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

Hickey (NYI) & Clune (NSH) Claimed from Waivers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-15-2013, 02:08 PM
  #201
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
And as if Detroit wouldn't have loved to have that waiver mistake back. It ended up costing the their own first round pick a few year later and gave a conference rival a good asset to work with.
That's 20/20. At the time, Quincey had 13 games of NHL experience in 3 full seasons. It wasn't really a mistake when it happened. All that was said was that Quincey might have a shot in the NHL. Typical prospect.

It would all be easy if the future could be predicted, and the past could be corrected.

KingsFan7824 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:14 PM
  #202
damacles1156
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 12,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
I honestly do not know, so someone please explain if they do... why could we not just keep Hickey AND Muzzin on the pro roster? Did we not have the roster space? We have the cap room to do it.

I'm sure in a week or two, when the regular season gets going and some D-man gets hurt or someones D starts looking bad, Hickey could have had at least the value of a 3rd or so at that point. Why didn't we just keep him, or did we not have any roster spots left?



This will have no impact on what the Kings do at the draft. Anyone they draft is likely 3 years away from the NHL anyways, especially since we don't even have a 1st this year. Besides, we have Campbell, Kolomatis, Deslauriers on the farm, Gravel and Forbort coming into the system in the enxt 18 months and we have drafted three blueliners in the last draft, one of which (Miller) will be turning pro within 18 months as well due to being overage when we drafted him.

If this dictates anything for DL, it might mean he takes a shot at a college UFA D-man, though he hasn't had much luck with those type of players in the past.

Was talking about potential draft picks hitting Manchester.

The Kings picked some over age kids that would hit Manchester pretty quick last draft year.

damacles1156 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:16 PM
  #203
Johnny Utah
Registered User
 
Johnny Utah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Santa Monica, CA
Posts: 6,927
vCash: 500
With Kopitar out, the Kings have 2 extra forwards....Stewart and Richardson. I believe teams are allowed to carry 3 or 4 extra players, correct?

So right now Stewart, Richardson, Bodnarchuk and Muzzin will be the 3-4 BUT when the season progresses and Kopitar and Mitchell come back...then Drewiske, Nolan, Richardson, Stewart, Bodnarchuk and Muzzin become the extras....that is 6. I would imagine Nolan goes to the AHL, Clifford takes his place, but what about the other 5...only 3-4 of those can stay. 1-2 will have to go.

Johnny Utah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:22 PM
  #204
damacles1156
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 12,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Utah View Post
With Kopitar out, the Kings have 2 extra forwards....Stewart and Richardson. I believe teams are allowed to carry 3 or 4 extra players, correct?

So right now Stewart, Richardson, Bodnarchuk and Muzzin will be the 3-4 BUT when the season progresses and Kopitar and Mitchell come back...then Drewiske, Nolan, Richardson, Stewart, Bodnarchuk and Muzzin become the extras....that is 6. I would imagine Nolan goes to the AHL, Clifford takes his place, but what about the other 5...only 3-4 of those can stay. 1-2 will have to go.
At some point this season One or two of; Richardson/Drewiske/Muzzin/Bodnarchuck have to be traded or waived.

damacles1156 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:27 PM
  #205
Johnny Utah
Registered User
 
Johnny Utah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Santa Monica, CA
Posts: 6,927
vCash: 500
If the Kings go with the same playoff line up....

Brown-Kopitar-Williams
Penner-Richards-Carter
Lewis-Stoll-King
Gagne-Fraser-Nolan

Extra's: Richardson, Stewart, Clifford

Doughty-Scuderi
Mitchell-Voynov
Greene-Martinez

Extra's: Drewiske, Muzzin, Bodnarchuk

The move here is to send Nolan down and replace him with Clifford because Nolan is the only player that won't have to clear waivers. That buys one extra spot. I don't like doing that and I don't think Sutter will either.

Even then you still have to do something with Muzzin and Bodnarchuk or one of Richardson/Stewart.

Johnny Utah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:30 PM
  #206
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsFan7824 View Post
That's 20/20. At the time, Quincey had 13 games of NHL experience in 3 full seasons. It wasn't really a mistake when it happened. All that was said was that Quincey might have a shot in the NHL. Typical prospect.

It would all be easy if the future could be predicted, and the past could be corrected.
At the time, Quincey was very much a well repected prospect, quite similar to Hickey. He wasn't just some random pick by DL. Even on this board people were very excited to be able to claim him. Their situation in terms of value when waived are very comparible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by damacles1156 View Post
At some point this season One or two of; Richardson/Drewiske/Muzzin/Bodnarchuck have to be traded or waived.
Frankly, they all should be waived, minus one of the D-men to serve as the #6/7 Richardson must have some good pictures of DL in a very compromising position, how he sticks around on this team, especially considering his cap hit isn't really all that great for what he brings, is baffling.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:32 PM
  #207
Johnny Utah
Registered User
 
Johnny Utah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Santa Monica, CA
Posts: 6,927
vCash: 500
I have to believe Nolan and Bodnarchuk go to the AHL, Richardson, Stewart, Drewiske and Muzzin stay up as extra's....

Does anyone know what the exact amount of guys extras a team can carry??????

Johnny Utah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:35 PM
  #208
Buddy The Elf
Kings!
 
Buddy The Elf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Belmont Shore
Country: United States
Posts: 9,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
I honestly do not know, so someone please explain if they do... why could we not just keep Hickey AND Muzzin on the pro roster? Did we not have the roster space? We have the cap room to do it.
I assume teams are allowed to carry 23 players on the roster like usual. If that is the case, there is no room for him. There is room for one player to take Mitchell's spot on defense while he is on IR. Hickey is not going to fill that role.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
At the time, Quincey was very much a well repected prospect, quite similar to Hickey. He wasn't just some random pick by DL. Even on this board people were very excited to be able to claim him. Their situation in terms of value when waived are very comparible.
You could say that but when Quincey was waived, I'm pretty cetain it was to keep Chelios (a veteran) on the roster. With Hickey, there are 3 players younger or as young as him that are ahead of him no the depth chart. There is just not room for him. By the way, don't you think Detroit tried to trade Quincey before he was waived? I'm sure the same thing happened with Hickey. Most teams that were remotely interested probably realized that DL would have to waive him and probably decided to role the dice with the waiver wire rather than give something up for him. That should tell you everything you need to know.

Buddy The Elf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:40 PM
  #209
Johnny Utah
Registered User
 
Johnny Utah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Santa Monica, CA
Posts: 6,927
vCash: 500
I just googled. 23 players. So after 2 goalies, 12 forwards and 6 D, that leaves 3 spots open...

Using the Stanley Cup roster with everyone healthy...the extra's would be Clifford, Richardson, Stewart, Drewiske, Muzzin and Bodnarchuk. 6 guys and only 3 spots...You send down Nolan and replace Clifford, you still have 2 guys to figure out what to do with....6-1=5 extras. Then take the extra 5-3=2....2 players to do something with...waive, trade, etc...

Johnny Utah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:43 PM
  #210
DaAnimal
Registered User
 
DaAnimal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Pasadena
Country: United States
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
I had a feeling the islanders would pick up hickey

DaAnimal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:44 PM
  #211
Herby
Culture Changer
 
Herby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,082
vCash: 500
The fact remains, the Kings had three regular defenseman on the team last year who were drafted after Hickey. Martinez the same year and Drew and Slava the next year. Obviously DD is a special talent, but there were still two spots and he couldn't beat out the other two guys, not DL or anyone else's fault.

As for Clune, good riddance. One of the most useless players I have ever seen play for this team, he was worse than McKenna. Happy we won't have to hear the usual posts to "call up Clune!" I just hope DL doesn't try and take him back when Nashville realizes how terrible he is and they waive him.

Herby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:45 PM
  #212
sweatypickle
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,092
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herby View Post
I just hope DL doesn't try and take him back when Nashville realizes how terrible he is and they waive him.
Heh.. If either are waived they'll be coming back..

sweatypickle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:46 PM
  #213
Johnny Utah
Registered User
 
Johnny Utah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Santa Monica, CA
Posts: 6,927
vCash: 500
Clune is a solid guy, he was doing most of the fighting down in the AHL. His teammates love him and the fans enjoy him. Excited for him to get his shot.

Johnny Utah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:52 PM
  #214
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 3,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
At the time, Quincey was very much a well repected prospect, quite similar to Hickey. He wasn't just some random pick by DL. Even on this board people were very excited to be able to claim him. Their situation in terms of value when waived are very comparible.
And the results may not be comparable. Or they might be. You never know. A prospect is still a prospect.

Lombardi didn't think enough of his own 4th overall selection to keep him on the roster, even without Mitchell. If Lombardi could've gotten something for Hickey, he would have. There was a reason to put him on waivers, whatever it was. I'm sure it's not just some random guess by DL, seeing as how he drafted Hickey that high. It doesn't make him look good to lose Hickey on waivers. Ya gotta do what ya gotta do though. It may come back to bite him, or it may not. When you're a GM, you can't worry about the bite.

KingsFan7824 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:53 PM
  #215
Monarchist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 872
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
I'm sure in a week or two, when the regular season gets going and some D-man gets hurt or someones D starts looking bad, Hickey could have had at least the value of a 3rd or so at that point. Why didn't we just keep him, or did we not have any roster spots left?
Martinek!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiskeypete View Post
oh well. just move along. can't get them all 100% right. bad pick, mis-managed pick....whatever the case. we can ***** about the Hickey and Teubert picks, but how about pulling the likes of Amart and Voynov out of no where. those picks offset and help soften the sting of 1st rounders that don't pay out
The mistakes aren't in evaluating players, they're in deciding whether to a) draft off the board for anticipated need or to b) go for best player available.

Monarchist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:55 PM
  #216
Jason Lewis
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Jason Lewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,052
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
Happy for Hickey and Clune since they'll get pt now but man this sucks for our depth.

Manchester is soft as bitter and has no skill on the backend. If Bodnarchuk outplays Muzzin like I forsee him doing so, the Kings will waive Muzzin and have no d depth when he's likely claimed.

Doughty
Scuderi
Martinez
Voynov
Greene
Drewiske
Bodnarchuk
Deslauriers
Kolomatis

That's horrible depth.
Next year are Forbort and Gravel's senior years at their respective college squads, Ebert is turning 19 in May, Alex Roach is having a phenomenal season in Calgary and will be 20-years-old, not to mention Paul LaDue is playing wonderfully in the USHL and will be with UND next season.

There is still a lot of promise defensively in that pipeline. If Manchester has one down year in terms of defensive depth it isn't the end of the world. Vincent LoVerde has done an admirable job coming up from Ontario, and there are always PTO guys willing to play for the AHL squad.

Jason Lewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:57 PM
  #217
Thrice
Coyote Killer
 
Thrice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,890
vCash: 500
What's the point of keeping Drewiske on this roster? At least with Muzzin there's plenty of untapped potential. I get that Drewiske is the designated 7th d-man but keeping that placeholder cost us an actual prospect and depth at the AHL level.

Thrice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 02:57 PM
  #218
cubsfan999
Registered User
 
cubsfan999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 270
vCash: 500
at least dean screwed pooch on hickey and not doughty. maybe he learned his lesson. imagine these boards if we got bogosian, and had to watch DD possibly become bourque elsewhere.

cubsfan999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:00 PM
  #219
damacles1156
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 12,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thrice View Post
What's the point of keeping Drewiske on this roster? At least with Muzzin there's plenty of untapped potential. I get that Drewiske is the designated 7th d-man but keeping that placeholder cost us an actual prospect and depth at the AHL level.
No idea, I just have this sick feeling that Scuds is going to get hurt early. Then it's going to look pretty bad on the D side.

damacles1156 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:03 PM
  #220
tigermask48
Maniacal Laugh
 
tigermask48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: R'Lyeh, Antarctica
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweatypickle View Post
Lubo's REVENGE!
This! Did we all forget that the selection of Hickey at #4 was said to "make Lubo expendable?" A month later Lubo is packing his bags for the Great White North. Fast forward a few years and Lubo may not report to his current team on Long Island, Hickey hasn't played an NHL game yet, Hickey hits waivers and the Isles take him to replace Lubo... Good stuff.

Also Nashville. Really? Clune? You could have paid Joe Schmoe way less to take bad penalties, lose fights and constantly miss checks...

tigermask48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:04 PM
  #221
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddy The Elf View Post
I assume teams are allowed to carry 23 players on the roster like usual. If that is the case, there is no room for him. There is room for one player to take Mitchell's spot on defense while he is on IR. Hickey is not going to fill that role.



You could say that but when Quincey was waived, I'm pretty cetain it was to keep Chelios (a veteran) on the roster. With Hickey, there are 3 players younger or as young as him that are ahead of him no the depth chart. There is just not room for him. By the way, don't you think Detroit tried to trade Quincey before he was waived? I'm sure the same thing happened with Hickey. Most teams that were remotely interested probably realized that DL would have to waive him and probably decided to role the dice with the waiver wire rather than give something up for him. That should tell you everything you need to know.
I'm not debating that. I'm saying two things:

A) DL should have decided to fish or cut bait with Hickey a long time ago. The NHl game is alot about maximizing assets and this didn't happen here because DL stuck to Hickey to long, then had to waive him for some reason.

B) Barring a trade, it makes little sense to me that the likes of Bodnarchuk and Drewiske get to remain on this roster at the expense of Hickey. Keep Hickey for a few more weeks and when someone else needs a D-man due to injury or something, ship him out for a pick at least.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thrice View Post
What's the point of keeping Drewiske on this roster? At least with Muzzin there's plenty of untapped potential. I get that Drewiske is the designated 7th d-man but keeping that placeholder cost us an actual prospect and depth at the AHL level.
Good question.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:09 PM
  #222
Johnny Utah
Registered User
 
Johnny Utah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Santa Monica, CA
Posts: 6,927
vCash: 500
I think Drewiske holds more value than Bodnarchuk. Muzzin has untapped prospect potential, but Drewiske has NHL and been around during 3 playoff runs.

Of all the extra players, Muzzin is the most likely to get picked up via waivers...then I would put Drewiske at #2.

Muzzin
Drewiske
Richardson
Bodnarchuk
Stewart

I put Stewart last because he has already been placed on waivers before.

Johnny Utah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:27 PM
  #223
Buddy The Elf
Kings!
 
Buddy The Elf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Belmont Shore
Country: United States
Posts: 9,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
I'm not debating that. I'm saying two things:

A) DL should have decided to fish or cut bait with Hickey a long time ago. The NHl game is alot about maximizing assets and this didn't happen here because DL stuck to Hickey to long, then had to waive him for some reason.

B) Barring a trade, it makes little sense to me that the likes of Bodnarchuk and Drewiske get to remain on this roster at the expense of Hickey. Keep Hickey for a few more weeks and when someone else needs a D-man due to injury or something, ship him out for a pick at least.
A) The emergence of Voynov happened last year. Martinez the year prior. There were no guarantees either one would be better than Hickey then. Fast forward to a year later and Hickey has been surpassed on the depth chart and he is now waiver eligible. DL realistically had this past summer with an impending lockout looming to do something. The fact that he wasn't moved then and waived now should tell you everything you need to know what kind of value he had. He had to waive him because there is no room for him on the roster for him. Why would you assume somebody is going to want Hickey in two weeks if they don't want him now? Even if a player gets hurt, teams will more than likely give their own prospects a shot for free or trade for somebody with experience rather than trade assets for a waiver eligible former first rounder with 0 NHL games. If a team traded for him, THEY HAVE to put him on the roster or risk losing him via waiver like the Kings did. Why would any team gamble assets on a guy who is 5 years removed from drafting and has played 0 NHL games?

B) Drewiske has proven he can play at the NHL level when needed. He has 100% more experience at the NHL level than Hickey has and has a different skillset. One that the Kings need the most right now. I don't know anything about the other guy but unless he really impresses in camp, he'll probably get waived as well assuming he is waiver eligible.

You guys are acting like DL left money on the table. There is no room fo Hickey on the roster and clearly if he was waived, he had little to no value and I doubt that occured overnight.

Buddy The Elf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:39 PM
  #224
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddy The Elf View Post
A) The emergence of Voynov happened last year. Martinez the year prior. There were no guarantees either one would be better than Hickey then. Fast forward to a year later and Hickey has been surpassed on the depth chart and he is now waiver eligible. DL realistically had this past summer with an impending lockout looming to do something. The fact that he wasn't moved then and waived now should tell you everything you need to know what kind of value he had. He had to waive him because there is no room for him on the roster for him. Why would you assume somebody is going to want Hickey in two weeks if they don't want him now? Even if a player gets hurt, teams will more than likely give their own prospects a shot for free or trade for somebody with experience rather than trade assets for a waiver eligible former first rounder with 0 NHL games. If a team traded for him, THEY HAVE to put him on the roster or risk losing him via waiver like the Kings did. Why would any team gamble assets on a guy who is 5 years removed from drafting and has played 0 NHL games?

B) Drewiske has proven he can play at the NHL level when needed. He has 100% more experience at the NHL level than Hickey has and has a different skillset. One that the Kings need the most right now. I don't know anything about the other guy but unless he really impresses in camp, he'll probably get waived as well assuming he is waiver eligible.

You guys are acting like DL left money on the table. There is no room fo Hickey on the roster and clearly if he was waived, he had little to no value and I doubt that occured overnight.
A) As I said, guys get hurt all the time. Besides, as others have mentioned, they may have been holding out knowing had to waive Hickey. If he didn't, there might have been trade value.

Besides, DL should have cut bait no later than the start of last season when Voynov made the team over Hickey. We had multiple D-men on the pro rosters (I beleive 8 when everyone was healthy). I do not agree with your assessment that Hickey held no value either, but neither of us can prove that so let's just leave that as is.

B) Drewiske has proven he can play the role of Peter Harrold 2.0, that's it. ANd of course Drewiske has 100% more experience than Hickey. He also has 100% more expereince than Nail Yakupov too. That means nothing in terms of actually ability. If Hickey can't even do what Drewiske does, then I retract all of my statements about Hickey and gladly except the fact he's gone. Hell, if he can't sit in a press box 75 games a season and play about 13 minutes a game the rest of the time, then Hickey should have been cut years ago. When it comes to Drewiske it has little to do about skillset and a lot to do about a guy who can jump in and eat a few minutes without getting destroyed out there. He's not doing anything other than giving the other 5 D-men a chance to suck on a water bottle. He's not filling in for anyone in particular, and certainly not Mitchell.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2013, 03:48 PM
  #225
Herby
Culture Changer
 
Herby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,082
vCash: 500
I don't know what the Kings saw in Hickey, but it was clearly something, he was a good offensive d-man in junior, he just never took the next step and now his career upside is another Mike Weaver. But atleast there was some potential for something.

The Teubert pick was just horrendous and indefensible. There is never any justifiable reason to draft a player with that type of skill set in the middle of the first round. The Kings did this plenty over the years (Biron, Zultek, Karlsson, Steckel) and hopefully that time has passed.

No ill will towards Hickey, wish him good luck, this is just a case of a kid who likely peaked at 18 or 19.

Herby is offline   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 02:51 AM.

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.