Why the Senators Were Right to Move a Star Defenceman
One of the things I enjoy about reading other writers' work is that sometimes it sparks a completely different question. That happened when I read Dayton Reimer's recent piece for The Hockey Writers arguing that the Ottawa Senators were right to trade Jakob Chychrun, even after watching him blossom into a star with the Washington Capitals.
At first glance, that sounds like a difficult argument to make. Chychrun just put together a remarkable season, scoring 26 goals, posting 60 points, and earning himself a massive long-term contract. When a player leaves your organization and immediately takes another step forward, it usually leads to second-guessing.
Reimer hinted at what the Senators were working to do with their team.
But I think Reimer is pointing toward something bigger. The question isn’t whether Chychrun became a great player. The question is whether Ottawa became a better team. Those aren’t always the same thing.
For years, NHL teams often operated under the assumption that the goal was simply to collect as much talent as possible. If you could acquire another good player, you did it. Then you figured out the rest later. The modern NHL doesn’t really work that way.
The salary cap forces teams to think in terms of systems rather than collections of stars. That’s where Ottawa’s plan becomes interesting.
Related: 5 Things You Might Not Know About the Senators' Jason Spezza.
The Senators didn't need Chychrun to fill out their team.
The Senators already had Thomas Chabot. Jake Sanderson was emerging as one of the league’s best young defencemen. More puck-moving defencemen were coming through the pipeline. What Ottawa lacked wasn’t offence from the blue line. What they lacked was balance.
That’s why the acquisition of Nick Jensen made sense, even if it wasn’t nearly as exciting as keeping Chychrun. Jensen complemented Chabot. The Senators’ defence became more structured, and the roster became more balanced. Perhaps most importantly, Ottawa maintained the financial flexibility to keep Shane Pinto, who looks increasingly like a core piece of the franchise.
That’s the part fans often miss when evaluating trades. The question isn’t, “Who was the better player?” The question is, “Which decision helped build a better team?
Sometimes these calculated trades pay off, and sometimes they don't.
The Senators essentially decided they would rather have Sanderson, Chabot, Jensen, Pinto, and future flexibility than devote another $9 million per season to a third offensive-minded defenceman.
Reasonable people can disagree with that choice. But it was a choice. And that’s why I think Reimer’s argument is interesting. The Chychrun trade wasn’t really about Chychrun at all. It was about Ottawa deciding what kind of team it wanted to become.
The job of a successful NHL team is more than just collecting the best talent.
The best organizations don’t just acquire talent. They build systems. And right now, the Senators seem to have a plan. How that plan has changed with the trade of Brady Tkachuk is yet to be seen. But, in short, it’s just another fork in the road for a team that wants to build a contender.