Player Discussion Artyom Zub (D) [Page 4 Senators sign from KHL]

[coladin]

Sorry reality is getting in the way of your balance.
When rusty nails are sticking up everywhere, it’s difficult not to hammer them - the better solution would be to remove the nails but this organization doesn’t do that.

I am going to have a rusty nail tonight! Zub is going to shut down the Jets. I need a Zub cam

 

[jbeck5]

It's not as simple as that. Some players need a change of scenery. Some are more effective playing in different systems.

You always want to do your due diligence on your assets. It's just so petty to get upset over giving a few games to 700+ game vets like Coburn and Anisimov. It has zero impact on the grand scheme of things.

I would agree to the players needing a change of scenery if the problem is chemistry or confidence...not ability. If you're too slow, going to another team won't make you faster.

Hainsey was too slow. It's not he's gonna be a speedster somewhere else.

Sometimes players age and get slower and no change of scenery will make a difference.

It's not that it hurts the team greatly. It just doesn't make sense. I'm sure I'm not alone. If you put up a vote of who should be a priority for NHL playing time, Anisimov or Logan brown, I'm sure +90% would say brown. Why did our coaching staff think so differently and doesn't that make you lose just a tiny bit of trust in the staff?

Like, answer me this, why play Haley over someone like formenton? Any logical reason?

 

[Alf Silfversson]

My criticisms however never focused on the whole of the team. I have continually suggested that patience is necessary in assessing this team as a whole. What I've seen from so many though is a never ending barrage of how everyone in this organization is dumb and doesn't know anything about anything. DJ should be fired, Dorion should be fired, etc. The question I'm asking is how can anyone assess a player defensively when the goaltenders are leaking goals that any average NHL goaltender wouldn't give up? That's the issue. How can anyone assess the coaching when the goaltenders play like Hogberg did last game? How can anyone assess the progress of the lineup the GM assembled when the team was getting .860 sv%?

I'll just address this really quick. You can absolutely assess bad overall and defensive play in the face of bad goaltending.

1. You can watch the game. Goalies had nothing to do with Coburn getting burned and turned into a pretzel night in and night out. And they had nothing to do with Josh Brown being completely unable to get the puck out of his zone or being too slow to cover his man. Or with Anisimov getting routinely walked in all three zones like his skates had been frozen into the ice. Simply put the "eye test" showed these players to be bad even when the puck was not close to their net.

2. If you disagree with the eye test you can look at the stats. When these players are on the ice the other team is shooting at our net WAYYY more than we're shooting at theirs. Even if our goalies were making saves this is bad and will result in losing hockey. Relative Corsi and Fenwick for %s for these players are generally atrocious as compared to their teammates, who have had to suffer the same bad goaltending.

 

[BankStreetParade]

I'm not saying we couldn't criticize a cup winning team. I'm saying the laughing stock of the league the last few years probably has more deserved criticism than other franchises...like almost open season.

The only reason I asked if the team is above criticism because when someone criticizes, we often get answers like "stop complaining" or "you think you know better than an NHL coach or gm?!" It's a weak shut down. It's like the parents who say "because I said so" instead of proper parenting where they set them aside and reason with them and use it as a teaching tool.

*Btw I'm speaking generally and not you specifically*

You can either not like the argument and gloss over the criticism or break it down and discuss it. It's when the response is "stop with the complaining" or "you don't know better than professionals" you'll get the dreaded "is the team above criticism?"

Anyways, it's clear you're actually willing to break it down and discuss, so that's good and I'm willing to do too.

Anyways, it's not the strategy that I'm against. I don't mind getting vets and allowing them to teach our young guys and then ship them off for assets. No problem from me there.

My issue? The quality of the assets and how poor our pro scouting tends to be. Instead of bringing in guys who have the attributes to succeed in this league, they brought in dinosaurs that would be effective in 1997 style play. Not 2021.

Had they brought in a couple solid vets, I wouldnt have a problem.

Instead of bringing in guys like sillinger, Smolinski, leschyshyn, etc (older guys who could play a role and accel but aren't super expensive) they brought in guys like Smith and Richardson that couldn't keep up.

It's the pro scouting I have an issue with. How did they not do their homework before coming? Especially when you can ask almost anyone who watched them on their previous team and they'd be like "way too slow. Can't keep up anymore."... Well what do you think is gonna happen with a full year off? They'll be that much older and slower.

I have no problem with the Coburn trade for the second. It's the playing him when it was clear he can't play. You don't have to play players just to justify a trade or signing if its obvious it's not working.

Like I used as an example earlier, we signed 500gp vet isbister in September and let him go in October without ever playing a game. We didn't try to justify the recent signing. We gave a bunch of rookies his ice. Why couldn't we have done that this year?

I agree though, that something like this is small.

I just don't say "who cares?" Because I add it to all the other small decisions that don't make sense..like Haley playing over brown...and it worries me just enough to post on a message board while I'm bored and not working. It's not like I'm upset. I'm just not like amazingly impressed lol.

This is a much more reasonable post than I've seen others offer.

Here's the thing though: we, as fans, get to make "decisions" without any consequences. There are hundreds of people posting their opinions in here that have no running track record of their opinions, free to flip-flop on their stances according to the flavour du jour.

Not even a handful of games ago everyone was ready to write off Murray. Imagine now that the people who make the decisions professionally have all the pressure in the world to make the right decision and there's no internet anonymity to protect them or shield them from criticism. Moreover, there aren't hundreds of people contributing all of their different opinions on the team and using that to make a decision.

Generally speaking, this subsection of the fanbase has been extremely negative about almost everything this team has done. I've been here long enough to see which way we've been trending. There's almost no discussions in good faith anymore because we can't even agree on the basic principles that outline the discussion. Wanna talk about evaluating Dorion? How can we do that, reasonably, when the guy has no support around him? Does that mean he should be careless with his decision making? No. But what if he actually had an AGM or two who had any hockey experience? What if there was an experienced hockey person as the POHO he could consult with? Would that type of support structure be more likely to guide him towards better decisions? I have no clue.

When this discussion is reduced to "Dorion f***ing sucks, he's a loser, he's the worst GM in the league, his name should be Morion" then how the hell can we all expect reasonableness?

I'm not willing to entertain conversations with people who are that foregone with their opinions of something. And I will continue to speak out about the need for balance in these discussions.

This post could go on and on addressing every single problem this team faces. We could talk about personnel, coaching, ownership, etc. But who do we have those conversations with? Minds are made up. And if you're one of those people willing to be reasonable about a subject they'll tell you you're a shill or you're paid by Melnyk or you're an apologist.

It all comes down to the simple question: what are your expectations?

When people continuously go back and forth on what their expectations are it's hard to provide structure to the discussion.

 

[SENATOR]

Zub is actually that vet who can stabilize our young defense. Everything he does is a high level and worth to emulate. Gap control, angling, stick work, positioning, pitching along the boards, passing, how to join the rush, first pass, how to get open, how to hit a player with a pass to exit the zone in full speed, takeaways, how to pin a player. I am sure he displayed all of this during squad practice games. I would say other GMs in the league are salivating over him right now.

 

[swiftwin]

This is a much more reasonable post than I've seen others offer.

Here's the thing though: we, as fans, get to make "decisions" without any consequences. There are hundreds of people posting their opinions in here that have no running track record of their opinions, free to flip-flop on their stances according to the flavour du jour.

Not even a handful of games ago everyone was ready to write off Murray. Imagine now that the people who make the decisions professionally have all the pressure in the world to make the right decision and there's no internet anonymity to protect them or shield them from criticism. Moreover, there aren't hundreds of people contributing all of their different opinions on the team and using that to make a decision.

Generally speaking, this subsection of the fanbase has been extremely negative about almost everything this team has done. I've been here long enough to see which way we've been trending. There's almost no discussions in good faith anymore because we can't even agree on the basic principles that outline the discussion. Wanna talk about evaluating Dorion? How can we do that, reasonably, when the guy has no support around him? Does that mean he should be careless with his decision making? No. But what if he actually had an AGM or two who had any hockey experience? What if there was an experienced hockey person as the POHO he could consult with? Would that type of support structure be more likely to guide him towards better decisions? I have no clue.

When this discussion is reduced to "Dorion f***ing sucks, he's a loser, he's the worst GM in the league, his name should be Morion" then how the hell can we all expect reasonableness?

I'm not willing to entertain conversations with people who are that foregone with their opinions of something. And I will continue to speak out about the need for balance in these discussions.

This post could go on and on addressing every single problem this team faces. We could talk about personnel, coaching, ownership, etc. But who do we have those conversations with? Minds are made up. And if you're one of those people willing to be reasonable about a subject they'll tell you you're a shill or you're paid by Melnyk or you're an apologist.

It all comes down to the simple question: what are your expectations?

When people continuously go back and forth on what their expectations are it's hard to provide structure to the discussion.

This a thousand times over.

It's the same f***ing thing when it comes to politics. People make up their minds first, then only accept the facts that reinforce their pre-conceived views, and disregard everything else. Then when those facts get challenged, they lash out, and declare the other side the enemy. Too many times have people just assumed my stance on things and put words in my mouth because of this. It's super toxic.

All I'm asking is that we all watch the same games, and all work off the same foundation of truth instead of all the flagrant lies and alternative facts that people peddle around here.

I'll be honest, I feel like I've seen some improvement in that regard this season, but there are still a few stragglers who are incessantly negative and refuse to follow facts.

edit: A perfect example of what you're talking about is with Murray. When we signed him, everyone was celebrating the deal as an amazing deal. Then we can that rough losing streak, and everyone is losing their shit, calling Dorion a Morion, and that we were stuck with a horrific contract, and that we should have stuck with Hogberg. Now he's playing great and Hogberg is shit, everyone is flip flopping the other way. It's just insanity. People have the attention span of fruit flies, and just vent non-sensical word vomit after every game, and are completely incapable of taking a step back and looking at the bigger picture when it comes to the management of the team. Like... people were calling for Dorion to get fired because of a losing streak. That's a joke. GMs don't get fired because of a losing streak. Especially not a mere two months after the most significant draft of the rebuild, and most of the youth isn't even on the NHL team. GMs get evaluated on much lager scales than that.

 

[swiftwin]

I'm not saying we couldn't criticize a cup winning team. I'm saying the laughing stock of the league the last few years probably has more deserved criticism than other franchises...like almost open season.

The only reason I asked if the team is above criticism because when someone criticizes, we often get answers like "stop complaining" or "you think you know better than an NHL coach or gm?!" It's a weak shut down. It's like the parents who say "because I said so" instead of proper parenting where they set them aside and reason with them and use it as a teaching tool.

*Btw I'm speaking generally and not you specifically*

You can either not like the argument and gloss over the criticism or break it down and discuss it. It's when the response is "stop with the complaining" or "you don't know better than professionals" you'll get the dreaded "is the team above criticism?"

Anyways, it's clear you're actually willing to break it down and discuss, so that's good and I'm willing to do too.

Anyways, it's not the strategy that I'm against. I don't mind getting vets and allowing them to teach our young guys and then ship them off for assets. No problem from me there.

My issue? The quality of the assets and how poor our pro scouting tends to be. Instead of bringing in guys who have the attributes to succeed in this league, they brought in dinosaurs that would be effective in 1997 style play. Not 2021.

Had they brought in a couple solid vets, I wouldnt have a problem.

Instead of bringing in guys like sillinger, Smolinski, leschyshyn, etc (older guys who could play a role and accel but aren't super expensive) they brought in guys like Smith and Richardson that couldn't keep up.

It's the pro scouting I have an issue with. How did they not do their homework before coming? Especially when you can ask almost anyone who watched them on their previous team and they'd be like "way too slow. Can't keep up anymore."... Well what do you think is gonna happen with a full year off? They'll be that much older and slower.

I have no problem with the Coburn trade for the second. It's the playing him when it was clear he can't play. You don't have to play players just to justify a trade or signing if its obvious it's not working.

Like I used as an example earlier, we signed 500gp vet isbister in September and let him go in October without ever playing a game. We didn't try to justify the recent signing. We gave a bunch of rookies his ice. Why couldn't we have done that this year?

I agree though, that something like this is small.

I just don't say "who cares?" Because I add it to all the other small decisions that don't make sense..like Haley playing over brown...and it worries me just enough to post on a message board while I'm bored and not working. It's not like I'm upset. I'm just not like amazingly impressed lol.

My problem is with the fact that people use the "we've been a laughing stock for years" as a free pass to criticize the team on many things that don't warrant criticism. Then throw in a dash of alternative facts and revisionism, and this place just turns into a toxic echo chamber.

For example, you keep talking about how Coburn was too slow. That's just not true. I'm can't find it now, but I remember in one of the earlier GDTs, a few people noted how surprisingly quick Coburn was. Yes, he was absolutely atrocious by the last game he played, but that doesn't erase the fact that he was decent earlier in the season. But because you had your pre-conceived notion on Coburn, you only look at what you thought about him before the season started, disregard the middle bit, then look at the last couple games he played, then attack the team by saying "he never deserved a chance to prove himself". When in reality, the team's approach was very reasonable considering there was no pre-season. The proof is that he played fine in the first few games. Then he started playing like shit (due to apathy, not speed), so he got waived.

This type of revisionism is a constant constant problem around here. Just the other day, we had a few people arguing that Stahlberg was a terrible acquisition in 2017 and an example of bad asset management, because he never played in the NHL again. That's just flagrantly false. He was a very very useful depth player, and our top PKer in that playoff run. This type of depth acquisition for a measly 3rd round pick happens on almost every team going into the playoffs at the TDL, and is usually a good move.

Then as soon as I shoot down false info with the truth, people get defensive and lash out with "we're allowed to criticize the team, because we were 30th last season", or will straight up attack me. Which is f***ed up. No. You don't get to spread lies because we were a bad team. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize the team and the organization. It's not like we need to make up false reasons.

 

[Dan Patrick]

If we are giving the sens players grades for the first quarter of the season Zub gets a solid A-. Probably one of, if not, the highest grade on the team.

 

[Wondercarrot]

I am going to have a rusty nail tonight! Zub is going to shut down the Jets. I need a Zub cam

lol, I haven’t had a rusty nail in maaaaany years. Ok so I’ll make this happen tonight as well and report back.
ISO ZUB CAM!

 

[Wondercarrot]

My problem is with the fact that people use the "we've been a laughing stock for years" as a free pass to criticize the team on many things that don't warrant criticism. Then throw in a dash of alternative facts and revisionism, and this place just turns into a toxic echo chamber.

For example, you keep talking about how Coburn was too slow. That's just not true. I'm can't find it now, but I remember in one of the earlier GDTs, a few people noted how surprisingly quick Coburn was. Yes, he was absolutely atrocious by the last game he played, but that doesn't erase the fact that he was decent earlier in the season. But because you had your pre-conceived notion on Coburn, you only look at what you thought about him before the season started, disregard the middle bit, then look at the last couple games he played, then attack the team by saying "he never deserved a chance to prove himself". When in reality, the team's approach was very reasonable considering there was no pre-season. The proof is that he played fine in the first few games. Then he started playing like shit (due to apathy, not speed), so he got waived.

This type of revisionism is a constant constant problem around here. Just the other day, we had a few people arguing that Stahlberg was a terrible acquisition in 2017 and an example of bad asset management, because he never played in the NHL again. That's just flagrantly false. He was a very very useful depth player, and our top PKer in that playoff run. This type of depth acquisition for a measly 3rd round pick happens on almost every team going into the playoffs at the TDL, and is usually a good move.

Then as soon as I shoot down false info with the truth, people get defensive and lash out with "we're allowed to criticize the team, because we were 30th last season", or will straight up attack me. Which is f***ed up. No. You don't get to spread lies because we were a bad team. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize the team and the organization. It's not like we need to make up false reasons.

The are two echo chambers on this board, each believe the other side is ridiculous and inflexible.

 

[jbeck5]

My problem is with the fact that people use the "we've been a laughing stock for years" as a free pass to criticize the team on many things that don't warrant criticism. Then throw in a dash of alternative facts and revisionism, and this place just turns into a toxic echo chamber.

For example, you keep talking about how Coburn was too slow. That's just not true. I'm can't find it now, but I remember in one of the earlier GDTs, a few people noted how surprisingly quick Coburn was. Yes, he was absolutely atrocious by the last game he played, but that doesn't erase the fact that he was decent earlier in the season. But because you had your pre-conceived notion on Coburn, you only look at what you thought about him before the season started, disregard the middle bit, then look at the last couple games he played, then attack the team by saying "he never deserved a chance to prove himself". When in reality, the team's approach was very reasonable considering there was no pre-season. The proof is that he played fine in the first few games. Then he started playing like shit (due to apathy, not speed), so he got waived.

This type of revisionism is a constant constant problem around here. Just the other day, we had a few people arguing that Stahlberg was a terrible acquisition in 2017 and an example of bad asset management, because he never played in the NHL again. That's just flagrantly false. He was a very very useful depth player, and our top PKer in that playoff run. This type of depth acquisition for a measly 3rd round pick happens on almost every team going into the playoffs at the TDL, and is usually a good move.

Then as soon as I shoot down false info with the truth, people get defensive and lash out with "we're allowed to criticize the team, because we were 30th last season", or will straight up attack me. Which is f***ed up. No. You don't get to spread lies because we were a bad team. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize the team and the organization. It's not like we need to make up false reasons.

Just to comment on the Coburn example. What you say seems to be accurate of brown. Brown is the guy who looks decently fast for a big guy but otherwise sucks.. I didn't see anyone say Coburn looked fast...any time speed was tied to his name, it was to say he was slow.

 

[coladin]

lol, I haven’t had a rusty nail in maaaaany years. Ok so I’ll make this happen tonight as well and report back.
ISO ZUB CAM!

2 parts scotch, 1 part drambuie for those curious!

 

[Wondercarrot]

Just to comment on the Coburn example. What you say seems to be accurate of brown. Brown is the guy who looks decently fast for a big guy but otherwise sucks.. I didn't see anyone say Coburn looked fast...any time speed was tied to his name, it was to say he was slow.

i remember a play in I think the first Toronto game where I thought Coburn looked surprisingly fast - but I don’t really recall much after that.

 

[DJB]

Did I just hear that Zub is out do to Covid?

 

[cudi]

Did I just hear that Zub is out do to Covid?

 

[Sun God Nika]

Zub is a core piece.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

 

[coladin]

Strange game for Zub, clearly got out of a heck of a rhythm, but still his worst game is better than anything else Ottawa has. Glad he got this under his belt before they hit Toronto!

 

[SensFactor]

I would sign him for 3 years once he turns RFA. He's the best overall defensemen we have.

Future dcore

Chabot Zub
Sanderson JBD
Thomson Brannstrom
Kleven

 

[Joeyjoejoe]

Strange game for Zub, clearly got out of a heck of a rhythm, but still his worst game is better than anything else Ottawa has. Glad he got this under his belt before they hit Toronto!

Yeah I agree, saw some very uncharacteristic turnovers by him but still played better than some of our dman like Wolanin, Gudbranson and Zaitsev.

 

[Yourkeyparka]

lol, I haven’t had a rusty nail in maaaaany years. Ok so I’ll make this happen tonight as well and report back.
ISO ZUB CAM!

My favorite mixed drink - Scotch and Drambuie...nectar of the Gods. My favorite single malt however is Aberlour A'bunadh..delightful !

 

[Ice-Tray]

To be fair, what's he supposed to say? Zub was ready to go from day one but DJ thought it best we watch Brown flail about for a dozen games first?

That’s not being fair really, that’s finessing a way to give equal credibility to an opinion based on far less information (none) than the one shared by the GM.

The underlying issue is that some fans see the owner as a big meany, the GM as complete moron, and the coach as Neanderthal.

Given that lens it’s no surprise how this kind of thing keeps getting play. We have long passed the mark where many take what is being said by the team as the likely truth, in favour of half baked theories that make sense when you are cynical about everything Sens related.

It is the state of affairs in here unfortunately for some, not so much for others.

 

[Micklebot]

That’s not being fair really, that’s finessing a way to give equal credibility to an opinion based on far less information (none) than the one shared by the GM.

The underlying issue is that some fans see the owner as a big meany, the GM as complete moron, and the coach as Neanderthal.

Given that lens it’s no surprise how this kind of thing keeps getting play. We have long passed the mark where many take what is being said by the team as the likely truth, in favour of half baked theories that make sense when you are cynical about everything Sens related.

It is the state of affairs in here unfortunately for some, not so much for others.

Fair is considering both perspectives without prejudice.

If i ignored Dorion's incentive to not throw his coach under the bus, would that be fair? If i ignored his history of sugar coating, or use of superlatives, would that be fair? I think not.

I made my opinion that potential language/communication issues made it perfectly defensible to ease him into the lineup, but i think it is fair at this point to take what Dorion says with a grain of salt, he has a history of exageration and putting a very positive spin on things, which isn't surprising given his role as GM.

 

[Ice-Tray]

This is a much more reasonable post than I've seen others offer.

Here's the thing though: we, as fans, get to make "decisions" without any consequences. There are hundreds of people posting their opinions in here that have no running track record of their opinions, free to flip-flop on their stances according to the flavour du jour.

Not even a handful of games ago everyone was ready to write off Murray. Imagine now that the people who make the decisions professionally have all the pressure in the world to make the right decision and there's no internet anonymity to protect them or shield them from criticism. Moreover, there aren't hundreds of people contributing all of their different opinions on the team and using that to make a decision.

Generally speaking, this subsection of the fanbase has been extremely negative about almost everything this team has done. I've been here long enough to see which way we've been trending. There's almost no discussions in good faith anymore because we can't even agree on the basic principles that outline the discussion. Wanna talk about evaluating Dorion? How can we do that, reasonably, when the guy has no support around him? Does that mean he should be careless with his decision making? No. But what if he actually had an AGM or two who had any hockey experience? What if there was an experienced hockey person as the POHO he could consult with? Would that type of support structure be more likely to guide him towards better decisions? I have no clue.

When this discussion is reduced to "Dorion f***ing sucks, he's a loser, he's the worst GM in the league, his name should be Morion" then how the hell can we all expect reasonableness?

I'm not willing to entertain conversations with people who are that foregone with their opinions of something. And I will continue to speak out about the need for balance in these discussions.

This post could go on and on addressing every single problem this team faces. We could talk about personnel, coaching, ownership, etc. But who do we have those conversations with? Minds are made up. And if you're one of those people willing to be reasonable about a subject they'll tell you you're a shill or you're paid by Melnyk or you're an apologist.

It all comes down to the simple question: what are your expectations?

When people continuously go back and forth on what their expectations are it's hard to provide structure to the discussion.

Fully agree. There is very little discussion in here. Most of it is just folks shouting over each other to have the cleverest management insult.

Pot shots everywhere, and when a strong opinion turns out to be proven factually wrong, like why Brannstrom wasn’t playing and when he was slated to get back in the line up, those same folks simply change the channel and move on. No admitting they were wrong, it’s that Bran and Dorion were both lying to the media...

Management is always wrong, but when they’re right, they are wrong over here.... Tedious, and has rendered so many posters here beyond worth reading their takes.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Fair is considering both perspectives without prejudice.

If i ignored Dorion's incentive to not throw his coach under the bus, would that be fair? If i ignored his history of sugar coating, or use of superlatives, would that be fair? I think not.

I made my opinion that potential language/communication issues made it perfectly defensible to ease him into the lineup, but i think it is fair at this point to take what Dorion says with a grain of salt, he has a history of exageration and putting a very positive spin on things, which isn't surprising given his role as GM.

Lol, what a load of bull.

It’s this kind of argument you guys use to validate your uninformed opinions against those who are actually in the know, or even worse against words said to the contrary.

If your taking the words of the GM with a grain of salt, your personal opinion is the fat free alternative, not to be considered equally and without prejudice.

Nice try