Forums/Armchair-GM

Bertuzzi Trade to OTT

Created by: gmack95
Initial Creation Date: Aug. 27, 2021
Published: Aug. 27, 2021
Team: 2021-22 Detroit Red Wings
Free Agent Signings
RFAYEARSCAP HIT
Hronek, Filip5$3,950,000
Smith, Givani2$800,000
Trades
1.
DET
  1. Brännström, Erik
  2. 2022 2nd round pick (OTT)
  3. 2022 3rd round pick (VAN)
OTT
  1. Bertuzzi, Tyler
  2. 2022 4th round pick (DET)
2.
DET
  1. 2023 3rd round pick (FLA)
FLA
  1. Stecher, Troy
  2. 2023 5th round pick (DET)
Buyouts
  • Frans Nielsen: $4,250,000
  • Justin Abdelkader: $2,305,556
Retained Salary Transactions
  • Richard Pánik: $1,375,000 (50%)
DRAFT YEARROUND 1ROUND 2ROUND 3ROUND 4ROUND 5ROUND 6ROUND 7
2022
DET
DET
WSH
OTT
DET
VAN
COL
VGK
DET
DET
2023
DET
DET
DET
FLA
DET
DET
DET
2024
DET
DET
DET
DET
DET
DET
DET
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES BONUSESCAP SPACE
20$81,500,000$61,373,889$0$4,650,000$20,126,111
Left WingCenterRight Wing
DET
Vrána, Jakub
$5,250,000
LW
UFA - 3
DET
Larkin, Dylan
$6,100,000
C, LW
UFA - 2
DET
Zadina, Filip
$894,167
RW, LW
RFA - 1
DET
Fabbri, Robby
$2,950,000
LW, C
UFA - 1
DET
Suter, Pius
$3,250,000
C, LW
UFA - 2
DET
Raymond, Lucas
$925,000
RW, LW
RFA - 3
DET
Rasmussen, Michael
$1,460,000
LW, C, RW
RFA - 3
DET
Gagner, Sam
$850,000
C, RW
UFA - 1
DET
Namestnikov, Vladislav
$2,000,000
RW, LW, C
UFA - 1
DET
Smith, Givani
$800,000
LW
RFA - 2
DET
Stephens, Mitchell
$737,500
C
RFA - 1
DET
Erne, Adam
$2,100,000
LW, RW
UFA - 2
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
DET
Leddy, Nick
$5,500,000
LD
UFA - 1
DET
Hronek, Filip
$3,950,000
RD
RFA - 3
DET
Nedeljkovic, Alex
$3,000,000
G
UFA - 2
DET
Staal, Marc
$2,000,000
LD
NMC
UFA - 1
DET
Seider, Moritz
$863,333
RD
RFA - 3
DET
Greiss, Thomas
$3,600,000
G
UFA - 1
DET
Oesterle, Jordan
$1,350,000
LD/RD
UFA - 2
OTT
Brännström, Erik
$863,333
RD
RFA - 1
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
DET
DeKeyser, Danny
$5,000,000
LD
NTC
UFA - 1
Taxi Squad
DET
Lindström, Gustav
$850,000 ($0)
RD
RFA - 2
DET
Newpower, Wyatt
$800,000 ($0)
RD
RFA - 2

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight
Aug. 27 at 1:40 p.m.
#1
Judd Bracket ripoff
Joined: Jul. 2019
Posts: 1,923
Likes: 767
Why is Ottawa adding?
Aug. 27 at 1:40 p.m.
#2
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec. 2015
Posts: 1,127
Likes: 139
Quoting: The_Rocket
Why is Ottawa adding?


Should picks be swithced?
Aug. 27 at 1:42 p.m.
#3
Joined: May 2020
Posts: 4,191
Likes: 3,078
I’m not sure Brannstrom fits Yzerman’s mold of defensemen as I don’t think he’s drafted or traded for anyone sub 6’. That bring being said I’d be curious when Brannstrom played his normal side being as RD is an area of strength for Detroit.
gmack95, aedoran, RedWing9119 and 1 other person liked this.
Aug. 27 at 1:44 p.m.
#4
KFTW
Joined: Jul. 2018
Posts: 25,387
Likes: 11,728
Quoting: BStinson
I’m not sure Brannstrom fits Yzerman’s mold of defensemen as I don’t think he’s drafted or traded for anyone sub 6’. That bring being said I’d be curious when Brannstrom played his normal side being as RD is an area of strength for Detroit.


I don’t like this trade for Ottawa mainly cuz of Bertuzzi’ term
BStinson, TCMonkey, aedoran and 1 other person liked this.
Aug. 27 at 1:46 p.m.
#5
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec. 2015
Posts: 1,127
Likes: 139
Quoting: csick
I don’t like this trade for Ottawa mainly cuz of Bertuzzi’ term


I mean you guys have all the cap space to make it work.
Aug. 27 at 1:46 p.m.
#6
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec. 2015
Posts: 1,127
Likes: 139
Quoting: BStinson
I’m not sure Brannstrom fits Yzerman’s mold of defensemen as I don’t think he’s drafted or traded for anyone sub 6’. That bring being said I’d be curious when Brannstrom played his normal side being as RD is an area of strength for Detroit.


He can play either side.
Aug. 27 at 1:47 p.m.
#7
Joined: May 2020
Posts: 4,191
Likes: 3,078
Quoting: csick
I don’t like this trade for Ottawa mainly cuz of Bertuzzi’ term

I get that, I’m not a fan of it either as I don’t see a logical “fair” trade to address need. It’s not like Ottawa is going to shop Pinto or Norris (nor should they).
gmack95, csick, aedoran and 1 other person liked this.
Aug. 27 at 1:49 p.m.
#8
Joined: May 2020
Posts: 4,191
Likes: 3,078
Quoting: gmack95
He can play either side.

Everyone can play either side but players have a preference as to what they feel more comfortable. Similarly how GMs/coaches value different traits based on the scheme they fit.
gmack95, DiehardRedWingsFan58, aedoran and 2 others liked this.
Aug. 27 at 3:24 p.m.
#9
Joined: Dec. 2017
Posts: 13,170
Likes: 6,178
Quoting: BStinson
I’m not sure Brannstrom fits Yzerman’s mold of defensemen as I don’t think he’s drafted or traded for anyone sub 6’. That bring being said I’d be curious when Brannstrom played his normal side being as RD is an area of strength for Detroit.


I agree he doesn't fit Yzerman likes big defensemen.
BStinson and RedWing9119 liked this.
Aug. 27 at 3:31 p.m.
#10
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 690
Again...pass. Yzerman simply doesn't use small defensemen. Albert Johansson is the only defenseman he has drafted that was under 6'2" and he's 6 ft. The Red Wings have a ton of defensive prospects that are as good or better than Brannstrom so it doesn't fill a need either. Also, the value simply isn't there. Both picks will likely be very late in their rounds and Brannstrom simply hasn't played enough to be given the value you're attributing to him here. The risk is far too great that we get nothing in return for our first line winger and that's simply not how Yzerman operates.
Aug. 27 at 3:42 p.m.
#11
Joined: Dec. 2017
Posts: 13,170
Likes: 6,178
Quoting: csick
I don’t like this trade for Ottawa mainly cuz of Bertuzzi’ term


I know exactly what you mean and if I was an Ottawa fan thats why I wouldn't make this trade.

Brännström size is why I don't like this for Detroit. He is pretty small but he doesn't have the skating or the shot that makes smaller players successful in the the NHL.

Ottawa is further a long in their rebuild than Detroit is but they are both rebuilding and rebuilding teams don't make very good trade partners.
Aug. 27 at 3:46 p.m.
#12
KFTW
Joined: Jul. 2018
Posts: 25,387
Likes: 11,728
Quoting: aedoran
I know exactly what you mean and if I was an Ottawa fan thats why I wouldn't make this trade.

Brännström size is why I don't like this for Detroit. He is pretty small but he doesn't have the skating or the shot that makes smaller players successful in the the NHL.

Ottawa is further a long in their rebuild than Detroit is but they are both rebuilding and rebuilding teams don't make very good trade partners.


Why do people think Brannstrom isn’t a good skater, he’s a very good skater when I’ve watched him.
Aug. 27 at 4:04 p.m.
#13
Joined: Dec. 2017
Posts: 13,170
Likes: 6,178
Quoting: csick
Why do people think Brannstrom isn’t a good skater, he’s a very good skater when I’ve watched him.


I didn't say he wasn't a good skater. When you look at NHL players under 6' (1.82m) especially defensemen it's usually their skating that sets them apart. Players like Hughes and Makar (to name a couple) there skating is just on another level and Brännström's skating isn't on that level.
RedWing9119 liked this.
Aug. 27 at 5:01 p.m.
#14
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 1,582
Likes: 626
Quoting: RedWing9119
The Red Wings have a ton of defensive prospects that are as good or better than Brannstrom.


Brannstrom was ranked 19th among NHL prospects in Pronman's April list...

I mean, not that what he says is gospel, but wow Detroit's pool must be really amazing

a TON of defensive prospects that are AS GOOD or BETTER
Aug. 27 at 5:47 p.m.
#15
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 690
Edited Aug. 27 at 6:39 p.m.
Quoting: Xspyrit
Brannstrom was ranked 19th among NHL prospects in Pronman's April list...

I mean, not that what he says is gospel, but wow Detroit's pool must be really amazing

a TON of defensive prospects that are AS GOOD or BETTER


Well if Pronman says it where do i sign? Give me a break. Is that your evidence? I'm sorry I told you no. I can imagine how rough that must be for you. Doesn't change the fact that we have better prospects. World beaters don't take five years to make in the NHL.
Aug. 28 at 8:43 a.m.
#16
Joined: Feb. 2018
Posts: 330
Likes: 156
Quoting: Xspyrit
Brannstrom was ranked 19th among NHL prospects in Pronman's April list...

I mean, not that what he says is gospel, but wow Detroit's pool must be really amazing

a TON of defensive prospects that are AS GOOD or BETTER


Detroit has Hronek already in the NHL, Seider (SHL Defenseman of the year at 20 years old), and Tuomisto (boom or bust prospect) on the right side. Brannstrom might be a good prospect, but they have some solid options already. Plus, trading an offensively skilled forward in Bertuzzi on a team that has desperately needs offense to fill an area that's already likely filled just doesn't make sense.
Not saying Brannstrom isn't a good prospect, he's just not what the Wings seem to be looking for.
RedWing9119 liked this.
Aug. 29 at 6:03 p.m.
#17
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 1,582
Likes: 626
Edited Aug. 30 at 3:23 p.m. by F50marco
Quoting: RedWing9119
Well if Pronman says it where do i sign? Give me a break. Is that your evidence? I'm sorry I told you no. I can imagine how rough that must be for you. Doesn't change the fact that we have better prospects. World beaters don't take five years to make in the NHL.


I took the time to say that Pronman's list wasn't gospel (so just an example) but you still reply with this crap...

You never told me "no". I am NOT the OP and we never discussed before (judging by this post, it's probably the last time I waste my time doing it too)

I'll repeat since you totally missed it like 10 feet over your head, I was ONLY and EXPRESSLY addressing this (stupid) statement :

The Red Wings have a ton of defensive prospects that are as good or better than Brannstrom

Why don't you back up your statement and name that TON?

Damn, kids really can't read nowadays
Aug. 29 at 6:17 p.m.
#18
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 1,582
Likes: 626
Quoting: HypotheticalImpossibility
Detroit has Hronek already in the NHL, Seider (SHL Defenseman of the year at 20 years old), and Tuomisto (boom or bust prospect) on the right side. Brannstrom might be a good prospect, but they have some solid options already. Plus, trading an offensively skilled forward in Bertuzzi on a team that has desperately needs offense to fill an area that's already likely filled just doesn't make sense.
Not saying Brannstrom isn't a good prospect, he's just not what the Wings seem to be looking for.


Erik Brannstrom is not a RD. It's a mistake on Cap Friendly's part.

Also, Hronek wouldn't qualify as a prospect. I was specifically addressing the comment that the Red Wings have a TON of defensive PROSPECTS that are as good or better than Brannstrom...

I was not arguing anything else but that.

Totally agree with Seider, I have him as the clear #1 NHL prospect right now. I'd add Edvinsson as well that I'd take above Brannstrom as well. Tuomisto is a good project but you won't find anybody that would rate him above Brannstrom at the moment. Remember what's being discussed here. Johansson is also another good prospect but not in the same tier... Maybe more in the JBD/Kleven tier


I don't see the TON of prospects the Wings have that are better than Brannstrom. I see 2, which is already more than most NHL teams.
Aug. 29 at 6:24 p.m.
#19
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 690
Quoting: Xspyrit
Erik Brannstrom is not a RD. It's a mistake on Cap Friendly's part.

Also, Hronek wouldn't qualify as a prospect. I was specifically addressing the comment that the Red Wings have a TON of defensive PROSPECTS that are as good or better than Brannstrom...

I was not arguing anything else but that.

Totally agree with Seider, I have him as the clear #1 NHL prospect right now. I'd add Edvinsson as well that I'd take above Brannstrom as well. Tuomisto is a good project but you won't find anybody that would rate him above Brannstrom at the moment. Remember what's being discussed here. Johansson is also another good prospect but not in the same tier... Maybe more in the JBD/Kleven tier


I don't see the TON of prospects the Wings have that are better than Brannstrom. I see 2, which is already more than most NHL teams.


Two? Yeah ok chief. Thanks for your uninformed assessment of our defensive depth and over valuation of Brannstrom. But is there a reason you're so defensive and upset about it? I mean you could just say you disagree with me without the insults. Do you think that helps you win the argument? Because it just makes you look defensive.
Aug. 30 at 3:33 p.m.
#20
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 1,582
Likes: 626
Edited Aug. 30 at 3:42 p.m.
Quoting: RedWing9119
Awww I'm sorry mister literal. Perhaps your dumba*s should look up hyperbole in the dictionary.


Look @ HypotheticalImpossibility post and look at yours. See the difference? One is an adult, the other is... well, you.

I asked a LEGITIMATE question, he answered without making stupid childish personal comments like "I'm sorry I told you no. I can imagine how rough that must be for you"

lol you're the posterboy as to why it's extremely difficult to communicate on the internet as you take it to a stupid EMO LEVEL right away.

Yes I then laughed at you, because frankly that's all there was to take away from your reply and now you just come up with more insults.


Oh and I just saw the end of that post that I initially skipped "Doesn't change the fact that we have better prospects"

Well, you can keep believing that but every "source" I have seen had the Sens pool over the Wings pool by a comfortable margin. I also have seen polls in NHL forums where people were voting for the Sens over the Wings, again pretty comfortably.

Any argument outside of your opinion?

Quoting: RedWing9119
Two? Yeah ok chief. Thanks for your uninformed assessment of our defensive depth and over valuation of Brannstrom. But is there a reason you're so defensive and upset about it?


What am I defensive and upset about exactly? lol read my answer to the other adult (HypotheticalImpossibility). It was 100% rational. That's what I care about, talk about hockey rationally. I am not the one making it "emo"...

Quoting: RedWing9119
I mean you could just say you disagree with me without the insults. Do you think that helps you win the argument? Because it just makes you look defensive.


Wait... You're now playing the victim? hahahaha

Frankly, I knew it was coming before reading your answer. It's totally "your type". Throws a jab, gets demolished then cries to mommy as the victim.

I am not defensive. I am literally laughing at you.

I don't care about "winning" this argument. I have myself said that the Wings had 2 better D prospects than Brannstrom. If you think there's more, name them as I am still quite curious.
Aug. 30 at 3:57 p.m.
#21
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 690
Quoting: Xspyrit
Look HypotheticalImpossibility post and look at yours. See the difference? One is an adult, the other is... well, you.

I asked a LEGITIMATE question, he answered without making stupid childish personal comments like "I'm sorry I told you no. I can imagine how rough that must be for you"

lol you're the posterboy as to why it's extremely difficult to communicate on the internet as you take it to a stupid EMO LEVEL right away.

Yes I then laughed at you, because frankly that's all there was to take away from your reply and now you just come up with more insults.


Oh and I just saw the end of that post that I initially skipped "Doesn't change the fact that we have better prospects"

Well, you can keep believing that but every "source" I have seen had the Sens pool over the Wings pool by a comfortable margin. I also have seen polls in NHL forums voting the Sens over the Wings, again pretty comfortably.

So what is it this time? Can't be hyperbole...



What am I defensive and upset about exactly? lol read my answer to the other adult (HypotheticalImpossibility). It was 100% rational. That's what I care about, talk about hockey rationally. I am not the one making it "emo"...



Wait... You're now playing the victim? hahahaha

Frankly, I knew it was coming before reading your answer. It's totally "your type". Throws a jab, gets demolished then cries to mommy as the victim.

I am not defensive. I am literally laughing at you.

I don't care about "winning" this argument. I have myself said that the Wings had 2 better D prospects than Brannstrom. If you think there's more, name them as I am still quite curious.


Wow for someone who said he was done talking to me you sure have a lot to say. Obviously you are upset because you have dragged this on for days because you don't like the hyperbole I used. I impugned the source of the "evidence" that you used to support your argument and you called me stupid. How convenient that you get to use a source and then get to dismiss anyone who questions the source. You've gone on and on about me but your the one doing the name calling (this appears to be a pattern with you). Keep on being mature. Good luck with all that anger. You've convinced me of nothing except that you behave like a child.
Oh and just as an addendum Brannstrom does play the right side and he prefers it. Ottawa moved him to the left side last season.
Aug. 30 at 5:41 p.m.
#22
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 1,582
Likes: 626
Quoting: RedWing9119
Wow for someone who said he was done talking to me you sure have a lot to say. Obviously you are upset because you have dragged this on for days because you don't like the hyperbole I used. I impugned the source of the "evidence" that you used to support your argument and you called me stupid. How convenient that you get to use a source and then get to dismiss anyone who questions the source. You've gone on and on about me but your the one doing the name calling (this appears to be a pattern with you). Keep on being mature. Good luck with all that anger. You've convinced me of nothing except that you behave like a child.
Oh and just as an addendum Brannstrom does play the right side and he prefers it. Ottawa moved him to the left side last season.


Sorry, people like you are always "fascinating" lol

I didn't call you stupid for calling out the source of the "evidence", lol where do you see that? I did say your comment stupid, but that was after the crap from your post #15

Anyway, I made everything clear post #20, it's there for everyone to see.

I didn't attack you or insult you whatsoever, you're the one who snapped (#15). You even got an insult deleted by mods...

Of course, I made sure to ridicule you in the process... You asked for it!


And now you went to that other thread trying to pass yourself as the "adult", this is literally hilarious!
Aug. 30 at 5:54 p.m.
#23
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 690
Quoting: Xspyrit
Sorry, people like you are always "fascinating" lol

I didn't call you stupid for calling out the source of the "evidence", lol where do you see that? I did say your comment stupid, but that was after the crap from your post #15

Anyway, I made everything clear post #20, it's there for everyone to see.

I didn't attack you or insult you whatsoever, you're the one who snapped (#15). You even got an insult deleted by mods...

Of course, I made sure to ridicule you in the process... You asked for it!


And now you went to that other thread trying to pass yourself as the "adult", this is literally hilarious!


Dude this is getting creepy. I notice you actually went back and edited post #17 to take out the sentence where you called my response stupid. Just put me on your ignore list and go away.
Aug. 30 at 6:30 p.m.
#24
Joined: Jul. 2016
Posts: 1,582
Likes: 626
Edited Aug. 30 at 6:39 p.m.
Quoting: RedWing9119
Dude this is getting creepy. I notice you actually went back and edited post #17 to take out the sentence where you called my response stupid. Just put me on your ignore list and go away.


lol the word "stupid" is still there in post #17

The only thing that got deleted in this thread is your insults

Nothing creepy here, we can go on as long as you want smile

Edit : Actually, I'll be gone for a few hours so we can move on! No hard feelings for me
Aug. 30 at 6:57 p.m.
#25
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 690
Quoting: Xspyrit
lol the word "stupid" is still there in post #17

The only thing that got deleted in this thread is your insults

Nothing creepy here, we can go on as long as you want smile

Edit : Actually, I'll be gone for a few hours so we can move on! No hard feelings for me


The moderator clearly took out the offensive statement that started all this in post #17 and then you tried to claim some sort of victory out of the fact that he also deleted my response (which was one sentence). So now we're gaslighting? I have no hard feelings. Bye.
My apologies to the OP of this GM and the Mod.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Remove Option
Submit Poll