HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Dean Lombardi: Missed Opportunities, or Not?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-23-2011, 10:54 AM
  #51
SC2008
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
Great post Whiskeypete, very insightful and shows how inept overall DT's scouting department was.

Of note, DL didn't trade away four guys from the 2003 draft class, he traded away three. DT traded away Tambellini himself in the Parrish+Sopel for Tambellini+Grebeshkov trade.
Its not so much that DT and scouting were inept, its that he didn't build a program to develop players.

You put some of those draft picks in Detroit, New Jersey, or, ironically, San Jose--which DL built--and they flourish becoming career NHLers.

Its about the staff as much as the players.

Roy Sommers (Longest tenure AHL Coach), the late Warren Strelow (legendary Goalie Coach), Ray Tuft (USA Olympic Trainer), Mike Alderich (USA Equipment Manager) were hired under DL's tenure at San Jose. Strelow aside, they are still all with the Sharks.

When you build a strong program it attracts free agents to take less (see Malhorta, '10), star players sign extensions for less than market value (Thornton, Marleau), and star players waive their "No Trade Clauses" to play for you (Heatley).

I understand what DL is doing because he laid that foundation in San Jose.

SC2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 10:59 AM
  #52
DIEHARD the King fan
Registered User
 
DIEHARD the King fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: blueline to slot
Country: United States
Posts: 6,244
vCash: 500
Whiskeypete...

For that work you should have been paid.

Thanks.

looking at that level of failure all I can say is:

God Damnit Al (Murray). WTF were you thinking?

DIEHARD the King fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 11:04 AM
  #53
Gentle Ben Kenobi
That's no moon......
 
Gentle Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Tatooine
Posts: 21,074
vCash: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by DIEHARD the King fan View Post
Whiskeypete...

For that work you should have been paid.

Thanks.

looking at that level of failure all I can say is:

God Damnit Al (Murray). WTF were you thinking?
I blame the development system as much as Al Murray

Case in point, Robert Lang. If he hadn't moved on to another org, he would have busted. I think the same holds true for Grebeshkov.

At least we are developing players now and also drafting better

Gentle Ben Kenobi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 11:43 AM
  #54
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Bunny Foo Foo View Post
I blame the development system as much as Al Murray

Case in point, Robert Lang. If he hadn't moved on to another org, he would have busted. I think the same holds true for Grebeshkov.

At least we are developing players now and also drafting better
To add to that, take a look at what the Kings were able to develop when they were affiliated with the Phoenix Roadrunners, the Long Beach Ice Dogs, the Lowell Lock Monsters and when they shared an affiliation in Fredericton and Springfield.

The Kings never employed a proper development system until Lombardi reshaped the organization. While Taylor and his scouts did draft some very talented players, it seems like the players were from that point on their own to develop into NHL quality players.

There were also blunders like their decision to rush Aki Berg and Jamie Storr due to them not having enough NHL quality talent on the blueline or between the pipes. They were never able to properly develop a blueline or goaltending tandem as we witnessed a ridiculous carousel of goaltenders and journeymen come and go.

While we await for Lombardi to add a missing piece to the puzzle, at the very least, he has stockpiled his organization with enough assets to insure that if he gives up some top quality prospects, he has others within the system that can readily replace those players.

Case in point, San Jose being able to trade for Joe Thornton and Dany Heatley largely through players they drafted, yet they did not miss a beat due to the volume of young and NHL ready forwards who were able to step in and replace the likes of Sturm, Stuart, Michalek, Cheechoo, etc.

The strong drafting record of teams like Detroit and Pittsburgh also speak volumes as it has permitted those clubs to acquire top talent. Detroit lost players like Fedorov, Shanahan and Yzerman, and they did not miss a beat. Pittsburgh drafted and developed Goligoski, saw that they were strong on the blueline and dealt from a position of strength to bring in a sniper in James Neal. That is the luxury teams gain when they are patient, draft well and develop quality players.

Ziggy Stardust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 11:44 AM
  #55
Whiskeypete
Registered User
 
Whiskeypete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: stuck in the middle
Country: United States
Posts: 2,407
vCash: 500
i made the change to the 2003 class as noted by kingsfan. thanks for the compliments. just doing my small part to break down the team we all are stupid crazy about.

the two issues i had and it still leaves me befuddled is
1) why in the process of scouting and interviewing players wasn't the issue/concern of "if we draft you will you come to NA and play?" LA wasted so many picks on picks that stayed in Europe it's absolutely mind boggling. this problem alone was enough to deplete the Kings organizational system

2) the lack of an established developmental system. LA's system was a mess when it came to where players would be assigned from '97 to '01. The AHL affiliations kept changing, the lower clubs as well. It's damn difficult to develop when this keeps changing. Coaches change, players keep changing so there is less cohesion and chemistry built. imo it was a system meant more to destroy a young players than to develop him.

add to this LA's lack of depth, personnel, etc in the NHL and players were being called up before they really were ready to compete at that level. 18-20 year old kids are the rare exception that can and are ready to play in the NHL. they need time to develop physically and mentally to play against adult men that have been playing the game since the 18-year old kid was in junior high for example.

i've had the chance over the years to play against ex college, semi and juniors players - they played at a different level, speed and pace than what us old men's league farts played. i've also had the chance to play against ex NHL and current players - they played at a level above and beyone what the JRs, college and semi guys did. players have to be given a chance to progress through the ranks, to develop the necessary tools it will require to succeed at each new level of advancement.

thank god LA has solidified their system/pipeline. MAN/ONT, before that MAN/READING. these kids needed a consistent environment to compete and learn in. i dont know or follow MAN or ONT, but would be interested in finding out other people's opinion on the coaching for those clubs. if and when TMu is gone, will MMorris from MAN move to LA? is he capable? im all for giving someone a try, rather than trying on yet another retread that has coached in the NHL for years/decades but never won the SC.

on to the breakdown of the DL drafts next

Whiskeypete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 12:17 PM
  #56
PSP
Couldn't Be Happier!
 
PSP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,290
vCash: 500
Whiskeypete, I appreciate your answer and I probably should have made my initial response clearer. I was referring primarily to the "rock bottom" in 2006, but I guess it depends what you include - does that include roster players?

The 2005/6 roster had a number of valuable assets, including Visnovsky, Frolov, Cammalleri, Gleason, Belanger, Demitra - all of whom were either traded for another asset or left to walk away. Add to that Dustin Brown on the roster with Kopitar and Quick and others in the pipeline...

I simply don't see that cupboard as bare.

I'm the last one in the world to say that I was happy with the DT era, but the hyperbole coming from the DL camp is unpalatable. There was nothing worth anything in the organization, no farm system or development - aren't these all the same things that we heard from the DT loyalists? Go back and read the draft reviews here from those woeful years - you'd think that the Kings had just won the lottery. Kanko and Grebeshkov were going to lead the team to the promised land!

In my business, I'm expected to produce results or I don't keep the job. I am held accountable for the results. In here, tangible results never seem to matter.

Quote:
DL has gotten LA closer to the end prize than any other GM while keeping the roster and prospect lists stockpiled
That's losing in the 1st round of the playoffs - is that really all that it takes?

What really bothers me is the assumption that spending all of the time "building it the right way" somehow guarantees a winning program. It takes more than patience and faith to build a winner.

I just hope that 5 years from now we aren't looking back at these times with the same level of disappointment with which we view the DT era today.

PSP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 12:25 PM
  #57
PSP
Couldn't Be Happier!
 
PSP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
To add to that, take a look at what the Kings were able to develop when they were affiliated with the Phoenix Roadrunners, the Long Beach Ice Dogs, the Lowell Lock Monsters and when they shared an affiliation in Fredericton and Springfield.

The Kings never employed a proper development system until Lombardi reshaped the organization. While Taylor and his scouts did draft some very talented players, it seems like the players were from that point on their own to develop into NHL quality players.
Wait a second - this was supposed to be one of the strong points of the DT era. AEG bought an AHL franchise and put the Monarchs in Manchester as the sole property of the organization. They played their first game in October 2001

DL was hired in 2006

PSP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 12:54 PM
  #58
Gentle Ben Kenobi
That's no moon......
 
Gentle Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Tatooine
Posts: 21,074
vCash: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSP View Post
Wait a second - this was supposed to be one of the strong points of the DT era. AEG bought an AHL franchise and put the Monarchs in Manchester as the sole property of the organization. They played their first game in October 2001

DL was hired in 2006
Just because they bought an AHL team doesn't mean that they were properly developing players

Have you seen what Kevin Gilmore is doing these days?

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/kevin-gilmore/b/b99/363

Gentle Ben Kenobi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 12:55 PM
  #59
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSP View Post
Wait a second - this was supposed to be one of the strong points of the DT era. AEG bought an AHL franchise and put the Monarchs in Manchester as the sole property of the organization. They played their first game in October 2001

DL was hired in 2006
Oh I'm aware of that. It's not entirely Taylor's fault that the Kings were mismanaged as the micromanagement from Leiweke and his right hand man at that time, Kevin Gilmore, led to such great organizational blunders as letting Boucher walk away for nothing, offering Luc Robitaille a pay cut after he was the leading scorer on the team, getting rid of Bruce Boudreau, etc.

But let's also review the players that spent time in Manchester during the Dave Taylor era that you could argue became or currently are NHLers:

Joe Corvo
George Parros
Jerrid Smithson
Dave Steckel
Michael Cammalleri
Tim Gleason
Dustin Brown
Tom Kostopoulous
Mike Weaver
Mathieu Garon
Jeff Tambellini
Denis Grebeshkov
Tim Jackman

Seven of those players were drafted by the Taylor, and from that group, under Taylor's watch, they lost Corvo, Steckel, Tambellini and Grebeshkov, three of them being former first round selections.

Mind you, I was a bit generous with the list in naming players who were in Manchester due to the 2004-05 lockout. So from 2001 through 2006, the Kings have one player (Dustin Brown) that played in Manchester (during the lockout year) that is still Kings property.

Now what happened with Gleason, Parros, Cammalleri, Garon, Jackman and Weaver was Lombardi's doing, either using players in trades, letting them walk as free agents or lost via waivers (Parros). While it isn't necessarily a poor listing of prospects developed in Manchester, the list is still small. Outside of Cammalleri, Brown and Gleason, they never really developed any top quality NHL players, just mainly role players.

Looking at the Monarchs since Lombardi took over management in 2006, they've had the following players develop there:

Matt Moulson
Patrick O'Sullivan
Trevor Lewis
Kevin Westgarth
Jason LaBarbera
Ted Purcell
Brian Boyle
Peter Harrold
Scott Parse
Davis Drewiske
Jonathan Quick
Jonathan Bernier
Alec Martinez
Oscar Moller
Andrei Loktionov

Some of those names have moved on to become better players (namely Moulson, Purcell and Boyle), while others have held steady jobs in the NHL (LaBarbera, Drewiske, Harrold), or had a brief stint of success (O'Sullivan, which turned into Justin Williams). But in a shorter amount of time, Lombardi with his staff in place has been able to churn out more NHL ready talent than Taylor was able to develop.

But again, do note that Kevin Gilmore hand his hands all over that team in Manchester and was one of the main culprits in ending the relationship with a lot of important figures that should have remained with the Kings.

What is conclusive however is that Manchester is doing a better job today of properly ushering in players who currently are or will someday benefit the Kings (or other NHL teams as is the case with Moulson).

Ziggy Stardust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 01:06 PM
  #60
Whiskeypete
Registered User
 
Whiskeypete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: stuck in the middle
Country: United States
Posts: 2,407
vCash: 500
the DL draft years 2006 to the present

im able to add some addt'l data and points of consideration. there is more available data on contract status due to the timeframe.

2006
-9 picks
-2 active (Bernier & Lewis)
-7 never played for LA
-3 non reports to NA (Ryan, Andersen, Braun)
-4 AHL system reports (Zatkoff, Holloway, Meckler, Nolet)
-64 GP
-8 Pts
-10 Wins
An immediate change of direction when it comes to LA's prospects being brought through a system. Also a decrease in the amount of European players that haven't reported to play in NA (due to the MAN/REA/ONT pipeline perhaps?). The non-reports have been to Kings dev camps, but no further info on status and assignment. Another change is that 7 players are yet to play for LA, but four of those players are in the system.

2007
-10 picks
-2 active (Simmonds, AMart)
-6 never played for LA
-3 non reports to NA
-2 "fringe' players (Moller, King - LA/MAN)
-1 AHL system report (Hickey)
-4 not re-signed (Cameron, Rowat, Kidd, Fillier)
-1 prospect/contract - NCAA (Turnbull)
-344 GP
-118 Pts
Another change is seen here, the "fringe" player. Players moving between LA and MAN. Could it be LA finally has developed players far enough long they get looks/call ups during the season....YES. Moller I hope gets a long look next season, personally I think he started to turn the corner this season just before the demotion. He needs more NHL seasoning to see his value and worth. The verdict is still out on King, but he's putting up good numbers in the AHL. The top pick Hickey is finally starting to show progress after all the freak crap he has gone through. If anything this again shows LA's developmental system is beginning to become a real 'pipeline'.

2008
-9 picks
-1 active (Doughty)
-7 never played for LA
-1 fringe player (Loktionov)
-5 AHL system report (Teubert, Voynov, Czarnik, Campbell, Azevedo)
-1 not re-signed (Wudrick)
-1 prospect/contract -NCAA (Roe)
-236 GP
-123 Pts
The year that truly shows that LA is committed to holding back players so they develop. It also shows that DL has started to fill the back-end and the glut of D prospects in LA's system becomes evident. Of the 7 still to play for LA; 5 are in MAN, 1 is still in the NCAA and 1 wasn't re-signed. This is the type of responsible player personnel/development a winning organization has to have. Lokti falls into the fringe player category, but began to show real promise. Next season will be interesting to see if he or Schenn becomes the fringe C for the team. I won't be surprised to see DL slowly bring Brayden along and bounce him between LA & MAN.

2009
-10 picks
-1 active (Clifford)
-1 fringe (Schenn - a bit of a stretch here but his case is strange)
-8 never played for LA
-3 AHL system report (Kolomatis, Kozun, Nolan)
-1 ECHL system report ( Pelech)
-4 prospect/contract - NCAA & Jrs (Deslauriers, Berube, Vey, Dowd)
-64 GP
-11 Pts
Schenn......LA fans are salivating (at least I am) to see what he becomes. Unless he becomes the next J Skinner, my guess is DL eases him into the line up as a fringe player. Let him mature some in MAN and not put him into the NHL line up to soon. Clifford was a great surprise to make the squad in 2010, so soon. He should be a great L3/L4 winger for years to come and bring great physical presence. The remainder of the class is still very young, most are just finishing their Jrs/NCAA careers and will/should be moving to MAN or ONT next. The remainder are the three kids in MAN. Nolan and Kozun are in their first season, so my guess is they will remain there for a bit longer. Kolo is yet another D man in the glut of prospects.

2010
-5 picks
-5 never played in LA
-5 prospect/contract - NCAA & Jrs (Forbort, Toffoli, Weal, Gravel, Kitsyn)
All five kids are still early in their development, either with their college or Jr teams. The great news for LA was Kitsyn reporting to Jrs after the WJC. He was a beast in the WJC and their are high hopes for him. Could it be that DL has bridged the gap with Russian prospects that DT couldn't? The fact that Lokti and Kitsyn are moving in the system, shows immediate improvement. Forbort - my personal favorite. The kid comes from my old neighborhood in Duluth. He played for the same elementary school I did and played at the HS I would have played at if we hadn't moved. I havent had the chance to see much of him yet unfortunately. At the WJC he was hurt, so it wasn't a very good representation of his ability. The bits of ND games I've seen he seems to play quietly, composed but doesn't seem to use his body that much. The others I haven't seen but I know there is very good buzz on TT and Weal's production.

Overall - LA has a system. Thank god. LA also is no longer wasting picks on kids that don't seem interested in coming to NA and working within a system to develop their game. Those are the best and most important aspects that DL has brought imo. Otherwise what's the point of drafting anybody.

When it comes to the players DL and his scouts have selected. it's still early to assess exactly where he stands. Most of them are in the Kings pipeline and only time will tell where/how they turn out. The players now have an organization with a plan, a plan that will move them along based on their performance and I assume character (we are talking about Lombardi after all). If not then they aren't being re-signed.

next is to compare results between Dave and Dean's regimes......

Whiskeypete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 01:18 PM
  #61
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
LA wasted so many picks on picks that stayed in Europe it's absolutely mind boggling.
Quote:
LA's system was a mess when it came to where players would be assigned from '97 to '01.
Quote:
add to this LA's lack of depth, personnel, etc in the NHL and players were being called up before they really were ready to compete at that level.
It all sort of ties together. The Kings didn't have a decent minor league situation to put players in, so they draft more players from Europe knowing they at least have a team to play for. A good number of them were older Europeans; Visnovsky, Lilja, Kaberle, Bednar, Pirnes, who at least in theory could come over and play right away, and not in the minors. The Kings have also not been a huge free agent destination(they didn't want to spend the money, or players chose to go elsewhere), which caused them to maybe look at those older Europeans as an option, or bringing up young players before they were really ready.

That process began to change when the Kings finally got their own AHL franchise. The problem was that they didn't have that many prospects to put in Manchester during the early years, since they had such a bad situation in the years prior to the Monarchs existing. Then the guys the Kings drafted in the first few years after the Monarchs were around, were all still 18-20, and in juniors, or wherever. It wasn't until 2003, or 2004, that the Kings were finally able to start putting some real prospects in a Manchester uniform.

Then the lockout. Then a change in GM. Followed by a house cleaning. Then another year or two before the new GM's picks are AHL eligible.

KingsFan7824 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 01:19 PM
  #62
Whiskeypete
Registered User
 
Whiskeypete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: stuck in the middle
Country: United States
Posts: 2,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSP View Post
Whiskeypete, I appreciate your answer and I probably should have made my initial response clearer. I was referring primarily to the "rock bottom" in 2006, but I guess it depends what you include - does that include roster players?

The 2005/6 roster had a number of valuable assets, including Visnovsky, Frolov, Cammalleri, Gleason, Belanger, Demitra - all of whom were either traded for another asset or left to walk away. Add to that Dustin Brown on the roster with Kopitar and Quick and others in the pipeline...

I simply don't see that cupboard as bare.

I'm the last one in the world to say that I was happy with the DT era, but the hyperbole coming from the DL camp is unpalatable. There was nothing worth anything in the organization, no farm system or development - aren't these all the same things that we heard from the DT loyalists? Go back and read the draft reviews here from those woeful years - you'd think that the Kings had just won the lottery. Kanko and Grebeshkov were going to lead the team to the promised land!

In my business, I'm expected to produce results or I don't keep the job. I am held accountable for the results. In here, tangible results never seem to matter.


That's losing in the 1st round of the playoffs - is that really all that it takes?

What really bothers me is the assumption that spending all of the time "building it the right way" somehow guarantees a winning program. It takes more than patience and faith to build a winner.

I just hope that 5 years from now we aren't looking back at these times with the same level of disappointment with which we view the DT era today.
im not looking so much at the LA roster players, except that they moved to being an "active" roster player. i agree the guys you listed were assets that brought in picks, players.

my statement of "the cupboard was bare" was in reference to prospects. LA imo was down to rock bottom, because the drafts i listed continued a disturbing trend. to many players drafted that NEVER reported. to many picks that ended being traded for yet another veteran that didn't bring the club anything long-term. prospects that never were brought along in a system. honestly im not sure what the hell was happening from '01-06 in MAN, but it certainly wasn't the positive environment it is today.

1st round playoff exits aren't what I'm looking for the same as you, the same as DL and the rest of the org. there is only one prize.

personally i dont think in 5 years we will look back and be disappointed. for starters i dont think it's possible. LA has a system and pipeline for the first time that will hopefully keep pumping players to LA. if DL drafts wisely then LA will remain in the running. what we may be disappointed in is the players/picks themselves. that is the intangible guess that goes with draft picks, you just never know what you'll get. will DL draft the talent it will take to run for the Cup and win? time will tell.....

Whiskeypete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 02:16 PM
  #63
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SC2008 View Post
Its not so much that DT and scouting were inept, its that he didn't build a program to develop players.

You put some of those draft picks in Detroit, New Jersey, or, ironically, San Jose--which DL built--and they flourish becoming career NHLers.

Its about the staff as much as the players.

Roy Sommers (Longest tenure AHL Coach), the late Warren Strelow (legendary Goalie Coach), Ray Tuft (USA Olympic Trainer), Mike Alderich (USA Equipment Manager) were hired under DL's tenure at San Jose. Strelow aside, they are still all with the Sharks.

When you build a strong program it attracts free agents to take less (see Malhorta, '10), star players sign extensions for less than market value (Thornton, Marleau), and star players waive their "No Trade Clauses" to play for you (Heatley).

I understand what DL is doing because he laid that foundation in San Jose.
I agree. Let me clarrify. When I say the scouting department was inept, I meant the entire process for a player until they reach the NHL. I lumped scouting and development together, because I guess I look at it as one thing as I think they should be on the same page. You could draft superstars, but if you are horrible at development, who cares?

I agree they are different, scouting and development, but I lumped the process together because the success of one feeds directly off the success of the other, and you can't be good at one without being good at the other. That's what I meant by inept scouting. I should have clarrfied, sorry, and thank you for pointing it out for me.

DT did not put a good system in place overall. Not to argue your point SC2008, but we can't really say for sure the scouting would have been deemed better with a better development system, and if it would have been, how much better, as that assumption. You are quite possibly right, but it's impossible to know for sure. Keep in mind, outside of first rounders, all of the prospects LA had that busted could have ended up on virtually every other team in the NHL and those teams elected to pass them over for players they felt were better. Given the known results of the DT draft era, there may be a reason for that.

kingsfan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 03:00 PM
  #64
Whiskeypete
Registered User
 
Whiskeypete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: stuck in the middle
Country: United States
Posts: 2,407
vCash: 500
DT vs. DL

Total Picks - 88 vs. 43 (9 seasons vs. 5)
Nothing to really compare here, since this can vary greatly year to year. If anything we can look at it similar to how teams are able to move prospects/players for picks. It's about keeping the pipeline full. Every players has to be viewed as an asset and when possible getting anything for them when they leave via RFA or UFA.

Active Roster- 4 vs. 6
To me this is a mixed result so far. DT's big names here are DB, Kopi & Quick. All putting up big numbers for LA. DL's names are primarily character guys with the exception of Doughty, so the numbers don't quite equate since they play different roles. It also reflects the large number of players from DT that were moved via trade.

System (AHL, etc) - 19 vs. 15
One of the first telling results. 19 of 88 (22%) players drafted by DT moved through LA's affiliates. While 15 of 43 (35%) of DL's are doing so now.

Never played for LA - 54 vs. 33
This isn't all that telling yet, since most of DL's picks are still early in development/lifecycle of a player. Remember this can represent a player that never reported to NA, to a player that made it to MAN but never to LA. DT - 61% vs. DL 77%

Non reports - 37 vs. 6
One of the most troubling results imo. Players that never came to NA and were brought within LA's affiliates. Most of these are European and Russian players that stayed overseas. DT - 42% vs. DL 14%

Fringe - 13 vs. 6
Again this is a number that is to early to put to much emphasis on since most of DL's picks are early in the process. At the same time when you look at the amount of overall picks to fringe it's almost a 1 to 1 ratio. DT had roughly twice the amount of picks and fringe players as DL. As the prospects and pipeline matures this number for DL will climb, showing the depth he has developed. Many of DT's fringe players also were of the less than 20 games for LA, it was more of a look than as a depth fill in character player it appears.

GP - 3183 vs. 708
Another number that will sway in time let's hope. DT hit big with (Corvo, Cami, DB, Kopi, Vis, Fro to name a few). DL so far has Doughty and Simmer logging the most for him. The remainder are guys in their first seasons, or fringe players still looking to make a full season. DT - 36 games vs DL 16 games. (GP / players drafted)

Pts - 1711 vs. 260
Again this is early to tell and with the likes of Kopi, Fro, Cami, DB it will be severly weighted to Taylor's regime. DT - 0.54 pts per game vs DL - 0.37. (Pts / GP)

Wins - 101 vs. 10
This comes down primarily to Quick vs Bernier. With Quicker being the #1 and JB finally making it full time in the back up role this will sway to Quick. Who emerges as the #1 in the long run who knows. Then also thrown in Zatkoff at some point then who knows where this may fall. DT - 101 vs DL - 10

Redrafted - 2 vs. 0
Again another distressing stat. The worse part is they were a 1st & 2nd rounder. Zultek in '97, some of the guys after him - B Morrow, K Huselius. Papineau in '98, some of the guys drafted after him - B Richards, B Gionta, E Cole. Thank god this stopped afterwards, talk about wasting a pick.

Traded - 21 vs. 0
Not sure how much weight you can put on this, since it's typical of a new GM to 'clean house' and bring in 'his guys'. What is telling though is the amount of trades that DT made of 'his guys' during his tenure within a year or two of drafting a player. So often they only had just a handful of games for LA or MAN, but were shipped off. DT traded many of these guys in what appears to be just to get some return for them, since many never reported to NA. He packaged many of these guys for picks, so at least he fleeced a few teams for future picks.

UFAs - 2 vs. 0
Corvo and Fro. The one thing this says is there is almost ZERO long-term tenure in LA for a player. They're either traded, or never develop during this period. Personally I would rather see guys traded for picks/prospects to keep filling the pipeline, than to let them walk as UFAs with no return. The downside is obviously it shows players weren't able to make a mutual long-term career in LA. Again let's hope this changes for the better.

Waived - 1 vs. 5
This one is difficult to find accurate data for the older classes. The only player bio I found that flat out said they were waived is Parros. I am certain this is higher, I just can't find the data. To date I found 5 guys that weren't re-signed/waived by DL. The data is more up to date due to timeframe. My guess is this will likely be similar in numbers since the org can only carry a max number of prospects. Room always needs to be made for the new kids.

Prospects (NCAA/Jrs) 0 vs. 14
This will obviously weigh to DLs favor due to time were talking. I hope that at least 10 of the 14 kids in this stage or finishing will move to ONT-MAN next. Bring them through the system.

take all this for what it's worth to you. to some it's rubbish, to some it will make some points. if anything i hope it sheds some light on where the org has come from, to where it stands today.

for me it solidifies what ive been thinking the past few seasons. LA is indeed in better shape now than before. there is a man with a plan, a plan that has direction, a direction that should be based on performance. there still seems to be some 'unknown' elements when it comes to player personnel decisions that as outsiders we won't be privy to. ie, Moller, Lokti back to MAN, etc. there will coaching decisions, styles, systems that as fans will leave us scratching our heads. regardless of these LA is set for the future better than it was in 2005-06, because kids are moving through a defined system and draft picks aren't being squandered the way they were.

Whiskeypete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 03:18 PM
  #65
Rorschach
Fearful Symmetry
 
Rorschach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 6,549
vCash: 500
Thank you to the OP as I was thinking about making exactly this type of thread myself, except I was going to let people bring up the deals themselves and talk about if we shoulda hit (like trading down or drafting another guy instead of drafting Hickey) that or dodged a bullet (not signing Drury, Gomez or any of those overpaid guys that year of UFA). As another poster said, I'd love to see the trades and then an analysis of possible draft picks/deals too.


Quote:
Originally Posted by OK Computer View Post
None of this changes the fact that the team has a glaring hole at LW that is ALL on HIM.
Yes, yes, glaring hole on LW...I think that's a hundred times better than where we were before, with glaring holes on left defense, right defense, goaltending, center and with nearly the entire prospect cupboard bare. LW is the least important position on a hockey team in my opinion if you're trying to win cups...that position plays the least amount of D and takes almost no face offs...

Hypothetically speaking, I wonder what Washington fans would think about a deal where Semin (signed) and Green for Doughty and Johnson. I bet all of the Kings fans here would say "no" and most of the Caps fans would say "yes." My point being that we are better stocked in positional players and the most player roles than even a lot of top teams right now.

- R

Rorschach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 03:45 PM
  #66
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiskeypete View Post
Non reports - 37 vs. 6
One of the most troubling results imo. Players that never came to NA and were brought within LA's affiliates. Most of these are European and Russian players that stayed overseas. DT - 42% vs. DL 14%

.
Great post overall again Whiskeypete. this stat is the one that frightens me. 42 per cent didn't even get into the system? That's just under half of all picks never even reported. Essentially, just under half of all our picks were thrown away under DT. No wonder we had such a poor turnout rate for prospects.

DL seems to take extra care in finding European (specifically Russian) players who want to come over, like Voynov, Loktionov and Kitsyn.

kingsfan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 04:15 PM
  #67
Whiskeypete
Registered User
 
Whiskeypete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: stuck in the middle
Country: United States
Posts: 2,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
DL seems to take extra care in finding European (specifically Russian) players who want to come over, like Voynov, Loktionov and Kitsyn.
anyone can criticize him when it comes to the "Lombardi type of player, character" references we always hear. what the criticism doesn't take into account is 'his' guys want to be here, they want to work into the system. ie, Voynov coming and making a go of it; in the past those guys just stayed overseas. during DT they may attend the prospect camps and/or training camp, but once they were demoted they went home and never came back. such a waste of picks and talent.

in the past i was among the masses always looking for the quick fix at the deadline. with what has and is happening i have swung the other way. i so want to see what becomes of these kids, to see LA push into the elite status in the league each year. after seeing how the 'Moneyball' influence has worked for other org's, i don't see why it won't work for LA.

i hate hammering on DT. i love and respect what he did in uniform, but i think it's clear he didn't have a strong plan for running a team. it's one thing to be a great player, quite another to succeed on the front office/ops side.

when and if the Kings get to the point of trading fan favorites that are all-stars, replacing them with younger players (that keep the cap down) and receive 1st/2nd round picks.....the system will be working.

i always use what Belichik and NE have done in the NFL using this type of system. they continue to be a threat each year and the reason they can do this under a salary cap is to be able to move guys out and replace them with equal to better talent.

Whiskeypete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 04:55 PM
  #68
northernKing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,839
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiskeypete View Post
this took forever breaking this down and the data isn't complete when it comes to most players per contracts. some you will find good data, others there is nothing. it's safe to assume that most guys get 2-4 year rookie contracts. after that timeframe if they aren't in around in LA or MAN its safe to assume they aren't with the org any longer.

i broke down two different points of consideration. not playing for LA at all. and also never even making to play in the NHL or the AHL affiliate. players that didn't even make the AHL club imo are total busts and were wasted picks. most of these players are from Europe and either never signed or were re-signed by LA.

1997
-9 picks overall
-6 never played for LA
-3 never even came to the US for LA or the AHL
-1 never signed and was re-drafted
-1 was traded (Jokinen to NYI '99)
-1 left via UFA (Corvo '06)
-301 GP
-109 Pts
Olli got shipped off to NYI for Ziggy. Zultek never signed/was re-drafted at #2. Barney never overcame the back issues iirc. Corvo left via UFA. The remainder never amounted to anything.

1998
-9 picks overall
-5 never played for LA
-4 never came to the US for LA or the AHL
-1 was never signed and re-drafted
-2 trades (Biron to NYI '99, Brennan to ATL '04)
-68 GP
-9 Pts
Biron was part of the trade for Ziggy/Smolinski package. Papineau was a never signed/re-draft. The rest of the class was a bust.

1999
-10 picks
-7 never played for LA
-5 never came to the US for LA or the AHL
-1 trade (Kaberle to CAR '00)
-1 waived/unsigned (Parros '06)
-112 GP
-17 Pts
Alot of picks spent on talent in Europe that never materialized. The worse of which was Shefer at #1 that had one season in the QMJHL then went back to Russia. Four other players were from Europe that didn't even make one season here. Three addt'l NA picks never made it past 50+ games in the AHL. Kaberle was the only player in this class that has amounted to anything. Parros and McGrattan are role players/enforcers.

2000
-11 picks
-6 never played for LA
-6 never came to the US for LA or the AHL
-4 trades (Lilja to FLA '02, Lehoux to PHX '06, Visnovsky to EDM '08, Federov to DAL '07)
-1 UFA (Frolov '10)
-1080 GP
-668 Pts
One of the only decent drafts during DT's tenure. It only bears out because of Fro's and Vis' production. Lilja showed some promise, but was still needed time to develop and LA didn't have the patience for it. The rest of the class was a bust. Vis was shipped to EDM in a salary dump that netted Stoll and Greene (via DL).

2001
-11 picks
-7 never played
-6 never came to the US for LA or the AHL
-3 trades (Cami to CAL '08, Bednar to FLA '02, Huet to MTL '04)
-376 GP
-220Pts
-14 Wins
Cami and Huet were the only ones to make the big squad. Worse part is the #1 and #2 picks were total busts. #1 Karlsson never made it to the US even. Aside from Cami this is one of the worse drafts for the regime.

2002
-11 picks
-8 never played for LA
-6 never came to the US
-2 trades (Grebeshkov to NYI '06, Anshakov to PIT '03)
-24 GP
-4 Pts
The worse draft in DT's tenure. 11 players drafted and it results in 24 GP total.

2003
-10 picks
-1 active player (DB)
-4 never played
-2 never came to the US
-4 trades (Boyle to NYR '09, Tambellini to NYI '06, Pushkarev to DAL '08, Munce to TB '07)
-608 GP
-316 Pts
DL used this class to help with the rebuild. He shipped off three players here to bring him assets. DT himself shipped off Tambellini for Sopel/Parrish. For DT at least it showed his staff was moving away from taking chances on European prospects that likely wouldn't come to the US/CAN.

2004
-9 picks
-1 active player (Parse - IR)
-5 never played
-3 never came to the US/CAN
-2 trades (Tukonen to DAL '08, Lukacevic to PHI '08)
-74 GP
-28 Pts
Again DL ships off the #1 and #4 picks for Clune, Gauthier and a pick. The jury is still out on Parse due to injury, but it's likely the window of opp for him is closing. He has one year left on his contract and he has to pay off next season or likely face not being re-signed. The rest of the class is a total bust. Yet another uninspiring draft class for LA that only meant the pipeline of talent got smaller.

2005
-8 picks
-2 active players (Kopi & Quick)
-6 never played for LA
-2 never came to the US/CAN
-2 trades (Hersley to PHI '08, Seymour to NYR '07)
-540 GP
-340 Pts
-87 Wins
This is a 'glass is half empty-half full' class depending on how you view it. IMO if there was just one player from the class on the LA roster I would consider it a successful class. The fact that DT got LA's #1 C and #1 G in the same class was an achievement. It's to bad that it took so long for him to make this kind of splash, because this was his last draft.

So back to the question of how many were traded, went un-signed? Like I said the data is very incomplete, but you can read the writing on the wall by just looking at LA's draft classes and who is around and who isn't.

I think if anything looking back at this DT and his scouts put to much emphasis and hope on bringing over talent from Europe and Russia. He had 13 1st rounders during his tenure. Of those 13 picks he used 6 of them on players from overseas. Only Kopi and Fro made it to LA, the other 4 never made an impact. That is four #1's wasted. The same problem continued as you went into the #2 and #3 picks at nearly the same ratio. As you get deeper into the picks the ratio gets worse, LA was taking big long shots on these kids ever coming to the US/CAN to develop their game.

anyways it's late and need to get to bed. im going to breakdown 2006+ under DL to compare tomorrow and see if the numbers improve.
People seem to forget that it was alot of injuries that cost LA some playoff success aswell. A healthy Allison-Palffy-Deadmarsh would have been HUGE. Also Scott Barney was hindered due to back issues which sadly prevented him from truly developing.
Also players he traded for were also banged up like Straka and Carter, yet unfortunatley went on to other teams and had solid seasons.

Yes DL has kept his picks and only time will tell on guys like Hickey,Teubert and even Voynov. DL may lose him to the KHL.

IMO the 2006 picks are a wash as DL has said they were made by Al Murray.
David Steckel at #30th overall is not a bust IMO. Any guy playing in the NHL 10 yrs after being drafted is not a bust.
Also Shefer at #43 was decent as the entire 99 draft was poor.

How many DT picks are playing in the NHL today? Yes he had to trade them for STAR players and strictly based on talent in/out DT lost very few deals IMO. I seriously doubt that DT had ownership in his corner and he had nowhere near the control DL was given. When is the last time anyone heard Tim Liewekie speak???? This guy NEVER shut up when DT was in charge.

AM/DT picks still playing

Kopitar
Quick
Brown
Bernier
Cammalleri
Frolov
Jokinen
Visnovsky
Boyle
Belanger
Steckel
Parros
Corvo
Rome
Lilja
Parse

We will only truly be able to judge DL in the next 2-3 yrs. It will be his trades/signings or lack of along with how many of the prized prospects actually pan out that shows how well he did.

As for blaming DT for the lack of LW, his staff provided two future NHL #1 goalies and DL has yet to bring in any LW's in his 4yrs too


Last edited by northernKing: 02-23-2011 at 05:08 PM.
northernKing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 06:28 PM
  #69
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,286
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=nK;31174384]
Quote:
People seem to forget that it was alot of injuries that cost LA some playoff success aswell. A healthy Allison-Palffy-Deadmarsh would have been HUGE. Also Scott Barney was hindered due to back issues which sadly prevented him from truly developing.
All POSSIBLE, but no way to know for sure. There's no guarantee having those players would have added any additional playoffs games/victories to the clubs totals.

Quote:
Also players he traded for were also banged up like Straka and Carter, yet unfortunatley went on to other teams and had solid seasons.
Injuries happen. Also, Carter did play virtually every game after the trade deadline, which is when he was acquired. A lot of guys play with injuries at that time of year.

Quote:
IMO the 2006 picks are a wash as DL has said they were made by Al Murray.
If Al Murray made most of the picks, why would you lump it in with DL?

Quote:
David Steckel at #30th overall is not a bust IMO. Any guy playing in the NHL 10 yrs after being drafted is not a bust.
Agreed.

Quote:
Also Shefer at #43 was decent as the entire 99 draft was poor.
Disagree. A 2nd round pick that played one season in the QMJHL and then left for Europe isn't not much return on investment at all. Btw, a draft may be poor in comparision with other drafts, but no draft is truly poor. 14 players selected after Shefer have thuse far played at least 400 games, and several others are nearly to that point, including goaltenders such as Ryan Miller. In total, 74 players selected after Shefer played at least one NHL game, one more than Shefer. There were plenty of other options for the Kings to pick, so to say he was a decent pick when he didn't even play in the NA pro ranks is absurd.

Quote:
How many DT picks are playing in the NHL today? Yes he had to trade them for STAR players and strictly based on talent in/out DT lost very few deals IMO.
As far as I recall, he did two trades for star players, the Palffy deal and the Allison trade. Palffy he won, Allison can be debated, though it'd have been nice to see how things looked without injuries. Also, if DT's drafting was so good, and he won his trades for star players, why wasn't DT's teams always at the top of the pile?

Quote:
I seriously doubt that DT had ownership in his corner and he had nowhere near the control DL was given.
No one goes eight years without ownership support. that support may have faded over the years, but he had ownerships support, at least for some time.

Quote:
As for blaming DT for the lack of LW, his staff provided two future NHL #1 goalies and DL has yet to bring in any LW's in his 4yrs too
And DT provided Huet ( I assume you are talking about him) in his fifth draft, but he didn't even emerge as a #1 until he reached Montreal in 2005-2006, eight years after he was drafted. Even then, Huet's career high in games played in a season is 48, and it can be debated he was never truly the number one for a full season on any team he played for. Quick would be the other one, and he was drafted in 2005, DT's ninth draft. Maybe we should give DL just as long to find a LW?

kingsfan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 06:49 PM
  #70
northernKing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,839
vCash: 500
People need to realize that it wasn't until the recent trouble with The Russian Ice Hockey Federation that the number of Europeans taken has declined. Id like to see how other teams ranked in drafting players that never came over.

Plus the draft used to be 9 rounds and has been cut down to 7 so teams are no longer trying the "homerun type pick" in later rounds.

Also maybe DT and Co. need to be given more credit for realizing guys like Tambellini, Aulin, Anshankov, Biron and others were not going to pan out and were able to get stuff for them. much like DL did with O'Sullivan

DT did very well in moving veterans too. Smolinski brought in Gleason and Schneider and Blake deals also brought back solid youth.

Trust me I will be thrilled to see Toffoli become a 30 goals scorer in the NHL, Forbort become a steady two way dman like P.Martin, Kitsyn become a young Frolov clone and Schenn become a M.Richards type of leader. However I also realize that not all top junior aged players make it to the NHL. Time will tell.

Judging the numbers of picks that came up from the AHL is also misleading because as noted some veteran Euro's went straight to the NHL.

Also how about college FA signings? Reinprecht and Blake are still in the NHL.

northernKing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 07:00 PM
  #71
northernKing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,839
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=kingsfan;31176132]
Quote:
Originally Posted by nK View Post

All POSSIBLE, but no way to know for sure. There's no guarantee having those players would have added any additional playoffs games/victories to the clubs totals.

Well reasonable thinking would have to be used and its not too far fetched to think the team would win as they did beat DET and take COL to back to back game 7's

Injuries happen. Also, Carter did play virtually every game after the trade deadline, which is when he was acquired. A lot of guys play with injuries at that time of year.


True but just pointing out how he had groin surgery afterwards

If Al Murray made most of the picks, why would you lump it in with DL?

I'm not. Bernier is a DT/AM pick IMO



Agreed.



Disagree. A 2nd round pick that played one season in the QMJHL and then left for Europe isn't not much return on investment at all. Btw, a draft may be poor in comparision with other drafts, but no draft is truly poor. 14 players selected after Shefer have thuse far played at least 400 games, and several others are nearly to that point, including goaltenders such as Ryan Miller. In total, 74 players selected after Shefer played at least one NHL game, one more than Shefer. There were plenty of other options for the Kings to pick, so to say he was a decent pick when he didn't even play in the NA pro ranks is absurd.

You are right


As far as I recall, he did two trades for star players, the Palffy deal and the Allison trade. Palffy he won, Allison can be debated, though it'd have been nice to see how things looked without injuries. Also, if DT's drafting was so good, and he won his trades for star players, why wasn't DT's teams always at the top of the pile?

INJURIES! LA has not had a line even close to what the Deadmarsh-Allison-Palffy line did when healthy

No one goes eight years without ownership support. that support may have faded over the years, but he had ownerships support, at least for some time.

Ok but he had ALOT of people looking over his shoulder ALOT of the time.



And DT provided Huet ( I assume you are talking about him) in his fifth draft, but he didn't even emerge as a #1 until he reached Montreal in 2005-2006, eight years after he was drafted. Even then, Huet's career high in games played in a season is 48, and it can be debated he was never truly the number one for a full season on any team he played for. Quick would be the other one, and he was drafted in 2005, DT's ninth draft. Maybe we should give DL just as long to find a LW?

I'm referring to Quick and Bernier as the two future #1 goalies. Also LA has two young stud dman in the NHL and about 6-8 others prospects that should be able to fill out the remaining 4 spots in the next few years. I just want LA and DL to start drafting more scoring LW's.

northernKing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 08:38 PM
  #72
Whiskeypete
Registered User
 
Whiskeypete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: stuck in the middle
Country: United States
Posts: 2,407
vCash: 500
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....

Whiskeypete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 08:46 PM
  #73
Whiskeypete
Registered User
 
Whiskeypete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: stuck in the middle
Country: United States
Posts: 2,407
vCash: 500
i didnt factor in the college FA signings. i just went with the drafted kids.

also if you guys didn't know this existed....every Kings trade. a quick way of seeing who we got at what cost

http://kings.nhl.com/club/page.htm?bcid=20801

next step is to then take all that further and show the results and possible other moves with the new players.

Whiskeypete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2011, 11:24 PM
  #74
northernKing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,839
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
Old
02-23-2011, 11:54 PM
  #75
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,286
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=nK;31176986]
Quote:
Originally Posted by nK View Post


I'm referring to Quick and Bernier as the two future #1 goalies. Also LA has two young stud dman in the NHL and about 6-8 others prospects that should be able to fill out the remaining 4 spots in the next few years. I just want LA and DL to start drafting more scoring LW's.
A) How can you call bernier a future number 1 when he's only in his first NHL season and is a backup?
B) How can you give DT credit for Bernier when DT wasn't even with the team anymore, and you said that draft was a wash between Al Murray and DL?

I don't want DL to draft more LW's.... unless that's the best player available. Drafting BPA is thebest option. I'd like to see LA trade for a LW though.


Last edited by kingsfan: 02-24-2011 at 12:14 AM.
kingsfan is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:13 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.