Ottawa 67s 2024-25 Season Thread, Part III

[OMG67]

I think it is worth while to expand on the “lessons learned” issues involving the 67’s.

In 2022-23, Ottawa had an outstanding team with a couple holes to fill. Boyd chose to fill those holes with Morrison and Mintyukov. There was a lot of talk around the league about Boyd ONLY offering draft picks for players. That is admirable but it makes it difficult to get the courtesy returned when you are selling players. If you are a team willing to give up your 1st round pick, you are more likely to have it returned in the future. The Frontenacs were specifically sourcing a young RHD for Wright. All indications at the time suggested Wright would accept a trade to Ottawa. That was probably the best fit for Kingston. The addition of Wright woudl most likely have made a huge difference. Yes, we would have given up a highly talented young player but we were beaten by a team that went far beyond what Ottawa was willing to do at the deadline (Peterborough). That teams on the Championship.

This is something we can learn from. Boyd decided to keep the main team intact to remain competitive. The following year we were on par with a lot of the other eastern conference teams, so Boyd traded assets to acquire Maillet, Kressler, and Mayer. The total assets out the door for those players was:
3x 2nds
5x 3rds
2x 5ths

This past deadline, we traded Mews for:
Jackson
2x 2nds
3x 3rds
1x 5th

If we were to have traded Mews (we see his value as an 18 year old) to Kingston for Wright, we’d have had a great chance to win a Championship. Had we traded MEws, we’d likely not have been in contention the following season which means that season would have been a seller season. We graduated Stonehouse and Mayich (OA’s this season) that could have both been solid deadline trades. But, that is beside the point. Even if we had chosen to not make seller deals last deadline (assuming there was a Mews for Wright deal the previous season), we’d have been in a position to win a Championship in 2022-23 and we wouldn’t have made a half effort at competing at the deadline two years in a row coming up empty both seasons losing in the 2nd round.

I think this shows that if you are going to throw assets at back to back seasons to remain part of the pack, you need a lot of luck. The alternative is you throw a lot more at one season and sacrifice the other season and give it a stronger push. It doesn’t guarantee a win but if you are effectively spending the assts anyway (over two seasons), you may as well spend them in one season and give it a more honest effort.

I think we may see the same issue in Brampton this year. They spend half hearted this season and aren't really doing a lot. They will be better next season not making a big push this year but it will not likely make a huge difference next year for them. Conversely, Barrie made a really big push this year and they seem in a much better position than Brampton. Oshawa spent lightly last deadline knowing this year would be a push year. They were fortunate last year. Brantford spent lightly this year and I expect them to spend heavy next year. They acquired Leenders but he is a two year player. Kingston should have sold last year to help set up this seaosn. They are doing well this season but I don’t think people could argue successfully they would not be better this year had they had the right assets coming out of last season. The teams that seem to make that one year push and align their assets are doing well. The teams that stay competitive, aren’t.

Let’s hope this lesson learned doesn’t fall on blind eyes.

 

[ecraigs]

Alas, while I would like to see hope for next year, I see it as much like this year. We've mismanaged our imports, our overage players, and our goaltending. The clear vacuum at centre has been treated with stopgap measures. We are too small and badly ill-prepared to play. We have plenty of talent, but it has been subordinated to a "structure" and it is physically dominated by larger teams. Other than that, things are great.

PS - Pinelli gets 4 games

 

[gadder]

OMG wrote:
The teams that seem to make that one year push and align their assets are doing well. The teams that stay competitive, aren’t.

I think this points to the strategy for the team. Do we want to win it all, or do we want to 'be competitive' every year? Going for it in one year means the cycle is we suck for 2 years then have success the following 3. Being competitive every year means we're goodish for longer but never reach the highs, then we linger in that medicore middle for years after. Boyd seems to have chosen the latter. I want progress and development and hope. I'm willing to put up with 2 crap years if it means good times are coming. This is junior hockey, not the NHL. The cycle is different; embrace it.

 

[OMG67]

OMG wrote:
The teams that seem to make that one year push and align their assets are doing well. The teams that stay competitive, aren’t.

I think this points to the strategy for the team. Do we want to win it all, or do we want to 'be competitive' every year? Going for it in one year means the cycle is we suck for 2 years then have success the following 3. Being competitive every year means we're goodish for longer but never reach the highs, then we linger in that medicore middle for years after. Boyd seems to have chosen the latter. I want progress and development and hope. I'm willing to put up with 2 crap years if it means good times are coming. This is junior hockey, not the NHL. The cycle is different; embrace it.

I just want to be a little more clear. I don’t think Boyd and the 67’s are only trying to be competitive. I think what they are trying to do is when they are competitive, they are trying to make a push but not sacrifice much all at once which basically amounts to not making a push. It is hard to explain.

The teams that are simply trying to be continually competitive aren’t trading 10 draft picks for Mintyukov. So, it is not like Boyd is not trying to make a push. The issue is when the time is right, the push seems to be equally distributed over two seasons instead of bulking up in one season. Effectively speaking, the same amount of assets are sacrificed trying to win a Championship as the other teams trying to make that one strong push. We just don’t recognize it because the optics are skewed by teams that are making that one single season push where they just toss everything into the wind and hope their sails carry them to at least a finals appearance.

In the aggregate, Ottawa has basically traded a boat load of draft picks and Mews, Gardiner, and two defected players, but only won two rounds in the playoffs over what looks to be three seasons. They did replenish draft picks and now hold a good surplus though so we do need to factor that in.

 

[beastintheeast]

I just want to be a little more clear. I don’t think Boyd and the 67’s are only trying to be competitive. I think what they are trying to do is when they are competitive, they are trying to make a push but not sacrifice much all at once which basically amounts to not making a push. It is hard to explain.

The teams that are simply trying to be continually competitive aren’t trading 10 draft picks for Mintyukov. So, it is not like Boyd is not trying to make a push. The issue is when the time is right, the push seems to be equally distributed over two seasons instead of bulking up in one season. Effectively speaking, the same amount of assets are sacrificed trying to win a Championship as the other teams trying to make that one strong push. We just don’t recognize it because the optics are skewed by teams that are making that one single season push where they just toss everything into the wind and hope their sails carry them to at least a finals appearance.

In the aggregate, Ottawa has basically traded a boat load of draft picks and Mews, Gardiner, and two defected players, but only won two rounds in the playoffs over what looks to be three seasons. They did replenish draft picks and now hold a good surplus though so we do need to factor that in.

I hate to add to the pain but there is also one constant to the last 4 years. Yes it is hard to draft stars when you re at the top BUT teams seem to do it.

The one thing that @OMG67 did not mention was the coaching. It seemed to me that while we got Minty for his offence, DC could match him with a stay-at-home and decided that he wanted Minty to play DC-style hockey instead of letting him do what he was doing.


@ecraigs also voices my concern in that DC has shown both here and at the WJC that he values a defensive structured style that uses certain players repeatedly. However, it does not seem to allow players to develop their scoring skills.

Ekberg is a goal scorer but gets relegated to the 4th line

Unless things change we have no offensive players in our future. If we look at what we have next year, we will see Dever and Foster as our top centers. We then leave Whitehead playing minimal minutes as a third-line center again, and Heaven helps anyone who gets drafted as a center this year.

Personally I think there has to be a change in coaching style that will allow the players to learn how to play an offensive game and learn to score which is why we drafted some of these players.

When we look at Ottawa itr has always been a city where scouts want to come to see oJose used to trade draft picks to get our players.
Quinn is showing what he has (again developed by Andre.)

Scouting has to been a bom for this team, either when you look at players that were drafted after us,

It is going to be an interesting end of March or early April.

This will tell people what we have next year and what the organization values.

 

[OMG67]

I hate to add to the pain but there is also one constant to the last 4 years. Yes it is hard to draft stars when you re at the top BUT teams seem to do it.

The one thing that @OMG67 did not mention was the coaching. It seemed to me that while we got Minty for his offence, DC could match him with a stay-at-home and decided that he wanted Minty to play DC-style hockey instead of letting him do what he was doing.


@ecraigs also voices my concern in that DC has shown both here and at the WJC that he values a defensive structured style that uses certain players repeatedly. However, it does not seem to allow players to develop their scoring skills.

Ekberg is a goal scorer but gets relegated to the 4th line

Unless things change we have no offensive players in our future. If we look at what we have next year, we will see Dever and Foster as our top centers. We then leave Whitehead playing minimal minutes as a third-line center again, and Heaven helps anyone who gets drafted as a center this year.

Personally I think there has to be a change in coaching style that will allow the players to learn how to play an offensive game and learn to score which is why we drafted some of these players.

When we look at Ottawa itr has always been a city where scouts want to come to see oJose used to trade draft picks to get our players.
Quinn is showing what he has (again developed by Andre.)

Scouting has to been a bom for this team, either when you look at players that were drafted after us,

It is going to be an interesting end of March or early April.

This will tell people what we have next year and what the organization values.

I think we need to move past the coaching. Replacing the coach is something I believe most feel is necessary. The issue is who you replace him with and whether the person that comes in has a different philosophy. And, if that new coach has a different philosophy, will that align with Boyd and the rest of OSEG? This is the main issue from my perspective and the reason why if DC is let go, it may be necessary to also remove Boyd. If all they do is replace DC with another guy that approaches the game and strategy the same way, would there be any meaningful change?

On top of that, we have Jan Egert who is also very talented but as Director of Scouting, he is ultimately responsible for identifying the players we draft. If there is an issue with drafting, does the ball land in his court? If so, how does that get addressed?

If OSEG prioritizes competitiveness over winning Championships, how do you replace an owner?

This is all intertwined. Sometimes you cannot simply replace one piece and everything is resolved.

I’ve been saying this now for three seasons. The team has not drafted, nor developed c]capable centres. You need capable centres. We’ve done a relatively good job trading for centres but that is not sustainable as we clearly see this year.

Although I agree DC needs to go, I am not convinced he is the central problem, nor will replacing him automatically resolve the problem. To be honest, without being on the inside, I cannot say with any certainty what the problem is and who’s doorstep this falls, especially when we’ve won the regular season with most point three of the last six seasons (including this season). How can we argue against that level of regular season success? I mean, honestly, how can we sit here barking for heads to roll? I know we all see it and I think we are being real because it doesn’t pass the smell test but how does OSEG as an organization that is arms length away from the operations of the team land on the realization they may need an overhaul? They won’t.

So, even if we remove DC, I am not confident the replacement will be much better. That person would need to be a strong personality that can impose his will and cut through whatever it is that seems to be holding this organization back from truly winning.

 

[ecraigs]

... voices my concern in that DC has shown both here and at the WJC that he values a defensive structured style that uses certain players repeatedly. However, it does not seem to allow players to develop their scoring skills.

Ekberg is a goal scorer but gets relegated to the 4th line

One play stands out for me from Wednesday's debacle against Oshawa. Ekberg brought the puck off the boards and right across the front of the net deep in the slot. Most players would have tried a backhand shot, because it was, like, the perfect spot for it. No way. He tried to get the puck out to the perimeter and it all went away. Our penalty kill remains terrible and, with the Mews trade and Pinelli's penalty issues, our power play is sinking down the table. It is very similar to the performance that got DC canned by the Senators.

 

[Larionov]

What I would like is for Boyd to come out publicly and a) acknowledge the mistakes that landed the team in this spot and b) outline exactly what the plan is for the future. The first one might be asking too much, as in junior hockey coaches and executives are naturally reluctant to appear to be throwing individual kids under the bus. (Even though we can go through the roster and clearly identify the kids who have fallen well short of expectations.) The second part, though, shouldn't be asking too much - fans deserve at least that much. I get the feeling, though, that OSEG doesn't want him going to a microphone and acknowledging that 2025-26 is going to be a tough rebuilding year, because it makes it tough to sell tickets. I'm the opposite - if I know the truth and know that there is hope for the future it makes me more likely to go. What I hate is being told that black is white, and night is day, and everything is great when it clearly isn't...

 

[ScoutLife4]

I have to admit, I'm kind of caught off guard by all the surprise at this team being in the position its in.
I feel like it was well known before the season even started this team would be fighting to barely get into the playoffs at best and a sell off would have to happen.

Losing Pinelli for nothing doesn't make a lot of sense from an asset management view but I think from the business side they made a decision to keep a big name to try and keep a few people in the arena watching the games.
We all know the cycle of JR hockey and how it goes.