''Senators won Brassard trade...''

[Shruggs Peterson]

https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/1...ade-despite-zibanejad-s-new-deal-with-rangers

In the end the Sens saved $350,000 by trading Zibanejad away, which the writer suggests the team will need everything they have to sign EK (he's not wrong).

Why this deal a year ago couldn't be a 1 for 1 I don't know. That 2nd rounder is still a head scratcher but to this point I've really liked what Brassard has brought.

Anyways the question is: If the Sens traded Mika based on the assumption that he'd be too expensive to resign, do you agree with the article?

Click to read more...

 

[Sun God Nika]

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Zibby at 5.35 is a hell of an asset. Much more valuable than Brassard who will be 30 to start next season.

 

[Senateurs]

With Ottawa, you always have to take into account real salary AND cap hit. Brassard's actual salary is 3.5 for the next two years. So that's 4M in the bank to put somewhere else.

I do agree with the 2nd rounder not being necessary. I'll consider it a rookie GM mistake on being too excited to pull the trigger on his first deal.

 

[MaxTheLimit]

... do you agree with the article?

No.
No, I do not.
Zibanejad may not have the advanced / underlying stats of Brassard, but he's bigger, younger, and surpassed the production per game of Brassard last year. Brassard posted TWO more points than Zibanejad but played in over TWENTY more games. That sort of PPG difference isn't really close.

If uninjured Zibanejad was on pace for his third straight 20+goal season, and 2nd straight 50+ point season. His pace slowed after the injury. He had an outside shot at 25+ goal 60+ points. I'm not liking that the Sens made this move. No point in lamenting now though. Sens have Brassard and he's a decent #2C who is due for a bit better year this year if he has some better luck/bounces. So long as his pace and health remain good, it will be fine ( if not ideal )

 

[Bevans]

With Ottawa, you always have to take into account real salary AND cap hit. Brassard's actual salary is 3.5 for the next two years. So that's 4M in the bank to put somewhere else.

I do agree with the 2nd rounder not being necessary. I'll consider it a rookie GM mistake on being too excited to pull the trigger on his first deal.

No it was payment to NY to wait until they had paid Brassard's $2 mil bonus last summer.

Melynk just sold a pick for his personal checking account.

 

[Knave]

Which team made it to the conference finals and was one goal away from the Stanley Cup finals?

People love taking chances... Brassard showed up in the playoffs, Zibanejad didn't, we moved on and had a real chance at the cup. We looked much better than the Predators did vs. Pittsburgh. Game 7 overtime. You could make a reasonable argument we were 1 bounce away from a Stanley Cup.

 

[JungleBeat]

We lost the trade. We lost the younger and better player while giving up a second as well.

 

[DanyHeatley]

Zibanejad would actually strive under Boucher he has the size, speed and defensive/offensive awareness that fits our system. He just lacks the motivation and dedication but I bet Erik yelling at him will get him off his ass and working

We still lost the trade though imo

 

[L'Aveuglette]

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Zibby at 5.35 is a hell of an asset. Much more valuable than Brassard who will be 30 to start next season.

I think you could stand to be a little less unpredictable with your opinions tbh.

 

[L'Aveuglette]

With Ottawa, you always have to take into account real salary AND cap hit. Brassard's actual salary is 3.5 for the next two years. So that's 4M in the bank to put somewhere else.

I do agree with the 2nd rounder not being necessary. I'll consider it a rookie GM mistake on being too excited to pull the trigger on his first deal.

Consider it something the GM had no choice in doing to get the deal done because of ownership being cheap instead.

 

[Senateurs]

Consider it something the GM had no choice in doing to get the deal done because of ownership being cheap instead.

yeah, that too

 

[Knave]

Maybe some of us are only interested in asset management [mod] but some of us are interested in the team winning a cup.

 

[albator71]

We have a much better team with Brassard then Zibanejad

So yeah we won the trade.

 

[RICKY SPANISH]

Without hesitation, I make that trade again.

Zib will always be an attractive piece. Fine regular season player. Wouldn't want him anywhere near my team when the games count though.

 

[Benjamin]

Pageau + Brassard = 2.6mil + 3.5mil = 6.1

Zibanejad = 6mil

I'd take both of them, individually, over Zibby.

 

[Hale The Villain]

When the trade was made I said that Brassard would have to be significantly better than Zibanejad and help us win a cup for the deal to be worth it. So far he hasn't. He's probably been worse.

In 2 years the Rangers will have a 26YR old Zibanejad signed on a long-term deal, and we'll have a 32YR old UFA in Brassard who we probably let go.

The deal was always going to be a major loser long-term, we should have at least got some short-term benefit out of it. Has yet to be the case.

Which team made it to the conference finals and was one goal away from the Stanley Cup finals?

People love taking chances... Brassard showed up in the playoffs, Zibanejad didn't, we moved on and had a real chance at the cup. We looked much better than the Predators did vs. Pittsburgh. Game 7 overtime. You could make a reasonable argument we were 1 bounce away from a Stanley Cup.

Brassard with his 4 goals and 11 points in 19 playoff games (pace of 47P in 82GP) showed up
Zibanejad with his 2 goals and 9 points in 12 playoff games (pace of 62P in 82GP) didn't show up?

Zibanejad led his team in scoring. Brassard was tied for 3rd on the Sens in scoring.

The argument that replacing Zibanejad with Brassard was a reason we went far in the playoffs just doesn't have a whole lot behind it. There's more evidence to suggest that we would have been a better team, and therefore had a better chance at winning the cup, if Zibanejad was still on the team.

Consider it something the GM had no choice in doing to get the deal done because of ownership being cheap instead.

Cop out.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Pageau + Brassard = 2.6mil + 3.5mil = 6.1

Zibanejad = 6mil

I'd take both of them, individually, over Zibby.

More accurately.

Brassard + Burrows = 6M

Zibanejad = 6M

Worth noting that if we had kept Zibanejad we would have signed him to a back-loaded deal, as we aren't made of money like the Rangers, so Zibanejad's salary in 2017/18 would probably be closer to 4M. And of course we're talking just about salary. If you look at cap space:

Brassard + Burrows = 7.5M

Zibanejad = 5.35M

Complete strawman pretending that keeping Zibanejad means losing Pageau. Was the guy going to walk as an RFA?

 

[Hale The Villain]

Without hesitation, I make that trade again.

Zib will always be an attractive piece. Fine regular season player. Wouldn't want him anywhere near my team when the games count though.

Just like in the regular season, Zibanejad handily out-produced Brassard when the games counted.

Led his team in scoring. You're going to argue he's some kind of playoff choker?

 

[Xspyrit]

The fascination of hockey fans about who won a trade...

Like I said in another thread, of course money was a factor. Real money is the most important asset in the end for business owners, so I have no idea why we still ask ourselves the question. It should really be a given by now.

The Sens didn't only save 350 000$ (lmao) by making this deal. If you compare the 3 first years of both players :

Brassard total cost for 3 years = 10.0
Zibanejad total cost for 3 years = 14.75

Sens saved almost 5 M$ of real dollars just right there... They swapped a younger player who would have been under contract longer for a player in his prime that had only 3 years left. It was a move for the short term but also because they identified that one of White, Brown or Chlapik could take on his role (maybe even Pageau) after 3 years.

Now people don't understand the 2nd. I think it is also pretty simple. Not only there was the 2 M$ bonus already paid which brought Brassard's owed money down, but also :

Brassard :

2014-15 : 0.75 PPG
2015-16 : 0.73 PPG

Zibanejad :

2014-15 : 0.58 PPG
2015-16 : 0.63 PPG

Plus the fact that Brassard has been super clutch in the playoffs and had 44 pts in 59 games before Ottawa (0.75 PPG)

I still hate that deal because I was a big Mika fan and miss him but I understand the hockey move. Was it that necessary though? Because it's a lateral move at best if you consider everything. Brassard brings more short term stuff, but Mika was younger and could have continued to grow with the team.

But in the end, they must have identified that it was totally necessary because Zibanejad wouldn't have fit the Boucher's system, while on the other hand Brassard fits like a glove.

I think every element of that trade is here, don't think I forgot anything but quote if you see anything missing!

We lost the trade. We lost the younger and better player while giving up a second as well.

Why you always have so many strong statements without any actual arguments?

 

[Benjamin]

More accurately.

Brassard + Burrows = 6M

Zibanejad = 6M

And of course that's just in salary. If you look at cap space:

Brassard + Burrows = 7.5M

Zibanejad = 5.35M

Complete strawman pretending that keeping Zibanejad means losing Pageau. Was the guy going to walk as an RFA?

That wasn't my point at all.

It was comparing Zibanejad's competition while he was with us combined with who he was traded for. Point being that those two are similar to Zibby but significantly more cost effective.

Burrows and cap hit are irrelevant.

You can't look beyond age and points.

 

[Hale The Villain]

That wasn't my point at all.

It was comparing Zibanejad's competition while he was with us combined with who he was traded for. Point being that those two are similar to Zibby but significantly more cost effective.

Burrows and cap hit are irrelevant.

Okay well the way your post was written it sounded like you were comparing Brassard + Pageau vs Zibanejad, as if the choice was between Zibanejad or the other two.

Burrows and his cap hit are not irrelevant. The only legitimate argument I have seen for why the trade was good for the Sens is that we shed around 2.5M in salary over the last two years of Brassard's deal.

Cap space is only valuable if it is used, and used correctly. Dorion chose to use the cap space opened up to overpay a 3rd/4th liner. Any value it had was erased on the day he chose to give a 36YR old Burrows a 2YR extension for 2.5M a year before seeing him play a single game for the Sens.

 

[Benjamin]

Okay well the way your post was written it sounded like you were comparing Brassard + Pageau vs Zibanejad, as if the choice was between Zibanejad or the other two.

Burrows and his cap hit are not irrelevant. The only legitimate argument I have seen for why the trade was good for the Sens is that we shed around 2.5M in salary over the last two years of Brassard's deal.

Cap space is only valuable if it is used, and used correctly. Dorion chose to use the cap space opened up to overpay a 3rd/4th liner. Any value it had was erased on the day he chose to give a 36YR old Burrows a 2YR extension for 2.5M a year before seeing him play a single game for the Sens.

I fully agree everything about the Dahlen trade. It was awful. Still, Brass/Zibby trade was a good one. Just poor use of its benefit.

 

[Hale The Villain]

The fascination of hockey fans about who won a trade...

Teams that lose trades often tend not to be good teams for long.

Especially when they are as objectively bad as this deal.

Like I said in another thread, of course money was a factor. Real money is the most important asset in the end for business owners, so I have no idea why we still ask ourselves the question. It should really be a given by now.

The Sens didn't only save 350 000$ (lmao) by making this deal. If you compare the 3 first years of both players :

Brassard total cost for 3 years = 10.0
Zibanejad total cost for 3 years = 14.75

Sens saved almost 5 M$ of real dollars just right there...

If Zibanejad was still a Senator, we wouldn't have given him a front-loaded contract like the Rangers. It would have been back-loaded just like almost every other one of our RFA contracts. That skews the numbers significantly.

It's more like:

2017
Zibanejad: 3.25M
Brassard: 3M

2018
Zibanejad: 4.75M
Brassard: 3.5M

2019
Zibanejad: 5.15M
Brassard: 3.5M

Total difference: 3.15M

And 2M of that 3.15M was saved, not by trading for Brassard's back-loaded contract, but rather by selling a 2nd to not have to pay Brassard's bonus.

When you consider all of this, the difference in salaries over a full 3 year span is a little over a million. Not even worth considering in the grand scheme of things.

The swapped a younger player who would have been under contract longer for a player in his prime that had only 3 years left. It was a move for the short term but also because they identified that one of White, Brown or Chlapik could take on his role (maybe even Pageau) after 3 years.

We needed Zibanejad for the next 3YRs just like we need Brassard for the 3YRs he will (likely) remain a Senator.

If after that time a guy like Brown, White or Chlapik was ready to take over his role as a top 2 center on this hockey team (which is unlikely), we could have traded Zibanejad for assets to a team that needs a big fast two-way center that can produce 50P, and every team could use a center like that.

I know people don't like the word asset management, but my god that's asset management 101 right there.

Now people don't understand the 2nd. I think it is also pretty simple. Not only there was the 2 M$ bonus already paid which brought Brassard's owed money down, but also :

Brassard :

2014-15 : 0.75 PPG
2015-16 : 0.73 PPG

Zibanejad :

2014-15 : 0.58 PPG
2015-16 : 0.63 PPG

Plus the fact that Brassard has been super clutch in the playoffs and had 44 pts in 59 games before Ottawa (0.75 PPG)

You're comparing a 27/28YR old's production with a 21/22YR old's production. You're comparing a forward in his prime to a forward just getting established in the league.

You also conveniently picked the only two years that Brassard produced above 50P. For most of his career, including many years in which he was older than Zibanejad in the two years you cited, he was a 40-50P guy that brought little to his game other than offense.

Management thinking Brassard was the answer to our #1 center issues was yet another example of the Sens terrible pro-scouting biting the team in the ass.

 

[Real Smart Sens Fan]

Zibanejad would actually strive under Boucher he has the size, speed and defensive/offensive awareness that fits our system. He just lacks the motivation and dedication but I bet Erik yelling at him will get him off his ass and working

We still lost the trade though imo

We can't say for sure, but it seems like Boucher didn't necessarily think that he would.

 

[Sensinitis]

The argument that replacing Zibanejad with Brassard was a reason we went far in the playoffs just doesn't have a whole lot behind it. There's more evidence to suggest that we would have been a better team, and therefore had a better chance at winning the cup, if Zibanejad was still on the team.

Oh, are you talking about his 2 goals in 16 games in the playoffs with the Sens? (one should have probably been disallowed as well, or was an extremely close call)

Or are you talking about when Turris got injured 2 seasons ago and Pageau outperformed Zbad to get the 1st line C role for a couple of months?

There is no 'evidence' describing your point. Zib was one of my favourite players here, his skillset is cool, but Brassard has already proven to play with more of an edge, and has been clutch. Nevermind what Mika is doing in NY (it's not like it's night and day with what he did here anyways).

We can't say for sure, but it seems like Boucher didn't necessarily think that he would.

Yep, seems that way.