Silver Seven Senators Long-Term Outlook: Defense

[AchtzehnBaby]

Taking a look at how the Senators shape up on defense in the present and in the future

The Ottawa Senators future is all of a sudden incredibly interesting and exciting, and it is fun to look at each of their positions to see how well they line up moving forward.

So far, I have analyzed left wing, centre, and right wing, and today I will be focusing on defense (both sides). As in past editions of the series, I will look first at the 2020-21 group, then I will move onto a projection of the Sens’ future.

Click to read more...

 

[Alf Silfversson]

It sure doesn't look good for this year but the future looks pretty bright, IMO.

I think Chabot (obviously), Sanderson and Brannstrom will be top 4s. I agree with the author that Brannstrom should be moved to RD. If he is then we need one of the other RD to pan out into a top 4 D and we're set. Hopefully one of JBD or Thomson can do that. Or even Jaros.

Bottom pairing guys are available for peanuts every offseason (see, Gudbranson, Brown, Boro, etc.) but if we don't want to go that route then we also have guys like Lajoie, Jaros, Kleven (in 3-4 years), Guenette (3-4 years) and others to fill those roles. Hell even second pairing guys become available at very reasonable prices some years (see D. Toews this year).

Getting a great two-way RD in a couple of years would give us one of the best, if not THE best, D corps in the league in a few years but those guys are REALLY hard to find.

Overall I think our D will be a strength for us in a few years.

 

[Wallet Inspector]

Obviously I'm biased, but we have a legit shot of having a top 3 defense corps in the NHL.

Chabot:Already a #1
Sanderson: Potential #1,
Brannstrom:Top pair potential
JBD:Very good chance at being a top 4 guy, decent shot at being a top pair D.

Then you have others like Kleven and Thomson.

 

[trentmccleary]

Chabot, Zaitsev and Gudbranson are going to be top-3 in ice time, in that order and by a clear margin.
Gudbranson has been playing 18-20 mins a night for teams much better than this one and he's definitely going to be on the top PK unit. He isn't in jeopardy of playing on the bottom pairing because he did for 7 games on a stacked Pens team.

Mike Reilly has played as a top-4 for bad teams for the past 120 games. Veterans like Reilly give coaches a known quantity to work with while prospects climb their way through the lineup. Wolanin or Brannstrom will have to fight Reilly for the 4 spot. One of them taking the 4 spot and sending Reilly to the 3rd pair is probably the biggest determinant of how well the defense is performing.

On the bottom pairing, Brown provides that veteran backstop in case Zub or Jaros don't take the spot from him. I suppose it's unlikely, but still possible that Brannstrom could also force his way onto the roster here if Wolanin beats him out for a spot on left side on the 2nd or 3rd pair.

I suppose they could go with a fairly safe lineup of;

Chabot - Zaitsev
Reilly - Gudbranson
Wolanin - Brown
Brannstrom as the swingman to fill holes on either side

 

[Sweatred]

I agree with the author that Brannstrom should be moved to RD. If h

This is so overplayed around here - basically your trading better vision on the ice and an offensive one timer for poor defending stick position in the offensive end, on the rush in the neutral zone, and defending the net. It also blocks his forehand defensive clear on the boards in his own end forcing him to his backhand.

So maybe he drives a few extra goals over the season but he’s a weaker defender and gets caved in in his own end. Great idea...

He needs to play his strong defensive side 5v5, he can flip or roam on the PP.

 

[Micklebot]

This is so overplayed around here - basically your trading better vision on the ice and an offensive one timer for poor defending stick position in the offensive end, on the rush in the neutral zone, and defending the net. It also blocks his forehand defensive clear on the boards in his own end forcing him to his backhand.

So maybe he drives a few extra goals over the season but he’s a weaker defender and gets caved in in his own end. Great idea...

He needs to play his strong defensive side 5v5, he can flip or roam on the PP.

I'd argue the disadvantage of playing on your offside is what's overblown. Lots of LD do it and have throughout their career, the problem is when you ask someone who doesn't have a history of it to do so. It requires you play a little differently than you would otherwise, but players who are accustomed to it can be just as effective on the ice.

While there may be some trade offs, it's certainly not 'good defensive on your strong side, caved on your offside', that's grade 'A' hyperbole.

 

[GCK]

I'd argue the disadvantage of playing on your offside is what's overblown. Lots of LD do it and have throughout their career, the problem is when you ask someone who doesn't have a history of it to do so. It requires you play a little differently than you would otherwise, but players who are accustomed to it can be just as effective on the ice.

While there may be some trade offs, it's certainly not 'good defensive on your strong side, caved on your offside', that's grade 'A' hyperbole.

I think we are all making too much of this. The team wants him to get comfortable in the league on his strong side at which point they may move him to the right side. Basically get used to the speed of the league on your strong side as it’s easier defensively. It seems clear to me that he will eventually play RD.

 

[Micklebot]

I think we are all making too much of this. The team wants him to get comfortable in the league on his strong side at which point they may move him to the right side. Basically get used to the speed of the league on your strong side as it’s easier defensively. It seems clear to me that he will eventually play RD.

Yeah, i don't mind how they are handling him, if anything the versatility is an advantage, but i actually found he seemed to handle the speed of the game better on his off side tbh. Comfort goes a long way in how you react.

I think 3rd pair LD is a good role for him right now, maybe playing RD on the 2nd PP and getting 2nd pair mins later in games where we are trailing, or heck even with Chabot, but long term i think he will need to be a 2nd pair dman, and the right side looks like the only potential opening.

 

[Sweatred]

I'd argue the disadvantage of playing on your offside is what's overblown. Lots of LD do it and have throughout their career, the problem is when you ask someone who doesn't have a history of it to do so. It requires you play a little differently than you would otherwise, but players who are accustomed to it can be just as effective on the ice.

While there may be some trade offs, it's certainly not 'good defensive on your strong side, caved on your offside', that's grade 'A' hyperbole.

Have you ever played defense ? or tried defending vs stronger forwards on your off side? Have you played defense as an undersized dman on your off wing? On your off wing your stick is constantly away from the center of the ice and your on your backhand all the time under pressure. Forwards will constantly drive your weak side which is the center of the ice.

 

[Micklebot]

Have you ever played defense ? or tried defending vs stronger forwards on your off side? Have you played defense as an undersized dman on your off wing? On your off wing your stick is constantly away from the center of the ice and your on your backhand all the time under pressure. Forwards will constantly drive your weak side which is the center of the ice.

Hey, I've never played defence in the Nhl but Marc Methot has and he said playing the off side isnt that big a deal. I'll take his assesment over yours, but thanks for your input.

Some coaches are big proponents of playing the strong side, others not so much. There are going to be sone trade offs but in the end it will always be a case by case basis, some players have the experience and skillset to adapt to it while others don't, some players are better on their offside while others prefer the traditional side.
The biggest factor though is going to be experience, if you've never or rarely played your offside, you'll struggle.

 

[Sweatred]

Hey, I've never played defence in the Nhl but Marc Methot has and he said playing the off side isnt that big a deal. I'll take his assesment over yours, but thanks for your input.

Some coaches are big proponents of playing the strong side, others not so much. There are going to be sone trade offs but in the end it will always be a case by case basis, some players have the experience and skillset to adapt to it while others don't, some players are better on their offside while others prefer the traditional side.
The biggest factor though is going to be experience, if you've never or rarely played your offside, you'll struggle.

Marc Methot isn’t an undersized dman.... and what he says to the
Media doesn’t necessarily account for his strength or weakness.

Methot saying it isnt a big deal doesn’t mean he isn’t weaker on that side. He was also deployed on a possession line not a defending line with EK and Ottawa offensive forwards.

if it wasn’t a big deal, more than half the dman in the league would play the their off side taking the offensive as a stage and the idea of drafting a RD wouldn’t exist.

Most coaches play RD on the right side (including Ottawa) , so clearly there is evidence contrary to your opinion from what you “watch and hear” based on a snippet Method said a few years ago.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

1.12 - All about prospects with Troy Mann - The Common Sens Podcast
from 21:45 Mann talks about the D coming and a little on Brannstrom
Mann is a proponent of playing L if you shoot left.
I think the points he makes about time are good ones.
Defensively retrieving pucks in the corner with pressure on your offside is definitely more difficult imo .. from playing D. Its a strength / ability thing on your backhand vs your forehand .. its something not everyone can do well.. and at the NHL level you need to be close to seemlesss on that. I think saying its hyperbole is misunderstanding the difficulty. We as fans have not had sufficient opportunity to evaluate specific situation abilities on Brannstrom. The coaches are in the best place to evaluate that in practice where they can do specific drills where that skill is exploited.. If there is an issue its not going to be evident all the time.. it will be in certain situations
Offensive perspective its a better angle for putting pucks on net. It could be that aspect that Brannstrom is looking at as a preference.

 

[Alf Silfversson]

Have you ever played defense ? or tried defending vs stronger forwards on your off side? Have you played defense as an undersized dman on your off wing? On your off wing your stick is constantly away from the center of the ice and your on your backhand all the time under pressure. Forwards will constantly drive your weak side which is the center of the ice.

When you are playing your off side the center of the ice is actually on your forehand, or strong side. The pivot to get players going wide is longer (if you want to play the puck) because to have any strength on your stick you have to get both shoulders around to make a good play on the puck. LHD playing RD are more likely to get beat wide than by a cut to the middle, IMO. In my limited experience playing D that's how it felt anyway.

The issue is more on puck retrieval and clearing. In the RD's corner a LH player will tend to go to his forehand side, which is towards/behind the net. This can limit outlet options. It also turns the defender's back a bit more to the onrushing forecheckers (in most cases). This can make the player vulnerable to big hits.

A player with the puck skills and smarts that Brannstrom has should be able to mitigate a lot of these issues, once they get used to the speed of the NHL game. As @Micklebot pointed out he has looked better all over the ice at RD and seems comfortable there. I'm totally fine with him starting his career on the left and going from there. But if we have a hole at RD in a year or two it would be foolish not to try him there.

 

[Sweatred]

When you are playing your off side the center of the ice is actually on your forehand, or strong side. The pivot to get players going wide is longer (if you want to play the puck) because to have any strength on your stick you have to get both shoulders around to make a good play on the puck. LHD playing RD are more likely to get beat wide than by a cut to the middle, IMO. In my limited experience playing D that's how it felt anyway.

The issue is more on puck retrieval and clearing. In the RD's corner a LH player will tend to go to his forehand side, which is towards/behind the net. This can limit outlet options. It also turns the defender's back a bit more to the onrushing forecheckers (in most cases). This can make the player vulnerable to big hits.

A player with the puck skills and smarts that Brannstrom has should be able to mitigate a lot of these issues, once they get used to the speed of the NHL game. As @Micklebot pointed out he has looked better all over the ice at RD and seems comfortable there. I'm totally fine with him starting his career on the left and going from there. But if we have a hole at RD in a year or two it would be foolish not to try him there.

There is never a time that Brann retrieving a puck to outlet/clear will be as effective on his back hand than forehand. You can't just waive a wand and make these weaknesses disappear. Or? why not just waive a wand an be as effective offensively from the left side of the ice as he is in the right side. A player with his creativity should be able to figure that out vs making that clear/outlet on his backhand as he's checked by someone 3 inches taller and 20 lbs heavier.

If you defending a rush on your offside at center with one hand on your stick, your stick is on the board side and the inside of the ice/center isn't covered unless you cross your body or hold you stick with two hands. Either way you have less reach to the inside. It is also a weak back to front pivot into the the center of the ice.

 

[Golden_Jet]

There is never a time that Brann retrieving a puck to outlet/clear will be as effective on his back hand than forehand. You can't just waive a wand and make these weaknesses disappear. Or? why not just waive a wand an be as effective offensively from the left side of the ice as he is in the right side. A player with his creativity should be able to figure that out vs making that clear/outlet on his backhand as he's checked by someone 3 inches taller and 20 lbs heavier.

If you defending a rush on your offside at center with one hand on your stick, your stick is on the board side and the inside of the ice/center isn't covered unless you cross your body or hold you stick with two hands. Either way you have less reach to the inside. It is also a weak foreword to back pivot into the the center of the ice.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

1st Tier. Chabot - our elite D for years (Makes losing Karlsson a little less painful)
2nd tier. Sanderson - can he be a top-2 D (maybe more?) or will he settle as a top-4 (maybe top-6 D)?
3rd Tier. Brannstrom, JBD, Wolanin- Potentially top-4 D but need to show more. Much more.
4th Tier. Thompson, Zub, Jaros, Lajoie - Outside shot at being top-4 D, at least top-6D

Not bad, but if we can draft high next year; grabbing one of those highly touted Ds wouldn't be a bad idea to insure a good safety net.

 

[Micklebot]

There is never a time that Brann retrieving a puck to outlet/clear will be as effective on his back hand than forehand. You can't just waive a wand and make these weaknesses disappear. Or? why not just waive a wand an be as effective offensively from the left side of the ice as he is in the right side. A player with his creativity should be able to figure that out vs making that clear/outlet on his backhand as he's checked by someone 3 inches taller and 20 lbs heavier.

This is nothing mire than a strawman. Nobody said he can be just as good passing on the backhand, he said players who have good puck skills and smarts can mitigate the disadvantage.
It just changes the decision making as your forehand has you clearing behind the net, this can be advantageous when its a one man forecheck, but requires a but different choices when the f1 and f2 come in hard.

If you defending a rush on your offside at center with one hand on your stick, your stick is on the board side and the inside of the ice/center isn't covered unless you cross your body or hold you stick with two hands. Either way you have less reach to the inside. It is also a weak foreword to back pivot into the the center of the ice.

Yes, your more likely to give up the outside if your defending on your off side, your positioning has to be adjusted which is part of why experience playing the offside is key.

 

[Micklebot]

He was refering to when you release the bottom hand you can reach out further towards center ice if playing the strong side, or the boards when playing the weak side.

 

[topshelf15]

A small LHD playing RHD, could pose problems in the defensive zone....However the points will be easier to attain in the O zone playing his off hand with more of the net to shoot at and more plays generated from his forehand

 

[Sweatred]

This is nothing mire than a strawman. Nobody said he can be just as good passing on the backhand, he said players who have good puck skills and smarts can mitigate the disadvantage.
It just changes the decision making as your forehand has you clearing behind the net, this can be advantageous when its a one man forecheck, but requires a but different choices when the f1 and f2 come in hard.


Yes, your more likely to give up the outside if your defending on your off side, your positioning has to be adjusted which is part of why experience playing the offside is key.

Ha ! Like you can just decide to switch forehand or back hand on a physically challenged puck retrieval under pressure - I get you it ... you don’t know what your talking about. Call me a straw man if you want ... at least I’m not posing about game play I really don’t understand.

 

[trentmccleary]

For the time being, it looks like he's competing with Wolanin for a spot of the left side.
If he happens to win that spot, it's easy to imagine him getting right point PP time ahead of Brown, Gudbranson and possibly even Zaitsev.
Additionally, he can fill in on the right side for short term injuries instead of making a call up.

For the record, these have been the pairings in our successful postseasons. Though Joe Corvo was probably the smallest d-man playing his off-side and he was notably larger than Brannstrom is now.

2003	Playoffs	_	2007	Playoffs	_	2017	Playoffs
L	R	_	L	L	_	L	R
L	L	_	L	L	_	L	R
L	L	_	R	R	_	L	R

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Micklebot]

Ha ! Like you can just decide to switch forehand or back hand on a physically challenged puck retrieval under pressure - I get you it ... you don’t know what your talking about. Call me a straw man if you want ... at least I’m not posing about game play I really don’t understand.

What are you even talking about? Clearly you aren't understanding what I'm saying...

If you're going into the corner on a dump in, you have multiple options, some are on your forehand and some the back hand. Playing your off hand switches them. Common stratedgy has the dman go behind the net on the one man forcheck which is an easier outlet playing the off side.

 

[dumbdick]

I'm not 100% sold on our defensive prospects.

 

[aragorn]

It depends! Are we talking about this coming season or at some future point when the defensive prospects have developed & graduated? Ottawa should use Brannstrom, Thomson & some of their other assets to move up in next yr's draft to select Ceulemans & Schmidt, both RDs for their future defence. I think it could take a few yrs before some of the prospects are ready to be full time NHL defencemen. Gudbranson & Reilly could be gone by the end of the yr & Zaitsev, Brown, Jaros & others at some future point. Where can we find the forwards?

This Coming Season:

Chabot - Zaitsev
Wolanin - Gudbranson
Reilly - J. Brown/Jaros

Future Defence:

Chabot - JBD
Sanderson - Ceulemans (2021 draft) or Guennette/Zub
Kleven - Schmidt (2021 draft) or Jaros/J. Brown

 

[JD1]

It depends! Are we talking about this coming season or at some future point when the defensive prospects have developed & graduated? Ottawa should use Brannstrom, Thomson & some of their other assets to move up in next yr's draft to select Ceulemans & Schmidt, both RDs for their future defence. I think it could take a few yrs before some of the prospects are ready to be full time NHL defencemen. Gudbranson & Reilly could be gone by the end of the yr & Zaitsev, Brown, Jaros & others at some future point. Where can we find the forwards?

This Coming Season:

Chabot - Zaitsev
Wolanin - Gudbranson
Reilly - J. Brown/Jaros

Future Defence:

Chabot - JBD
Sanderson - Ceulemans (2021 draft) or Guennette/Zub
Kleven - Schmidt (2021 draft) or Jaros/J. Brown

At this point, in my view trading semi developed assets for draft picks just kicks the can down the road