Why the Troy Brouwer signing looks bad for the Flames

Ari Yanover
July 01 2016 02:00PM

Despite being up tight against the cap, the Flames made a relatively big splash in the free agent market. They didn't sign one of the most expensive contracts of the day - with some of the dollars and term being tossed around, far from it - but signing Troy Brouwer to a four-year, $18 million deal is definitely notable.

Brouwer is big. He's a right winger. He has veteran experience. These all fit Calgary's needs.

That's about where it ends, though.

Brouwer in St. Louis

Brouwer spent the 2015-16 season in St. Louis after the Washington Capitals traded him for T.J. Oshie.

Season GP G A P ATOI 5v5 CF 5v5 OZS
2015-16 82 18 21 39 16:00 49.56% 26.71

He played middle six minutes and had modest production for them. If the Flames are going to put him on a line with Sean Monahan or Sam Bennett, as is rumoured, then an uptick in ice time and uptick in linemates could see an increase in production.

Speaking of linemates, let's take a look at how Brouwer fared with who he played with in St. Louis. Via Corsica:

troy brouwer blues wowy

Almost all of Brouwer's most common linemates were better away from him. Jay Bouwmeester is the lone exception; Brouwer was marginally better away from him than vice versa. But Brouwer and Bouwmeester still sunk each other, as did Brouwer and Alex Steen.

On his own, Brouwer sunk Paul Stastny, big time. Colton Parayko had to do major work to drag him up, as did Joel Edmundson. He brought Kevin Shattenkirk down, and suffered away from Robby Fabbri.

Considering how Stastny and Fabbri were two of his most common linemates, that's a really bad look for Brouwer. David Backes was his other most common linemate, but they appeared to mesh together well enough (although Backes was better away from him, too).

Via OwnThePuck, we can get a general impression of what kind of fit Brouwer was with the Blues:

brouwer stl otp

His linemates were better away from him. His offence was bottom six caliber. His possession was bottom six caliber. He is not getting paid bottom six money for the next four seasons.

So far, based on just last season, the Brouwer signing isn't looking too good. But he only spent the one season with the Blues; maybe it just wasn't as great a fit.

Brouwer in Washington

Brouwer played four seasons with the Washington Capitals after they traded the 26th overall pick in the 2011 draft for him. He was 26 years old when he started in DC; his last season there was his 29-year-old season. That's going to give us a solid look at him, so let's dive in.

Season GP G A P ATOI 5v5 CF 5v5 OZS
2011-12 82 18 15 33 17:11 48.40% 29.60%
2012-13 47 19 14 33 18:32 47.53% 25.50%
2013-14 82 25 18 43 18:51 47.82% 30.38%
2014-15 82 21 22 43 17:31 50.83% 35.01%

The first thing that jumps out to me: Brouwer got bigger minutes in Washington. Despite that, his point scoring didn't exactly see an increase. That didn't come until he started getting more offensive zone starts.

The second thing that jumps out to me: his corsi numbers have never been particularly great. He has had one year over 50%.

Only once in the past five seasons has Brouwer been a positive corsi rel player: in 2013-14, he was a +0.11% CFrel guy at 5v5. Every single other year, he has been negative relative to his team. (I know this is the Washington section, but his worst CFrel numbers came last season: -3.32%.)

Let's take a look at just how Brouwer fared with his linemates over four seasons with the Capitals:

troy brouwer capitals wowy

It's not much more flattering than his portrait with the Blues. Once again, almost all of his teammates was better away from Brouwer than with him, and this is a four year sample we're looking at. No more excuses.

Brouwer collaborated with Eric Fehr and Mike Green to all boost each other, but Fehr and Green were still better away from Brouwer than Brouwer was away from them.

He brought down John Carlson and Karl Alzner. He also brought down Brooks Laich and Jay Beagle, but was better away from them. He worked relatively well with Marcus Johansson and Evgeny Kuznetsov.

But the main talk is Brouwer playing on the top lines with the Flames' young, budding stars. Questioning how well that's going to turn out doesn't have to be a hypothetical, because he lived it with Alex Ovechkin and Nicklas Backstrom, two of the best forwards in the entire game.

And he brought them both down. Both superstar, high-scoring forwards fared better when Brouwer wasn't on their line.

Let's take an in-depth look at his 2014-15 season:

brouwer wsh otp

This is more flattering than his 2015-16 season. His production is still at bottom six levels, but Brouwer saw a massive boost in his shot suppression. It wasn't that high throughout his tenure in Washington. It did steadily increase as he progressed, though - so it might be something to look forward to in Calgary.

Was this the best use of Calgary's money?

The Flames are up tight against the cap; more so after today. Presumably until Sean Monahan and Johnny Gaudreau sign their extensions, Brouwer is now the highest paid Flames forward with a $4.5 million cap hit for the next four seasons. 

He's a big, veteran right winger. That alone is a fit. It does give him a leg up over, say, Joe Colborne, who signed a two-year deal with the Colorado Avalanche for a $2.5 million annual average value. Colborne was big, and he could play right wing, but he doesn't have quite the veteran expertise Brouwer does, and he was a left shot, compared to Brouwer's right.

Colborne is also five years younger, signed for two years fewer, and at $2 million cheaper per year. Hell, say what you will about when most of Colborne's points came, or the Backlund Bump - his career high is higher than Brouwer's.

brouwer vs colborne

Colborne is significantly better in almost every single stat. The shot generation is on par, but that's about it.

If the Flames were going to spend this money no matter what, they probably would have been better off just giving Colborne what he was asking for.

What this means

Signing Brouwer indicates the Flames want to win now. This isn't a move a team makes when they're still rebuilding; Brouwer's reputation as a player with size who's gone deep into the playoffs multiple times doesn't allow for that.

The only problem is, are the Flames actually going to be a better team with Brouwer? He fills a positional need, but does he fill it particularly well? Not only that, but he's getting older, and he's not going to get any cheaper.

It's easy to say that you have to pay to get players on July 1; in that case, maybe just... don't go out on July 1? It's easy to say Brouwer's deal is maybe a year too long; it was just as easy to say that about Mason Raymond. It's still just as easy to say that about Matt Stajan, Brandon Bollig, Dennis Wideman, Ladislav Smid, Deryk Engelland. These things add up. Just because the Flames only have five players committed to Brouwer's final season doesn't mean they won't add up.

And it's $4.5 million. With Monahan and Gaudreau still to re-sign. With the defence likely needing some bolstering. With three more forwards to bring in to create a full lineup. It isn't just going to be tight; there's going to have to be a trade, at this rate.

My initial impression of this signing was "hm." Now that I've spent a bit more time looking into it, I really, really don't like it.

We'll see what happens when Brouwer hits the ice. But the fact he couldn't make it work with Ovechkin and Backstrom is a massive red flag for me - and at $4.5 million, it's not a good one to have sitting on your cap for the next four seasons.

F0c4c8e806b29606c84e319f03049d40
Ari first fell in love with the Flames during the city-wide madness that was 2004. She enjoys thinking about the Flames, writing about the Flames, (Alexander) Hamilton, and dogs. You can find 140-character versions of her yelling at @thirtyfourseven.
Avatar
#1 #97Train/McDavidCopperfield
July 01 2016, 02:15PM
Trash it!
65
trashes
Props
7
props

Kris Russell back with the Flames. How you gonna explain all the bad mouthing you did after he was traded last year?

Avatar
#2 #97Train/McDavidCopperfield
July 01 2016, 02:19PM
Trash it!
61
trashes
Props
6
props
TheoForever wrote:

Colbourne barely played center last year too, watch the team first.

He played a lot on the wing but is an nhl centre.Bennett is still an unknown down the middle.

Avatar
#3 #97Train/McDavidCopperfield
July 01 2016, 02:13PM
Trash it!
60
trashes
Props
26
props

Colbourne is the guy you should have signed 2.5 mil/year. good deal for Colorado. Depth down the middle would have been a strong point vs an unknown. Bennett barely played centre last year.

Terrible move letting Colbourne go. He was one of the few big guys you had.

Avatar
#4 #97Train/McDavidCopperfield
July 01 2016, 02:41PM
Trash it!
51
trashes
Props
8
props
Stud Puffin wrote:

And if you think Colborne will repeat his offensive production it is a terrible move. However its not like he traded his top LW'er for a 2nd pairing dman with no offense or anything, so I'd be careful about gloating.

That was a team move for Edmonton.They got New Jersey's best dman and were able to sign the epitome of the NHL power forward. So id say thats a good move. Two for one.

Avatar
#5 #97Train/McDavidCopperfield
July 01 2016, 02:22PM
Trash it!
46
trashes
Props
4
props

Same amount of points and 1.5ml cheaper than Brouwer.Good job Treleving.

Avatar
#6 Styxx
July 01 2016, 07:25PM
Trash it!
41
trashes
Props
3
props

Apparently Tre is moving to a "win now" philosophy rather than patiently developing our talent.

We have seven(!!) 1st & 2nd rounders plus other worthy prospects, all of whom are Draft +2,3,4 years who have no NHL playing experience.

Instead of developing the kids we just gave their time to grandpa.

Avatar
#7 Derzie
July 01 2016, 02:06PM
Trash it!
38
trashes
Props
73
props

Stats. All that matter. Here we go again.

Avatar
#8 #97Train/McDavidCopperfield
July 01 2016, 02:58PM
Trash it!
32
trashes
Props
2
props

Calgary tsn reported it. i just repeated it. oops

Avatar
#9 Parallex
July 01 2016, 08:13PM
Trash it!
29
trashes
Props
9
props

Yeah, this isn't a good deal. It's way to much for a middle rotation guy like him on the bad side of 30 that doesn't move the needle in terms of puck possession.

Everyone meet your new Stajan... except with expectations!

Avatar
#10 cberg
July 01 2016, 02:37PM
Trash it!
27
trashes
Props
61
props
Derzie wrote:

Stats. All that matter. Here we go again.

Yes, disgusting. Not even four hours since the signing and the geniuses at FN lining up to run the guy out of town, while boosting Joe Colborne whom they've spent the last two years tearing down. Pathetic!

Avatar
#11 Juan Valdez
July 01 2016, 03:50PM
Trash it!
20
trashes
Props
14
props

I don't understand the logic behind needing to overpay for UFAs. The only reason players reach free agency is because their former teams felt they were replaceable and / or not worth their asking price.

Avatar
#12 Ken V.
July 01 2016, 02:37PM
Trash it!
19
trashes
Props
16
props

Bottom line for me is that there were better products available at lower costs. This is a business correct? This was a mistake by Tre. We can accept it, its done. Doesn't mean we have to try and put lipstick on it to wrap our heads around it or make it look pretty. Its bad, no we move on.

Avatar
#13 Baalzamon
July 01 2016, 05:01PM
Trash it!
17
trashes
Props
14
props

Boedker signs in SJ for four years at four per. Ouch.

Avatar
#14 Stud Puffin
July 01 2016, 02:28PM
Trash it!
16
trashes
Props
55
props

I'm sorry, but I am loving the irony here. The last 2 years we have endured the endless whining, crying, snipes at Colborne, and now the same people who have went out of their way to completely degrade him as a player are howling for him to be signed instead of Brouwer. This is HILARIOUS!.

Yes this was not a great contract. Not entirely happy with it. A couple years too long, and a couple of million too expensive. I do think he will bring the same offensive numbers Colborne had this year and that is what they wanted. Colborne was not a good bet to repeat his offense.

Avatar
#15 KiLLKiND
July 01 2016, 02:52PM
Trash it!
16
trashes
Props
10
props
Stud Puffin wrote:

I'm sorry, but I am loving the irony here. The last 2 years we have endured the endless whining, crying, snipes at Colborne, and now the same people who have went out of their way to completely degrade him as a player are howling for him to be signed instead of Brouwer. This is HILARIOUS!.

Yes this was not a great contract. Not entirely happy with it. A couple years too long, and a couple of million too expensive. I do think he will bring the same offensive numbers Colborne had this year and that is what they wanted. Colborne was not a good bet to repeat his offense.

If you noticed the comments section for the past I dunno 6 months, people have been fine with Colborne's play and did want him to remain on the team. That does not mean we wanted him to play on the power play or in the top 6. Just because we were unhappy with his deployment does not mean we were unhappy with his play.

I would have much rather signed Colborne for the same contract as Brouwer. Colborne is younger, on the up swing and has all the locker room attibutes that teams like. If we had to offload one in two years most teams would rather take Colborne as a salvation project compared to a 32 year old never hit 45 points salvation project/ cap dump. This is not saying Colborne should be signed to this contract either, as his contract with the Avelanche would have been perfect for Calgary.

Do you actually believe Brouwer has a better chance to match Colborne's numbers from last year? What made you arrive at that conclusion? Was it the massive amounts of points he got in Washington, the fact that he drags all of his teamates down, or is it simply because Calgary will improve all around next year and doesn't have a higher paid RW than him?

Avatar
#16 #97Train/McDavidCopperfield
July 01 2016, 02:57PM
Trash it!
15
trashes
Props
3
props
Stud Puffin wrote:

See that's where you are wrong. He was their 3rd best dman behind Greene and Severson. AND you still don't have a pp dman. Brilliant gm'ing there!

Lucic buyout proof for 7 years, good deal for first 3 to 4 years. last 3 years you will regret it big time.

So who would be better the 3rd dman on the 8 best defense in the league or the number 1 d man on the worst defense in the league?

Avatar
#17 KiLLKiND
July 01 2016, 03:04PM
Trash it!
15
trashes
Props
2
props

Brent Connally a much better hockey player that would be awesome to have on our 2nd line with Bennett just signed for 1 year 850k. Can we not let Treliving sign anymore UFA's? Is that a rule we could implement, just no Brad remember last year when signed Brouwer for 4.5 when you could have gotten Connally for 1?

Avatar
#18 DangleSnipeCelly
July 01 2016, 02:19PM
Trash it!
14
trashes
Props
51
props
Derzie wrote:

Stats. All that matter. Here we go again.

Not pointing fingers at anyone in particular but July 1st is the day to mute the analytics follows in your Twitter feed. I'm on board with advanced stats, I really am but I don't think you can apply them to every spot on your roster. We're trying to build a team here. Math is legit but so is psychology.

Avatar
#19 sneedis
July 01 2016, 03:02PM
Trash it!
13
trashes
Props
10
props

The problem with Brouwer is that he's a bottom 6 player making $4.5MM. It's not a travesty, but it will cause problems when players like Bennett and Tkachuk need to be re-signed. It may even cause some issues re-signing Monahan and Gaudreau.

When you consider we also lack a #4 defenceman (and I know Wideman's cap comes off the books next year), this is not how I would have used my cap space. Brouwer brings his teams down more than he brings them up, and he's played with some strong linemates.

This is a really unexpected step backwards for Treliving. I thought he would have learned with Raymond, Engelland, etc.

Avatar
#20 cberg
July 01 2016, 03:35PM
Trash it!
13
trashes
Props
21
props
Nick24 wrote:

How would you prefer Brouwer be evaluated?

Stats are only a small part of what a player contributes to a team, so ideally you would look at all aspects. Practically lots of things matter beyond stats, but are not measurable by standard stats so that isn't easy to uncover. As a stats site it would be nice, and expected that the writers be able, and willing to dig a bit deeper than a few summary stats line charts (e.g. Comment #5) but alas that rarely happens. The superficial (should I say lazy?) analyses is what is frustrating, but we have come to expect that. Hopefully over the next few years that will greatly improve so we get a more balanced perspective.

Now, Trash away, nothing else is expected.

Avatar
#21 mattyc
July 01 2016, 07:07PM
Trash it!
13
trashes
Props
6
props
DangleSnipeCelly wrote:

Not pointing fingers at anyone in particular but July 1st is the day to mute the analytics follows in your Twitter feed. I'm on board with advanced stats, I really am but I don't think you can apply them to every spot on your roster. We're trying to build a team here. Math is legit but so is psychology.

I'd suggest to you that building a team is exactly when you want to rely on predictive stats. Corsi doesn't do a great job of telling you who will win the next game, but it's really good at telling you who will help you win more over the long run... Psychology can be a good tie-breaker (all things even you want the good guys on your side), but even then, I'm skeptical it can be evaluated effectively. Chasing intangible (ephemeral) attributes is a fools errand, and doesn't seem to work out any more often than random chance.

As for Brouwer; the big picture is he's a pretty good player (likely high-end 3rd liner, low-end 2nd liner). His possession game is pretty mediocre, but part of that is due to his tough circumstances (lots of starts in the defensive zone). His goal stats are great, but likely partially due to getting to play in Washington and St. Louis. He's certainly a good bet to be better than Colborne next year, and will probably get 40 points.

The issue is the cost (and more so the term) and age. We've committed to paying him $4.5M at 34-35. Maybe his value is in line with his performance next year, but it's not a great bet to be anywhere close to full value at 34.

Avatar
#22 DestroDertell
July 01 2016, 02:46PM
Trash it!
12
trashes
Props
2
props
FeyWest wrote:

How do we know it's bad if we haven't even seen any games played.... New Goalies, New players, New coach, New systems.... Colborne was soft and there's no guarantee Colborne would have signed with us unless we overpaid and I'd rather pay 4/4.5 for a known commodity than 4/4.5 for someone everyone believes is not going to put up the same numbers.

Tanner Glass is also a known commodity. Should we trade for him? How do we know it would be bad if we haven't even seen any games played....

Avatar
#23 FeyWest
July 01 2016, 03:25PM
Trash it!
12
trashes
Props
22
props

Also as an aside, in regards to possession if a player is strong on the boards, battles for a puck and is able to help the team "Possess" the puck even though he may not be the one to come out with it. Wouldn't that mean he would be a stronger possession driver even though it doesn't show up in the possession stats?

I've not seen Brouwer play much aside from the few times he's faced the flames (burning them on more than one occassion). But by the sounds of it he's strong on the boards and creates space on the ice.

Avatar
#24 GodsGotSandals
July 01 2016, 04:01PM
Trash it!
12
trashes
Props
14
props
Nick24 wrote:

Brower may be bad for the Flames, but you know who he'd be great for? Las Vegas!

Very true.

Avatar
#25 FireScorpion
July 01 2016, 03:12PM
Trash it!
11
trashes
Props
19
props

So you cut down Colborne all year and the minute he's gone you say we should have kept him? Don't even start

Avatar
#26 The Last Big Bear
July 01 2016, 02:32PM
Trash it!
10
trashes
Props
17
props

Not happy with this contract.

Too much money and too much term for a middle-of-the-roster guy.

The above stats aren't really sufficient to evaluate a player like Brouwer, particularly as he's likely to have unique deployment in terms of zone starts, special teams, etc.

But I'm not really happy with how the Flames have fared in UFA today, especially in light of contracts given to guys like Staal, Colborne, and Perron.

Avatar
#27 Nick24
July 01 2016, 02:53PM
Trash it!
10
trashes
Props
13
props
Derzie wrote:

Stats. All that matter. Here we go again.

How would you prefer Brouwer be evaluated?

Avatar
#28 SmellOfVictory
July 01 2016, 08:07PM
Trash it!
10
trashes
Props
7
props
FeyWest wrote:

Also as an aside, in regards to possession if a player is strong on the boards, battles for a puck and is able to help the team "Possess" the puck even though he may not be the one to come out with it. Wouldn't that mean he would be a stronger possession driver even though it doesn't show up in the possession stats?

I've not seen Brouwer play much aside from the few times he's faced the flames (burning them on more than one occassion). But by the sounds of it he's strong on the boards and creates space on the ice.

The idea with possession stats is that they are a proxy for all possession, as the end goal of puck possession is always a shot at the net. If a player is good on the boards, his team will inherently have the puck more, which will inherently lead to either less shot attempts against, more shot attempts for, or likely both, resulting in a better Corsi ratio.

Avatar
#29 The Fall
July 01 2016, 08:36PM
Trash it!
10
trashes
Props
4
props

Johnny. Sean. Frolik.

Tkachuck. Bennett. Brouwer.

Hunter. Backs. Chiasson.

All the kids get a vet.

Avatar
#30 everton fc
July 01 2016, 02:08PM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Props
27
props

Vanek and Connolly would have cost 3.4mill. I know Vanek's a flake, but Vanek scores more goals. Both would have been nice short-term solutions... Say, two years? Easy to move, with those contracts. Good signing by the Wings and Caps. Sceviour for $950K? Another good signing by the Panthers. Smith-Pelly for 1.3mill. Good on the Devils. But we were lookinh gor someone long-term. "Win now" seems like Burke's call.

BT and Burke have yet to wow this fan, when it comes to free agency. And we lost Colborne for nothing.

Will we sign Nakladal? Jooris?? The Oilers should pounce on Nakladal.

As for Brouwer, welcome to Calgary. Here's hoping your numbers stay steady. Caps fans loved him, by the way. So did Blues fans. Here's hoping we can embrace him, as well.

It's not my money - I'm glad he's here. And the fact he wants to be here, wants to live in our city... I think he'll play well for us. (Colborne's spot w/Backlund and Frolik is Ferland's. If Colborne was suppose to be on the 2nd line, Shinkaruk may have convinced the staff he's a better player to take a chance on.)

Avatar
#31 Ken V.
July 01 2016, 03:14PM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Props
0
props
FeyWest wrote:

How do we know it's bad if we haven't even seen any games played.... New Goalies, New players, New coach, New systems.... Colborne was soft and there's no guarantee Colborne would have signed with us unless we overpaid and I'd rather pay 4/4.5 for a known commodity than 4/4.5 for someone everyone believes is not going to put up the same numbers.

You are going to have to show me where I indicated that Joe Colbourne was who I was referring to..... I was more on the lines of Martin 4/$10m , Weise 4/$9.4m . Both better deals for similar guys. Just saying.

Avatar
#32 The GREAT Walter White
July 01 2016, 06:58PM
Trash it!
9
trashes
Props
8
props

Who is our top line RW.....?

WW

Avatar
#33 #97Train/McDavidCopperfield
July 01 2016, 02:46PM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Props
3
props
FeyWest wrote:

How do we know it's bad if we haven't even seen any games played.... New Goalies, New players, New coach, New systems.... Colborne was soft and there's no guarantee Colborne would have signed with us unless we overpaid and I'd rather pay 4/4.5 for a known commodity than 4/4.5 for someone everyone believes is not going to put up the same numbers.

It would have only cost 3 million. Where did you get 4.5? He signed with Colorado for 3 ml.

Avatar
#34 flamesburn89
July 01 2016, 03:03PM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Props
7
props
Kevin R wrote:

Seriously Ari!!! Show me one of your posts last year or even the year before that you came anywhere close to being complimentary about Joe Colborne & I'll show you many that you trashed him. Cmon now! What is this? Yes St Louis & wash fans have good things to say about him. He's the RW bridge we need to get some of these young guys up to the big level like Poirrier & Shinkaruk. He had a pretty solid year last year playing on St Louis 2nd line.

Sounds to me like she's saying Colborne is a better player in her mind (and cheaper) than Brouwer, not necessarily that Colborne is actually a good player.

Avatar
#35 Stu Cazz
July 01 2016, 06:11PM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Props
8
props
brodiegio4life wrote:

I really don't agree in saying that signing Brouwer means they want to win now... no they want to fill a major need in their lineup right now and be competitive right now... you make it seem like treliving has givin up on the rebuild by signing Brouwer calm down

That's really ridiculous ...what team does not want to win now. Rebuild has been going on for 3+ years...get over it...let's win now...playoffs are the goal...nothing less!

Avatar
#36 The Fall
July 01 2016, 08:33PM
Trash it!
8
trashes
Props
4
props
The GREAT Walter White wrote:

Who is our top line RW.....?

WW

Frolik.

Avatar
#37 K Theory
July 01 2016, 02:16PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
31
props

Reposting from the other thread:

I'm actually quite happy with this signing. We paid a little more than ideal, due to the day on the calendar, but Brouwer is a still a very solid pickup. I'm sure that without his brutal OZS% deployment, he'd do a lot better on the counting stats.

One of the key stats that I find to be pretty enlightening is to compare how often a player starts vs. finishes in the offensive zone. I.e., how effective they are at pushing the play up the ice. It's a handy compliment to the raw CF% numbers. By that metric, Brouwer was absolutely one of the best on the Blues (behind Backes).

Compare him to FlamesNation darlings Backlund and Frolik. Stats below are all for 5v5 play.

CF% T.Brouwer: 48.9 M.Frolik: 51.44 M.Backlund: 52.33

ZSR -> ZFR (Change%) T.Brouwer: 38.7 -> 45.5 (+6.8%) M.Frolik: 48.0 -> 49.7 (+1.7%) M. Backlund: 49.08 -> 51.02 (+1.9%)

I also think that he'll help out our special teams quite a lot. He scored at a higher rate on the PP than just about anyone on the flames.Take a look at his goal difference (For - Against) on the power play:

PP GF-GA-GD/60 T.Brouwer: 7.2 // -0.8 // 6.4 S.Monahan: 7.1 // -0.4 // 6.7 M.Gio: 7.4 // 0.8 // 6.4

Penalty kill rates will also put him right at the top of the Flames. Take a look at his goal difference (Against-For) on penalty kill:

PK GF-GA-GD/60 T.Brouwer: 0.0 // -4.9 // -4.9 M.Frolik: 2.0 // - 7.7 // - 5.7 M.Backlund: 2.0 // -7.5 // -5.5

All in all, I think that there is a lot more to Brouwer's game that might meet the eye at a first glance. I'm sure that he'll be a solid contributor and will give decent (not great) value for what he's paid.

Avatar
#38 TheoForever
July 01 2016, 02:18PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
29
props
#97Train/McDavidCopperfield wrote:

Colbourne is the guy you should have signed 2.5 mil/year. good deal for Colorado. Depth down the middle would have been a strong point vs an unknown. Bennett barely played centre last year.

Terrible move letting Colbourne go. He was one of the few big guys you had.

Colbourne barely played center last year too, watch the team first.

Avatar
#39 Matty Franchise Jr
July 01 2016, 02:30PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
19
props

Seems like an overpay for Brouwer, and I'm not terribly optimistic that he'll actually be the 3rd best forward on the team, while being paid that way. I guess we'll see what the new season brings.

Avatar
#40 FeyWest
July 01 2016, 02:43PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
9
props

@Ken V.

How do we know it's bad if we haven't even seen any games played.... New Goalies, New players, New coach, New systems.... Colborne was soft and there's no guarantee Colborne would have signed with us unless we overpaid and I'd rather pay 4/4.5 for a known commodity than 4/4.5 for someone everyone believes is not going to put up the same numbers.

Avatar
#41 WildfireOne
July 01 2016, 02:49PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
20
props
cberg wrote:

Yes, disgusting. Not even four hours since the signing and the geniuses at FN lining up to run the guy out of town, while boosting Joe Colborne whom they've spent the last two years tearing down. Pathetic!

I don't think it's a matter of boosting Big and Local. It's more like, "EVEN Joe Colborne, who we already don't like, was better than Brouwer..." So it's more of an indictment of Brouwer than a boost to Joe.

If this overpayment means we don't sign Nakladal, I really don't like it.

Avatar
#42 Kevin R
July 01 2016, 03:02PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
19
props
Nick24 wrote:

How would you prefer Brouwer be evaluated?

How about stats in a Flames Jersey.

Avatar
#43 Ricky
July 01 2016, 03:30PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
45
props

Colborne was a big body who almost never played a physical game. The second half of last year after the Flames were eliminated from the playoffs is when he went on a tear. Big deal, what matters is coming through in the clutch. Brouwer has won a Stanley Cup and in my opinion was a very strong player for St. Louis in the playoffs. I consider his game to be similar to Ryan Kesler, he can get under your skin and he is physical. Anaheim totally destroyed us physically last year going after and trying to injure Gaudreau in particular with no response from the Flames. The addition of Brouwer and Chiasson helps significantly in the toughness area. You can't keep allowing the opposition to abuse out star players and I like the direction that Treliving is going in. Bear in mind that his good moves far outweigh the bad ones. If Wideman hadn't pulled off his stupid stunt last year I m positive that Treliving would have been able to trade him at the deadline. Wideman has made it very difficult to move him and his salary unfortunately but if anyone can do the right move with Wideman then I have 100% faith in Treliving. Thank goodness that we don't have a GM who trades Iginla and Boumeester for basically literally nothing and they are both still very productive players in the league. Anyway, that is my opinion on a few things. Go Flames Go!!

Avatar
#44 Dougie
July 01 2016, 03:54PM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
1
props
McRib wrote:

Outside of last year hasn't Joe Colborne been awful possessionaly and at least from the eye test he played in an insanily favourable situation last season (i.e. He will never get that kind of opportunity again). I mean he had 15-20+ Games on the first line. If anything Frolik, Backlund should now get more offensive minutes with him gone. Anyway I have always been under the impression that throughout his career Joe Colborne has essentially been dominated even strength outside of last year. Maybe I am wrong...

It just seems like the advanced stat community during the course of one year has gone from absolutely hating this player to wanting this player desperately.... I have really started to appreciate Advanced Stats, but I do have a problem with using selective figures to make an isolated argument look better or worse. If we are willing to admit teams (like 2014-2015 Flames) can have statistical anomaly seasons.

Don't get me wrong I wouldn't have minded signing Colborne to $2.5 Million x 2 Years and don't really disagree with this article at all. Just find it funny we are now praising Colborne statistically and find it strange on an individual basis how short term of a memory most Advanced Stats folks have, when they also acknowledge that teams can go on unsustainable runs. These "hero charts" have really become the trend of the day, but I have to say I would love to see a more long term data set of three seasons for these charts. I understand Colborne is "fairly young", but I would put a lot of money on the fact that this was an isolated occurrence (more than willing to eat crow if he hits 40+ points again next year, but I am not buying it). One thing I won't miss about Colborne is regularly watching a 6'5" forward play like he is 5'9".

Even strength Colborne played 117 minutes with Monahan and 74 minutes with Gaudreau. Hardly 15-20+ games. By comparison he played 259 with Stajan, 171 with Jones and 94 with Bouma.

WRT to Backlund and Frolic. Frolic had 18% of his 5-5 ice time with Colborne (136 of 978) while scoring 29% of his points (7/24). Backlund had 28% of his 5-5 points (8/29) while playing 25% of his 5-5 time with Colborne. Frolic's corsi was improved while playing with Colborne (52.7-51.5) while Backlunds was worse (49.6-53.1). I don't think having Colborne as a line mate hurt either players offensive production.

Avatar
#45 MattyFranchise
July 03 2016, 07:47AM
Trash it!
6
trashes
Props
1
props

First off, I didn't want Colborne on the Flames. I just want to get that out of the way right now.

Secondly, Brouwer's value is not in his possession stats, because they are just slightly below average, but in his versatility. He can be a top line player or a fourth line plug and he spent a significant amount of time playing all three forward positions last season.

My concern is his contract, not his ability. This is a bad contract. Will he help the Flames? Most likely. But BT done goofed on this one. Too much money, too much term.

Avatar
#46 Nick24
July 01 2016, 02:26PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
44
props

Brower may be bad for the Flames, but you know who he'd be great for? Las Vegas!

Avatar
#47 sneedis
July 01 2016, 02:46PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
13
props
cberg wrote:

Yes, disgusting. Not even four hours since the signing and the geniuses at FN lining up to run the guy out of town, while boosting Joe Colborne whom they've spent the last two years tearing down. Pathetic!

Just because they dislike Colborne doesn't mean they can't dislike Brouwer even more (especially given contracts and age).

Avatar
#48 Kevin R
July 01 2016, 03:00PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
25
props

Seriously Ari!!! Show me one of your posts last year or even the year before that you came anywhere close to being complimentary about Joe Colborne & I'll show you many that you trashed him. Cmon now! What is this? Yes St Louis & wash fans have good things to say about him. He's the RW bridge we need to get some of these young guys up to the big level like Poirrier & Shinkaruk. He had a pretty solid year last year playing on St Louis 2nd line.

Avatar
#49 Victoria Flames Fan
July 01 2016, 07:05PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
26
props

What I love is how class our organization is - phoning Troy and Chad's (new) wives... showing a lot of enthusiasm... looking after the personal part of thing... that's why I think we are on the way to a winning franchise. I live on the West Coast now and have some friends very closely affiliated with the Canucks organization and I am coming to realize what a different culture we have in Cowtown (my hometown). I am very excited that Troy Brouwer and Chad Johnson are a part of our organization (and Alex Chaisson too).

Avatar
#50 Truculence
July 01 2016, 07:53PM
Trash it!
5
trashes
Props
16
props

@mattyc

Brouwer's contract is up before he hits 35. His skating isn't an issue like some power forwards (Lucic), so he is probably a good bet to be still producing at age 34. The question is, will his salary and roster spot prohibit the Flames from advancing a better option on RW a few years from now? Who knows. We'll cross that bridge if we ever get there.

Comments are closed for this article.