Proposal: Hoglander to LA

[BatVader]

Honestly I’ve suggested this several times with mixed reactions. Something around Horvat and Hoglander for Scheifele. Change of scenery type deals as both guys Horvat/Scheifele could use a fresh start. Horvat is younger and Scheifele has more offensive upside hence the Hoglander add. More pieces could also be added.

Issue for me is we don’t need Hog… Jets need RHW and RHD.
Horvat and Boeser for Scheifele+ I’d be interested in

 

[sting101]

Ironically the best comp for Hoglander is Arvidsson. Obviously VA is much better presently but Hoglander is 21 and currently mired in a bit of a sophomore slump which is pretty normal.

Once he figures out some positioning issues and making less egregious turnovers at the bluelines (which plagues most young players) he will be a fine player who can move anywhere throughout your top3 lines.

Not someone Canucks should be looking to move nor a great target for LA who have plenty of young winger prospects to sort through before trading for one. I would think LA would want an established vet if they want to try and make noise with Kopitar and Doughty still around

 

[LAKings88]

Ironically the best comp for Hoglander is Arvidsson. Obviously VA is much better presently but Hoglander is 21 and currently mired in a bit of a sophomore slump which is pretty normal.

Once he figures out some positioning issues and making less egregious turnovers at the bluelines (which plagues most young players) he will be a fine player who can move anywhere throughout your top3 lines.

Not someone Canucks should be looking to move nor a great target for LA who have plenty of young winger prospects to sort through before trading for one. I would think LA would want an established vet if they want to try and make noise with Kopitar and Doughty still around

Miller is the guy I’d be most interested in honesty.

 

[Crown Royal]

I wouldn't do Spence or Vilardi, I am higher on Spence than most.
I like Hoglander but LA already has a log jam of forwards.

Spence is a keeper

 

[Kurrilino]

Folks, the poster quoted above has been laughed out of his own teams forum for his nonsensical, argumentative and less-than-remedial hockey IQ takes. Sorry he poisons the mainboard in EVERY Kings trade thread with his ridiculuous and aggressive garbage, you deserve better.

To address his drivel, I simply need to point to the success Arvidsson and Moore are enjoying on a team whose system favors up tempo, attacking forwards capable of quick, slashing movements and can handle long stretch passes.

So, again, on behalf of Kings fans everywhere, please understand that you have our sympathies when dealing with this particular brand of dung.

Good job buddy, this still doesn't change that Hoglander isn't of interest to the Kings

 

[zcaptain]

Yes, Kings prospects are not good.
This is the reason Vancouver desperately tries to trade with Kings.
Vancouver has garbage prospect pool and LA is not going to solve their misery.

I think you have this all wrong...........Vancouver Gm, has not said anything about LA's prospects.........

The truth is, the "prospect" is just that, in definition, it means a unproven player, who has yet to show
anything at the NHL level..........and any.......and I mean "ANY" hockey fan worth his salt knows, the
NHL is filled with mostly 1st round picks, and that most "prospects" do not turn out as advertised,
which is the reason, they are moved so often. Now I will admit, that blue chip prospects..........
aka Brandt Clarke are not often moved, but they still are from time to time.

Lesser prospects, such as Spence, Granns and Faber are seen as good prospects, but not blue chip.

Hockey Writers top 100 drafted prospects not in the NHL, posted January 11, 2022, posts Grans at #90,
Faber at #46, and Clarke at #13. Spence is not even on the list. Incidentally, I am very envious of your
prospect list, so don't take what I said as insulting.

And, I am not saying that LA should be interested in Hoglander, but he floats between the 1st and 3rd line
in Vancouver, in the "NHL". In redraft, for 2020, he is easily in the 1st round. ( in the Hockey News Re-draft
of the 2019 Draft, Hoglander would be drafted in the #18 spot. Admittedly, Hoglander has not scored
as much this year, but his play has been consistently that of a young 2nd tier, 1st or 2nd line player.
(please do not be confused with a 1st tier player like Zegras or Turcotte, who are both drivers.)

Again, I am not sure if Hoglander would be needed in LA with their prospect pool so rich, but let's
not talk like the GM's are saying they do or don't want Hoglander, because that has never been said,
either way.

No, these opinion are from us non-professional, hockey Fan's that have very little true knowledge of
what a hockey GM would say..........

In saying all that.................carry on! You are entitled to your opinion!

 

[zcaptain]

Miller is the guy I’d be most interested in honesty.

The trouble with wanting him, is you have to pay for him, and reading this thread and how much La fans love their prospects, I honestly can not see any possible way, us fans could agree in a theoretical trade.

Example......................

JT Miller to LA for Kempe. Faber and 2022 1st

and I bet there is not one LA taker............not a one! LOL

 

[LAKings88]

The trouble with wanting him, is you have to pay for him, and reading this thread and how much La fans love their prospects, I honestly can not see any possible way, us fans could agree in a theoretical trade.

Example......................

JT Miller to LA for Kempe. Faber and 2022 1st

and I bet there is not one LA taker............not a one! LOL

Yep, you’re right.

 

[Seventy7]

Amongst those who don’t know why VAN would be trading young players… Here’s the reality. Vancouver is looking for U25 DMen… ideally to pair with Hughes long term. Everyone but Petterson, Demko, and Hughes are available… regardless of age, if they find the player they want, anything can happen here.

LA makes sense as they have assets that could work for the long term, and Van has assets to help LA make a push… which is what they intend on doing.

 

[kilowatt]

Hopefully L.A looks at a Hoggie and comes home with a refreshing Miller. JT fils huge needs.

I'd trade a medium-sized fortune for JT Miller.

Vilardi, Walker, and a lottery-protected 2022 1st seems reasonable.

 

[Kingspiracy]

I'd trade a medium-sized fortune for JT Miller.

Vilardi, Walker, and a lottery-protected 2022 1st seems reasonable.

Not for a guy needing a new retirement contract in 18months. I like the player, just the timing is all out.

 

[quietbruinfan]

Hoglander cannot finish. He gets chances but......I am almost surprised to see the thread, If I am the Kings I don't bother.

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

Issue for me is we don’t need Hog… Jets need RHW and RHD.
Horvat and Boeser for Scheifele+ I’d be interested in

I’d imagine Ehlers is the other guy we would want.
Van: Scheifele + Ehlers
Wpg: Horvat + Boeser + Rathbone

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

Not for a guy needing a new retirement contract in 18months. I like the player, just the timing is all out.

Canucks are looking to build off speed and skill, this doesn’t address any of that anyways. Canucks would pass.

 

[kinghock]

I think you have this all wrong...........Vancouver Gm, has not said anything about LA's prospects.........

The truth is, the "prospect" is just that, in definition, it means a unproven player, who has yet to show
anything at the NHL level..........and any.......and I mean "ANY" hockey fan worth his salt knows, the
NHL is filled with mostly 1st round picks, and that most "prospects" do not turn out as advertised,
which is the reason, they are moved so often. Now I will admit, that blue chip prospects..........
aka Brandt Clarke are not often moved, but they still are from time to time.

Lesser prospects, such as Spence, Granns and Faber are seen as good prospects, but not blue chip.

Hockey Writers top 100 drafted prospects not in the NHL, posted January 11, 2022, posts Grans at #90,
Faber at #46, and Clarke at #13. Spence is not even on the list. Incidentally, I am very envious of your
prospect list, so don't take what I said as insulting.

And, I am not saying that LA should be interested in Hoglander, but he floats between the 1st and 3rd line
in Vancouver, in the "NHL". In redraft, for 2020, he is easily in the 1st round. ( in the Hockey News Re-draft
of the 2019 Draft, Hoglander would be drafted in the #18 spot. Admittedly, Hoglander has not scored
as much this year, but his play has been consistently that of a young 2nd tier, 1st or 2nd line player.
(please do not be confused with a 1st tier player like Zegras or Turcotte, who are both drivers.)

Again, I am not sure if Hoglander would be needed in LA with their prospect pool so rich, but let's
not talk like the GM's are saying they do or don't want Hoglander, because that has never been said,
either way.

No, these opinion are from us non-professional, hockey Fan's that have very little true knowledge of
what a hockey GM would say..........

In saying all that.................carry on! You are entitled to your opinion!

You are simply misquoting my statements.
My statement was: “Vancouver has garbage prospect pool” and nothing I said about quality of Hoglander as a player.
Can you please point to where did I say he is not good?
My argument was that Hoglander is not needed in LA, especially for the price of talented RD prospects which can be used in trade for young elite goalie and LD.

 

[kinghock]

Amongst those who don’t know why VAN would be trading young players… Here’s the reality. Vancouver is looking for U25 DMen… ideally to pair with Hughes long term. Everyone but Petterson, Demko, and Hughes are available… regardless of age, if they find the player they want, anything can happen here.

LA makes sense as they have assets that could work for the long term, and Van has assets to help LA make a push… which is what they intend on doing.

I do not believe Kings need Van assets to help LA make a push this year.
Plan for this year was to make playoff.
LA need continue to develop their own assets to become contender in year or two.

 

[kinghock]

Ironically the best comp for Hoglander is Arvidsson. Obviously VA is much better presently but Hoglander is 21 and currently mired in a bit of a sophomore slump which is pretty normal.

Once he figures out some positioning issues and making less egregious turnovers at the bluelines (which plagues most young players) he will be a fine player who can move anywhere throughout your top3 lines.

Not someone Canucks should be looking to move nor a great target for LA who have plenty of young winger prospects to sort through before trading for one. I would think LA would want an established vet if they want to try and make noise with Kopitar and Doughty still around

I do not believe huffing and puffing noises from Kopitar and Brown will help Kings win titles anymore.
It is not 2012 or 2014.
This time is gone unfortunately.
Vancouver does not make sense as trading partner for LA in my opinion.
They have no assets that could work for Kings long term (elite goalie prospect and young elite LD).
Can you suggest any of those from your team?
If not LA should look somewhere else for trades.

 

[BatVader]

I’d imagine Ehlers is the other guy we would want.
Van: Scheifele + Ehlers
Wpg: Horvat + Boeser + Rathbone

Ehlers, hopefully, won’t be available

 

[KingTech]

kings offer Strand or Walker if walker This king fan wants a mid pick added. If this is not good enough so be it.

 

[zcaptain]

You are simply misquoting my statements.
My statement was: “Vancouver has garbage prospect pool” and nothing I said about quality of Hoglander as a player.
Can you please point to where did I say he is not good?
My argument was that Hoglander is not needed in LA, especially for the price of talented RD prospects which can be used in trade for young elite goalie and LD.

I used your comment for all the comments about LA's RHD's who just about all LA fans seem to think will be #1 type Dmen. I simply said they are unproven, while Hoglander is proven.

Asisde from the obvious, I am also saying that all of us, are just fans, but talk like we are the friggin GM himself................

I think LA prospect pool is amazing, but those that have not played in the NHL, other than Clarke who is blue chip are just good prospects, not blue chip.............

I was trying to remind all of us, not all prospects are the same, and that we are not the GM's of any club, and probably do not know what they think............................

I mean, Gretzky was traded................and it seems most NYR and now LA fans think there is no way these prospects will be traded................

In saying all that, and I agree with you, LA has different needs, which Vancouver may still be able to help with...........

AKA.............maybe a Faber for Rathbone trade might be something...........Faber has more value, so maybe it is part of a larger trade, maybe it comes with a plus.........???? Maybe LA is not interested? Or maybe Vancouver is not interested.

We can only talk about the merits of such a trade..........I know we are big on Rathbone........and you on Faber, so ?????

The goalie target is much more interesting...........I mean Edmonton sure can't seem to get it right, but that is Edmonton...........
Personally, We don't have what you need in that account, and not many teams want to give up good ones, so it may be that you have to draft one.............unless you would give up a Faber, a forward, etc.......

Most rebuilding teams want to keep their #1 goalie prospects............

I will apologize if you felt it was personal, that is on me! Did not mean to do that!

 

[Mats26]

I would ask for Spence + if I am Vancouver. For the Kings it will cost them a RHD, but Durzi, Faber and Clarke will fill the void. It really depends on how Vancouver see the TDL and how high they are on Hoglander.
For me I won't move Spence. The kid is on fire in the AHL.

 

[zcaptain]

Hoglander cannot finish. He gets chances but......I am almost surprised to see the thread, If I am the Kings I don't bother.

Boy, i think you have to look past this year, as it is such a small sample size.......

Look at his junior days........or look that he was one of the top scorers 2 years running at the world juniors....

I would not argue with you comment, if you should just look at his 1 year production, but you should not.

The Sophomore jinx, is a real thing, but he will figure it out........the kid does have talent

I am not saying the Kings should take him, I am just saying don't count him out

 

[zcaptain]

I do not believe huffing and puffing noises from Kopitar and Brown will help Kings win titles anymore.
It is not 2012 or 2014.
This time is gone unfortunately.
Vancouver does not make sense as trading partner for LA in my opinion.
They have no assets that could work for Kings long term (elite goalie prospect and young elite LD).
Can you suggest any of those from your team?
If not LA should look somewhere else for trades.

I don't think Rathbone is elite, but I do think he has as much chance of being a NHL Dman as Faber........

IMO, Rathbone is a puck mover, and will look good on a NHL PP, when the time comes
(He scores at higher than a Point per game in the AHL)
His current injury, is a concussion that was given to him by some meat head, as he was run in head first to
the end boards...........he is almost back, and it may take a bit of time to get back up to snuff.
"IF" OEL was not here for the next Billion years, Rathbone would be on our second pairing for years.......
I love his skill set..............
I also think he would be here if Benning and Green knew what they were doing back at the start of the season.
BWAH...........man I hated Green! Bad coach!

 

[kinghock]

I used your comment for all the comments about LA's RHD's who just about all LA fans seem to think will be #1 type Dmen. I simply said they are unproven, while Hoglander is proven.

Asisde from the obvious, I am also saying that all of us, are just fans, but talk like we are the friggin GM himself................

I think LA prospect pool is amazing, but those that have not played in the NHL, other than Clarke who is blue chip are just good prospects, not blue chip.............

I was trying to remind all of us, not all prospects are the same, and that we are not the GM's of any club, and probably do not know what they think............................

I mean, Gretzky was traded................and it seems most NYR and now LA fans think there is no way these prospects will be traded................

In saying all that, and I agree with you, LA has different needs, which Vancouver may still be able to help with...........

AKA.............maybe a Faber for Rathbone trade might be something...........Faber has more value, so maybe it is part of a larger trade, maybe it comes with a plus.........???? Maybe LA is not interested? Or maybe Vancouver is not interested.

We can only talk about the merits of such a trade..........I know we are big on Rathbone........and you on Faber, so ?????

The goalie target is much more interesting...........I mean Edmonton sure can't seem to get it right, but that is Edmonton...........
Personally, We don't have what you need in that account, and not many teams want to give up good ones, so it may be that you have to draft one.............unless you would give up a Faber, a forward, etc.......

Most rebuilding teams want to keep their #1 goalie prospects............

I will apologize if you felt it was personal, that is on me! Did not mean to do that!

I believe that trade Faber for Rathbone even with a plus from Vancouver does not make sense for LA.
LA does not need to trade quality for quantity at all.
I think Faber is second best RD prospect Kings have after Clarke and will be great players for LA for years to come.
I believe Grans for Rathbone will make some sense for Kings.
What do you think about it?

 

[Rorschach]

Hoglander doesn't move the needle for LA. We're looking for certainty and a clear upgrade; we have a ton of young players who "might" develop into the role.

Also, unless there is some player Vancouver doesn't think they'll be able to afford
to re-sign, cap-wise, I don't see LA and Vancouver as good trading partners as both are chasing playoff positioning in the West.