Speculation: LA Kings News, Rumors, Roster Thread 2022-23 Season

[Herby]

It's a results oriented business.

This guy would play all 4 'normal' dudes on NES Ice Hockey.

Hey, quit stealing my favorite line and my lame jokes.

He had a back and a hip issue before he was drafted and has had zero issues with those since so I call bullshit. He has had mono twice, once before getting drafted, and appendicitis. He had yet to have a concussion before the draft so his biggest health issue certainly was not known. How are these related to his pre-draft health issues?

As for how he started in the AHL, a 19 year old putting 19 points in 32 games is pretty good. Sure, others did better but that doesn't mean he played poorly.

Anytime you draft a player that size who is going to play the type of game he does there is an injury risk. This organization should know it first hand with Deadmarsh and Richards. Now is that a reason not to draft him? No, but there was a risk, just as there were risk in drafting Zegras and Caufield.

The development decision was horrible, Turcotte had 3 goals in his first 30 AHL games before a hat-trick in the finale, while looking small and having a tough time handling the strength of other players in the league.

Every single reason that people here came up with to support the decision turned out wrong. He did not reach the NHL quicker by being put into the Kings system as a teenager, in fact many from his draft year who were taken after him and played 2 years are now NHL regulars, some star caliber players. There was nothing wrong with the development at Wisconsin, Miller and Caufield are difference making players, Trent Frederic is one of the best in the league at what he does.

If Cale Makar, Quinn Hughes, Charlie McAvoy, Matty Beniers, Cole Caufield, Owen Power, Matt Boldy, Josh Norris, K'Andre Miller, Kent Johnson, Zach Werenski, Alex Newhook and Cam York played 2 years in college, so should Alex Turcotte.

The evidence overwhelmingly supports NCAA players playing 2 years unless they are ready to be NHL'ers. The Kings were undoubtedly aware of that and still chose to pull him from school early and damaged his development in the process.

The Kings 100% deserve the blame for that choice.

 

[King'sPawn]

But the Islanders didn't add an $8.5m player mid-season. It's about important detail.

But we're going to get into a context thing again, which I'm sure caused an argument months ago. Nobody is ever completely stuck, but the number of road blocks becomes a problem.

Horvat, soon to be UFA. Tavares, UFA. How many players in a similar situation as Kopitar over the past few years have been traded? What was the return? Are they better off?

In the grand scheme of things, adding $4.125 mid-season versus committing $8.5 mid-season, when most of the money/cap hit is a concern AFTER the midseason obstacle, is picking nits just for the sake of arguing.

If Kopitar was traded midseason, a team would have to worry about $5 million for the rest of the season he was acquired.

Is that a huge issue compared to acquiring a $4.125 million player midseason?

Edit: and what's the difference between trading for a soon-to-be UFA and extending him yourself for a term versus trading for a player who already has the term you're aware of?

 

[Statto]

Had they dealt the first and Faber for Wallstedt folks would debate the decision but not the logic behind it.

I don’t think you can debate the logic of the Fiala move. We acquired the guy that is our best offensive player for a good price (even if you would have preferred we move someone other than Faber). As I’ve said before I think this is the wrong bill to fight over. The argument must surely be why wasn’t an existing top 6 winger moved for help elsewhere, especially when Vilardi started scoring.

Blake must make that trade 100/100.

 

[Fishhead]

In the grand scheme of things, adding $4.125 mid-season versus committing $8.5 mid-season, when most of the money/cap hit is a concern AFTER the midseason obstacle, is picking nits just for the sake of arguing.

If Kopitar was traded midseason, a team would have to worry about $5 million for the rest of the season he was acquired.

Is that a huge issue compared to acquiring a $4.125 million player midseason?

Edit: and what's the difference between trading for a soon-to-be UFA and extending him yourself for a term versus trading for a player who already has the term you're aware of?

The Isles could have afforded Kopitar as well, the mid-season difference isn't crazy. The $10M next season is what really limits the teams that would entertain a trade for him. It also only makes sense for playoff teams, so it limits it even further.

Trying to think who would/could trade for Kopitar right now. If one of the big Avalanche players was out for the year maybe. Winnipeg could do it, but it would be tight. The Wild could, but not sure what the plan is there. Fringe/non-playoff teams could, but it wouldn't make sense.

 

[lumbergh]

You don't understand it because nobody is saying that or offering evidence to support it.

Had they dealt the first and Faber for Wallstedt folks would debate the decision but not the logic behind it.

Trading for an offensive winger two years in a row when most of your NHL ready prospects are fit for those spots, then pigeon-holing those prospects into roles they aren't suited for is poor at worst, indecisive at best.

Especially when you consider the effect on the team - now you have offensive wingers on all 4 lines and next to no role players in those spots. That means more offense but fewer wins. Cutting off your nose to spite your face in its most obvious form.

It's been my belief for several seasons that the plan is to create a more skilled and faster team that is more entertaining to watch and take the focus away from merely trying to keep the puck out of your own net. 2018: Boring team playing boring hockey. Now, no lead is safe from the Kings.

It doesn't take a genius to see that this team needed a game breaker in the worst way for years. It took Rob Blake and the right opportunity to get that game breaker. He tried and failed with the Kovalchuk experiment, getting an old shell of a formerly good player. When another team needed to shed a player, Blake hit a home run with the Fiala acquisition. He had the resources (top prospect and pick) to grab a game breaking forward who is still young and hitting his prime.

You've seen it in his other acquisitions. He's not just dumpster diving every time. He's looking for specific types of players to create a deeper, faster team. He doesn't panic buy or sell. He doesn't overpay. He doesn't trade just for the sake of trading.

I see the plan; it's been out in front of you for years. Once it was apparent the Kings were barely treading water, he sold off most valuable assets except for Kopitar, Brown, Doughty, and Quick, the aging core. The plan is for these 4 players to pass on their experience to a younger generation. That's happening. The plan was to bottom out, amass assets, and then build around a young core, not just the drafted ones, but a core of quality players with a good distribution of ages. The plan was to build as some young players began arriving a team that would grow together. That's happening. And the plan was to get back into playoff contention by last year, compete for the division this year, and bust the window open. That's happening.

You're focused on giving spots to prospects as they move up, but that's not where this is going. Either the prospects earn their spots or they end up on simmer. I'm almost certain you're going to see some prospects getting moved out in transactions over the next 5 months. Lot's of people here are going to be pissed when some of those prospects are prized possessions. In reality, those are assets that Blake will use to continue to build the team into a contender. Will it work? I don't know. But it's the plan.

 

[Sol]

Don’t think you can really debate the Fiala trade at all. We got a great player and we got offense. Made sense if that was the best the Kings had to get from Minnesota.

On another note, I like the idea of Demko to the Kings but history has shown us that you can’t expect a good goalie to put up good numbers when the defense is bad. Look at the graveyard at goalie position the oilers have had.

If kings are going to blow their load on a trade it should be a for LD then if they can pull a goalie they should.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

You're focused on giving spots to prospects as they move up, but that's not where this is going. Either the prospects earn their spots or they end up on simmer. I'm almost certain you're going to see some prospects getting moved out in transactions over the next 5 months. Lot's of people here are going to be pissed when some of those prospects are prized possessions. In reality, those are assets that Blake will use to continue to build the team into a contender. Will it work? I don't know. But it's the plan.

Sure, and now that everyone knows he's forced to move them, he's self-depreciated the assets by 1. not playing them appropriately and 2. running out of contract space and waiver eligibility.

It can't be much of a 'plan' to overdraft to an unhealthy surplus and trade them for pennies on the dollar (edit: or waive them in camp--sure every year some guys pass thru because that's the circle of life but this year and next year's list for the Kings is staggering). It's the stick-in-own-spokes meme.

Edit x2 I'd ALSO add that if the complaint is the prospects aren't stealing spots--then that's ANOTHER failure, rather than another alibi. Personally I think many of them are good enough and they're blocked--but if the complaint is they aren't good enough, that's a drafting issue. I think it's that theyr'e blocked, a development issue.

 

[King'sPawn]

Sure, and now that everyone knows he's forced to move them, he's self-depreciated the assets by 1. not playing them appropriately and 2. running out of contract space and waiver eligibility.

It can't be much of a 'plan' to overdraft to an unhealthy surplus and trade them for pennies on the dollar. It's the stick-in-own-spokes meme.

This is the criticism with Blake's plan.

Marinate prospects until there's an injury or you're forced to move them is apparently the plan with the prospects, judging by how they're by and large being utilized, and it's just not a very good plan.

 

[Surf Nutz]

Just furthers the narrative floating around here that Blake tends to make moves in a vacuum, with little consideration to a larger “plan”.

I say this as a huge fan of the Fiala acquisition, FWIW.

Well looking at what Buffalo just paid for Cozens, I like that vacuum cleaner very much

 

[bland]

I don’t think you can debate the logic of the Fiala move. We acquired the guy that is our best offensive player for a good price (even if you would have preferred we move someone other than Faber). As I’ve said before I think this is the wrong bill to fight over. The argument must surely be why wasn’t an existing top 6 winger moved for help elsewhere, especially when Vilardi started scoring.

Blake must make that trade 100/100.

And I think you are 100/100 in the wrong here.

Its a line of thinking that is based on an EXTREMELY narrow understanding of value and a very, very common fallacious belief that more offense means better hockey. It just isn't the case. Never has been, never will be, yet a LOT of well meaning make that mistake.

More exciting? Absolutely. Better? Definitely not now and most likely not in the future.

Offensive wingers are the absolute easiest thing in the league to draft, develop and acquire. You can get them any year you want. They also lose their value faster than players of any other position. For as much as we marvel Fiala's ability , there are over 30 guys out there this year doing better, and a dozen or so around the same.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

It's not that DL is overrated, it's just the up and down process to get to where that era ended up is overlooked or forgotten due to the ultimate outcome. We don't care that Penner couldn't at all do what he was brought in to do. We just remember that series winning OT goal to send them to the Final. We never mention Moulson's name anymore, when he was a pivotal point of discussion for a long time. We don't even think about how they not only missed on a top 4 pick, but then lost that top 4 pick for nothing. Doesn't matter that they weren't a playoff team the day they got Carter. It was obvious they were a real contender, because real contenders are middle of the pack all the time.

We still talk about things that happened in 2015 today though, because they haven't won since in order to erase that from memory.



The Islanders did not add an $8.5m C mid-season. They added a $4.125m C mid-season.

Would you be expecting anything for Kopitar?

Which year did Van trade a UFA to be Horvat? The year they sucked. Which year did the Kings suck when Kopitar was going to be a UFA? No year. If Van was in 1st place and top 5 overall, do they re-sign Horvat? Absolutely.

I’m not going to argue whether Kopitar should or should not have been traded in 2016 or 2018 or 2020 or next weekend. These arguments have been beaten to death. We all agree that we don’t agree when - if ever - there was the ideal time to move Kopitar.

My original point was that you cannot on one hand absolve Blake of “inheriting an aging core” and on the other hand applaud him for holding on to players like Kopitar and Doughty. Either Kopitar and Doughty were great players that Blake was right to hold on to, or they were an albatross he inherited from Lombardi. You (not you in particular, but certain posters) can’t have it both ways.

The entire narrative surrounding Blake has been poisoned recently by the outright lie that he came aboard with the intention to rebuild. Some of us have provided direct quotes to the contrary and there is a contingent of posters refusing to acknowledge it. This is why old narratives like trading/keeping Kopitar are being brought up again.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

In the grand scheme of things, adding $4.125 mid-season versus committing $8.5 mid-season, when most of the money/cap hit is a concern AFTER the midseason obstacle, is picking nits just for the sake of arguing.

If Kopitar was traded midseason, a team would have to worry about $5 million for the rest of the season he was acquired.

Is that a huge issue compared to acquiring a $4.125 million player midseason?

Edit: and what's the difference between trading for a soon-to-be UFA and extending him yourself for a term versus trading for a player who already has the term you're aware of?

Let’s not forget Jack Eichel - a $10 million premier center - was traded mid-contract, too.

But these trades never happen, right? Nothing Blake can do, man.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Then again, if you view everything thru the lens of "blake had no intention of rebuilding", everything makes a lot of sense.

Which is why I get the worry we'll see something job-savingly absurd like Clarke for Chychrun--which is probably fair value in a vacuum but not fun for those of us who are waiting for the next generation. How he treats the current ready-to-graduate prospects that are about to run out of waiver eligibility will be very telling.

And ironically enough on the other hand, it makes the current lack of goaltending and LHD even more maddening. Not accomplishing EITHER goal well, really.

I'm trying to suspend full judgment until after the deadline/end of this year but as of right now, this moment, it looks pretty bleak. This is basically his keystone moment.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Then again, if you view everything thru the lens of "blake had no intention of rebuilding", everything makes a lot of sense.

Which is why I get the worry we'll see something job-savingly absurd like Clarke for Chychrun--which is probably fair value in a vacuum but not fun for those of us who are waiting for the next generation. How he treats the current ready-to-graduate prospects that are about to run out of waiver eligibility will be very telling.

And ironically enough on the other hand, it makes the current lack of goaltending and LHD even more maddening. Not accomplishing EITHER goal well, really.

I'm trying to suspend full judgment until after the deadline/end of this year but as of right now, this moment, it looks pretty bleak. This is basically his keystone moment.

I’ve been beating this drum for years.

Blake and Luc never wanted to rebuild. They didn’t want to in 2017. They didn’t want to in 2020. They don’t want to now. They told everyone - including the fanbase - they wanted to contend.

Blake’s entire managing strategy or lack thereof makes sense through that lens alone.

Otherwise, he’s quite literally a moron who should’ve never been hired, which I don’t believe.

 

[Surf Nutz]

I thought Strand played well has size, shoots h

Where have you heard management say let's win another cup with Kopi and Doughty? They are not going to trade Kopitar. Also Doughty only gets traded if he wants to leave. Right or wrong they deserve that option. They are not that far from legitimate contention. As you said they need a LD and Goaltender. Well Quick comes off the books this year and you can get a #1 goalie with the 5.8 mil quick is being paid. If the Kings really wanted a LD they could easily get one using the likes of Walker, Durzi, and with Edler off the books. Every fan call out urgency This is not Baseball where you get a Billionaire throwing money around willing to pay those penalties. NHL has a hard cap. Me #1 get rid of Durzi. #2 a solid top 4 LD. 3# Goalie better than Copley. All can be done and I think at least one of the 3 will happen very soon. - Side note I think Quick goes on LTIR soon. Kings take the cap relief + say Durzi/Walker to trade for a goalie.

Durzi is underrated because of his extremely costly defensive miscues.
He seems to be working on them but was put in an even more difficult LD with RH's spot.
His offensive potential is above the 50th percentile.
Blake won't trade him unless he is getting real value in return.
He will be resigned and show marked improvement when he returns to RD.

Acquiring Stecher for a 7th was another great move.
If not a RD, I would have liked to resign him.
Spence wasn't quite ready for Edmonton's high caliber offense in the playoffs, and Stecher came in and played very well.
This is another one of the Choir's most frequently sung, non-hit singles
Bjornfot needs to be held and the surplus of RHD's and F's needs to be what is used in any trades

I lost my like button, for my post pointing out the argumentativeness of non regionally located posters on this board. I thought I was well within the rules. I am learning the gray areas or who is friends of the moderators, maybe.

Therefore I will be increasing my number of reply's, except for revisionist history.
I know most here will be unfazed except a small circle.
You guys have been forewarned.

Rebuilding without having competent veterans to show the youth the way would be just asinine, another argument against another frequently played non-hit single from the choir.
Definitely needing some new DJ's on here anyways.

Regardless it meshes with what I feel is a directive from those above Bluc, build a winner while always making the playoffs with the veteran mentors in place.
I don't feel like this is the Kings year, and they may come up short, because of the rapid deterioration of goal tending just since last years playoffs. Those awaiting the end of the year to pass judgement, could be pissed.
They better not trade Clarke.
I don't even want underwhelming LTIR posterboy Chyrun, and do not believe Blake is dumb enough to pay the ransom no matter how much the feedback loop grunts and groans.

 

[Schrute farms]

Still a loooong ways until Saturday. Looking forward to actual game day fights & discussions.

 

[YAYSAY]

And I think you are 100/100 in the wrong here.

Its a line of thinking that is based on an EXTREMELY narrow understanding of value and a very, very common fallacious belief that more offense means better hockey. It just isn't the case. Never has been, never will be, yet a LOT of well meaning make that mistake.

More exciting? Absolutely. Better? Definitely not now and most likely not in the future.

Offensive wingers are the absolute easiest thing in the league to draft, develop and acquire. You can get them any year you want. They also lose their value faster than players of any other position. For as much as we marvel Fiala's ability , there are over 30 guys out there this year doing better, and a dozen or so around the same.

And yet Fiala is the first player we've had who has been able to measure up to Palffy, if they were really so easy to acquire surely it wouldn't have taken so long to get a player as good as him and every team would have multiple PPG wingers who can take control of games. Meanwhile since Palffy we've had numerous players like Faber come and go.

 

[Statto]

And I think you are 100/100 in the wrong here.

Its a line of thinking that is based on an EXTREMELY narrow understanding of value and a very, very common fallacious belief that more offense means better hockey. It just isn't the case. Never has been, never will be, yet a LOT of well meaning make that mistake.

More exciting? Absolutely. Better? Definitely not now and most likely not in the future.

Offensive wingers are the absolute easiest thing in the league to draft, develop and acquire. You can get them any year you want. They also lose their value faster than players of any other position. For as much as we marvel Fiala's ability , there are over 30 guys out there this year doing better, and a dozen or so around the same.

Well we’ve not had a player like Fiala since probably Ziggy. We haven’t been able to get that type of player for an eternity so at that price, yes I think it was a great value trade for something we haven’t had in a generation. The value was good and the contract fair. I think it was a great bit of business all around. Has it left us with an unbalanced roster? Yes. However I see that as the result of other moves not happening for whatever reason. I don’t think acquiring Fiala has prevented us doing anything. I’ve never overly cared how exciting the hockey is, I don’t see the game in that way (I enjoyed the technicalities of the NZ trap). What I see in Fiala is a player that can create something from nothing and can be (and has been) a difference maker. He brings an X-Factor.

Signing Moore, whilst keeping Iaffalo and Arvidsson is more of an issue for the roster makeup. To be clear I like each of the players but not all three guys together, it’s the wrong mix for me. There is definitely a case for trading one of them to free up funds for the blue line. If young guys take further steps maybe two of the veteran wingers get moved.

I think we will agree to disagree on this one

 

[Surf Nutz]

I think people need to get a bit of a grip with the Lombardi situation and realize that there’s good evidence both ways. Just a matter of preference which way you want to line up. There’s many good reasons to think he was overrated and made a lot of bad calls or you can be the other guy and just think about the cups being the only thing you care about. Both fine.

Results are the best measurement.
For those ignoring the score:

Lombardi= 2
Every other GM in Kings history = 0

Flat out amazing how many people here think they know unequivocally what would happen, what should happen...what will happen....

According to LWL (so who knows how accurate) Kings are the 11th youngest team in the league, out of the 10 that are ahead of them, only TWO are playoff teams, the 10 right after LA, SIX are playoff teams....

Yet some people on here absolutely convinced that the Kings are trash, they won't do anything the next 1-2-3-4 years, that everyone ELSE is doing it right......because of their insane dislike/hatred of all things Blake, or all things Robitaille, or both......

I mean for f*** sake, you change the names of the President and GM to Jim Bob Furley, and Jim Crack Corn....and everyone loves this f***ing team...it's absolutely f***ing insane.....

And for those who wanna bitch...I get it....OMG NO G....AND OMG NO LD......AND OMG THEY ARE DEVELOPING CLARKE WRONG......and all the other bullshit you want to spew.......Amazing, because so many were convinced they were developing Vilardi wrong, Byfield wrong, Kaliyev wrong, and yet... there they are f***ing prospering......but yea....it's wrong....

 

[KINGS17]

Sure, and now that everyone knows he's forced to move them, he's self-depreciated the assets by 1. not playing them appropriately and 2. running out of contract space and waiver eligibility.

It can't be much of a 'plan' to overdraft to an unhealthy surplus and trade them for pennies on the dollar (edit: or waive them in camp--sure every year some guys pass thru because that's the circle of life but this year and next year's list for the Kings is staggering). It's the stick-in-own-spokes meme.

Edit x2 I'd ALSO add that if the complaint is the prospects aren't stealing spots--then that's ANOTHER failure, rather than another alibi. Personally I think many of them are good enough and they're blocked--but if the complaint is they aren't good enough, that's a drafting issue. I think it's that theyr'e blocked, a development issue.

What? You can't take spots from guys that are setting up the Kings to be 1st round playoff fodder.

Just remember, all you have to do is get in and anything can happen. Remember beating the Red Wings in the 1st round that one year, and then losing to the Avs in seven games? That was quite an accomplishment. That year right there was the highlight the Kings organization banked on for 7 or 8 years. Good times!

 

[SmytheKing]

I’ve been beating this drum for years.

Blake and Luc never wanted to rebuild. They didn’t want to in 2017. They didn’t want to in 2020. They don’t want to now. They told everyone - including the fanbase - they wanted to contend.

Blake’s entire managing strategy or lack thereof makes sense through that lens alone.

Otherwise, he’s quite literally a moron who should’ve never been hired, which I don’t believe.

...and yet it DOESN'T make sense because, if you don't want to rebuild, then why aren't you trading the #2 overall (Byfield) when that pick had sky high value to fill positions of need with NHL-level players? If the thought is, well you want a bridge to the next group too, then why are you picking the project player instead of the guy who could contribute quicker?

There's just no consistency in the message and it can really be maddening at times.

 

[lumbergh]

Sure, and now that everyone knows he's forced to move them, he's self-depreciated the assets by 1. not playing them appropriately and 2. running out of contract space and waiver eligibility.

It can't be much of a 'plan' to overdraft to an unhealthy surplus and trade them for pennies on the dollar (edit: or waive them in camp--sure every year some guys pass thru because that's the circle of life but this year and next year's list for the Kings is staggering). It's the stick-in-own-spokes meme.

Edit x2 I'd ALSO add that if the complaint is the prospects aren't stealing spots--then that's ANOTHER failure, rather than another alibi. Personally I think many of them are good enough and they're blocked--but if the complaint is they aren't good enough, that's a drafting issue. I think it's that theyr'e blocked, a development issue.

Has he lost a prospect to a waiver claim yet? Last I checked, October went fine.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Has he lost a prospect to a waiver claim yet? Last I checked, October went fine.

Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it's not worth talking about. I mean hell this last offseason several people were giving others of us shit for worrying about LHD and goaltending and...you know the rest.

This coming offseason's waiver eligible players:
JAD
Lias
Grundstrom

Moverare
Bjornfot
Fagemo
Kupari
Madden
Thomas

Then Turcotte Byfield Spence the following offseason.

If you're another team, you're probably getting Fagemo, Kupari, Madden, Thomas for picks rounds lower than we got them for if you're not picking them up on waivers, simply because the Kings couldn't find opportunity. JAD or Lizotte, same.

Some of these guys we won't shed tears for, but the clock is ticking on asset management. Depreciation is still a thing.

 

[KINGS17]

SR's point is that a team committed cap space to a quality player, which dispels the narrative that Blake was "stuck" with Kopitar.

If Kopitar was ever made available over the past few years, a team would have made room.

Now, I don't think Kopitar, Doughty, or Quick should have been traded, because I still believe they provide quality to a rebuilding team (assuming they buy into a rebuild, which Doughty was never really interested in). But the point is people are being revisionists by saying "Blake couldn't do a rebuild because of these AGING VETERANS that nobody wants."

...and Kopitar should have been made available.

 

[KINGS17]

Has he lost a prospect to a waiver claim yet? Last I checked, October went fine.

I hear the train a comin'...