Senators News & Notes

dave cameron

Just after posting about there being no news in Sensland, Eugene Melnyk  dropped a few bombs.  Thoughts:
-I agree with Nichols (link above) that Melnyk threw Dave Cameron under the bus and that he’ll be gone at the end of the season; I can’t celebrate knowing Bryan Murray is likely the one replacing him, as Murray’s coaching selections have been between awful and incompetent
-Melnyk carried on the Sens tradition of making excuses for how the season turned out (blaming injuries)
-Nichols spends about forty paragraphs explaining why being a budget team hurts the Senators–it’s all good stuff, but just on the face of it the problems it creates are pretty obvious
-I’m not sure what “Well, not a lot of changes, but key changes” means, but again, who is making the changes is what’s important
-I partially agree with Nichols’ sentiment on how the Sens have drafted, although I’d add that they’ve traded away (or alienated) some of the better assets they’ve acquired, with a downward arc since losing Anders Forsberg and Tim Murray (the former, incidentally, works for the latter in Buffalo now)
-I’ll quote Nichols: “maybe if a team struggles to get on a significant winning streak, the talent level of that team isn’t very good?” Indeed!
-Melnyk understandably poopoos another rebuild, even though the team never truly went through that process
-Melnyk: “I’m looking at all of it [adding new voices]. It’s right across the board. There’s nobody safe when you have a year like we just did. There’s no way. The status quo will just us there again next year and this team cannot survive not making the playoffs. We have to do it by guts. We have to do it by hard work and we can get there.”  The “guts and hardwork” is meaningless patter and is usually used to justify the Mark Borowiecki‘s and Zack Stortini‘s of the world.  On the other hand, doing so would be the status quo–so who knows what Melnyk means here?  It doesn’t help that he added this:

Well, I’ve actually had a lot of experience in analytics when it comes to horse racing. In horse racing, it doesn’t work. I can tell you that. I spent a lot of money on it. In hockey, you defer to and it depends on who you talk to. It can work as a tool, but it’s only a small tool. It’s not even half the tool. It just tells you… a lot of statistics, you have to be into that, but a good, experienced hockey person like a Bryan Murray – of that vintage – they don’t need analytics. They can see it already. They’ve seen the play over and over and over again and they know how to fix things because they’ve been there and done that. It’s just another day in the office, so analytics are great. People should see it, but it’s not the beginning and the end. There’s no chance that it will make that big of a difference

This is incredibly stupid.  We all know what a false equivalency is, but putting that aside, Eugene simply demonstrates no understanding of analytics at all.  Zero.  Which does explain why Bryan Murray can bumble and stumble around with old-time-hockey cliches and get away with it (and also why the Sens will remain a bumbling organisation so long as he, or someone like him, is at the top).


Ary M explores at length the mismanagement of Matt Puempel as an asset, which is well worth reading, but no surprise to anyone who has followed the Sens the last few years.  Having finally become a top-AHL players he’s languished and stagnated in the NHL as Dave Cameron (like all of Murray’s coaching hires) prefers to dress less talented players.


Travis Yost looks at what drives coaches to reduce ice time and the answer (for both forwards and defense) is a decrease in offensive production.



There was an interesting piece posted recently that found that Francophone officials call more penalties on Anglophone players.


More free agent signings out of college, as Casey Nelson was signed by Buffalo and Tom Parisi by Montreal.

This article is written by Peter Levi (@eyeonthesens)



  1. Drafting has not gone south since departure of tim murray,and puemple has shown absolutely nothing. He’s lucky to have gotten as many games as he has.

    • Generally if you want to make points you want to back them with facts/information, yes? Just saying the moon is made of cheese doesn’t make it so.

  2. How is it possible for you to say that the drafting has degraded since Tim Murray left? He left in January of 2014. Only two drafts have taken place since then, so it is impossible to know that the drafting has decreased in quality. Chabot and White are excellent prospects. Francis Perron is intriguing. There are several other prospects who look interesting….which is no different than any other team at this point. To say otherwise is disingenuous, and it’s just another argument to fit your narrative.

    Proof works both ways, and you didn’t provide anything to say that the drafting has decreased. I looked at Buffalo’s draft picks the last two years, and for the number of high picks (ie. 4 2nd round picks) they’ve had they haven’t exactly set the world on fire. Eichel and Reinhart were no brainers.

    There are issues with management and ownership, but don’t make up things either.

    • I’m going to take you at face value and that you’re not simply trolling:
      1) I’m telling you what I think about the quality of Ottawa’s drafting–if you’ve read this blog consistently you are aware of what goes into that
      2) You’re making the argument that you can’t judge drafts too early…and then proceed to offer your own opinion about them–you can’t have it both ways, either you accept that you can make early judgments or you don’t–so either *no one* can offer early opinions on draft picks or anyone can, and in the latter case its the quality of the opinion that matters
      3) I didn’t delve into why I think what I think because I’m expressing a commonly shared opinion held by the scouting community; if you want to read nuanced opinions about how to assess drafts there are numerous posts on this site to better inform you
      4) Which dovetails into your final comment which is pretty silly and I’m sure in retrospect you’d rather have not included it

      • I’ve got better things to do with my time than troll…

        1) Your opinion and averaged out draft rankings
        2) So instead of defending Tim Murray’s draft record, you’re saying I can’t have it both ways. I listed 3 guys that are better than any of Buffalo’s prospects, because their top prospects (Eichel and Reinhart), were both no brainers and already playing in the league. Grant McCagg of McKeen’s gave Ottawa’s 2015 draft an A. I doubt Buffalo got an A plus, especially when they traded away picks for O’Reilly and Lehner, which would mean at best Buffalo’s draft would be a push. 2014 draft? I have no idea what the rankings were, but it’s easy to be lower ranked when you have no first round pick. Certainly not the “downward arc” hyperbole you’ve suggested, and haven’t backed up.
        3) Commonly shared opinion shared by the scouting community? Since when? THN future watch? That listing is based on players 21 and younger…I’ve never seen any other consensus of scout opinions…if you could point something out that would be greatly appreciated.
        4) I 100% stand behind my comments. You are downplaying the most recent drafts to fit your narrative. That’s your prerogative. Ultimately, it’s your blog, and you can say what you want. But don’t expect not to be called out on it when someone disagrees with you and your methodology.

      • So you are serious–let’s take a look, shall we:
        1) this is incomplete and redactive: I suggest you read up!
        2) I didn’t address this point originally because it’s so problematic, however:
        a) if you really want to compare Tim Murray’s draft record with his uncle’s you have to compare *all* of it (granted Tim has been drafting for his uncle most of his career)
        b) you don’t get to dismiss a draft pick because it’s early–the picks are the picks and you play the cards that you are dealt–if you think all early picks are easy let me direct you to Alexandre Daigle
        c) draft *rankings* are largely worthless–they might as well be emojis of peanut butter and jelly–there’s no criteria behind them
        3) You asked nicely but it’s after midnight and I’m too bloody tired to find the information for you–however, if you want to see what serious scouts think about a team’s drafting you shell out cash for things like ISS, RLR, etc; I don’t always agree with them, but it’s a good place to start (and if you want an assessment on scouting itself I’ve written a couple of pieces on how well they do); the opinion on Ottawa’s drafting is shared by the better bloggers in this city–if you want to have fun just read the back issues of The 6th Sens
        4) Saying I make things up is obviously insulting and I recommend you avoid that when you want an earnest debate (it’s why I thought you were trolling)–while I enjoy using hyperbole what I’ve said stands–you need a more persuasive argument than what you’re presented to change my mind, but as always, I’m open to new insights

  3. You know, levi,it’s just not worth communicating with you’re just an argumentative fuck who won’t tolerate any disagreement.

  4. […] Senators News & Notes […]

  5. […] After being traded to the Rangers Matt Puempel sounded off about the Sens coaching staff (not teaching skill and the double standard for skilled players).  This is self-serving on his part, but as it’s something we’ve heard over and over again from players when moved there’s something fundamentally wrong with how Ottawa handles its assets (I’ve discussed this before; about Puempel himself there’s this). […]

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.