Troy Brouwer: 2013-14 Season Review

Photo: Chris Gordon

Someone protect us from the wrath of the Brouwer Rangers. Today’s the day we talk about their boy, Troy Brouwer, and both of the seasons he had.

By the Numbers

82 Games played
18.4 Average time on ice per game
25 Goals
18 Assists
47.8% Shot attempt percentage during 5v5
47.8% Goal percentage during 5v5
7.2% On-ice shooting percentage during 5v5
93.2% On-ice saving percentage during 5v5

Peter’s Take

Brouwer should get two of these year-in-review posts. Through the end of November, Brouwer was paired with Brooks Laich, where he got absolutely dominated. In hindsight, Brooks Laich’s lingering groin injury was probably the driving factor (though Oates’ territory-over-possession attitude and Brouwer’s lack of dump-and-chase skills were in involved too). Once they broke up, Brouwer became a threat again.


He never quite got out of the red cumulatively, but Brouwer was really good when the team was underperforming early in the new year, particularly when taking shifts with Fehr and Backstrom. That implies Brouwer is something of a passenger when it comes to possession, though I think he’s still a good finisher.

The rest of the story was the power play, where Brouwer was an assassin, scoring 12 goals on 53 shots as an excellent fulcrum in the crease. If the Caps keep anything from this blighted season, let’s hope it’s the 1-3-1 powerplay and Brouwer’s hardscrabble effort in the paint.

There. I bet you thought this was going to be negative. Nope. Brouwer might be overpaid and he might not drive play so much, but he’s got the fundamentals to be a serious producer next season. Take it to the bank.

Brouwer on RMNB

In Pictures

Celebrating 100 goals. I love this photo by the Brouwer Rangers.

He’s good on the power play, but he’s truly great at this.

Troy got a mustache bobblehead. This GIF is High Art as far as I’m concerned.

There have been better goal celebrations than this.

Your Turn

Am I wrong about Troy Brouwer? Would you rather see him crashing the net on a line with Alex Ovechkin or being the primary shooter on the second line? If the Caps go into rebuild mode, is Brouwer one of the first to move?

Read more: Japers Rink

Tagged with:
  • DashingDave314

    Brouwer’s not overpaid. Seeing Ian in spandex alone was worth his salary. The Brouwer bombs, stats, and awesomeness were just an added bonus.

  • 5manfront

    I like Brouwer. He’s one of those good glue guys. Plus he’s a decent finisher, has some good size, is responsible defensively, an option in most every situation. I think he fits perfectly on the 2nd line with Grabo (provided he re-signs… please!) and Kuzya.

    But he’s also a complimentary player, not one who drives the action. So he’s a bit of a luxury, and someone who, at RW, is a bit redundant. We have similar players in Fehr and Ward already, and Wilson could turn into a much bigger and badder version someday. So if we could move his cap-hit for a top-4 defenseman, I’d do it in a heartbeat.

  • I’m setting out lawn chairs and brew up some sweet tea for the “trade Brouwer” crowd. You know they’re coming. I’m a little surprised myself that I was so favorable towards him.

  • Owen Johnson

    Good God, he almost boarded Grabo there.

  • Jason W

    I think we could trade him while his value is high for help on defense, which would improve a weakness as well as open up more minutes for Tom Wilson to further his development.

  • DashingDave314

    Wilson is why I’d be OK with a Brouwer trade if the return is right. He’s a valuable player. But he is replaceable. My gut tells me he won’t get traded yet, but down the line I think he does.

  • CapsCast

    Chicago used Brouwer pretty well as a 3rd line wing. That’s where I think he’s always belonged, talent-wise. The 3.66 million cap hit seems a little high for what he brings to the team.
    Throughout the season I noticed that he whiffed on a lot of one-timers. He seems like a good locker room guy, but I wouldn’t mind if the Caps look to deal him for defense. I wouldn’t mind if they kept him, either, but not in the top 6.

  • Brouwer Rangers

    No wrath here. Great work as always.

  • Looking at me in spandex is worth $3.6 million? Am I doing this right?

  • frowning

    Honestly, I would not take Brouwer to the bank, I’d taking him to the trading block while his stock is high. His possession was often bad because he was playing poorly, not anticipating passes nearly as well as others, not being strong enough on the puck despite being touted as a grinder type. Overall his ability to clean up stray pucks in the crease was a valuable asset, but what he lacks amounts to a serious deficiency, especially at 3.5mil. I wish he was consistent – he’s fun and clearly a good guy – but he hasn’t been consistent and something probably has to change. a

  • VeggieTart

    Wilson is why I’d like Brouwer to stick around–am I the only one who thinks Brouwer could be a sort of mentor to help Wilson develop grit that makes him a player nobody wants to go up against?

  • frowning

    The Brouwer Rangers have pulled the wool over your eyes.

  • Mike Reppenhagen

    I love the idea of Brouwer as the net crasher on a top line with Ovi and Backstrom. I thought that was what we were giving away a 1st rounder and a good salary for, right after we let an aging Knuble walk. Seeing him in weird pairings with guys like Laich and Penner (who just do his thing) was annoying. He should be in the top six.

  • I’m glad you brought that up– Brouwer as a Knuble replacement.

    If we measure him purely by that, Troy’s been a disappointment. But is that because he hasn’t been up to the task or because Ovi+Backstrom aren’t nearly as effective now as they were back then?

    I’d love to see a top line where Backstrom lugs the mail, Ovi fires the shot, and Brouwer crashes the net. Why that hasn’t happened is a point of sadness and confusion for me. Whenever I rate Brouwer based on that expectation, he’s been a bummer.

  • 1 point deduction for missing obvious reference

    they pulled the SPANDEX over my eyes

  • Boush

    Essay time: I am steadfastly in the “trade Brouwer” crowd not because I think he is a bad player, but expressly because I think he is a good, valuable player. He hits, he can score on the powerplay, and he’s not a complete lunkhead defensively. A solid power forward coming off two very good seasons.

    He is, however, a bit redundant on this team that appears to be made up solely of more than capable right wingers (Ovechkin, Brouwer, Fehr, Ward, Wilson, non-Oates Kuznetsov, to an extent even Beagle…). In addition to signing his slightly-above-ideal salary cap contract, McPhee traded a late 1st-round pick for his RFA rights. Given that in a Caps sweater, he has performed as well or better as he did for the Blackhawks, he should be able to bring back another late-to-mid 1st round or a good defenseman.

    Fehr can make up for his scoring as a 2RW, and Wilson can make up his physicality in an expanded role.

    All that said, I am a little concerned that despite his frequent (much appreciated) antics, he might be the problem in the locker room. From publicly clashing with then-teammate Roman Hamrlik during the lockout, comments about Semin once he left, and some other remarks I truthfully cannot recall that rubbed me just a little bit the wrong way, plus (vague, probably unsubstantiated) rumors of there being a rift in the locker room, and I think there are some “intangible” reasons to move him. If and when he no longer plays for the Caps, I’d stake my bet on some backhanded comments about the organization in one of his first interviews with his new team.

  • Lawrence

    Sometimes I am a little too hard on Brouwer, mainly because people label him as a team first guy, but then he goes and talks bad about ex-teammates, current-old coaches, and comes off as a guy who thinks his opinion is the only one that should matter. But I will try to stay positive in my review. He has a lot of good qualities, hes our 2nd or 3rd best goal scoarer, great in the high slots on the pp, and he throws his body around better than all our other players. His play style is certainly needed on this team and he will benefit a lot from having a different coach, who emphasis puck possession, which as peter said is not brouwer’s strong point.

    A few years ago I remember thinking by this time, I really had hoped we would see more synergy with Brouwer and Mojo (as the 2nd line center). Mojo hasn’t really developed into the player I thought he would become though (perhaps he wasn’t given a fair go yet, idk), but it is apparent to me that Brouwer is in need of a good 2nd line center (grabo pleaseeee). I see Brouwer really shining when our team can carry possession and he has backy, ribs, or another great center with him. He has been at his best when backy plays with him, thats for sure.

    My complaints with him are very similar to the ones I have with Laich. I just get the feeling, again this is speculating off interviews and what not so feel free to call me out on that, but I get the feeling he ostracizes a lot of our players that he doesn’t like, and for the capitals, those types of players that brouwer doesn’t like has been our strength the last 6-7 years. Brouwer is a replaceable piece imo, the players he criticizes are not. All I am saying is, keep it in your head or keep it in the locker room. I don’t see why people say brouwer is a team first guy and a great locker room guy. So please explain to me how/why you think that way.

  • Robert

    What is his Sasha rating this year?

  • Well you can take your fair, nuanced, well-explained opinion and SHOVE IT

  • tpr04

    I would trade Brouwer while his value is somewhat high. His 5v5 performance was not good, though it’s hard to assess anyone who played under Oates’ system – how much of this was the player and how much of it was the coach? That said, we have depth at RW and are very shallow on defense. Brouwer is probably someone you can put in a package to change that equation. Not much available on the UFA front, so you’re going to have to go the trade route to strengthen the defense.

    In terms of his PP production, I think Ward gives you what Brouwer gives you.

  • Lawrence

    I think it has more to do with ovi-backy not being as effective as they once were. Specifically, Ovi’s game has changed a lot from then but if you slotted in Brouwer for Knubs back then, you would see the same production level imo. Ovi was a puck carrying machine and he had backstrom to back him up and make plays in tight spaces in the offense/neutral zone. Knuble was just there to cause havoc in front of the net, which brouwer would be good at if told to do so, but that takes away his best aspect, his shot. Now, backy is relied on much more to carry the puck up, which is not one of his best strengths (i understand some may disagree with that) because he is not the fastest skater and ends up having to dump the puck in or turn around looking to pass to someone else.

    Because of this, I think what ovi-backy need is more of a team strategy puck possession game which starts with the defense and moves up to their offense. That starts with coaching, a system and then filling in the respected roles. Finding this fix will be much harder than just relying on ovechkin like they did in the past. Just imagine backy and ovechkin slotted into detroit’s system right now, they both would be unreal on that team and it is not because of their roster, but their system they play.

  • Ian didn’t want me to do sashas. I’m bitter.

  • Lawrence


  • tpr04

    Who on this team in the past two years has been asked to crash the net? When McPhee got Penner, everyone assumed that he was going to fill the Knuble role, but Oates stuck him on the 4th line.

    Oates had Johannson at 1L for most of the year – a guy who is physically and mentally incapable of crashing the net. And a guy who managed to score ZERO goals while playing 1L for about 65 games.

    Basically, it’s really hard to judge these guys for their on ice performance as, in many cases, the coaching negated the skill sets.

  • Sarah

    You’re doing everything right, Ian. You write one of the best hockey blogs on the interwebs, you’re friendly, you’re funny, you’re awesome, and what everyone really cares about is how you look in Spandex. That’s life.
    Trust me, it would be a lot worse if you were female.

  • 5manfront

    Net crashers? Ward, Brouwer, Beagle, Wilson… to varying degrees of success. None were as good as Knoobs, but he was one of the best. Penner isn’t so much a net-crasher as he was a big screen who could pot deflection and rebounds. He was never in that way except on the PP2. He also really didn’t want to be here and his apathy was pretty evident in his play.

    And RE: Majo,… Zero goals in ~65 games is a lot more than just a coach negating his skill set. When we drafted him, I remember his description as being a fast two-way center with play-making ability. Haven’t really seen anything other than the fast and the willingness to pass, even in the most obvious shooting situations, unfortunately.

  • Todd N

    Halak for 4th rounder….EHHHhh

  • tpr04

    Ward and Wilson maybe, but Brouwer and Beagle, not reall. Brouwer should be, but he hasn’t played that way.

    Totally agree with you on Mojo.

  • Diller M

    FTR Peter is the single one

  • 70Caps


  • Sarah

    Not hitting on Ian, just sympathizing with him for being objectified. He’s not just a pretty face, you know.

  • Jonah

    let me preface this by saying that i love brouwer. he is one of my favorite personality guys on the team.
    i think he, mojo and laich are the most expendable players on this team at the moment.
    Brouwer is a big “grinder” forward. However, i think we already have FOUR of those players on our team (Fehr, Willy, Wardo, and brouwer. three of them are RW). I think that ward-chimmer line is perfect as is. we should replace fehr with a quick center; the names eakin, perreault come to mind (damn you oates/gmgm!). i think that fehr or wilson should be slotted into the top six. the combination of kuyza-grabo-wilson gives me a funny tingly feeling in my pants. i think fehr could be a good player with backy and OVI. when ovi was out early in the season fehr was with backstrom and the two of them seemed to have some good chemistry. also, fehr is one of the few skaters on this team (imo) who can keep up with that dynamic duo while also adding some grit in the corners (a part of ovi’s game which is SERIOUSLY lacking).
    as you can probably see i have the first three lines already figured out and there is no brouwer to be seen. i understand his success at the power play (or pouwerplay, for the heck of it), but i fail to see how fehr or wilson wouldn’t be any BETTER at that job in the crease. ward did very well at it, and i think the other two big forwards can too (on the cheap too!).
    unless brouwer wants to accept a 4th line energy type role who helps out on PK, i think that he should be given the option to be traded. I think that with his stats from the last half of the year , he has good trade stock. possibly a deal with him, mojo and some AHL defensemen we have so many of, could lead to a good top 4 defensemen.
    as well as free up some cap space, this would help wilson’s development and add more speed to our top 6.
    round out the fourth line with latta, beagle, brown, well man, or a veteran off waivers and we got ourselves a pretty good team going forward.
    Ted, if you see this, give me a call-i might have just saved your team, your welcome

  • Shaun Phillips

    Didn’t one of you guys (I think it was Peter) yell at someone a few days ago for reminding them of team sexy legs and the fact that half of that dynamo is in the playoffs elsewhere?

  • JenniferH

    I like Troy Brouwer. I read a lot of complaints about him, but dangit, I like him. That’s my uneducated hockey opinion.

  • JenniferH

    Guys just don’t understand. :shakes head:

  • Lawrence

    Good post, but I think we need major improvements on defense. Might be hard to get without giving up something valuable. I just wish there were two weber’s out there, or something that we could trade for him. Weber and Green on the back pairing together, would be sooooo much fun.

  • johnnymorte

    Brouwer is a character guy and a competitior, but a lot of the goals he scores on the PP can be attributed to double man coverage on Ovi. I don’t think he is overpaid, but I don’t see where he fits in with this current roster if we choose to retain Grabo, I believe his return value would be high considering his numbers in the past two seasons, and I would like to see WIllie bumped up to the second line. We should look to gain value on the blue line with someone like Brouwer, or let Grabo walk and get someone who could gel well with Brouwer like a David Legwand. My feeling is that we should move forward with our strong suit which is skill, and look to get value on the blue line since that is where we need to address weakness. With JoJo, Ovi, Grabo, Markus, Backie, Kuzya, Willie and Burakovsky in the pipeline, I think we pretty much have the top six nailed down along with our third line.

  • Eric Schulz

    I thought Johansson showed the “two-way” part early on also… I think he’s a really talented player, and I do expect that to translate to production soon. I think he’s a very nice piece because of how talented, young, and cheap he is. I don’t want that to get lost; that being said, he definitely is a horrible fit on the top line. I’d love to see us try to create a puck possession 3rd line that we could use to try to negate the opposing team’s top line. Laich – Johansson – Penner would’ve been a great fit for that, at least on paper, although Laich’s lingering groin problems means he wasn’t ready for that this year (and Penner would’ve been better deployed on the top line). But something like that… if we are lucky enough to keep Grabovski, I’d love to see Johansson centering the 3rd, especially if Fehr is on his wing. At this point, we are still really, really strong up front, and have a lot of options. I’d rather try to acquire a better player; I’ve suggested many times that packaging Johansson and Carrick to a rebuilding team should net us an upgrade, whether something like Frans Nielsen of the Islanders, or maybe in a package for Kesler, or try to pry Bogosian from the Jets… I’d rather do that, of course, but I do think Johansson will develop.
    I disagree about Penner’s apathy though; I thought he was our best forechecker from the moment he arrived.

  • Eric Schulz

    Brouwer has simply been inconsistent; that’s to be expected from power forwards. Power forwards typically take longer to develop than any other forward. I think that he’s really starting to get it, and hope/expect that he can get 30 next year. (I think last year was when things started to click consistently, but this year he tried to be too fancy – as he admitted – and once he got back to his game, he took off. I think he sticks to it from now on.) That being said, I’d rather him be the primary guy on a lower line (2nd or 3rd). Assuming we let Penner go, resign Grabovski, and nothing else changes…
    Ovechkin – Backstrom – Fehr
    Kuznetsov – Grabovski – Wilson
    Laich – Johansson – Brouwer
    Chimera – Latta – Ward
    Solid depth, I think; you could stack them better if you didn’t mind being more top-heavy – Wilson to 3rd, obviously Grabovski on top line with BackstrOvie is an obvious top-heavy combination – but I like rolling 4 lines. Minutes breakup: 18-16-14-12. Something like that… PPs would screw things up, maybe, if we had a lot, but PKs would balance that out. If one line is going better than another, then just lean on them. Over the course of the season, it should all even out. If Wilson isn’t ready for a top-6 role (I think he is, but I have no idea… thanks, Oates – not that it matters much what *I* think, but I assume it’s harder for real hockey insiders to properly judge as well), you could swap him with Brouwer… if Fehr doesn’t drive play as much as I’d expect, or just doesn’t fit, then maybe you drop him to 3rd C and pull up Brouwer and move Johansson back to LW, or just have Fehr play the off-wing… maybe have to do that anyway since Laich may be in and out of the lineup if he still isn’t fully recovered despite the long offseason… although maybe we are lucky and Burakovsky is ready, and he plays there. In that case, then I really want Brouwer there, so we don’t have a 3rd of Burakovsky – Johansson – Wilson… too much inexperience, IMO.

    If I were the GM, though, I’d be trying to address:
    resign Grabovski

    resign Penner (we can move on from him, but I think he’s the best fit for the top line that we have, and he shouldn’t cost more than $2.5 per year, if that, which is a bargain for a top-6 guy, and we need bargains)

    3rd C (esp faceoffs)
    top-4 D

    and top-6 D
    I’d probably target Meszaros for top 6 (pairing him with Orlov would make a lot of sense, IMO, and I’d like a top-4 in the AHL of:
    Schimdt – Wey
    Brouillette – Strachan… I think Brouillette would be a fine 6th, I know Strachan is a fine 7th, but the goal is to bury them so that you don’t have to rely on them.. if the moves don’t work out, then they are a fine fall-back plan… and Schmidt and Wey both look ready for NHL action, at least in a limited role… if we were rebuilding, I’d be ready to give them some minutes, but we aren’t… an extra year or two of AHL seasoning never hurt anybody, ask the Bruins or Red Wings), while I’d try to trade for the 3rd C and top-4 D… I’d make Carrick, Brouwer, Ward, and Johansson *very* available. Perhaps Brouwer, Johansson, and a 1st next year pry Kesler away from the Canucks? If so, then we can have a 3rd of:
    Laich – Kesler – Fehr or Chimera – Kesler – Ward. (If we keep Penner, Fehr can slot there… if Laich is healthy, he can slot there. If neither, the latter is a very attractive 3rd, no?) That makes it much harder to acquire the top-4 D, but I think it’s worth it (although I’m not sure Kesler is the guy I remember… but in this hypothetical where I am the GM, I have NHL scouts who can let me know how good these guys are… I just have them scouting the guys I *think* we want, then rely on them to let me know which ones are the right players, then I make trades – or try to – based off of their scouting).

    Maybe Johansson, Carrick, and a 1st next year gets us Bogosian from the Jets; they get some nice youth. If they think – incorrectly – that they aren’t rebuilding, then maybe not… although, I’d hate to do it… but Johansson, Carrick, and Grubauer *should* get it done; they need goaltending, and with Trouba, Bogosian is at least kind of, a little bit expendable. I’d want to sign a veteran backup anyway. (The Jets aren’t exactly rebuilding, as young as they are, but they aren’t quite ready to contend… Bogosian is young, but Johansson is just as young, Carrick is younger, and their goaltending blows… that trade makes them better, even if losing Bogosian sucks for them.) Then maybe we move Brouwer straight-up to the Flames for Stajan? They definitely know they are rebuilding. He’s on a shorter deal (pretty sure), and is slightly younger. He gives them a little more production, while Stajan gives us a nice two-way center for the 3rd line who can win faceoffs. Maybe we throw in a low draft pick too; I thought he was 3 years younger, he’s only 1. Whatever.
    Thanks to Latta and Brown, we have some nice bottom-6 depth. We could let Penner walk, move Brouwer, a prospect (Sanford?), and a 1st for Kesler, move Johansson, Carrick, Grubauer for Bogosian, and still roll out:
    Ovechkin – Backstrom – Fehr
    Kuznetsov – Grabovski – Wilson
    Chimera – Kesler – Ward
    Laich – Latta – Brown
    Before trades and free agency, I have:
    Ovechkin – Backstrom – Penner
    Kuznetsov – Grabovski – Wilson
    Fehr – Johansson – Brouwer
    Chimera – Laich – Ward
    Alzner – Carlson
    X – Green
    Orlov – X
    with the top AHL lines:
    Burakovsky – Latta – Brown
    Stoa – Wellman – ?
    Schmidt – Wey
    Brouillette – Strachan
    something like that, before trades… you can see the weaknesses and redundancies. Use the latter to fix the former. All prospects not listed save Barber are eminently tradeable. (I *really* wouldn’t want to trade him or Burakovsky… BUT they would be available for the right top-4 defenseman. As with Forsberg… I didn’t think there was *NO* way we should’ve traded him, but if we aren’t getting a young, physical partner for Green, then no.)
    I got quite a bit off topic… but I’m honestly excited for our future… I just hope we get the right GM and coach. It’s all on them now.

  • Eric Schulz

    I should add: all too often, I see people suggest trades that make NO sense for the other team. I think mine do; I’m trying to find equal value for each side, and ones that make sense for both sides fit-wise, not just our team. That being said, I could be off. I watch A LOT of hockey, and read a lot of articles about it, by both NHL and amateur scouts. However, I only really watch a lot of Capitals games; I watch a lot of non-Capitals games, but there aren’t many teams I watch frequently. So, I may only see each non-Capital team play 5-7 times a year; I may have simply seen the best 5 games that Matt Stajan played all year. In the hypothetical (but completely realistic) scenario in which I am the Caps’ GM, I would, as I said, rely on the NHL scouts to identify which of these guys I’d want to add. So, if any of you are like, “Stajan’s not that good,” then sure… I just checked out his faceoffs, and he was about 46% last year; I thought he was better than that. That may have been a down year, but still. But I mean a guy similar to who I perceive Stajan as. If it was actually my job, I’d be able to spend more time scouting these guys, and I’d have a better list.
    Flip-side, I could be overvaluing our guys. I hate when others do it… but if I am, it’s not because I’m overvaluing them exactly, but just because maybe other teams may be seeing a different fit. Like, I don’t think Carrick should’ve been in the NHL this year… but he’s 19! Certainly by 21, he’ll be an asset; he should, at minimum, be a better option for the 3rd unit than whatever guy they would’ve used, and a solid 2nd unit PP guy. If you are a rebuilding team, you should value that guy pretty highly. I’m not judging him on how good he was on the ice this past year; I’m not trying to trade him to a playoff team, saying that he improves their 3rd pair, I’m trading him (along with another talented young guy like Johansson, who is probably already an above average 3rd line C – I’m giving him some benefit of the doubt, of course, but Oates really made it hard to judge) in order to acquire a guy that is older and more expensive than those two combined, and throwing in a relatively high pick and/or prospect to acquire him (if it’s a Kesler, or Bogosian, somebody like that).

  • Eric Schulz

    It seems like most of us like him, but realize we have bigger weaknesses to be addressed. You can’t get something for nothing; he’s valuable as a trade asset. I’d make a few guys available (notably: Brouwer, Ward, Johansson, Carrick), and after addressing really the two biggest weaknesses (3rd C, esp faceoffs, and top-4 D; at least the latter, first would be nice too though), if Brouwer was still here, great. It’s just that the RW spot is deep for us right now and we need to shore up some other spots. He by no means needs to be traded; we aren’t trying to move him because we don’t want him. We just think he’s a player that other teams value that we can afford to give up. I hope he stays, but I’d rather a better, deeper, more defensively responsible team. If he’s part of that, great. But I don’t see it. Although, maybe we are good enough as is that a new GM and a new coach only need to make small moves (sign a 4th C and top-6 D, under-the-radar type moves) and we’ll contend because of the right style and right coach. I’m pretty optimistic about the team though, and even I don’t see that.

  • Guest

    Well, there’s one other person who agrees. I’d be fine with Ovechkin mentoring him in the art of then power forward… with somebody else teaching him about back-checking.

  • Eric Schulz

    Well, it seems like there’s one other person, at least. I disagree; I’d be fine with Ovechkin teaching him the art of the power forward… with somebody else teaching him back-checking.

  • kuznetsy

    I totally agree with you about Brower’s character.
    Maybe that stems from the fact that I am a Semin apologist, but either way, I don’t think it’s in good character to ostracize a former teammate or coach.
    However, as you mentioned he does have an upside, but I feel like he is expendable and could get us something valuable back in return.

  • DashingDave314

    Wilson is already that type of guy, IMO. But yeah, I think Brouwer could definitely serve as a mentor to Wilson. How to crash the net, where to be on power plays, etc.

  • DashingDave314

    I think Ward is more moveable (same reasons as Brouwer pretty much). Plus, no forcing Wilson into a top 6 forward role, which would be as asinine as Wilson being on the fourth line seeing sub-10 minutes a game. I think that right now, Wilson would be an upgrade over Joel Ward. Tommy can do the same things Ward can, only better.

  • DashingDave314

    Yes, and I’d love for Kate Upton to be my wife. That ain’t happening either.

  • Boush

    Honestly I’m all for moving Ward, too. His value will never be higher, and you’re right, Wilson can fill his 3RW role. I’d slot Latta at 4C and move Beagle to 4RW, so you’d have Ovi-Fehr-Wilson-Beagle down the right side. You have to deal from a position of strength, and RW is the Caps’ now that they’ve flung goalies all over the league.

  • Jonah

    I do not think you completely understood my argument, and I get that I didn’t phrase it very cohesively.
    I think that Brouwer is as valuable now as he ever could be (trade for defense) and that our forward situation is fine as is without any big moves.
    And yes, weber, green, Ovi on a PP makes me feel very very excited. .

  • DashingDave314

    Only problem is I don’t want to tinker with the Green Line too much. IMO, when you strike gold with a line, you don’t break it up completely. You keep it together as much as you can while hoping that you can build that chemistry with the other 3 lines.