That's weird because I don't understand this line of thinking.
1. It doesn't matter whether Brannstrom is happy about what happened, only that it happened and that it needs to be corrected.
2. I don't understand concern about this making him play 'safe'. He didn't make a mistake by turning it over attempting a skill play to create offense - he made a technical error in neutral zone/blue line defending. A pretty basic one, in fact. When difference makers turn pucks over trying to create offense you live with it, to a reasonable extent at least, but these sort of technique errors need to be weeded out as soon as possible. Within reason - nobody plays perfect hockey. On top of that, Brannstrom is a top prospect and the expectations and standard for him are much higher than they are for someone like Reilly.
3. Your last sentence pretty much sums up the prevailing opinion here on the coaching staff. If they hold the young guys to any sort of reasonable standard they catch an absurd amount of shit. Look at the Colin White situation. He struggled last year and was given endless rope to play his way out of it, but this year they pushed him much harder. He had to watch a few games. Response? He's playing a bit better. But people aren't willing to acknowledge that maybe DJ had it right all along and what he did worked. Instead the consensus is that he was holding the player back and White would have figured everything out regardless. The game is rigged against him; all the successes are the players alone and all the failures are the coaching staff's alone.
4. There have to be consequences.
1. Agreed that it doesn't really matter what Brannstrom thinks and that the important bit is that needs to be corrected. The reason I brought that up is because it was being implied that Brannstrom needs to be informed that his error was an error -- come on, he knows that. Anyway, I just disagree on
how is best to correct a mistake like this. This is the crux of the debate and imo the only real issue regarding this whole thing.
2. If a player is benched for an error, they are more likely to choose plays that don't end up as errors. That means that they will try less high risk plays. This wasn't a main argument of mine, but that was my point there. I agree that categorically the error Brannstrom made is different from rushing the puck up the ice.
3. I have no opinion on the Colin White thing, I barely watched the team last year. You are extrapolating this incident to the board's general opinion which I understand, but like I said I have no real opinion on this point.
4. I mean, I guess so, but I think this is a little reductive. If say Brannstrom made this mistake in practice and DJ said "Come on Branny, that's a bush league move just do this." and then Brannstrom still makes the mistake by ignoring the coaching, I would say benching him is a good move. That's very unlikely, and I am guessing DJ was just upset with the play in the moment and made a decision to sit him for a while because he thought it was the best thing for the team and player. That's fine, I just question it in the long run. But like I said earlier, I bet this incident has zero impact on Brannstrom's career, either positively or negatively.
