Ottawa 67s 2024 25 Season Thread Part Iii

[dirty12]

wHY HAS THE 67 THREAD BECOME THE fRONTS THREAD

Not so much about the FRONTS for me as it is the importance of pick accumulation is overstated.

 

[OMG67]

Kingston really only needs 3,4,5 picks for the ‘26 draft and 2,3 picks for ‘27. Assuming Kingston does not bust in the next two import drafts they should with relative ease come up with 3-‘08s & 2-‘09s over two seasons, and maintain an adequate amount of picks.

North Bay in one year moved out 3-OAs, 2-‘05s, [and picks with a bare cupboard]; and brought in an OA, ‘06, 4-‘07s, 2-‘08s, as well as an adequate amount of picks to draft with.
Now I do not think Kingston has the real option of holding Battaglia at deadline like NB did with Kennedy & Romani, and Brantford did with VanVliet & Roberts; so, Kingston may not make out as well in that regard. I do however believe Kingston can choose to re-tool or choose to accumulate a silly amount of draft picks.

I no longer like the pick accumulation strategy because in recent years I have seen teams frivolously over spend for Rehkopf; Leenders; VanVliet & Roberts; five OAs over three seasons; …of those five OAs, only Morrison could not be had for a song a couple of years prior.
Furthermore, teams are using those accumulated picks on players that were their third or fourth options.

Say what you want about the inability of Kingston to acquire targeted players, but the truth is; Wakely chose Barrie because it gave him a direct line of communication with the coach/GM, and SSM was not taking a deal for Gibson unless Kingston gave up Hopkins.

I get what you are saying and I don’t discount some of the trends that have emerged as being another challenge to contend with. However, at the same time, you cannot acquire ANYONE without giving assets in return. Obviously the best route to follow is to draft and develop players. But, that only gets you so far. You need to augment your lineup. If you trade picks to do it, you lose your ability to draft and develop. There really is no way around it.

The Fronts have an excess of OA’s going into the offseason. @beastintheeast has done a roster review and suggests that most teams will be retuning players so the OA market is likely to be similar next season as it was this season. I will take his word for it since i haven’t looked my self. If that is the case, only the elite OA’s will be in demand.

The OA’s they have that could be in demand are Hay, Miedema, Soto, Willis, and McGowan. Willis is a signed NHL player so he is unlikely to return. There was some OA movement pre-seaosn last year with Guindon, VanVliet, Mathurin, and Sova moving. Wakely and Bryan moved early. After that, there wans’t much moved at the deadline compared to previous years. It may be tough for Kingston to move three of those guys. But, regardless, I have argued that they can fill in all their pick gaps moving OA’s. So, from an argument standpoint, I have conceded that they will fill in the gaps without trading battaglia.

When it comes to Battaglia, IMO, it is about pushing MORE assets forward. If Kingston moves all those OAs and isn’t able to do it in the offseason and keep the lessor players like Pickell, McNamarra, and Bishop, they will lbe undermanned post-deadline. This is what I have pointed to since the beginning of this discussion. Keeping battaglia in that situation would be worse than Ottawa keeping Pinelli. It would be insanity. So, from my perspective, there is no other option. That should be set in stone. Their plan for next eyar should not be a surprise to anyone.

Then you look at what they are left with. I agree with you that the best course of action is to make an attempt to try to pick up as many as three ‘07s-‘08s that fall into the market that may be able to help that team. To get guys like arrowsmith, crane, MacNamarra, and Outwater, it usually costs around two 3rds and a 5th. If you can acquire 2-3 of those guys, that is four to six extra 3rds you need plus some 4th, 5th’s and 6ths etc. It doesn’t matter if you bring your picks back level if you are going out there and spending them. You then aren’t level anymore.

There is a path for Kingston. And, for @beastintheeast, where this conversation becomes relevant to the 67’s thread is the commonality between here Ottawa is is very similar to Kingston. When running a rebuild, it is important to recoup picks, and add extra picks so you can jump on players like Outwater, McNamarra, Arrowsmith, and Crane when they become available. They can help support the middle of your lineup and will be serviceable during your rebuild. I can understand those that woudl suggest Ottawa already has a lot of that type of player and I would agree but we don’t’ have them as centres. So if a centre were to come available as an ‘07 or ‘08, we should jump on it.

The importance of accumulation of picks is not overstated. You need to give something to get something when you need it. Having pick flexibility is important. What you should be saying is how you use them is important. You cannot point to these big trades and draw the corelation that having extra picks is bad because teams use too many of them to acquire players. If a team needs a player or two, how do they get them without trading picks or other players? They don’t. It is like saying, “I only need the amount of money I spend to survive because if I had more, I would waste it on fast women and fast cars.” Well, fast women and fast cars are fun!

The Fronts had a mature roster but they still had holes. They added Hay, Willis, and Bishop. They traded Villiaris, Weir, Four 2nds, six 3rds, two 4ths, two 5ths, a 6th and a 7th. Had they not had a surplus of picks, they’d have had to trade almost every pick they had between the 2nd and 5th round to acquire those players as well as trade their ‘07 2nd and 3rd round picked players. Without those deals, they’d wouldn’t have managed to finish where they finished and they wouldn’t be as well positioned. AND, that is not to mention what it cost to acquire Guindon (two 2nds, a 4th and 5th). Having excess picks has allowed Kingston o maximize the potential of their already mature roster to give them a chance this year. I don’t’ understand how anyone could suggest that having excess picks is overstated.

 

[NoQuit67s]

I get what you are saying and I don’t discount some of the trends that have emerged as being another challenge to contend with. However, at the same time, you cannot acquire ANYONE without giving assets in return. Obviously the best route to follow is to draft and develop players. But, that only gets you so far. You need to augment your lineup. If you trade picks to do it, you lose your ability to draft and develop. There really is no way around it.

Agreed. However, given:
- the new rule changes regarding NCAA commitments and more accessibility to these players, and,
- the possibility (if it becomes reality) of CHL team having access to 3 imports players

It seems that OHL teams will (maybe if the import rule is changed) have more options to bolster their teams by drafting, developing and attracting players even more so than so than traditionally in the past, meaning, in order to contend they may be a little less reliant on trades to bolster their teams in specific years?

IMO teams will now have more control in strengthening their lineup with less dependance on the fluctuating trade market in a given year.

If a team dedicates more resources to strong scouting for imports and attracting more US born and NCAA bound players, then they may be less dependent on giving up a boat load of resources in trades with opposing teams.
Maybe this also weakens an agent's ability to dictate where his client goes to, as well?

 

[Section5Petes]

@OMG67 tagged a few accounts in here, Who wants to make the 3rd overall pick in the HFBoards mock draft? McGregor and Warren are taken

 

[OMG67]

Delete

 

[OMG67]

Agreed. However, given:
- the new rule changes regarding NCAA commitments and more accessibility to these players, and,
- the possibility (if it becomes reality) of CHL team having access to 3 imports players

It seems that OHL teams will (maybe if the import rule is changed) have more options to bolster their teams by drafting, developing and attracting players even more so than so than traditionally in the past, meaning, in order to contend they may be a little less reliant on trades to bolster their teams in specific years?

IMO teams will now have more control in strengthening their lineup with less dependance on the fluctuating trade market in a given year.

If a team dedicates more resources to strong scouting for imports and attracting more US born and NCAA bound players, then they may be less dependent on giving up a boat load of resources in trades with opposing teams.
Maybe this also weakens an agent's ability to dictate where his client goes to, as well?

Regarding the NCAA issue, there are multiple cohorts this year. But, after this year, those multiple cohorts will be gone and it will be relegated to draft only starting with the ‘09 age group in this years Priority selection. This summer is effectively the last time some teams that had previously went a little heavier drafting NCAA recruits can gain an advantage. For example, because of the multiple cohorts, Ottawa could end up with both Barnett boys as well as someone like Vandenberg. However, next year, the best they can do is add whomever they draft next year. The multiple cohorts variability will be gone.

Also, I am not certain the 3 Import rule will make a big difference. It may for some teams if they can manage to find a way to draft a 17 year old every year and then keep them on a three year cycle. But, even having two good Imports is tough for most teams. The 2nd round is a crap shoot at best for almost all teams. I think it may make a bigger difference in goaltending. My intuition tells me that the Import Goalie will come back heavier starting as soon as teams can roster three Imports.

 

[beastintheeast]

Regarding the NCAA issue, there are multiple cohorts this year. But, after this year, those multiple cohorts will be gone and it will be relegated to draft only starting with the ‘09 age group in this years Priority selection. This summer is effectively the last time some teams that had previously went a little heavier drafting NCAA recruits can gain an advantage. For example, because of the multiple cohorts, Ottawa could end up with both Barnett boys as well as someone like Vandenberg. However, next year, the best they can do is add whomever they draft next year. The multiple cohorts variability will be gone.

Also, I am not certain the 3 Import rule will make a big difference. It may for some teams if they can manage to find a way to draft a 17 year old every year and then keep them on a three year cycle. But, even having two good Imports is tough for most teams. The 2nd round is a crap shoot at best for almost all teams. I think it may make a bigger difference in goaltending. My intuition tells me that the Import Goalie will come back heavier starting as soon as teams can roster three Imports.

The 3 Euro rule will not affect the Euro draft. Teams have a hard enough time drafting 2 impact players. Where the 2 Euro rule comes into effect is a team like London or a team that is going for it and has a 2-star Euro already. An example would be Kington or London. This year, they have two good Euros going for it. Imagine if they could add a player like Ekberg to the roster.

This is where the 3 Euro rule will have an effect not at the draft at all.

NCAA: I think the rich will get richer for the most part this year. Teams that are good and going for it will be able to attract NCAA-caliber players. NCAA bound USHL, BCHL or other leagues players will be looking at where can they develop their skills the most. For a couple, it will also mean showcasing for the scouts.

In the long run, the only thing the NCAA rule has changed is it has removed the "don't draft me, I will go NCAA or BCHL" BS from agents and players.

 

[dirty12]

The 3 Euro rule will not affect the Euro draft. Teams have a hard enough time drafting 2 impact players. Where the 2 Euro rule comes into effect is a team like London or a team that is going for it and has a 2-star Euro already. An example would be Kington or London. This year, they have two good Euros going for it. Imagine if they could add a player like Ekberg to the roster.

This is where the 3 Euro rule will have an effect not at the draft at all.

NCAA: I think the rich will get richer for the most part this year. Teams that are good and going for it will be able to attract NCAA-caliber players. NCAA bound USHL, BCHL or other leagues players will be looking at where can they develop their skills the most. For a couple, it will also mean showcasing for the scouts.

In the long run, the only thing the NCAA rule has changed is it has removed the "don't draft me, I will go NCAA or BCHL" BS from agents and players.

I think allowing three imports would affect the competitive balance. It would certainly benefit Barrie and London, and teams each year that player agents and NHL GMs believe could go on long playoff runs.

If the ‘rich’ get US born ‘free’ this season, it is the fault of teams with a lot of picks. The ‘67s have 8 picks through 5 rounds. If they choose, they can pick-off at least a few US born players 2006-08. Barrie, Flint, London, NB have multiple 5ths & 6ths to use.

 

[beastintheeast]

I think allowing three imports would affect the competitive balance. It would certainly benefit Barrie and London, and teams each year that player agents and NHL GMs believe could go on long playoff runs.

If the ‘rich’ get US born ‘free’ this season, it is the fault of teams with a lot of picks. The ‘67s have 8 picks through 5 rounds. If they choose, they can pick-off at least a few US born players 2006-08. Barrie, Flint, London, NB have multiple 5ths & 6ths to use.

Hate to come back to an old song but still not sure the front office situation is resolved. That in my mind is still going to affect players signing.

 

[dirty12]

Hate to come back to an old song but still not sure the front office situation is resolved. That in my mind is still going to affect players signing.

Well, I heard in a casual conversation that the ‘front office’ is not really interested in an extended rebuild; and if things go their way, the ‘67s could be competitive this season. Right or wrong, I interpreted that to mean the ‘67s might use picks to draft 17-19 yr old players.

 

[OHL4Life]

Hate to come back to an old song but still not sure the front office situation is resolved. That in my mind is still going to affect players signing.

what front office issue is that?

 

[OMG67]

The 3 Euro rule will not affect the Euro draft. Teams have a hard enough time drafting 2 impact players. Where the 2 Euro rule comes into effect is a team like London or a team that is going for it and has a 2-star Euro already. An example would be Kington or London. This year, they have two good Euros going for it. Imagine if they could add a player like Ekberg to the roster.

This is where the 3 Euro rule will have an effect not at the draft at all.

NCAA: I think the rich will get richer for the most part this year. Teams that are good and going for it will be able to attract NCAA-caliber players. NCAA bound USHL, BCHL or other leagues players will be looking at where can they develop their skills the most. For a couple, it will also mean showcasing for the scouts.

In the long run, the only thing the NCAA rule has changed is it has removed the "don't draft me, I will go NCAA or BCHL" BS from agents and players.

I’m not really sure how much the NCAA rule will remove the “Don’t draft me” element. I still think players in the top 10 will mostly go where they want. The defect rule has dictated that teams are now compensated for it as opposed to the past where they weren’t. That comp 1st has had a far greater effect on reducing the shenanigans than the NCAA rule will ever.

After a couple seasons, what is likely to happen is there will be a greater number of Americans in the OHL which will fuel expansion. The Americans will rely less on staying “close to home.” Eventually, they will fall in line with the league the same way as GTA players playing in SSM and Ottawa etc. IT will be part of the gig.

I agree about the Euro rule change. Some teams, like Ottawa, will be able to recruit fairly well. Like I said, if you have one 17, one 18, and one 19 year old and you keep that cycle going, you can simply draft a 17 year old every year and not pass on your draft pick once every three year.s. But, like you said, it will be tough on supply. However, if they are talking about this now, there must be a reason why. They must project the supply to increase at some point soon. I cannot see the 3 Euro rule come into play without some form of supply increase. This is why I suggested the goaltending. The Euro goalies tend to be pretty good.

 

[OMG67]

I think allowing three imports would affect the competitive balance. It would certainly benefit Barrie and London, and teams each year that player agents and NHL GMs believe could go on long playoff runs.

If the ‘rich’ get US born ‘free’ this season, it is the fault of teams with a lot of picks. The ‘67s have 8 picks through 5 rounds. If they choose, they can pick-off at least a few US born players 2006-08. Barrie, Flint, London, NB have multiple 5ths & 6ths to use.

This year will be the real test on how the teams initially react to the new rule. Not only will they draft more Americans but they may draft them much earlier.

But, I think it is also a test of how teams can recruit what they drafted in the past. But, we don’t know which players teams have protected. As @OHL4Life mentioned, we may see a lot of ‘08’s, ‘07s, and possibly ‘06s drafted this year. It is really going to be a crazy draft. I think once we get to round 3, it will be a Wild West version of the draft. A team like London with three 5ths and two 6ths (only one 3rd and no 4ths) may be shit out of luck by the time they start to pick in round 5, whereas a team like Guelph with three 3rds or Ottawa with two 3rds and three 4ths may be able to take advantage and pick more mature Americans as opposed to picking ‘09s.

This draft is going to be crazy I think.

 

[OMG67]

Well, I heard in a casual conversation that the ‘front office’ is not really interested in an extended rebuild; and if things go their way, the ‘67s could be competitive this season. Right or wrong, I interpreted that to mean the ‘67s might use picks to draft 17-19 yr old players.

I should have read this comment before I posted the last comment. This is exactly what I think is going to happen. With a solid back end and some serviceable wingers, if they can bring in a couple mature American centres, they could be pretty good.

We tend to all think in terms of the normal rebuild period but this year presents an opportunity to skip all of that. With the potential for a massive surplus of mature players available, teams could strategically use picks in a very different way. Imagine a treat that drafts late in round one picking an 18 year old mor mature American? Take a team like Brantford that could pick a mature American in round one and then get Malhotra to sign? That is a game changer for their competitive outcome next season vs picking a 16 year old. Screw picking a 16 year old and trading him at the deadline. Just go pick a mature 18 year old American and bypass that whole trade situation. If the American doesn’t report, jsut declare him defected and get the comp pick next year.

 

[dirty12]

I’m not really sure how much the NCAA rule will remove the “Don’t draft me” element. I still think players in the top 10 will mostly go where they want. The defect rule has dictated that teams are now compensated for it as opposed to the past where they weren’t. That comp 1st has had a far greater effect on reducing the shenanigans than the NCAA rule will ever.

After a couple seasons, what is likely to happen is there will be a greater number of Americans in the OHL which will fuel expansion. The Americans will rely less on staying “close to home.” Eventually, they will fall in line with the league the same way as GTA players playing in SSM and Ottawa etc. IT will be part of the gig.

I agree about the Euro rule change. Some teams, like Ottawa, will be able to recruit fairly well. Like I said, if you have one 17, one 18, and one 19 year old and you keep that cycle going, you can simply draft a 17 year old every year and not pass on your draft pick once every three year.s. But, like you said, it will be tough on supply. However, if they are talking about this now, there must be a reason why. They must project the supply to increase at some point soon. I cannot see the 3 Euro rule come into play without some form of supply increase. This is why I suggested the goaltending. The Euro goalies tend to be pretty good.

The defect rule will remain an important equalizer if/when US expansion happens.

More Russians will come over, I’m sure; but I am not at all convinced supply of Europeans will even get back to the levels of a decade ago.
I find the thought of allowing three imports concerning. There must be a belief that three good OAs is not sustainable given new rules?

 

[OMG67]

The defect rule will remain an important equalizer if/when US expansion happens.

More Russians will come over, I’m sure; but I am not at all convinced supply of Europeans will even get back to the levels a decade ago.
I find the though of allowing three imports concerning.
There must be a belief that three good OAs is not sustainable given new rules?

It is tough to say. It seems OBVIOUS to me that 3 Imports is not sustainable across all teams in all three leagues. But, if it seems that way to us, there must be a reason why it is being considered. Maybe, like you said, the Russians will fill in a big gap. But, that won’t fill the whole gap.

It maybe could be more so teams being able to protect some of the better Imports sort of in reserve? So, a teams could draft harder to sign Imports, keep that player on their reserve list just in case and then still keep two good imports. MAybe it is something like that? Right now I think they can only do that with high NHL picks.

 

[dirty12]

I should have read this comment before I posted the last comment. This is exactly what I think is going to happen. With a solid back end and some serviceable wingers, if they can bring in a couple mature American centres, they could be pretty good.

We tend to all think in terms of the normal rebuild period but this year presents an opportunity to skip all of that. With the potential for a massive surplus of mature players available, teams could strategically use picks in a very different way. Imagine a treat that drafts late in round one picking an 18 year old mor mature American? Take a team like Brantford that could pick a mature American in round one and then get Malhotra to sign? That is a game changer for their competitive outcome next season vs picking a 16 year old. Screw picking a 16 year old and trading him at the deadline. Just go pick a mature 18 year old American and bypass that whole trade situation. If the American doesn’t report, jsut declare him defected and get the comp pick next year.

The ‘67s are well positioned to strike first. Most teams will use 1-3 picks, and 4th pick if not having a surplus, to draft true rookies. I don’t think that will ever change.
But with the benefit of hindsight, I think the idea of drafting 17-19 yr old US born players was thought up several months ago. That might explain the unusual amount of 6-7-8 picks tossed around leading up to the trade deadline.

 

[dirty12]

It is tough to say. It seems OBVIOUS to me that 3 Imports is not sustainable across all teams in all three leagues. But, if it seems that way to us, there must be a reason why it is being considered. Maybe, like you said, the Russians will fill in a big gap. But, that won’t fill the whole gap.

It maybe could be more so teams being able to protect some of the better Imports sort of in reserve? So, a teams could draft harder to sign Imports, keep that player on their reserve list just in case and then still keep two good imports. MAybe it is something like that? Right now I think they can only do that with high NHL picks.

I believe unsigned OHL imports that are NHL 1st picks, NHL signed, and OAs do not at all count against the limit; and those selected that have not elected to come over can be protected up until two imports are on the roster.
Two years ago, I think the wolves had five import options going into the season.

 

[beastintheeast]

How does drafting all these older kids affect the development of the second-year layers I know everyone here thinks that Ottawa is the best citry for kids to play JrA. and it was I am just not sure it is the best city with the best coaching.

If Ottawa thinks it is going to go for it, look to a line of Barlas Foster and Dever playing big minutes because we all know Dave hates to play new players.

Personally I think that this push is a GM and coach that are worried about their contracts.

As has been said the draft will tellus a lot.

@OMG67

Just imagine the draft two years ago if they could have drafted three players: Uronen Korbler and Not quite Korbler. Or last year, they could have drafted Ekberg and Korbler's cousin.

Also, is the present rule that they draft players, and if they come, do you have to play them or send them home? Talk about taking ice time away from NA kid.


Like I said, I'll wait until I see if there is a change in the coaching with an assistant getting more control of the Offence. I am not going to hold my breath.

I find it interesting that thre is no rumour or talk about contract extensions.

 

[OMG67]

The ‘67s are well positioned to strike first. Most teams will use 1-3 picks, and 4th pick if not having a surplus, to draft true rookies. I don’t think that will ever change.
But with the benefit of hindsight, I think the idea of drafting 17-19 yr old US born players was thought up several months ago. That might explain the unusual amount of 6-7-8 picks tossed around leading up to the trade deadline.

Yes. It is a one time strategy for sure. The question is whether te teams will incorporate the Americans as if they were Canadians? The true 16 year old Americans will now be drafted higher but will they be drafted at their true draft ranking? I think they will. I think teams will most certainly be comfortable drafting a 3rd round ranked american kid in the 3rd round instead of the 6th.

What that does is it pushes some of the 4th and 5th round ranked Canadian kids that moved up to the 3rd round, back to the 4th and 5th round. We will see some Canadian kids picked int he 5th round this year that would probably have been drafted 20-30 slots higher if there were no NCAA/CHL Agreement.

It may also make it more difficult for 16 year olds to actually make teams this year. FI we see 20-30 more mature Americans suit up this year, that is 20-20 less 16 year olds suiting up. It makes the league a little older and more competitive from a skill level perspective. A team that decides to go into a traditional cycle may be further behind than most years.

It is really going to be a crazy landscape unfolding. I am looking forward to next year to see how it all plays out.

 

[Larionov]

I find it interesting that thre is no rumour or talk about contract extensions.

FWIW, Bob Dyce and Shawn Burke are in the same boat with the REDBLACKS - no contract extensions in place at present, and both are going into the final year of their deals in 2025. There was word that OSEG was going to extend them, but no announcement has happened as yet.

 

[OMG67]

How does drafting all these older kids affect the development of the second-year layers I know everyone here thinks that Ottawa is the best citry for kids to play JrA. and it was I am just not sure it is the best city with the best coaching.

If Ottawa thinks it is going to go for it, look to a line of Barlas Foster and Dever playing big minutes because we all know Dave hates to play new players.

Personally I think that this push is a GM and coach that are worried about their contracts.

As has been said the draft will tellus a lot.

@OMG67

Just imagine the draft two years ago if they could have drafted three players: Uronen Korbler and Not quite Korbler. Or last year, they could have drafted Ekberg and Korbler's cousin.

Also, is the present rule that they draft players, and if they come, do you have to play them or send them home? Talk about taking ice time away from NA kid.


Like I said, I'll wait until I see if there is a change in the coaching with an assistant getting more control of the Offence. I am not going to hold my breath.

I find it interesting that thre is no rumour or talk about contract extensions.

Normally I would tend to agree with your underlying statements but this year is an oddball year. Effectively, teams will have access to draft from FOUR age cohorts of Americans. Granted, as the age increases, the supply decreases because some will be in College already or about to enrol this fall, but the reality is, this is a one shot deal. There won’t be a second chance to do this. Next year reverts back to drafting almost exclusively the 16 year olds age group.

Fundamentally, it is incumbent on each team to perform at the highest level. That doesn’t necessarily mean compete for a championship. It means reach the highest level it can with the assets in hand. So, from an Ottawa 67’s perspective, if they have the inside track on a few Americans that can come in and make the team better (as long as we aren’t talking about five 19 year olds) then they should do it.

The reality is the 16 year olds are mostly useless. Their game is immature and they need time to develop, We’ve seen countless situations where the 16 year olds have developed jsut as well playing Tier II JrA as playing Major Junior. I have ZERO issues with the 2nd and 3rd round 16yo picks not playing with the 67’s this season. I think we will only see the 3rd overall pick suit up for Ottawa as a 16 year old.

Hypothetically speaking, if Ottawa were to nail down Vandenberg, the younger Barnett kid and then draft two mature 18 year olds American kids, that is a game changer. Will be be a championship contender? No. But we won’t be a doormat either.

Fromt he perspective of development, we have too many “developing” players. I remember a post I made about that sort of thing last year or maybe the year previous where I stated you can only truly develop around 5 young players. After that, it is tough to give proper opportunity. You are juggling opportunity. So, if we have Amidovski, Whitehead, Eshkawkogan, and NElson, that is four players. Add int he 1st round picks and maybe one mor eplayer like Kingwell. There is no more room to develop more than those guys. How would you do it? If you put a kid on the 4th line and he outgrows his role, how to you elevate him when there is a log jam ahead of him? It is tough. So, realistically, developing young guys is somewhat limited.

 

[OMG67]

FWIW, Bob Dyce and Shawn Burke are in the same boat with the REDBLACKS - no contract extensions in place at present, and both are going into the final year of their deals in 2025. There was word that OSEG was going to extend them, but no announcement has happened as yet.

For the 67’s, I would think any announcement would come in August.

The challenge for Ottawa is if they extend Boyd and don’t extend Cameron. I could see both getting a one year extension but they are likely to get two years. Like I said before, if they don’t’ replace them this summer then that is an endorsement. They are most certainly in a situation where they have ot give them 2-year extensions. But, that one year extension may come into play if they do draft some older American kids and there is less of a rebuild cycle. That would change the landscape enough to justify it.

 

[OMG67]

It would be an interesting turn if Ottawa were to bulk up on American kids. What would their roster look like?

Foster(OA) - 18yo AMERICAN - Ekberg
Whitehead - 18 yo AMERICIAN - Dever(OA)
Amidovski - Vandenberg - Kelly
Kingwell - 1st Round Pick - IMPORT
Yanni - Perrier - Houben

Marrelli - Abe Barnett
Jackson - Eshkawkogan
Dietsch - Brady
Bonomo - White

Nelson
Backup (Trade)

There is still room in there for another OA or Barlas/Horner. Still more signed players left off that roster as well. Avila, Bowes, Souliere, Alain…..

I am not saying this will happen but if they use their 2nd round pick and one of their 3rds on mature American centres, this is a possible roster gong into next season.

They also have Krawczyk, Asher Barnett, Lucas Zajic, and Cole McKinney in the pipeline as unlikely to sign players but you never know.

 

[dirty12]

Yes. It is a one time strategy for sure. The question is whether te teams will incorporate the Americans as if they were Canadians? The true 16 year old Americans will now be drafted higher but will they be drafted at their true draft ranking? I think they will. I think teams will most certainly be comfortable drafting a 3rd round ranked american kid in the 3rd round instead of the 6th.

What that does is it pushes some of the 4th and 5th round ranked Canadian kids that moved up to the 3rd round, back to the 4th and 5th round. We will see some Canadian kids picked int he 5th round this year that would probably have been drafted 20-30 slots higher if there were no NCAA/CHL Agreement.

It may also make it more difficult for 16 year olds to actually make teams this year. FI we see 20-30 more mature Americans suit up this year, that is 20-20 less 16 year olds suiting up. It makes the league a little older and more competitive from a skill level perspective. A team that decides to go into a traditional cycle may be further behind than most years.

It is really going to be a crazy landscape unfolding. I am looking forward to next year to see how it all plays out.

I can see the possibility of Guelph, Kitchener, Ottawa going for an unprotected ‘07 USNTDP player with one of their 3rd picks. Most will prioritize the (NA) true rookie though.
Odds of pro prospect being equal, the ON kid gets drafted first because he probably has a lower education cost.