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

[DoktorJeep]

No way Willy heard Blake’s statements about earning ice time in B&W.

I think it’s too much too assume Willy knows how to find and watch an online video like Black & White. Unless he watches TV during intermissions like the rest us of course.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

What is an "extinguishing" circumstance? Do you mean "extenuating"?

I've repeatedly asked you to present a single example of a contending team with 10% of their cap tied up in a 34 year or older player. You can't, because there isn't one. All of these discussions revolve around unprecedented situations.

What you're doing here is an extravagant appeal to authority. No team has traded a 28 year old prime #1 center; you're right. And that has little bearing on what the Kings SHOULD have done in 2015 other than to illustrate a breaking of precedent. Before 2012, no #8 seed had ever won the Cup. By this logic, the Kings should not have won in 2012. Before 2005, no Slovenian had ever played in the NHL. By this logic, the Kings should have passed on drafting Kopitar. Do you see where this starts to break down? Precedent ALONE doesn't matter when we veer into the weeds of normative claims and value judgments. We understand we are advocating for a radical, unprecedented decision to have been made. A judgment being radical and unprecedented doesn't automatically discredit it.

All we can objectively know is this: the Kings have not contended under Kopitar's current contract.

It appears likely - though obviously and objectively uncertain - that the Kings will not contend for the duration of Kopitar's current contract.

Therefore, it's entirely fair for people to start questioning the value of that contract. Denigrating this discussion - which is indeed a worthwhile discussion - with hyperbole about trading Kopitar pre-2012 is childish and useless banter.

If you want to actually participate, make a value judgment and support it. What value has Kopitar's contract brought to the Kings? What value will it continue to bring to the Kings?

Yea, brain wasn't working on that, part, thank you,

As far as your asking for a team with 10% of the cap tied up a 34 year or old player, cap era is 14 years old, give it time padawan.

As far as what the Kings SHOULD have done....I AGREE WITH YOU, I do think they should have traded Kopitar when he was a UFA, here's the part that differentiates us, I don't bemoan it, nor demonize the club for not doing so, I don't bitch and moan and say he's a detriment, because I understand that NO TEAM HAS DONE IT, NO TEAM WILL DO IT, AND NO TEAM WILL EVER DO IT.

It's called professional sports.....what have clownishly showed as precedent, is idiotic because the mechanisms of what you presented, and what professional sport teams actually do, are completely different.

There is a REASON it's NEVER been done, and it's not because it can't be done, or 5 years down the road it might not be done, it's because teams are there, to win. That simple, win. They don't care about winning 10 years from now, or 3 years from now, they are in it, to win now. It's absolutely insane that I have to defend the decision to keep a top 5 player....thats just asinine to me.

 

[DoktorJeep]

It's worth pointing out that as far as 18/19 is concerned, no one has a worse cap to results ratio than the Kings. They're uniquely bad in this area.

I think a better way to frame this overall discussion is value rather than detriment. We're never going to reach common ground re: detriment because 2023 and 2024 are years away with too many variables to objectively account for. The detractor crowd is convinced the Kopitar contract will eventually become a detriment. The apologist crowd is convinced it will not. Impossible to determine until we reach the later years of the contract.

So it's probably better to discuss actual value, both past and potential. It's quite clear that Kopitar's $10 million contract has brought little value to the LA Kings. During the contract's active lifespan, the Kings have:

16/17: Missed the playoffs
17/18: First Round sweep
18/19: Missed the playoffs

That says nothing about Kopitar's "worth" in relation to the contract. It's simply a value judgment. So if Kopitar's current contract carries little to no value, and doesn't project to increase in value, isn't it fair to discuss the hypothetical value of NOT having said contract?

But muh Hart, there’s no Team in Selke, 3rd place Norris

 

[AlphaBravo]

Some of the arguments on this board are insane. No GM in his right mind trades a 1C coming off of two cup wins in 3 years simply because the team missed the playoffs in 2015, largely because of the Voynov, Richards situations and fatigue.

It’s easy to make these grand proclamations when you have the benefit of looking back, but the GMs have to make decisions based on present facts.

1Cs are very rare and are difficult to get via trades or UFAs. No way was DL or Blake trading Kopitar.

 

[Herby]

Some of the arguments on this board are insane. No GM in his right mind trades a 1C coming off of two cup wins in 3 years simply because the team missed the playoffs in 2015, largely because of the Voynov, Richards situations and fatigue.

It’s easy to make these grand proclamations when you have the benefit of looking back, but the GMs have to make decisions based on present facts.

1Cs are very rare and are difficult to get via trades or UFAs. No way was DL or Blake trading Kopitar.

I agree.

Hard to see anyway that it was realistic to to trade Kopitar at that time, now Doughty before he signed is a different story.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

What is an "extinguishing" circumstance? Do you mean "extenuating"?

I've repeatedly asked you to present a single example of a contending team with 10% of their cap tied up in a 34 year or older player. You can't, because there isn't one. All of these discussions revolve around unprecedented situations.

What you're doing here is an extravagant appeal to authority. No team has traded a 28 year old prime #1 center; you're right. And that has little bearing on what the Kings SHOULD have done in 2015 other than to illustrate a breaking of precedent. Before 2012, no #8 seed had ever won the Cup. By this logic, the Kings should not have won in 2012. Before 2005, no Slovenian had ever played in the NHL. By this logic, the Kings should have passed on drafting Kopitar. Do you see where this starts to break down? Precedent ALONE doesn't matter when we veer into the weeds of normative claims and value judgments. We understand we are advocating for a radical, unprecedented decision to have been made. A judgment being radical and unprecedented doesn't automatically discredit it.

All we can objectively know is this: the Kings have not contended under Kopitar's current contract.

It appears likely - though obviously and objectively uncertain - that the Kings will not contend for the duration of Kopitar's current contract.

Therefore, it's entirely fair for people to start questioning the value of that contract. Denigrating this discussion - which is indeed a worthwhile discussion - with hyperbole about trading Kopitar pre-2012 is childish and useless banter.

If you want to actually participate, make a value judgment and support it. What value has Kopitar's contract brought to the Kings? What value will it continue to bring to the Kings?

Ovehckin, next year will be the closest thing, and that will just depend on what the cap is.

Burns will be very close as well

 

[YP44]

What is an "extinguishing" circumstance? Do you mean "extenuating"?

I've repeatedly asked you to present a single example of a contending team with 10% of their cap tied up in a 34 year or older player. You can't, because there isn't one. All of these discussions revolve around unprecedented situations.

What you're doing here is an extravagant appeal to authority. No team has traded a 28 year old prime #1 center; you're right. And that has little bearing on what the Kings SHOULD have done in 2015 other than to illustrate a breaking of precedent. Before 2012, no #8 seed had ever won the Cup. By this logic, the Kings should not have won in 2012. Before 2005, no Slovenian had ever played in the NHL. By this logic, the Kings should have passed on drafting Kopitar. Do you see where this starts to break down? Precedent ALONE doesn't matter when we veer into the weeds of normative claims and value judgments. We understand we are advocating for a radical, unprecedented decision to have been made. A judgment being radical and unprecedented doesn't automatically discredit it.

All we can objectively know is this: the Kings have not contended under Kopitar's current contract.

It appears likely - though obviously and objectively uncertain - that the Kings will not contend for the duration of Kopitar's current contract.

Therefore, it's entirely fair for people to start questioning the value of that contract. Denigrating this discussion - which is indeed a worthwhile discussion - with hyperbole about trading Kopitar pre-2012 is childish and useless banter.

If you want to actually participate, make a value judgment and support it. What value has Kopitar's contract brought to the Kings? What value will it continue to bring to the Kings?

Well Ovechkin is 12% of the Capitals (almost 13% last year) and he is 33.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I agree.

Hard to see anyway that it was realistic to to trade Kopitar at that time, now Doughty is a different story.

Not much different in the sense that....players like him, do not come around very often....really depends on what you could have gotten for a year of signed Doughty, would you have been happy with the Karlsson return? Because that is what you were looking at.

 

[AlphaBravo]

I also note that cap space is not an issue for this team. This team sucks because we basically lost our entire second line and don’t have enough skill and talent. Kopitar has the skills to amp up how game. The guy has had crappy line mates and no depth support this season.

 

[YP44]

Some of the arguments on this board are insane. No GM in his right mind trades a 1C coming off of two cup wins in 3 years simply because the team missed the playoffs in 2015, largely because of the Voynov, Richards situations and fatigue.

It’s easy to make these grand proclamations when you have the benefit of looking back, but the GMs have to make decisions based on present facts.

1Cs are very rare and are difficult to get via trades or UFAs. No way was DL or Blake trading Kopitar.

could not agree more.

 

[Herby]

Not much different in the sense that....players like him, do not come around very often....really depends on what you could have gotten for a year of signed Doughty, would you have been happy with the Karlsson return? Because that is what you were looking at.

Yes, it was significantly different. When Kopitar signed in the 15-16 the team was two years removed from a SC and was leading the division at the time, plus they had Doughty signed through 17-18 at a steal of a cap hit. When Doughty re-signed the team was 4 years removed from a Stanley Cup and on the decline and Kopitar was already inked to a massive contract himself. Doughty was also not a rental or coming off a major injury like Karlsson was, you are being insanely dishonest when you make the comment that Doughty would have returned what Karlsson did if the Kings traded him in 2016 or 2017.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

It's worth pointing out that as far as 18/19 is concerned, no one has a worse cap to results ratio than the Kings. They're uniquely bad in this area.

I think a better way to frame this overall discussion is value rather than detriment. We're never going to reach common ground re: detriment because 2023 and 2024 are years away with too many variables to objectively account for. The detractor crowd is convinced the Kopitar contract will eventually become a detriment. The apologist crowd is convinced it will not. Impossible to determine until we reach the later years of the contract.

So it's probably better to discuss actual value, both past and potential. It's quite clear that Kopitar's $10 million contract has brought little value to the LA Kings. During the contract's active lifespan, the Kings have:

16/17: Missed the playoffs
17/18: First Round sweep
18/19: Missed the playoffs

That says nothing about Kopitar's "worth" in relation to the contract. It's simply a value judgment. So if Kopitar's current contract carries little to no value, and doesn't project to increase in value, isn't it fair to discuss the hypothetical value of NOT having said contract?

He had a Hart-caliber, Selke-winning season. That's not the norm, but there's a lot of grey area between that and 'little value.' I get what you're saying that the net team result is nothing, though.

To the last sentence, hypothetically, yes--but if it doesn't help OR hurt us, it's essentially value-neutral given Uncle Phil's monopoly money, but I'm all ears for the hypothetical value of NOT having said contract. It is certainly tough to project a few years down the road but if we are truly rebuilding we may actually need his contract for the cap floor. I don't see what else we'd be doing with his money?

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Yea, brain wasn't working on that, part, thank you,

As far as your asking for a team with 10% of the cap tied up a 34 year or old player, cap era is 14 years old, give it time padawan.

As far as what the Kings SHOULD have done....I AGREE WITH YOU, I do think they should have traded Kopitar when he was a UFA, here's the part that differentiates us, I don't bemoan it, nor demonize the club for not doing so, I don't ***** and moan and say he's a detriment, because I understand that NO TEAM HAS DONE IT, NO TEAM WILL DO IT, AND NO TEAM WILL EVER DO IT.

It's called professional sports.....what have clownishly showed as precedent, is idiotic because the mechanisms of what you presented, and what professional sport teams actually do, are completely different.

There is a REASON it's NEVER been done, and it's not because it can't be done, or 5 years down the road it might not be done, it's because teams are there, to win. That simple, win. They don't care about winning 10 years from now, or 3 years from now, they are in it, to win now. It's absolutely insane that I have to defend the decision to keep a top 5 player....thats just asinine to me.

So if you agree with me regarding the value judgment of Kopitar’s contract, why are you continuing to argue? Because others are “whining” about an opinion you admit right here you share? Who are you to police who whines about what - or what even determines “whining” - on a public forum? Your ego is completely out of control.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

He had a Hart-caliber, Selke-winning season. That's not the norm, but there's a lot of grey area between that and 'little value.' I get what you're saying that the net team result is nothing, though.

To the last sentence, hypothetically, yes--but if it doesn't help OR hurt us, it's essentially value-neutral given Uncle Phil's monopoly money, but I'm all ears for the hypothetical value of NOT having said contract. It is certainly tough to project a few years down the road but if we are truly rebuilding we may actually need his contract for the cap floor. I don't see what else we'd be doing with his money?

It’s really hard to determine, and I’m the first one to admit that. We’ll just have to see how things play out over the course of his deal.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Yes, it was significantly different. When Kopitar signed in the 15-16 the team was two years removed from a SC and was leading the division at the time, plus they had Doughty signed through 17-18 at a steal of a cap hit. When Doughty re-signed the team was 4 years removed from a Stanley Cup and on the decline and Kopitar was already inked to a massive contract himself. Doughty was also not a rental or coming off a major injury like Karlsson was, you are being insanely dishonest when you make the comment that Doughty would have returned what Karlsson did if the Kings traded him in 2016 or 2017.

Karlsson wasn't a rental either..... the only thing you can say is Karlsson was coming off of a major injury....that he played very well through etc....

 

[BigKing]

The worst thing that happened for Blake so far is that he bought in to the results of his evaluation season as the norm moving forward, ignoring everything since 2014. This further delayed a process that should have started when DL was fired.

When I say start the process, I'm not saying to trade Kopitar because I understand that wasn't going to happen: Doughty either. I agree with SR10 that the point many are making on here is that we want a visionary GM and not some guy that just does what every other GM has done but we know what we have so expecting the trade of either of the team's two superstars--especially with Luc in power--was never going to happen.

So with that being said, Carter should have been moved heading in to last season to maximize value. Blake kept the band together, however, and they pulled a giant fluke season out of their asses on the back of Kopitar's best season ever which, without checking history, I doubt many players do in their 12th season. Blake bought in to them being contenders and here we are with depreciated assets and a sad-sack roster.

I'm not going to blame DL or Blake for not trading Kopitar or Doughty. I don't like the cap hits but that is life. What you have to do then is try to retool around them by moving the other older assets that won't be contributing much in a few seasons while they have value. You've identified 11 and 8 as your cornerstones, great, now go about setting the team up to be a contender within the next couple of seasons by maximizing value on depreciating assets.

Instead, you sign an even older player that has been out of the NHL for years in the hopes that this old team will continue to be as good as they were last year, a season that resulted in three total goals scored in the playoffs.

But hey: Doughty said he didn't want to be part of a rebuild. Blake showed him that he was going to keep going for it so he could keep him. Now that he got his contract, he's cool with staying. Awesome.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

So if you agree with me regarding the value judgment of Kopitar’s contract, why are you continuing to argue? Because others are “whining” about an opinion you admit right here you share? Who are you to police who whines about what - or what even determines “whining” - on a public forum? Your ego is completely out of control.

Because it's absolutely idiotic to sit there and look back and say, yea, we shouldn't have signed him etc.....

You can lament the fact that he hasn't played up to his contract this year, you can lament the fact that the Kings are in last place....but to sit back like some have said and yea....I KNEW we shouldn't sign him....is 100% hindsight bullshit.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

The worst thing that happened for Blake so far is that he bought in to the results of his evaluation season as the norm moving forward, ignoring everything since 2014. This further delayed a process that should have started when DL was fired.

When I say start the process, I'm not saying to trade Kopitar because I understand that wasn't going to happen: Doughty either. I agree with SR10 that the point many are making on here is that we want a visionary GM and not some guy that just does what every other GM has done but we know what we have so expecting the trade of either of the team's two superstars--especially with Luc in power--was never going to happen.

So with that being said, Carter should have been moved heading in to last season to maximize value. Blake kept the band together, however, and they pulled a giant fluke season out of their asses on the back of Kopitar's best season ever which, without checking history, I doubt many players do in their 12th season. Blake bought in to them being contenders and here we are with depreciated assets and a sad-sack roster.

I'm not going to blame DL or Blake for not trading Kopitar or Doughty. I don't like the cap hits but that is life. What you have to do then is try to retool around them by moving the other older assets that won't be contributing much in a few seasons while they have value. You've identified 11 and 8 as your cornerstones, great, now go about setting the team up to be a contender within the next couple of seasons by maximizing value on depreciating assets.

Instead, you sign an even older player that has been out of the NHL for years in the hopes that this old team will continue to be as good as they were last year, a season that resulted in three total goals scored in the playoffs.

But hey: Doughty said he didn't want to be part of a rebuild. Blake showed him that he was going to keep going for it so he could keep him. Now that he got his contract, he's cool with staying. Awesome.

Bolded the part that needs to be fixed, that was never going to happen WHOMEVER WAS IN CHARGE, it could have been Stan freaking Bowman, wouldn't have happened.

Other than that....post is spot on...

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Well Ovechkin is 12% of the Capitals (almost 13% last year) and he is 33.

Ovechkin can almost surely be written off as a statistical anomaly because even at 31 and 32 he was unusually productive for his age.

But yes, he will be 34 next year. We’ll see how competitive the Capitals remain over the finals years of his deal.

I wouldn’t look too much into Burns, either. There’s a reason most pundits are saying 18/19 is sort of the last shot for this Sharks core. They are all getting very old. They will not be contenders in 19/20, and they’re arguably not legitimate contenders in 18/19.

Just my opinion, of course.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Because it's absolutely idiotic to sit there and look back and say, yea, we shouldn't have signed him etc.....

You can lament the fact that he hasn't played up to his contract this year, you can lament the fact that the Kings are in last place....but to sit back like some have said and yea....I KNEW we shouldn't sign him....is 100% hindsight bull****.

It’s really not hindsight when we have written proof of K17 arguing exactly this in the summer of 2015.

 

[Herby]

Karlsson wasn't a rental either..... the only thing you can say is Karlsson was coming off of a major injury....that he played very well through etc....

Karlsson was traded in September, so yeah he was a rental for the Sharks since he was un-signed and hits UFA this coming summer.

 

[AlphaBravo]

It’s really not hindsight when we have written proof of K17 arguing exactly this in the summer of 2015.

K17 is a fan and not a GM with his butt in the hot seat if things go wrong. No reasonable GM would trade Kopitar in 2015.

I can spout on this board today that the Penguins should trade Crosby and rebuild, and 4 years from now looking back people may say that move would have been great if Crosby’s play declines, but the Pens GM would never trade Crosby after the back to back cups. In fact, he would be trashed for doing so and no reasonable GM would trade Crosby in 2019.

 

[BigKing]

Bolded the part that needs to be fixed, that was never going to happen WHOMEVER WAS IN CHARGE, it could have been Stan freaking Bowman, wouldn't have happened.

Other than that....post is spot on...

We know Stan wouldn't have done it either because he didn't.

The point being made is: why do it just because that is how it has always been done? Doing it the way it always has been done seems to have left the team in a horrible spot. What is wrong with wanting a visionary GM? Why bring in Blake but keep everyone else if it is just going to be business as usual?

Regardless, I said they weren't going to trade them. The Kopitar argument is moot since he has a NMC and nobody--not even a visionary--is trading him during the 2016 season. This visionary would have had to trade him coming off of 2015 going in to the last year of his deal. Would take real balls but, in hindsight, it probably would have been the best move. Don't trade for Lucic, trade Kopitar, have multiple 1st round picks in a good draft and hopefully decent prospects/players from said Kopitar trade. You move Jones for something else and you keep that little bitch defenseman from Vegas that I can't remember his name right now. Oh yeah, Miller. Very easy to explain away the 2014 season as I have--and often--still do so, yes, it is extremely unlikely anybody would. AEG definitely would have said no to it as the fans would have been pissed and they were still riding the money train.

Doughty is a different story since his contract came up further away from the Kings being relevant. There was a zero percent chance that Rob Blake was going to turn Drew Doughty into Rob Blake, however.

Now, Luc can't shine this turd so they are acknowledging that they aren't a contender. Drew is cool with staying so his rebuild stuff was posturing. Good for him.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

K17 is a fan and not a GM with his butt in the hot seat if things go wrong. No reasonable GM would trade Kopitar in 2015.

I can spout on this board today that the Penguins should trade Crosby and rebuild, and 4 years from now looking back people may say that move would have been great, but the Pens GM would never trade Crosby after the back to back cups. In fact, he would be trashed for doing so and no reasonable GM would trade Crosby in 2019.

Again, we are making value judgments. Precedent does not tell the entire story.

And why shouldn't we want a visionary GM who makes difficult but beneficial decisions for the longterm health of the franchise? Isn't that why we're in this mess to begin with? Lombardi's poor foresight and insistence on chasing more Cups?

"Well, everyone else is doing it," is such plebeian justification for a bad contract.

 

[AlphaBravo]

Again, we are making value judgments. Precedent does not tell the entire story.

And why shouldn't we want a visionary GM who makes difficult but beneficial decisions for the longterm health of the franchise? Isn't that why we're in this mess to begin with? Lombardi's poor foresight and insistence on chasing more Cups?

"Well, everyone else is doing it," is such plebeian justification for a bad contract.

Trading your star number 1C after 2 cup wins in 3 years is not being a visionary. There are big risks in being what you describe as a visionary, and what I would call stupid. Look at the moves Florida made a few years ago, letting Galant and other players go because they didn’t fit in their new analytics vision. Turned out great for them right?

Or the visionary GM in Arizona who has yet to turn he franchise around.