Sturm previously exhibited speed. We have no idea what he skates like now. I am certain he will NOT exhibit the speed we all wish we already had in out lineup, at least not for another season.
My concern is that DL now plays the familiar "I got you the top 6 winger you all wanted" card and puts his search on hold hereafter. The LW hole was DL created, and to date, he has not filled it. Hoping a 32 year old 20+ goal scorer coming off two major knee surgeries in as many years is going to fill the void is wishful thinking. its wishful thinking we can afford and afford to try, but its still wishful thinking at best.
That would be inconsistent with what he has said so far and even yesterday when the deal appeared all but 100% final. He has said this search was precipitated by Parse's injury and that Sturm's role and future depend upon how well he plays.
Nowhere is he lauding this as the crime of the century or the missing piece.
The Kings still have roughly $4M in cap space as it is, they aren't precluded from pursuing another good player or even two but I think they should wait to identify what they need. They also have limited choice since now is not the time that players are widely available in deals anyway.
Cap space acquisitions are pro-rated at the deadline. Meaning 10 million of a cap hit is pro-rated down to how many days the player would be spending with the team. 4 million would fit in any player in the entire NHL.
Sturm at this point should be the type of pickup Modin was last season, a veteran capable of playing a sound two way game and chipping in some offense from a bottom 6 role. If Lombardi actually goes out and gets a real winger at the deadline then this is a great low risk trade.
The problem is they are going to expect him to play a top 6 role, which is ridiculous for a guy coming off major surgery who has one 50 point season in his career. This is no different than what Taylor used to do with Klatt, Rasmussen, Randy Robitaille, Heinze etc. They acquire guys like this and say "Oh we'll put them on a line with Palffy and call them a first liner"...... it's the same thing except the name Palffy has been replaced by Kopitar.
Dustin Brown, Marco Sturm, Justin Williams and Ryan Smyth is an incredibly weak group of Top 6 wingers, both in the current and for the long term.
Sturm, Williams, Smyth, Brown is still better than Williams, Smyth, Brown, King/Lokti/richardson/plug.
Who would you trade for to fill that 1st line LW need? Keep in mind, this is not NHL11.
We are a better team with Sturm than without, and we gave up nothing to get him.
My answer would be...
After almost five years on the job I wouldn't have such a gaping hole on the wing. I really don't know what they were thinking, maybe they really did think Parse was the answer, I have no idea but this was a problem that should have never gotten to this point.
Like I said, no problem with the move, atleast his contract is off the books and we're not paying him $18 mill over three years. Marco Sturm is/was a good hockey player, but so was Trent Klatt, didn't mean I wanted him on a scoring line.
After almost five years on the job I wouldn't have such a gaping hole on the wing. I really don't know what they were thinking, maybe they really did think Parse was the answer, I have no idea but this was a problem that should have never gotten to this point.
...
(cropping mine)
I have so many problems with this type of logic it's hard for me to list them all in a single post ... but I will try.
1) He asked you a simple question. "What would you do right now to fill the hole?" You dodged it by saying you would never be here in the first place. If you're going to do that you need to list viable alternatives that could fill the hole.
2) Wingers, although nice, are not the lynch pin for any Stanley Cup winning team. Stanley Cups are won with depth down the middle and on defense. Out of the top 50 paid players in the league the only wingers who has won a Stanley Cup were Eric Staal, Patrick Kane, and Patrik Elias. Staal and Kane did it on their entry level contracts while Elias was still a RFA not making much. Spending money on wingers in a salary cap situation is folly.
3) I know you like to make the "Dean should draft more scoring wingers" argument. What really irks me about this argument is that this is EXACTLY how the Kings drafted before Dean got here. Let's take a look at the wingers that the Kings drafted from 2000-2005 in rounds one through three: Frolov (00), Karlsson (01), Bednar (01), Juntunen (01), Anshakov (02), Kanko (02), Brown (03), Tambellini (03), Pushkarev (03), Tukonen (04), and Roussin (05). Eleven players drafted over five years and only two have had any impact at the NHL level. In case you're missing my point: The fact that the Kings drafted more wingers than anything else over rounds 1-3 from 2000-2005 is WHY the Kings were terrible.
4) Lombardi came into the Kings with virtually no back end, no depth of any kind at any position, and an old, aging team. He puts together a young competitive team, filling out the most important parts of the team first ... the team makes the playoffs last year and is poised to do so again this year despite being one of the top five youngest teams in the league ... and your gripe is that the least important part of a team would have been something you thought was important to address?
I have so many problems with this type of logic it's hard for me to list them all in a single post ... but I will try.
1) He asked you a simple question. "What would you do right now to fill the hole?" You dodged it by saying you would never be here in the first place. If you're going to do that you need to list viable alternatives that could fill the hole.
2) Wingers, although nice, are not the lynch pin for any Stanley Cup winning team. Stanley Cups are won with depth down the middle and on defense. Out of the top 50 paid players in the league the only wingers who has won a Stanley Cup were Eric Staal, Patrick Kane, and Patrik Elias. Staal and Kane did it on their entry level contracts while Elias was still a RFA not making much. Spending money on wingers in a salary cap situation is folly.
3) I know you like to make the "Dean should draft more scoring wingers" argument. What really irks me about this argument is that this is EXACTLY how the Kings drafted before Dean got here. Let's take a look at the wingers that the Kings drafted from 2000-2005 in rounds one through three: Frolov (00), Karlsson (01), Bednar (01), Juntunen (01), Anshakov (02), Kanko (02), Brown (03), Tambellini (03), Pushkarev (03), Tukonen (04), and Roussin (05). Eleven players drafted over five years and only two have had any impact at the NHL level. In case you're missing my point: The fact that the Kings drafted more wingers than anything else over rounds 1-3 from 2000-2005 is WHY the Kings were terrible.
4) Lombardi came into the Kings with virtually no back end, no depth of any kind at any position, and an old, aging team. He puts together a young competitive team, filling out the most important parts of the team first ... the team makes the playoffs last year and is poised to do so again this year despite being one of the top five youngest teams in the league ... and your gripe is that the least important part of a team would have been something you thought was important to address?
According to Hammond, Sturm will wear #10 for the Kings and may join the Kings tomorrow in St Louis if he is medically cleared.
__________________
"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 have so many problems with this type of logic it's hard for me to list them all in a single post ... but I will try.
1) He asked you a simple question. "What would you do right now to fill the hole?" You dodged it by saying you would never be here in the first place. If you're going to do that you need to list viable alternatives that could fill the hole.
2) Wingers, although nice, are not the lynch pin for any Stanley Cup winning team. Stanley Cups are won with depth down the middle and on defense. Out of the top 50 paid players in the league the only wingers who has won a Stanley Cup were Eric Staal, Patrick Kane, and Patrik Elias. Staal and Kane did it on their entry level contracts while Elias was still a RFA not making much. Spending money on wingers in a salary cap situation is folly.
3) I know you like to make the "Dean should draft more scoring wingers" argument. What really irks me about this argument is that this is EXACTLY how the Kings drafted before Dean got here. Let's take a look at the wingers that the Kings drafted from 2000-2005 in rounds one through three: Frolov (00), Karlsson (01), Bednar (01), Juntunen (01), Anshakov (02), Kanko (02), Brown (03), Tambellini (03), Pushkarev (03), Tukonen (04), and Roussin (05). Eleven players drafted over five years and only two have had any impact at the NHL level. In case you're missing my point: The fact that the Kings drafted more wingers than anything else over rounds 1-3 from 2000-2005 is WHY the Kings were terrible.
4) Lombardi came into the Kings with virtually no back end, no depth of any kind at any position, and an old, aging team. He puts together a young competitive team, filling out the most important parts of the team first ... the team makes the playoffs last year and is poised to do so again this year despite being one of the top five youngest teams in the league ... and your gripe is that the least important part of a team would have been something you thought was important to address?
The deal was more "Hey you owe me one" The Bruins were thinking of putting Strum on waivers. There is little chance the Kings would have gotten him. The Kings now may offer the Bruins the same deal in return some day. Or they may need help in moving up a few spots in the draft one year or it may be nothing ever.
We traded Cap Space to Boston. Cap Space has been on our team for a while and wanted to a chance of scenery. I wish him well.
Either you have some intense Dyslexia and read "Sturm" as "Semin," or you crazy foo.
Nice pickup, for now, at least. Let's see if he can do some positive things on the ice. Hopefully his speed will make a difference.
LOL no I thought LA was good enough to win long before this deal. They have the defense and the goaltending and their offense isn't as lacking as most people say it is. Maybe my comment didn't go without hyperbole, but I really do expect big things from this club.
I have so many problems with this type of logic it's hard for me to list them all in a single post ... but I will try.
1) He asked you a simple question. "What would you do right now to fill the hole?" You dodged it by saying you would never be here in the first place. If you're going to do that you need to list viable alternatives that could fill the hole.
2) Wingers, although nice, are not the lynch pin for any Stanley Cup winning team. Stanley Cups are won with depth down the middle and on defense. Out of the top 50 paid players in the league the only wingers who has won a Stanley Cup were Eric Staal, Patrick Kane, and Patrik Elias. Staal and Kane did it on their entry level contracts while Elias was still a RFA not making much. Spending money on wingers in a salary cap situation is folly.
3) I know you like to make the "Dean should draft more scoring wingers" argument. What really irks me about this argument is that this is EXACTLY how the Kings drafted before Dean got here. Let's take a look at the wingers that the Kings drafted from 2000-2005 in rounds one through three: Frolov (00), Karlsson (01), Bednar (01), Juntunen (01), Anshakov (02), Kanko (02), Brown (03), Tambellini (03), Pushkarev (03), Tukonen (04), and Roussin (05). Eleven players drafted over five years and only two have had any impact at the NHL level. In case you're missing my point: The fact that the Kings drafted more wingers than anything else over rounds 1-3 from 2000-2005 is WHY the Kings were terrible.
4) Lombardi came into the Kings with virtually no back end, no depth of any kind at any position, and an old, aging team. He puts together a young competitive team, filling out the most important parts of the team first ... the team makes the playoffs last year and is poised to do so again this year despite being one of the top five youngest teams in the league ... and your gripe is that the least important part of a team would have been something you thought was important to address?
I'd have to look at the top 50 list but I'll take your word for it. Just a quick correction there, Staal is not a winger nor has he ever been to my knowledge. He centered Eric Cole and Cory Stillman on that Cup team. Elias also plays center but was predominantly a winger for the great Devs teams.
LOL no I thought LA was good enough to win long before this deal. They have the defense and the goaltending and their offense isn't as lacking as most people say it is. Maybe my comment didn't go without hyperbole, but I really do expect big things from this club.
Kings hit a slump and the World came to an end. Kings have gotten 7 points in the last four games, but because the goalie made a couple of bonehead plays that cost the team a point the fans are still in the holiday blues. December for Kings fans the last few years is usually the time the team folds, so we are use to doom and gloom for the holidays. Once the team has a solid playoff spot in Febuary the fans will be happier (well some will always think the worst will happen).
LOL no I thought LA was good enough to win long before this deal. They have the defense and the goaltending and their offense isn't as lacking as most people say it is. Maybe my comment didn't go without hyperbole, but I really do expect big things from this club.
It's lacking. Their first line has been a joke as far as first lines go.
This will hopefully help.
Just get a point tonight. I was expecting a win vs MIN and a loss tonight. A point in each and I'll call it even. If we find a way to get two points tonight, then we're ahead of the curve IMO.
It's lacking. Their first line has been a joke as far as first lines go.
This will hopefully help.
Exactly. Brown needs to be moved back to his natural side, and hopefully Sturm has retained his speed and can do to the left side what Williams does for the right. If Sturm can return to a 20 goal per full season form, then we will have two solid lines for the first time in who knows how long...
Kings will have Westgarth, Harrold, Drewiske and Parse. We all assume Moller and Zeiler will be sent down but we can't have 4 extra players. You can have 3 healthy scratches only.
I have so many problems with this type of logic it's hard for me to list them all in a single post ... but I will try.
1) He asked you a simple question. "What would you do right now to fill the hole?" You dodged it by saying you would never be here in the first place. If you're going to do that you need to list viable alternatives that could fill the hole.?
Not wanting to revisit this issue, again, I am reasonably certain Herby was making an indirect reference to the trading of one smallish left wing who went on the score 39 goals the season after he was traded and led the league in playoff goal scoring last season playing 7 less games than the other playoff points leaders... DL created the hole he is now, (still and unsucessfully) looking to fill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chruceg
2) Wingers, although nice, are not the lynch pin for any Stanley Cup winning team. Stanley Cups are won with depth down the middle and on defense. Out of the top 50 paid players in the league the only wingers who has won a Stanley Cup were Eric Staal, Patrick Kane, and Patrik Elias. Staal and Kane did it on their entry level contracts while Elias was still a RFA not making much. Spending money on wingers in a salary cap situation is folly.
I am also reasonably certain that wingers win the cup every season. Every team has at least eight of them, and although centers my be more valuable, a lack of scoring from the wing can leave a team handcuffed, as it is clear we currently are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chruceg
3) I know you like to make the "Dean should draft more scoring wingers" argument. What really irks me about this argument is that this is EXACTLY how the Kings drafted before Dean got here. Let's take a look at the wingers that the Kings drafted from 2000-2005 in rounds one through three: Frolov (00), Karlsson (01), Bednar (01), Juntunen (01), Anshakov (02), Kanko (02), Brown (03), Tambellini (03), Pushkarev (03), Tukonen (04), and Roussin (05). Eleven players drafted over five years and only two have had any impact at the NHL level. In case you're missing my point: The fact that the Kings drafted more wingers than anything else over rounds 1-3 from 2000-2005 is WHY the Kings were terrible.
Its who they drafted, not what position they drafted. 2 out of 11 is piss-poor for any position
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chruceg
(
4) Lombardi came into the Kings with virtually no back end, no depth of any kind at any position, and an old, aging team. He puts together a young competitive team, filling out the most important parts of the team first ... the team makes the playoffs last year and is poised to do so again this year despite being one of the top five youngest teams in the league ... and your gripe is that the least important part of a team would have been something you thought was important to address?
I dont think anyone would agree right now that the empty spot on the top line is the least important position on the team. The hole has been present since Lombardi created it, and nothing he's done has addressed the situation adequately.
Look, I've come a long way in my evaluation of DL as a GM, but to kiss his butt when we havent yet won a single playoff series and a gaping hole exists on our top line isnt going to happen on my watch either. Absent a miraculous recovery by Sturm, I dont see this move as being helpful. Its risk free so I'm not too disappointed, but it isnt likely to solve the problem.
When we have a left wing sniper and have won a playoff round or two, I'll re-evaluate again, but I think what Herby mentions are equally valid points, he just saw it from a different point of view
I have so many problems with this type of logic it's hard for me to list them all in a single post ... but I will try.
1) He asked you a simple question. "What would you do right now to fill the hole?" You dodged it by saying you would never be here in the first place. If you're going to do that you need to list viable alternatives that could fill the hole.
2) Wingers, although nice, are not the lynch pin for any Stanley Cup winning team. Stanley Cups are won with depth down the middle and on defense. Out of the top 50 paid players in the league the only wingers who has won a Stanley Cup were Eric Staal, Patrick Kane, and Patrik Elias. Staal and Kane did it on their entry level contracts while Elias was still a RFA not making much. Spending money on wingers in a salary cap situation is folly.
3) I know you like to make the "Dean should draft more scoring wingers" argument. What really irks me about this argument is that this is EXACTLY how the Kings drafted before Dean got here. Let's take a look at the wingers that the Kings drafted from 2000-2005 in rounds one through three: Frolov (00), Karlsson (01), Bednar (01), Juntunen (01), Anshakov (02), Kanko (02), Brown (03), Tambellini (03), Pushkarev (03), Tukonen (04), and Roussin (05). Eleven players drafted over five years and only two have had any impact at the NHL level. In case you're missing my point: The fact that the Kings drafted more wingers than anything else over rounds 1-3 from 2000-2005 is WHY the Kings were terrible.
4) Lombardi came into the Kings with virtually no back end, no depth of any kind at any position, and an old, aging team. He puts together a young competitive team, filling out the most important parts of the team first ... the team makes the playoffs last year and is poised to do so again this year despite being one of the top five youngest teams in the league ... and your gripe is that the least important part of a team would have been something you thought was important to address?
Exactly. Brown needs to be moved back to his natural side, and hopefully Sturm has retained his speed and can do to the left side what Williams does for the right. If Sturm can return to a 20 goal per full season form, then we will have two solid lines for the first time in who knows how long...
Sturm-Kopitar-Brown
Smyth-Stoll-Williams
Looks sexy to me...
Pretty much. Expecting much more than 20 from the left wing is expecting too much. There just aren't that many #1 scoring LWs in the league. (According to NHL.com, just 15 LWs topped 25 goals last season and another 20 got to 20 goals or more (one of whom was Ryan Smyth)).
I'd have to look at the top 50 list but I'll take your word for it. Just a quick correction there, Staal is not a winger nor has he ever been to my knowledge. He centered Eric Cole and Cory Stillman on that Cup team. Elias also plays center but was predominantly a winger for the great Devs teams.
Here's the link for the top fifty cap hits in the NHL. Take a look. As for Staal ... my mistake. Either way you're only helping my argument.
