Confirmed with Link: VAN/COL Poolman (20% retained) + 2025 4th for Erik Brannstrom(Waived)

[VanJack]

I watched him in a couple Ottawa games last season, and he wasn't actually bad. I think he gets a lot of poop because of expectations for where he was drafted and who he was traded for. He's an NHLer. First injury we get on D, and he'll be the first one they call up.

I was kind of shocked to read that Brannstrom was actually a +5 in his last two years in Ottawa, on a team that was generally a defensive train-wreck. So he couldn't have been that bad in his own zone.

I think you're right. Being traded for Mark Stone landed him in a 'no-win' situation with the Sens and their fans.

 

[ManVanFan]

I was kind of shocked to read that Brannstrom was actually a +5 in his last two years in Ottawa, on a team that was generally a defensive train-wreck. So he couldn't have been that bad in his own zone.

I think you're right. Being traded for Mark Stone landed him in a 'no-win' situation with the Sens and their fans.

When I heard about the trade, I honestly thought they were going to send down Friedman or Juulsen and run 4 lefties, 4 righties.

He was 9th worst among defenders that played half a season or more in giveaways per 60.

 

[TruGr1t]

When I heard about the trade, I honestly thought they were going to send down Friedman or Juulsen and run 4 lefties, 4 righties.

He was 9th worst among defenders that played half a season or more in giveaways per 60.

Report following the trade was the Canucks looked at Brannstrom in free agency, but weren't interested in him. So I doubt they're that high on the player ... he's a big addition to the farm, though, and we'll see how things play out and if he gets any call-ups.

 

[ManVanFan]

Report following the trade was the Canucks looked at Brannstrom in free agency, but weren't interested in him. So I doubt they're that high on the player ... he's a big addition to the farm, though, and we'll see how things play out and if he gets any call-ups.

I'd think they would have to have a little interest to make the trade for him.

 

[Bertuzzzi44]

Trade was purely a camp dump, however Brannstrom is better than Juulsen & probably better than Friedman as the #7 Dman.

 

[TruGr1t]

I'd think they would have to have a little interest to make the trade for him.

It was all about Poolman and trying to stay out of LTIR to max salary accrual, they probably would have taken a $900k bag of potatoes in the deal if the math worked.

 

[Bertuzzzi44]

I was kind of shocked to read that Brannstrom was actually a +5 in his last two years in Ottawa, on a team that was generally a defensive train-wreck. So he couldn't have been that bad in his own zone.

I think you're right. Being traded for Mark Stone landed him in a 'no-win' situation with the Sens and their fans.

Nice upgrade on Juulsen who in his last 5 games was..

Opp	G	A	P	+/-	PIM	PPG	SHG	S	SHIFT	TOI
May 14, 24	@ EDM	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	20	14:25
Apr 23, 24	vs NSH	0	0	0	-1	4	0	0	0	22	11:24
Apr 18, 24	@ WPG	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	23	18:21
Mar 31, 24	vs ANA	0	0	0	-1	2	0	0	1	21	13:25
Mar 23, 24	vs CGY	0	0	0	-1

 

[RobertKron]

Brannstrom has played NHL games every year he's been in pro hockey, other than 18-19 when he was rookie with Vegas and played 41 games with their farm team in Chicago.

And in terms of games in the AHL, Juulsen has played 152 games in the minors since he broke in, while Brannstrom has played in just 82 AHL games.

So what's your point exactly?

That you thinking there was no way the Canucks staff could turn Juulsen, basically a player somewhat established as NHL depth-chart guy, into a depth defenseman is either just one of your weird made up algorithmic-esque have-to-fit-the-three-paragraph-template flourishes, or an indictment of your reasoning.

I’m going with the second one, since responding to that post with “uh well Brannstrom played X games!!! is similarly bizarre.