Speculation: LA Kings News, Rumors, Roster Thread part VII

[KingsFan7824]

I am just saying for those who value winning a championship

We're going to start going down this road? I don't know about you plebs, with your, pedestrian interests, but IIIIIIIIIIIIII want a championship.

 

[kilowatt]

You're seriously factoring in the few games he started before signing last year? He was a .911 with a real workload. They signed him big and he responded with a .895. An .895 with 3 shutouts. He's going to have to step it up.

…he started 50 games between 2018-19 and 2020-21 and 35 games in 2021-22. He signed his contract extension in September 2021 with 50 games started under his belt. So what are you talking about? Do those 50 starts not count? And even if you want to count only 2020-21 for some reason, it’s still a .911 SV%. That was tied for 13th in the league in SV% with — get this — Jake Oettinger.

 

[Statto]

It ultimately depends on which Petersen we get. If it’s the Petersen from the year before he signed the contract it’ll be fine if it’s the guy last year we have a problem. The first guy was worth 5m, the second isn’t. I’m hopeful it’s the first version because he didn’t play his game last year. He wasn’t show the solid fundamentals that he had done previously, so clearly wasn’t delivering his usual game. I really think the issue was between his ears which means he can bounce back BUT it doesn’t mean he will.

 

[Herby]

We're going to start going down this road? I don't know about you plebs, with your, pedestrian interests, but IIIIIIIIIIIIII want a championship.

Why the stupid tone? Unnecessary, but ok.

Going down what road?

I acknowledged the business realities and the fact that some people would prefer to return to competitiveness quicker. You fail to acknowledge there are many others who would prefer a longer wait if it meant a larger more realistic championship window.

The reality is that over the last 17 years since the lockout there has been a certain way that most of the championship teams have been constructed and that is through 2-3 foundational pieces that were almost all drafted near the top of the draft and then constructing teams around those guys.

Kane & Toews
Kopitar & Doughty
Crosby & Malkiin
Stamkos & Hedman
Ovechkin & Backstrom

Have there been others to win it? Sure.

Carolina won coming out of the lockout with a FA based roster, but also had a homegrown 22 year old 1C
Anaheim won with 2 Hall of Fame defenseman they brought in.

Who has a better chance to win a championship in the next 10 years, LA in what they are currently doing or Chicago in their tear down?

And you act like it's unheard of for a franchise to even consider that, Chicago is going to take a huge hit at the gate and their fans are going to end up going 10+ years without a true playoff series win, yet ownership is ok'ing it because they were are convinced it's the best and most proven way to return to Stanley Cup glory, which in the end will hopefully recoup financial losses that will occur in the immediate.

And I wasn't suggesting LA even needed to tear it down for another 5-6 years, LA had some nice pieces drafted, but is/was still lacking the high-end pieces that rebuilds normally have before they are going forward. Would it have been so outlandish and to much to ask of a small but dedicated fanbase like LA's to wait 2-3 more seasons to try and return to competitiveness if it resulted in a team with a roster that realistically could compete for a championship for the next 8?

When Blake's original plan to catch his highly drafted prospects like GV and AT at the beginning of their primes and DD and AK at the end of theirs fizzled out he had two paths to go on. He could have attempted to go back to the drafting well again in 2022, 2023 and possibly 2024 (with the reality he could lose DD to trade request) or he could have signed and traded for a bunch of veterans to catch the tail-end of AK and DD. There were two paths and you seem amazed that people would even consider the other one, despite the fact that plenty of other teams have gone down that path over the past 30 years.

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

Who has a better chance to win a championship in the next 10 years, LA in what they are currently doing or Chicago in their tear down?

I assume you feel CHI is doing whatever they can to move out Toews and Kane? If not, I'm not seeing they are as methodical in this 'tear down' approach you are alluding to.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Why the stupid tone? Unnecessary, but ok.

Going down what road?

I acknowledged the business realities and the fact that some people would prefer to return to competitiveness quicker. You fail to acknowledge there are many others who would prefer a longer wait if it meant a larger more realistic championship window.

The reality is that over the last 17 years since the lockout there has been a certain way that most of the championship teams have been constructed and that is through 2-3 foundational pieces that were almost all drafted near the top of the draft and then constructing teams around those guys.

Kane & Toews
Kopitar & Doughty
Crosby & Malkiin
Stamkos & Hedman
Ovechkin & Backstrom

Have there been others to win it? Sure.

Carolina won coming out of the lockout with a FA based roster, but also had a homegrown 22 year old 1C
Anaheim won with 2 Hall of Fame defenseman they brought in.

Who has a better chance to win a championship in the next 10 years, LA in what they are currently doing or Chicago in their tear down?

And you act like it's unheard of for a franchise to even consider that, Chicago is going to take a huge hit at the gate and their fans are going to end up going 10+ years without a true playoff series win, yet ownership is ok'ing it because they were are convinced it's the best and most proven way to return to Stanley Cup glory, which in the end will hopefully recoup financial losses that will occur in the immediate.

And I wasn't suggesting LA even needed to tear it down for another 5-6 years, LA had some nice pieces drafted, but is/was still lacking the high-end pieces that rebuilds normally have before they are going forward. Would it have been so outlandish and to much to ask of a small but dedicated fanbase like LA's to wait 2-3 more seasons to try and return to competitiveness if it resulted in a team with a roster that realistically could compete for a championship for the next 8?

When Blake's original plan to catch his highly drafted prospects like GV and AT at the beginning of their primes and DD and AK at the end of theirs fizzled out he had two paths to go on. He could have attempted to go back to the drafting well again in 2022, 2023 and possibly 2024 (with the reality he could lose DD to trade request) or he could have signed and traded for a bunch of veterans to catch the tail-end of AK and DD. There were two paths and you seem amazed that people would even consider the other one, despite the fact that plenty of other teams have gone down that path over the past 30 years.

The stupid tone, because that's what you said. I doubt anyone around here isn't interested in another Cup or twelve, regardless of how they feel the team is being, or should be, built. Don't think there's a special and exclusive club that wants championships.

Where have I ever failed the acknowledge a total rebuild as a general option for a team? What I have acknowledged is the lack of any real opportunity to trade Kopitar and Doughty since June 2014, which is something that would always hinder a total rebuild. It's not some stroke of genius that has Chicago going scorched earth in the last year of a 33 and 34 year old Kane and Toews, after having already been crap for the last 5 years. It's specifically because they're in the last year of their deals, more tradeable, and they've been somewhat rebuilding for years anyway, despite Toews seemingly having been completely oblivious to that.

But again, you and others seem so ready to declare what the Kings have done, are doing, or will do, a failure. Maybe Byfield and Clarke are the duo the Kings need. Maybe they're not. You're so set in your well they haven't done this by now, or that by then, that it's almost like you can't wait to say it's over. That's the part I don't get. What's the hurry? Critique all day long, but the picture hasn't played itself out yet.

Is Chicago likely to win in the next 10 years? No. I don't know who they're going to end up getting yet, but no, their odds of winning are as low as anyone else's as of right now. As much as you're already saying the Kings have failed, you're praising the possible success of the Hawks. Other than the immense power and perception of completely unknown potential, I don't know how you're doing that.

 

[lumbergh]

Why the stupid tone? Unnecessary, but ok.

Going down what road?

I acknowledged the business realities and the fact that some people would prefer to return to competitiveness quicker. You fail to acknowledge there are many others who would prefer a longer wait if it meant a larger more realistic championship window.

The reality is that over the last 17 years since the lockout there has been a certain way that most of the championship teams have been constructed and that is through 2-3 foundational pieces that were almost all drafted near the top of the draft and then constructing teams around those guys.

Kane & Toews
Kopitar & Doughty
Crosby & Malkiin
Stamkos & Hedman
Ovechkin & Backstrom

Have there been others to win it? Sure.

Carolina won coming out of the lockout with a FA based roster, but also had a homegrown 22 year old 1C
Anaheim won with 2 Hall of Fame defenseman they brought in.

Who has a better chance to win a championship in the next 10 years, LA in what they are currently doing or Chicago in their tear down?

And you act like it's unheard of for a franchise to even consider that, Chicago is going to take a huge hit at the gate and their fans are going to end up going 10+ years without a true playoff series win, yet ownership is ok'ing it because they were are convinced it's the best and most proven way to return to Stanley Cup glory, which in the end will hopefully recoup financial losses that will occur in the immediate.

And I wasn't suggesting LA even needed to tear it down for another 5-6 years, LA had some nice pieces drafted, but is/was still lacking the high-end pieces that rebuilds normally have before they are going forward. Would it have been so outlandish and to much to ask of a small but dedicated fanbase like LA's to wait 2-3 more seasons to try and return to competitiveness if it resulted in a team with a roster that realistically could compete for a championship for the next 8?

When Blake's original plan to catch his highly drafted prospects like GV and AT at the beginning of their primes and DD and AK at the end of theirs fizzled out he had two paths to go on. He could have attempted to go back to the drafting well again in 2022, 2023 and possibly 2024 (with the reality he could lose DD to trade request) or he could have signed and traded for a bunch of veterans to catch the tail-end of AK and DD. There were two paths and you seem amazed that people would even consider the other one, despite the fact that plenty of other teams have gone down that path over the past 30 years.

Each path has examples of successes and failures. That's what I'm saying, that there doesn't seem to be a known right path to Stanley Cup success. For every example you have there of foundational pieces, there are teams that have those same types of foundational pieces that haven't won anything. I could answer with Benn and Seguin, Wheeler and Scheifele, Eichel and Dahlin, McDavid and Draisaitl. Maybe the Kings are transitioning to a foundation around Byfield and Clarke that brings them into the next decade of success. No one has a crystal ball that's gonna tell them, "if we tank for x years, we'll win the Cup in y years". Every GM thinks they have the right formula, and 80% of them fail.

The Kings could have continued to tank for three more years and ended up like Buffalo or Arizona. They chose to do a short rebuild. Maybe they end up like the Flames or the Stars, your proverbial "black hole" teams that tread water year after year. But maybe they end up like the Avalanche or the Blues or the Lightning, each of which went through a 5-7 year drought, lost in the playoffs for a few years, then won the Cup. Nobody really knows which way this is going to turn.

Blake has chosen the short rebuild path. I get that you don't agree with it. We'll continue to argue about whether that was the right path. We'll just find out in two or three years if the Kings can get to the conference finals.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I assume you feel CHI is doing whatever they can to move out Toews and Kane? If not, I'm not seeing they are as methodical in this 'tear down' approach you are alluding to.

Meh, trading Dach, Debrincat......doesn't seem like CHI is too worried about winning, management etc.

Moving Kane and Toews is easier said than done with age and salary etc.

 

[Herby]

The stupid tone, because that's what you said. I doubt anyone around here isn't interested in another Cup or twelve, regardless of how they feel the team is being, or should be, built. Don't think there's a special and exclusive club that wants championships.

Where have I ever failed the acknowledge a total rebuild as a general option for a team? What I have acknowledged is the lack of any real opportunity to trade Kopitar and Doughty since June 2014, which is something that would always hinder a total rebuild. It's not some stroke of genius that has Chicago going scorched earth in the last year of a 33 and 34 year old Kane and Toews, after having already been crap for the last 5 years. It's specifically because they're in the last year of their deals, more tradeable, and they've been somewhat rebuilding for years anyway, despite Toews seemingly having been completely oblivious to that.

But again, you and others seem so ready to declare what the Kings have done, are doing, or will do, a failure. Maybe Byfield and Clarke are the duo the Kings need. Maybe they're not. You're so set in your well they haven't done this by now, or that by then, that it's almost like you can't wait to say it's over. That's the part I don't get. What's the hurry? Critique all day long, but the picture hasn't played itself out yet.

Is Chicago likely to win in the next 10 years? No. I don't know who they're going to end up getting yet, but no, their odds of winning are as low as anyone else's as of right now. As much as you're already saying the Kings have failed, you're praising the possible success of the Hawks. Other than the immense power and perception of completely unknown potential, I don't know how you're doing that.

There have been plenty of replies from people who have said they weren't ready for a rebuild to continue and were ready for the Kings to return to the playoffs, even if they likely know it lessens the chances of winning a SC in the long-term vs the other path. I am not putting words into peoples mouths, just saying that there is a group that wants that and there is a group that wants a much slower but also more proven and reliable path.

Doughty already said if the Kings went to a full rebuild he wanted out, a Kings team entering a full rebuild could easily have traded Drew Doughty anytime in the last 2-3 years and retained salary without it being a concern for a team trying to rebuild and add assets.

Could Clarke and Byfield be Kopitar and Doughty? Sure I guess, is it likely? No. You basically have all your marbles with two guys who had 6 and 0 NHL games when you committed to ending the rebuild.

My gripe is not so much with the Clarke and Byfield picks, you are right, they are question marks. But do you realize what a disaster for the rebuild the Vilardi and Turcotte picks truly were? They aren't kids anymore, they are the age where players you used with picks like that should be at the very least solid NHL contributors if not on the cusp of stardom, the Kings have an AHL/NHL tweener and a 2nd line AHL center. It can't be overstated just how much those picks derailed things, and if you want to do a true rebuild based on proven methods you need picks like that to hit, they didn't. If Turcotte or Vilardi are 2nd liners with 1st line potential as was obviously the expectation then the rebuild could have turned a page to the next step.

I never said Chicago was likely to win. There is 1 SC champion every year, no team is "likely" to win. I said Chicago is going to go down a path that LA, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Washington and Tampa went down in the last dozen years which lead to a SC champion. What team are the Kings modeling off of now?

 

[Herby]

I assume you feel CHI is doing whatever they can to move out Toews and Kane? If not, I'm not seeing they are as methodical in this 'tear down' approach you are alluding to.

Chicago doesn't care about Kane and Toews anymore. They are part of a past era that is never coming back in Chicago. Teams who appease aging veterans at the expense of solid rebuilds are not doing things right. That is what Stan Bowman did and he dug them an even bigger hole and made the next SC window be further away than it could have.

If they trade them and the players accept the trades, that is great, they will get some secondary assets for their rebuild, if they don't it doesn't matter the team is going to be one of the worst in the NHL whether Kane and Toews are there or not. They were the 6th worst team in the NHL last year with those two, they have gutted the team even more (with more coming) and those two are a year older. Kane and Toews won't stop them from bottoming out. It's up to them whether they want to be there or not.

I have a question for you and I guess everyone else.

Would you rather be competitive but never really a cup favorite for 5 straight years or would you rather be picking in the top 5 for 5 straight years knowing that it could result in being Buffalo but could also result in being like those previous teams I mentioned (LA, Chicago, Tampa)?

 

[Schrute farms]

I have a question for you and I guess everyone else.

Would you rather be competitive but never really a cup favorite for 5 straight years or would you rather be picking in the top 5 for 5 straight years knowing that it could result in being Buffalo but could also result in being like those previous teams I mentioned (LA, Chicago, Tampa)?

Why are you giving the full-on many years tanking route the chance at both winning/losing but not the competitive one?
I could turn it around to you: would you rather be competitive for 5 years with the chance to maybe win one year like Wash/StL recently or would you prefer to being horrible picking in the top 5 each year with no hopes for anything like Buffalo, AZ, Ottawa, etc. the past decade?

Personally, i love the draft and rebuilding. But lets be real. There is no set path to building into a SC champ. If it were so easy as tanking for 5-7 years and then boom you have yourself the 90s Redwings or TB/Col right now. Many teams try that and almost all fail. It's takes many things to become an annual SC contender (drafting, scouting, development, luck, great trades, luck...luck).

 

[YP44]

who is more likely to win a cup next Chicago or LA. So many different paths that it's hard to say. If Chicago ends up getting Bedard I would likely lean them, but they could go on a run of losing drafts ala Buffalo. Who am I kidding it is Chicago, they will get Bedard.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Chicago doesn't care about Kane and Toews anymore. They are part of a past era that is never coming back in Chicago. Teams who appease aging veterans at the expense of solid rebuilds are not doing things right. That is what Stan Bowman did and he dug them an even bigger hole and made the next SC window be further away than it could have.

If they trade them and the players accept the trades, that is great, they will get some secondary assets for their rebuild, if they don't it doesn't matter the team is going to be one of the worst in the NHL whether Kane and Toews are there or not. They were the 6th worst team in the NHL last year with those two, they have gutted the team even more (with more coming) and those two are a year older. Kane and Toews won't stop them from bottoming out. It's up to them whether they want to be there or not.

I have a question for you and I guess everyone else.

Would you rather be competitive but never really a cup favorite for 5 straight years or would you rather be picking in the top 5 for 5 straight years knowing that it could result in being Buffalo but could also result in being like those previous teams I mentioned (LA, Chicago, Tampa)?

Competitive for 5 years.....while adding pieces and making tweaks......every time that makes the playoff is a contender......are some more than others...sure......but every team that makes it....is a contender

 

[kingsholygrail]

…he started 50 games between 2018-19 and 2020-21 and 35 games in 2021-22. He signed his contract extension in September 2021 with 50 games started under his belt. So what are you talking about? Do those 50 starts not count? And even if you want to count only 2020-21 for some reason, it’s still a .911 SV%. That was tied for 13th in the league in SV% with — get this — Jake Oettinger.

He started 10 games in 2018-19.
He started 8 games in 2019-20.
I wouldn't factor those stats into anything meaningful for a goalie. Not at all.

 

[Herby]

Why are you giving the full-on many years tanking route the chance at both winning/losing but not the competitive one?
I could turn it around to you: would you rather be competitive for 5 years with the chance to maybe win one year like Wash/StL recently or would you prefer to being horrible picking in the top 5 each year with no hopes for anything like Buffalo, AZ, Ottawa, etc. the past decade?

Personally, i love the draft and rebuilding. But lets be real. There is no set path to building into a SC champ. If it were so easy as tanking for 5-7 years and then boom you have yourself the 90s Redwings or TB/Col right now. Many teams try that and almost all fail. It's takes many things to become an annual SC contender (drafting, scouting, development, luck, great trades, luck...luck).

Fine, you can re-word the question. That is fine.

Would you rather be competitive for 5 straight years with a 5-12% yearly chance of winning a cup.

BTW, you do the same thing with the 2nd part that you (I guess correctly) say I did with the first. I clearly said there is risk to being a Buffalo team so why are you saying I didn't include that part?

I never said that path was a guarantee to championships.

Just that the most successful multi-cup winning teams in the cap era have all been built on drafting multiple star to superstar players in the 1st round (that is a fact, correct?)

 

[TruKingFan]

I never heard Doughty wanting to be "out" if the Kings rebuild. All he said was he didn't want to keep losing, right? Maybe I'm delusional but I don't think that's the same thing.

 

[Herby]

I never heard Doughty wanting to be "out" if the Kings rebuild. All he said was he didn't want to keep losing, right? Maybe I'm delusional but I don't think that's the same thing.

Ok and what does Rob Blake take from those comments.

Doesn't it translate to

"If you plan on another 2-3 years on the rebuild, I want out" ?

That is what I would take from it, but maybe I am wrong, idk.

And I don't criticize Doughty in any way for feeling that way, he is obviously well onto the back-9 of his career and hasn't had any success since 2014.

 

[FSL KINGS]

Cal's save % last year was because of bad defense.

 

[King'sPawn]

.I have a question for you and I guess everyone else.

Would you rather be competitive but never really a cup favorite for 5 straight years or would you rather be picking in the top 5 for 5 straight years knowing that it could result in being Buffalo but could also result in being like those previous teams I mentioned (LA, Chicago, Tampa)?

I don't think it's as binary as that, though.

None of the stanley cup winners since the cap was implemented have picked top-5 for 5 straight years.

I'm also in the minority where I could honestly not give a flip at a *gasp* black hole season. Plenty of good players, including Kopitar, have been picked 11-15.

It's also why I'm such a stubborn ass about development and drafting. And why, subtly, I talk about identity.

I would rather the Kings pick in the "black hole" for 5 straight years if they are picking players that fit a core identity and they develop those players to play within a system and to fit a team's paradigm. I've said it before, if the Kings drafted all defensive forwards with two-way game, and brought them along to play in that system, I'd be fine.

I HAVE brought up offense in the past, because Blake said at the time he became GM that players like to score, and the Kings are going to score more. And TMac said he wants players to play with pace. So, if they want players who score and play with pace, why are they burying their scoring prospects in the bottom-six to "lern2defens" and check? And the same development staff that made things work so well under Lombardi are being tasked to develop players under a different vision.

What good is picking top-5 if you're wasting the player's and org's time with compatibility issues?

 

[KingsFan7824]

There have been plenty of replies from people who have said they weren't ready for a rebuild to continue and were ready for the Kings to return to the playoffs, even if they likely know it lessens the chances of winning a SC in the long-term vs the other path. I am not putting words into peoples mouths, just saying that there is a group that wants that and there is a group that wants a much slower but also more proven and reliable path.

Doughty already said if the Kings went to a full rebuild he wanted out, a Kings team entering a full rebuild could easily have traded Drew Doughty anytime in the last 2-3 years and retained salary without it being a concern for a team trying to rebuild and add assets.

Could Clarke and Byfield be Kopitar and Doughty? Sure I guess, is it likely? No. You basically have all your marbles with two guys who had 6 and 0 NHL games when you committed to ending the rebuild.

My gripe is not so much with the Clarke and Byfield picks, you are right, they are question marks. But do you realize what a disaster for the rebuild the Vilardi and Turcotte picks truly were? They aren't kids anymore, they are the age where players you used with picks like that should be at the very least solid NHL contributors if not on the cusp of stardom, the Kings have an AHL/NHL tweener and a 2nd line AHL center. It can't be overstated just how much those picks derailed things, and if you want to do a true rebuild based on proven methods you need picks like that to hit, they didn't. If Turcotte or Vilardi are 2nd liners with 1st line potential as was obviously the expectation then the rebuild could have turned a page to the next step.

I never said Chicago was likely to win. There is 1 SC champion every year, no team is "likely" to win. I said Chicago is going to go down a path that LA, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Washington and Tampa went down in the last dozen years which lead to a SC champion. What team are the Kings modeling off of now?

A 30 year old signed for 6-8 years with a full NMC is not easily moved. Retain what fot that long? What assets are coming back for the kind of guy the championship fans say to never sign due to age and natural regression? You don't get assets for 30 year olds signed forever. You get them for top level 25 year olds, or 20 year old uber prospects.

If you'd like to argue that 17-18 was the worst possible season, I can dig it. If they had only been a bottom 5 team that year, instead of the one after re-signing Doughty, then maybe he remains a soon to be UFA between the summer of 2018 and the 2019 deadline, and he's out. But, like every contract that anyone on this team signed after winning the Cup in 2012, it worked out poorly.

Byfield just turned 20 a few weeks ago, and Clarke turns 20 in Feb. Again, why the rush to declare them failed leaders of the franchise? Maybe they do suck because they're not already NHL stars at 19, but why so eager to say they won't be?

You're heaping praise on Chicago, giving them decent odds to be a team built the right way, without knowing much of anyone they're going go build around. You don't know who they're going to draft, or what moves they're going to make within the next 3-5 years, but they have a better chance to win. Simply because potential can be anything. They've drafted almost nobody in their tear down, but it's already a success, because they might draft the next McDavid or Kucherov.

Just like a car. The moment you take it off the lot, it losses value. The unknown draft pick is more valuable than the more known prospect, because it's not an actual player with flaws yet. The second you use the pick, the unknown potential losses value, because the variable is now more known.

Again with the absolute declarations. Vilardi and Turcotte are a derailed disaster. Not might be, but are. Maybe they are. Vilardi cannot contribute this year though? It's over? Just like Danault isn't getting 27g, Kempe isn't getting 35, and they're not making the playoffs if Doughty misses 40 games. None of that is possible. Vilardi cannot get 20g this year. It's impossible for that to happen. It will not, cannot, and won't happen. At all. That's set in stone.

 

[funky]

So according to Mayor.

Arvy will be at training camp but non contact

Turcotte working out but no hockey related news

Jamsen coming over to rookie camp

Chromiak lost 15 lbs with a virus, reason he missed WJC. Recovering.

No updates on Durzi and Anderson. Figures Kings have 4 mil to work with

 

[kingsholygrail]

Cal's save % last year was because of bad defense.

lol The spoiler didn't pop up for some reason.

 

[Cianide]

What pedigree?

Uh...drafted 5 OA?

 

[Schrute farms]

BTW, you do the same thing with the 2nd part that you (I guess correctly) say I did with the first. I clearly said there is risk to being a Buffalo team so why are you saying I didn't include that part?

Yeah, that was on purpose and my point. That you skewed your question to get the answer that supports your opinion.
Truth is, there is no single way toward the SC. Don't tell me the Kings two SCs were done by tanking 5+ years. Same with Chicago, Boston and Pitt. Even Colorado's tanking failed -- they lucked into things later with the right trades and certain guys blossoming years later after signing low LT deals.

I agree that the draft is the best path or gives you the best chances toward that goal. But it's much more multifaceted and involved. That's part of the equation when going down that path. It's a small chance of success though. And there are other ways/paths to get there.

 

[Schrute farms]

I don't think it's as binary as that, though.

None of the stanley cup winners since the cap was implemented have picked top-5 for 5 straight years.

I'm also in the minority where I could honestly not give a flip at a *gasp* black hole season. Plenty of good players, including Kopitar, have been picked 11-15.

It's also why I'm such a stubborn ass about development and drafting. And why, subtly, I talk about identity.

I would rather the Kings pick in the "black hole" for 5 straight years if they are picking players that fit a core identity and they develop those players to play within a system and to fit a team's paradigm. I've said it before, if the Kings drafted all defensive forwards with two-way game, and brought them along to play in that system, I'd be fine.

I HAVE brought up offense in the past, because Blake said at the time he became GM that players like to score, and the Kings are going to score more. And TMac said he wants players to play with pace. So, if they want players who score and play with pace, why are they burying their scoring prospects in the bottom-six to "lern2defens" and check? And the same development staff that made things work so well under Lombardi are being tasked to develop players under a different vision.

What good is picking top-5 if you're wasting the player's and org's time with compatibility issues?

Great post KP