Toggle sidebar

Speculation: 2020-21 News/Rumors/Roster Thread Part II

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Doughty, Walker, Roy on the right side. Maatta, MacD, Anderson, Clague, Bjornfot on the left. Some of the young guys have to start playing to know what they are or are not. Where's the room to add another NHL guy?
 
KingsFan7824 said:
Doughty, Walker, Roy on the right side. Maatta, MacD, Anderson, Clague, Bjornfot on the left. Some of the young guys have to start playing to know what they are or are not. Where's the room to add another NHL guy?
Click to expand...

Alt was added to the Reign. That’s the backup of the backup of the backup.

Otherwise, the roster candidates are set and it’s all gonna be taking the spot on the roster.
 
KingTech said:
Not sure Ghost can play the defense that would be expected of him in la However i would not mind finding out first hand.
Click to expand...

Ya I think it is risky, but I also imagine the acquisition cost is low, maybe even could come with a sweetener. Of course that was before Maata and (sorry forget his name-Niskanen?) retired in philly
 
YP44 said:
Ya I think it is risky, but I also imagine the acquisition cost is low, maybe even could come with a sweetener. Of course that was before Maata and (sorry forget his name-Niskanen?) retired in philly
Click to expand...

I think we might still want another vet or younger established defense. As I stated elsewhere Drew is playing far to many minutes and they need to come down bad.
 
KopitarFAN said:
Something like this:

Iafallo - Kopitar - Brown
Kempe - Vilardi - Frk
Wagner - Lizotte - Carter
Grundström - Amadio - Moore
Luff, Anderson-Dolan rotating in and out.

Byfield or Kaliyev might a few games, but I wouldn't expect either of them to stick around.
Click to expand...
And where exactly would Byfield go if not with the Kings? Back to the OHL where body checking isn't allowed?
 
KopitarFAN said:
Yea. Better than wasting a year on his ELC for a partial season.

Or this:
Click to expand...
Is it really better? He's already a giant, I think it would be horrible for his development to go back to the O where he'll have too easy of a time because he won't be worrying about getting his clock cleaned. Not to mention the OHL has a much higher chance of not actually playing this season than the NHL does. The OHL doesn't have the resources that the NHL does in terms of preventing corona outbreaks. Europe would be great, but MacLellan's quote about the rebuild being done and turning the corner the other day, plus everything I've seen and heard leads me to believe he'll be with the Kings full time.
 
J Smoove said:
Is it really better? He's already a giant, I think it would be horrible for his development to go back to the O where he'll have too easy of a time because he won't be worrying about getting his clock cleaned. Not to mention the OHL has a much higher chance of not actually playing this season than the NHL does. The OHL doesn't have the resources that the NHL does in terms of preventing corona outbreaks. Europe would be great, but MacLellan's quote about the rebuild being done and turning the corner the other day, plus everything I've seen and heard leads me to believe he'll be with the Kings full time.
Click to expand...

It's about asset management, I'd rather not have one of few cost effective years be wasted, not only on a partial season, but also one where he'll be relegated to a bottom six role, and i'm not inclined to believe that McLellan's recent comments mean that he's giving an 18 year old big minutes.

I see it as more of Melrose with Stamkos situation, not because Todd is a bad coach, but rather they may have talked themselves into thinking they can win anything more than 4th or 5th depending on who is in the division. So again, it's a waste unless Byfield can play a prominent role or they have chance to win something, and they don't.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KINGS17 and Schrute farms
ELC year only gets burned if he plays in more than nine NHL games (although I'd need to double check if that gets prorated for a shortened season). If the OHL isn't playing yet, I could see the Kings keeping Byfield around by stretching those nine games over several weeks before making a final decision. Basically the same thing the Kings did with Brayden Schenn in 2010.

There's probably some benefit for Byfield to be practicing against NHLers over that time. If the rumor that there'll be expanded rosters, keeping Byfield around wouldn't be as big a problem as it would be normally.

If it were me, I'd probably want to preserve an ELC year for his age 21 season over his age 18 season but it's not necessarily a decision you have to make right away.
 
KopitarFAN said:
It's about asset management, I'd rather not have one of few cost effective years be wasted, not only on a partial season, but also one where he'll be relegated to a bottom six role, and i'm not inclined to believe that McLellan's recent comments mean that he's giving an 18 year old big minutes.

I see it as more of Melrose with Stamkos situation, not because Todd is a bad coach, but rather they may have talked themselves into thinking they can win anything more than 4th or 5th depending on who is in the division. So again, it's a waste unless Byfield can play a prominent role or they have chance to win something, and they don't.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I get what you're saying. Though I could argue that him losing a valuable year of development by being the O is as bad or worse than burning a year from his ELC but gaining valuable development experience by training with the big club. Guess we'll find out soon enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Master Yoda
I just don't see it with Grundstrom. He's a wash with guys like Amadio and Luff, better in the corners with retrieval and possession, but lacking the higher offensive skill the other two have. I haven't seen anything that indicates he's not an expendable player.

That said, I'd put him in for an extended period to see if he's ever going to progress past a waiver level guy.
 
KingTech said:
I think we might still want another vet or younger established defense. As I stated elsewhere Drew is playing far to many minutes and they need to come down bad.
Click to expand...

Walker and Roy are already there behind Doughty. Run those two into the ground. They're young enough that their bodies can take it, but also old enough that they may or may not be long term assets anyway.

They got Maatta to eat minutes. MacD can play his 12 or whatever. It's time to find out what Anderson and Clague are. Bjornfot is already knocking.

They have more than enough potential warm bodies. Bring in who, and play him where? They have 14 or 15 dmen signed. That's enough to fill both the Kings and Reign, assuming the AHL is going to even have a season.

Unless someone is hurt like Forbort last year, which opened a spot for Hutton, I'd guess Blake is done.
 
Usually 2nd overall picks are ready enough to go right away. Having just turned 18 in August though, another year of junior isn't going to hurt Byfield.

Like Kopitar when they traded Belanger, you need a place to play him. Kopitar, Vilardi, Lizotte, Amadio, Anderrson, maybe Moore, JAD, Carter if need be, it's a lot of bodies. If QB is the 4C, is it worth it?

It's more interesting and fun if he's here, in any capacity, but there's also no rush.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KopitarFAN
Brodeur said:
ELC year only gets burned if he plays in more than nine NHL games (although I'd need to double check if that gets prorated for a shortened season). If the OHL isn't playing yet, I could see the Kings keeping Byfield around by stretching those nine games over several weeks before making a final decision. Basically the same thing the Kings did with Brayden Schenn in 2010.

There's probably some benefit for Byfield to be practicing against NHLers over that time. If the rumor that there'll be expanded rosters, keeping Byfield around wouldn't be as big a problem as it would be normally.

If it were me, I'd probably want to preserve an ELC year for his age 21 season over his age 18 season but it's not necessarily a decision you have to make right away.
Click to expand...

Burning the year would mean he signs a 2nd contract one year earlier, but it also means the AAV of that 2nd contract would likely be lower if he signed it after his age 20 season vs after his age 21 season. If he breaks out and has a PPG season at age 21 we might be wishing we had burned the year so we had locked him up before the breakout season.

Ultimately, I don't really care about the ELC. I'd like the organization to make the decision based on what is best for his development, even if its not ideal for the cap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dick341 and yankeeking
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom