ScoreZeGoals
Boooorrrrriiiinnnnng
- Jun 29, 2010
- 17,624
- 7,554
Does anyone seriously think the Kings will push Quick onto LTIR to finish out his last season as a King?
Speculation: LA Kings News, Rumors, Roster Thread 2022-23 Season
- Thread starter kingsboy11
- Start date
-
HF Sportsbook has been reset for the new season - Click here to play. It's Back - NHL Survivor 2024-25 is now open Click here to join.
- Status
Seattle King
Registered User
- Aug 19, 2022
- 874
- 1,977
Teams carry 3 goalies frequently, even though its not ideal. The press box is nice, Quick will enjoy the view and enjoy some tasty complimentary snacks.
All The Kings Men
Registered User
- Apr 7, 2016
- 2,250
- 5,362
There were entire packages of Red Vines up there last night.
ScoreZeGoals
Boooorrrrriiiinnnnng
- Jun 29, 2010
- 17,624
- 7,554
I don't see the Kings pushing Quick into the press box either
I don't understand it either.
FSL KINGS
Registered User
- May 10, 2021
- 2,774
- 2,506
If Quick can't make a comeback options are trade, AHL, 3 goalies or LTIR & free up 6M on the cap.
They aren't trading or sending Quick to the AHL. Press box vs LTIR isn't much of a difference.
They're not doing anything with Quick. He's done at the end of the season. This is all the same talk Brown got last season.
Little Psycho
I solemnly swear I'm up to no good
No Name The Nameless
Registered User
I have zero worries about losing Clark or Byfield. That’s not happening. I’m just hoping to hold on the Spence and Vilardi.
Mats26
Vet Movement - What's the Maatta?
- Sep 16, 2005
- 3,863
- 3,797
We lose Byfield or Clarke in a trade for one D man that does not make us contenders. I don't see this happening eithier. Yotes already asked for Vilardi a while ago and Kings said no. My guess is Kaliyev-Spence are on the table.
Sol
Smile
- Jun 30, 2017
- 24,177
- 20,250
You’re missing the big picture. It’s not to make the Kings contenders…it’s because they have no one on LD. anyone who thinks it’s to make the Kings into contenders is way far off. This trades happens because the Kings have no other option on LD. So yeah I wouldn’t be surprised if Clarke is on the table. Kings have a lot of RD and no one on LD.
Trading Clarke for Chychrun seems like a panic move. Like if the Kings were floundering and falling and Blake was throwing out a life preserver to save the season.
If they did a panic move for a goalie it’d be more understandable. But I just don’t see Clarke involved.
Turcotte, Durzi/Spence, Grans, 1st, Walker or Iafallo for cap reasons.
If they did a panic move for a goalie it’d be more understandable. But I just don’t see Clarke involved.
Turcotte, Durzi/Spence, Grans, 1st, Walker or Iafallo for cap reasons.
Mats26
Vet Movement - What's the Maatta?
- Sep 16, 2005
- 3,863
- 3,797
Clarke is not just one of many RD. The kid is special and probably the best RD we had since Voynov. You don't trade a talent like this just to fill a LD void.
Sol
Smile
- Jun 30, 2017
- 24,177
- 20,250
Chychrun is a very good player. Yeah it’d suck to trade Clarke but it also makes sense. Kings have Spence and Grans. They have no one on LD. Not one player.
Schrute farms
LA Kings: new GM wanted -- inquire within
- Jul 7, 2020
- 2,501
- 4,535
That would be an F in GM 101. You don't trade future stars for guys simply because you need someone there. It needs to be a difference maker and help you contend for the Cup. Especially when YOU (our GM Blake) created this freaking problem in the first place by not properly supplying the organization with LHD (& goalies). Not to mention the fact we already have a guy in Bjornfot (& Mov who can be a decent 3rd LHD on this team).
It's like -- oh i need to sacrifice the future to fix this problem....a problem that I created myself and everyone saw coming a mile away. BTW, we still have the goalie problem and the size/toughness problem. Again, created by our GM as well.
bland
Registered User
- Jul 1, 2004
- 7,783
- 11,732
Of course not. That's why the re-signed Copley yesterday, he will be waived and pinky promised the backup next year. Yes, even with that record.
Mats26
Vet Movement - What's the Maatta?
- Sep 16, 2005
- 3,863
- 3,797
Then go and sign one or make a trade with picks and B level prospects. You don't give up on a top player in his draft class. We'll never draft in the top 10, for a while. Need to keep the top kids, especially the ones who look like they can take over a game and be impactful.
Two big moves: Fiala, Chychrun aimed at competing now when your only prospect established as playing a core role for more than a full season is Mikey Anderson and when your 1C and 1D are well over 30 probably isn't the best timing IF this is indeed a rebuild and if you're giving up Clarke.
But I guess it was always intended to be a retool. If Clarke is the return, then the entire thing hinges on Byfield replacing Kopitar within 2 seasons and becoming a 1C (or pulling a 1C from elsewhere, highly unlikely). Neither Kopitar nor Byfield are good enough now for them to win this season and Lizotte probably isn't a 3C on a championship team either, nor is Copley a starting goaltender. That's with or without Chychrun. Also, with Kopitar getting older and Byfield being as raw as he is, this almost certainly won't happen even next season. The first time you might get that kind of look with Byfield is just about the time Chychrun's contract will be close to ending or already up.
I think the paradox of Blake's management is that on one hand we complain about how passive low-risk it is tactically, but on the other hand, strategically speaking, this retool is basically hanging by a thread and quite high risk. If they deal Clarke then it's all on Byfield to become a premier center within 2-3 seasons. And if that's closer to 3, you have to hope Doughty hasn't fallen off a cliff by then because you don't have Clarke (or anyone else) to replace him as the #1 high IQ RD, Durzi is a stretch in that role as is probably Spence and Clarke might not become that (a risk with any prospect), but with Clarke you at least have the projection and open-ended possibilities that match with Byfield's age.
When you think of it, if Clarke for Chychrun is a thing, then this kind of plan would actually be razor-thin in terms of working out.
I understand the appeal of it though. From a "real-world" perspective the current management will have to do something. If you don't, you kind of admit the whole Danault, Arvidsson, Fiala etc. acquisitions don't make sense. They've put themselves into this position first by trying to compete with the old core and losing time (and probably value on veteran assets) and then by trying to balance between satisfying old Cup veterans and rebuilding at the same time. This weird in-between lane they've driven for years will eventually force them into a commitment once the road runs out.
There are a number of ways to play this. I think moving Clarke for Chychrun would be a mistake when taking into account the state of the team and the timing of it. If you do that, you've basically narrowed down your future to needing to perform Byfield as a premier center before Doughty declines and hope Chychrun is happy to resign here. And you still need to get a starting goaltender and a real 3C in that same timeframe. That's a 2-3 year window for all of that to happen. Thats a razor thin margin on all sides.
I think there are better ways to play this. I would try to move a surplus core young piece or package for a LD young-ish or mid-age equivalent. If you keep Clarke, then the LD can be a secondary core type, you don't need a Chychrun level star. Until you can do that, you can opt for placeholder low price vets. The main difference is keeping Clarke gives you flexibility now and in future. Whereas a Clarke for Chychrun trade would really narrow the way the Kings can proceed forward and put undue stress on the entire structure to basically come together and perform within 2-3 years. That wouldn't be an issue if the team had established young players at key positions like Lombardi had, but as it is...this plan could only work out at paper thin margins.
From a real world perspective, I understand the management group might be pressured into that, for every Poile there's 10 GMs (and their staff) that get fired when you're moving into 5+year territory of not bringing the plan to its final conclusion.. But I am not sure a move like this is the best thing for the organization to do now. I don't think the paper-thin upside and the push to make it work within 2-3 years is worth losing the flexibility, given the lack of established young players at key positions.
But I guess it was always intended to be a retool. If Clarke is the return, then the entire thing hinges on Byfield replacing Kopitar within 2 seasons and becoming a 1C (or pulling a 1C from elsewhere, highly unlikely). Neither Kopitar nor Byfield are good enough now for them to win this season and Lizotte probably isn't a 3C on a championship team either, nor is Copley a starting goaltender. That's with or without Chychrun. Also, with Kopitar getting older and Byfield being as raw as he is, this almost certainly won't happen even next season. The first time you might get that kind of look with Byfield is just about the time Chychrun's contract will be close to ending or already up.
I think the paradox of Blake's management is that on one hand we complain about how passive low-risk it is tactically, but on the other hand, strategically speaking, this retool is basically hanging by a thread and quite high risk. If they deal Clarke then it's all on Byfield to become a premier center within 2-3 seasons. And if that's closer to 3, you have to hope Doughty hasn't fallen off a cliff by then because you don't have Clarke (or anyone else) to replace him as the #1 high IQ RD, Durzi is a stretch in that role as is probably Spence and Clarke might not become that (a risk with any prospect), but with Clarke you at least have the projection and open-ended possibilities that match with Byfield's age.
When you think of it, if Clarke for Chychrun is a thing, then this kind of plan would actually be razor-thin in terms of working out.
I understand the appeal of it though. From a "real-world" perspective the current management will have to do something. If you don't, you kind of admit the whole Danault, Arvidsson, Fiala etc. acquisitions don't make sense. They've put themselves into this position first by trying to compete with the old core and losing time (and probably value on veteran assets) and then by trying to balance between satisfying old Cup veterans and rebuilding at the same time. This weird in-between lane they've driven for years will eventually force them into a commitment once the road runs out.
There are a number of ways to play this. I think moving Clarke for Chychrun would be a mistake when taking into account the state of the team and the timing of it. If you do that, you've basically narrowed down your future to needing to perform Byfield as a premier center before Doughty declines and hope Chychrun is happy to resign here. And you still need to get a starting goaltender and a real 3C in that same timeframe. That's a 2-3 year window for all of that to happen. Thats a razor thin margin on all sides.
I think there are better ways to play this. I would try to move a surplus core young piece or package for a LD young-ish or mid-age equivalent. If you keep Clarke, then the LD can be a secondary core type, you don't need a Chychrun level star. Until you can do that, you can opt for placeholder low price vets. The main difference is keeping Clarke gives you flexibility now and in future. Whereas a Clarke for Chychrun trade would really narrow the way the Kings can proceed forward and put undue stress on the entire structure to basically come together and perform within 2-3 years. That wouldn't be an issue if the team had established young players at key positions like Lombardi had, but as it is...this plan could only work out at paper thin margins.
From a real world perspective, I understand the management group might be pressured into that, for every Poile there's 10 GMs (and their staff) that get fired when you're moving into 5+year territory of not bringing the plan to its final conclusion.. But I am not sure a move like this is the best thing for the organization to do now. I don't think the paper-thin upside and the push to make it work within 2-3 years is worth losing the flexibility, given the lack of established young players at key positions.
Last edited:
There are going to be some really pissed off people here if this is true.
I am a bit disappointed but not surprised, because I never thought the rebuild was ready to go to the next stage, which they did then last 2 summers. Vilardi getting injured and struggling, the horrible Turcotte pick at 5OA (sorry we have to be results oriented) and QB taking slower than expected should have made them take a slower path, stick with what they had and try and add more pieces, not try and chase playoff spots with a roster that wasn't ready to contend, but BLuc wasn't willing to play the long game. People here really failed to realize what the last two summers signaled in the direction they were going with the youth. Whether right or wrong, they gave up on the rebuild.
I thought they made two great RHD draft picks in back to back years, an offensive and defensive stud that would have complimented each other great and been foundation pieces for the next dozen years. And now if these rumors are true, both those pieces are gone. And gone for good, but not great franchise type players.
I am a bit disappointed but not surprised, because I never thought the rebuild was ready to go to the next stage, which they did then last 2 summers. Vilardi getting injured and struggling, the horrible Turcotte pick at 5OA (sorry we have to be results oriented) and QB taking slower than expected should have made them take a slower path, stick with what they had and try and add more pieces, not try and chase playoff spots with a roster that wasn't ready to contend, but BLuc wasn't willing to play the long game. People here really failed to realize what the last two summers signaled in the direction they were going with the youth. Whether right or wrong, they gave up on the rebuild.
I thought they made two great RHD draft picks in back to back years, an offensive and defensive stud that would have complimented each other great and been foundation pieces for the next dozen years. And now if these rumors are true, both those pieces are gone. And gone for good, but not great franchise type players.
Mats26
Vet Movement - What's the Maatta?
- Sep 16, 2005
- 3,863
- 3,797
There is a reason the Wild and now the Yotes want Clarke. The kid is talented. What a bad trade if true. When Doughty slows down Durzi will be getting more ice time... enjoy.
tny760
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 20,211
- 21,959
and worst case all you're getting is 2.5 years of chychrun who may or may not pan out here
i'm patiently hoping this isn't true but i understand the "trade the maybe for the 'sure thing'" methodology
if clarke pans out elsewhere and chychrun doesn't contribute here or has injury problems, holy cow
- Status
