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

How would you feel about trading Norstrom?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-05-2005, 02:40 PM
  #1
Creeping Death
Registered User
 
Creeping Death's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 185
vCash: 500
How would you feel about trading Norstrom?

Matty is one of my alltime favorite Kings, but now may be the time to let him go. His trade value is the highest right now that its ever going to be. He is a warrior and a leader. I love everything that Matty brings to the rink, however, it may be time we start looking at getting a return for him. By trading Norstrom, the Kings could completely revamp their blueline. It would free up a good chunk of cash to get 1 or 2 defenseman. I was just kinda curious how Kings fans would feel about giving up Norstrom. I think moving Matty could be a key component in a deal with Buffalo for Biron and McKee. We keep McKee, and move Biron for another defenseman. The end results I believe would be more beneficial to the longterm goals of the Kings, but we would be losing one of the best stay at home defenseman in the league. What do y'all think?

Creeping Death is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 03:00 PM
  #2
McSorley 33
Registered User
 
McSorley 33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Yorba Linda, Ca
Posts: 1,152
vCash: 500
Ah.........NO!




McSorley 33 is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 03:01 PM
  #3
DBrown23*
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Greece
Posts: 96
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DBrown23*
i would stop being a kings fan if they traded him

DBrown23* is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 03:04 PM
  #4
Dooney
Love me some Carter!
 
Dooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sunny So Cal.
Country: United States
Posts: 10,096
vCash: 500
No. Although it could be a possibility in the future I suppose. I would hate to see it happen. He brings so much leadership to the team.

Dooney is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 03:09 PM
  #5
David A. Rainer
Registered User
 
David A. Rainer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Huntington Beach
Country: Italy
Posts: 7,293
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to David A. Rainer
I would consider trading him if the right deal came along. What that deal is, I'm not sure but I would be open to listening.

__________________
Saxon Sports Information and Research
David A. Rainer is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 03:27 PM
  #6
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Legionnaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 35,595
vCash: 500
Agree with Dave. If we could get a great return (not Avery, Kuznetsov and a 1st "great" better) at the deadline, I'd be all for it.

__________________
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Legionnaire is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 03:40 PM
  #7
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,686
vCash: 500
Kings fans have always valued Norstrom a little more highly than the rest of the league, IMO. Granted, it's easy to overlook a quiet leader who puts up few points, but fans who watch a lot of Kings games have the opportunity to see more in him than others do. [Edited that last sentence to be clearer]

Also, I disagree about his trade value being highest now. I think that it peaked following Blake's last couple of years in LA. He's still good and most teams would love to have him, but he'll be turning 34 this season (and making quite a bit), so I don't think that the return would be worth it. He's worth more to the Kings than he would be to any other team, so I think that it's best for everyone (especially the Kings) that he remain in LA.


Last edited by Osprey: 09-05-2005 at 04:13 PM.
Osprey is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 03:41 PM
  #8
agentfouser
Playoffs?!?!
 
agentfouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Ireland
Posts: 2,361
vCash: 500
the problem with moving norstrom is the hole it creates. even if the return is great, how do you compensate for the loss of our captain, best or second-best defenseman, and one of our most durable players?

now, if this season is a disaster, then i imagine he'll find himself in a new jersey before the deadline. otherwise, the return would have to be truly spectacular.

agentfouser is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 03:53 PM
  #9
Scottkmlps
Moderator
 
Scottkmlps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey
Kings fans have always valued Norstrom a little more highly than the rest of the league, IMO. Granted, it's easy to overlook a quiet leader who puts up no points, but what fans of LA see and what everyone else sees aren't quite the same.
That's because alot of fans of other teams don't see him that much, especially east coast team fans. Norstrom has always been under-rated by fans of other teams, except maybe Rangers fans who saw him when he first came in and knew what his potential was going to be. A tough, on ice leader, stay at home d-man can catch a very good return, especially for a playoff team or a top contending team. Would I want the Kings to trade him? That's a tough question. If it came deadline time and the Kings were out of it, then I would definately want DT to listen to offers. But if the Kings were in the playoff hunt or were in a position (1 through 4th seed) to make a strong run in the playoffs, then no way in hell would I want DT to listen to any offers. Players like Norstrom are very, very valuable come playoff time. Plus he will be a good mentor to the youngsters like Gleason and Grebeshkov coming in.

Scottkmlps is online now  
Old
09-05-2005, 04:30 PM
  #10
Matt13
Registered User
 
Matt13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: I'm on a boat MF!
Country: United States
Posts: 4,112
vCash: 500
For the right deal, for like a Boumeester or something along those line yeah. Miller and Matty are both going to be too old by the time this team is cup ready.

Matt13 is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 06:10 PM
  #11
10 ft. pole
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 1,247
vCash: 500
The way Norstrom keeps himself in shape it is not unreasonable to see him play til 38. He is also the type of guy who WILL take a paycut to finish his career in LA. I am looking forwrd to seeing him paired with Blake once againas our second defensive pairing!

10 ft. pole is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 06:19 PM
  #12
funky
Registered User
 
funky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Saskatoon, Sask
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,148
vCash: 500
for the right price I would trade him. We have to remember that the new NHL will rely on a lot of speed and as much as I like Matty if the right deal were to come along I would trade him because of his age, the money he makes, and the fact that we still have Miller. Like I said the package would have to be very right and include a Witt, or a McKee, or a crease clearer that will be around in 2-3 years when this team will be more effective.

But lets just enjoy Matty now, hes a fan favorite, an on ice leader and a pilar of strength behind the blueline.

funky is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 06:21 PM
  #13
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,566
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
His game has tailed off since Blake was traded. I would like to see how his game is affected by the new rules. Matty does not enter the offensive zone enough IMO and he does a lot of clutching and grabbing. He is over rated by Kings fans, he is the captain but he would not be on a team he is traded to. You put his numbers next to other dmen in the league including plus-minus and he does not have that much value. He is probably more valuable to the Kings than anything they can get in return.

The Tikkanen is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 06:45 PM
  #14
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,912
vCash: 500
I'd send him packing if I can get a younger Dman like Pitkanen in an expanded trade.

no name is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 07:38 PM
  #15
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 31,299
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
When we started dealing guys like Smoke and Schneider, I wanted us to take it a step further and deal Miller, Norstrom, and even Palffy. Might as well get awesome returns for those guys like we did with Schneider and Smolinski. We could've easily got some blue chip prospects as well as a couple of 1st rounders for those guys. Instead of 3 first rounders we could've had 5 in a very nice draft. And really, would it have been any different than the seasons we've sat through since those Schneider and Smolinski have been traded? We missed the playoffs and basically kept ourselves as a fringe team. We would've had better draft picks, more prospects, and a prospect pool unlike anyother team in the league. It was dumb to re-sign Miller. We should've dealt Palffy at the deadline for whatever return we could have received, anything is better that losing him for nothing.

I wouldn't really look forward to dealing Matty, but, if the right kind of deal came along, I'd do it.

Reaper45 is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 08:01 PM
  #16
goldjet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 70
vCash: 500
I am not opposed to trading him, but I tend to think Norstrom probably would not fetch enough for the Kings to consider trading him. It wouldn't really make sense for the Kings who have rebuilt their corps of forwards and then trade the cornerstone of the defense. If the Kings decided to go with all young guys this year, then dealing Norstrom and Miller would make sense, but based on DT's acquisitions the Kings are not rebuilding.

goldjet is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 08:17 PM
  #17
King'sPawn
Enjoy the chaos
 
King'sPawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8,425
vCash: 500
Hell, I'd trade Frolov for the right price. Nobody's untouchable.

King'sPawn is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 08:32 PM
  #18
danaluvsthekings
Registered User
 
danaluvsthekings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 4,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldjet
I am not opposed to trading him, but I tend to think Norstrom probably would not fetch enough for the Kings to consider trading him. It wouldn't really make sense for the Kings who have rebuilt their corps of forwards and then trade the cornerstone of the defense. If the Kings decided to go with all young guys this year, then dealing Norstrom and Miller would make sense, but based on DT's acquisitions the Kings are not rebuilding.
I agree with you in that Norstrom probably would not fetch enough for the Kings to consider trading him unless they packaged him with some other players. If they move Norstrom they have no #1 defenseman (not that Norstrom's a #1 like Lidstrom, Blake, Pronger. He's the Kings #1 though) and odds are they wouldn't be getting one back. Miller can't play that much, Gleason isn't ready for that spot, and Visnovsky doesn't fit that role either. Grebeshkov isn't ready for the NHL most likely, Dempsey and Corvo aren't ever going to be defensemen that play in the top pair. There are defensemen better than Norstrom but I don't know if any of them are available. Besides even if they swapped Norstrom for another defenseman, they still need another defenseman on top of that so Corvo's not in the lineup every day. I'd rather move someone else for another defenseman or sign another defenseman while keeping Norstrom.

I'll say Matti's game has slipped the last few years but he was playing hurt last year and the last two seasons with all the injuries no one was playing with the same partner on a consistent basis. That's also going to affect the play. As soon as you get used to playing with someone and get to know their game, the pair would be broken up because of injuries.

danaluvsthekings is offline  
Old
09-05-2005, 10:08 PM
  #19
goldjet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 70
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danaluvsthekings
I'll say Matti's game has slipped the last few years but he was playing hurt last year and the last two seasons with all the injuries no one was playing with the same partner on a consistent basis. That's also going to affect the play. As soon as you get used to playing with someone and get to know their game, the pair would be broken up because of injuries.
Good post dana, you bring up a lot of good points.

Speaking of injuries--despite the fact that his game has slipped the last couple of seasons, Norstrom for the most part has been in the lineup just about every night. The Kings can just about pencil him in for 70-80 games a year.

Compare that to Aaron Miller who has been so injury prone since the Kings acquired him. At this point I think the Kings have to hope Miller can stay healthy and return to the form he showed when they first traded for him.

I have to say that I think DT did a good job at adding quality forwards, but the defense concerns me. Norstrom and Miller are getting up in age, Visnovsky and Dempsey don't have the size to match up against top line forwards, and Gleason is still inexperienced. It would be nice if the Kings were able to add a legitimate top pairing defenseman to take the pressure off Norstrom and Miller.

goldjet is offline  
Old
09-06-2005, 12:05 AM
  #20
danaluvsthekings
Registered User
 
danaluvsthekings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 4,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldjet
Good post dana, you bring up a lot of good points.

Speaking of injuries--despite the fact that his game has slipped the last couple of seasons, Norstrom for the most part has been in the lineup just about every night. The Kings can just about pencil him in for 70-80 games a year.

Compare that to Aaron Miller who has been so injury prone since the Kings acquired him. At this point I think the Kings have to hope Miller can stay healthy and return to the form he showed when they first traded for him.

I have to say that I think DT did a good job at adding quality forwards, but the defense concerns me. Norstrom and Miller are getting up in age, Visnovsky and Dempsey don't have the size to match up against top line forwards, and Gleason is still inexperienced. It would be nice if the Kings were able to add a legitimate top pairing defenseman to take the pressure off Norstrom and Miller.

Norstrom will be 34 next season. While that's not young, it's not like Chris Chelios or Brian Leetch old. Plus Norstrom has always kept himself in great physical shape so I think there's less to worry about for him than for some other players. He did play in Sweden last year for part of the season and he played at Worlds and did very well actually. Norstrom had 7 assists in 9 games at Worlds and Visnovsky led defensemen in scoring with 8 points so Matti even held his own offensively. So I'm not as worried about him. On the other hand Miller only played at Worlds and he's injury prone. A sports hernia for him during training camp wouldn't surprise me at all.

I just don't think for all that Norstrom brings to the Kings, that anyone else they could get is worth losing Norstrom's leadership and physical play. Someone else mentioned getting Jay McKee and or Brendan Witt. Why would you want to move Norstrom for those guys. They're not bad defensemen, but I think moving Norstrom for either of those two would be an overpayment by the Kings and a lateral move at best, doing nothing to improve the Kings defensive corps. Adding one of them while keeping Norstrom is something I'd be in favor of. Looking at numbers I'd be leery of McKee too. He's only played 59 and 43 games the last 2 NHL seasons. The last thing the Kings need is another injury prone defenseman. They knew Miller was injury prone when they traded for him.

danaluvsthekings is offline  
Old
09-06-2005, 01:00 AM
  #21
Creeping Death
Registered User
 
Creeping Death's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 185
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danaluvsthekings
Norstrom will be 34 next season. While that's not young, it's not like Chris Chelios or Brian Leetch old. Plus Norstrom has always kept himself in great physical shape so I think there's less to worry about for him than for some other players. He did play in Sweden last year for part of the season and he played at Worlds and did very well actually. Norstrom had 7 assists in 9 games at Worlds and Visnovsky led defensemen in scoring with 8 points so Matti even held his own offensively. So I'm not as worried about him. On the other hand Miller only played at Worlds and he's injury prone. A sports hernia for him during training camp wouldn't surprise me at all.

I just don't think for all that Norstrom brings to the Kings, that anyone else they could get is worth losing Norstrom's leadership and physical play. Someone else mentioned getting Jay McKee and or Brendan Witt. Why would you want to move Norstrom for those guys. They're not bad defensemen, but I think moving Norstrom for either of those two would be an overpayment by the Kings and a lateral move at best, doing nothing to improve the Kings defensive corps. Adding one of them while keeping Norstrom is something I'd be in favor of. Looking at numbers I'd be leery of McKee too. He's only played 59 and 43 games the last 2 NHL seasons. The last thing the Kings need is another injury prone defenseman. They knew Miller was injury prone when they traded for him.
I brought up McKee in the beginning. I think McKee is a younger replacement for Norstrom. He would be able to carry up Matty defensive play with some solid hitting. I think any deal with Buffalo should be involved for Biron. Thats the only way I could see this happening. Norstrom/pick or prospect for Biron/McKee. It would let Buffalo unload some salary, and give them their top 2 defenseman, at the same time, it'd put us with a 27 year old defenseman who is probably half a step down from Norstrom, plus a number 1 goaltender. IMO, I think we'd need to ship a goaltender for a defenseman at that point. We can carry 3 goaltenders through training camp, and even into the season for that matter. Someone will come calling for a goaltender, and we have 2 fairly young inexpensive number 1s in Biron and hopefully Garon. Every year a few teams get it bad in net, and need a quick replacement. It allows us to trade from a position of strength, and only giving up very little of our youth in the deal.

I think it may be time though to put Norstrom up, and see who bites. I think we don't have what it takes this year, but in a year or 2, we could be ready, but some of the key players this year Roenick/Norstrom will not be. I think we should try and make some moves to plan ahead.

Creeping Death is offline  
Old
09-06-2005, 01:13 AM
  #22
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,912
vCash: 500
I would prefer Miller over Biron if we were trading with Buffalo.

no name is offline  
Old
09-06-2005, 01:33 AM
  #23
danaluvsthekings
Registered User
 
danaluvsthekings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 4,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Creeping Death
I brought up McKee in the beginning. I think McKee is a younger replacement for Norstrom. He would be able to carry up Matty defensive play with some solid hitting. I think any deal with Buffalo should be involved for Biron. Thats the only way I could see this happening. Norstrom/pick or prospect for Biron/McKee. It would let Buffalo unload some salary, and give them their top 2 defenseman, at the same time, it'd put us with a 27 year old defenseman who is probably half a step down from Norstrom, plus a number 1 goaltender. IMO, I think we'd need to ship a goaltender for a defenseman at that point. We can carry 3 goaltenders through training camp, and even into the season for that matter. Someone will come calling for a goaltender, and we have 2 fairly young inexpensive number 1s in Biron and hopefully Garon. Every year a few teams get it bad in net, and need a quick replacement. It allows us to trade from a position of strength, and only giving up very little of our youth in the deal.

I think it may be time though to put Norstrom up, and see who bites. I think we don't have what it takes this year, but in a year or 2, we could be ready, but some of the key players this year Roenick/Norstrom will not be. I think we should try and make some moves to plan ahead.
I'm not saying McKee is a bad player, I just think that at best it's a lateral move. I also think that after the last two years the Kings need to stay away from injury prone players and McKee, who does turn 28 later this week, only playing 59 and 43 games would have me worried. I've said before that some injuries are flukes and there's nothing that can be done to prevent them (see Palffy taking a puck in the face on the bench) but it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that Miller gets hurt often, he's never been an iron man. For the last two years the Kings have had a collection of other players that would be classified as injury prone, and surprise surprise, they've led the NHL in man games lost to injury.

I also think that Garon should be given a chance as starter first. Guys like Witt and McKee might not cost that much to acquire. Washington and Buffalo aren't up against the cap so they wouldn't be salary dumps like Lydman and might cost more than a mid-round draft pick. On the other hand teams that might be interested in Witt and McKee might not have the room in their budgets to add salary at this point.

danaluvsthekings is offline  
Old
09-06-2005, 01:52 AM
  #24
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Legionnaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 35,595
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by no name
I would prefer Miller over Biron if we were trading with Buffalo.
That would be great! Then would have have THREE great AHL goaltenders who haven't proved much at the NHL level. Hell, would could start a reality show about it. We could title it Could the Real NHL Goaltender Please Stand Up...or Butterfly. Then we could send them out on challenges like signing autographs, or bedding groupies where they could score points based on their NHL "readiness". At the end of the competition we would tally the points and announce it much like the Miss America pagent.

And the AHL goaltender is.....

After that the two finalists for the starting job would be waiting for the annoucement; holding hands and looking anxious..and then the annoucement would come.

And your NHL back up goaltender is....

The winner would then be given some flowers and a Kings goalie mask instead of a crown. To cap it all off they would play "There he is your new Kings goaltender."





....Yes I am on drugs. No seriously.

Legionnaire is offline  
Old
09-06-2005, 07:35 PM
  #25
PRMan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Yorba Linda, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,683
vCash: 500
Trade the players with big names who don't do much (Fedorov, New York Rangers). Sign the players who get the job done with no recognition (Norstrom, Calgary Flames).

PRMan is offline  
Closed Thread

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 04:03 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.