Ottawa 67s 2024-25 Season Thread, Part I

[Mild Italian]

Yeah, I think that’s pretty inaccurate.

I had made a very strong case as to why Korbler is a waste of space. All but about 2 of his points were scored against teams finishing 8th or worse in their Conference. So, he only managed to score against the weak teams. The amount of ice time he got with the top line last year and he couldn’t even pick up a handful of secondary assists bs the middling and top teams speaks loudly of his ineffectiveness in the offensive zone at even strength. He simply had very few puck touches and wasn’t involved in the play.

Uronen was an NHL draft pick that was significantly bigger than the very small Korbler. He was also the 1st round Import pick. Those two factors alone create a significant differentiator.

To cap it off, any investment in Korbler requires the 67s to pass on their next Import pick which is likely to fall inside the top 20. It has been a while since Ottawa has picked inside the top 20. The last time they did they picked Rossi. With Ottawa’s strong connections in Europe, I am reasonably certain they will nail down a better player than Korbler with that pick. He’ll, Elbert was picked in the middle of the 1st and look what we got there vs a player picked a dozen or more spots higher.

On top of all that, if this were to turn out to be a rebuild year as predicted, trading Uronen at the deadline would be far more valuable than the offseason.

These are all the same arguments I made in the summer. To me, keeping Korbler over Utonen made no sense at all. I don’t think anyone can make an argument for keeping him. Not one solid point. The main one people point to is his age. He will be 19 next year. We won’t compete next year. Who cares? Even if it is a wash competitively between him as a 19 year old and the new 17 year old, it means our next competitive window will open with his replacement instead of a 19 year old Elbert coupled with an 18 year old 2025 pick.

Again, zero reason to keep Korbler over Uronen. So, unless Uronen demanded a trade (possible), there was no reason to make this poor of a

It was a player that didn't want to stay and picked his destination.

You forgot to mention, that Uronen or his agent wanted a trade to Kingston after he was told by the 67s the risk for them would be to high to keep him, since he has not played a game in 9 months. Uronen was cleared to play in July . Kingston did not take a risk, they had Piniemi and Chromiak already.
Looks a little different, once you know the facts.
Now you can continue to dump shit on a 17 year old kid.
Funny thing it is mostly comming from a guy, who does not attend homegames ,because a staffer was once mean to his wifi.

 

[OMG67]

You forgot to mention, that Uronen or his agent wanted a trade to Kingston after he was told by the 67s the risk for them would be to high to keep him, since he has not played a game in 9 months. Uronen was cleared to play in July . Kingston did not take a risk, they had Piniemi and Chromiak already.
Looks a little different, once you know the facts.
Now you can continue to dump shit on a 17 year old kid.
Funny thing it is mostly comming from a guy, who does not attend homegames ,because a staffer was once mean to his wifi.

Just so we are clear, I am dumping on Management for making the decision to keep a player clearly not capable of playing in a role he is not suited for. If you choose to look at it differently, so be it. But, we question decisions of Management all the time and that questioning falls on the players by default. Grow a pair or go home has always been my opinion. If you cannot take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. If a kid cannot take criticism (constructive or otherwise), he isn’t mentally prepared to play at a high level.

If what you are saying is true then it is in fact what I was discussing previously until @ScoutLife4 provided some context. This was a 67’s management decision to cut ties with the player. IF so, that is another reason to question the 67’s management. Clearly a piss poor decision.

Regarding the “incident,” it was a lot more than that. After 25 years of season tickets, it was disrespectful what they did. I can only control where I spend my $$$ and it won’t be with OSEG for any of their coffers. That is a decision I made a while back and I continue to stick to it. I still travel out of town to see games. I have no issues putting $$$ in the pockets of the opposing teams.

AND, for the record, I don’t say anything on here I wouldn’t feel comfortable saying to a person’s face in real life. Keep in mind that words on a screen can sometimes be taken somewhat out of context where talking in person can sometimes be more clear in a back and forth conversation. But I would have zero issues taking Boyd and DC to task over the number of players that have chosen to take their game elsewhere. I have zero issues questioning moves they have made. And, they are professional enough to stick up for themselves and state their positions. Same with players. Overall, I think I am very fair. I point to successes and failures. Even players I dislike, I highlight when they have a good game or if they are improving.

 

[beastintheeast]

Just so we are clear, I am dumping on Management for making the decision to keep a player clearly not capable of playing in a role he is not suited for. If you choose to look at it differently, so be it. But, we question decisions of Management all the time and that questioning falls on the players by default. Grow a pair or go home has always been my opinion. If you cannot take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. If a kid cannot take criticism (constructive or otherwise), he isn’t mentally prepared to play at a high level.

If what you are saying is true then it is in fact what I was discussing previously until @ScoutLife4 provided some context. This was a 67’s management decision to cut ties with the player. IF so, that is another reason to question the 67’s management. Clearly a piss poor decision.

Regarding the “incident,” it was a lot more than that. After 25 years of season tickets, it was disrespectful what they did. I can only control where I spend my $$$ and it won’t be with OSEG for any of their coffers. That is a decision I made a while back and I continue to stick to it. I still travel out of town to see games. I have no issues putting $$$ in the pockets of the opposing teams.

AND, for the record, I don’t say anything on here I wouldn’t feel comfortable saying to a person’s face in real life. Keep in mind that words on a screen can sometimes be taken somewhat out of context where talking in person can sometimes be more clear in a back and forth conversation. But I would have zero issues taking Boyd and DC to task over the number of players that have chosen to take their game elsewhere. I have zero issues questioning moves they have made. And, they are professional enough to stick up for themselves and state their positions. Same with players. Overall, I think I am very fair. I point to successes and failures. Even players I dislike, I highlight when they have a good game or if they are improving.

So just to be clear

you DON T LIKE KORBLER

I think you have to cut the kid some slack. It is hard to say if he is having a good year or if he is playing like we need to when he only played four games. Let's give him some time to get healthy and see what he does before we condemn him.

There are many reasons why you trade player A and not player B that we, as fans, are unaware of.

 

[OMG67]

So just to be clear

you DON T LIKE KORBLER

I think you have to cut the kid some slack. It is hard to say if he is having a good year or if he is playing like we need to when he only played four games. Let's give him some time to get healthy and see what he does before we condemn him.

There are many reasons why you trade player A and not player B that we, as fans, are unaware of.

It is not about liking a kid or not. It is about making an assessment as to whether Player “A” should be on the team. Strategically, it makes zero sense for Korbler to take a roster spot.

We only get two Imports. If we draft 17 year olds, which is fine, we then have to PASS on our Import pick every 3rd year. Korbler is 18. Ekberg is 17. If we keep Korbler, we have to PASS on our Import pick this next draft. We are likely to finish low in the standings. Maybe we finish middle of the pack like last year but even then we picked Ekberg. The 67’s have a solid network to draw from in Europe and the finances to make it happen.

There isn’t a viable argument to suggest keeping Korbler under those circumstances that makes sense. We have people on here constantly chirping about not developing players but this management and coaching unit are throwing ice time at a player that is highly unlikely to return next season.

If Korbler were a North American, it would be a completely different discussion. He would then get grouped in with all the other younger players as to where he deserves to play base don performance. But, he is not a North American.

Essentially, we only get to draft two players every three years in the Import draft. That is assuming we pick 17 year olds. Make it count! The only other option is to trade the player to give yourself a chance to make a pick. That is what we did this past summer. We traded Uronen so we could pick Ekberg. Next year, we are HIGHLY likely to either trade Korbler or release him so we can use our Import pick, especially since it is likley o be inside the 20th pick. That is Gold! We cannot let that slide. Rules don’t allow us to trade the pick so we use it or lose it.

If we want to use the pick next year then it would be better for us to have a 19 year old that organically graduates. If that 19 year old is likely better than the 18 year old (he was an NHL pick after all), then keep the 19 year old. To me, that is not rocket science.

Then factor in the team will be weak next year without a doubt because of the poor ‘07 class, you then want to use next year to develop the new Import so when we go into the next competitive window, we have two Imports running out every game playing key minutes in the 2026-27 season.

To me, this is roster management 101. I have no issues with Korbler playing 3rd/4th line minutes on this team. Compared to the other players, that’s about where he is. But, he is not a North American and you need to play a better strategic game when working with Imports and OAs roster spots.

 

[beastintheeast]

It is not about liking a kid or not. It is about making an assessment as to whether Player “A” should be on the team. Strategically, it makes zero sense for Korbler to take a roster spot.

We only get two Imports. If we draft 17 year olds, which is fine, we then have to PASS on our Import pick every 3rd year. Korbler is 18. Ekberg is 17. If we keep Korbler, we have to PASS on our Import pick this next draft. We are likely to finish low in the standings. Maybe we finish middle of the pack like last year but even then we picked Ekberg. The 67’s have a solid network to draw from in Europe and the finances to make it happen.

There isn’t a viable argument to suggest keeping Korbler under those circumstances that makes sense. We have people on here constantly chirping about not developing players but this management and coaching unit are throwing ice time at a player that is highly unlikely to return next season.

If Korbler were a North American, it would be a completely different discussion. He would then get grouped in with all the other younger players as to where he deserves to play base don performance. But, he is not a North American.

Essentially, we only get to draft two players every three years in the Import draft. That is assuming we pick 17 year olds. Make it count! The only other option is to trade the player to give yourself a chance to make a pick. That is what we did this past summer. We traded Uronen so we could pick Ekberg. Next year, we are HIGHLY likely to either trade Korbler or release him so we can use our Import pick, especially since it is likley o be inside the 20th pick. That is Gold! We cannot let that slide. Rules don’t allow us to trade the pick so we use it or lose it.

If we want to use the pick next year then it would be better for us to have a 19 year old that organically graduates. If that 19 year old is likely better than the 18 year old (he was an NHL pick after all), then keep the 19 year old. To me, that is not rocket science.

Then factor in the team will be weak next year without a doubt because of the poor ‘07 class, you then want to use next year to develop the new Import so when we go into the next competitive window, we have two Imports running out every game playing key minutes in the 2026-27 season.

To me, this is roster management 101. I have no issues with Korbler playing 3rd/4th line minutes on this team. Compared to the other players, that’s about where he is. But, he is not a North American and you need to play a better strategic game when working with Imports and OAs roster spots.

You do accept that there is an alternate management 101. That says that there may be something we are not seeing and that injury has held him back this year. That he may bring something once he is healed.

You have one thought my thought is that he may be a good player and play the way DC wants him to. Uronen had a chance to lay with his friend Pie and took it.

You are talking as if Boyd had a choice. We do not and probably will not know if he did or did not. There is the possibility that Uronen said he would not be back in Ottawa. We simply do not know.
What we do know is tht if he does not work out this year then he can either be traded or released.

Like the rest of the rookies, let's give him a break and see what he does when he gets back.

 

[OMG67]

You do accept that there is an alternate management 101. That says that there may be something we are not seeing and that injury has held him back this year. That he may bring something once he is healed.

You have one thought my thought is that he may be a good player and play the way DC wants him to. Uronen had a chance to lay with his friend Pie and took it.

You are talking as if Boyd had a choice. We do not and probably will not know if he did or did not. There is the possibility that Uronen said he would not be back in Ottawa. We simply do not know.
What we do know is tht if he does not work out this year then he can either be traded or released.

Like the rest of the rookies, let's give him a break and see what he does when he gets back.

That’s fine. Then release or trade him at the end of the season and use the draft pick. There is no scenario that makes sense to keep him.

Keep running him out on the first line and give Amidovski 3 minutes per game and complain some more about bad development strategies. I’m actually giving you an example of horrendous development strategy and you are oblivious and coming up with lame excuses of if this and maybe that. If my Grandmother had wheels, she’d be a bicycle.

As mentioned previously, he scores virtually no points as a 17 year old against teams not above 8th place in the conference. That is while playing mostly on top lines much of the 2nd half of the season and playoffs. He looked lost to start the season, again on the top line.

If there was an external reason to move Uronen that was beyond their control, so be it. No lroblem. He’s just another player on a growing list of players that don’t want to be here.

If they knew that and didn’t think they could draft a player in round 2 that is better then fine. Keep him. But understand that it is 95% likely he is done after this season for all the reasons I have listed. Sinking resources into him isn’t ideal when resources are finite and the resources he takes up come at the expense of developing other players. As long as we understand that, I am fine with it.

 

[beastintheeast]

That’s fine. Then release or trade him at the end of the season and use the draft pick. There is no scenario that makes sense to keep him.

Keep running him out on the first line and give Amidovski 3 minutes per game and complain some more about bad development strategies. I’m actually giving you an example of horrendous development strategy and you are oblivious and coming up with lame excuses of if this and maybe that. If my Grandmother had wheels, she’d be a bicycle.

As mentioned previously, he scores virtually no points as a 17 year old against teams not above 8th place in the conference. That is while playing mostly on top lines much of the 2nd half of the season and playoffs. He looked lost to start the season, again on the top line.

If there was an external reason to move Uronen that was beyond their control, so be it. No lroblem. He’s just another player on a growing list of players that don’t want to be here.

If they knew that and didn’t think they could draft a player in round 2 that is better then fine. Keep him. But understand that it is 95% likely he is done after this season for all the reasons I have listed. Sinking resources into him isn’t ideal when resources are finite and the resources he takes up come at the expense of developing other players. As long as we understand that, I am fine with it.

LOL, you almost sound as negative as another person that is on here was and got called out for it.

What we have is what we have. Just as people have told me to give Camneron a chance to show what he can do I would sugest leaving Korbler alone and letting him show us what he can do once he is healthy.
AGAIN it is almost impossible to judge a player that is not playing as good or bad.

 

[OMG67]

LOL, you almost sound as negative as another person that is on here was and got called out for it.

What we have is what we have. Just as people have told me to give Camneron a chance to show what he can do I would sugest leaving Korbler alone and letting him show us what he can do once he is healthy.
AGAIN it is almost impossible to judge a player that is not playing as good or bad.

It is not being negative. It is strategy assessment. It is also not directly about the player. We need to strategically deploy Imports and Overage players differently than the rest of the players because there is a finite number of roster spots assigned to those two categories.

For example, we can be as patient as we want with a kid like Kelly (same age). If we want to replace him, we have loads of annual draft picks to recruit players and replace him. Healthy competition works its way out to determine who plays and who doesn’t. We don’t have that same luxury with Imports and OA’s. If we may a mistake on an Import, we don’t have the luxury of dipping into our prospect pool and replacing him.

Korbler is a decent defensive player that skates well and isn’t all that bad. He isn’t very gifted offensively but that is not the point. The point is “can we draft a better player next year?” Actually, the first question is whether the Ottawa management chose Korbler over Uronen. I question that for sure. And to be honest, it should be questioned! But, assuming he wanted out and it wasn’t Ottawa making the decision for him, Yes, we can draft a better player.

I actually look at this as a positive situation in some respects. I am actually suggesting that Ottawa has developed a strong network in Europe. They’ve been very successful at drafting in the first round of the Import Draft. That is why I am so confident they will do well in the next draft, especially if they pick top 20. We should not be passing on the draft pick:
2024: Ekberg (33)
2023: Uronen (57)
2022: Kasper (20)
2021: Rohrer (27)
2020: Gaidamak (57)
2019: PASS
2018: Rossi (18)
2017: Okhotyuk (16)

Of course, Uronen was injured (almost has more points so far this year than Korbler last year) and Kasper wasn’t assigned to Ottawa (the Sens sort of screwed us when they traded their 1st in the Debrincat trade). Outside of that, all those players are better than Korbler. Well, Uronen and Kasper are clearly better players but what I mean is they didn’t perform WITH the 67s.

You can look at it as negative but I look at it positive. We are very likely capable of drafting and getting a player to report that will have a higher impact for this organization than Korbler. That’s the whole point.

 

[beastintheeast]

It is not being negative. It is strategy assessment. It is also not directly about the player. We need to strategically deploy Imports and Overage players differently than the rest of the players because there is a finite number of roster spots assigned to those two categories.

For example, we can be as patient as we want with a kid like Kelly (same age). If we want to replace him, we have loads of annual draft picks to recruit players and replace him. Healthy competition works its way out to determine who plays and who doesn’t. We don’t have that same luxury with Imports and OA’s. If we may a mistake on an Import, we don’t have the luxury of dipping into our prospect pool and replacing him.

Korbler is a decent defensive player that skates well and isn’t all that bad. He isn’t very gifted offensively but that is not the point. The point is “can we draft a better player next year?” Actually, the first question is whether the Ottawa management chose Korbler over Uronen. I question that for sure. And to be honest, it should be questioned! But, assuming he wanted out and it wasn’t Ottawa making the decision for him, Yes, we can draft a better player.

I actually look at this as a positive situation in some respects. I am actually suggesting that Ottawa has developed a strong network in Europe. They’ve been very successful at drafting in the first round of the Import Draft. That is why I am so confident they will do well in the next draft, especially if they pick top 20. We should not be passing on the draft pick:
2024: Ekberg (33)
2023: Uronen (57)
2022: Kasper (20)
2021: Rohrer (27)
2020: Gaidamak (57)
2019: PASS
2018: Rossi (18)
2017: Okhotyuk (16)

Of course, Uronen was injured (almost has more points so far this year than Korbler last year) and Kasper wasn’t assigned to Ottawa (the Sens sort of screwed us when they traded their 1st in the Debrincat trade). Outside of that, all those players are better than Korbler. Well, Uronen and Kasper are clearly better players but what I mean is they didn’t perform WITH the 67s.

You can look at it as negative but I look at it positive. We are very likely capable of drafting and getting a player to report that will have a higher impact for this organization than Korbler. That’s the whole point.

My point is that everything you are saying may be correct. The difference is that there is nothing this team can do at this stage. We have the players we have. Would we have rather gone into this year with two rookie Euros? I think keeping Korbler and developing him is the right approach for this year. Again, you do not need a team of rookies.

If, at the end of the season, it is a case that he has not developed the way they want or they see another shiny apple in Europe, then they can trade or release him.

We still do not know what he has in the tank this year because we have not seen him play this year.

My point is give the kid a chance and let him play. at the end of the year, he can always be traded to open up the spot if something shiny comes along.

 

[OMG67]

My point is that everything you are saying may be correct. The difference is that there is nothing this team can do at this stage. We have the players we have. Would we have rather gone into this year with two rookie Euros? I think keeping Korbler and developing him is the right approach for this year. Again, you do not need a team of rookies.

If, at the end of the season, it is a case that he has not developed the way they want or they see another shiny apple in Europe, then they can trade or release him.

We still do not know what he has in the tank this year because we have not seen him play this year.

My point is give the kid a chance and let him play. at the end of the year, he can always be traded to open up the spot if something shiny comes along.

Understood but if he gets inserted back beside Foster and Pinelli again, I think I might lose my mind….if I already haven’t.

 

[beastintheeast]

Understood but if he gets inserted back beside Foster and Pinelli again, I think I might lose my mind….if I already haven’t.

Ekberg Dever and Korbler would be okay though ????????/.

 

[OMG67]

Ekberg Dever and Korbler would be okay though ????????/.

Depends on the OA situation.

I think he 67’s have four forwards plus either one or two OA forwards. Then there is Whitehead. After that, it is a lot of development types. If there are two OA’s, I think the plan would be to load up two lines and try to score. Not necessarily my focus but the only real reason to keep two OA forwards would be for that purpose.

It also depends on what they do with Pinelli.

Like you said, the Import ship has sailed. I am not suggesting they make an alternate plan to replace Korbler. I stated they made the wrong decision and going forward, developing Korbler “at the expense of” a returning player is poor asset management.

 

[beastintheeast]

We know that they have to keep Mayich.

Now the question is if they do not get a good deal for Stonehouse, who do you keep, and who do you waive?

A lot depends on who they make available on the market.

 

[Hinterland]

Understood but if he gets inserted back beside Foster and Pinelli again, I think I might lose my mind….if I already haven’t.

The thing is that the team's record with Körbler is better than the team's record without him. Also, the topline has been more fun to watch without Körbler but it hasn't been more efficient because it became more of a liability. I think you need someone on that line to do the hard work along the boards/in the slot and cover for Pinelli. That doesn't have to be Körbler but I'm not a fan of the current topline either.

Which is why I still want to see:

Pinelli, Ekberg, Kelly
Foster, Dever, Körbler

 

[beastintheeast]

The thing is that the team's record with Körbler is better than the team's record without him. Also, the topline has been more fun to watch without Körbler but it hasn't been more efficient because it became more of a liability. I think you need someone on that line to do the hard work along the boards/in the slot and cover for Pinelli. That doesn't have to be Körbler but I'm not a fan of the current topline either.

Which is why I still want to see:

Pinelli, Ekberg, Kelly
Foster, Dever, Körbler

Looking at everything, I have a feeling that Ekberg is being slotted as an LW rather than a center.

Pinelli Dever Stonehouse
Ekberg Barlas Foster
Yanni Whitehead Korbler
HOuben Amidovski Horner/Kelly
Perrier player, we may get for Mews or Pinelli
Horner may have to be moved back to defence as at least the number 7 D man
We trade Pinelli everyone on the LW moves up

 

[Hinterland]

Looking at everything, I have a feeling that Ekberg is being slotted as an LW rather than a center.

Pinelli Dever Stonehouse
Ekberg Barlas Foster
Yanni Whitehead Korbler
HOuben Amidovski Horner/Kelly
Perrier player, we may get for Mews or Pinelli
Horner may have to be moved back to defence as at least the number 7 D man
We trade Pinelli everyone on the LW moves up

Ekberg is by far the best playmaker of this team...he should be playing Center. Barlas is an offensive blackhole. Game after game we see plays die on his stick. He shouldn't play Center.

 

[OMG67]

The thing is that the team's record with Körbler is better than the team's record without him. Also, the topline has been more fun to watch without Körbler but it hasn't been more efficient because it became more of a liability. I think you need someone on that line to do the hard work along the boards/in the slot and cover for Pinelli. That doesn't have to be Körbler but I'm not a fan of the current topline either.

Which is why I still want to see:

Pinelli, Ekberg, Kelly
Foster, Dever, Körbler

There are two separate conversations regarding Korbler. The first is basically just a comment that we should have kept Uronen. That stands on its own merit. Management made a poor decision. The only caveat to that is whether Uronen woudl only return to the OHL if traded by Ottawa. IF that is the case then technically there is nothing Ottawa could do under that circumstance and sure, I get that. That then contributes to the discussion surrounding the growing list of players that don’t’ want to play in Ottawa which is starting to get a little deep for my liking.

The second conversation regarding Korbler is that he is here and how do we handle him going forward. IMO, he needs to be considered a graduating player. I think it is very unlikely he returns. I. Cannot see a viable scenario where Boyd passes on a very early Import pick to retain Korber. That would be like forfeiting a 2nd round pick in next year’s Priority selection to retain Caden Kelly. It would be absurd.

So, how do we handle Korbler? It depends on what the goal is. IF the goal is to win games at the cost of developing younger players (which is fine when we are trying to compete for a Championship), then you slot the best players in positions you feel are best to win games. The end. If the goal is to shift focus onto future season success, you then use your graduating players as tools to help develop younger players. There are many combinations that can be used to facilitate that strategy; however, in the 2nd half of the season when the rookies start to turn up the heat and typically start to contribute at a higher level, we need to ensure the ones that do show they are ready for a bigger level of responsibility get that added responsibility. We need to ensure graduating players are not blocking the returning players ice time. Of course, that doesn’t’ mean graduating players take a back seat but it does mean the primary focus is on returning players, not winning. As such, Korbler needs to be used as a developer tool, not a developing player. He will graduate. So, any discussion regarding the deployment of Korbler related to “give him some premium ice and see if he develops and contributes” should not really be on the table. At best, he should get ice that is relative to his current level of contribution because he is a graduating player. If his further development comes at the expense of a returning player, it is a poor distribution of resources.

 

[OMG67]

Ekberg is by far the best playmaker of this team...he should be playing Center. Barlas is an offensive blackhole. Game after game we see plays die on his stick. He shouldn't play Center.

100%.

Barlas isn’t a useless player. He is a very capable Winger. The issue is we are void of centres and we have a massive over abundance of LW. So, Barlas becomes a player in the same boat as Korbler. He’s a graduating player so he should get used to fill gaps. If the gap is at centre on the 3rd line then so be it. He plays centre on the 3rd line.

I think once we get through the trade deadline, we will hopefully add an ‘07 centre. It will be helpful. We’d then have Whitehead and the new ‘07 centre.

I fully agree without a doubt that Ekberg needs to start taking shifts at centre. I am not sure who his wingers should be. If we keep Stonehouse, I think he may be the best candidate for him to play with. Maybe throw Korbler on his right side? Like you said, Korbler can dig out pucks and play the defensive minded game to help protect that line and give Ekberg a little space? In the absence of Stonehouse, maybe Gerrior but the issue I have with that is then you’d have three smaller players and I am not sure that works well.

I think Stonehouse - Ekberg - Korbler as a 2nd line may be the way to go?

Then you form the Foster - Whitehead - Dever line?

This is assuming you trade Pinelli a the deadline.

Still too many variable at play right now to really get any sense of what the lineup should look like post-deadline. They could go out there and trade Mews for Musty and this is a completely different conversation entirely. Who knows what will happen.

 

[beastintheeast]

100%.

Barlas isn’t a useless player. He is a very capable Winger. The issue is we are void of centres and we have a massive over abundance of LW. So, Barlas becomes a player in the same boat as Korbler. He’s a graduating player so he should get used to fill gaps. If the gap is at centre on the 3rd line then so be it. He plays centre on the 3rd line.

I think once we get through the trade deadline, we will hopefully add an ‘07 centre. It will be helpful. We’d then have Whitehead and the new ‘07 centre.

I fully agree without a doubt that Ekberg needs to start taking shifts at centre. I am not sure who his wingers should be. If we keep Stonehouse, I think he may be the best candidate for him to play with. Maybe throw Korbler on his right side? Like you said, Korbler can dig out pucks and play the defensive minded game to help protect that line and give Ekberg a little space? In the absence of Stonehouse, maybe Gerrior but the issue I have with that is then you’d have three smaller players and I am not sure that works well.

I think Stonehouse - Ekberg - Korbler as a 2nd line may be the way to go?

Then you form the Foster - Whitehead - Dever line?

This is assuming you trade Pinelli a the deadline.

As it is my lines that were discuused I thought I would answer.

@OMG67 made my point for me if you look at the centers tht ahve been used this year they are
Dever
Foster
Barlas
Whitehead

Ekberg might in a year be a center but I think right now he is getting used to the ice as well asl N.A. style hockey.

This is the kid's draft year, and he is highly rated as an LW, so it may be a case of leaving him there this year.

Barlas is strange. While yes he seems to have challenges, he is still one of the best faceoff people on the team . I know that is not great, but hey, it is what it is.

As to Stonehouse I would rather see him on RW we have enough LW now even if we trade Pinelli.

As to getting an 07 center We all know that that is a crap shoot it isn ot guaranteed what a team is going to be willing to give up in a trade.

Still too many variable at play right now to really get any sense of what the lineup should look like post-deadline.

They could go out there and trade Mews for Musty and this is a completely different conversation entirely. Who knows what will happen.

@OMG67 I think we need to get the Lye soap out and wash your mouth for saying such nasty things.

REMEMBER DON'T FEED THE MONKEYS

WELL DON'T FEED BOYD

Seems that we may be jumping the gun

 

[OMG67]

As it is my lines that were discuused I thought I would answer.

@OMG67 made my point for me if you look at the centers tht ahve been used this year they are
Dever
Foster
Barlas
Whitehead

Ekberg might in a year be a center but I think right now he is getting used to the ice as well asl N.A. style hockey.

This is the kid's draft year, and he is highly rated as an LW, so it may be a case of leaving him there this year.

Barlas is strange. While yes he seems to have challenges, he is still one of the best faceoff people on the team . I know that is not great, but hey, it is what it is.

As to Stonehouse I would rather see him on RW we have enough LW now even if we trade Pinelli.

As to getting an 07 center We all know that that is a crap shoot it isn ot guaranteed what a team is going to be willing to give up in a trade.




@OMG67 I think we need to get the Lye soap out and wash your mouth for saying such nasty things.

REMEMBER DON'T FEED THE MONKEYS

WELL DON'T FEED BOYD

Seems that we may be jumping the gun

Stonehouse is parked there while injured. Once he comes off injury (expected Nov 1 or earlier), the Oilers will need to make a decision as to where to reassign him. If the intention was to reassign him to Bakersfield, he’d be working out with Bakersfield. He’d be practising with them. As it stands, he is with the 67’s so it stands to reason why the expectation is he would be reassigned to the 67’s. It makes no sense for the Oilers to send him to Ottawa to rehab and practise with the Junior team if they intend on tuning him pro.

With respect tto the Musty - Mews deal, I am not “feeding” anything. It is jsut another potential option that could be out there. If Boyd and DC want to compete this year and feel this team has merit, then we could potentially see a deal like that. I don’t want to see a deal like that but it is possible which points to my assessment that there are too many variables for us to really nail down a post-deadline lineup.

 

[beastintheeast]

Stonehouse is parked there while injured. Once he comes off injury (expected Nov 1 or earlier), the Oilers will need to make a decision as to where to reassign him. If the intention was to reassign him to Bakersfield, he’d be working out with Bakersfield. He’d be practising with them. As it stands, he is with the 67’s so it stands to reason why the expectation is he would be reassigned to the 67’s. It makes no sense for the Oilers to send him to Ottawa to rehab and practise with the Junior team if they intend on tuning him pro.

With respect tto the Musty - Mews deal, I am not “feeding” anything. It is jsut another potential option that could be out there. If Boyd and DC want to compete this year and feel this team has merit, then we could potentially see a deal like that. I don’t want to see a deal like that but it is possible which points to my assessment that there are too many variables for us to really nail down a post-deadline lineup.

Yeah it is unknown. The question is, what are they doing? Financially it is cheaper to put him in Ottawa because if they put him in Bakersfield they need to provide money for rent and such.

This way they can let him sit in Ottawa see probably the same specialist the Sens use and then make a decision. I just thought it was interesting.

As to Musty the last thing we want to give Boyud is any ideas. This team is not a competing team and they should not even think about it.

 

[OMG67]

Yeah it is unknown. The question is, what are they doing? Financially it is cheaper to put him in Ottawa because if they put him in Bakersfield they need to provide money for rent and such.

This way they can let him sit in Ottawa see probably the same specialist the Sens use and then make a decision. I just thought it was interesting.

As to Musty the last thing we want to give Boyud is any ideas. This team is not a competing team and they should not even think about it.

I’m sure Boyd is scouring the Internet message boards right now in hopes of finding the information he needs to make decisions….

I don’t think the Oilers are worried about “rent and such” when it comes to player development when they signed him for >$450k over three years in guaranteed $$$$. Even setting him up in a short term furnished apartment with a per diem would be around $5k for the month. If that breaks the bank for Edmonton as a Salary Cap Ceiling team, I wouldn’t know what to say…..

 

[beastintheeast]

I’m sure Boyd is scouring the Internet message boards right now in hopes of finding the information he needs to make decisions….

I don’t think the Oilers are worried about “rent and such” when it comes to player development when they signed him for >$450k over three years in guaranteed $$$$. Even setting him up in a short term furnished apartment with a per diem would be around $5k for the month. If that breaks the bank for Edmonton as a Salary Cap Ceiling team, I wouldn’t know what to say…..

No but if he plays in the AHL does it not enact his contract

 

[OMG67]

No but if he plays in the AHL does it not enact his contract

He is not eligible for an Entry-Level slide now that he is an OA. Honestly, I am not sure what happens if they are returned to junior. They do not collect their pro $$$. But, if they play 10 games (even in the AHL), I am not sure if he then collects his pro money even if returned to the OHL. I assume he only collects on his pro contract when he is playing pro and he would not collect his salary when playing junior. I think if he plays in Ottawa the entire season, he has his first year effectively deleted from his contract leaving the final two years plus the three signing bonus years as his minimum payout.

I think the conversation is moot. He is sitting in Ottawa skating with the 67’s. IF there were any intention of him starting the year in Bakersfield, he’d be practising in Bakersfield, not his junior team. NHL teams typically wouldn’t send their players to junior teams for rehab assignments.

 

[44 95 plus tax]

I think in a typical, cyclical junior hockey world, year 1 rebuild, year 2 retool, year 3 compete for home ice playoff, year 4 compete for winning it all. or some version of that. Years 1 and 2 sell off big, year three small sell off/buy, year 4 all in.

Well, not typical in Ottawa, I guess.

Seeing the roster that we have now, I can't see Ottawa competing for home play off in a couple of years, nor competing for winning it all in 3-4 years.

Bad drafting, bad asset management, suspect coaching decisions.

I said back when it was rumoured we would be in on Mintukov and Morrison, that we had the team to go for it, and if they didn't buy big, I would be disappointed. They didn't do enough, in my mind. I could have livid with the rebuild the next year.