I wish Williams all the best in his recovery. I think even the best case scenario would have him out for at least two months. My son had fib and tib break and if there are no complications that is at least three to four months. My son had infections, plate removal, etc., which seems all too common, and that took him out for 8 months.
Either way, bad luck for Williams.
I think Rich Clune or Scott Parse will get called up, if not, it's Teddy Purcell's time to shine and if that doesn't work out, I expect a trade, especially if it's a long term injury
That's what Bako said on Kings Insider. Anyone else think it is going to be 3-4 months?
I'll be stunned if he can even come back for the playoffs, assuming that's still in the cards for this team. Replacing JW much harder than replacing Smyth IMO.
I wish Williams all the best in his recovery. I think even the best case scenario would have him out for at least two months. My son had fib and tib break and if there are no complications that is at least three to four months. My son had infections, plate removal, etc., which seems all too common, and that took him out for 8 months.
Either way, bad luck for Williams.
That's what happened to me. Infection showed itself on the ankle screws 5 months later so they took out the screws and gave me medicine. Two weeks later, the infection comes back even worse so they took all of the metal out. This put me back on crutches for another 3 months along with a 2x daile home-IV hookup to fight the infection.
This was worse-case stuff, along with the fatty embolism at the time of the break, but I am perfectly fine and have pushed my leg harder since than I had before the break. He will be fine and this isn't career-ending stuff but it's extremely optimistic to expect him back this season.
The Kings were sorely missing a top 6 scorer before this, now we are down 2. Parse and Purcell have proven nothing...Kings could use a guy who is going to be UFA and they can pick up for peanuts in March.
As long as it's not the tibia. It sounds like recovery for that is a lot longer and has more possibilities for recurring problems than a broken fibula. I really hope it's not both. That would be awful.
From what I'm reading, it's hard to break the tibia without breaking the fibula too, but you can break the fibula without breaking the tibia. Hopefully the latter is the case.
I broke both it hurts a lot and i was in a cast for around 3 months. Lets hope it isn't that
Last edited by son of earl: 12-27-2009 at 12:36 PM.
I hope that it's not as serious as it looked. I was at the game last night and he looked like he was in considerable pain. Hopefully he can make a full and speedy recovery!
I had a compound fracture of the tibia & fibula back in '93. Most of the wait was waiting for the plastic surgery to heal, after they closed up my leg.
But all told, I was about 18 months before I was 'normal' again.
Hopin' JW is a faster healer than me. (And I don't think it was a compound fracture - there would've been more blood bleeding through his socks. And he wouldn't have been on crutches. So, small blessings.)
I'm hoping Purcell will get a chance to play on the RW but then again, I can easily see TM opting for Simmonds or even Moller, especially if Stoll returns by monday.
I just think it's a smart move to have Purcell on the 1st line as it could help his trade value if he plays well.
Simmonds should really be bumped to the first line indefinitely. He has the energy and board skills to make a good substitute for Williams. Plus, he has already done it before. The lines should be:
Scuderi - Doughty
Johnson - O'Donnell
Drewiske - Greene
__________________
"It has not been a good day. I lost my glasses early this morning and I had to go buy a pair of 79 dollar reading glasses today. 79 bucks. You can literally get them at Costco, three-for-20." - Darryl Sutter's response to going up 2-0 in the series.
I'm hoping Purcell will get a chance to play on the RW but then again, I can easily see TM opting for Simmonds or even Moller, especially if Stoll returns by monday.
I just think it's a smart move to have Purcell on the 1st line as it could help his trade value if he plays well.
given the way Simmonds played last night, i don't think it's a bad idea, regardless of whether or not Stoll returns, to at least start the game on Monday with Purcell on that line. Murray can then make his usual in-game adjustments if need be, then re-evaluate heading into Wednesday's game... essentially treating Simmonds as day to day until the New Year, by which point i think he should probably be good to go on the top line by the Washington game.
you guys need to start worrying less about the success of a player as it relates to this mythical "trade value," and a little more about the success of a player as it relates to the overall success of the team on a nightly basis.
given the way Simmonds played last night, i don't think it's a bad idea, regardless of whether or not Stoll returns, to at least start the game on Monday with Purcell on that line. Murray can then make his usual in-game adjustments if need be, then re-evaluate heading into Wednesday's game... essentially treating Simmonds as day to day until the New Year, by which point i think he should probably be good to go on the top line by the Washington game.
you guys need to start worrying less about the success of a player as it relates to this mythical "trade value," and a little more about the success of a player as it relates to the overall success of the team on a nightly basis.
Well, if Purcell plays well, I think we can probably achieve both.
Well, if Purcell plays well, I think we can probably achieve both.
you DO realize that player performance is near the bottom of the list, regardless of how well he does or does not, when it comes to trade value, right?
the main factor in determining a player's overall value in trade is the calendar... and then it goes from there.
the bottom line is... hypothetically speaking, if say the switch in Purcell's game gets flipped into Ludicrous Speed and he's out there helping the team win games going forward, why then would you WANT to trade him? i mean, do you seriously want to see him step up and do well for the sole purpose of saying - "oh goody, i wonder if we can now get a mint for him in March?"
a "yes" answer, and that's not only really jacked up, but a pretty twisted view on the game altogether. it sort of reeks of someone less interested in hockey (and most importantly, KINGS hockey), and more entertained by the excitement of the turnover dates like the deadline, free agency, and the brief waiver period prior to the start of each season... that isn't hockey... that's videogames.
This guy has to be the most UNLUCKIEST guy ever, talk about a flukey injury.... Man this guy can't buy a healthy season. Wonder if he gets resigned. We need a top six brought in, not sure how to accomplish it though. Purcell, Moller or Parse wont cut it for a long stretch. We need to stay competitive. Hope he gets back fast. Kopi needs to step up......
the bottom line is... hypothetically speaking, if say the switch in Purcell's game gets flipped into Ludicrous Speed and he's out there helping the team win games going forward, why then would you WANT to trade him? i mean, do you seriously want to see him step up and do well for the sole purpose of saying - "oh goody, i wonder if we can now get a mint for him in March?"
a "yes" answer, and that's not only really jacked up, but a pretty twisted view on the game altogether. it sort of reeks of someone less interested in hockey (and most importantly, KINGS hockey), and more entertained by the excitement of the turnover dates like the deadline, free agency, and the brief waiver period prior to the start of each season... that isn't hockey... that's videogames.
First off, know that you're talking to one poster who has consistently backed Purcell this entire season.
Secondly, you're making this waaaay too personal. This is hockey and hockey IS a business after all. If you're thinking that hockey isn't a business, then you have a lot to learn. You need to know about how salaries effect the business of hockey as do contracts and the status of hockey players etc. Don't ever confuse NHL with a sport you played growing up or watched as a child because it's not.
Last year, I said that we should trade Quincey as his stock was high as it's ever been. Majority of the board felt otherwise. Why do I bring this up? Because that's how you have to look at it from a business perspective. And thank god DL agreed.
Getting back to Purcell..if he produces and becomes a legit scorer then that gives us more options. Perhaps, we can opt to trade JW who may have more value to other teams in the league or we can say thank you to Purcell and send him packing. Yeah, it's a bit cold you can say but I like to think that's just good business. You just have to learn to separate your emotions from the attachment of players. It's not always easy but you just have to understand it's business, nothing personal.
First off, know that you're talking to one poster who has consistently backed Purcell this entire season.
Secondly, you're making this waaaay too personal. This is hockey and hockey IS a business after all. If you're thinking that hockey isn't a business, then you have a lot to learn. You need to know about how salaries effect the business of hockey as do contracts and the status of hockey players etc. Don't ever confuse NHL with a sport you played growing up or watched as a child because it's not.
Last year, I said that we should trade Quincey as his stock was high as it's ever been. Majority of the board felt otherwise. Why do I bring this up? Because that's how you have to look at it from a business perspective. And thank god DL agreed.
Getting back to Purcell..if he produces and becomes a legit scorer then that gives us more options. Perhaps, we can opt to trade JW who may have more value to other teams in the league or we can say thank you to Purcell and send him packing. Yeah, it's a bit cold you can say but I like to think that's just good business. You just have to learn to separate your emotions from the attachment of players. It's not always easy but you just have to understand it's business, nothing personal.
personal? really?
it's all business, and a player's value is determined outside of his established layer by the calendar. this "stock" nonsense is a recent phenomenon coming in the wake of fantasy sports.
you're talking to the wrong person about Kyle Quincey. by November of last season i went well beyond suggesting he should be traded, and flat out called it... and clearly, since it was only the second month of the season, i obviously didn't base that notion on his "stock," but rather the clear business of depth and how it relates to the overall on-ice and in-pocket bigger picture. i can almost promise you that the decision to move Quincey over someone like Johnson say, had very little to do with some very ancillary performance based trade value.
player's don't exist in a vacuum nor is their value determined in isolation. it's about strength of position, depth, reserve list, money committed and projected financial commitments... and in order to find a comfortable working level with regard to the latter two, a player like Purcell needs to be gauged against what is, isn't and what may be from within the system.
For me its neither "personal" nor "business" unless its the business of the KINGS winning Hockey games. IF, and that is a big IF, Purcell steps up, DL will not seek to use him as trade bait to replace Williams -- Purcell will play himself into a roster spot. If, on the other hand, Purcell plays like, well, Purcell, he will certainly be one of the chips DL uses to acquire a top six winger for the stretch run.
His time is nearly up to produce here. I think the guy has talent, but so far, he hasnt shown what he has. If you can't put the numbers or contribute in other ways, and he really hasnt done either, then what good is he?
For me its neither "personal" nor "business" unless its the business of the KINGS winning Hockey games. IF, and that is a big IF, Purcell steps up, DL will not seek to use him as trade bait to replace Williams -- Purcell will play himself into a roster spot. If, on the other hand, Purcell plays like, well, Purcell, he will certainly be one of the chips DL uses to acquire a top six winger for the stretch run.
His time is nearly up to produce here. I think the guy has talent, but so far, he hasnt shown what he has. If you can't put the numbers or contribute in other ways, and he really hasnt done either, then what good is he?
you're talking to the wrong person about Kyle Quincey. by November of last season i went well beyond suggesting he should be traded, and flat out called it... and clearly, since it was only the second month of the season, i obviously didn't base that notion on his "stock," but rather the clear business of depth and how it relates to the overall on-ice and in-pocket bigger picture. i can almost promise you that the decision to move Quincey over someone like Johnson say, had very little to do with some very ancillary performance based trade value.
You're missing the point about Quincey. I wasn't making a point about whether you called it or I called it, but rather to trade a player when it's most appropriate.
Besides, you're kind of contradicting yourself. On one hand you claim to understand that hockey is "all business". But yet, you also claim that if we were to trade Purcell at his highest value
Quote:
that's not only really jacked up, but a pretty twisted view on the game altogether. it sort of reeks of someone less interested in hockey (and most importantly, KINGS hockey), and more entertained by the excitement of the turnover dates like the deadline, free agency, and the brief waiver period prior to the start of each season... that isn't hockey... that's videogames.
And by the way, the main factor in determining the value of a player isn't the calendar. I have no idea where you get that from.
