Around the league part 2

[Sol]

Uh um well PLD doesn't get injured so we definitely won the trade

BUT VILARDI MISSES 20 games a season!!! While PLD only shows up for 20 games a season allegedly.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

BUT VILARDI MISSES 20 games a season!!! While PLD only shows up for 20 games a season allegedly.

Vilardi misses 20 games a season with injury

PLD misses 40 games a season voluntarily

 

[Sol]

Vilardi misses 20 games a season with injury

PLD misses 40 games a season voluntarily

That’s the scary part, from what I’ve heard, he “tries” for a quarter of the season. 40 games would be amazing.

 

[SmytheKing]

Faber having to rise to the occasion?

Should be his emergence as a #1 then!

Dude just ascends, that's what he does.

Wild are 2-1 since this post. Faber is +2 with an assist and averaging 30 minutes a game. Still find it hard to believe the kings are worse off if they don’t trade for Fiala and PLD.

 

[Herby]

Wild are 2-1 since this post. Faber is +2 with an assist and averaging 30 minutes a game. Still find it hard to believe the kings are worse off if they don’t trade for Fiala and PLD.

I'd still be concerned with the center depth without some kind of trade. We still don't know if QB will be able to play C effectively in the NHL, it could be a Vilardi situation where he's just so much better at the wing where teams just don't try and force it, even if it's a more valuable position. Remember the Jets fans and media were insistent GV was going to play C, and he's not.

As far as Faber, well yeah he's been better than even those of us who were his strongest supporters could have imagined, a 35 point pace with the type of defensive game he is playing is pretty incredible for a rookie. To me he's like the d-man version of Bergeron, just unreal game-sense in the defensive zone and looking better offensively than people thought. Game-sense is always under-drafted, especially guys who have it in the defensive zone.

The Kings are going to have to win a SC here in the next couple of years for that trade to not end up being really bad.

 

[kingsfan28]

Wild are 2-1 since this post. Faber is +2 with an assist and averaging 30 minutes a game. Still find it hard to believe the kings are worse off if they don’t trade for Fiala and PLD.

If you go by the current script, Faber would be in the AHL logging valuable minutes waiting for his turn. Just like Clarke.

 

[Nasti]

I will never understand how Herby could say so confidently that players care about each other’s wellbeing. What this year has shown us if a player feels wronged they will escalate the situation despite the consequences to get revenge. I know KingsPawn always says “Engelund didn’t deter this from happening”. I think it’s not a matter of deterrence as much as it is now teams are trying to not be just be the victims. DL said every team needs a couple of criminals for a reason. I think teams need players that are willing to f*** up the opposition because it doesn’t make sense that one team should be okay with being on the receiving end exclusively.

I’m sure if you asked each player away from the rink, they’d all say they care. But being in the heat of battle is a whole other thing. It’s clear by actions that some of these guys want to hurt their opponent in that moment. Not everyone is Anze Kopitar.

 

[King'sPawn]

Uh um well PLD doesn't get injured so we definitely won the trade

Don't worry. Once Vilardi only gets 2 points in the next 15 games, they can be tied in scoring and we can call it a win again. Maybe PLD can get a point or two in that span to take the lead.

I'd still be concerned with the center depth without some kind of trade. We still don't know if QB will be able to play C effectively in the NHL, it could be a Vilardi situation where he's just so much better at the wing where teams just don't try and force it, even if it's a more valuable position. Remember the Jets fans and media were insistent GV was going to play C, and he's not.

That's fair - but there are a few disagreements:
- Center depth could have been acquired via free agency. A few names signed in the offseason: O'Reilly, Bjugstad, Poehling, Duchene, Steel, Bonino, Donato, Eller, and Compher are all capable centers who signed on July 1 of this year while also being more productive and/or less expensive than PLD. Vilardi, Iafallo, etc could have been traded for less costly upgrades, center prospects, or picks.
- Other centers could have been targeted instead of PLD, if the Kings wanted to trade away Vilardi and/or Iafallo. Mikael Granlund can play center, is only $5 million, and was traded back in August.

It's one thing to think the center depth is lacking. It's another to overpay.

And it was brought up at the time of the trade that Vilardi could outscore PLD as soon as this year. Myself and (I think) @SettlementRichie10 said as much. Barring another Vilardi injury or some scoring surge from PLD, that's looking like a real possibility.

 

[Nasti]

This is when I miss Lombardi. You’d get a half hour lecture on what makes the player he traded for worth trading for. What he brings to the table, his attitude, the type of person he is, etc. With these guys currently running the show, crickets. WTF did you see in this player that made you think it was worth trading Vilardi by himself, let alone the rest, and then signing that deal? And it was all done in such a hurry. “We better do this now before the opportunity is lost”. It’s like they thought they were trading for McDavid and not a second could be wasted. Don’t forget they cleared space with the Petersen/Walker and Durzi deals just prior. Like what the actual F.

 

[Herby]

If you go by the current script, Faber would be in the AHL logging valuable minutes waiting for his turn. Just like Clarke.

Yup, and just think how messed up that is. It's just completely denying the team a chance at having a difference making player making $925k until he "pays his dues" and "learns the system" while similar caliber players are thriving all over the league.

And some people thought when Faber turned down Blake's offer (and 1 game stint in St. Paul) after his sophomore season it was because he didn't want to ever sign. He and his agent knew exactly what the future held for Brock if he signed in LA at that time, very likely an entire season in Ontario and missing out on a chance to try and captain his squad to a national championship, all while making peanuts in the AHL. Going back to the Gophers last year was a very wise career move for Faber, as the NCAA is a much better place for a high end prospects to develop than the AHL. I'm sure Faber took note of what ended up happening to his former WJC teammate when the Kings pushed for him to bolt for the AHL and said "Thanks, but no thanks"

This is why, as much as I like Matt Roy, he should be moved to address other holes and replaced by Clarke and his ELC cap hit. You only get 3 of these ELC years, and the Kings don't maximize those enough.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Herby, would you have parted with Faber++ for Eichel two years ago?

 

[Herby]

Herby, would you have parted with Faber++ for Eichel two years ago?

Yes.

I think the Kings passing on Eichel was a huge mistake, one that has been compounded with the PLD trade, in which the Kings (still in need of a C like they were at the time of the Eichel trade) gave up similar assets for a worse player who they had to sign to a contract that takes him through his age 32 season. In Eichel they had a chance to get a true #1 center who was 25 at the time and signed to a fair contract that ends after his age 29 season.

25 year old players as good as Jack Eichel just rarely hit the market, the Kings were in a prime spot to take advantage of this and set themselves up with one of the best C trios in the league and were scared to take the plunge in a league where you have to be willing to gamble. Blake passed on doubling down on an 11 vs. a 6 and then 2 years later decided to double down on a 9 vs a 9.

Instead Eichel ends up in the division, where he has already won a SC and is a key part of the team that is the biggest obstacle to the Kings winning the SC before 11 and 8 retire.

 

[kingsfan28]

Yup, and just think how messed up that is. It's just completely denying the team a chance at having a difference making player making $925k until he "pays his dues" and "learns the system" while similar caliber players are thriving all over the league.

And some people thought when Faber turned down Blake's offer (and 1 game stint in St. Paul) after his sophomore season it was because he didn't want to ever sign. He and his agent knew exactly what the future held for Brock if he signed in LA at that time, very likely an entire season in Ontario and missing out on a chance to try and captain his squad to a national championship, all while making peanuts in the AHL. Going back to the Gophers last year was a very wise career move for Faber, as the NCAA is a much better place for a high end prospects to develop than the AHL. I'm sure Faber took note of what ended up happening to his former WJC teammate when the Kings pushed for him to bolt for the AHL and said "Thanks, but no thanks"

This is why, as much as I like Matt Roy, he should be moved to address other holes and replaced by Clarke and his ELC cap hit. You only get 3 of these ELC years, and the Kings don't maximize those enough.

The problem with moving Roy is now you risk playing two rookies on the right side and hope it works. Even if he's never traded , it's Faber/Spence or both Faber/Clake, that too much to ask two inexperienced kids to do. I can't think of many teams, other than teams in full rebuild would do that, especially a playoff team. I still like the deal, because they Kings really needed a dynamic scorer and delt from a position of strength for a change.

 

[Statto]

I was always a big Vilardi fan but at this point I don’t ‘t care, like I don’t care about Quick. Sure both are having a good spell but there is no guarantee that either would do as well had they stayed. Of course they could have done either better or worse, but we don’t know. Maybe if they stay they collide with each other in training camp or perhaps they get the Rocket and Vezina respectively. I don’t care because they don’t matter to me anymore, neither do ANY ex-Kings. I’m only interested in the play of guys in a Kings shirt and I tend to assess trades based on what we knew at the time of the trade as we are all a bit more knowledgeable about hockey with hindsight. But that’s just me.

 

[Johnny Utah]

No one should care about Quick he made it clear he was going to keep playing, was an UFA and terrible the past few years in la.

Vilardi on the other hand had a breakout year and is on fire.

Also, to those saying deal Roy. I’m shocked.

Doughty-Anderson
Clarke-Gavrikov
Spence-Englund

That might be the softest D in the NHL and you take Englund out it is the softest. There is no Englund in Ontario either.

 

[Kudelski37]

I was always a big Vilardi fan but at this point I don’t ‘t care, like I don’t care about Quick. Sure both are having a good spell but there is no guarantee that either would do as well had they stayed. Of course they could have don’t either better or worse, but we don’t know. Maybe if they stay they collide with each other in training camp or perhaps they get the Rocket and Vezina respectively. I don’t care because they don’t matter to me anymore, neither do ANY ex-Kings. I’m only interested in the play of guys in a Kings shirt and I tend to assess trades based on what we knew at the time of the trade as we are all a bit more knowledgeable about hockey with hindsight. But that’s just me.

I think how the traded players play is important to see how well the Kings evaluate and coach players. Either the Kings do well in these areas or changes need to be made.

Quick is an exception because there was zero reason for the Kings to keep/extend him after several years of struggling and his desire to keep playing. Quick and/or Ranford screwed that up...for years. Both are gone so changes were made.

 

[YP44]

I think how the traded players play is important to see how well the Kings evaluate and coach players. Either the Kings do well in these areas or changes need to be made.

Quick is an exception because there was zero reason for the Kings to keep/extend him after several years of struggling and his desire to keep playing. Quick and/or Ranford screwed that up...for years. Both are gone so changes were made.

Ranford's gone?

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I think how the traded players play is important to see how well the Kings evaluate and coach players. Either the Kings do well in these areas or changes need to be made.

Quick is an exception because there was zero reason for the Kings to keep/extend him after several years of struggling and his desire to keep playing. Quick and/or Ranford screwed that up...for years. Both are gone so changes were made.

Interesting point, how do you factor in different systems, roles, matchups and the like?

 

[King'sPawn]

Ranford's gone?

His role changed. I'm assuming that's what they meant.

 

[Kudelski37]

Ranford's gone?

Moved up to head the goalie team or something overseeing all things goalie in the Kings organization....no longer goalie coach.

 

[Kudelski37]

Interesting point, how do you factor in different systems, roles, matchups and the like?

That can be part coaching and roster construction, right? If player A is used in a way that highlights a weakness...that can be coaching, but if he is still best on his team for that role then it is a roster construction issue. Same with strengths. Some players might be ripe for a change in scenery if they are stuck behind a star with similar skills...they aren't getting power play time or the right role on the pp.

Another way is finding similarities between players that played well with certain players or under the coach or similar systems. If player B has the same strengths as successful.players under a coach for a particular role and that is the hole that needs to be filled, then adding that player has a reasonable chance of success. If the role isn't defined, then the odds of the move working are less.

 

[BringTheReign]

Herby, would you have parted with Faber++ for Eichel two years ago?

Yes.

I think the Kings passing on Eichel was a huge mistake, one that has been compounded with the PLD trade, in which the Kings (still in need of a C like they were at the time of the Eichel trade) gave up similar assets for a worse player who they had to sign to a contract that takes him through his age 32 season. In Eichel they had a chance to get a true #1 center who was 25 at the time and signed to a fair contract that ends after his age 29 season.

25 year old players as good as Jack Eichel just rarely hit the market, the Kings were in a prime spot to take advantage of this and set themselves up with one of the best C trios in the league and were scared to take the plunge in a league where you have to be willing to gamble. Blake passed on doubling down on an 11 vs. a 6 and then 2 years later decided to double down on a 9 vs a 9.

Instead Eichel ends up in the division, where he has already won a SC and is a key part of the team that is the biggest obstacle to the Kings winning the SC before 11 and 8 retire.

I don't think Faber++ is enough to land Eichel two years ago though, so as much as I agree that we should have pushed harder for Eichel it is disingenuous to compare with Faber as the centerpiece. November 2021 was a different time in terms of Kings' asset valuation. Vilardi hadn't broken out yet and as was still a reclamation project (Turcotte the same), Byfield's development was more uncertain, and Faber's stock hadn't rose to where it is today (he hadn't even played at the WJC by Nov '21).

Tuch, Krebs, '22 1st, and '23 2nd in November 2021 translated to Kings assets is tricky. That was Kempe's breakout year, and with all due respect to Iafallo and Moore, Kempe is likely the only comparable for Tuch we had then. Faber++ without Kempe included in 2021 means the ++ is Clarke or Byfield (the latter's development looking shaky at that point to boot). I think Kempe, Faber, and a 1st is the price we're paying in November 2021 valuation, and Vegas might still win out given Tuch's size, playoff experience, production, and connection to Buffalo.

 

[YP44]

I don't think Faber++ is enough to land Eichel two years ago though, so as much as I agree that we should have pushed harder for Eichel it is disingenuous to compare with Faber as the centerpiece. November 2021 was a different time in terms of Kings' asset valuation. Vilardi hadn't broken out yet and as was still a reclamation project (Turcotte the same), Byfield's development was more uncertain, and Faber's stock hadn't rose to where it is today (he hadn't even played at the WJC by Nov '21).

Tuch, Krebs, '22 1st, and '23 2nd in November 2021 translated to Kings assets is tricky. That was Kempe's breakout year, and with all due respect to Iafallo and Moore, Kempe is likely the only comparable for Tuch we had then. Faber++ without Kempe included in 2021 means the ++ is Clarke or Byfield (the latter's development looking shaky at that point to boot). I think Kempe, Faber, and a 1st is the price we're paying in November 2021 valuation, and Vegas might still win out given Tuch's size, playoff experience, production, and connection to Buffalo.

I thnk if Buffalo wanted more futured Turcotte held value then. I probably would have been leery given Eichel's neck injury. He has definately been a great get for Vegas.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

I don't think Faber++ is enough to land Eichel two years ago though, so as much as I agree that we should have pushed harder for Eichel it is disingenuous to compare with Faber as the centerpiece. November 2021 was a different time in terms of Kings' asset valuation. Vilardi hadn't broken out yet and as was still a reclamation project (Turcotte the same), Byfield's development was more uncertain, and Faber's stock hadn't rose to where it is today (he hadn't even played at the WJC by Nov '21).

Tuch, Krebs, '22 1st, and '23 2nd in November 2021 translated to Kings assets is tricky. That was Kempe's breakout year, and with all due respect to Iafallo and Moore, Kempe is likely the only comparable for Tuch we had then. Faber++ without Kempe included in 2021 means the ++ is Clarke or Byfield (the latter's development looking shaky at that point to boot). I think Kempe, Faber, and a 1st is the price we're paying in November 2021 valuation, and Vegas might still win out given Tuch's size, playoff experience, production, and connection to Buffalo.

As painful as it would’ve been to part with Kempe, Eichel/Byfield solves your center problem for another 10+ years and is probably worth it.

 

[BringTheReign]

I thnk if Buffalo wanted more futured Turcotte held value then. I probably would have been leery given Eichel's neck injury. He has definately been a great get for Vegas.

I disagree that Turcotte is enough. Nov '21 is already 2+ years after his draft after the failed Wisconsin experiment and after he'd already experienced injury issues and inconsistency in Ontario.

As painful as it would’ve been to part with Kempe, Eichel/Byfield solves your center problem for another 10+ years and is probably worth it.

I agree, but what I was getting at is that Kempe + Faber + picks in Nov '21 might not be enough to win that trade over what Vegas was offering. I'd argue Tuch > Kempe and Krebs > Faber in Nov '21 in terms of value, which means if we want Eichel we're either giving up another top prospect or we're having to swap Faber for either Clarke or Byfield.