I don't buy that because I experienced the "rebuild" after the team traded Wayne Gretzky, and what did those assets turn into?
Say they get rid of Kopitar and pulled a Flyers like rebuild, who dealt Richards and Carter. Did that right their ship and turn them into contenders? Look at the position the Flyers are in now. Would you trade places with them?
The Kings aren't worse or in a bad position because they retained Kopitar, and things could be considerably worse without him. There's no guarantee that trading every 30+aged player was going to lead to success and a better development path for all the young players who are waiting for an opportunity.
Did the Ducks hanging onto Getzlaf prevent Trevor Zegras from breaking out? Getzlaf still had the highest average ice-time among all Ducks forwards, but that didn't block Zegras from becoming a productive player.
No offense, but you are picking at nits instead of looking at the bigger picture.
Retaining Kopitar did nothing positive for the Kings. No team success at all, his worst individual seasons have come after that deal, and management continues to make decisions based on maintaining a dwindling status quo instead of moving forward.
I made this argument years ago and it unfolded exactly as I laid it out. It was a poor return on an investment with no realistic upside. The team was heading south due to the lack of cost-controlled assets, a non-existant prospect pool and an aging core that was contracting them into a corner. The only upside was just the hope that it would work out, there was no path to success.
The thing about your (and many others) argument is that you claim that folks like me are stating that a rebuild guarantees success while leaving your argument open to the possibilities of success if handled correctly. It applies both ways, Ziggy. Nothing is guaranteed. You weigh the likliehood of success for each path, and if you are honest with yourself, you would see that there was just nowhere near the chance for a positive outcome by keeping Kopitar instead of dealing him. And it isn't just about Anze either, this is just part of the whole issue. His part was the biggest because his deal came up at a crossroads for the team, and they chose the wrong turn.
You don't have to win that trade on ice, the most important thing would have been removing the expectations of the same kind of success from players that couldn't hope to maintain it. Byfield shouldn't have his growth measured against winning now, its not reasonable.
That commitment was always most likely ending in failure and it has turned out exactly as predicted. 4 playoff games won since he signed that deal, no series wins, and more years outside of the playoffs than in them. Plus the oft-mentioned mentoring thing hasn't really happened yet either, right? How many first round picks spent on centers have honestly benefitted from Kopitar? Look at the reverse though. How many kids have had their development handled poorly because the team was chasing immediate success instead of following thru on the rebuilds investment? Its just not even close.
