Around the League Thread part V

[King'sPawn]

so can one of you guys who feel that signing an above average 2nd line center and a PAG+ firstl or sec line winger pushes us farther back from a cup , not being an ass just don't get the logic . These aren;t like resigning AA these are appearing to be great signings , and it provides a little longer for our drafted #2 center to get footing and man power that is needed for his type of game . As for the others from outside the org. who has not excelled Moore, Durzi, Grundstrum and I get the Matta or Elder but the left side has developed slower and one is gone and the other will be in the press box if anyone can put him there in what is probably his last season at least with us . Not going to argue the normal points of drafting and development that goes on because as much as Herby, KP and RJ as well as others are right in questioning the decisions the team makes there has to be more than one way to build a cup winner and adding very good guys in their prime seems to be one route. If we had signed say Perry or AA types again just to make the playoffs i could see it putting us farther away but these are moves that should augment as we fill spots with prospects, I think if even one rookie or second year guy gets it this year we will take a giant step for kings fans, can hardly wait for this season to get started

To me, it's not necessarily the acquisition of any particular type of player that does the "closer to the playoffs, bur further from the cup" state.

It's a combination of attitudes, decisions, and mindsets that lead to this. Part of it is the fact that the Kings won the cup both as the No. 8 and as a wildcard seed, there's this attitude of "make the playoffs, and anything can happen."

But when you prioritize "just making the playoffs":
- you want to minimize mistakes, so you give the less experienced people less time. You end up leaning on your veterans
- Because younger prospects are, either subliminally or overtly, told to make as few mistakes as possible, they are more likely to become more deferential to the veterans, instead of working the knowledge of the veterans into their own game
- Because the prospects are more likely to be deferential, they are less likely to take on ownership of the team's identity.

There is not a team out there that has won the cup without some level of homegrown talent. The Kings, for YEARS, have needed a new wave of leadership that's homegrown, instead of having it always rest on the shoulders of Kopitar, Doughty, Brown, and Quick. And this isn't because I think any of the aforementioned are "poor leaders." They are supposed to complement the leadership that's already there.

There is undoubtedly a value in making the playoffs. Experience matters. Growth matters. But if you opt to bring in more outside talent, and you continue to push your youth into lesser roles, you remove a key component that every team has historically had before winning the cup... all in the name of merely "making the playoffs, where anything can happen."

If Byfield, Kaliyev et al get opportunities with stronger players and get more opportunity, it will be a step in the right direction. But if they're just plugged in the bottom-six with second-unit powerplay time at best, you're not elevating your core anymore.

 

[Statto]

Agree Quick should have won the Hart

So that was the gnarliest run I’ve ever had that year on anything to do with sports betting, with Kings unders. Go back and look at the game logs basically every game was 2-1, 2-0 or 1-0 for about 3 months before the Kings offense finally ramped up a bit at the end of the year.

Any other goalie I don’t think they make the playoffs in 2012 and obviously don’t win the cup.

It was one of the alltime great seasons by a goaltender in the history of the league when you factor in regular and post season.

I’ve made this argument many times on the main board. It doesn’t seem to count on there . Idiots.

He should have had the Vezina, Hart and was one of 4 for the Conn Smythe (Kopi, DD and Brown all had a case).

 

[Sol]

so can one of you guys who feel that signing an above average 2nd line center and a PAG+ firstl or sec line winger pushes us farther back from a cup , not being an ass just don't get the logic . These aren;t like resigning AA these are appearing to be great signings , and it provides a little longer for our drafted #2 center to get footing and man power that is needed for his type of game . As for the others from outside the org. who has not excelled Moore, Durzi, Grundstrum and I get the Matta or Elder but the left side has developed slower and one is gone and the other will be in the press box if anyone can put him there in what is probably his last season at least with us . Not going to argue the normal points of drafting and development that goes on because as much as Herby, KP and RJ as well as others are right in questioning the decisions the team makes there has to be more than one way to build a cup winner and adding very good guys in their prime seems to be one route. If we had signed say Perry or AA types again just to make the playoffs i could see it putting us farther away but these are moves that should augment as we fill spots with prospects, I think if even one rookie or second year guy gets it this year we will take a giant step for kings fans, can hardly wait for this season to get started

Because you are just going to be a bubble team until those players are gone and wasting time avoiding getting franchise players through drafting that will win you the cup. Farther from the cup because the Kings won’t be rebuilding any time with these moves and they won’t be bad with these moves. But the needle won’t move any further than that unless prospects somehow pan out to be franchise players. Hence farther from the cup

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

You’re the one that sounds grumpy. you can rehash and regurgitate your takes however many times you like. it doesn’t mean it‘s any more correct than any other on here. this forum is really all wasted bandwidth as none of this matter anyway. So there’s that.

I wish you could appreciate the sheer self-owning irony but it appears you scrolled too quickly through your own posts.

 

[kingsfan28]

I’ve made this argument many times on the main board. It doesn’t seem to count on there . Idiots.

He should have had the Vezina, Hart and was one of 4 for the Conn Smythe (Kopi, DD and Brown all had a case).

The staggering east coast bias toward Hank couldn't be any clearer [120 votes to 63]. It's like they didn't even know Quick was there until he was raising the cup.

 

[lumbergh]

Say what you want about Hoven but he is usually right on stuff like this.

Also the Kings have a history of doing this so why would it be surprising?

Training camp ended already? Maybe let's wait a couple weeks before we jump to conclusions.

 

[kilowatt]

“Closer to the playoffs than the Cup” doesn’t really make sense to me. The last five years or so have really changed my mind about draft position and expectations. We hit on Kopitar and Doughty and then traded most of our first round picks for a decade. 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015, 2016, and the two picks in 2012 and 2014 were 30th. I kind of forgot that a lot of picks just don’t pan out. From Doughty to Vilardi, which I would argue was the start of the rebuild, we had a single drafted first round pick (drafted before 30th pick) suit up for us: Derek Forbort.

All of that is to say that sometimes these guys don’t pan out. And other times, guys drafted later get better faster than others. In a redraft, Spence gets taken in the first round, no? Spence is better than a lot of guys in that 2019 draft, but it’s hard when looking at the sunk cost of a high draft pick and evaluating worth. Matias Micelli, taken three picks after Spence, looks a lot more promising than Turcotte right now. But Turcotte had a significantly higher draft slot… so in my mind he has the higher ceiling, and it would feel bad trading one for the other. That’s how it feels to me at least.

Maybe Turcotte’s not a great example. He’s been injured. Feels like all our high-end prospects have been injured though. I don’t want to let “what ifs” cloud my judgement anymore so I’ve been trying to do a lot better at evaluating what is, not what could be based on where players were drafted.

Back to the playoffs thing, I don’t think homegrown talent is necessarily the key. I think the real key is maximizing valuable contracts. That often means home grown, young talent on entry level or bridge deals, but not always. Smart veteran contracts, team-friendly deals, and cap retention are all valid tools at maximizing said value. I don’t think we’re truly cup contenders until Kopitar’s $10 million is down to a more manageable number, because I don’t think Kopitar (or even Doughty) are providing appropriate value at their current cap hits.

I do think we’re getting closer to winning the Cup though. And you obviously can’t do that without making the playoffs. We need a prospect or two to take a step forward, yes, but we also need the coaching staff to provide them an opportunity. But the Danault, Arvidsson, and Fiala moves were excellent, and all three guys are under 30. What’s not to like?

 

[cyclones22]

Home grown top talent absolutely is vital to winning a Cup. Look at every champion since the lockout and just about all of them had home grown franchise players. Maybe you argue the Blues, but they hit on Pietrangelo as their #1 defenseman and Tarasenko as a top line winger even if they traded for O'Reilly and Schenn. The Ducks traded for/signed 2 HOF defensemen and for Teemu. Perry and Getzlaf they nailed but they didn't carry that team. The Kings aren't winning shit again until they start drafting and DEVELOPING 1st line forwards and #1 defensemen again.

 

[Steve Zissou]

Looks about right.

 

[KINGS17]

To me, it's not necessarily the acquisition of any particular type of player that does the "closer to the playoffs, bur further from the cup" state.

It's a combination of attitudes, decisions, and mindsets that lead to this. Part of it is the fact that the Kings won the cup both as the No. 8 and as a wildcard seed, there's this attitude of "make the playoffs, and anything can happen."

But when you prioritize "just making the playoffs":
- you want to minimize mistakes, so you give the less experienced people less time. You end up leaning on your veterans
- Because younger prospects are, either subliminally or overtly, told to make as few mistakes as possible, they are more likely to become more deferential to the veterans, instead of working the knowledge of the veterans into their own game
- Because the prospects are more likely to be deferential, they are less likely to take on ownership of the team's identity.

There is not a team out there that has won the cup without some level of homegrown talent. The Kings, for YEARS, have needed a new wave of leadership that's homegrown, instead of having it always rest on the shoulders of Kopitar, Doughty, Brown, and Quick. And this isn't because I think any of the aforementioned are "poor leaders." They are supposed to complement the leadership that's already there.

There is undoubtedly a value in making the playoffs. Experience matters. Growth matters. But if you opt to bring in more outside talent, and you continue to push your youth into lesser roles, you remove a key component that every team has historically had before winning the cup... all in the name of merely "making the playoffs, where anything can happen."

If Byfield, Kaliyev et al get opportunities with stronger players and get more opportunity, it will be a step in the right direction. But if they're just plugged in the bottom-six with second-unit powerplay time at best, you're not elevating your core anymore.

Yes, there is a big difference between BLuc's "just make the playoffs and anything can happen" approach, and Lombardi's "a team built for the playoffs".

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Yes, there is a big difference between BLuc's "just make the playoffs and anything can happen" approach, and Lombardi's "a team built for the playoffs".

Were the Kings that made the postseason in 2010 and 2011 considered "built for the playoffs" teams? You realize they got a little taste of the playoffs and got ousted in the first round before they turned into another beast in 2012.

Do you recall who the Kings added at the 2010 and 2011 trade deadlines for their playoff push, or need I remind you of those players?

 

[KINGS17]

Were the Kings that made the postseason in 2010 and 2011 considered "built for the playoffs" teams? You realize they got a little taste of the playoffs and got ousted in the first round before they turned into another beast in 2012.

Do you recall who the Kings added at the 2010 and 2011 trade deadlines for their playoff push, or need I remind you of those players?

You realize in 2010 and 2011 they were getting big contributions from players that would go on to star in the 2012-2014 playoffs, and not playing the has been's on the roster 25 minutes a game, right?

Looks about right.

All that protection and they still cry?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

You realize in 2010 and 2011 they were getting big contributions from players that would go on to star in the 2012-2014 playoffs, and not playing the has been's on the roster 25 minutes a game, right?

If only Rob Blake inherited a team that featured a young Kopitar, Brown, Quick, etc. Completely different sets of circumstances that you can't differentiate from. And I take it that those teams in 2010 and 2011 were not "built for the playoffs" teams, correct?

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

You realize in 2010 and 2011 they were getting big contributions from players that would go on to star in the 2012-2014 playoffs, and not playing the has been's on the roster 25 minutes a game, right?


All that protection and they still cry?

Imagine if the 2014 Kings didn't bring along Pearson and Toffoli because they hung on to Frattin, that's about what happened this year with Athanasiou et. al.

Then when we get to the 2023 playoffs it'll be 'the kids aren't ready' because they've only been getting 8 minutes a game so Nate Thompson can take some faceoffs and lose some fights

 

[KINGS17]

If only Rob Blake inherited a team that featured a young Kopitar, Brown, Quick, etc. Completely different sets of circumstances that you can't differentiate from. And I take it that those teams in 2010 and 2011 were not "built for the playoffs" teams, correct?

If only Rob Blake understood he had to start from scratch instead of hanging onto the antiques on the roster. I never said Lombardi and Blake started from the same point. BLuc has simply delayed the inevitable, and therefore made the wait to get back into contention longer that it had to be, if it happens at all. Likely the first step back to actual relevance in the playoffs will be firing them.

Imagine if the 2014 Kings didn't bring along Pearson and Toffoli because they hung on to Frattin, that's about what happened this year with Athanasiou et. al.

Then when we get to the 2023 playoffs it'll be 'the kids aren't ready' because they've only been getting 8 minutes a game so Nate Thompson can take some faceoffs and lose some fights

...or in 2012 keeping the veteran doofuses whose names I don't even care to remember instead of promoting Nolan and King.

 

[Schmooley]

Imagine if the 2014 Kings didn't bring along Pearson and Toffoli because they hung on to Frattin, that's about what happened this year with Athanasiou et. al.

Then when we get to the 2023 playoffs it'll be 'the kids aren't ready' because they've only been getting 8 minutes a game so Nate Thompson can take some faceoffs and lose some fights

They arent actually signing Thompson? Hes probably just skating with the guys cause hes friends with them and lives in the area.
There is no way he is signed right?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

If only Rob Blake understood he had to start from scratch instead of hanging onto the antiques on the roster. I never said Lombardi and Blake started from the same point. BLuc has simply delayed the inevitable, and therefore made the wait to get back into contention longer that it had to be, if it happens at all. Likely the first step back to actual relevance in the playoffs will be firing them.

When they initially took over the team in 2017-18, they certainly did delay the inevitable, but look at the seasons the veterans came off of in response. They all had their best performances, so what was management supposed to do with a Norris Trophy candidate, a goalie who played like prime Dominik Hasek in the playoffs, and their captain who should have won the Hart Trophy that year? Trade them all away?

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

They arent actually signing Thompson? Hes probably just skating with the guys cause hes friends with them and lives in the area.
There is no way he is signed right?

With my whole brain yes it makes sense that he's just auditioning for ANY pro role, loves it here, loves the guys, is here for camp competition and training.

But with everything we've seen over the last two years, I'm not convinced until he's cut.

 

[Herby]

Kopitar and Doughty were getting older , but still had plenty of years left after Blake took over that had the correct picks and development paths been taken that there was no reason that the team couldn't have had a couple of years of a run with drafted and developed youth entering their primes at the tail end of AK and DD's.

Anze Kopitar and Drew Doughty were 33 and 31 when Nick Suzuki and Cole Caufield (two players the Kings could have drafted) were arguably the two best forwards on a team that went to the final. Had Kopitar and Doughty been given players of that caliber to work with the Kings could have had a realistic chance to at least get to Colorado this year (although climbing that mountain may be near impossible for anyone).

But ofcourse those players were barely old enough and not old enough to buy a beer and had spent a total combined 3 games between them in the AHL (oh the horror, eh Glen Murray!). Still waiting for an answer from anyone why Kings prospects need so much AHL time but other teams can put guys into 1st line roles without any. Maybe one of these days someone can give an answer.

 

[KINGS17]

When they initially took over the team in 2017-18, they certainly did delay the inevitable, but look at the seasons the veterans came off of in response. They all had their best performances, so what was management supposed to do with a Norris Trophy candidate, a goalie who played like prime Dominik Hasek in the playoffs, and their captain who should have won the Hart Trophy that year? Trade them all away?

Trade some of them for players that will help produce another cup within the next decade.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Trade some of them for players that will help produce another cup within the next decade.

Show one team that has done that....JUST one......please......

Because what you are arguing is that Tampa should be trading Hedman, Stamkos, Point, and Kucherov, that COL should be trading Landeskog, and Rantanen.....

I mean this argument is so f***ing stupid that NO PRO SPORTS TEAM HAS EVER DONE THIS.....EVER...IN THE HISTORY OF PRO SPORTS....EVER....minus any kind of financial motivation (specifically thinking of the Marlins back in the 90's) or players that demand to leave......

So answer me this, if this is such a GRAND idea, that it SHOULD BE DONE......why has NO SPORTS TEAM EVER DONE IT?

It just smacks of someone who is completely unable to understand the nature of sports.

 

[YP44]

Show one team that has done that....JUST one......please......

Because what you are arguing is that Tampa should be trading Hedman, Stamkos, Point, and Kucherov, that COL should be trading Landeskog, and Rantanen.....

I mean this argument is so f***ing stupid that NO PRO SPORTS TEAM HAS EVER DONE THIS.....EVER...IN THE HISTORY OF PRO SPORTS....EVER....minus any kind of financial motivation (specifically thinking of the Marlins back in the 90's) or players that demand to leave......

So answer me this, if this is such a GRAND idea, that it SHOULD BE DONE......why has NO SPORTS TEAM EVER DONE IT?

It just smacks of someone who is completely unable to understand the nature of sports.

closest would be when the colts dealt manning knowing they could land Luck.
Looked like the perfect transition, but they failed to protect their asset

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

closest would be when the colts dealt manning knowing they could land Luck.
Looked like the perfect transition, but they failed to protect their asset

Fair enough....but when you look into it, that was financially motivated, and they cut him, did not trade him, but he also had health questions etc.....

So yea, it's definitely the closest example.....with asteriks for sure

 

[KINGS17]

BTW, for all the non-geniuses out there saying no sports team has ever traded a long-time star player with a franchise to get younger and better later...the Dodgers used to do it all the time.

Ever hear of Branch Rickey? "Better to trade them a year too early than a year too late."

That philosophy continued under Buzzie Bavasi and Al Campanis. Anyone care to hazard a guess regarding how many division titles, National League pennants, and World Series the Dodgers won from 1950 - 1987? They were a pretty successful franchise with that philosophy.

The same philosophy can, and should be, applied in a league with a salary cap.

But by all means be the Cubs, and hang onto Ernie Banks (Anze Kopitar) for his entire career.

 

[KINGS17]

You want an NHL example? Go back and look at the trades the Montreal Canadiens made in the 1970's to screw over many teams, including your very own Los Angeles Kings. Steve Shutt anyone?

I like the idea, "No one does that!!". It's exactly the reason why a smart GM should do it.