2016-2017 Kings Roster Talk Part III

[KingCanadain1976]

Mersch did get to play with the NHL team for a while (17 games) and was mostly useless (1G/2A). not sure what else he could learn in the AHL like you said but he got his chance and disappointed. Im sure he'll get another look sooner than later, hopefully he has a speedy recovery

I disagree with you on him being useless Young player need ice time to show what they can do and 17 games of very little ice time is not enough. He out played some vets in training camp and imo earned a roster spot However he could go ahl without waiver so h was sent down in order to have place holders fill in which made no sense to me I would have rather seen him get some time to see if he could adjust or not . I think every year there needs to a roster spot for a rookie to make the team It makes sense for the cheap contract thats needed to make the cap work.

Click to read more...

 

[HookKing]

Or, how about not wasting roster spots on them? LaDue and Kempe outplayed a number of vets in preseason and camp. Would their development really have been hurt if they started the season with the team?

I would take that bet.

 

[driller1]

Sure it does. Answer these questions:

1) What was the point of those signings?

2) What resulted from those signings?

3) Did those signings serve a purpose or play a role on this team?

1) Allowed DL to fill out a 23 man roster so the kids could develop in the AHL
2) The kids played heavy minutes in Ontario, making them better players
3) Yes, the kids are now better prepared to play a role on the Kings during a critical time of the season

 

[BigKing]

-It was most likely best for LaDue to start the season in Ontario seeing as his only AHL time was joining the team mid-playoff run last season. Hard to make an argument he should of started the season, even if he was good in the pre-season.

-More of an argument can be made for Kempe but I also have no problem with him playing more minutes in Ontario and being looked to as "the guy". Also, it's a good psychological move to see how he handles the "adversity" of being sent down. Now, if he blew the doors off of pre-season, it would be a different story but, let's be honest here, he didn't do anything that screamed "He's got to stay up here" as a 20 year old prospect.

The Kings planned on calling them up later in the season the entire time. I'm sure they figured they would be in the playoff hunt and these two would be the February King/Nolan/Voynov/Pearson/Toffoli call-up that was the norm from 2012-14.

Time to catch lightning in a bottle, perhaps. Next move is for DL to decide if he wants to make a deadline deal to accompany these call-ups or keep his powder dry with more of an eye towards future seasons.

I hope Kempe crushes it. If he does, you will not find me on here saying "He should of been here all season" since, if he plays well, it would be hard to argue against the development strategy.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Or, how about not wasting roster spots on them? LaDue and Kempe outplayed a number of vets in preseason and camp. Would their development really have been hurt if they started the season with the team?

It's not a question that anyone can answer with any certainty without it having happened that way to see how it goes. GM's have two choices; send young guys down, or don't. If they do, it may work out great, ok, or bad, or any other potential possibility. If they don't, it may work out great, ok, or bad, or any other potential possibility.

If Kempe gets 27 points in the remaining 27 games this year, will that prove that he should've been on the team from day 1, or does that prove that he should've been in the AHL until now? If anyone can answer that question with 100% certainty either way, you will have 31 NHL franchises bidding very competitively for your services.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I would take that bet.

And how would you be able to prove it?

 

[Ollie Weeks]

1) Allowed DL to fill out a 23 man roster so the kids could develop in the AHL
2) The kids played heavy minutes in Ontario, making them better players
3) Yes, the kids are now better prepared to play a role on the Kings during a critical time of the season

Nailed it. You will not be responded to.

 

[YP44]

And how would you be able to prove it?

better to be safe than sorry no?

Before the start of the season if someone was to tell me that Quick would get injured during game one, be out past the all star break, that LA would not aquire a new starter and still be in a playoff spot (point percentage), I would have called BS. Point is this team is doing quite well and now can bring up some rookies at the perfect time. And those depth UFA signings are now injury insurance (except Gilbert). So yay!!

Maybe I just still remember the dark days before 2010 too much still.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Continued!

Sure it does. Answer these questions:

1) What was the point of those signings?

2) What resulted from those signings?

3) Did those signings serve a purpose or play a role on this team?

I get that some of them were minor league, depth signings, but 3 or 4 of them were not intended to be that way, those being Purcell, Gilbert, Zatkoff, and to a lesser degree, Setoguchi.

Even in the short term, these said players were not a good fit. At the time of those signings, they weren't considered minor league signings. They were brought in to compete for roster spots, and failed to achieve that.

I don't care that they didn't work out, my issue is that this management team seeked out these players who would be a poor fit and couldn't even identify serviceable depth forwards. They failed to achieve the bare minimum of what they were expected to do from October through April.

This is a team that has won one single playoff game since 2014. Any criticism of this management group is fair, warranted and just. These aren't minor nitpick, it's a microcosm of an organizational problem: failing to identify talent.

1. We don't know for certain. We can only speculate. To me, they are low-risk, medium-to-high reward signings designed to create competition for roster spots for the most prepared players. Now, it's also pretty apparent to me they were holding down the fort until a few guys could ripen. But that's all debateable.

2. They allowed for more development time for our prospects. We don't know if LaDue et. al. would have been 'ruined' by starting the season here, but I appreciate that we have an organization that's erring on the side of caution instead of putting Darnell Nurse on the top pairing immediately.

3. Yes, indisputably yes. Gilbert was servicable and held down the fort in case Greene was dead. He was outperformed by youngsters--isn't this what we want to happen? Isn't that what you worry about in your tirades about our prospects being garbage? Purcell was a swing and a miss, oh well. Zatkoff's play has been indefensible but don't pretend you don't see why he was brought here. Seto was literally a league-minimum player who played his heart out to make it back to the NHL and while he's been up and down what the hell are your expectations that you're bashing him? He's an experienced player and helped us by jumping up and down the lineup when people were injured. Now, we're going to see what the youth brings. My big question to you is what did signing these players make us miss out on? Because you seem to be suggesting that those signings doomed us to failure when I don't at all see a certain opportunity cost. Who else in FA would have been our savior? Because that's not what those signings were intended to be by any stretch of the imagination.

I'm sorry Ziggy but your rants are getting hazy. On one thread, you're complaining about the youth and drafting; now that they're called up, you're complaining about the signings. You're arguing against yourself across the board. I'm not against criticism, but the hypothesis that we're 'failing to identify talent' is based on false premises.

 

[Stimpythecat]

The signings of Gilbert, Purcell, etc. were placeholder signings. they were just to buy us time for LaDue, Kempe, Brodzinski, et all to develop in Ontario. they got to play significant minutes there that they wouldn't at the NHL level.

I don't buy the argument that the kings could have gotten a single decent player or two for the combined salaries of the guys that didn't work out.

Why? Because any decent player would want term. More than one year and in all liklihood 2-3. The cap and contract log jam is next season, not this season. Any term would screw us up for 2017-2018.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

You guys really think if any of the free agent signings were playing well the Kings would even bother calling up LaDue or Kempe this season? I don't think so. The Kings signed Purcell and Gilbert early on in free agency. They were not considered for minor league spots when Lombardi spent $3M on them.

Kempe and LaDue are up here because those signings were duds. They're up here because the team needs a boost and an injection of new blood that hasn't been tainted yet.

This is a team that averages less goals than the lowly Carolina Hurricanes. This is a team that has only two players who will have 20+ goals this season (Carter is already there, Pearson is at 16 as of today, the next highest is Toffoli with 9).

17 of their 28 wins have been in regulation. That's tied for the 8th fewest regulation wins, alongside Buffalo. Thank God for Pearson and Carter and the 3-on-3 OT format, because we'd be looking at a repeat of the 2014-15 season without it.

As of today they're a point out of a wild card spot, but thankfully have three games in hand on Calgary, and two points separates them from the top wild card spot. I don't think they'd be any worse had they started the season with Kempe, LaDue, Mersch, etc. all in the lineup from day one.

How am I arguing against youth? I've been in favor for it all along. My argument has been the lack of it and how there is barely any viable options available in Ontario due to poor scouting and draft choices. How many top six options does this team have in Ontario? Kempe was one, and Brodzinski is the other. That's it.

Some posters here are so dense and are afraid of accepting reality. A few of us skeptics have been in favor of a youth movement from day one. Take a look at the ****ing Blackhawks and how well they've done in spite of Toews and his struggles. They're getting contributions from other sources who are expected to produce and are getting more from a number of players that they have brought up from the minors. What a novel concept! And look at where they are in the standings.

What other excuses do you guys want to lean on?

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

You guys really think if any of the free agent signings were playing well the Kings would even bother calling up LaDue or Kempe this season? I don't think so. The Kings signed Purcell and Gilbert early on in free agency. They were not considered for minor league spots when Lombardi spent $3M on them.

Kempe and LaDue are up here because those signings were duds. They're up here because the team needs a boost and an injection of new blood that hasn't been tainted yet.

This is a team that averages less goals than the lowly Carolina Hurricanes. This is a team that has only two players who will have 20+ goals this season (Carter is already there, Pearson is at 16 as of today, the next highest is Toffoli with 9).

17 of their 28 wins have been in regulation. That's tied for the 8th fewest regulation wins, alongside Buffalo. Thank God for Pearson and Carter and the 3-on-3 OT format, because we'd be looking at a repeat of the 2014-15 season without it.

As of today they're a point out of a wild card spot, but thankfully have three games in hand on Calgary, and two points separates them from the top wild card spot. I don't think they'd be any worse had they started the season with Kempe, LaDue, Mersch, etc. all in the lineup from day one.

How am I arguing against youth? I've been in favor for it all along. My argument has been the lack of it and how there is barely any viable options available in Ontario due to poor scouting and draft choices. How many top six options does this team have in Ontario? Kempe was one, and Brodzinski is the other. That's it.

Some posters here are so dense and are afraid of accepting reality. A few of us skeptics have been in favor of a youth movement from day one. Take a look at the ****ing Blackhawks and how well they've done in spite of Toews and his struggles. They're getting contributions from other sources who are expected to produce and are getting more from a number of players that they have brought up from the minors. What a novel concept! And look at where they are in the standings.

What other excuses do you guys want to lean on?

Chicago is the Panarin and Kane show. If you're using them as an example, you may want to review. Their only real 'youngster' making a big contribution is Hartman, a 2013 first round pick. You know who our comparable is there? Our 2012 first round pick, Tanner Pearson. Who would you rather have? Also, Hartman has 23 points in 52 games, and has spent time with Toews as his C; Dowd has 17 in 48. That smells like the organization knows how to find talent, hmm?

You want to go down the list of rookies, you'll be pleasantly surprised to find our youth are contributing more than chicago's are. But you won't, because that's not convenient to your argument.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Chicago is the Panarin and Kane show. If you're using them as an example, you may want to review. Their only real 'youngster' making a big contribution is Hartman, a 2013 first round pick. You know who our comparable is there? Our 2012 first round pick, Tanner Pearson. Who would you rather have? Also, Hartman has 23 points in 52 games, and has spent time with Toews as his C; Dowd has 17 in 48. That smells like the organization knows how to find talent, hmm?

You want to go down the list of rookies, you'll be pleasantly surprised to find our youth are contributing more than chicago's are. But you won't, because that's not convenient to your argument.

You're so full of yourself. Maybe when you remove your lips from Lombardi's rear end you'll notice the facts.

Hartman (22 y.o.), 13 goals, 23 points
Hinostroza (22 y.o.), 6 goals, 14 points
Schmaltz (20 y.o.), 4 goals, 10 points
Kero (24 y.o.), 4 goals, 8 points
Motte (21 y.o.), 4 goals, 7 points
Rasmussen (26 y.o.), 4 goals, 8 points

35 goals from players who the Hawks have brought up this season.

Let's see how the Kings compare...

Dowd (26 y.o.), 4 goals, 17 points

Oh, that's it. Dowd is the only forward the Kings brought up from Ontario this season (until Kempe was called up this week).

So, what was that again? Our youth is contributing more than Chicago's? Can't wait to see your excuse filled response.

 

[HookKing]

And how would you be able to prove it?

Then why ask? Ask a silly question get a silly answer.

 

[driller1]

How am I arguing against youth? I've been in favor for it all along. My argument has been the lack of it and how there is barely any viable options available in Ontario due to poor scouting and draft choices. How many top six options does this team have in Ontario? Kempe was one, and Brodzinski is the other. That's it.

The reality is that you only One Top-6 player to call up every other year. True Top-6 players like Carter, Kopitar will be in the NHL for well in excess of 12 years. I would be disappointed if Tofolli and Pearson didn't make it at least 10 years. But 6 spots divided into 12 years is one every other year. You make it seem like we need to restock the Top 6 every year or something. We don't.

Would I like more options? Yes. But the sky isn't falling either.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

The reality is that you only One Top-6 player to call up every other year. True Top-6 players like Carter, Kopitar will be in the NHL for well in excess of 12 years. I would be disappointed if Tofolli and Pearson didn't make it at least 10 years. But 6 spots divided into 12 years is one every other year. You make it seem like we need to restock the Top 6 every year or something. We don't.

Would I like more options? Yes. But the sky isn't falling either.

The problem is when the wheels fall off a guy like Brown and Gaborik, where do you slot them, and who steps in for them? Then you add in the struggles of everyone else not named Carter or Pearson and you have a big dilemma due to cap constraints and a lack of player development up front.

The sky isn't falling? I guess there's nowhere to go but up when you have one playoff victory in the last two seasons, right?

How many of you experienced the lows of this team after they reached the Cup Finals in '93? We assumed that there's still a future with guys like Blake, Zhitnik and Sydor being the three young pillars on the blueline. That all fell apart and they didn't win a single playoff series again until 2001. And after 2001, they didn't win another playoff series until 2012.

Guess we'll see how things fare this April. I hope the new kids come in and blow us all away, but I'm also not going to set myself up for disappointment and expect unrealistic results from them. It's not like they're bringing up another Anze Kopitar or Drew Doughty. I just want them to do well, see the team get younger, and actually show that they belong at this stage as Derek Forbort and Kevin Gravel and Nic Dowd have shown.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Then why ask? Ask a silly question get a silly answer.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=hypothetical+question

 

[KingCanadain1976]

You're so full of yourself. Maybe when you remove your lips from Lombardi's rear end you'll notice the facts.

Hartman (22 y.o.), 13 goals, 23 points
Hinostroza (22 y.o.), 6 goals, 14 points
Schmaltz (20 y.o.), 4 goals, 10 points
Kero (24 y.o.), 4 goals, 8 points
Motte (21 y.o.), 4 goals, 7 points
Rasmussen (26 y.o.), 4 goals, 8 points

35 goals from players who the Hawks have brought up this season.

Let's see how the Kings compare...

Dowd (26 y.o.), 4 goals, 17 points

Oh, that's it. Dowd is the only forward the Kings brought up from Ontario this season (until Kempe was called up this week).

So, what was that again? Our youth is contributing more than Chicago's? Can't wait to see your excuse filled response.

wow is this the best ever example of kettle calling a pot black i've seen in years ty

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

You're so full of yourself. Maybe when you remove your lips from Lombardi's rear end you'll notice the facts.

Hartman (22 y.o.), 13 goals, 23 points
Hinostroza (22 y.o.), 6 goals, 14 points
Schmaltz (20 y.o.), 4 goals, 10 points
Kero (24 y.o.), 4 goals, 8 points
Motte (21 y.o.), 4 goals, 7 points
Rasmussen (26 y.o.), 4 goals, 8 points

35 goals from players who the Hawks have brought up this season.

Let's see how the Kings compare...

Dowd (26 y.o.), 4 goals, 17 points

Oh, that's it. Dowd is the only forward the Kings brought up from Ontario this season (until Kempe was called up this week).

So, what was that again? Our youth is contributing more than Chicago's? Can't wait to see your excuse filled response.

Let me get this straight. 4 guys with 10 points or less--and you want to toot your horn that they're 'producing?' How do you feel about Jordan Nolan? He'd go right in the middle of that chart. Dwight King as well. But hey, I'm sure Chicago is thrilled their first and second rounders are becoming decent bottom sixers. Meanwhile, our 5th and 6th round picks are entering the lineup and performing exactly the same way, the only difference is you're *****ing about those players and somehow exalting Chicago's.

Care to lecture me on who is full of themselves some more? I'd better never again hear about how Kyle Clifford is a wasted second round pick since he has more goals and points than most of Chicago's unstoppable youth in the lineup. Tell me about how great Chicago has been at finding quality in their draft over us.

Forbort has more points than anyone not named Hartman there.

Maybe when you remove ego from the equation you'll be able to form a reasonable middle stance instead of cherry picking and contradicting yourself from thread to thread. It's boring and predictable when you're hovering your finger over the "nuke DL everything he does is bad" button. I'm all for criticism and I can appreciate the other side of the argument when it doesn't stay on the other side just for the sake of being outraged.

 

[PJ Kings Hockey]

Now this is what I call an entertaining pre-game thread.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Now this is what I call an entertaining pre-game thread.

I'd rather have a beer with Ziggy. I get the feeling a lot of this gets lost in translation over the internet.

 

[KingPuckChoo]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=hypothetical+question

how'd you do that?? that's so cool lol

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

It isn't cherry picking stats or facts when I present a ****ing list of six forwards on one of the best team's in the league who are in their early 20s and contributing to varying degrees.

The Kings are one of the oldest teams in the league. Is that cherry picking as well?

The Hawks are a great example of a team that had to restructure itself as a result of the cap. Look at where they're at and what they're doing now. They are bringing up players and using them effectively. Are you guys so obtuse that this fact isn't registering in your heads?

The Kings have struggled to do this because they hardly have any options in Ontario. Why is it so difficult for some of you to accept this as a fact? I'm not making these numbers up when I show that the Kings have gotten older (as has Ontario), and haven't had many options to recall.

And now I ask, why is that, and who's responsible for it?

 

[King'sPawn]

The Kings have struggled to do this because they hardly have any options in Ontario. Why is it so difficult for some of you to accept this as a fact?

Because it's not a fact. It's an opinion. One I don't entirely disagree with, but it's an opinion.

And now I ask, why is that, and who's responsible for it?

I feel Lombardi is responsible for trading away some valuable assets for quick fixes. But some players acted irresponsibly which also affected the depth.

Lombardi made some moves which impacted the cupboard, but his hands were tied with some valuable players.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Because it's not a fact. It's an opinion. One I don't entirely disagree with, but it's an opinion.

Until Kempe, only one forward was brought up from Ontario: Nic Dowd. That's not an opinion.

I feel Lombardi is responsible for trading away some valuable assets for quick fixes. But some players acted irresponsibly which also affected the depth.

Lombardi made some moves which impacted the cupboard, but his hands were tied with some valuable players.

That's all his own doing.

Anyhow, this first game back from the break sure inspires a lot of confidence.