Toggle sidebar

Trade Rumors 2013 Part II

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
damacles1156 said:
Probably due to age. Iggy is not the Iggy from Five years ago.

Toffoli is the only pure Goal scoring prospect the Kings have.

Also if the Kings are going to deal Toffoli, a Big/bad/Nasty, minute eating Defender (top 2) better be the deal Toffoli goes in.

The Kings should never expect Mitchell to come back. Treat it like a bonus if he does.
Click to expand...

There is no way Toffoli gets a top 2 d coming back. Especially one like you have described.
 
tsanuri said:
If he were to say at the same salary he wouldn't be hard to fit into the new cap. It's does DL want to fit him in?
Click to expand...

Actually, yes it would. Resigning Penner at 3.25 again would leave only 11.59 in cap room with only 14 players signed. These players will be needing new deals: Clifford, Lewis, Nolan, Scuderi, Voynov, Martinez, Muzzin, Bernier (or another back-up), and possibly Ellerby. This takes into account letting Drewiske and Richardson walk. Voynov is going to eat up a good chunk of that remaining cap and if Scuderi is back, he will be looking at about 3m as well. Mathematically, Penner coming back simply doesn't work
 
RonSwanson said:
Okay guys, put your thinking caps on. Why would Dallas trade away their top goal scorer when they are thinking playoffs? They are currently one point out.

:shakehead
Click to expand...

It's all just speculation at this point. Obviously if they are in the playoff picture, they shouldn't/wouldn't be dealing him.

Perro said:
So why not use them to get a player we know will contribute ASAP
Click to expand...

Because you're typically only going to get rentals/depth players for young, unproven players. It's like trading a dollar tomorrow for a quarter today. Eventually you'll be broke.

The Kings are thinned out heavily after trades in the past two years and graduation of some players like A-Mart and Voynov. We need to restock.
 
kingsfan said:
It's all just speculation at this point. Obviously if they are in the playoff picture, they shouldn't/wouldn't be dealing him.



Because you're typically only going to get rentals/depth players for young, unproven players. It's like trading a dollar tomorrow for a quarter today. Eventually you'll be broke.

The Kings are thinned out heavily after trades in the past two years and graduation of some players like A-Mart and Voynov. We need to restock.
Click to expand...

Bingo,

Proper asset management. If you are going to trade Toffoli, he better go in a deal that lands someone that is not on the verge of retirement.

Schenn/Simmonds went for Mike Richards. That is proper asset management.

Purcell for Halpern was not.

The Kings also don't have to have Iggy. Don't even really need him.

What they do need , is a Mitchell type player.
 
Purcell for Halpern was a bit different. No one thought Purcell would be what he was at the time of the trade. It wouldn't shock me if he was added simply because we had to unload a contract or Tampa Bay needed a roster filler for the rest of the season. I bet if you would have done a poll on this board at the time of the trade, the majority would have said Purcell wouldn't even be in the NHL five years down the line.

To me Purcell is just bad luck.
 
RonSwanson said:
Exactly.

I was surprised how many people blasted my thought of trading Toffoli for Iginla yesterday.
Click to expand...

Because Vey Pearson and Toffoli could also become the next Brown Giroux Williams. We are going to need to start replacing our forwards long term and sooner rather than later. Prospects with promise fail, its absolutely true but under DL we have had several successes, so many so that we are waiving kids who are getting snapped up by other teams and succeeding.

These kids have a better than average shot at becoming good to exceptionally good NHLers so dealing any one of them for a rental player should be out of the question unless that player is THE key piece that we are missing to win the cup.

Deal them? Yes. Deal any one of them for Iginla or Jagr? No, not in my opinion because neither of those two guys are likely to be the single key pieces that we need to win the cup or at least not so much so that they are worth losing key pieces to our future over.

We don't need a big nasty snarling Dman, we have one about back and one that could be back. The only reason to get one would be to replace one of our current D. Another thing you don't do for a rental or at least not any of this years class.

Sending one of our current D along for an upgrade? Sure but they would have to be key players because the cost would surely be there.

If we hadn't won the cup last year then things would be different but since we did we know that we have more than enough talent here to do it again. We are absolutely missing MG/WM and maybe we should replace one of our current D to get another player like one of those two but not as a rental.

Fill a hole to dig a different one doesn't work either from our roster or prospects.

We do have prospects that are very good that other teams would want and that we could afford to move for the right player(s), but they don't include any of TT Vey or Pearson.
 
Tonellisghost said:
Because Vey Pearson and Toffoli could also become the next Brown Giroux Williams. We are going to need to start replacing our forwards long term and sooner rather than later. Prospects with promise fail, its absolutely true but under DL we have had several successes, so many so that we are waiving kids who are getting snapped up by other teams and succeeding.

These kids have a better than average shot at becoming good to exceptionally good NHLers so dealing any one of them for a rental player should be out of the question unless that player is THE key piece that we are missing to win the cup.

Deal them? Yes. Deal any one of them for Iginla or Jagr? No, not in my opinion because neither of those two guys are likely to be the single key pieces that we need to win the cup or at least not so much so that they are worth losing key pieces to our future over.

We don't need a big nasty snarling Dman, we have one about back and one that could be back. The only reason to get one would be to replace one of our current D. Another thing you don't do for a rental or at least not any of this years class.

Sending one of our current D along for an upgrade? Sure but they would have to be key players because the cost would surely be there.

If we hadn't won the cup last year then things would be different but since we did we know that we have more than enough talent here to do it again. We are absolutely missing MG/WM and maybe we should replace one of our current D to get another player like one of those two but not for a rental.

Fill a hole to dig a different one doesn't work either from our roster or prospects.

We do have prospects that are very good that other teams would want and that we could afford to move for the right player(s), but they don't include any of TT Vey or Pearson.
Click to expand...

You can't expect Mitchell to come back, you just can't.

There is nothing wrong with replacing him, The current D core would struggle in a tight playoff game(my opinion).

Id be willing to move one of the young guys for a Big defender in his prime. (Richards type deal).

Is Mitchell even in LA ?
 
ScoreZeGoals said:
Trading your top prospect for a 35 year old UFA who is a luxury, not a need, is bad asset management
Click to expand...

You're a little late to the discussion, but Toffoli won't be playing in the playoffs barring injuries, and therefore I would prefer the player that helps us win again this year.
 
kingsfan said:
Purcell for Halpern was a bit different. No one thought Purcell would be what he was at the time of the trade. It wouldn't shock me if he was added simply because we had to unload a contract or Tampa Bay needed a roster filler for the rest of the season. I bet if you would have done a poll on this board at the time of the trade, the majority would have said Purcell wouldn't even be in the NHL five years down the line.

To me Purcell is just bad luck.
Click to expand...

My only problem with the deal was, Purcell was still a young guy.

He wasn't finding his groove with the Kings that is 100% true.

But the Kings threw him in a deal that was for a guy on the verge of retirement.

Lombardi has not had anymore throw in's since....Learned a lesson I think.


I like how Lewis/Clifford are getting plenty of time. The old Kings may have traded those guys by now.
 
damacles1156 said:
You can't expect Mitchell to come back, you just can't.

There is nothing wrong with replacing him, The current D core would struggle in a tight playoff game(my opinion).

Id be willing to move one of the young guys for a Big defender in his prime. (Richards type deal).

Is Mitchell even in LA ?
Click to expand...

Yes he is, he lives here and was at a school event other week with a few kings and was at the dinner went as well I believe.
 
Love seeing Ranger fans making proposals on their boards of Gaborik+ for Voynov+ or Clifford+Muzzin+Pearson+Forbort lol not a chance.
 
damacles1156 said:
You can't expect Mitchell to come back, you just can't.

There is nothing wrong with replacing him, The current D core would struggle in a tight playoff game(my opinion).

Id be willing to move one of the young guys for a Big defender in his prime. (Richards type deal).

Is Mitchell even in LA ?
Click to expand...

I can expect WM to come back but I can see why other people wouldn't.

A young D in his prime that could be a long term solution as a replacement for WM or RS? Sure, as long as it was the right young guy and the right big defender in his prime but that was what I said in my post too.

I wouldn't deal any of our top prospects to get Iggy or Jagr no matter how much I would like to see either of them wearing the crown.
 
I wouldn't trade anything for Gaborik for the simple reason he'd be in Sutter's doghouse within a week. The guy doesn't fit this team's identity at all. If he's too soft to play in New York he's definitely too soft to play here.

Voynov has also moved into the untouchable realm. I cannot think of any player who could get traded who I would trade him for straight up.
 
NYR Boyler87 said:
Would the Kings think about something like:

Williams + Clifford + prospect for Gaborik?
Click to expand...

Williams is consistently around the top of the league in possession stats and is actually rated #1 this year at the moment. The guy is so good at just keeping the puck alive allowing Kopitar to work his magic. Combine that with how cheap his contract is and i wouldn't trade him straight up for Gaborik since we need his skills more than Gaboriks
 
Live in the Now said:
I wouldn't trade anything for Gaborik for the simple reason he'd be in Sutter's doghouse within a week. The guy doesn't fit this team's identity at all. If he's too soft to play in New York he's definitely too soft to play here.

Voynov has also moved into the untouchable realm. I cannot think of any player who could get traded who I would trade him for straight up.
Click to expand...

Agree on all points, I see no deal that makes sense, one guy said LA would need Stralman+Gaborik for Voynov....lol

Only a couple of players I'd move Voynov for and neither of them would ever be traded so its a moot point.
 
No to Gaborik. No thanks.

Absolutely no to Gabby for Williams Clifford plus anything. Gabby gets injured all to easily and there is a reason that the Rags want to deal him. No thanks. That ship has sailed imo. Please just no.
 
Live in the Now said:
I wouldn't trade anything for Gaborik for the simple reason he'd be in Sutter's doghouse within a week. The guy doesn't fit this team's identity at all. If he's too soft to play in New York he's definitely too soft to play here.

Voynov has also moved into the untouchable realm. I cannot think of any player who could get traded who I would trade him for straight up.
Click to expand...

100% agree on both points.
 
RonSwanson said:
Exactly.

I was surprised how many people blasted my thought of trading Toffoli for Iginla yesterday.
Click to expand...

Then what happens if they don't win the Cup? No Toffoli and no Iginla and an asset lost. It's recycling the same mistake they made when they dealt Grebeshkov and Tambellini for Parrish and Sopel.

The problem wasn't just trading youth for prospects, but trading them for a player who will be rented for a few months makes absolutely no sense unless it assures you a Stanley Cup, and Iginla is not that player. He's not the same player he used to be.

A more sensible move involving the trading of prospects and future assets was like the one the Ducks made to acquire Chris Pronger (trading Lupul, Smid and two 1sts) or something along the lines of the Mike Richards trade. You're adding a pivotal player who will be around for more than just a season with a move like that.

If the Kings are going for a rental, why give up Toffoli? They'll be kicking themselves if they don't win a Cup and Toffoli turns into a 30 goal scorer that the Kings will be looking for after their rental player (and Penner) depart, leaving a hole in their top six. It just creates more problems if you apply logic and think things through.
 
RonSwanson said:
Okay guys, put your thinking caps on. Why would Dallas trade away their top goal scorer when they are thinking playoffs? They are currently one point out.

:shakehead
Click to expand...

Look at the reality of their situation. They may be on the outside looking in come April, and it is pure speculation.

And to add to that, these are players with expiring contracts that we are discussing. And we aren't the only ones talking about Stars players potentially moving.

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nh...-piece-stanley-cup-puzzle-152530040--nhl.html

Since the Flames are only 6 points out of a playoff spot I guess we shouldn't speculate that they might trade Iginla as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom