HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Los Angeles Kings (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=42)
-   -   Palffy and Stumpel (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=154680)

12# Peter Bondra 07-26-2005 01:49 PM

Palffy and Stumpel
 
Palffy is rumoured to sign a 3 year deal with LA.

Article: http://hokej.point.sk/spravy/?clanok=36431 in Slovak

He said:"My agent is talking with LA and everything is going well".

He also said Stumpel is talking too and he wants LA to sign him so they can play again together.

Discuss.

Old Hickory 07-26-2005 01:54 PM

thanks for the heads up man. Any chance you can translate it?

jt 07-26-2005 02:08 PM

Hmmm...Stumpel and Conroy as the top 2 centers...? THREE year deals? Not for Stumpel I wouldn't. I'd give him TWO years and if the new CBA allows an option year, I'd tag that on. If Ziggy didn't want to come back unless Stumpel signed for three years, I'd let him walk. Also, Stumpel better come CHEAP...like for $2 mil or less because there's NO WAY he's should preclude the Kings from getting in on next summer's UFA's.

That said, I don't think I'd sign either one of them...it's time to turn the page.

12# Peter Bondra 07-26-2005 02:11 PM

The Slovak hockey player Zigmund Palffy, after the year long lockout, should again play for his last team, the LA Kings. Palffy will probably sign a deal with LA, for which he played from 99 to 04, which will be a 3 year deal.

"My agent is discussing and it looks good", Palffy said to TV Markiza. The 33 year old attacker was a UFA and the club, if they wanted him, needed to offer him a contract. The Kings have already agreed to a contract with Robitaille and Stumpel is also said to be discussing with LA and he is Palffy's long time friend and teammate (I almost wrote playmate :biglaugh: ). "I would be happy if we both signed" Palffy added.

The skilled winger with a sense for goals and a good pass played last season in the Czech Republic for Slavia Prague and played a while in the Slovak League, where he played for Skalica. In the NHL during 11 seasons he has played in the jerseys of NYI and LA 642 games, scoring 318 goals and 353 assists, totaling 671 points. Palffy also had a rich national career. He is the world champ from the year 2002 and bronze medalist from the year 2003. He has ended his career in the national side.

Old Hickory 07-26-2005 02:12 PM

Thanks PB!

King'sPawn 07-26-2005 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jt
Hmmm...Stumpel and Conroy as the top 2 centers...? THREE year deals? Not for Stumpel I wouldn't. I'd give him TWO years and if the new CBA allows an option year, I'd tag that on. If Ziggy didn't want to come back unless Stumpel signed for three years, I'd let him walk. Also, Stumpel better come CHEAP...like for $2 mil or less because there's NO WAY he's should preclude the Kings from getting in on next summer's UFA's.

That said, I don't think I'd sign either one of them...it's time to turn the page.

Not even $2 mil for Stumpel. 1.5 tops. I'd consider paying more if Ziggy will, in turn, sign for less.

But I agree... if Ziggy will ONLY play if Stumpel plays, let him walk. Kings have shown plenty of good faith actions for Ziggy, including a $6.5 million contract pre-lockout. There are so many other UFAs out there that it's not worth letting Palffy blackmail the Kings.

12# Peter Bondra 07-26-2005 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jt
Hmmm...Stumpel and Conroy as the top 2 centers...? THREE year deals? Not for Stumpel I wouldn't. I'd give him TWO years and if the new CBA allows an option year, I'd tag that on. If Ziggy didn't want to come back unless Stumpel signed for three years, I'd let him walk. Also, Stumpel better come CHEAP...like for $2 mil or less because there's NO WAY he's should preclude the Kings from getting in on next summer's UFA's.

That said, I don't think I'd sign either one of them...it's time to turn the page.

Stumpel's contract length wasnt mentioned. Palffy said it would be good if Stumpel signed but it didnt mean its the main reason why he wants to sign.

Stumpel, IMO should get 1-1,5 mil per year and I dont know about Palffy, due to his injuries.

TonySCV 07-26-2005 02:29 PM

I'd love to see Palffy back, but PLEASE God tell me that he's actually kept in shape during the offseason. His offseason training regimen in the past was, well... craptacular.

12# Peter Bondra 07-26-2005 02:32 PM

If you consider lying on the beach in the Caribean great offseason training then yes :).

He hasnt trained whatsoever. He even said it himself one day before it was announced that they made a deal in principle. He said (something like this):"This was the first offseason I didnt train and just relaxed. Its good to not train once in many years".

His offseason training program = none.

TonySCV 07-26-2005 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12# Peter Bondra
If you consider lying on the beach in the Caribean great offseason training then yes :).

He hasnt trained whatsoever. He even said it himself one day before it was announced that they made a deal in principle. He said (something like this):"This was the first offseason I didnt train and just relaxed. Its good to not train once in many years".

His offseason training program = none.

Unfortunately, that's not much different than usual for him. IMO it contributes to his "brittleness" and just makes him that much more injury prone.

- T

jt 07-26-2005 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12# Peter Bondra
If you consider lying on the beach in the Caribean great offseason training then yes :).

He hasnt trained whatsoever. He even said it himself one day before it was announced that they made a deal in principle. He said (something like this):"This was the first offseason I didnt train and just relaxed. Its good to not train once in many years".

His offseason training program = none.

And this is why I'm not a Ziggy Palffy fan and when all is said and done I don't want him back. He'll play well until he gets hurt and if he signs a 3 yr deal he's going to tie up too much cap space...unless he comes cheap (as in $3 mil or so).

And I agree with you guys...$2 mil is too much for Stumpel. He's not worth much more (if any) than Army, who's due $760k.

12# Peter Bondra 07-26-2005 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonySCV
Unfortunately, that's not much different than usual for him. IMO it contributes to his "brittleness" and just makes him that much more injury prone.

- T

Its well known here too his training program is horrible. Imagine if he had great work ethic along with his skills. That would be one heck of a hockey player.

He just hates working out and like you said, it causes him to be injury prone.

TonySCV 07-26-2005 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12# Peter Bondra
Its well known here too his training program is horrible. Imagine if he had great work ethic along with his skills. That would be one heck of a hockey player.

He just hates working out and like you said, it causes him to be injury prone.

*sigh*... if he weren't such a superstar when he's healthy. I pay just to see him play. He dazzles on a regular basis when he's healthy.

willywonka 07-26-2005 03:03 PM

Yes to Palffy at no more than $4-5mm for 3 years, but a big no thank you to Stumple. Thank you for the info PB.

12# Peter Bondra 07-26-2005 03:04 PM

Thats the price of being a star. You get hunted and injured if you are injury prone.

Old Hickory 07-26-2005 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12# Peter Bondra
Thats the price of being a star. You get hunted and injured if you are injury prone.

Especially when your team dresses middleweights as your enforcers

kingsfan25 07-26-2005 03:08 PM

With regards to Ziggy, all I have to say is YES!!! I'm somewhat less enthused about Stumpel. I think that with the numbers he put up last year that even 1.5 would be too generous. I don't mind having him back in a depth capacity, as long as he's not considered one of the top-sixers, especially if it entices Ziggy, but he better not be the help up the middle that management has been talking about. I prefer to think that he's not, but if he isn't going to be our number 1 or 2 centre, I don't see how well he fits into the bottom two lines. Can anyone see him as an overly-effective 3rd or 4th liner?

hockey_nut 07-26-2005 03:08 PM

just a note...the Kings cannot negotiate with Palffy (on the record, officially, etc.) until August 1st.

Palffy was a UFA before the lockout started, therefore they are not allowed to talk to him about a contract.

In the LA times, it says that Kings GM Dave Taylor will start talking to Palffy right thing August 1st.

12# Peter Bondra 07-26-2005 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hockey_nut
just a note...the Kings cannot negotiate with Palffy (on the record, officially, etc.) until August 1st.

Palffy was a UFA before the lockout started, therefore they are not allowed to talk to him about a contract.

In the LA times, it says that Kings GM Dave Taylor will start talking to Palffy right thing August 1st.

Thats what I was asking in another thread and the answer was LA could talk with Palffy but he was an UFA BEFORE the lockout so I thought he couldnt.

Reaper45 07-26-2005 03:12 PM

Oh god in heaven, oh god in heaven and baby jesus, please do not sign Stumpel.

12# Peter Bondra 07-26-2005 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingsfan25
With regards to Ziggy, all I have to say is YES!!! I'm somewhat less enthused about Stumpel. I think that with the numbers he put up last year that even 1.5 would be too generous. I don't mind having him back in a depth capacity, as long as he's not considered one of the top-sixers, especially if it entices Ziggy, but he better not be the help up the middle that management has been talking about. I prefer to think that he's not, but if he isn't going to be our number 1 or 2 centre, I don't see how well he fits into the bottom two lines. Can anyone see him as an overly-effective 3rd or 4th liner?

I cant see him as a 4th liner. He has too good passing and too bad defensive coverage for a 4th liner.

kingsfan25 07-26-2005 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12# Peter Bondra
I cant see him as a 4th liner. He has too good passing and too bad defensive coverage for a 4th liner.

Which is why I do not see a place for him on the roster.

hockey_nut 07-26-2005 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12# Peter Bondra
Thats what I was asking in another thread and the answer was LA could talk with Palffy but he was an UFA BEFORE the lockout so I thought he couldnt.


if a player was a UFA prior to the lockout, he's off limits until August 1... same goes for Palffy

of course, that doesn't mean they can pick up a phone, ask how life's treating them and slip in some contract talk... but officially, they're not allowed

Tadite 07-26-2005 03:22 PM

I am down with having Palffy back.

But good god all mightly please do not punish us with Stumpel!

If we do get Palffy though we would still need at least 1 legit offensive center and a top-6 RW.

kingsfan25 07-26-2005 03:31 PM

Players always seem more candid in overseas interviews.

And just curious... hockey_nut , u say that the Kings are not allowed to talk to Palffy since he was a UFA before the lockout. But is there a penalty in place for such a violation. Normally when something like this happens, there is tampering compensation, but since Palffy last belonged to the Kings... that rule wouldn't really apply. I assume then that it would be a fine of some kind. Not that it really matters, I'm sure whatever correspondance they have does not constitute any violation. Just wondering, since this is kind of a unique situation.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:53 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.