Around the League 2024-25 season
- Thread starter Herby
- Start date
Not sure i would compare Kopitar and the Edmonton top guys.
Kopi doesn't even score half of those guys.
The Kings would need more than 2 Kopitars match which would be a price tag of 20+ Mill
Edmonton gets the better deal here even if they sign for 15Mill or whatever the league max is at that point
Steve Zissou
I'll order you a red cap and a Speedo.
I always love these old pictures contrasted against a current image. 
- May 9, 2014
- 5,694
- 8,045
You only judge Kopitar on goals and assists, that’s all you ever bang on about. He is an elite 2 way player and was the 1C on two cup teams. As good as the other two are they still haven’t won because their roster is too top heavy. Kopitar is getting fair money for what he delivers, we lack more scoring on the roster but Kopitars deal isn’t the issue.
DoktorJeep
Fair winds and following seas Nikolai.
You forget he was paid much less when he was a 1C on two cup teams. And zero playoff series wins since he made more and did worse.
mysterman2
Registered User
And you just know in the final year or two of that deal, Blake(if hes still around) will sign someone to a big deal that will totally handcuff his ability to resign QB.
In this case I’d guess anything beyond five years was a dealbreaker for QB’s camp. You’d have to be insane to commit eight years to the Kings right now especially with Blake still in charge.
Two years minimum (but more likely three, when Doughty expires) from even starting a rebuild. Then let’s say they half ass it again and do another three year “rebuild or retool or whatever” as Luc called it. Now you’re looking at MAYBE sneaking into the playoffs as a bubble team in year seven at the earliest. I can see why a guy who’s already 22 wouldn’t want to sign a deal with a team on that trajectory that would put him at free agency on the wrong side of 30.
- May 9, 2014
- 5,694
- 8,045
I have not forgotten anything. I’m just saying his deals aren’t the problem.
Bad trades, a shortened rebuild and bad contracts elsewhere have blocked our success more than us having one of the best two way C’s in the last generation. The other being Bergeron.
This is doubtful. No player is turning down maximum dollar long term deals. Even if its with a bottom feeder team that drafted the player. There are teams worse than the Kings locking up players. The only players of this caliber that leave early are when they want out of cities like Winnipeg/Columbus or are traded due to character issues.
The players probably dont care about rebuilds and take the guaranteed money.
Byfields contract is the median between a short term show me deal and the long term maximum deal all his peers are getting. All laid out in a timeframe and dollar structure to maximize the chance of winning while Kopitar and Doughty are still playing with little regard for the years after.
johnjm22
Pseudo Intellectual
- Aug 2, 2005
- 20,977
- 17,875
lumbergh
It was an idea. I didn't say it was a good idea.
I think the contract was good. Win-win for both sides. Good AAV for a decent amount of time; great deal for the Kings for its duration if Byfield continues to develop into 1C. Byfield signed his last contract before unrestricted free agency, so if he continues to develop into 1C, he can sign a mega-contract when this deal is over. Makes sense for Byfield too. Good motivation on all sides for Byfield to become successful.
There's people around here who play armchair GM thinking that there's only one side to negotiating a contract. Like Byfield and his agent will agree to whatever they think is appropriate for the Kings. Maybe Byfield didn't want to sign for 8 years and give up an extra 3 years of UFA?
Say if he goes $8Mx8Y, that's $64M. Say he becomes the point-per-game player we all want him to be in year 3 of the deal. Next big deal he signs is gonna be 4-5 years away.
$6.25x5Y is $31.25M. His next deal in 5 years might be $12-13M AAV if he matures into PPG 1C. He makes up the difference for the 3 years and he can sign his mega deal while he's 26, not 29. There's a big difference there.
Not unreasonable on both sides, in my opinion.
- May 9, 2014
- 5,694
- 8,045
There’s lots to hate with BLuc but I was ok with the deal for similar reasons.
Yea its not unreasonable. Its actually better for the team right at this very moment so I like it in that regard.
Just that there was someone saying it was probably QBs idea to do it because he doesnt want to be around for the next rebuild and I just dont think thats how it is. Athletes always want max term and money guaranteed. This deal was the compromise between what similar players are asking (8.5 million for 8 years) or the 2-3 year 4.5 million dollar show me contract gms give younger players with more to prove.
Raccoon Jesus
We were right there
That deal is reasonable for the sense that it serves the current team
I'ts unreasonable in the sense that that's a god damn stupid reason to make that deal
I'ts unreasonable in the sense that that's a god damn stupid reason to make that deal
I absolutely do not.
I judge by position and expectations.
The #1 C position requires not only to create offense, it requires to assert your game on the opposition.
If your #1C scores 60+ points while the other teams have #1C scoring 100+ points you don't win stuff. This especially is a problem if your #1C asks for leagues top salary.
Now the difference of 40 points have to come from somewhere else since you have to score more goals than the opponent, which is difficult to archive since your #1C eat up a lot of salary.
I wouldn't complain at all if Kopitar would have gotten 5-6mill, being a 2nd line center.
All this has nothing to do with 2 way play and where the lite is coming from is far beyond me
Herby
How could Blake have known?
Yes I know, I was shocked to see how happy people were at the time. I think it was because there was a fear that Byfield was going to have an extended contract issue that was going to drag into the summer. Either that or people simply don't care about what is going to happen 5 years from now.
Unless Byfield himself didn't want an 8 year deal (which has never been reported anywhere) how can you be happy about losing team control 3 years before all these other teams are going to lose team control over their guy?
I know it will never be asked of management in any of their media appearances, but maybe someone here can answer this, what was the reasoning for drafting the biggest project top 2 pick of all time (using their own "won't hit his stride until 23-25") only to turn around and sign him to a deal that takes him to UFA at age 26? How does that make any sense?
All these other teams are doing it one way, and the Kings do it another way. With all the history of decisions by this management team that defies what most teams do (Byfield, Turcotte, Clarke etc) why do you we think it's any different here, and think the player himself may have wanted it? How many times in the NHL has it ever been reported that a team wanted to sign a guy off an ELC to an 8 year deal and the player wanted 5? I can't think of a situation like that, it seems from looking at the league that everyone (players and teams) are happy to get those 8 year deals.
And not only that, if he does kill it and the Kings wish to re-sign him, his next contract (unless he wouldn't want an 8 year deal) would take him until his age 35 season, which everyone here (rightly) criticizes other teams for doing.
The way more likely scenario is the Kings didn't want to give QB 8 years because the higher cap hit would hurt the Kings in this ridiculous quest to win another championship with ancient players. This decision, like every decision the last three years has geared towards maximizing 11 and 8, and the $1m or so in extra cap space for these seasons was reason enough for them to punt team control and three prime years over to QB and his agent.
Last edited:
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
Guess they won't be going after Dubois.
Last edited:
Bandit
Registered User
KingsHockey24
Registered User
- Aug 1, 2013
- 14,550
- 13,376
Kyle Clifford dishing the puck to Auston Matthews in 2024 is pretty funny to me.
- May 9, 2014
- 5,694
- 8,045
I said I was ok with it, not ‘happy’.
Whilst I of course would prefer 8 years on this deal, if he doesn’t want to extend going into his last year you trade him in his prime. He likely commands a decent package during his prime years, at a time this team is probably rebuilding in some capacity anyway. If he doesn’t command a decent package at that point we’d all be glad it’s an 8 year deal.
I’ll only be able to give an informed view of the deal once I know what happens at the end of it.
KingsFan7824
Registered User
Matthews has yet to sign a long term deal. Granted, everyone laughs at the Leafs, and Byfield ain't Matthews, but there's one.
Since they've made the choice to "try" to win with the ancient ones, when Doughty is done in 3 years, Byfield will be too old to be the guy to build around anyway. 25, with 2 years left on a small cap hit? That's an asset, assuming he continues to progress, that you could trade to get a someone to build around. That asset gets you a 20 year old with potential.
Maybe, but you gotta remember, Byfield and company had no f***ing say, so it was clearly LA Management that said 5 years and only 5 years, and this cap hit, not more, not less, I mean, Byfield was forced everything....no say, nothing.
That's how people on this form view things, it's both amazing and amazingly stupid at the same time.
lumbergh
It was an idea. I didn't say it was a good idea.
Byfield mentioned that he had a couple of offers on the table from the Kings, and they came to a mutual agreement. That's how negotiations with your star player should go. You don't know what those offers were. No one has said, to my knowledge, that Kopi or Doughty played any role in the negotiations.
Quinton Byfield speaks on his new, five-year contract - "I want to be an LA King for the rest of my life" - LA Kings Insider
5 years for 55. With yesterday’s announcement, the number-one priority for the summer is locked in. We didn’t know exactly how many years Quinton Byfield would sign for. We didn’t know exactly what the AAV would be. We did know, though, that he would be signed. Now he is. “We are extremely...
lakingsinsider.com
All too often here people disregard the fact that all these players are individuals with their own motivations and interests. Ideally you have a situation where the interests of the player and the team line up, and the player feels appropriately valued and motivated to succeed. Seems like that's what happened with Byfield. He says he wants to be a King for life. This deal goes a long way to making that happen.
The other piece of the calculation is the age at which Byfield goes UFA. Let's all hope he "kills it" and earns an 8-year mega deal for his next contract. A 5-year RFA deal means that next contract could cover his mid career from age 26 to 34, or all of his mid-career. An 8-year RFA deal means that next contract covers 29-37, which is mid- to late-career. I think both sides would prefer the first situation and not the latter, where the contract would have to account for his probable decline after age 35.
The expected rise in the cap also played a part, there was only so much the Kings could offer salary wise for the next few years, so a shorter term at a lower AAV was really the only option, big payday next contract.
- May 9, 2014
- 5,694
- 8,045
It really wouldn’t surprise me if the max contract term comes down in the next CBA.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
Grub's Canucks & NHL News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | Trade Breezes- Latest: Jerry the great
