The signings for Tierney, C.Brown, are awesome dealine trades to contenders alot of teams will be calling for those players at deadline for a affordable price and Dorion make it look pretty to catch deadline trades for picks. Dont think they are long term players as sens have young prospects to starting moving up in the line ups. Dorion has the same tactics every year which is great for signing depth players for cheap deals that entice trade dead line trades.

I was certainly vocal about who was left on the board with many of those picks, but I'll acknowledge that both Sanderson/Greig could prove to be underrated picks, even at their drafted positions. Other than 'C', having a strong 'D' is critical to long-term success, and I think they've now established their blue line as the true foundation of the team. That's hard for me to argue against, especially with a relatively large number of draft picks lined for next year as well. I'd also suggest that Greig looks like a potential buzz-saw kind of player... so maybe more of a fan-favorite type than just a "safe" pick like White, Pinto, etc.

Beyond that, I actually don't mind the Kleven pick... other than the perceived need to trade up to get him. He's at least a 3rd pairing guy, who could have a Methot-like role down the road. At the end of the day, he represents a necessary counter-balance to the fleet of smaller/mobile d-men they already have in the system like Brannstrom, Wolanin, Thomson, Lajoie, and Tychonick. It's not what most people focus on, but the combination of size, skating, and character were obviously something they wanted to have in the longer-term prospect system.
- khawk

Good post.

Some fans want to view this painting as a single brush stroke rather than standing back and looking at the full picture.

Many of the people critical of Dorion's draft are the same folks who were critical of the Karlsson trade, the Stone trade, the Duchene trade and to a lesser extent the Pageau trade.

Dorion is building a team. Too many fans would rather use a late first round or 2nd round draft pick to take a kid that has a 20% chance of being a top 6 player. Give me a Formenton or JBD or Pinto.

Good post.

Some fans want to view this painting as a single brush stroke rather than standing back and looking at the full picture.

Many of the people critical of Dorion's draft are the same folks who were critical of the Karlsson trade, the Stone trade, the Duchene trade and to a lesser extent the Pageau trade.

Dorion is building a team. Too many fans would rather use a late first round or 2nd round draft pick to take a kid that has a 20% chance of being a top 6 player. Give me a Formenton or JBD or Pinto.
- spatso

i agree with a lot of what people are saying , I still am concerned with center - but if stutzle moves there that’d be excdllent

The signings for Tierney, C.Brown, are awesome dealine trades to contenders alot of teams will be calling for those players at deadline for a affordable price and Dorion make it look pretty to catch deadline trades for picks. Dont think they are long term players as sens have young prospects to starting moving up in the line ups. Dorion has the same tactics every year which is great for signing depth players for cheap deals that entice trade dead line trades.
- SENS-sational

I think the same.

Dorion will stick with short term movable contracts. I believe he is fully committed to the idea of preserving cap space. This year the cap is problematic for some teams. But, next year the problem becomes so much more severe.

Lots of great UFA and RFA's needing contracts and most teams needing to offload player costs.

Mike Hoffman is this year's poster boy for failed player leverage. Next year is going to be a tough year for player agents.

This year is just a warmup for the RFA nightmare of next year. Sportsnet's list of 15 top unsigned RFA's gives us a sense of how deeply player leverage is eroding.

1. Mathew Barzal
2. Anthony Cirelli
3. Pierre-Luc Dubois
4. Mikhail Sergachev
5. Ryan Pulock
6. MacKenzie Blackwood
7. Jake DeBrusk
8. Ryan Strome
9. Anthony Mantha
10. MacKenzie Weegar
11. Victor Olofsson
12. Vince Dunn
13. Ethan Bear
14. Roope Hintz
15. Jesper Bratt

Good post.

Some fans want to view this painting as a single brush stroke rather than standing back and looking at the full picture.

Many of the people critical of Dorion's draft are the same folks who were critical of the Karlsson trade, the Stone trade, the Duchene trade and to a lesser extent the Pageau trade.

Dorion is building a team. Too many fans would rather use a late first round or 2nd round draft pick to take a kid that has a 20% chance of being a top 6 player. Give me a Formenton or JBD or Pinto.
- spatso

But you already have Formenton, JBD, and Pinto....

The teams perceived depth doesn't look to be a problem. There is a lack of quality top line players in the system. Those could be developed with the players that they have. Remains to be seen.

Are you arguing that you'd rather have depth players instead of taking a chance on a a player who can be a top 6 option? Both of whom may not pan out?

But you already have Formenton, JBD, and Pinto....

The teams perceived depth doesn't look to be a problem. There is a lack of quality top line players in the system. Those could be developed with the players that they have. Remains to be seen.

Are you arguing that you'd rather have depth players instead of taking a chance on a a player who can be a top 6 option? Both of whom may not pan out?
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

Great question. Goes to the very heart of the risk/reward opportunities that the draft offers.

There are tests that can help you look at the whole of the exercise. The easiest is to substitute the selection taken by your team in the first two rounds with the player that was actually taken next.

Stuetzle
Sanderson
Greig
Jarventia
Kleven
Sokolov

or

Raymond
Drysdale
Brisson
Paterka
Faber
Goncalves

Which roster do you choose. The choice is either/or for one list or the other. You can also play the game by making the "or" list any player not already drafted. But you have to give up all your teams picks.

Great question. Goes to the very heart of the risk/reward opportunities that the draft offers.

There are tests that can help you look at the whole of the exercise. The easiest is to substitute the selection taken by your team in the first two rounds with the player that was actually taken next.

Stuetzle
Sanderson
Greig
Jarventia
Kleven
Sokolov

or

Raymond
Drysdale
Brisson
Paterka
Faber
Goncalves

Which roster do you choose. The choice is either/or for one list or the other. You can also play the game by making the "or" list any player not already drafted. But you have to give up all your teams picks.
- spatso

This choice makes zero sense.

What does this do to support your notion of taking the "Pintos and Formentons" over a guy that is less well-rounded, but more dynamic in certain areas?

My biggest issue with the draft is that Dorion could have had the same players, plus another couple of prospects (not trading two picks for a stay at home d-man) and/or a higher ranked prospect than Greig if he was more aggressive in the first round.

I don't mind the crop of prospects but there just seemed to be several reaches with picks when you could have had the same player with a later pick...

This choice makes zero sense.

What does this do to support your notion of taking the "Pintos and Formentons" over a guy that is less well-rounded, but more dynamic in certain areas?

My biggest issue with the draft is that Dorion could have had the same players, plus another couple of prospects (not trading two picks for a stay at home d-man) and/or a higher ranked prospect than Greig if he was more aggressive in the first round.

I don't mind the crop of prospects but there just seemed to be several reaches with picks when you could have had the same player with a later pick...
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

you assume they would be available later based solely on rankings and mock drafts that were largely made by media types.

the fact that, beyond the first round, the actual draft never even comes close to looking like the pre-draft rankings (for any team), tells me that scouts follow their own assessments (from watching these kids, in some cases, for years) rather than simply reading the "draft kings" mock draft, like most fans do and then use that to criticize and second guess the players that teams pick.

it's like people criticizing taking sanderson over rossi or perfetti, because TSN and sportsnet had them rated higher...........but 5 other teams passed also before those players were taken, so maybe the teams know more than the media.

This choice makes zero sense.

What does this do to support your notion of taking the "Pintos and Formentons" over a guy that is less well-rounded, but more dynamic in certain areas?

My biggest issue with the draft is that Dorion could have had the same players, plus another couple of prospects (not trading two picks for a stay at home d-man) and/or a higher ranked prospect than Greig if he was more aggressive in the first round.

I don't mind the crop of prospects but there just seemed to be several reaches with picks when you could have had the same player with a later pick...
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

Because the Pinto choice was heavily criticized with many people claiming there were far better high end choices left of the board when Dorion selected him. Same, but not as intense with Formenton.

If I remember some fans were upset that Dorion did not take Bobby Brink over Pinto

Because the Pinto choice was heavily criticized with many people claiming there were far better high end choices left of the board when Dorion selected him. Same, but not as intense with Formenton.

If I remember some fans were upset that Dorion did not take Bobby Brink over Pinto
- spatso

The 2020 draft, Dorion had quite a few picks. Would have been easy to select the "Pintos" he selected plus other pieces. It really wasn't a situation where he picked and had to wait another 31 picks for a player. This is really my argument I am trying to make. I am not arguing they should have picked this guy over that guy (although I would have loved to have nabbed Lapierre late in round 1).

Two 2nd rounders were moved (one in the Murray deal and one to move up in the 2nd round). Whether those picks had to be moved is a legitimate question, I think.

Since there were a few less picks, Dorion may felt more inclined to take "his guy" rather than wait to see the cards fall. Which is fine, really. But don't forget, The Sens seemed to focus on North Dakota and Finland for some of their picks. Familiarity probably came into play rather than objectively knowing all the prospects well. Let's not kid ourselves, the Sens scouting staff is not very big.

I'm ok with the crop of players they got. I was surprised by a couple of the picks, but it is what it is. I feel it's a reasonable observation to make from the draft rather than just taking the results without a question.

you assume they would be available later based solely on rankings and mock drafts that were largely made by media types.

the fact that, beyond the first round, the actual draft never even comes close to looking like the pre-draft rankings (for any team), tells me that scouts follow their own assessments (from watching these kids, in some cases, for years) rather than simply reading the "draft kings" mock draft, like most fans do and then use that to criticize and second guess the players that teams pick.

it's like people criticizing taking sanderson over rossi or perfetti, because TSN and sportsnet had them rated higher...........but 5 other teams passed also before those players were taken, so maybe the teams know more than the media.
- sensarmy_11

No doubt. The prospect order means less and less the further you go in the draft. No argument. I guess my observations of the draft are just that. Observations.

It's foolish to think if Dorion did this and that, I'd be 100% on board and this team would be on its way to success. It's also foolish to think the crop of prospects that was taken was the absolute best collection of prospects that could be had.

That's why the draft is so entertaining. In 3 years from now, the order that these players should have been taken will be drastically different.

No doubt. The prospect order means less and less the further you go in the draft. No argument. I guess my observations of the draft are just that. Observations.

It's foolish to think if Dorion did this and that, I'd be 100% on board and this team would be on its way to success. It's also foolish to think the crop of prospects that was taken was the absolute best collection of prospects that could be had.

That's why the draft is so entertaining. In 3 years from now, the order that these players should have been taken will be drastically different.
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

But your original point is a valid point. As you move farther down in the draft do you take a risk and swing for the fences hoping to get a 1st or 2nd line player? Or do you use those picks to add depth and select a player that have
a good chance to be a decent NHL player.

Most kids picked in the top 10 of the draft will play 10 NHL games. It drops off from 11-20 and even more from 12-31. The drop off in the second round is huge. A player like Anthony Cereli in the 3rd round is taken because he plays a full 200' game and scouts believe he can be developed into an NHL 3rd line player. When he grows beyond that it is bonus. Home runs like Braydon Point, Kucherov, Mark Stone are most often taken beyond the 2nd round.

You guys have good luck with him!
https://twitter.com/Pierr.../1321477931202392070?s=20
Hearing that the Ottawa Senators are close to signing UFA forward Alex Galchenyuk.

You guys have good luck with him!
https://twitter.com/Pierr.../1321477931202392070?s=20
Hearing that the Ottawa Senators are close to signing UFA forward Alex Galchenyuk.
- BoutchBouchard

I heard the same thing. Could work out I guess...

No doubt. The prospect order means less and less the further you go in the draft. No argument. I guess my observations of the draft are just that. Observations.

It's foolish to think if Dorion did this and that, I'd be 100% on board and this team would be on its way to success. It's also foolish to think the crop of prospects that was taken was the absolute best collection of prospects that could be had.

That's why the draft is so entertaining. In 3 years from now, the order that these players should have been taken will be drastically different.
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

as long as you don't make stupid reaches in the 1st rd (see CBJ this year), then i'm fine with taking risks in other rounds.

With Galchenyuk signing, even less spots will be available for prospects. Interesting play. Not sure how I feel about it.

With Galchenyuk signing, even less spots will be available for prospects. Interesting play. Not sure how I feel about it.
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

seems like more of a situation where they sign a guy cheap to see if they can get assets for him at the deadline. if he ends up sucking and not worth having in the lineup over a prospect, you just waive him and bury him in the minors.

this is a solid zero risk signing IMO

With Galchenyuk signing, even less spots will be available for prospects. Interesting play. Not sure how I feel about it.
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

So...

Brady White Dadonov
Galc Tierny Batherson
Norris Brown Brown
Paul Annisomov Watson

So...

Brady White Dadonov
Galc Tierny Batherson
Norris Brown Brown
Paul Annisomov Watson
- david22

Stutzle not making the team?

seems like more of a situation where they sign a guy cheap to see if they can get assets for him at the deadline. if he ends up sucking and not worth having in the lineup over a prospect, you just waive him and bury him in the minors.

this is a solid zero risk signing IMO
- sensarmy_11

I get it from that angle. I'm on the fence about bringing him on. Maybe a couple of the "promising" prospects in fact need more time in the minors.

Stutzle not making the team?
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

Lets say I totally intentionally to left him out to spend a year developing in Europe/belleville.

Lets say I totally intentionally to left him out to spend a year developing in Europe/belleville.
- david22

I get it from that angle. I'm on the fence about bringing him on. Maybe a couple of the "promising" prospects in fact need more time in the minors.
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

I suppose it really depends on where they plan to play him

right now the only centers we have that are "guaranteed" roster spots are white, Tierney, and I guess anisimov. so playing him there takes a spot away from Brown or Norris.

if they throw him on the wing...Ottawa is still really thin there...even if you assume that Batherson plays full time in the NHL this year.

even if all they do is throw Galchenyuk on the 3rd or 4th line, and sit Watson in the press box most nights, i'm fine with that too.

right now, assuming the "prospects" that make the team are Norris, L. Brown, Stuetzle, Batherson, and Balcers....that gives you 14 forwards for 13 spots (unless i'm forgetting someone). that seems manageable.

With Galchenyuk signing, even less spots will be available for prospects. Interesting play. Not sure how I feel about it.
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

This is true... one fewer roster spot for the 'AHL' forward crowd of last year, including Batherson, Norris, Formenton, and Brown. I'm guessing the victim here is Formenton, which all things considered isn't that big of a deal - especially if there's more they want him to work on at the AHL level. Or, as someone noted, maybe Stutzle, just because it's such a crazy year in general.

On the flip side, it's hard to question the $$$/term - for a 26yo forward with 20G potential in their prime. This also expands the list of clear trade deadline candidates to include: Galchenyuk, Anisimov, Gudbranson, Reilly, and Nilsson... though it's unlikely there's anything more than a 2nd/3rd round pick among them.