2019-20 Kings News/Rumors

Status
Not open for further replies.

SettlementRichie10

Registered User
May 6, 2012
10,202
8,416
I think that is totally fair, adopting a team that moves into your home city just makes sense. I'm sure there are quite a lot of former Kings fans that cheer for VGK now as well, with frozen fury being a thing for so long.

Kings will always be #1 because they’re the team of my childhood and it’s almost impossible to supplant that nostalgia. But VGK definitely second for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crassbonanza

KINGS17

Smartest in the Room
Apr 6, 2006
32,564
11,711
Trevor Moore is a 24-year old undrafted forward. This guy is an AHL'er. A third round pick, maybe third round pick, and an AHL'er is the best Blake could do for Clifford AND Campbell. Not a very good trade for the Kings. Would have rather kept a character player like Clifford, and just trade Campbell to make room for Petersen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DryIslandBartender

kilowatt

the vibes are not immaculate
Jan 1, 2009
18,684
21,757
Trevor Moore is a 24-year old undrafted forward. This guy is an AHL'er. A third round pick, maybe third round pick, and an AHL'er is the best Blake could do for Clifford AND Campbell. Not a very good trade for the Kings. Would have rather kept a character player like Clifford, and just trade Campbell to make room for Petersen.

To be fair, it's a third in 2020 and either a second or third in 2021, depending on whether 1. Clifford re-signs, or 2. Campbell wins at least 6 regular season games.
 

KINGS17

Smartest in the Room
Apr 6, 2006
32,564
11,711
The conditional 3rd is guaranteed, it becomes a 2nd if Campbell wins six games or Clifford is re-signed by the Leafs.

They dealt a UFA grinder and a backup goalie. Remember what the Kings got when they dealt a young Sean Avery? A bunch of junk.

I think Clifford will be back with the Kings on July 1.
Well, that's a little better.
 

Ziggy Stardust

Master Debater
Jul 25, 2002
63,608
35,667
Parts Unknown
To be fair, it's a third in 2020 and either a second or third in 2021, depending on whether 1. Clifford re-signs, or 2. Campbell wins at least 6 regular season games.

He's around 11th among Kings forward in average ice time. The only forwards who averaged less ice time were Matt Luff and Jaret-Anderson Dolan. Clifford was great in his role, but getting a 3rd and/or a potential 2nd or additional 3rd is a pretty good haul.

Look at what Nate Thompson was dealt for. That's about what the going rate normally is for a bottom line forward.
 

kings11

Registered User
Sep 29, 2011
6,311
4,127
Las Vegas
He's around 11th among Kings forward in average ice time. The only forwards who averaged less ice time were Matt Luff and Jaret-Anderson Dolan. Clifford was great in his role, but getting a 3rd and/or a potential 2nd or additional 3rd is a pretty good haul.

Look at what Nate Thompson was dealt for. That's about what the going rate normally is for a bottom line forward.
Exactly, it’s a good haul being 2- 3rds... a potential 2nd makes it sweeter
 

King'sPawn

Enjoy the chaos
Jul 1, 2003
22,927
23,499
I'm sorry man but yes, you are being deliberately obtuse to make your point. It is a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem regardless, but the answers to both questions are :yes."

I think the conclusion is fine, but you have to make a lot of oversights for the premises.

Saying Kings haven't drafted and developed a regular top line forward since '05 deliberately overlooks what I posted above about '09 and forward (Does Schenn not count?), in addition to previous years:

08--Drafted Doughty, Teubert (LOL), Voynov in the first 32 picks. I'd say they did great with what they had there.
07--another d-man high in Hickey. Simmonds at 61--should they have developed him better? I'm not so sure. He became a PP monster when he left but he was essentially the same player.
06--Bernier highest pick, Trevor Lewis...not sure they could have done much more with him.

So from '06 on...they either drafted a d-man/goalie with their highest pick, traded the pick or the player, or turned them into a player appropriate to their draft spot. If we're looking at strictly top-line forwards, they haven't had the opportunity imo. That's a lot of d-man and goalie development, appropriate to a team that was very focused on two-way hockey. "What we're doing wrong" is simply not throwing top-echelon picks at forward talent, not giving appropriate credit for UFA signings (the school of thought that discounts Iafallo, Muzzin, Jones because "we didn't draft them," which I think is a little bit dishonest), and not giving guys like Schenn, Toffoli, Pearson appropriate credit for the players they are.

Really the only guy from those draft classes on I look at and wonder what could have been is Moller.

Edit: I think the question will have to be answered with this crop of dudes from the last three years: Turcotte, Vilardi, Kaliyev, Fagemo, Kupari, Thomas, Shafigullin, JAD is a good sample size of diverse top-end talent to see what happens. It's terrifying that it's high-stakes but it's the only way to know.

Kings drafted Schenn, who had a good career. Again, I am saying the amateur scouts are doing a great job.

But would you say the Kings "developed" Schenn? He was traded 2 years after being drafted. Played 9 games in the NHL with LA and 7 games in the AHL with Manchester. Do you really think the development staff can claim credit for how his career has turned out?

I repeat, the top line LW the past few seasons is an UNDRAFTED UFA. Amateur scouts nailed it with Iafallo. But undrafted players typically have a very low chance of having a great career.

So, I am arguing if you have scouts who can find a top line forward without even a 7th round pick, saying the development staff hasn't had much to work with is a flimsy excuse.

If you insist they haven't had much to work with, then I'll just disagree. Frankly, a development team shouldn't "need" a high pick to be successful. That's the Edmonton Oilers excuse, whose only good players are top 3 picks.

Again: look at what Ranford did with Quick (3rd tound), Jones (undrafted), Campbell (1st round, but career was almost over). Scrivens had a good run, too. Bernier had a decent career.

If you want to chance plateauing the upcoming promising players by leaving them in the hands of staff who need a high pick to look good, by all means, keep being patient. Nothing wrong with it. I just think the Kings should expect better and fix things before waiting another few years (because we can't judge the current crop for another few years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigBrown

Raccoon Jesus

We were right there
Oct 30, 2008
63,492
66,570
I.E.
Kings drafted Schenn, who had a good career. Again, I am saying the amateur scouts are doing a great job.

But would you say the Kings "developed" Schenn? He was traded 2 years after being drafted. Played 9 games in the NHL with LA and 7 games in the AHL with Manchester. Do you really think the development staff can claim credit for how his career has turned out?

I repeat, the top line LW the past few seasons is an UNDRAFTED UFA. Amateur scouts nailed it with Iafallo. But undrafted players typically have a very low chance of having a great career.

So, I am arguing if you have scouts who can find a top line forward without even a 7th round pick, saying the development staff hasn't had much to work with is a flimsy excuse.

If you insist they haven't had much to work with, then I'll just disagree. Frankly, a development team shouldn't "need" a high pick to be successful. That's the Edmonton Oilers excuse, whose only good players are top 3 picks.

Again: look at what Ranford did with Quick (3rd tound), Jones (undrafted), Campbell (1st round, but career was almost over). Scrivens had a good run, too. Bernier had a decent career.

If you want to chance plateauing the upcoming promising players by leaving them in the hands of staff who need a high pick to look good, by all means, keep being patient. Nothing wrong with it. I just think the Kings should expect better and fix things before waiting another few years (because we can't judge the current crop for another few years.


Ehh, I wouldn't compare goalies to position players, lots of very good goalies aren't 1st rounders. Apples to oranges imo.

Ultimately I agree with you, like I said. I'm flat out worried that Gabe Vilardi is learning anything from Nelson Emerson and co. But I also don't think there's evidence to go by because they haven't had much in the way of skill players to work with. I will totally disagree with you that they've had really ANYTHING to work with. I've literally laid out a decade of picks, and most of them that we've developed have been successful relative to their draft spot. Holding them accountable for not drafting a Jamie Benn with a 5th or something is I guess 'fair' in the sense that you need to hit a home run or two to be successful, but to expect that isn't a fair metric.

Hell the only thing I like with our development squad is Mikey Anderson with SOD, that's f***ing nails.

You say "So, I am arguing if you have scouts who can find a top line forward without even a 7th round pick, saying the development staff hasn't had much to work with is a flimsy excuse." Can you give me an example of someone they should have done better with?
 

funky

Build around Byfield, not the vets
Mar 9, 2002
7,078
4,744
Great move in adding at minimum a bonus 3rd the next 2 drafts as well as a great AHL scoring vet or NHL bottom 6 winger for our backup and 1/3 year of Cliffy. Hopefully Campbell helps the Leafs to the playoffs and we get Upgraded to a 2nd.

Loved Cliffy but this shows the team anyone can get traded.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crassbonanza

King'sPawn

Enjoy the chaos
Jul 1, 2003
22,927
23,499
You say "So, I am arguing if you have scouts who can find a top line forward without even a 7th round pick, saying the development staff hasn't had much to work with is a flimsy excuse." Can you give me an example of someone they should have done better with?

I'm not dodging. Just on my phone and lazy. I'll try to get back to you tomorrow. Feel free to call me out/remind me if I forget :)
 

KingsFan7824

Registered User
Dec 4, 2003
19,528
7,603
Visit site
Kings drafted Schenn, who had a good career. Again, I am saying the amateur scouts are doing a great job.

But would you say the Kings "developed" Schenn? He was traded 2 years after being drafted. Played 9 games in the NHL with LA and 7 games in the AHL with Manchester. Do you really think the development staff can claim credit for how his career has turned out?

I repeat, the top line LW the past few seasons is an UNDRAFTED UFA. Amateur scouts nailed it with Iafallo. But undrafted players typically have a very low chance of having a great career.

So, I am arguing if you have scouts who can find a top line forward without even a 7th round pick, saying the development staff hasn't had much to work with is a flimsy excuse.

If you insist they haven't had much to work with, then I'll just disagree. Frankly, a development team shouldn't "need" a high pick to be successful. That's the Edmonton Oilers excuse, whose only good players are top 3 picks.

Again: look at what Ranford did with Quick (3rd tound), Jones (undrafted), Campbell (1st round, but career was almost over). Scrivens had a good run, too. Bernier had a decent career.

If you want to chance plateauing the upcoming promising players by leaving them in the hands of staff who need a high pick to look good, by all means, keep being patient. Nothing wrong with it. I just think the Kings should expect better and fix things before waiting another few years (because we can't judge the current crop for another few years.

Did TB develop their 58th overall pick from 2011? Barely played in Russia the year after being drafted, went to the Q for 1 year, then barely spent any time in the AHL before being on the NHL team. Development comes into play, but you also just need talent. Easier to mold a talented player than it is to squeeze a player with little ceiling. Sometimes there's blame thrown around for Clifford being on the team so soon, but there was never going to be much more than what there was to Clifford. Even if he spent a couple years in the minors, and only got a full time spot in say 13-14, he wasn't going to be scoring 25 goals a year because he played in the AHL. In hindsight, there weren't that many players they should've drafted at that spot instead. Not realistically anyway. It was fine to go low ceiling and safe. Games played means something, especially when a guy plays like he does, and Clifford is top 10 in his draft class in that category.
 

kovacro

Uvijek Vjerni
Nov 20, 2008
9,935
5,418
Hamilton, ON
I'd put AMart in bubble wrap and/or sit him some prior to the deadline. The list of teams looking for experienced defense help with Stanley Cup pedigree is long. Hope for that deadline day bidding war and a nice return.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: YP44

YP44

Registered User
Jan 30, 2012
27,351
7,687
Calgary, AB
I'd put AMart in bubble wrap and/or sit him some prior to the deadline. The list of teams looking for experienced defense help with Stanley Cup pedigree is long. Hope for that deadline day bidding war and a nice return.

same with toffoli.
 

DoktorJeep

Luc and Rob are a waste of time and money.
Aug 2, 2005
6,811
6,177
OC
BLuc should have a chat with the fellas who have NMC's, see if they want to play playoff hockey for the remainder of their careers. Just a chat.

Clifford #AlwaysaKing

Kovi, Nate Dog, Foles and Muzz are all playing better since leaving the Kings. Now Cliffy and Soupy have a chance to shine and convince Quicky, Cartsy, and Drew to request a trade to greener pastures.

#KingsCoreDiaspora
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fat Elvis
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad