frontsfan67
Registered User
- Dec 3, 2022
- 2,915
- 1,658
Ottawa 67's 2023-2024 Off-Season Thread (Part 2)
- Thread starter nelli27
- Start date
-
HF Sportsbook has been reset for the new season - Click here to play.
- Status
lol there’s probably some truth to this Jack just doesn’t know anything yet.
We all know Macker has to go and I was thinking this season made a lot of sense to move Dever as I don’t see Ottawa bringing him back for his OA year.
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,800
- 7,649
There are a few challenging parts to this still. The obvious one is Nathan Day. He is a starter and only 19. If they trade for MacK, it means they don’t have faith in Day OR Day has requested a change.
The other issue is that Dever is projected to play a strong role for Ottawa this year. If they make that move, there really needs to be a body being returned and it would need to be one capable of playing centre or RW in a middle six role. Of course, Boyd could jsut do picks and then flip some picks elsewhere. Flint has a ton of 3rds and 4ths. Not many 2nds. I’m not sure what MacK’s value is. It would be high if the acquiring team truly feels confident that he is healthy. He is a capable game stealer and has proven to be that (when healthy). I jsut don’t see a lot of value there otherwise. IF they are bringing him in to platoon with Day, I don’t see value in it.
Why wouldn't Ottawa bring him back for an OA year? Good player and one of our better options imo. Asking because it's just not only you saying this and I don't get why he would not be a good OA option.
They believe in Nelson is the info i have got the past couple months so if they believe he is the guy then they need to do the right thing and flip Macker to get a return instead of having him sit on the bench as backup and losing him for nothing as an OA.
He can easily be a primary goalie on a hand full of teams.
flint doesn’t have 0a room for a back up goalie and Mack is a perfect 1/1a with Nelson. I do t think you’ll see this one move forward. Ottawa would move barlas before Dever
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,800
- 7,649
The only thing that gives me pause is the GM that is on the other side. HE made a couple head scratcher type trades at the deadline last year. Why would you flip your graduating OA’s and then flip almost the same amount of picks you received for other OA’s? He moved out Hayes and Kressler but brought in Mancini, Peer, and Ewles. The only reasonable answer is because he felt the fit was better. Considering that series of trades last deadline, he could be doing the same this year. He moves out Day for MacK because he is a better goalie and finds a landing spot for his 3rd OA to make roster space for MacK. It may be as simple as that. If there were one GM capable of making that series of trades, it is him. HE did it last deadline.
Flint did not flip a 19 yr old for an OA at the same position last season. The GM moved two OA Fs for an OA F & OA D, one of those moved had an off-season agreement that he would be sent home to a contending team if Flint could not contend.
That is why the wolves did not end up with Punnet, and made the VanVliet trade.
That is why the wolves did not end up with Punnet, and made the VanVliet trade.
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,800
- 7,649
If these rumours are true, regardless of whether this Flint trade were to happen, it seems rather obvious that Boyd is trying to clear the deck and open space for younger players. I think he sees the value in stockpiling draft picks and adding to the core of younger players. That is a good sign. HE may say one thing but he seems to be doing the other which is good.
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,800
- 7,649
I don’t think that matters much. The reality is if he were selling players, there was no reason to buy similar value same age players. He moved out Kressler and then acquired Peer at a higher cost than he received for Kressler. Although, the picks in the Peer deal were further out which would create an argument of value of picks.
If he is trading Hayes, even if it were based on an agreement in the pre-season, it doesn’t discount any agreement he may now have with Day or any other player. Or, he could quite simply feel MacK is a superior goalie and he wants superior goaltending and is willing to clear out an OA as well as his current starter to do it. There are viable explanations for it. I may not agree with the rationale he’d be giving but I can see the possibilities nonetheless.
The reality is, if MacK is healthy (questionable), he is a top 5 goalie. He does have the ability to win games by himself and proved it last year in the first half before his injury and is reflected in his stats line the previous season.
I’m not sure of his health status. He didn’t look very spry in Kingston but he seemed better in North Bay. If his groin is 100% and he is moving better and is back to normal, he is poised ofr a great season. I still question his durability though. I am not sure I would be leaning on him on a championship calibre team.
Flint was selling with the near future in mind while placing an importance on remaining somewhat competitive; there is nothing wrong with that.
The off-season agreement was with Giroux-Sudbury. I don’t think you can appreciate how some wolves fans felt about the Giroux(s) not being on their local club; or, the noise made by the Giroux booster club.
Papineau really had no other option.
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,800
- 7,649
That still doesn’t explain trading Kressler only to bring in Peer at a higher cost…all while also dealing Hayes to SSM. Seems mostly redundant OR a better fit. The Mancini addition falls into the category of better fit. If it was a better fit, my point is, he could look at the goaltending situation and feel MacK is a better option. End of story. Day being 19 and an NHL drafted goalie is meaningless if the GM doesn’t have faith in him or wants to upgrade. Whether or not MacK is an upgrade or not can be discussed but really it comes down to the GM making the decision.
If there are discussions then the option is on the table and both sides are having talks. That would suggest Flint is wanting to acquire the OA Goalie. Justification may be odd or difficult to understand but like I said, sometimes the GM’s operate at a different level than we do and they have reasons for what they are doing we aren’t privy to. There are always head scratcher deals made that wouldn’t be head scratchers if we had all the information.
There is really no way to explain the Flint side of a Day for MacKenzie and Dever trade, but It’s entirely possible that could be part of much larger deal; or, a three team trade. Maybe Boyd really does not like his young goalies so he is attempting a Day-MacKenzie exchange by offering Pinelli to Flint.
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,800
- 7,649
Day is a goaltender “prospect” that has middling to poor numbers but a big body. I can understand why an NHL team would roll the dice on him with a late round pick because of his frame but he has done nothing to inspire any confidence in being a starter that can win. An .868 Save% on a full season last year puts him 3rd last amongst qualified goalies last year. It is the same reason why Lalonde is a head scratcher for me with Kingston.
I think the 67’s acquiring Day because they aren’t happy with their goaltending and they are using Pinelli to solve it with Day seems absurd of we are speaking plainly. It seems a lot more likely that finishing 3rd last in save% amongst qualified goalies last year would lead to a GM looking for a better alternative, thus trying to upgrade in net. I know Day is an NHL draft pick but if we are bing real, he is at best a long shot prospect like any other big goalie that gets drafted late. MacKenzie finished 6th in Save% while battling through a groin injury for half his games. Even injured, MacKenzie outperformed Day handily.
Flint may not have been a great team but they weren’t putrid. They weren’t Niagara or Windsor. Even the previous year when they finished in the 4-5 slot, he had crap numbers. I cannot understand any sort of rationale that would suggest it would be Boyd pursuing Day and dangling Pinelli in an effort to acquire. That seems silly to an extreme. Maybe as silly as I have every heard.
I purposely made an attempt to be as absurd as you have been today.
Mackenzie might be ideal to provide Brampton insurance against injury, and able to nearly match career high starts by relieving Ivankovic for 25-30 games.
I just dont think this is good enough to use a OA spot on.
It's not like Jack's a leader in the room or anything like that he's a very quiet guy that keeps to himself.
frontsfan67
Registered User
- Dec 3, 2022
- 2,915
- 1,658
Sure there is.
Day is nowhere near as good as McKenzie. NHL drafted is irrelevant. Look at guys like Michael Simpson.
With Ottawa you get a starting goalie the next 2 years as an option while Nelson gets ready to take over, flint gets a good OA goalie that will be needed especially since the back end needs some help after losing Bertucci. If Nelson is great next year they can just flip day again for a couple picks and get a younger backup to Nelson
Dever is a bit better than Lombardi but yes Lombardi has way more potential obviously. Flint isn’t thinking much about their future with this deal. Just winning now. No brainer for Ottawa to accept- they’re not doing anything special this year anyways.
Apologies to OMG67; I was unnecessarily rude.
Um, Simpson played more games in 2022-23 than MacKenzie has in his OHL career.
If you’re trading Day for the sole purpose of making MacKenzie your starter; you’re not thinking straight. And throw in Lombardi for Dever so you can have a 4th line RW in place of Zurawski?!
Last edited:
What do you think the cost of Mackenzie would be just straight up to any team in the league who needed a goalie?
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,800
- 7,649
In all fairness, I have stated that I am not sure MacK has value specifically because of injury history. That is why I placed the caveat specifically on it being what Flint wants and values. If they see MacK as not being in the high risk of injury zone, then he does have significant value IF IF IF they have lost faith in Nathan Day. That is the scenario where it makes sense. I didn’t say it made sense from my perspective but that is where the logic would lie from Flint’s perspective.
I also stated it was likely a pipe dream to get Lombardi in that deal. But, if Ottawa wanted a centre, Lombardi would be the only viable option. Kostich would be a better fit from a value perspective. Ottawa could use the RW but still would prefer a Centre.
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,800
- 7,649
Here’s the problem with that question. Is he being used as a starter? Do they feel confident he won’t be an injury risk? If so, then I agree with @Petes1987. He’d be worth a 2nd and 5th.
If he was being used as a backup or safety net in case of injury, then that changes the price significantly. That then goes down to probably a 5th round pick.
If he were in a platoon situation then I think you look at the Lalonde trade this summer where it would be a 3rd and 7th.
To me, it only makes sense for Ottawa to trade MacK if he is going to be the #1 goalie. Why would he want to go be a backup somewhere? Or even be a platoon guy? He is a capable #1 goalie UNTIL he gets injured. If you have MacK as a healthy starter, he is a .910-.915 Save% guy on a solid team.
I still question his durability. He has had two out of three seasons where he was injured and missed considerable time. Even last year he came back but really wasn’t the same. You could see he was tentative with the groin.
- Status
