Ottawa 67s 2024-25 Season Thread, Part I

[OMG67]

What I would like to see is Whitehead nail down the #3 centre role this year but keep some of the older players so Whitehead has either a strong veteran winger beside him or one fo the stud rookies like Amidovski. I don’t want to see him play 3C with depth rookies that won’t help his development.

From my perspective, that is the key. Keep enough of the good older players so the KEY rookies will develop.

 

[OMG67]

But when you have stock on your shelves that is not selling or producing income, you lower the price and sell it to make room for other stock.

The challenge is that they are not doing that. Hence things look bleak, and you are moving to an area where you are not going to be weak for a year but weak for a longer period.

The bottom line is that Boyd needs to make some deals and get rid of some of this year's products. Three of them have passed their best-used-before date, and he has four more that are rapidly approaching that date.

But you still need quality players for the rookies to play with so they can develop on a better curve. Again, I don’t want to see rookies out there chasing pucks all game. I want to see them handling it and forcing plays.

If we trade Pinelli, we have Barlas, Foster, Gerrior, and potentially Stonehouse as veteran wingers. I’d rather see Whitehead play with Amidovski and Barlas because Whitehead is a KEY rookie that we will rely on next season to make a jump forward. If we move Barlas, Pinelli , and Foster to make room for the rookies, the rookies will only play with the other rookies in high leverage situations. That is not a good development track. Either the rookies play with other rookies in low leverage positions or you speckle the rookies in with the veterans in high leverage situations. Our lineup is poised to allow for that type of development track. You cannot develop 8 rookies (or rookie 2nd year players) all at once by throwing excessive ice time at them without being properly insulated.

 

[Hinterland]

What I would like to see is Whitehead nail down the #3 centre role this year but keep some of the older players so Whitehead has either a strong veteran winger beside him or one fo the stud rookies like Amidovski. I don’t want to see him play 3C with depth rookies that won’t help his development.

From my perspective, that is the key. Keep enough of the good older players so the KEY rookies will develop.

I agree with this 100%. However, Barlas is not a "good" older player, he's the worst of them...at least among forwards all others have more impact. Barlas doesn't fill a need either because he's just another lefty winger or depth Center...of which the 67's have plenty. I agree they have to keep enough good player to develop the kids but Barlas is really just blocking the kids and would be better of playing on a contender.

 

[OMG67]

I agree with this 100%. However, Barlas is not a "good" older player, he's the worst of them...at least among forwards all others have more impact. Barlas doesn't fill a need either because he's just another lefty winger or depth Center...of which the 67's have plenty. I agree they have to keep enough good player to develop the kids but Barlas is really just blocking the kids and would be better of playing on a contender.

I think Pinelli is done at the deadline. When he’s gone, that leaves them with Foster and one of Gerrior or Stonehouse. Who is the next best winger? Between Barlas, Korbler, Kelly, Amidovski, Horner, Yanni, and Houben, are any of them clearly ahead of the other? Two of that group will play 2nd line. The next two play 3rs line with Whitehead.

If you take Barlas out of that group, it is likely Korbler and Amidovski are the next best. That leaves Houben and Yanni with Whitehead? Maybe Horner? I’m not sure that moves the needle on Whiteheads development.

I’d rather see them move Kelly than Barlas. Same with Korbler. Open the Import slot for an early pick next year. From a strategy perspective, Barlas has shown wayyyyy more than Kelly.

 

[beastintheeast]

But you still need quality players for the rookies to play with so they can develop on a better curve. Again, I don’t want to see rookies out there chasing pucks all game. I want to see them handling it and forcing plays.

If we trade Pinelli, we have Barlas, Foster, Gerrior, and potentially Stonehouse as veteran wingers. I’d rather see Whitehead play with Amidovski and Barlas because Whitehead is a KEY rookie that we will rely on next season to make a jump forward. If we move Barlas, Pinelli , and Foster to make room for the rookies, the rookies will only play with the other rookies in high leverage situations. That is not a good development track. Either the rookies play with other rookies in low leverage positions or you speckle the rookies in with the veterans in high leverage situations. Our lineup is poised to allow for that type of development track. You cannot develop 8 rookies (or rookie 2nd year players) all at once by throwing excessive ice time at them without being properly insulated.

You keep missing my point. I am not saying we should trade away all the older players. What I am saying is that we need to cull the herd. Pinellie or Foster would be my choices to trade. However, I would look at waiting until the deadline unless we can get a young 17-year-old center in a deal.

Barlas has a place on this team just as Cam Tolnai and Tuden and Gustafson did. They can be the helpers in developing players as you suggest. BUT the organization has to want to develop and play these players.

Putting Yanni with Dever is another spot that we could look at this year It gives us as you said a senior player to assist them.

Ekberg would benefit from playing with Pinelli and Foster on his wings as they would force him to look at this ofence but, more importantly, his defensive playing, Where he is lacking according to scouts.

But putting together a line of Dever Barlas and Gerrior and playing them 20 minutes a game while playing a line of Pinelli Ekberg and Foster playing 25 minutes a game leaving the young kids to run around with no one helping or caring for the scraps that are left is not the answer.

I know how people feel about Sirman, Gerrior, and Stonehouse, but in order to make things work now, I think we have to release two of these players. Stonehouse, we could do a conditional 8th-round pick. Unfortunately, no matter what happens, I do not see a place for Sirman or Gerrior on a trade. So, to me, holding them until it is too late to play anywhere else is not fair to them.

He's a good coach, and you and I, @OMG67, have seen a few of his young players on the ice. He lets them make mistakes early in the season but corrects them as they happen and during practice. He trains them on what he expects of them and then gives them the ability to out and do it.

If they are skating around the ice looking stupid, that is not the players fault. That is the coach's.

 

[beastintheeast]

I think Pinelli is done at the deadline. When he’s gone, that leaves them with Foster and one of Gerrior or Stonehouse. Who is the next best winger? Between Barlas, Korbler, Kelly, Amidovski, Horner, Yanni, and Houben, are any of them clearly ahead of the other? Two of that group will play 2nd line. The next two play 3rs line with Whitehead.

If you take Barlas out of that group, it is likely Korbler and Amidovski are the next best. That leaves Houben and Yanni with Whitehead? Maybe Horner? I’m not sure that moves the needle on Whiteheads development.

I’d rather see them move Kelly than Barlas. Same with Korbler. Open the Import slot for an early pick next year. From a strategy perspective, Barlas has shown wayyyyy more than Kelly.

Barlas is to me untradeable. His skill level, as well as the uni package, are going to make it almost impossible to trade or waive him.

I agree that kelly would be a better person to trade BUT again who is going to want him?

That is teh challenge this is a team that is made up of players that no one wants. Yes we have Pinelli and someone will come knocking but is there a palce for Foster on another team NOt sure


Is Stonehouse coming back again? I'm not sure. If he is, should he not be traded for the meagre picks we could get?

No one wants Gerrior. He just does not have the upside that would make a team want to release one of their OAs to get him.

We can play with what we have. The challenge is to move some of the younger players up the chart and move some of the older players down.

I would move Ekberg up to first line there is more of an upside for him at center than there is Dever

Move Dever to 2nd line but put Yanni on his wing with Korbler

Move whitehead to 3rd line with Gerrior and Horner

Give Amidovski Houben minutes in games that develop them and play Barlas with them.

As to Stonehouse do a conditional trade to open the slot

 

[Hinterland]

I think Pinelli is done at the deadline. When he’s gone, that leaves them with Foster and one of Gerrior or Stonehouse. Who is the next best winger? Between Barlas, Korbler, Kelly, Amidovski, Horner, Yanni, and Houben, are any of them clearly ahead of the other? Two of that group will play 2nd line. The next two play 3rs line with Whitehead.

If you take Barlas out of that group, it is likely Korbler and Amidovski are the next best. That leaves Houben and Yanni with Whitehead? Maybe Horner? I’m not sure that moves the needle on Whiteheads development.

I’d rather see them move Kelly than Barlas. Same with Korbler. Open the Import slot for an early pick next year. From a strategy perspective, Barlas has shown wayyyyy more than Kelly.

Again, Barlas doesn't fit the timeline. When you're retooling in order to then quickly go for it again then you gotta develop and keep the younger players, not Barlas who's two handfuls away from being an overager this season already. Körbler and Kelly may not have done much offensively but unlike Barlas they do seem have the tools. But mainly, what they have more of is time. They have one more year in the league which is valuable for a team not able to win right now. Kelly and Körbler are also just as able to fill a 4th line/PK role as Barlas. Like, they're better players than Barlas already despite not breaking out offensively (just yet?).

Was Barlas used the wrong way and has he been unlucky? Probably. But he also hasn't developed the slightest bit during his tenure with the 67's. Nothing I've seen makes me think he has the slightest offensive upside. He's an offensive blackhole. Not a player you wanna have to "develop" younger players. Barlas can cover for Whitehead defensively but he'll always hold him back offensively.

And again, Barlas doesn't fit the timeline. The 67's aren't winning now and Barlas is likely gone from the league next season. He'd be gone already if born 10 days earlier, that's for sure. He's lucky to even still be in the league.

 

[OMG67]

I honestly think it is best to group our players into two groups:
1> Established players
2> unestablished players

It is important to look at it that way because the unestablished players are not all deserving of the same treatment for various reasons.

IMO the established players are MacKenzie, Mews, Marrelli, Mayich, Sirman, Pinelli, Foster, Gerrior, Stonehouse, and Dever. That is ten players but 5 are OA’s so we will need to delete two of those players off the list.

The unestablished players can be broken down into a few different categories:
1> Key Rookies. This category consists of players the team needs to rely on for their future. They either have solid pedigree and were picked early OR they are players that have showed a lot of promise. They should get all the advantages of development. They should not be left behind fending for leftover scraps. This group consists of Amidovski, Eshkawkogan, Ekberg, Whitehead, Dietsch, and Nelson. That is six players. It is tough to bring along more than six young players at a time. Our development focus needs to be on this group of six.
2> Rookies or younger players that we hope develop but there are only so many resources available to them. The focus needs to be on group #1 so these players need to take a back seat on development and will need to make the most of their limited opportunities. This group consists of Yanni, Perrier, and Houben. Hopefully these guys make it through to the other side but with six players in group #1, it is unlikely these guys will see anything higher than spot duty on Line #3. They need to be patient, work hard in practise and wait for their opportunity.
3> Older players that haven’t’ shown capable of nailing down a role in the top half of the roster. These guys can still be effective depth players but they are at the point where investing significant resources in them isn’t ideal. This group consists of Barlas, Korbler, Horner, Kelly, and Brady.

We know what to do with group #1. Play them in key positions and let them develop at their own pace. They’ve either shown capable or have high pedigree levels that demonstrate they will likely flourish.

We know what to do with Group #3. They had their opportunities. If there is a role that suits them then so be it. If there isn’t then they need to prove they are more deserving of opportunities than the players in Group #1 where they would gain a spot as an established player. Which ones seem the most deserving of an opportunity and a graduation to group #1:
1> Korbler. Kimi is an Import. Assuming Ekberg doesn’t graduate this next offseason, we will need to make a decision as to whether it is better to keep Kimi or use the early Import Pick. I think everyone on here knows where I stand. From my perspective, he can easily be replaced next year with a top 25 Import Pick so why would we invest any time in his development? IMO, if there are teams out there with an Import slot open and need a winger with his attributes, move him and gain some picks.
2> Kelly. I liked him as a rookie. I thought he had promise. Last year was not good for him. So far this yer, he hasn’t really managed to make a positive contribution. I’m not sure he is going to turn it around. I am on the fence with Kelly. I’d say depending on what Ottawa can add to the roster in other deals at the deadline, I’d say wait and see. We may need bodies.
3> Barlas. He is 19 years old. I think he has shown what he is capable of. I think he can continue to play a role but I don’t think he will establish himself as a key contributor. That said, he still plays a strong role as a penalty killer, a decent energy winger and a moderately capable depth centre when needed. I think a player like this is valuable in that depth role.
4> Brady. He is capable. He can be a #6 type D-Man. He’s only 18 so from my perspective, he’s the leading candidate to move into the Established player list.

So, there you have it. Just because a player is young doesn’t mean he deserves the same opportunities as others. You cannot treat them all the same. You have to separate them. If you have a lot of unestablished players, you cannot place the same amount of effort into all of them. Some players need to play on the 4th line and wait their turn. Some may need to spend more time in the press box waiting their turn. It is what it is. We cannot develop a group of ten players all at once expecting it to work out.

If we can move any of the players in group 2 or 3 (with the exception of Brady because we are short on defence) for a young centre that can play a depth centre role to help develop a few of the younger wingers from group #2, then I think that would be a good management of assets.