Toggle sidebar

What should LA do at the deadline?

  • 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
Really think we should stand pat barring some team making a too good to pass up offer. I see our Dcorp as being so thick that we will be able to be a perennial playoff team for years to come. Given the added cap space on the way to sign another UFA or two and the Kids who will just get better- think the team would be foolish to go all in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fat Elvis and kinghock
mysterman2 said:
damn.....the return for Chariot and Jarnkroc pretty high. The bar has been set and its a sellers market for sure.
Click to expand...
The deadline is 100% a sellers market always, and it’s delusional GM’s who think their bubble team is a contender who make it so.

The Kings need to hold their cards until next season, or at the very least the draft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schrute farms, Fat Elvis, kinghock and 1 other person
deaderhead28 said:
This thread definitely needs a thumb down option for some of these posts. Best one was calling the season a disaster if team doesn't get in the playoff, its a goal,not a must. Team has been struck with injuries and the kids are overachievering to say the lease.
Click to expand...
That was me.

The biggest reason it would be a disaster would be that they missed the playoffs *AND* didn’t get a high pick *AND* failed to see significant progress from any of Byfield, Turcotte, Vilardi or Kupari. If you are going to call out posts have the decency to atleast quote the entire thing. I’m the person who wanted to try and be a bottom team after last season, so I don’t care if they made the playoffs or not. I’m more concerned with the lack of development from high picks than making the playoffs

Also, the Kings are being carried by veteran players this season. What kids are overachieving? Some of the d-man have for sure, but some of the most important forwards have certainly not.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Peter James Bond II, Raccoon Jesus and King'sPawn
Herby said:
That was me.

The biggest reason it would be a disaster would be that they missed the playoffs *AND* didn’t get a high pick *AND* failed to see significant progress from any of Byfield, Turcotte, Vilardi or Kupari. If you are going to call out posts have the decency to atleast quote the entire thing. I’m the person who wanted to try and be a bottom team after last season, so I don’t care if they made the playoffs or not. I’m more concerned with the lack of development from high picks than making the playoffs

Also, the Kings are being carried by veteran players this season. What kids are overachieving? Some of the d-man have for sure, but some of the most important forwards have certainly not.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Disappointment in player development is a great argument on not acquiring a deadline-type player.

Forward development has been abhorrent, adding a band-aid in the hopes of getting more than 2 home playoff games is the type of thinking that kept the kings in the black hole for 40 years.
 
value of: anze kopitar
value of: drew doughty
value of: jonathan quick

you fools thought i wanted to trade for jt miller? ha! i want to trade away all our players. all of them. vets and prospects. i want to contract the league. zero teams. no more hockey
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raccoon Jesus
Raccoon Jesus said:
Seeing the values of some of these mediocre players makes me want to sell Kempe instead of buy anything.
Click to expand...
May as well listen to offers if teams wanna pay the price. The rebuild is not over until Byfield and Clarke fully arrive. Id move Maatta, AA, Walker, Iafallo, Roy and Kopitar before Kempe though.
 
Raccoon Jesus said:
Seeing the values of some of these mediocre players makes me want to sell Kempe instead of buy anything.
Click to expand...
I'd move Kempe. His new contract is going to be expensive & the team will be capped & not have what it needs to be successful. Use the money on another legit C like Danault. Move Kopi to Kempe's spot. Otherwise you're just waiting until the prospects develop to do anything.
 
Raccoon Jesus said:
Seeing the values of some of these mediocre players makes me want to sell Kempe instead of buy anything.
Click to expand...

I know this won't be a popular opinion, but if I could get a young skilled forward that has already been properly developed for Roy I'd do it. I don't know who that would be, but the Kings are overloaded at RD that are ready or close to ready and still desperately need offensive skilled players for the rebuild. It would have to be someone pretty good from a contender, but I'd explore it. I doubt it happens now with the team in the hunt, but I wonder if the Kings had 10 less points if it's something Blake would have considered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ghetty Green, Raccoon Jesus, Schrute farms and 2 others
Clifford to the Flames (e5).

Sutter looking for an extra-attacker specialist to throw out there when he pulls his goalie late in the game

*Still possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen a Kings coach do. I think DS just didn't give a **** his last season here, he had his mind on his farm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ibleedkings
Herby said:
I know this won't be a popular opinion, but if I could get a young skilled forward that has already been properly developed for Roy I'd do it. I don't know who that would be, but the Kings are overloaded at RD that are ready or close to ready and still desperately need offensive skilled players for the rebuild. It would have to be someone pretty good from a contender, but I'd explore it. I doubt it happens now with the team in the hunt, but I wonder if the Kings had 10 less points if it's something Blake would have considered.
Click to expand...
He isnt that young and skilled but Victor Olofsson could be an even trade. Having Kaliyev, Olofsson, and soon Chromiak would make for a good shooter on each of the top 3 lines.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter James Bond II
Schmooley said:
He isnt that young and skilled but Victor Olofsson could be an even trade. Having Kaliyev, Olofsson, and soon Chromiak would make for a good shooter on each of the top 3 lines.
Click to expand...
I would shoot higher if I were trading Roy. Someone a bit more skilled and someone closer to the age of the Kings young players. Olofsson's one big year kind of looks like an anomaly. Roy is also a bit of a tricky age for Buffalo or any team at the early stages of a rebuild, he isn't old, but he will be 30+ when Buffalo is ready to contend again, although he would be a perfect partner to put with Power next season. I'm thinking Roy would be more valuable to a contending team with his age and contract should the Kings consider moving him in the near future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schmooley
Herby said:
I would shoot higher if I were trading Roy. Someone a bit more skilled and someone closer to the age of the Kings young players. Olofsson's one big year kind of looks like an anomaly. Roy is also a bit of a tricky age for Buffalo or any team at the early stages of a rebuild, he isn't old, but he will be 30+ when Buffalo is ready to contend again, although he would be a perfect partner to put with Power next season. I'm thinking Roy would be more valuable to a contending team with his age and contract should the Kings consider moving him in the near future.
Click to expand...
Yea Roy would be a good fit in Buffalo to help their young dmen ease into the NHL or be useful to a contender. Really the Kings dont need to do a one for one trade. They can package 3-5 assets for a game changer. Or do two different trades where they send out 2-3 assets for one great player and land a good forward and a good dman.
 
JohnWhite said:
Why would a contending team trade a well developed, productive, young, skilled forward?
Click to expand...
Because Matt Roy is a very good d-man. I didn't say he had to be nvery productive, it could be a situation where there isn't room for the player. But I trust other teams to develop forwards better than LA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbrown33
Herby said:
Because Matt Roy is a very good d-man. I didn't say he had to be nvery productive, it could be a situation where there isn't room for the player. But I trust other teams to develop forwards better than LA.
Click to expand...
Got it. So the Kings should find a contending team that has a successfully developed, not necessarily productive, young, skilled forward that the contender might not have room for on their roster to trade Matt Roy for.
 
JohnWhite said:
Got it. So the Kings should find a contending team that has a successfully developed, not necessarily productive, young, skilled forward that the contender might not have room for on their roster to trade Matt Roy for.
Click to expand...

Probably not at this point, but eventually the Kings are going to have to

1. Move a RHD or two because they are overloaded at the NHL level and in the pipeline

2. Find some young forwards that produce offense at the NHL level.

Your weird responses are not needed, yes believe it or not teams often times have different strengths and weaknesses and make trades. The Kings strengths are d-man and their weaknesses are skilled forwards. There are probably teams with the opposite situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ghetty Green, Kurrilino and kenito7
Herby said:
Your weird responses are not needed, yes believe it or not teams often times have different strengths and weaknesses and make trades.
Click to expand...

Wait, what was weird about my responses? I didn't understand what you were suggesting and asked for a clarification. Then when you clarified, I re-stated the complete thought to make sure I had it straight.

Herby said:
The Kings strengths are d-man and their weaknesses are skilled forwards. There are probably teams with the opposite situation.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and I think finding teams who have complimentary situations to the Kings, as you point out, is a good strategy. I was having trouble getting my head around the specificity of the tactic you were advocating.

Could we agree that teams would be no more willing to part with young players they perceive as topping out as top line forwards any more than we would trade players we think are top line defensemen? If so, a trade would be more about perceived middle six forwards and perceived bottom-four defensemen, and finding a situation where the parties think the other has made a mistake in their assessment or that a different system would allow that player to blossom.

I think that's the philosophy behind acquiring Lias Andersson, Carl Grundstrom, and Trevor Moore (though not necessarily for defensemen).
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbrown33 and No Name The Nameless
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom