey. Around the Dallas game in particular. They were snuffing out rushes coming at them and transitioning quickly into rush offense.

If They can add more cycle offense and defense, they could really dominate games.

I’m willing to bet if it was brought up people would say “ah our rush defence sucks so many odd man rushes bad pinches from chabot and chycrun and brannstrom and this and that”.

I mean how many times have we heard that we leave the slot wide open constantly. It’s just not true relative to other NHL teams.

 

[GCK]

Agreed. People seem to talk like replacing Brannstrom with Kleven will make this team so much better.

Kleven is a prospect that needs to be phased into the lineup but making a swap of those two likely results in a step back next year.

In short Brannstrom provided good value at $2M this year and is actually pretty close to the least of our worries moving forward.

I'm not convinced replacing Brannstrom with Klevin makes the team any better next year, but I'm damn sure it won't make them worse.

 

[Alf Silfversson]

I'm not convinced replacing Brannstrom with Klevin makes the team any better next year, but I'm damn sure it won't make them worse.

It absolutely could. If you get a young Boro type player (not unrealistic for young Kleven) instead of 24 year old Brannstrom we could be worse. It's the third pairing so the needle won't move much either way but we could see that third pairing hemmed in our end a whole lot more than Brannstrom was.

Brannstrom in undersized and loses more puck battles than he wins but if he got the puck on his stick it almost always made it out of our zone, often under our control. I'm very far from sure that will be the case with Kleven next year.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

Team plays all right team d on average, but the self inflicted chances they give up are atrocious, just undisciplined meltdowns that undo all the good.

And then when the goalie doesn't make the ten bell saves on them, it's their fault. And not the defensive meltdown.

 

[PlayOn]

No I didn’t say that narrative was right or wrong. But goaltending has swung this narrative very far.

They’re real flaws if you want to be a contender. But I mean we aren’t leaking scoring chances. We are blocking shots. And we’re protecting our slot quite well. I posted the numbers right there.

This team is average. Should we be better than average year 6 of the rebuild? Probably yes but that’s not my argument

There’s no emotion in those numbers. Our team defence is NOT some abomination relative to the rest of the NHL.


I’m willing to bet if it was brought up people would say “ah our rush defence sucks so many odd man rushes bad pinches from chabot and chycrun and brannstrom and this and that”.

I mean how many times have we heard that we leave the slot wide open constantly. It’s just not true relative to other NHL teams.

I don’t disagree.

But my point is that success is just as blinding as failure. It’s why the Leafs have been running their core back for a million years despite the fact that it has never worked.

So no we’re not some defensive abomination, I agree. But there isn’t a single bubble team in the East that is impressive in any way, so when we say that’s what we are with competent goaltending, we still basically suck. And if we agree we need to be better than that, then quite frankly it doesn’t matter what the narrative is. The narrative would change based on expectations, so the second we found success and our expectations grew beyond “playing meaningful games” we would start having the same conversations we’re having today. Our goaltending just fast-tracked them.

 

[GCK]

It absolutely could. If you get a young Boro type player (not unrealistic for young Kleven) instead of 24 year old Brannstrom we could be worse. It's the third pairing so the needle won't move much either way but we could see that third pairing hemmed in our end a whole lot more than Brannstrom was.

Brannstrom in undersized and loses more puck battles than he wins but if he got the puck on his stick it almost always made it out of our zone, often under our control. I'm very far from sure that will be the case with Kleven next year.

Losing puck battles results in getting hemmed in.

 

[Dionysus]

No I didn’t say that narrative was right or wrong. But goaltending has swung this narrative very far.

They’re real flaws if you want to be a contender. But I mean we aren’t leaking scoring chances. We are blocking shots. And we’re protecting our slot quite well. I posted the numbers right there.

This team is average. Should we be better than average year 6 of the rebuild? Probably yes but that’s not my argument

There’s no emotion in those numbers. Our team defence is NOT some abomination relative to the rest of the NHL.


I’m willing to bet if it was brought up people would say “ah our rush defence sucks so many odd man rushes bad pinches from chabot and chycrun and brannstrom and this and that”.

I mean how many times have we heard that we leave the slot wide open constantly. It’s just not true relative to other NHL teams.

I do feel that they often were broken down on the cycle. Poor switches and not covering the points well, leading to extended zone time, and open opponents in the slot or in front for tips/rebounds.

The current dcore has issues breaking up cycles and defending the net front. And the forwards lack some details in defending down low, as well as covering the points. They get caught in-between.

Good mobility from the dcore allows them to defend rushes well, and the forwards were tracking back better, as well as staying above the puck more. A little more aggressive defending the neutral zone.

 

[Alf Silfversson]

Losing puck battles results in getting hemmed in.

It can. But if he loses 60/40 but makes successful breakouts 90% of the 40 that is 36 Instant breakouts out of 100 entries.

If Kleven wins 55% of his board battles (optimistic for a rookie) but immediately breaks out 60% of those, that is 33% immediate exits. And turnovers are far more destructive to D-zone coverage than slowly losing a puck battle. I'd also be concerned about rookie Kleven's positioning and the ability to even get to pucks to start 50/50 battles.

 

[GCK]

It can. But if he loses 60/40 but makes successful breakouts 90% of the 40 that is 36 Instant breakouts out of 100 entries.

If Kleven wins 55% of his board battles (optimistic for a rookie) but immediately breaks out 60% of those, that is 33% immediate exits. And turnovers are far more destructive to D-zone coverage than slowly losing a puck battle. I'd also be concerned about rookie Kleven's positioning and the ability to even get to pucks to start 50/50 battles.

If Brannstrom broke the puck out successfully 90% of the time we wouldn’t be discussing this.

 

[jhutter]

I think it was the Vancouver game that broke me.


Just watching shot after shot go in that not even the early 2000s Devils defense could have done anything about.

Just absolutely shit goaltending

That Rangers game in late January or early February was what did it for me. It doesn't matter who's on defence when you let in low-danger shots.

 

[Alf Silfversson]

If Brannstrom broke the puck out successfully 90% of the time we wouldn’t be discussing this.

Sigh.

It was obviously just an example using numbers. If you want to nitpick obviously hypothetical numbers then we're done here.

 

[Big Muddy]

I don’t disagree.

But my point is that success is just as blinding as failure. It’s why the Leafs have been running their core back for a million years despite the fact that it has never worked.

So no we’re not some defensive abomination, I agree. But there isn’t a single bubble team in the East that is impressive in any way, so when we say that’s what we are with competent goaltending, we still basically suck. And if we agree we need to be better than that, then quite frankly it doesn’t matter what the narrative is. The narrative would change based on expectations, so the second we found success and our expectations grew beyond “playing meaningful games” we would start having the same conversations we’re having today. Our goaltending just fast-tracked them.

I’m hoping we improve in several areas versus just one area. Goaltending, coaching, defense, team D are all areas we could improve in. A lot depends on what the objective is. If you're happy just getting close to a playoff seed, then maybe an improvement in one area or element will be sufficient. Hopefully Senators management are setting much higher objectives. As another poster mentioned, even when Forsberg had a .917 save percentage season, we were still just 10 places above the absolute worst seed.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

Agreed. People seem to talk like replacing Brannstrom with Kleven will make this team so much better.

Kleven is a prospect that needs to be phased into the lineup but making a swap of those two likely results in a step back next year.

In short Brannstrom provided good value at $2M this year and is actually pretty close to the least of our worries moving forward.

You can replace brannstrom with lidstrom. If the goalies play the same we will finish the same

 

[GCK]

Sigh.

It was obviously just an example using numbers. If you want to nitpick obviously hypothetical numbers then we're done here.

My point is that Brannstrom is not this hidden gem that only a few Sens fans can see. He is a serviceable bottom pair D on a non playoff team that you can throw out there in the regular season. He is what he is, there is no untapped potential and 2M+ is too much for that.

 

[aragorn]

To Columbus: Korpisalo G, Joseph LW/RW & Brannstrom LD ($9 mil out)
To Ottawa: Patrick Laine RW ($8.7 mil in) (Columbus retains $3.7 mil for 1 yr)

UFA: Magnus Hellberg G ($1 mil @ 1or 2 yrs)

Tkachuk - Norris - Batherson
Stutzle - Pinto - Laine
Ostapchuk - Greig - Giroux
Sokolov - Kastelic - MacEwan/Kelly - $50 mil

Chabot - Roy
Sanderson - Zub
Kleven - JBD/Hamonic - $29 mil

Ullmark - Hellburg - $6 mil = $85 mil

 

[kilroy]

To Columbus: Korpisalo G, Joseph LW/RW & Brannstrom LD ($9 mil out)
To Ottawa: Patrick Laine RW ($8.7 mil in) (Columbus retains $3.7 mil for 1 yr)

UFA: Magnus Hellberg G ($1 mil @ 1or 2 yrs)

Tkachuk - Norris - Batherson
Stutzle - Pinto - Laine
Ostapchuk - Greig - Giroux
Sokolov - Kastelic - MacEwan/Kelly - $50 mil

Chabot - Roy
Sanderson - Zub
Kleven - JBD/Hamonic - $29 mil

Ullmark - Hellburg - $6 mil = $85 mil

What's Ullmark cost in this scenario, I assume something around Forsberg and Chychrun, right?