Around the league part 2
- Thread starter Bandit
- Start date
- Status
Everything is fraught with risk. Signing a young guy to a huge contract is just a different risk than signing an older one.
It's either going to pay off big or they are going to be a middling team stuck with some contracts that are just big enough to keep them from over the hump. I'm not completely sold on their contracts for 3 main reasons. First, if you are going to have 5 big contracts ideally you have at least 1F, 1D, and 1G in that mix. Second, their style inflates numbers, they are kind of the anti Lombardi era Kings. Third, they didn't have to pay that much. They had control and leverage and didn't utilize it, and they won't be able to add much to supplement the young core. If I'm signing a guy to a long expensive contract like that, I certainly don't want him to be 27-29 years old when it expires.
But kudos to them for identifying top talents and hitching their wagon to them.
It's either going to pay off big or they are going to be a middling team stuck with some contracts that are just big enough to keep them from over the hump. I'm not completely sold on their contracts for 3 main reasons. First, if you are going to have 5 big contracts ideally you have at least 1F, 1D, and 1G in that mix. Second, their style inflates numbers, they are kind of the anti Lombardi era Kings. Third, they didn't have to pay that much. They had control and leverage and didn't utilize it, and they won't be able to add much to supplement the young core. If I'm signing a guy to a long expensive contract like that, I certainly don't want him to be 27-29 years old when it expires.
But kudos to them for identifying top talents and hitching their wagon to them.
Herby
Thank You, Team 144
Ottawa's contract to Sanderson ends when he is 30 years old, which is right about the time that players begin to leave their peak. They did the same thing with Stutzle (29) and Norris (31). This means Ottawa isn't committed to paying these guys big money in their non-prime years, if they don't want to. According to Axl, "Nelly" was on the Pravda Podcast and his nose was again growing as he was talking talking about QB being a project who would arrive as a contributor at 23-25 years old (anyone can clarify if that isn't true, if I wanted to listen to someone lie to me for an hour I'd turn on C-Span). So even if that is true, that means QB signs a 2-3 year bridge after this season and then would be getting his 8 year deal which would carry him further into non-prime territory than what Ottawa has done with signing these guys immediately after ELC's, that along with getting almost nothing from a #2 OA pick on an ELC.
Would you rather have an 8 year deal end for a player at 30 or 33? I think the answer to that is pretty simple. The league is littered with terrible 30+ contracts. That's why, even if this "slow cook" non-sense were true, it makes ZERO SENSE because you give yourself such a short window with players you used massive draft capital on. You get nothing from a #2 OA on his ELC's, while players around the league who teams spent similar draft capital on are contributing significantly from 18, 19, 20 until their late 20's. So we are supposed to believe the Kings weren't expecting a #2 overall pick to be anything it until he was 23-25 years old, when the average player begins to slow down in their late 20's? That is complete lunacy, they are either lying (most likely) or these guys make Mike Milbury look like the Albert Einstein, either way its bad news.
And getting back to Emerson and the continued stuff the members of the organization tell Pravda every time they go on there, could you imagine being a "journalist" and not asking a simple follow up question of..
"Why did you take a 5-6 year project while simultaneously attempting to win again with players in their mid to late 30's"
I guess that would require a shred of journalist integrity, of which you find none from those guys. They completely shit on three of the five pillars of journalistic integrity. But that doesn't stop some from consuming everything that is said on there by both the hosts and the guests and then using it in their arguments.
Last edited:
tny760
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 20,306
- 22,099
i don't really have much to add besides "let em have it" herby
Herby
Thank You, Team 144
I can see you don't get the DM's from someone named after a musician, regurgitating this nonsense every time Pravda uploads to iTunes or Spotify.
I am jealous.
Schrute farms
LA Kings: new GM wanted -- inquire within
- Jul 7, 2020
- 2,533
- 4,591
That's very true and astute. However, i feel like teams end up re-signing these guys unless either:
a) they regress and don't live up to the original contract; or
b) they want out and leave.
Beyond those two scenario's, > 90% of the time the original team re-signs them....or certainly makes every effort possible to do so. Not learning from what your point was -- that the team should not pay for past performance and should let someone else overpay for an aging / decreasing player. Use them for their prime years and then get out.
Raccoon Jesus
We were right there
If I've been posting less it's because Herby is on a f***ing drum solo and we've just gotta let him rock out better than me
Herby
Thank You, Team 144
I'm actually pretty happy with what the Kings have done at the NHL level, to be honest. It wasn't my first choice for a strategy, but for trying to win with the short window of 11 and 8 the last two summers have been pretty strong. It has no viability beyond the end of Kopitar's career, but I think they already know that. The Kings are going to be spectacularly bad in 3-4 years, you just can't trade away multiple 1st round picks, an elite D prospect, whiff on a #5 pick, have a #2 pick struggle this much and have no tangible goaltender in the system and think the results will be anything but that.
I just don't understand how a team can be this terrible at integrating high picks into a lineup in comparison to the rest of the NHL. And as far as the lying and the dynamic of one propaganda mouthpiece media entity used to spread said lies, well yeah, that just tilts the **** out of me. I just can't believe for the life of me that anyone takes anything that either the hosts or the members or the organization say when they go on there. I feel like we are living in North Korea and are being told that Dear Leader just shot another round of 45 on the course today. Although I guess the good news is when I question the lies I don't get shot in the head, I just get DM's from Axl telling me to become a Ducks fan.
Can anyone who defends the surfing crew just answer one question. Why would a team who's stated goal was to win a SC within a short window with two old players, would knowingly use an incredibly valuable asset that could have helped achieve that goal and use it to draft a 5-7 year project (as they claim)?
I agree Herby, thats why its a different risk with the young guys. They certainly arent waiting to see what they have first and they are banking on zero regression.
The Kings obviously aren't of the same mind and would never do this. Either they drafted poorly or simply develop them at too slow of a pace. I am totally for giving guys time if they need it. I was fine with Byfield or Vilardi in the A because of how things played out, but I thought sending Clarke back was a terrible decision. I also think the ELC is king, and not taking advantage of it when it’s possible is bad management.
Both can work, both can fail. Its all down to identifying guys that benefit from extra time and those who dont.
The Kings obviously aren't of the same mind and would never do this. Either they drafted poorly or simply develop them at too slow of a pace. I am totally for giving guys time if they need it. I was fine with Byfield or Vilardi in the A because of how things played out, but I thought sending Clarke back was a terrible decision. I also think the ELC is king, and not taking advantage of it when it’s possible is bad management.
Both can work, both can fail. Its all down to identifying guys that benefit from extra time and those who dont.
I’m not as critical about their development as you are because I feel drafting is such an inexact science, but if anything bugs me the most its this. Its fine to have balance, but have the cake and eat it approaches don’t usually work. I wish they would have either committed more to the rebuild or to a retool.
The saving grace with what they are doing is that they are getting the right age and types of players for the most part. Fiala and PLD are fantastic young stars. They’ve done good business there. When Byfield went down and didn't light it up, they did change things on the fly and make a good move when they could.
I can kinda see what the end goal is and what the plan is, but it shouldn’t be a kinda, it should be more clear. Would I have done what Ottawa did? Probably, but I would have made certain that I got better deals than those. Thats what RFA is for. Even if those players keep it up they wouldn't get that much more than they recently signed for in 4-5 years. And there would be a lot more flexibility to bring in the needed pieces while their salaries are controlled. I feel they have drafted and developed wonderfully lately, but threw a lot of that advantage out the window by not being more shrewd.
They’ve always been the little brother of the Canadian teams though, I can’t help but think that pressure contributed to going all in and committing to such a young pack of players. They will have around 47% of their cap wrapped up in 5 guys.
King'sPawn
Enjoy the chaos
- Jul 1, 2003
- 22,846
- 23,342
To be specific, Emerson said that Yannetti told the crew to expect an impact from Byfield when he's 23.
And honestly, I think that's part of the problem. They take an inductive approach - reach a conclusion then provide the supporting pieces to make it true.
I guess that allows for them to be patient if they have no immediate expectation, but it comes with a lack of reflection and criticism and it can act as a detriment.
Like, I understand that they want to acknowledge growth takes time, but if you have the mentality of someone not being an impact player until 5 years after they're drafted, it will affect how they are played, challenged, developed, and pushed.
And honestly, I think that's part of the problem. They take an inductive approach - reach a conclusion then provide the supporting pieces to make it true.
I guess that allows for them to be patient if they have no immediate expectation, but it comes with a lack of reflection and criticism and it can act as a detriment.
Like, I understand that they want to acknowledge growth takes time, but if you have the mentality of someone not being an impact player until 5 years after they're drafted, it will affect how they are played, challenged, developed, and pushed.
KingsFan7824
Registered User
The Kings and Sens shouldn't be compared. One traded their big money guys, the other didn't.
Bandit
Registered User
One has also won something this century. The sens are a joke and will continue to be so.
Raccoon Jesus
We were right there
As much as I don't hate what they've done I do very much agree that the Sens unfurling the mission accomplished banner has the same vibes as the "new york rangers quickest best rebuild of all time"
The game is to win games, not win contracts
The game is to win games, not win contracts
Don't want to count those chickens.
I remember when Parayko broke in, he had an even better rookie season than Sanderson. Then next season he did a little better. Then... He dropped off a bit and ended up a 30 point guy who plays really solid defense and has leadership. I thought he was destined for the Norris after his first few seasons, but he just turned into something really solid.
Not that the same for sure is going to happen with Sanderson, but it can go either way with a 21 year old.
Raccoon Jesus
We were right there
Oh you sweet summer child
it means
Doughty-Anderson
Gavrikov-Roy
Englund-Santini
Clarke will be PKing on the left side in the AHL
DoktorJeep
Fair winds and following seas Nikolai.
- May 9, 2014
- 5,672
- 8,016
I’m not. I love Spence but Clarke has significantly more upside than Spence and in 3 years could easily be the best player in a Kings shirt. Clarke in the NHL has to be the priority.
Given he’s a UFA after this season I’d actually rather trade Roy, (probably for some physicality on LD or upfront) and get both Spence and Clarke on the ice. Maybe do it at the TDL.
The Englund, Björnfot decision will probably be decided in camp. If Toby comes in ready to go I think he will have the inside track.
- May 9, 2014
- 5,672
- 8,016
I think his draft pedigree, the fact he’s a solid d-man that played ok when called up means they will give him every opportunity. I wouldn’t go as far as it being his spot to lose but I do think he heads into camp with an advantage as far as the Kings set up is concerned. GM’s frequently favour the guys they drafted In that way.
I’m not saying he should have any sort of inside track but I think he will do. FWIW I think both will see NHL ice in a Kings jersey.
Englund was given 2 years at 2 million.
Kings know they miss MacDermid. This is their answer. Toby is either the 7D, down in Ontario (waivers) or traded IMO.
Kings know they miss MacDermid. This is their answer. Toby is either the 7D, down in Ontario (waivers) or traded IMO.
Chazz Reinhold
Registered User
Not the first time the Kings have given a borderline roster player a second year on a contract to discourage teams from taking the player on waivers. None of Englund’s cap hit will count against the cap when he’s in the AHL.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
Confirmed with Link: Alex Newhook for 31st, 37th and Fairbrother- Latest: Lafleurs Guy
-
-
-
