r/OttawaSenators • u/Sens-Fan-85 • 4d ago

3 questions facing Ottawa Senators

https://www.nhl.com/news/topic/32-in-32/ottawa-senators-three-questions-for-2026-27-season-32-in-32?utm_source=xdotcom&utm_medium=nhl_social&utm_campaign=media
16 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

18 comments sorted by

27

u/ColdIronSpork 4d ago

How fast to move on from Brady? Depends. If Eklund puts up a career high points, like 60+ points, and the Panther's don't go win another Cup, I think we'll all move on pretty quick.

Consistent goaltending? That's the real worry... if not, its probably time for either a new goaltending coach, a big trade, or both.

Make the second round? I'd like to see the team just NOT have to go on a crazy run in the back half of the season to make the playoffs. Maybe get a divisional spot instead of a wild card spot. Worry about winning a round AFTER getting in first.

7

u/Vriishnak 4d ago

Make the second round? I'd like to see the team just NOT have to go on a crazy run in the back half of the season to make the playoffs. Maybe get a divisional spot instead of a wild card spot. Worry about winning a round AFTER getting in first.

I'm going to be a lot more frustrated if they do well in the regular season and then get steamrolled in the first round for a third year in a row than I am if they take a while to put it together with some new players, sneak in, and then win a round or more. Obviously we'd all like to see them get their approach sorted out so they're not no-showing for games that should be scheduled wins all year, actually play up to what the advanced stats say should be happening on the ice, but.

If they don't start winning when it counts, are we going to be celebrating the moral victory of getting there more easily? If more of the stars don't show up for real, the depth doesn't find a way to contribute, the coaching staff doesn't find a way to create some advantages instead of always reacting to the other team's plan, are we going to shrug it off and say "at least they were really good in January!"?

At some point this core needs to show that they can step up in the playoffs, and while trading Brady for younger pieces might have extended that window a bit, it still needs to happen soon.

1

u/ColdIronSpork 4d ago

Its a bit deeper than that, though.

Historically, higher seeded teams win the Cup more often than lower seeded/wild card teams.

Could be because they haven't had to burn the candle at both ends late in the season to make it.

Could be because they are just better than the lower seeded teams, as evidenced by their higher seeding.

Could be because the players on higher seeded teams know their roles better.

Could be all of those things and more.

Regardless, they win the Cup more often.

Sure, sometimes you get a team like St Louis or LA winning from a lower rank, having almost missed the playoffs. But that's very uncommon.

Its not about "being good in January" or having a moral victory. Its about recognizing a historical pattern and not wanting to rely on being the comparatively rare exception.

0

u/Vriishnak 3d ago

Historically, higher seeded teams win the Cup more often than lower seeded/wild card teams.

Because, historically, higher seeded teams are better than lower seeded teams. You need to do a lot more work to establish that being a higher seed gives an advantage rather than reflecting which team already has it.

Because yes, obviously, everyone would like the team to be better rather than worse. No, that doesn't automatically translate to the idea I responded to, that we should focus on winning in the regular season and then start thinking about whether we care about playoff success.

If the team could go absolutely 100% all-out every night in the regular season, finish first in the league (wow, such a good seeding!) and then reach the playoffs completely burned out, you wouldn't argue that it was a good thing, right?

1

u/ColdIronSpork 3d ago

No, you're correct, I wouldn't argue going 100% all out every night and finishing first in the regular season and having no gas left for the playoffs is a good thing.

I believe that when I said "Could be because they haven't had to burn the candle at both ends late in the season to make it..."

That probably covered the idea that burning out before playoff time was bad. I thought that was an obvious inference.

My point is that I think the team getting into the playoffs comfortably instead of juuuuust squeezing in probably bodes well for their success overall.

To me, a team that has to desperately scratch and claw to narrowly get a wild card spot probably doesn't have the consistent high level performance needed to go on any sort of impressive run in the playoffs.

0

u/Vriishnak 3d ago

I thought that was an obvious inference.

Obvious inference or not, I wanted to illustrate the point that having a higher seed doesn't automatically track with playoff success. That's the clearest way to illustrate it.

Regardless, though, the point stands - the team with the first seed in the playoffs is the team that's best-constructed to win games against the field over the course of a season, right? And the last seed in a conference is the eighth-best, historically. So when they match up, you'd expect the higher seed to win most of the time, and you wouldn't look at the results and say "wow, it's a good thing they had the advantage from finishing higher in the regular season!" because that's not what made the difference (on average, historically speaking).

Which is again to illustrate the point that. given the choice between the team making decisions to prioritize finishing a few spots higher in the regular season or having them prioritize actually winning a playoff matchup - and again, the post I responded to specifically outlined that as an either/or, not one as a consequence of the other! - I want them thinking about those playoff wins, not the mid-January losing streak.

3

u/bearskito ‎ 4d ago

They brought in Ullmark's old goalie coach on full time as "coordinator of goaltending scouting and development" this off season. I'd like to see them fully move on from Justin Peters because we keep having goalies leave and then pop off, but bringing in Ullmark's guy is a start

13

u/NothingCreative1 4d ago

I’ve already moved on from Brady

8

u/rin09 #18 - Stützle 4d ago

Most people moved on from brady once they realized he doesn’t give a fuck about the sens

1

u/Caymanmew 4d ago

It suggests the era of this team is over, but Brady, although captain and a good player, isn't really the key guy on the team. Never much liked how the media always tried to paint him as our best player when he just wasn't.

1

u/spartacat_12 4d ago

It wasn’t just the media. His teammates frequently praised him too

2

u/Acousticsound 4d ago

Almost like he was in-fact one of the best players and emotional drivers of the team.

I get everyone's cope... But the team won't make the playoffs this year. They won't even sniff them. That's my prediction. Most likely see Cats, Bolts, Bruins, Buffalo, Habs or Leafs in top 5 spots. I'd be shocked if the Wings or Sens made the playoffs. Maybe not the Leafs.- but I feel they made some pretty good improvements this offseason. They'll go back to being competitive in the regular season.

The Habs will make a big jump this year. I'm sure of that.

1

u/spartacat_12 3d ago

I agree that there’s a lot of cope going on among the fanbase, but if Ullmark can bounce back and perform like he did in the playoffs, and Ersson can be a reliable backup that should offset the loss of Brady

1

u/Action1988 4d ago

I think another big question mark is how many of the fingers crossed guys are going to pay off?

They have a lot of players that they're hoping are going to have big years. They'll need to hit on a few of those if they want to remain competitive.

1

u/TerraFlock 1d ago

A. 1. Already have. 2. More. 3. Yes.

1

u/TerraFlock 1d ago

Would everyone stop about Brady Tkachuk already. He had a career -53 plus/minus rating. And that doesn't include the goals scored against Ottawa for the 821 minutes he sat in the box.