The Kings would not be in any danger of losing JJ or Doughty had they made any of these signings because Smyth and his $6.2 mill a year cap hit would not be here.
Doughty and JJ were never leaving over money, that is a pathetic excuse you guys come up with when making excuses for why the first line LW and 2nd line center holes have not been filled.
How is $5 mill a year overpaying for Cammalleri, that is the going rate for players of his level.
Still no idea how you can defend not paying those guys what they are making then you turn around and defend Smyth's contract?
Let me guess, when Williams leaves this summer because Dean won't pay him the going rate you will just say he is overpaid too.
2nd line center hole? Wow, haven't watched a game this year have you? You would see Stoll there,
Anyways, 5 million a year for Cammalleri at THE TIME HE WAS ASKING FOR IT, was a gross overpayment, but hey, revisionist history again,
Again, how is Gaborik panning out for NYR this year?
Yah dude, I got that part. I'm 37 years old, I'm well aware of what Detroit has done to become what they are. Detroit is not the only team in the NHL that believes in not rushing kids or winning in the long term! How did Carolina win if they didn't copy Detroit?
The Detroit style of building in the 90's would not be successful in a CAP league.
Detroit would have lost many of their secondary guys due to cap restraints.
Still think the best way to win in today's NHL is to acquire star players, sign them to long term deals and fill in the holes by drafting and signing and trading for older UFA's.
The days of teams having great 2nd and 3rd liners for 5+ years are over. And you cannot win in this league without 3 star players.
Yah dude, I got that part. I'm 37 years old, I'm well aware of what Detroit has done to become what they are. Detroit is not the only team in the NHL that believes in not rushing kids or winning in the long term! How did Carolina win if they didn't copy Detroit?
Oh, wait, you want the one and done route? Instead of being perennial contenders?
That explains it...
BTW how has Carolina done since winning the cup????
LOL so then you must rate Dave Taylor above Ken Holland, as if your only candidate for risk is to trade 1st rounders, and proven players for unproven players...my god...really?
THAT is what you call risky?
Then why isn't the Smyth trade considered a "risk", or the "Sturm" trade a risk??
There is a difference between a risk taker and a successful risk taker.
I think Mike Keenan is one of the biggest risk takers out there, but i wouldn't call him an overly successful GM. Taylor was far more risky than DL was, just look at the Palffy trade, but that doesn't mean he was successful in his risk taking. Hollan on the other hand makes his risks pan out most times. He looked like a genius on the Schneider, Shanahan and Chelios trades, and most deadlines is involved in dealing prospects away for help in the playoffs. Name the last trade that DL did for a big name player in the NHL.
The biggest risks DL takes is at the draft (Hickey), not in trades. Arguably the biggest risk he took on the trade front is the Johnson/Gleason deal, and really, if that didn't pan out was losing Gleason for nothing the end of the world? It would have sucked, but we could recover. I'm a big DL supporter, but he's not a risk taker at all, and makes Holland look like Tom Dwan in terms of risk taking, to use a poker reference.
The Detroit style of building in the 90's would not be successful in a CAP league.
Detroit would have lost many of their secondary guys due to cap restraints.
Still think the best way to win in today's NHL is to acquire star players, sign them to long term deals and fill in the holes by drafting and signing and trading for older UFA's.
The days of teams having great 2nd and 3rd liners for 5+ years are over. And you cannot win in this league without 3 star players.
You mean like Chicago?...
You cannot win in this league without 3 star players, yet your counterpart just said that Carolina won.....
Sure, just let the depth in the system rot away in Manchester.
Why draft players when you can just keep re-signing slow stiffs every year????
LOL that is defensive depth,
Forward depth still has to be worked on, but hey, we can play 5 rookies every year and then ***** and whine when there are fluctuations in their game...
There is a difference between a risk taker and a successful risk taker.
I think Mike Keenan is one of the biggest risk takers out there, but i wouldn't call him an overly successful GM. Taylor was far more risky than DL was, just look at the Palffy trade, but that doesn't mean he was successful in his risk taking. Hollan on the other hand makes his risks pan out most times. He looked like a genius on the Schneider, Shanahan and Chelios trades, and most deadlines is involved in dealing prospects away for help in the playoffs. Name the last trade that DL did for a big name player in the NHL.
The biggest risks DL takes is at the draft (Hickey), not in trades. Arguably the biggest risk he took on the trade front is the Johnson/Gleason deal, and really, if that didn't pan out was losing Gleason for nothing the end of the world? It would have sucked, but we could recover. I'm a big DL supporter, but he's not a risk taker at all, and makes Holland look like Tom Dwan in terms of risk taking, to use a poker reference.
There is a difference between a risk taker and a successful risk taker.
I think Mike Keenan is one of the biggest risk takers out there, but i wouldn't call him an overly successful GM. Taylor was far more risky than DL was, just look at the Palffy trade, but that doesn't mean he was successful in his risk taking. Hollan on the other hand makes his risks pan out most times. He looked like a genius on the Schneider, Shanahan and Chelios trades, and most deadlines is involved in dealing prospects away for help in the playoffs. Name the last trade that DL did for a big name player in the NHL.
The biggest risks DL takes is at the draft (Hickey), not in trades. Arguably the biggest risk he took on the trade front is the Johnson/Gleason deal, and really, if that didn't pan out was losing Gleason for nothing the end of the world? It would have sucked, but we could recover. I'm a big DL supporter, but he's not a risk taker at all, and makes Holland look like Tom Dwan in terms of risk taking, to use a poker reference.
I agree, except that I don't rate the Shanahan, Schneider or Chelios trades as risks....
Forward depth still has to be worked on, but hey, we can play 5 rookies every year and then ***** and whine when there are fluctuations in their game...
Schenn? Moller? Loktionov?
Are they gonna keep those guys in Manchester again next year?
You would prefer to keep Poni and Handzus around for another season or longer?
Did Tampa and Anaheim copy a set series of moves to win it all? Did Anaheim know that by trading for Rob Niedermayer they would then land his brother? Every team does it differently. We're all in agreement that the Kings should not rush their kids and win in the long term! I don't want to see Schenn traded. Please write this down so you remember it. I want to see the GM make the best possible moves so the team wins. Is that trading whoever for Hemsky? I don't know, not my job. Will doing nothing suddenly make the Kings winners? It's possible. All I want to see is the neccessary steps to get to the goal-NONE OF US KNOW WHAT THAT IS! We're supposed to be here to share our opinions but instead we're bombarded with people who think they know everything about hockey tellig us we don't know what we're talking about. Saying Dean Lombardi isn't doing his job right is a perfectly vailid opinion as is saying he is doing his job right. We won't know until either the Kings win the Cup or Deano is fired. Then you will see some serious backpedaling by the experts on here.
I'd have to check again, but I would say the Lidstrom/Federov draft was the real start, and I believe that was 89/90.
Again, you do realize that Yzerman was not the target for Detroit in 84, right?
No, fill me in with your facts. I was under the impression Steve Yzerman was the cornerstone of the franchise post Gordie Howe but now I'm being told I am wrong. This is devastating. I need your facts to be set straight.
Oh wait, you are right, they are expiring, and we are gonna have....no one....fill their shoes,
Gotcha, hey in 10 years we can be down to one player!
At some point you have to assume the kids will, and those kids, especially the likes of Loktionov, Mollar, etc., don't cost what Handzus, Poni, etc do. Not to mention the cap is slated to go up another $2 million or so.
LA should have about $15 million to eat Doughty's raise, replace Sturm/Handzus/Poni/ and add a piece or two. We could easily have spent the extra cap space we have this year.
Did Tampa and Anaheim copy a set series of moves to win it all? Did Anaheim know that by trading for Rob Niedermayer they would then land his brother? Every team does it differently. We're all in agreement that the Kings should not rush their kids and win in the long term! I don't want to see Schenn traded. Please write this down so you remember it. I want to see the GM make the best possible moves so the team wins. Is that trading whoever for Hemsky? I don't know, not my job. Will doing nothing suddenly make the Kings winners? It's possible. All I want to see is the neccessary steps to get to the goal-NONE OF US KNOW WHAT THAT IS! We're supposed to be here to share our opinions but instead we're bombarded with people who think they know everything about hockey tellig us we don't know what we're talking about. Saying Dean Lombardi isn't doing his job right is a perfectly vailid opinion as is saying he is doing his job right. We won't know until either the Kings win the Cup or Deano is fired. Then you will see some serious backpedaling by the experts on here.
LOL I agree, and disagree,
The majority of people who say a trade has to be made, is in fact saying that DL can't do the job, that their judgment is better, keeping in mind they offer absolutely no other solution than "a move"
