gritdash60
Registered User
Some team should just get him and Jesse Puljujärvi and form a line of "could've beens". Wonder who would be the center for that line, Byfield?
Really hasn't produced much at the pro level. 56 points in 91 AHL games for a high skill player. 0 points in 12 NHL games. Had a solid Freshman year at a PPG. Opted to turn pro given the uncertainties of Covid in the Big10. Hasn't worked out for him yet.Most people realize that.
I would much rather gamble on the potential upside of Turcotte vs. that of some random 3rd round pick is all.
He has more value to the Kings than he does on the open market, it's not some metacommentary on thinking all prospects pan out. If anything, your post is ironic because it suggests gambling on a mid round pick is somehow better.
Really hasn't produced much at the pro level. 56 points in 91 AHL games for a high skill player. 0 points in 12 NHL games. Had a solid Freshman year at a PPG. Opted to turn pro given the uncertainties of Covid in the Big10. Hasn't worked out for him yet.
As long as you adjust your expectations on Turcotte down, there's really no difference between Turcotte and a 3rd round pick.And what does a midround pick do for a current playoff team in contrast?
Other than the obvious untapped upside of the former 5th OA pick, absolutely.As long as you adjust your expectations on Turcotte down, there's really no difference between Turcotte and a 3rd round pick.
I have no issue with your first sentence, but disagree with the bolded. His value is his value. It’s like Rangers fans who say they wouldn’t trade Lafreniere for anything less than a top 10 pick. If he was on another team, they obviously wouldn’t trade a top 10 pick for him, so the idea that they should value him that highly just because they drafted him is silly. Sunk cost. If you wouldn’t trade a first or second for Turcotte if he was on another team, then he shouldn’t hold that value to you.I would much rather gamble on the potential upside of Turcotte vs. that of some random 3rd round pick is all.
He has more value to the Kings than he does on the open market, it's not some metacommentary on thinking all prospects pan out. If anything, your post is ironic because it suggests gambling on a mid round pick is somehow better.
Value in a vacuum versus situational value to an organization are two entirely different things.I have no issue with your first sentence, but disagree with the bolded. His value is his value. It’s like Rangers fans who say they wouldn’t trade Lafreniere for anything less than a top 10 pick. If he was on another team, they obviously wouldn’t trade a top 10 pick for him, so the idea that they should value him that highly just because they drafted him is silly. Sunk cost. If you wouldn’t trade a first or second for Turcotte if he was on another team, then he shouldn’t hold that value to you.
What’s the situation you’re referring to that Increases his value beyond market value?Value in a vacuum versus situational value to an organization are two entirely different things.
As long as you adjust your expectations on Turcotte down, there's really no difference between Turcotte and a 3rd round pick.
I have no issue with your first sentence, but disagree with the bolded. His value is his value. It’s like Rangers fans who say they wouldn’t trade Lafreniere for anything less than a top 10 pick. If he was on another team, they obviously wouldn’t trade a top 10 pick for him, so the idea that they should value him that highly just because they drafted him is silly. Sunk cost. If you wouldn’t trade a first or second for Turcotte if he was on another team, then he shouldn’t hold that value to you.
No offense taken. What is the situational value you and others refer to that increases his value to the kings beyond his market value?a 2024 3rd round pick does nothing for the Kings this year.
Turcotte is 22 and has proven he can--at worst--be a very useful depth player.
Yes, there is a difference.
See above, and also no, if you can't make sense of the concept of situational/contextual value vs. value in a vacuum, I don't know what to say to you, no offense intended.
King's might as well hold on to him at this point instead of dumping him for low ball offers.
Over Turcotte in his draft year, maybe he was over-drafted in hindsight since he never had elite skill but make no mistake about it, awful development by LA and injuries have ruined him, definitely had Larkin type potential.
the value in him going on to some form of a nhl career or more.What’s the situation you’re referring to that Increases his value beyond market value?
That's valuing your facade over your structure, which is a common but ultimately destructive way of looking at any choice. Road to failure and collapse.the value in him going on to some form of a nhl career or more.
this would mitigate or even vindicate the pick at a later date.
One you trade him its a failed pick forever and even worse if he starts to perform on another team.
Any team making a trade takes that same risk. His likelihood of a nhl career is factored into his market value. Where you picked him is a sunk cost and irrelevant.the value in him going on to some form of a nhl career or more.
this would mitigate or even vindicate the pick at a later date.
One you trade him its a failed pick forever and even worse if he starts to perform on another team.
Well, Turcotte might be able to play right now. A future pick cant.As long as you adjust your expectations on Turcotte down, there's really no difference between Turcotte and a 3rd round pick.
SOounds like you live in Canada from that comment.That's valuing your facade over your structure, which is a common but ultimately destructive way of looking at any choice. Road to failure and collapse.
Right , we are not trading Turcotte and not taking any risk yet.Any team making a trade takes that same risk. His likelihood of a nhl career is factored into his market value. Where you picked him is a sunk cost and irrelevant.
Chicago has unfortunately been on the wrong side of these trades. We traded for Strome and lost. We traded for Alex Nylander and lost. We traded for Rundblad and lost (that pick turned into Dvorak). Those teams properly assessed the value of their player, and where he was drafted years prior didn’t matter.
We need you to keep Bergevin away from Robitaille and the KingsExcellent reclamation project for Montréal, with all the others
What are Los Angeles needs?
To clarify I meant in terms of on ice potential, ie a lower case 1C or elite 2C, not actual playing style!He was never remotely Larkin-like at all though. He was always a pretty sluggish skater. He had skill, but nothing like that zip around dynamic speed and attacking mentality of Larkin.
We you to keep Bergevin away from Robitaille and the Kings
Maybe try next year. Not currently for sale.If LA needs a D prospect, we could package one + mid pick for Turcotte