Who are the Kings' untouchables?

[HolyShot*]

Richards looks done to me. If he won't step up in the playoffs this year, I would trade him as soon as possible, while he is still under 30 to get back as much as possible. I would pack him with Brown and a 1st to get some real 1st line young talent. I don't like Brown's new contract. Lombardi got screwed on that one.

Richards is game and as much as you don't like it, he's an elite center. His chemistry with carter is overrated but they still form a pretty good line. He needs someone big and skilled on the other wing to really boost his performance. Trading him would be a huge mistake and come back to bite us in the ass big time.

Go read the flyer boards. They're all talking about how dealing richards was a huge mistake and how they wish they still had him. You don't know what you got til its gone.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

It all depends on the system. You could put miller in philly and he would stink it up. Conversely, labarbera in la (lol) or boston would put up respectable numbers.

Its true. There are elite goalies out there but they're just not much better than the tier below them. Good goaltending comes from good defense. This isn't to say that just anybody could put up quicks numbers from 2012. Quick is great.

Its hard to explain and I don't feel like racking my brain now for it. Goaltending is all about athleticism and focus. If a guy is no good at either one, he won't stop ****. And if there's a bad system in front of him, then he definitely won't stop ****.

I don't know man, I've never really played goalie before but when I did it was all about staying in front of the puck and having quick control of your limbs. This was roller hockey but same thing applies I believe.

How dare you bring up Barbs in LA

And it's okay, I'm not demanding an in-depth explanation or attacking you or anything; I just feel that there are very few exceptions to the rule of you need a good goalie to be consistently strong. The ones off the top of my head include Crawford and Osgood, but the teams in front of them were so damn good it didn't matter PLUS they have come up big when asked to be (and even then how many times did Detroit bring in someone to be 'better' than Osgood?). People like to often bring up Leighton for Philly in this debate but to me just about any NHL goalie can put up a strong year and take a team far, but if you want to go back, you're going to need a strong goalie for year-to-year consistency.

That's why, to me at least, Quick is untouchable. He's had some issues with focus in the regular season (and yes, had some bizarre issues vs. Chicago), but he's come up HUGE when needed in the playoffs.

 

[moosehead81]

Anybody is tradeable for the right return. The issue is there's probably no right return that would benefit the team. A guy like Hartnell might show some promise with a change to LA but who wants to take a chance on him and his contract? And if you're up against the cap you have to trade away the same value to get a guy like that. If Toronto, for instance, was interested in Mike Richards playing in their 1C spot, LA gets back a Tyler Bozak (5.75 vs 4.2 million cap hit) for its 2C spot, but then Toronto's well over the cap and does Bozak improve LA's 2C position? In the short term, likely not. Very difficult times in the NHL to make season changing trades.

 

[Sybil227]

Apparently not Carcillo...

 

[ukyo]

The trade market for Quick is miniscule.

How many teams are right there, already Stanley Cup contenders (not just simply playoff teams), and just replacing their current goaltender with Quick will put them over the top?

I think the only teams that match that filter are Pittsburgh, San Jose, Anaheim, and St. Louis. Maybe Chicago, but if I'm them I don't change a thing. Everybody else has bigger problems. Pittsburgh has no forwards to spare, St. Louis has the same scoring problems we have, and if you ask Sharks or Ducks fans, they probably don't think goaltending is a problem (never mind the fact that I will throw a chair out the window if I ever see Quick in either of those jerseys).

 

[Frolov 6'3]

The trade market for Quick is miniscule.

How many teams are right there, already Stanley Cup contenders (not just simply playoff teams), and just replacing their current goaltender with Quick will put them over the top?

I think the only teams that match that filter are Pittsburgh, San Jose, Anaheim, and St. Louis. Maybe Chicago, but if I'm them I don't change a thing. Everybody else has bigger problems. Pittsburgh has no forwards to spare, St. Louis has the same scoring problems we have, and if you ask Sharks or Ducks fans, they probably don't think goaltending is a problem (never mind the fact that I will throw a chair out the window if I ever see Quick in either of those jerseys).

St.Louis has the same scoring problems as we have ?

They are ranked 3rd in GF leaguewise.

 

[ukyo]

St.Louis has the same scoring problems as we have ?

They are ranked 3rd in GF leaguewise.

Hmm, then maybe not. But whenever their fans talk trade, they always talk about how their needs are scoring wingers. That sounds just like us.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Hmm, then maybe not. But whenever their fans talk trade, they always talk about how their needs are scoring wingers. That sounds just like us.

They want a gamebreaker like how we snagged Carter. They have depth up the wazoo and get contributions from everyone (but they ACTUALLY get it), but have some issues in close game (at least vs. us) because they don't feel they have a guy to put them over the top.

 

[kingsfan28]

The OP really has it bad for Kane.

 

[Trolfoli]

Couple things...

-Quick
trade market is Edmonton... MacT would pay a king's ransom (no pun intended) for a great goalie signed for the next decade. Not saying this should be done, only that EDM would over pay.

-Richards
Not sure how I feel about the possibility of trading Richards. He is huge in the playoffs and lays it all on the line. That doesn't change the fact that the first 2 lines appear to be
King/Kopitar/Carter
Brown/Stoll/Williams

Richards doesn't fit. With the way the second line plays Richards is an upgrade over Stoll, but doesn't fit well on that line (no sniper to set up) So is it worth having Richards as a 3rd C? Maybe a team like TO takes a shot at him for something like JVR + Kadri

King/Kopitar/Carter
Brown/Stoll/Williams
JVR/Kadri/Toffoli
Nolan/Vey/Frattin

is that better then the bot 6 being
Frattin/Richards/Toffoli
Clifford/Lewis/Nolan

 

[Reclamation Project]

No way Toronto gives up JVR + Kadri.

 

[HolyShot*]

The OP really has it bad for Kane.

He's a great player.

 

[Mats26]

The trade market for Quick is miniscule.

How many teams are right there, already Stanley Cup contenders (not just simply playoff teams), and just replacing their current goaltender with Quick will put them over the top?

I think the only teams that match that filter are Pittsburgh, San Jose, Anaheim, and St. Louis. Maybe Chicago, but if I'm them I don't change a thing. Everybody else has bigger problems. Pittsburgh has no forwards to spare, St. Louis has the same scoring problems we have, and if you ask Sharks or Ducks fans, they probably don't think goaltending is a problem (never mind the fact that I will throw a chair out the window if I ever see Quick in either of those jerseys).

If they are already Stanley cup contenders then they don't need Quick. All of those teams can win the cup without Quick. Look for Edmonton, Buffalo, Washington, Islanders to be the teams looking for a franshise goalie to build around to get them on track.

 

[Buddy The Elf]

No one is untouchable. Quick, Doughty and Kopitar are the three closest with Doughty being voted "most likely to not be traded". He is the least replacable out of the three.