Calad
Section 422
Kravtsov of any interest here? Or any other pieces in the Rangers system, not named Kakko or Lafreniere?
Value of: Alex Turcotte
- Thread starter DeagleJenkins
- Start date
Kravtsov of any interest here? Or any other pieces in the Rangers system, not named Kakko or Lafreniere?
Seabrook for Turcotte
Safe to say Turcotte will never have the level of intangibles Seabrook has
Safe to say Turcotte will never have the level of intangibles Seabrook has
I would be kinda interested in Kravtsov. Problem is that he isn't turning heads at all with his performance
I would still do Lizotte for Kravtsov since i believe he can turn it around
kilowatt
the vibes are not immaculate
- Jan 1, 2009
- 18,674
- 21,732
I assume you are new here. One of the main traits you have to bring to post in here, is to ignore facts.
Guitpik
Registered User
- Jul 8, 2006
- 930
- 641
Igor Shestyorkin
#26, the sickest of 'em all.
Do you have the LA Kings draft rankings at your disposal or something?
Reaper45
Registered User
Vilardi can always shift to RW, Thomas can play wing. The Kings have had plenty of success with 2 centers on a line.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,563
- 18,904
Are you going to explain the "huge" talent gap between Boldy and Turcotte without using draft position, or are you done with that discussion?
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,248
- 12,390
I don't really see any conceivable reason for the Kings to be moving a young prospect like Turcotte. He's part of the future they're trying to build. He can play Center or Wing, as can most of their top forward prospects. There's no issue there. If they need defencemen, they can draft and develop them, and in the meantime they've still got Doughty for a long time to come.
It just doesn't make any sense, for them to move a player like Turcotte. Period.
It just doesn't make any sense, for them to move a player like Turcotte. Period.
Reaper45
Registered User
Correct. Only way it'd make sense if it was for a #1 d prospect.
Guitpik
Registered User
- Jul 8, 2006
- 930
- 641
The Kings are NOT going to trade either Turcotte or Villardi. The prospect of having a Center depth of Byfield - Turcotte - Vilardi, with all three able to slot in for each other, all being close in age, is not something that this team should trade away. It's rare that a team can draft that kind of Center depth so close together, Blake would be F'n nuts to trade that.
Other than that, the Kings are too early in their rebuild to start gutting the top end of their depth. They aren't going to be ready to contend for at least a couple years. When they get to the point where they are player or two away from getting to the next level, that will be when they start making trades.
Other than that, the Kings are too early in their rebuild to start gutting the top end of their depth. They aren't going to be ready to contend for at least a couple years. When they get to the point where they are player or two away from getting to the next level, that will be when they start making trades.
Guitpik
Registered User
- Jul 8, 2006
- 930
- 641
Best Player Available. Blake stated that after the Draft Lottery. He said it doesn't matter if it's a position of strength, they pick by BPA. They picked by need once, and it was without a doubt the wrong thing to do. He said they will definitely not be taking defense with the #2.
stempniaksen
Registered User
- Oct 12, 2008
- 11,167
- 4,492
Doubt it's something either team have the stomach to pull the trigger on, but something around Turcotte for Brannstrom+NYI 1st seems like it could make sense for both teams. Kings get a blue chip defensive prospect and can look at adding one of the talented wingers that should be available later in the 1st round. Sens continue to add to the stable of Americans they've drafted recently and gives them the option of going Drysdale/Sanderson at #5.
I think it would still be better to draft another high end center prospect.
You can always turn centers to wingers or trade them for defensemen. I feel like trading a good prospect because you have a couple of good prospects is never a good idea, because there's no saying that any of them are actually going to contribute at the NHL level until they show you they can do it.
Guitpik
Registered User
- Jul 8, 2006
- 930
- 641
Guitpik
Registered User
- Jul 8, 2006
- 930
- 641
As a Kings fan, I definitely had questions regarding Vivaldi's health, to the point where I wasn't really counting on him, not only supporting his draft status, but making an NHL roster. However, his time with Ontario and the Kings answered both of those questions.
Players get injured in all sports, it happens. It's how they respond to injury that I look for. Kind of like La Freniere getting injured in the WJC, I was looking to see how he responded to that. And he did, big time. Right there, in my opinion he answered any question of being the best prospect in this draft class. I see that same attribute in Vilardi and I don't see the Kings trading home at this point.
Guitpik
Registered User
- Jul 8, 2006
- 930
- 641
John Hoven, who is the closest Kings insider to the pulse of this team, did say that Byfield is the leading candidate at #2.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,563
- 18,904
That does absolutely nothing to explain any kind of talent gap whatsoever
BuiumSaveUs
Danila Yurov Fan Club Executive Assistant
- May 2, 2018
- 19,152
- 12,071
There isn’t a one-size fits all formula for decideding what makes a player a good center and a good winger. The talent gap you speak of doesn’t exist. Turcotte is a better skater. That’s it. Boldy can create things with his size and hands like Turcotte couldn’t dream of. I’d put Zegras and Newhook in front of Turcotte personally in terms of centers with high ceilings.
Igor Shestyorkin
#26, the sickest of 'em all.
Pavel Buchnevich
"Pavel Buchnevich The Fake"
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,563
- 18,904
If you go back and look at the draft order, the players taken, you might notice a pattern
