View Single Post
Old
02-23-2011, 11:24 PM
  #74
northernKing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiskeypete View Post
a ton of great points. one of the reasons i point the time into doing this. get some strong evidence/numbers to analyze and people can start to see inside the speculation and opinions we all have.

trying to hit all the points

the injury situation had a lot to do with the teams lack of success post 2002. it's hard to keep going forward when the guys you trade for end up with career ending injuries. this one killed me because i was a huge fan of Deader, i hated seeing him having to stop playing. when a team makes trades of prospects and picks to secure players like DT did for Ziggy, Allison, Deader helped to strip the depth in the org. Barney was definitely a big letdown also, so much was expected of him at the time. iirc he was the next coming of LeClair and Thachuk...ironically a big power forward LW.

2006 falls under DL in my assessment simply because it falls under his regime, not Taylor's. whether he made the picks or A Murray, in time they will be ID'ed with DL.

Steckel isn't a bust and is performing well for WASH, but not for LA. He didn't develop until after he was traded as part of the Deader/Miller for Blake/Reino trade. His numbers doubled with COL's affiliate and then moved again to WASH. I guess it depends on where each person looks to draw the line in this exercise. For me I was looking entirely at everything from within the LA org, not other teams. IMO he didn't turn into what he is today until after he left the org. Once again it takes time, a good developmental program and ultimately patience for players to emerge.

i also agree with kingsfan and stand by my point on Shefer and the '99 draft being a bust. i think his argument is sound and doesn't call for anymore from me.

DT's trades who won? The one way of looking at it is the same as any other GM, did it win them the SC. No. That is the crap shoot GM's face with trades. 29 GM's all make the wrong move(s) each season and only 1 makes the right move(s).

One of the things I did notice that Taylor seemed adept at was packaging prospects in trades that likely wouldn't report or was going to lose rights to. For example, S Anshakov for M Straka. Marty was just a rental, but DT paid for him with a prospect that never left Russia.

Ownership support. That's hard for us on the outside to know how the Kings and AEG operate. How much/how little support or micro-management exists we likely will never know. At least I think it's safe to say that a GM for AEG is free to operate as they wish if they remain profitable. For a team to remain profitable it has to be effective when it comes to success. The Kings have a dedicated fanbase which allows a GM some lean years I'm sure when it comes to success. I wonder what the numbers are for season seats from 2000 - 2010?

Huet emerged late in the game and the same as Steckel I don't see him as a success for LA in developing him. Huet moved to MTL and began to log more games then made his way to WASH and CHI. I don't remember the reasoning but the fact he was traded in a package deal for another goalie makes me think LA didn't see his value.

no way i'm tearing into multiple teams picks of Russian players for the same time frame. that could turn into a another 2-3 days.

the draft going from 9 to 7 and it's effect on the 'homerun factor' and non-reporting players. surprisingly there are just as many players that never played for LA drafted from 1-7. the reduction of rounds doesnt influence this at all.

noted earlier i think Taylor moved guys out and along pretty well. especially ones that were quickly deemed to not measure up in there limited time with MAN or LA. he seemed to move guys quicker than DL has done. is it because Taylor's team was better at evaluating talent, or the players in the system now are more talented and take longer to evaluate? time will tell....
First off let me just say THANK YOU for all the info and hard work. Also the link!
I will look into picks made by other teams and the success rate of getting them over to North America and post the results.

Yes Shefer was a bust.
The reduction of rounds meant less "high risk" picks. How many late picks make it?
Also the Cap means more teams put a focus on picks and development. We don't know how this would have altered DT regime.

Another point in regards to Euro's is it appears alot more are playing in NA prior to their drafts. This gives more insight and its easier to judge them vs their peers.

Overall good discussion!

northernKing is offline   Reply With Quote