Player Discussion Thomas Chabot (D) Part 2

[Tragedy]

I love how his mention triggers people.

Brannstrom! Brannstrom! BRANNSTROM!

Let's throw in a DA COSTA! for good measure.

Shane Prince shares a drink with Filatov somewhere in a Russian bar

 

[bicboi64]

Chabot's slapshot almost ripped off that poor Flames players arm off (Hanley?)

More of those and goalies will be ducking

 

[Xspyrit]

That definitely matches with the eye test, the team has looked lost without Chabot/Jensen on the ice offensively. Chabot has been the teams best player a quarter of the way through the season.

They have been the top pair for the past month and a half.

I'd say 2nd to Stutzle but yeah these 2 have easily been the team's best players, not close.

Looking at those Branny Sandstrom stats, it seems evident from the stats that Brann is the wiser defenceman to spend money on since he is one quarter the cost and just as good if not better. And if thats what the stats suggest, im asking for a 2nd opinion.

No that's not what it means. Nobody knows how he would fare in Chabot or Sanderson's role but is it smart to have him on your 3rd pairing or as a band aid anywhere in your defensive squad? Absolutely.

Also, that ES stat is NOT advanced stats, it is REAL production at Even Strength, an extremely valuable stat. He has outscored Sanderson in 10 less games and way less ice-time. Sure, Sanderson started at 20 y/o, is still in development and has a tougher role but nonetheless, it's still worth something.

Among 219 D-men who played at least 1000 ES mins since 2022-23, Brannstrom ranks 69th in points/60. He's been underrated even offensively. And before someone tries to diminish this stat, the Top-3 is Makar, Karlsson, Hughes. It gives you a good idea of who can produce at ES

When Sandstrom was drafted many were calling him a defensive defenceman. But he was always an all round dman whose great skating was going to surely get him involved in points. Im not expecting him to ever lead all defencemen in points, that's not the strength i thought he was drafted for.

Jan Sandstrom?

Regarding Sanderson, he's getting paid 8.05 AAV on his RFA years, he has to put up points. If he can only produce on the PP (11 of his 14 pts on the PP), it would be disappointing. We need ES production

I love how his mention triggers people.

Brannstrom! Brannstrom! BRANNSTROM!

Let's throw in a DA COSTA! for good measure.

Da Costa played 47 NHL games though, Brannstrom is 25 y/o and at 282 NHL GP

I would have rather paid Brannstrom at 2.0 than Hamonic at 1.1

 

[Ice-Tray]

It made me laugh thinking of holding on to Branstrom for offence.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

It made me laugh thinking of holding on to Branstrom for offence.

Why? He's a really skilled guy to have on the 3rd pair.

It is pretty valuable to have a 3rd pair that consistently outplays the other teams depth, and even more so when that player can play higher up in the lineup. Which is exactly what Brannstrom did.


People who don't understand Brannstroms game don't understand hockey IQ imo.

Even now how can anyone still say with a straight face that we don't need a Brannstrom.

Zub is injured, we are playing JBD or Hamonic in the top 4, Chabot will likely get injured. Like the season has already had a bad start but now it might be the nail in the coffin.

Pretty avoidable had we managed to keep Brannstrom.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Why? He's a really skilled guy to have on the 3rd pair.

It is pretty valuable to have a 3rd pair that consistently outplays the other teams depth, and even more so when that player can play higher up in the lineup. Which is exactly what Brannstrom did.


People who don't understand Brannstroms game don't understand hockey IQ imo.

Even now how can anyone still say with a straight face that we don't need a Brannstrom.

Zub is injured, we are playing JBD or Hamonic in the top 4, Chabot will likely get injured. Like the season has already had a bad start but now it might be the nail in the coffin.

Pretty avoidable had we managed to keep Brannstrom.

I understand hockey, and I understand Branstrom’s value.

He’s not a really skilled guy on the third pair. He’s an undersized, defender who isn’t great at defending, can’t box out bigger forwards, and can’t produce any offence. He can transition the puck nicely, and has a heart of a lion, but just isn’t very effective in the position at all.

JBD is a better RD than Branstrom is, and is paid a lot less than he was slated to be paid. Branstrom has been here for years. He has never been a difference maker in any bad season, why do you think he would be this year? You’re the one complaining about rolling back the core, and yet you think Branstrom is going to make a difference?

We don’t need Branstrom on this team in the slightest. He wouldn’t help with anything on D that we need help with. I’m glad he’s found a home in Vancouver as I like the guy and am pulling for him as I do for guys like him and Kelly, but there is limited value and there needs to be a team that has a temporary fit, and that isn’t us anymore, thankfully.

As for your IQ comment, In my opinion, people who are Brady haters don’t understand hockey IQ.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

I understand hockey, and I understand Branstrom’s value.

He’s not a really skilled guy on the third pair. He’s an undersized, defender who isn’t great at defending, can’t box out bigger forwards, and can’t produce any offence. He can transition the puck nicely, and has a heart of a lion, but just isn’t very effective in the position at all.

JBD is a better RD than Branstrom is, and is paid a lot less than he was slated to be paid. Branstrom has been here for years. He has never been a difference maker in any bad season, why do you think he would be this year? You’re the one complaining about rolling back the core, and yet you think Branstrom is going to make a difference?

We don’t need Branstrom on this team in the slightest. He wouldn’t help with anything on D that we need help with. I’m glad he’s found a home in Vancouver as I like the guy and am pulling for him as I do for guys like him and Kelly, but there is limited value and there needs to be a team that has a temporary fit, and that isn’t us anymore, thankfully.

As for your IQ comment, In my opinion, people who are Brady haters don’t understand hockey IQ.

It's all about depth.

Zub is out now and hopefully you are right and JBD, Hamonic, Kleven can do well with more responsibility, otherwise we could have used Brannstrom. Brannstrom has a history of playing well in the top 4 and definitely did move the needle on the bottom pair.

I don't hate Brady I just don't like his defensive effort last few years.

 

[Ice-Tray]

It's all about depth.

Zub is out now and hopefully you are right and JBD, Hamonic, Kleven can do well with more responsibility, otherwise we could have used Brannstrom. Brannstrom has a history of playing well in the top 4 and definitely did move the needle on the bottom pair.

I don't hate Brady I just don't like his defensive effort last few years.

Like I said, I like Bran, but moving on from him was the right play in my opinion. His contract was too high, and he doesn’t bring what we need on the bottom pairing. With a healthy defence he isn’t playing, and at this point in his career he needs to be on a team that has a spot for him.

it would be nice to have good players waiting in the wings for when injuries hit, but it’s not really realistic with the cap and roster limits. We couldn’t afford a 7-8 guy at 2 mill, and we should probably be giving injury time to AHL guys when it comes up. So far our LDs have been good, and healthy, so I’m not sure if Branny would even have a game with us so far.

I wish him well, and I appreciate your comments on having depth, but when we’re talking about 7-8 position guys, we really should be talking about drafting better so we have better young talent to call up for injuries.

 

[Xspyrit]

It made me laugh thinking of holding on to Branstrom for offence.

And it makes me laugh when people throw these little sentences without any substance. You didn’t see the statistic I provided? It was not only an advanced stat...

I said « I know some people won't like that but, since 2022-23 :

Sanderson : 40 ESP in 176 GP, 16:57 ES TOI/GP

Brannstrom : 42 ESP in 166 GP, 14:12 ES TOI/GP

Chabot : 53 ESP in 139 GP, 20:19 ES TOI/GP »


I cut some stats to simplify but if you know what ESP, GP and TOI means… this stat is very telling and nullifies your point instantly

Which brings me to my MAIN point about all this :

It was stupid to let go Brannstrom just so TWO of Hamonic, Kleven and JBD would play every game of the season (all play is one injury)

I’d love to see someone trying to debunk that

 

[Xspyrit]

Like I said, I like Bran, but moving on from him was the right play in my opinion. His contract was too high, and he doesn’t bring what we need on the bottom pairing. With a healthy defence he isn’t playing, and at this point in his career he needs to be on a team that has a spot for him.

it would be nice to have good players waiting in the wings for when injuries hit, but it’s not really realistic with the cap and roster limits. We couldn’t afford a 7-8 guy at 2 mill, and we should probably be giving injury time to AHL guys when it comes up. So far our LDs have been good, and healthy, so I’m not sure if Branny would even have a game with us so far.

I wish him well, and I appreciate your comments on having depth, but when we’re talking about 7-8 position guys, we really should be talking about drafting better so we have better young talent to call up for injuries.

What? I didn't read that before. Brannstrom would probably be our 5th best D-man and considering that Zub has been injured all season, our #4-5

He just needed a bit of time outside Ottawa for people to understand that Brannstrom is actually a quality support player. I think it was because "It doesn't mean anything that Ottawa plays him, they are terrible"

It seems that it's because you think he doesn't play RD but he had 231 ES minutes with Chabot last season and they had a 61.5 xGF% in 231 minutes and a minuscule 1.92 xGA/60

Why? He's a really skilled guy to have on the 3rd pair.

It is pretty valuable to have a 3rd pair that consistently outplays the other teams depth, and even more so when that player can play higher up in the lineup. Which is exactly what Brannstrom did.


People who don't understand Brannstroms game don't understand hockey IQ imo.

Even now how can anyone still say with a straight face that we don't need a Brannstrom.

Zub is injured, we are playing JBD or Hamonic in the top 4, Chabot will likely get injured. Like the season has already had a bad start but now it might be the nail in the coffin.

Pretty avoidable had we managed to keep Brannstrom.

Agreed, Chabot or Sanderson injury and our season is done.

This is so sad, we always do one step forward, 2 steps back

Stutzle and Batherson are back to form. Norris and Chabot are finally healthy. Ullmark could in theory solidify our goaltending

but...

Our depth is absolutely horrible. Not only in the forward group but having all of Kleven, JBD and Hamonic in the lineup, making for 50% of your defense is not a recipe for success.

 

[Ice-Tray]

What? I didn't read that before. Brannstrom would probably be our 5th best D-man and considering that Zub has been injured all season, our #4-5

He just needed a bit of time outside Ottawa for people to understand that Brannstrom is actually a quality support player. I think it was because "It doesn't mean anything that Ottawa plays him, they are terrible"

It seems that it's because you think he doesn't play RD but he had 231 ES minutes with Chabot last season and they had a 61.5 xGF% in 231 minutes and a minuscule 1.92 xGA/60



Agreed, Chabot or Sanderson injury and our season is done.

This is so sad, we always do one step forward, 2 steps back

Stutzle and Batherson are back to form. Norris and Chabot are finally healthy. Ullmark could in theory solidify our goaltending

but...

Our depth is absolutely horrible. Not only in the forward group but having all of Kleven, JBD and Hamonic in the lineup, making for 50% of your defense is not a recipe for success.

I liked Bran and his story as the undersized heart-of-lion kid that tries his best.

But he wasn’t very good on the right side in the D zone, so it’s very doubtful he would play there over JBD or Hamonic. He also wouldn’t play over Kleven. He also got pushed around on D, and brought zero offence to go with his solid transition game. He is not at all what our team needs in the bottom 3 positions 5-6-7. It is what it is, other teams can use what he brings and wish him well. He’s just not a fit here in any of the 6 regular D spots.

Our depth on D isn’t horrible at all, it’s on par with many teams. We have a solid top 4, and a pretty solid 3rd pairing of kids, with a grizzled vet at 7 who can step in and play game when injuries hit or one of the kids is deemed to need a break. Branstrom could have been the 7, but Hamonic is on a contract that couldn’t be gotten rid of without being shitty, and besides that he brings elements at 7 that Bran doesn’t. Bran also very likely doesn’t want to be a 7 at this stage of his career especially on a bubble team.

I’d rather see a kid from Belleville be the 8th guy called up. It’s all moot though because we were never going to pay anyone 2mill to play the 7 spot.

In the end this is a subjective discussion and we will unlikely ever agree on this player, much like I never agreed about most marginal players we have let go, but for some never quite let go.

Agree to disagree on my end, and I’m moving on. Cheers X!

 

[Xspyrit]

But he wasn’t very good on the right side in the D zone

But the numbers provided show that when paired with Chabot on RD, that pair gave a very minuscule amount of scoring chances. Isn't that the end goal of defense? That is why all these things are tracked and millions are spent, because it's impossible to rely on human memory and observation without bias.

and brought zero offence to go with his solid transition game.

But again, I provided the data that says the opposite? Did you go through maths in high school telling the teacher the opposite of what he/she was teaching?

I showed that Brannstrom had 2 more ES pts than Sanderson in 10 less games, in almost 3 ES minutes less per game... If that shows "zero offence" then maybe we were totally wrong on Sanderson and we should try to trade him while he sill has some value.

He is not at all what our team needs in the bottom 3 positions 5-6-7. It is what it is, other teams can use what he brings and wish him well. He’s just not a fit here in any of the 6 regular D spots.

I would say the opposite. This is the ES pts by our Ds so far in 22 games :

Chabot 9 pts, Jensen 8 pts

Sanderson, Kleven, JBD, Zub : 2 pts, Hamonic 1 pt

He would have been the ideal partner for Kleven actually. And JBD would play since Zub is injury prone. He would have been our safe guard from having to watch Hamonic, which instantly improves the whole fanbase mental health

Our depth on D isn’t horrible at all, it’s on par with many teams. We have a solid top 4, and a pretty solid 3rd pairing of kids, with a grizzled vet at 7 who can step in and play game when injuries hit or one of the kids is deemed to need a break. Branstrom could have been the 7, but Hamonic is on a contract that couldn’t be gotten rid of without being shitty, and besides that he brings elements at 7 that Bran doesn’t. Bran also very likely doesn’t want to be a 7 at this stage of his career especially on a bubble team.

Obviously, Hamonic contract as a problem but we could have claimed Brannstrom back at 0.9 AAV

Our Top-6 isn't that bad but one injury and it goes to hell. And since Zub and Chabot have been injured a lot and are injury prone, it makes our depth on defense suspect, but not as much as on forward

I’d rather see a kid from Belleville be the 8th guy called up. It’s all moot though because we were never going to pay anyone 2mill to play the 7 spot.

In the end this is a subjective discussion and we will unlikely ever agree on this player, much like I never agreed about most marginal players we have let go, but for some never quite let go.

Agree to disagree on my end, and I’m moving on. Cheers X!

Again, it was always accepted that we couldn't bring back Brannstrom at 2 M$ but he was available for less this season... And I would much much rather pay Brannstrom 2 M$ than Hamonic 1.1 M$

It is not about "letting player x or y go", it's about the stupid decisions we make year after year and why our team is still very doubtful to make the playoffs in their 8th rebuilding season.

 

[PlayersLtd]

But the numbers provided show that when paired with Chabot on RD, that pair gave a very minuscule amount of scoring chances. Isn't that the end goal of defense? That is why all these things are tracked and millions are spent, because it's impossible to rely on human memory and observation without bias.



But again, I provided the data that says the opposite? Did you go through maths in high school telling the teacher the opposite of what he/she was teaching?

I showed that Brannstrom had 2 more ES pts than Sanderson in 10 less games, in almost 3 ES minutes less per game... If that shows "zero offence" then maybe we were totally wrong on Sanderson and we should try to trade him while he sill has some value.



I would say the opposite. This is the ES pts by our Ds so far in 22 games :

Chabot 9 pts, Jensen 8 pts

Sanderson, Kleven, JBD, Zub : 2 pts, Hamonic 1 pt

He would have been the ideal partner for Kleven actually. And JBD would play since Zub is injury prone. He would have been our safe guard from having to watch Hamonic, which instantly improves the whole fanbase mental health



Obviously, Hamonic contract as a problem but we could have claimed Brannstrom back at 0.9 AAV

Our Top-6 isn't that bad but one injury and it goes to hell. And since Zub and Chabot have been injured a lot and are injury prone, it makes our depth on defense suspect, but not as much as on forward



Again, it was always accepted that we couldn't bring back Brannstrom at 2 M$ but he was available for less this season... And I would much much rather pay Brannstrom 2 M$ than Hamonic 1.1 M$

It is not about "letting player x or y go", it's about the stupid decisions we make year after year and why our team is still very doubtful to make the playoffs in their 8th rebuilding season.

But we were stuck with Hamonic. So what is the point of bringing this up? We had no room for Brannstrom but yes, having him as our #8 D at $.9M would have been amazing.

 

[Loach]

But we were stuck with Hamonic. So what is the point of bringing this up? We had no room for Brannstrom but yes, having him as our #8 D at $.9M would have been amazing.

I'm starting to dislike Brannstrom the same way as Colin White. Fck it. It's done.

 

[Xspyrit]

But we were stuck with Hamonic. So what is the point of bringing this up? We had no room for Brannstrom but yes, having him as our #8 D at $.9M would have been amazing.

It's true, even though it's hard to realize (why would anyone PAY for Hamonic? Canucks wanted to get rid of him, we even paid more than their initial ask. But even worse, why would you give him 2 years and a NMC?)

We could have still picked him up on waivers. Or actually, I would have kept Joseph, not sign Amadio and Perron and sign a guy like Noesen, Duhaime, Foegele or Heinen. Offer Brannstrom 3 years for less than his QO. There was other ways than end up with the depth we have at F and D

I'm not sure why you guys keep talking about a #8 D, he'd clearly be our 6th best (let's say you want to prop Kleven) and possibly 5th when everyone is healthy. One injury to Zub or Chabot and he is most likely Top-4

So my initial point stands :

"Our defense without Chabot has ZERO offensive ability... another reason why it was stupid to let go Brannstrom just so TWO of Hamonic, Kleven and JBD would play every game of the season. Don't need hindsight to know this, I kept banging that drum in the offseason. That and Amadio over Joseph... and Perron signing (although I dont blame him for his underperformance)"

We need Sanderson to wake up and we need to revamp the whole pro scouting. I think they brought Calen Addison on a PTO thinking he could replace that role but Addison is not NHL level (outside of the PP). Pro scouting really has been our biggest weakness for a while

 

[Golden_Jet]

It's true, even though it's hard to realize (why would anyone PAY for Hamonic? Canucks wanted to get rid of him, we even paid more than their initial ask. But even worse, why would you give him 2 years and a NMC?)

We could have still picked him up on waivers. Or actually, I would have kept Joseph, not sign Amadio and Perron and sign a guy like Noesen, Duhaime, Foegele or Heinen. Offer Brannstrom 3 years for less than his QO. There was other ways than end up with the depth we have at F and D

I'm not sure why you guys keep talking about a #8 D, he'd clearly be our 6th best (let's say you want to prop Kleven) and possibly 5th when everyone is healthy. One injury to Zub or Chabot and he is most likely Top-4

So my initial point stands :

"Our defense without Chabot has ZERO offensive ability... another reason why it was stupid to let go Brannstrom just so TWO of Hamonic, Kleven and JBD would play every game of the season. Don't need hindsight to know this, I kept banging that drum in the offseason. That and Amadio over Joseph... and Perron signing (although I dont blame him for his underperformance)"

We need Sanderson to wake up and we need to revamp the whole pro scouting. I think they brought Calen Addison on a PTO thinking he could replace that role but Addison is not NHL level (outside of the PP). Pro scouting really has been our biggest weakness for a while

Qualifying offer
Time to move on

 

[OD99]

But the numbers provided show that when paired with Chabot on RD, that pair gave a very minuscule amount of scoring chances. Isn't that the end goal of defense? That is why all these things are tracked and millions are spent, because it's impossible to rely on human memory and observation without bias.



But again, I provided the data that says the opposite? Did you go through maths in high school telling the teacher the opposite of what he/she was teaching?

I showed that Brannstrom had 2 more ES pts than Sanderson in 10 less games, in almost 3 ES minutes less per game... If that shows "zero offence" then maybe we were totally wrong on Sanderson and we should try to trade him while he sill has some value.



I would say the opposite. This is the ES pts by our Ds so far in 22 games :

Chabot 9 pts, Jensen 8 pts

Sanderson, Kleven, JBD, Zub : 2 pts, Hamonic 1 pt

He would have been the ideal partner for Kleven actually. And JBD would play since Zub is injury prone. He would have been our safe guard from having to watch Hamonic, which instantly improves the whole fanbase mental health



Obviously, Hamonic contract as a problem but we could have claimed Brannstrom back at 0.9 AAV

Our Top-6 isn't that bad but one injury and it goes to hell. And since Zub and Chabot have been injured a lot and are injury prone, it makes our depth on defense suspect, but not as much as on forward



Again, it was always accepted that we couldn't bring back Brannstrom at 2 M$ but he was available for less this season... And I would much much rather pay Brannstrom 2 M$ than Hamonic 1.1 M$

It is not about "letting player x or y go", it's about the stupid decisions we make year after year and why our team is still very doubtful to make the playoffs in their 8th rebuilding season.

You are, of course, right.

He was and is consistent in his contributions, but he isn't flashy and will always be considered a disappointment due to the Stone fiasco.

His size also works against him, as does the fact he isn't a big point producer. We could use him at the price he is at now, but you are fighting a losing battle on this board.