HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Notices

What Would it take to get Cammalleri

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-13-2007, 12:36 AM
  #101
Venom_17
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,093
vCash: 500
I said Cammy will get 35 this season!! Prove me right, Cammy!

Venom_17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 12:52 AM
  #102
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
That's the big difference between Cammy and guys like St. Louis and Gionta. He's not a great skater like they are, and he does not have the speed that they posess.
But he has almost twice the shot of those guys and he has learned to be real solid all around.

no name is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 03:11 AM
  #103
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,120
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Blazer View Post
He has two seasons of RFA status left with an extremely comfortable CAP hit for a team taking him on at this deadline. Next season, his salary increases and so will the CAP hit to the team that acquires him and they'll only get one season of RFA status. In two seasons, his CAP hit to the acquiring will be even higer with no RFA status associated. If that's an acceptable trade-off to you, then sure, you go for it.
You're arguing against signing him to one-year contracts. I never suggested such a thing. I suggested signing him to a long-term contract. His cap hit would stay at the same value for the entire contract. He'd also retain value by having his contract extend past when he would've been a UFA.

I really believe that he's worth more under a long-term contract (even at a high price) than he is as an impending RFA. Any team getting him right now is going to know that they'll have to pay him big bucks next year. Having him already signed, and signed for 3-4 years, are two fewer things to worry about.

Osprey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 06:21 AM
  #104
King Blazer
Registered User
 
King Blazer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 6,420
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
That's the big difference between Cammy and guys like St. Louis and Gionta. He's not a great skater like they are, and he does not have the speed that they posess.
I seem to remember that Luc wasn't the best skater either. That didn't seem to hinder his production too much...

St. Louis is 31 and has considerably more NHL experience than Cammalleri. For all that St. Louis is, which in my opinion is pretty darn good, to date, he's only surpassed the 35-goal threshold in the NHL regular season once in his career but looks to be headed toward doing it this season...

Cammalleri hasn't hit the 35-goal threshold yet in the NHL. Maybe he will, maybe not. I happen to think he's capable of doing it if not this season, certainly in the not so distant future...

Gionta's numbers as of today = 56GP - 24G - 18A - 42PTS
Cammalleri's numbers as of today = 57GP - 23G - 32A - 55PTS

Gionta's 28 and like St. Louis, has considerably more NHL experience than Cammalleri who is 24.

Granted Cammalleri doesn't possess elite speed, or sick skating skills, however, he seems to be doing ok in spite of that...

I remember when Cammalleri put up the numbers he did in the AHL during the lockout season and was pushing Spezza for the scoring title, a lot of folks talked about AHL number are meaningless and such...

Spezza's number to date: 43GP - 22G - 29A - 51PTS. His numbers are certainly better than Cammalleri's, but they're not that much better...


Last edited by King Blazer: 02-13-2007 at 06:31 AM.
King Blazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 06:55 AM
  #105
King Blazer
Registered User
 
King Blazer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 6,420
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
You're arguing against signing him to one-year contracts. I never suggested such a thing. I suggested signing him to a long-term contract. His cap hit would stay at the same value for the entire contract. He'd also retain value by having his contract extend past when he would've been a UFA.
Yes, I'm looking at it in one-year deal segments. I've yet to read or hear anything that leads me to believe that Cammalleri would or even should look at it any other way unless of course the Kings are willing to overpay him to get it done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
I really believe that he's worth more under a long-term contract (even at a high price) than he is as an impending RFA. Any team getting him right now is going to know that they'll have to pay him big bucks next year. Having him already signed, and signed for 3-4 years, are two fewer things to worry about.
I just don't see him signing with the Kings for 3-4 years unless it's an incredible contract. He'd likely enter the FA market as a top target for many teams.

I think the time for the Kings to lock-up Cammalleri long-term has probably passed. DT did Frolov, and much the same as Lombardi didn't have enough information to do a long-term deal with Cammalleri this past off-season, I think the same was true for DT coming out of the lockout when he did the contract with Frolov. FWIW, I would have made the same decision that DT made...

Lombardi might have had a window to get it done this past season, but by his comments, he clearly wasn't convinced or at least wasn't comfortable enough with Cammalleri's potential to do it. Both Lombardi and DT have been conservative in their contract dealings with Cammalleri. Not necessarily the wrong approach IF you're willing to pony up when a player pans out. Lombardi is probably going to have to step-up big time to get anything longer than a 2-year deal with Cammalleri at this point...

King Blazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 09:08 AM
  #106
Shaun_W_W
Registered User
 
Shaun_W_W's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
If Kings were to trade Cammalleri how about...

To NYR
Cammalleri

To LA
Sanguinetti
Montoya
Maybe a pick or anouther propect

OR

To LA
Prucha
Sanguinetti or Montoya

Shaun_W_W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 10:20 AM
  #107
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 30,564
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Blazer View Post
I seem to remember that Luc wasn't the best skater either. That didn't seem to hinder his production too much...

St. Louis is 31 and has considerably more NHL experience than Cammalleri. For all that St. Louis is, which in my opinion is pretty darn good, to date, he's only surpassed the 35-goal threshold in the NHL regular season once in his career but looks to be headed toward doing it this season...

Cammalleri hasn't hit the 35-goal threshold yet in the NHL. Maybe he will, maybe not. I happen to think he's capable of doing it if not this season, certainly in the not so distant future...

Gionta's numbers as of today = 56GP - 24G - 18A - 42PTS
Cammalleri's numbers as of today = 57GP - 23G - 32A - 55PTS

Gionta's 28 and like St. Louis, has considerably more NHL experience than Cammalleri who is 24.

Granted Cammalleri doesn't possess elite speed, or sick skating skills, however, he seems to be doing ok in spite of that...

I remember when Cammalleri put up the numbers he did in the AHL during the lockout season and was pushing Spezza for the scoring title, a lot of folks talked about AHL number are meaningless and such...

Spezza's number to date: 43GP - 22G - 29A - 51PTS. His numbers are certainly better than Cammalleri's, but they're not that much better...
I know, wasn't a knock on Cammy, more like a statement. Dude still has a sick shot, the only thing that bugs me with him is that on one knee shot.

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 10:28 AM
  #108
Fat Elvis
Registered User
 
Fat Elvis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Money Pit
Country: United States
Posts: 5,240
vCash: 500
He's not going anywhere soon. Seems like everyone wants to fix the pieces that aren't broke.

Fat Elvis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 10:33 AM
  #109
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 30,564
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Elvis View Post
He's not going anywhere soon. Seems like everyone wants to fix the pieces that aren't broke.
Honestly, it may sound that way, but there are legitimate reasons.

We have a hell of a time attracting the necessary free agents to L.A. right? Only guys who want to play here are guys are the end of their career, or guys interested in surfing. So how's DL supposed to get the guys he wants? Through trades. Cammalleri is one of those guys that can bring back a return to fill a bunch of needs on the team. Him and Visnovsky actually. Then there is the whole salary deal. I wonder if anyone has even read KB's posts in this thread, not saying you Elvi.

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 10:36 AM
  #110
wabwat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: pasadena, ca.
Posts: 6,630
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to wabwat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun_W_W View Post
If Kings were to trade Cammalleri how about...

To NYR
Cammalleri

To LA
Sanguinetti
Montoya
Maybe a pick or anouther propect

OR

To LA
Prucha
Sanguinetti or Montoya

even though both of those deals are an overpayment... from a Kings standpoint, evven the mightiest of the mighty Cammalleri fans would be foolish not to consider something like this.

wabwat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 10:40 AM
  #111
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 30,564
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Quote:
Originally Posted by wabwat View Post
even though both of those deals are an overpayment... from a Kings standpoint, evven the mightiest of the mighty Cammalleri fans would be foolish not to consider something like this.
The 2nd one especially. Prucha replaces Cammalleri AND we get Montoya or Sanguinetti.

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 10:45 AM
  #112
Fat Elvis
Registered User
 
Fat Elvis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Money Pit
Country: United States
Posts: 5,240
vCash: 500
I hear you Reap, but this management team has had one offseason and put together a team knowing the organization had some way to go This seaon. They went out to find some "character" players, and they probably feel like they did.

Saleries will be moving around in the next 2 seasons with all the vets going off the books. Time is right when most of the young "core" can be shored up long term (3+ years). At this moment it would be too hard to replace the production that Cammy puts out, not a whole lot avaliable that do produce at the age of Cammy imo.

This off season we should see some better players actively sought after by LA (at least more than 1 player). Past GM's seem to look at 1 player and if they didn't get them (low ball offers) LA would go to plan 2 (roll players, Tripp, TK, RR and so on). You have to give them one more offseason to see if they are as good as their word.

This is just my observation and I could be wrong.

Fat Elvis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 11:25 AM
  #113
wabwat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: pasadena, ca.
Posts: 6,630
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to wabwat
again, much of the pro-Cammalleri argument is coming from a purely organizational standpoint. i have yet to see anyone who happens to be in the trading Camms is stupid camp to even bother to wax about anything KB has alluded to with regards to the possibility that Mike may be unwilling to sign a deal that takes him into his first couple of UFA years.


Last edited by wabwat: 02-13-2007 at 12:50 PM.
wabwat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 11:27 AM
  #114
treason47
 
treason47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 329
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to treason47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haik View Post
Cammy isn't remotely close to St. Louis imo.
Considering his size, Cammy is a horrible skater...nor does he have the heart or the fire that St. Louis has.
wow you could truly not be more wrong. I watched cammalleri play his university hockey. has the heart of a champion and a great leader for that team. In due time he will be for the kings. He's the 1st one in the corner after a loose puck... that tells me that he is getting there first and has the guts to head there at all therefore he must have the speed and heart. how many points was st.louis notching at the same point of his career that cammy is at right now?

treason47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 11:35 AM
  #115
treason47
 
treason47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 329
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to treason47
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Blazer View Post
I think you'd be hard pressed to find more than a handful of Kings fans that WANT to trade Cammalleri. The NHL is now a salary CAP league.

Take things forward just two seasons.

Kopitar hits RFA and Probably commands in the $6M/season range...
Visnovsky will probably be in the $5M range...
Frolov will be entering the last year of his contract at $4M. Do you think he'll take a cut and sign for less the next season?

Now Cammalleri, conservatively at say $4.5M...

That's close to $20M and you still have to sign Frolov the following season and maybe JMFJ as he comes out of the EL system (if he signs this offseason)...

Too much talent, not enough space to fit it under a CAP...

Now, can the Kings hold onto Cammalleri for another season? Sure...Do they want to shoot for two seasons and try to deal him at the deadline? I sure as hell hope not. As the Kings move forward with Cammalleri, his salary is going to increase. As his salary increases, the teams that will be able to take on his salary in a deadline deal likely decreases...

It's not Dave Taylor thinking. It's the reality of a salary CAP. If you don't move Cammalleri, then you've got to move another top player...
so move someone else. By then JJ will be coming around and I'm sure Lombardi would've worked on bolstering the blueline so why not (dare I say) move Visnovsky?

treason47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 11:59 AM
  #116
treason47
 
treason47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 329
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to treason47
Quote:
Originally Posted by wabwat View Post
again, much of the pro-Cammalleri argument is coming from a purely organizational standpoint. i have yet to see anyone who happens to be in the [i]trading Camms is stupid[i] camp to even bother to wax about anything KB has alluded to with regards to the possibility that Mike may be unwilling to sign a deal that takes him into his first couple of UFA years.
who said unwilling? cammy or KB?

treason47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 12:02 PM
  #117
Chazz Reinhold
Registered User
 
Chazz Reinhold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Stanley Cup
Country: United States
Posts: 6,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by treason47 View Post
so move someone else. By then JJ will be coming around and I'm sure Lombardi would've worked on bolstering the blueline so why not (dare I say) move Visnovsky?
Because based on Visnovsky's play the last couple seasons, he's going to command a very large contract when he becomes an UFA. Contracts in excess of $4-6 million are difficult to move in a salary cap world. It's not that KB doesn't want Cammalleri here, he's just thinking in terms of the best assest management possible.

Chazz Reinhold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 12:03 PM
  #118
lakings41
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by treason47 View Post
so move someone else. By then JJ will be coming around and I'm sure Lombardi would've worked on bolstering the blueline so why not (dare I say) move Visnovsky?
Why move any of them? The argument is ridiculous. I haven't seen Buffalo, Detroit, Anaheim, New Jersey, New York, Dallas, San Jose, Ottawa, Nashville, Calgary....**** I can go down the whole NHL list of teams that DO NOT move their nucleus but only add to it.
Why would we touch our nucleus of Kopitar, Frolov, Cammi, Brown, and Lubo....and soon to be Johnson? Why does this club constantly want to rewind? It's pointless. We share the same disease as the Chicago Blackhawks and the Boston Bruins.

If you guys really think that we can't afford all of them then how do all the other clubs do it? Maybe if we stop making wasteful signings and actually run physicals before we aquire players than maybe we can save a few million. Our motto is groom our young talent so when they hit their prime we can move them for another 18 yr old only to groom him and move him when he hits his prime.

lakings41 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 12:06 PM
  #119
Chazz Reinhold
Registered User
 
Chazz Reinhold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Stanley Cup
Country: United States
Posts: 6,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakings41 View Post
Why move any of them? The argument is ridiculous. I haven't seen Buffalo, Detroit, Anaheim, New Jersey, New York, Dallas, San Jose, Ottawa, Nashville, Calgary....**** I can go down the whole NHL list of teams that DO NOT move their nucleus but only add to it.
Why would we touch our nucleus of Kopitar, Frolov, Cammi, Brown, and Lubo....and soon to be Johnson? Why does this club constantly want to rewind? It's pointless. We share the same disease as the Chicago Blackhawks and the Boston Bruins.

If you guys really think that we can't afford all of them then how do all the other clubs do it? Maybe if we stop making wasteful signings and actually run physicals before we aquire players than maybe we can save a few million. Our motto is groom our young talent so when they hit their prime we can move them for another 18 yr old only to groom him and move him when he hits his prime.
So in a couple years, you'd be willing to tie up approximately half of the cap space in 4 or 5 players?

I honestly don't even think you're comprehending the argument that KB is making here.

Chazz Reinhold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 12:14 PM
  #120
treason47
 
treason47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 329
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to treason47
ok in a couple years is when we need to worry about the cap which will go up by then. Also, by then we won't have to worry about Norstrom salary or Miller salary. even if we pay 25 mil for Lubo, Cammy, Frolov, Brown, Kopitar what is so wrong about that? that gives the kings 20 mil to sign the rest of the team. the above mentioned players are the core of the team. They are young players who developed on our team and have played well thus far improving their play each season. I know kings fans are not used to having a few decent young players developing on their team but that's how it goes. They get better and are paid more because of it. every team has goo dplayers who produce and in turn are paid well for it. I don't see why it is such a problem.

treason47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 12:16 PM
  #121
treason47
 
treason47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 329
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to treason47
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakings41 View Post
Why move any of them? The argument is ridiculous. I haven't seen Buffalo, Detroit, Anaheim, New Jersey, New York, Dallas, San Jose, Ottawa, Nashville, Calgary....**** I can go down the whole NHL list of teams that DO NOT move their nucleus but only add to it.
Why would we touch our nucleus of Kopitar, Frolov, Cammi, Brown, and Lubo....and soon to be Johnson? Why does this club constantly want to rewind? It's pointless. We share the same disease as the Chicago Blackhawks and the Boston Bruins.

If you guys really think that we can't afford all of them then how do all the other clubs do it? Maybe if we stop making wasteful signings and actually run physicals before we aquire players than maybe we can save a few million. Our motto is groom our young talent so when they hit their prime we can move them for another 18 yr old only to groom him and move him when he hits his prime.
agree right on...you guys want to win or be in a constant state of cheap rebuild? future cammy isn't 5-6 mil or even 4.5 mil (in ref. to the next time he can sign a new contract)...3-3.5 mil for cammy stop exxageratting. Comrie was the same situation, scores 3o goals for his team and thus earns 3 mil a year contract how does the team respond? by getting rid of him. Comrie was a good fit in Edmonton. then they went and spent the money on Peca and Pronger who left after one season. Pay comrie 3 mil a season and he would've wanted to stay. wasted comrie because they see six figures on the dotted line. you draft the guy, develop him and then salary dump him when he is worth a damn. right. that's how you win a stanley cup.


Last edited by treason47: 02-13-2007 at 12:26 PM.
treason47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 12:18 PM
  #122
lakings41
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chazz Reinhold View Post
So in a couple years, you'd be willing to tie up approximately half of the cap space in 4 or 5 players?

I honestly don't even think you're comprehending the argument that KB is making here.

I understand completely. Do you understand the teams I mentioned. How are they doing it?
Go to nhlpa.com. Check out team by team salaries. It's not our job to overspeculate on what these players are actually asking for. Every team in the league has a cap. Why does everybody here get the notion that Cammi will be demanding in the upwards of four million.
It's all speculation on our part but it's our front office's job to get everybody under the cap. Nobody including myself knows what these players (or agents) are asking for.

lakings41 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 12:25 PM
  #123
Fat Elvis
Registered User
 
Fat Elvis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Money Pit
Country: United States
Posts: 5,240
vCash: 500
So, does everyone know what the cap is going to be in 2 or 3 years? It's difficult to argue cap issues when the cap # is unknown. Also to take into consideration are the players that come back in a Cammy trade could command as much if not more $'s to sign. The idea that Cammy is going to be hard to sign is somewhat a guess. Facts are not avaliable to back that up. After this season LA has 4 big bad contracts left(Blake, Matty, Thornton, Clouts). After next season Blake and Matty are off if Matty isn't moved before then, and Clouts should be bought out(in a perfect world). It baffles me how anyone knows that Cammy will be a head ache to sign. You honestly know, huh?

Fat Elvis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 12:38 PM
  #124
Live in the Now
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Live in the Now's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: LA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,659
vCash: 1888
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakings41 View Post
I understand completely. Do you understand the teams I mentioned. How are they doing it?
Go to nhlpa.com. Check out team by team salaries. It's not our job to overspeculate on what these players are actually asking for. Every team in the league has a cap. Why does everybody here get the notion that Cammi will be demanding in the upwards of four million.
It's all speculation on our part but it's our front office's job to get everybody under the cap. Nobody including myself knows what these players (or agents) are asking for.
If you don't think that Cammy's going to get more than 3.5 million, then there's really no point in having this discussion. You keep him or Frolov. That's the way I look at it.

Live in the Now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2007, 01:01 PM
  #125
Fishhead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,995
vCash: 500
The salary cap could easily be $50M in 2 years. Just sign MC and get it over with.

The core we have right now needs to be built around, not traded.

Fishhead 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 11:42 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.