Toggle sidebar

Around the League 2018-2019 Part 2- Everyone is having fun except us

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
AzKing said:
If you see any of these teams lose in the playoffs because of goaltending, there may be more interest in Quick in the offseason. Quick has had some rough moments this year but there is not denying that he is still a solid goalie and what he needs is a better team in front of him.
Click to expand...

The question will be about options. Is a better team in the position to spend that much, for that long, on an aging goalie? The Kings won 1 Cup with Quick at $6m, and he was 28 years old. Kopitar was at $7m for both, Brown at $3m for both, Carter at $5m for both, Doughty at $7m for both, Martinez at about $1m for both, and Muzzin was around for 1 Cup, and was at $1m for it.
 
From what I’ve read from Coyotes fans, Tippet may have been cancer for developing young talent. If so, why would we, a rebuilding team, be at all interested?
 
  • Like
Reactions: KINGS17
Ollie Weeks said:
From what I’ve read from Coyotes fans, Tippet may have been cancer for developing young talent. If so, why would we, a rebuilding team, be at all interested?
Click to expand...

Really, I think they got a lot of there young guys while he was there. Definitely more than whomever had been developing Strome.
 
Dewey is pretty much right to a large degree, however, he picked a horrible season to say it. Not that he has played that bad, but obviously the Kings are a dumpster fire so his argument loses some validity. Then again, he isn't saying he should win it, though I think we all agree he should have 3 or 4 Norris trophies, not one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YP44
EDM picks up at least a point assuring the Kings no worse than 9th in lottery odds.

Kings losing in SO assures them no worse than 7th.
 
Last edited:
Ziggy Stardust said:
Imagine if the Oilers won the draft lottery, the Avs get 2nd, dropping the Kings to 3rd.

All of this suffering, only to have it end with a swift kick in the balls.
Click to expand...
Oh you didn't even do worst case scenario. Ducks get 3rd, someone else gets 4th,and Kings get 5th.
 
KingsFan7824 said:
The question will be about options. Is a better team in the position to spend that much, for that long, on an aging goalie? The Kings won 1 Cup with Quick at $6m, and he was 28 years old. Kopitar was at $7m for both, Brown at $3m for both, Carter at $5m for both, Doughty at $7m for both, Martinez at about $1m for both, and Muzzin was around for 1 Cup, and was at $1m for it.
Click to expand...

A UFA Bobrovsky is going to cost you upwards of 8. Almost everyone under 5m is a total journeyman, and a few guys are due for raises. A team COULD take a chance on a journeyman, or pray an RFA steps up, but if you're a team whose goaltending is a questionmark (i.e. Calgary since Kipper), yeah, spending money on a goalie could be smart. I know that flies in the face of the current "lol replacement level goaltending" wisdom of "don't spend money on goalies" but Quick is 10th in cap hits and soon will have his salary cheaper than a bridge goalie and literally less than 1/3 of Price.

I don't know where the mythos about Quick being a huge contract comes from at this point frankly. Term being a couple more years, sure. Injury history, sure. But money? No. If I'm Calgary or SJ or any other team whose full-on visible achilles heel is G, I'd probably rather take a chance on Quick than the 15th straight incarnation of "1B goalie who falls apart after 40 games," which is basically going to be any dude you sign for less than 3 years for less than 5 million a year.
 
Raccoon Jesus said:
A UFA Bobrovsky is going to cost you upwards of 8. Almost everyone under 5m is a total journeyman, and a few guys are due for raises. A team COULD take a chance on a journeyman, or pray an RFA steps up, but if you're a team whose goaltending is a questionmark (i.e. Calgary since Kipper), yeah, spending money on a goalie could be smart. I know that flies in the face of the current "lol replacement level goaltending" wisdom of "don't spend money on goalies" but Quick is 10th in cap hits and soon will have his salary cheaper than a bridge goalie and literally less than 1/3 of Price.

I don't know where the mythos about Quick being a huge contract comes from at this point frankly. Term being a couple more years, sure. Injury history, sure. But money? No. If I'm Calgary or SJ or any other team whose full-on visible achilles heel is G, I'd probably rather take a chance on Quick than the 15th straight incarnation of "1B goalie who falls apart after 40 games," which is basically going to be any dude you sign for less than 3 years for less than 5 million a year.
Click to expand...

It's the age and term. DL kept the cap hit down, but it came at a cost. If Quick had 1 year, his hit could be $8m and it would still be easier to trade him. Even more likely that the Kings would retain 50% for 1 year to make it happen too.

Just going by history, goalie trades/value are complicated. Doesn't help anything, regardless of the context, that this is Quick's worst year of his career either. Or that, in relation to other non-Budaj goalies on the roster, his numbers look even worse. Even if you take out games the first couple games of the season before he was out injured. If some other team wants Quick, by all means, get rid of him. However, every variable is coming together to make it difficult to do. The only thing Quick has going for him is what he did 5+ years ago. Just like Richards, there's a mystique around Quick. Richards was a great leader, Quick is a big game warrior, but he hasn't been able to save a team from not winning only 1 playoff game since 2014. How good of a team does he have to go to in order for that team to take full advantage of what Quick has left? And does that team likely already have a goalie? Can an average team use a 33/34+ year old Quick to lift them to an elite level? If you're an average team, is that the investment you want to make in a hard cap league? If Calgary wants him after they lose this year, and waste career years from all their top scorers, that'll be great. Can Quick carry the Flames if they don't have 5 guys with 70+ points again though?

In a terrible and boring season, it will be fascinating to see if the Kings can actually get rid of any of their old crap. Plenty of talk about it, but just have to wait and see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raccoon Jesus and DoktorJeep
kingsholygrail said:
Could be Detroit.
Click to expand...

wouldn't be mad if Detroit got it. For one they are in the other conference so would not impact LA as much. And two as soon as they moved to the East the team finally turned to shit after years of being so dominant in the West. I want them to be good to stick it to the East for a bit like they did the West.

Top 5 Teams I would be pissed if they won:
1) Anaheim
2) Edmonton - although the fallout would be hilarious
3) Buffalo
4) Vancouver
5) Chicago
 
  • Like
Reactions: DoktorJeep
Rumpelstiltskin said:
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but: if the Kings themselves don't outright win the draft lottery, wouldn't the best result be Ottawa winning it? That way, the Kings at least get the #2 overall pick...?
Click to expand...

No, the first 3 picks are all drawn, any of the 15 non playoff teams can end up with any of the first 3 picks. After that its reverse order of standings. So if we don't win any of the 1-3 picks, then we'd hope the Ottawa pick was one of them so we'd at least get #4. Worst case scenario (assuming the standings stay as is) neither us or the Ottawa pick are drawn and we'd fall to #5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DoktorJeep, SlimCharles, Faterson and 1 other person
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom