Rumor: KINGS 2018-19 Season- Luc/Rob ****Show/ Sell Everyone!! Part 3

[Chazz Reinhold]

Man, must be a slow news day. A LOT of hand wringing about a late round pick.

It's not about the late round pick to me, per se. It's about the principle of general asset management by Blake.

 

[Chazz Reinhold]

We are talking about in a vacuum, because we are discussing value. The 123rd pick is more valuable than the 130th pick. Even if analytics say there is not a huge measurable difference in prospect success, I don't think you would find anyone, anywhere in the whole world of hockey that would say that the 130th pick is more valuable than the 123rd, even if it is a small amount. Therefor, the Kings did not pay to trade Thompson and were able to extract some value, which I don't think anyone could be upset about. Especially when we see that the comparable real world value of the trade is ~a 4th round pick(The San Jose trade up from last season is what I am basing said value off of. I understand your argument that the Kings should just stockpile picks in any round, but it is not like he is a high value asset and the likely other option was letting him walk.

Here (note the 114-124 range versus the 125-139 range):

Here's a recent analysis on draft pick value: https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-values-1.1119528

Again, minimal difference between 4th (especially late 4th) and 7th round.

 

[crassbonanza]

Here (note the 114-124 range versus the 125-139 range):

Wait, are you seriously trying to argue that having a pick in the 125th-139th range is more valuable than having a pick in the 114-124th range because the latter happened to have a slightly better value drafted between 1990 and 2014? That is a horrible way to look at statistics. This does show that there is a big drop in draft pick value as one enters the later portion of the first round, but using 24 drafts to deduce that a player drafted in the range of 63-72 has a significantly greater chance of playing 100 games is a horrific abuse of statistics. We are working with an N=24, there is going to be severe variances with such a small number. The fact is, being able to draft higher is more valuable than drafting later and no amount of late round surprises/early round misses can change that.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Wait, are you seriously trying to argue that having a pick in the 125th-139th range is more valuable than having a pick in the 114-124th range because the latter happened to have a slightly better value drafted between 1990 and 2014? That is a horrible way to look at statistics. This does show that there is a big drop in draft pick value as one enters the later portion of the first round, but using 24 drafts to deduce that a player drafted in the range of 63-72 has a significantly greater chance of playing 100 games is a horrific abuse of statistics. We are working with an N=24, there is going to be severe variances with such a small number. The fact is, being able to draft higher is more valuable than drafting later and no amount of late round surprises/early round misses can change that.

That wasn't my takeaway; I read it as the movement in spots is utterly meaningless, i.e. we basically gave Thompson away, that drafting 114-124 instead of 125-139 is a negligible difference in value.

 

[King'sPawn]

Development is even more important than the draft when you are talking about picks outside the 1st round.

Sure, but the better players are still available in the 4th round. There's still considerable talent available.

 

[crassbonanza]

That wasn't my takeaway; I read it as the movement in spots is utterly meaningless, i.e. we basically gave Thompson away, that drafting 114-124 instead of 125-139 is a negligible difference in value.

I assume he was mentioning that because the table showing the ranges he pointed out showed slightly more value from the lower range. I agree that the value is not that much greater drafting in the 4th round rather than the 5th round, but it is more valuable. Anytime you have the ability to choose earlier you take it. You are right though, we did basically give Thompson away, similar to how we gave Cammi away last year and how the Avs gave Iggy away a few years back, etc. However, they did not pay to trade Thompson away, which is what Chazz was arguing and that I was countering. They got a small amount of value and benefited the current roster and the player.

 

[King'sPawn]

I assume he was mentioning that because the table showing the ranges he pointed out showed slightly more value from the lower range. I agree that the value is not that much greater drafting in the 4th round rather than the 5th round, but it is more valuable. Anytime you have the ability to choose earlier you take it. You are right though, we did basically give Thompson away, similar to how we gave Cammi away last year and how the Avs gave Iggy away a few years back, etc. However, they did not pay to trade Thompson away, which is what Chazz was arguing and that I was countering. They got a small amount of value and benefited the current roster and the player.

It's not much value to move up, but it wasn't much value anyway.

Thompson is an overpaid 4th liner pending UFA with a NTC.

 

[SlimCharles]

I would have asked for a 6th from Bergevin instead. Oh well, really not a big deal anyways.

 

[ScoreZeGoals]

If Thompson would have been traded for a conditional 7th, with the condition being the Kings win the cup I would have been good with that. It's hard to squabble about asset management when where are taking about a player that isn't an asset

 

[regulate]

Quick 29 GP .899 Sv % 3.10 GAA
Campbell 18 GP .933 Sv% 2.12 GAA

What say you Kings fans..........

 

[KingsFan7824]

Quick 29 GP .899 Sv % 3.10 GAA
Campbell 18 GP .933 Sv% 2.12 GAA

What say you Kings fans..........

It's easier to get an asset for Campbell than Quick.

 

[Peter James Bond II]

It's easier to get an asset for Campbell than Quick.

The problem with that, is no team would probably not offer more than a B+ prospect for Campbell, or possibly better than a 3rd round draft choice....and yet, he is worth 8 times that....and he's been better than Quick all season.The numbers don't lie...they're not even far away, let alone close. It's Quick you trade. Campbell is better than many NHL starters right now and signed next yr for $700,000.
The Kings survive without Muzzin and Carter and they will survive without Quick. 2019; 5 years removed from last Cup. And all players from that team have slightly regressed to more than slightly regressed. All of them.

The worst trades ever made is dealing a player for 25% of his actual value. Dealing Campbell would be one of those.

 

[kilowatt]

delete

 

[kilowatt]

That wasn't my takeaway; I read it as the movement in spots is utterly meaningless, i.e. we basically gave Thompson away, that drafting 114-124 instead of 125-139 is a negligible difference in value.

It’s possible this was a favor for Thompson more than anything. Could be a good will type of move should we need to sign any veterans this offseason to fill the roster for a year.

 

[KingsFan7824]

The problem with that, is no team would probably not offer more than a B+ prospect for Campbell, or possibly better than a 3rd round draft choice....and yet, he is worth 8 times that....and he's been better than Quick all season.The numbers don't lie...they're not even far away, let alone close. It's Quick you trade. Campbell is better than many NHL starters right now and signed next yr for $700,000.
The Kings survive without Muzzin and Carter and they will survive without Quick.

The worst trades ever made is dealing a player for 25% of his actual value. This would be one of those.

He's a 27 year old former failed 1st rd pick reclamation project goalie who has 24 good games with the Kings, that was gotten for Nick Ebert. In general, goalies don't have a ton of value to begin with. I would say you're vastly inflating the value of Jack Campbell.

It's not about keeping Quick because of some emotional connection to past glory or that the franchise will crumble without him. Quick should've been traded years ago, probably instead of Jones, and never should've been given a 10 year contract coming off a Conn Smythe. Trade Quick tomorrow too, if you can(since he's that much worse than Campbell, and much more expensive). If we're talking about asset management, and Campbell is that good and cheap, you trade him a year too early rather than a year too late(since the Kings aren't going anywhere with him anyway), before he gets older, his number even out over a larger sample size, and he gets more expensive.

 

[KingsFan7824]

So now that we know the value of Nate Thompson, what is the supposed value of Hagelin?

What has Hagelin been traded for in his career? It will likely not be anything better than what he's returned in the past.

I would have asked for a 6th from Bergevin instead. Oh well, really not a big deal anyways.

Maybe Blake did ask for that, and was told no.

 

[Peter James Bond II]

He's a 27 year old former failed 1st rd pick reclamation project goalie who has 24 good games with the Kings, that was gotten for Nick Ebert. In general, goalies don't have a ton of value to begin with. I would say you're vastly inflating the value of Jack Campbell.

It's not about keeping Quick because of some emotional connection to past glory or that the franchise will crumble without him. Quick should've been traded years ago, probably instead of Jones, and never should've been given a 10 year contract coming off a Conn Smythe. Trade Quick tomorrow too, if you can(since he's that much worse than Campbell, and much more expensive). If we're talking about asset management, and Campbell is that good and cheap, you trade him a year too early rather than a year too late(since the Kings aren't going anywhere with him anyway), before he gets older, his number even out over a larger sample size, and he gets more expensive.

Jack Campbell is a great NHL goaltender right now and in his prime, on a $700,000 contract. Why trade him? His past and path matters not...what matters is his play, performance and yes and he's well liked and respected by his teammates. They have full confidence in him.

What do you think they should do? Keep Quick, deal Campbell, sign Petersen and make him backup?
Regulate - your opinion?

 

[bouncesonly]

That wasn't my takeaway; I read it as the movement in spots is utterly meaningless, i.e. we basically gave Thompson away, that drafting 114-124 instead of 125-139 is a negligible difference in value.

The alternative to not trading Thompson immediately is hoping for a desperate team that needs a 4C. But if that doesn't come through, you got nothing for Thompson. And that would be worse asset management than trading him for 10 spot movement in the 4th.

 

[deaderhead28]

Blake is going to move more guys if he can. It could be anyone. Hagelin will be gone for sure regardless. They will move him even if it only brings back a 3rd because he is a UFA. They will hold out for whatever they can get but he is gone. If they can get a great return for Carter, Quick, Toffoli, Kovy or Martinez then they probably would move them. Lewis could be moved. I really think that the only guys who are completely off the market are Doughty, Kopitar, Clifford and Brown. I tend to think that Martinez as well just because you trade him and you essentially lose 2 Top 4 Dman in one season. That's really tough to replace.

I don't pay attention to anything with regards to the experts saying who is going to be held back or moved. They are guessing for the most part just like we are. It's fun to watch but Blake is going to try and get assets that don't apply to the cap and won't need to be protected in the next expansion draft.

I would be shocked if Haglin brought back a 3rd.Thats wishful thinking really.Toffoli isnt being moved without overpayment.Toffoli was reported in Kings plans next season and a 1% chance of being traded.

 

[deaderhead28]

Jack Campbell is a great NHL goaltender right now and in his prime, on a $700,000 contract. Why trade him? His past and path matters not...what matters is his play, performance and yes and he's well liked and respected by his teammates. They have full confidence in him.

What do you think they should do? Keep Quick, deal Campbell, sign Petersen and make him backup?
Regulate - your opinion?

Campbell will probably be traded next season.Kings have Peterson taking over for Quick for the future.

 

[deaderhead28]

Well it's not a huge deal but I dont get this deal.Thomson alone should get you a 4th,then you throw in a 5th to go 10 spots.Im over this trade.Hope Blake can make it up in another trade.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Jack Campbell is a great NHL goaltender right now and in his prime, on a $700,000 contract. Why trade him? His past and path matters not...what matters is his play, performance and yes and he's well liked and respected by his teammates. They have full confidence in him.

I don't know if he's a great NHL goalie, but if he is, this is as good as it's going to get. He will have to be re-signed soon, and if he's great, he is going to want to be a #1 soon. If Petersen is the next guy, Campbell won't re-sign with the Kings, and he's a UFA next year. Or, keep Campbell, sign him, and trade Petersen. He's got all that potential next to his name right now. Quick is old, has years left on his deal.

What do you think they should do? Keep Quick, deal Campbell, sign Petersen and make him backup?

Pretty much. And hope Petersen will re-sign for 3 years, at a relatively low cap hit. Unless you can clear Quick's cap hit. Give him to Columbus if they want him, but they'll still have to trade Campbell at some point if he's great. Great goalies don't sit on the bench. Petersen will already be 25 next season. He has to play, so trade the other two, and bring in some random goalie to back Petersen up.
What do you think they should do? Keep Quick, deal Campbell, sign Petersen and make him backup?
Regulate - your opinion

 

[LAKings88]

All the Kings stats are skewed thanks to that horrendous start.

I couldn’t blame Quick for most of those goals against Washington.

Quick is still one of the best goalies in the world, especially when the game really matters.

Carolina or Columbus should be all over him. Pair him with an up and coming rookie and you have stability in net. Expose him to Seattle in a couple of years.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Carolina or Columbus should be all over him. Pair him with an up and coming rookie and you have stability in net. Expose him to Seattle in a couple of years.

Expecting what in return?

Columbus is going to lose Panarin, probably not be able to replace him, and they haven't been able to get over the hump with him. Quick can't win playoff games by himself, no matter how good he is, as seen by his 1-8 record in the playoffs since 2014.

Carolina hasn't made the playoffs in a decade, they're one of the lowest spending teams every year, they're still on the hook for Darling for 2 more years, and it'll be dead cap for a low spending team if they buy him out. Their 3rd leading scorer Williams is 37, they'll probably lose their 4th leading scorer Ferland, they don't know what to do with Hamilton, and they have to sign Aho to what will likely be a major investment.

 

[YP44]

Expecting what in return?

Columbus is going to lose Panarin, probably not be able to replace him, and they haven't been able to get over the hump with him. Quick can't win playoff games by himself, no matter how good he is, as seen by his 1-8 record in the playoffs since 2014.

Carolina hasn't made the playoffs in a decade, they're one of the lowest spending teams every year, they're still on the hook for Darling for 2 more years, and it'll be dead cap for a low spending team if they buy him out. Their 3rd leading scorer Williams is 37, they'll probably lose their 4th leading scorer Ferland, they don't know what to do with Hamilton, and they have to sign Aho to what will likely be a major investment.

Carolina has a lot of interesting pieces. They have d prospects like Fleury and Bean. The emergence of Aho and the fact Necas is coming could make a guy like Tarvainen available. You mention Hamilton, Maybe he part of deal so they save money or maybe he is moved elsewhere.
Darling does pigeon hold them a bit. I doubt LA would be keen on taking him back.