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

Tradable Players

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-08-2007, 05:55 PM
  #26
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squidward View Post
On Wall Street the motto is "Buy low and Sell high". The Kings selected Cammalleri with a 2nd round pick in 2001. Currently he could conceivably net multiple 1st round picks and prospects. His value right now is higher than it has ever been and it will probably remain that way at least until the trade deadline this year. During the offseason and into next year it will probably go down somewhat. So if Lombardi truly believes that Mike is intending on testing free agency he really needs to consider dealing him this year. At least if he wants to maximize his return.
Not only that, but what happens if the Kings are actually in the playoff hunt next year? It would be very difficult to trade away one of your key players while in the hunt for a playoff spot.

If Cammy is going to be moved, NOW is undoubtedly the time to do it.

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 06:01 PM
  #27
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
Not only that, but what happens if the Kings are actually in the playoff hunt next year? It would be very difficult to trade away one of your key players while in the hunt for a playoff spot.

If Cammy is going to be moved, NOW is undoubtedly the time to do it.
Cammalleri is one of my favorite players on the Kings and it will be hard for me to see him go to another team. But my loyalty lies with the Kings before it does with it's individual players. With that being said I believe the best thing to do would be to trade Cammalleri this year so the Kings get the most out of his trade value. Because honestly I think the guy is getting sick of losing and is more than likely be looking for a way out when his contract is up.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 06:04 PM
  #28
aegwillnotwinthecup*
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 4,392
vCash: 500
nagy.
hopefully blake, if he waives his ntc. we could get a lot for him.
armstrong.
thornton.
willsie.
modry.
aubin.
possibly stuart. if he stays this average up until the deadline, he'll be traded. if he keeps getting better, i wouldn't mind seeing him as a king for a couple more years. he and preissing would be an extremely solid third pairing.

what the kings are sorely lacking is a shutdown pairing like volchenkov-phillips in ottawa or tallinder-lydman in buffalo. i wouldn't mind seeing foote as a king, if the price isn't ridiculous. i would like to see brian campbell a king next year, too. he's having an off year this season, as is almost every sabre, but he's one of the best puck moving defensemen in the league. he's great at generating/joining the rush and would be great with visnovsky or even johnson.

but i think, and hope, that our first pairing for years and years to come will be visnovsky-johnson.

as far as cammalleri goes, i have a hunch he'll be traded next year. frolov isn't going anywhere until 10/11, and although cammy would be a great captain, i just think he'll be asking for way too much money. lombardi can't even begin negotiating an extension until july 1 of 2008. if cammy isn't locked up by midseason of 08/09, i'm almost positive lombardi will trade him at the deadline, even if the kings are in the playoff hunt. cammy will just be too valuable to let go to ufa, especially if he scores 40-50 goals this year.

aegwillnotwinthecup* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 06:12 PM
  #29
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingswillwinthecup View Post
but i think, and hope, that our first pairing for years and years to come will be visnovsky-johnson.
Unless the Kings get Doughty or Pietrangelo this draft. Both of those guys would easily be a better top pairing defenseman than Visnovsky.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 06:13 PM
  #30
Heske_44
Registered User
 
Heske_44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,361
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greasy Squid View Post
Actually, I think that Johnjm22 hit it right on the nose with Cammy.
I disagree with this statement Heske_44. The first time Edmonton came to our building on OCT 27 it was Hockey Night in Canada. They always interview someone after the game, and they chose Cammalleri that night. I was lucky enough to watch that interview because for some weird reason they did not have that game blackout coming from the feed on my Center Ice package, since it was televised on FSN too. Anyway, during that interview with Cammy, he was asked about his arbitration and possibly playing somewhere else after his current contract was over. His reply was something to the effect of "I am very happy with my employer right now", "We are doing some exciting things here in LA and I have not even come close to think about that" (in reference to playing somewhere else, possible Toronto where he is from). Now that being said, again I think that Johnjm22 got it right when he said "I don't think DL is willing to give Mike the money he wants to stay". This is where I hope that Cammy, in the next season and a half grows so fond of this team/organization/players that he sees the light and changes his tune (so to speak). I think that dumping his current agent would be a nice start.

Sorry what does the interview have to do with anything? If anything he gave a generic response in regards to his future at worst and stated at best he is very happy living in LA and being a part of a exciting Kings core. I saw the interview as well. His parents were there and promised he is going to go back and finish school...not so sure I put money on that at this point in time.

So you bolded me saying I don't have any evidence to suggest he is moved, noone does and this was the reply? That you both don't think DL will pay him what he'll command? That could be true, quite easily, still doesn't mean he is going to be moved....at all.

That is just an opinion and hardly any evidence.

I stated an opinion, so have you. We both don't have any factual evidence to support or go against the other parties opinion at this point. So my statement stills stands strong until someone can provide something factual to sway my opinion...

I have no evidence to suggest one way or the other, noone does, but I am willing to say he won't be moved this year.

Heske_44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 06:23 PM
  #31
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heske_44 View Post
So my statement stills stands strong until someone can provide something factual to sway my opinion...

I have no evidence to suggest one way or the other, noone does, but I am willing to say he won't be moved this year.
I guess the FACT that every player who went to arbitration in the 2005-06 season and the 2006-07 season are now playing for different teams is not enough to convince you?

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 06:30 PM
  #32
Heske_44
Registered User
 
Heske_44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,361
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squidward View Post
I guess the FACT that every player who went to arbitration in the 2005-06 season and the 2006-07 season are now playing for different teams is not enough to convince you?
Sorry, that is borderline superstition where you are basing the events/outcomes based on variables that have no connection other than going to arbitration.

That is a stat, other than this trend there isn't anything to suggest Camms wants to leave nor the Kings do.

I could say every athlete who has been shown on MTV cribs has stayed with the same club for at least two years. A similarity, possibly coicidence, that have no bearing on the situation.

Imagine doing a murder case...well we are going to skip the evidence and you'll be sentenced to life because the last three men we brought in wearing a plaid shirt were guilty.

Just saying I prefer something a little closer to the source.

Heske_44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 06:39 PM
  #33
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heske_44 View Post
Sorry, that is borderline superstition where you are basing the events/outcomes based on variables that have no connection other than going to arbitration.

That is a stat, other than this trend there isn't anything to suggest Camms wants to leave nor the Kings do.

I could say every athlete who has been shown on MTV cribs has stayed with the same club for at least two years. A similarity, possibly coicidence, that have no bearing on the situation.

Imagine doing a murder case...well we are going to skip the evidence and you'll be sentenced to life because the last three men we brought in wearing a plaid shirt were guilty.

Just saying I prefer something a little closer to the source.
If I said that 95% of those taken to arbitration ended up on a different team within a year I might think it was a "coincidence". But we are talking about 100% of those who went to arbitration now play for a different team. And in a few of those instances the players and/or teams involved publicly took shots at one another before they parted ways. I am sure that has no relation to them being belittled in an arbitration hearing.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 06:43 PM
  #34
AnThGrt
Registered User
 
AnThGrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newport Beach
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,707
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AnThGrt
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squidward View Post
I was comparing the Cammalleri of "this" year the to Vanek of "this" year. But if you want to you could compare the Vanek of "last" year to the Cammalleri of "last" year and you would see that Vanek had 84 points in 82 games (1.02 points/game) compared to Mike's 80 points in 81 games (.99 points/game). Those are still very close in comparison. Vanek is definitely better on defense....but he is also making more than twice what Cammalleri is. Which means that more teams could afford to acquire Cammalleri than Vanek which would put their values very close. In fact Cammalleri's cap figure probably makes him more attractive than Vanek right now.
You were comparing Cammalleri value to Vanek's offer sheet value hence comparing them from last year. Obviously now Cammalleri is more attractive than Vanek based upon this season but when Vanek recieved his offer sheet he was worth quite a lot more than Cammalleri is now, was last season, or anytime in his career. This is no insult to Cammalleri nor saying Cammalleri is some ok player or something of that sort. Cammalleri is a very nice talent no doubt but that comparison is quite off.

AnThGrt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 06:51 PM
  #35
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Legionnaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 35,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnThGrt View Post
I like Cammalleri quite a bit but comparing him to Vanek is a FAR stretch. Vanek brings A LOT more to the table than Cammalleri. For starters he is one of the better defensive players and quite a bit bigger. Do not forget that this is also a PPG player who is several years younger.
No. Vanek's doesn't really bring all that much more. His defense is average at best, don't let the plus minus fool you. He lacks speed. He can't carry the puck on the rush. He's got some decent one on one moves, but nothing to write home about. So basically, all you've got left, is size.

Less 2 years younger. 26gp 8g 10a. Not a ppg player either without Drury and Briere's line taking the pressure off.

__________________
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Legionnaire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 06:53 PM
  #36
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnThGrt View Post
You were comparing Cammalleri value to Vanek's offer sheet value hence comparing them from last year. Obviously now Cammalleri is more attractive than Vanek based upon this season but when Vanek recieved his offer sheet he was worth quite a lot more than Cammalleri is now, was last season, or anytime in his career. This is no insult to Cammalleri nor saying Cammalleri is some ok player or something of that sort. Cammalleri is a very nice talent no doubt but that comparison is quite off.
Last time I checked Cammalleri was only 4 points behind Vanek last season. I have already conceded that Vanek is better defensively.....but I think you are trying to say that the two were not comparable in terms of scoring last year.....Which is most certainly not the case. But the point still stands Cammalleri (a PPG player) at $3.5 million/year is the same value (if not more) than Vanek (a PPG player) at $7.1 million/year. I don't care what his +/- is. Are you saying that a GM would rather have Vanek over 2 Cammalleri's? Because when you look at the price to production aspect that is what you are saying.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 07:00 PM
  #37
AnThGrt
Registered User
 
AnThGrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newport Beach
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,707
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AnThGrt
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legionnaire View Post
No. Vanek's doesn't really bring all that much more. His defense is average at best, don't let the plus minus fool you. He lacks speed. He can't carry the puck on the rush. He's got some decent one on one moves, but nothing to write home about. So basically, all you've got left, is size.

Less 2 years younger. 26gp 8g 10a. Not a ppg player either without Drury and Briere's line taking the pressure off.
You both are saying less than two years younger. The point is we are comparing Vanek's value as of last July where he was 22 to Cammalleri's at the deadline where he will be 25 1/2. I do not let +/- fool me nor do I think it is the best stat but its worth discussing. Furthermore if you have watched him sure saying he is a defensive stalwart is overdoing it but for his age he is easilly above average. His speed at 22 is better than Cammalleri's at 25. Not sure how much BUF you watched no he is not the best at carrying the puck on the rush but he definately can, has, and does so enough. Based upon what you wrote he is average at best defensively (meaning more bad than good), is slow, can't carry a puck, and is decent one on one. As for size well we already stated he does not hit much so does not largely help him. Based upon the above let me ask you why the hell was he offered such a large contract than and why did BUF match and not let him go as it seems he is decent at best or worse in everything but his shot.

Edit - Instead of making a new post to quickly reply to Squid's post above. I do not think there is a big scoring difference but I think that when Vanek is 25 that he will further his points difference (Do not think there will ever be a HUGE difference but I think 10-15 pts better). A reason Vanek got that contract is due to his potential where as Cammalleri is already more reaching his prime (Not saying he has reached it nor can't improve further, just not to the same degree as Vanek). As for would I take 2 Cammalleri's or a Vanek the answer is quite easilly Cammalleri. With that stated though the team getting Cammalleri does not have a guarantee he does not leave after next season so they get 1 1/2 season while the Vanek deal would have landed him 7 yrs.


Last edited by AnThGrt: 12-08-2007 at 07:06 PM.
AnThGrt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 07:20 PM
  #38
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnThGrt View Post
You both are saying less than two years younger. The point is we are comparing Vanek's value as of last July where he was 22 to Cammalleri's at the deadline where he will be 25 1/2. I do not let +/- fool me nor do I think it is the best stat but its worth discussing. Furthermore if you have watched him sure saying he is a defensive stalwart is overdoing it but for his age he is easilly above average. His speed at 22 is better than Cammalleri's at 25. Not sure how much BUF you watched no he is not the best at carrying the puck on the rush but he definately can, has, and does so enough. Based upon what you wrote he is average at best defensively (meaning more bad than good), is slow, can't carry a puck, and is decent one on one. As for size well we already stated he does not hit much so does not largely help him. Based upon the above let me ask you why the hell was he offered such a large contract than and why did BUF match and not let him go as it seems he is decent at best or worse in everything but his shot.

Edit - Instead of making a new post to quickly reply to Squid's post above. I do not think there is a big scoring difference but I think that when Vanek is 25 that he will further his points difference (Do not think there will ever be a HUGE difference but I think 10-15 pts better). A reason Vanek got that contract is due to his potential where as Cammalleri is already more reaching his prime (Not saying he has reached it nor can't improve further, just not to the same degree as Vanek). As for would I take 2 Cammalleri's or a Vanek the answer is quite easilly Cammalleri. With that stated though the team getting Cammalleri does not have a guarantee he does not leave after next season so they get 1 1/2 season while the Vanek deal would have landed him 7 yrs.
Minor detail.....Vanek turned 23 in January (will be 24 next month). So he was offered the $7 million contract when he was 23.

Also last year Buffalo led the league in goals with 308.....the Kings only had 227. So the fact that Vanek only had 4 more points than Cammalleri is actually a negative comment about Vanek. I could say that if the Kings would have scored 81 more goals last year that Cammallari would have gotten significantly more than the 4 extra points that Vanek had.

I could also say that last years PPG achievement by Vanek was a fluke. Because he has only achieved that feat once and the way this season is going he more than likely will not repeat it this season. So while you believe that Vanek will eventually become a 100 point/seaon player I could just as easily say that he could settle in at a 60 point/season player (what he is on pace for right now). And getting Cammalleri (on pace for 75 points) for $3.5 million is a vastly better value than getting a 60 point/season player for $7 million/year.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 07:47 PM
  #39
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heske_44 View Post
Sorry what does the interview have to do with anything? If anything he gave a generic response in regards to his future at worst and stated at best he is very happy living in LA and being a part of a exciting Kings core. I saw the interview as well. His parents were there and promised he is going to go back and finish school...not so sure I put money on that at this point in time.

So you bolded me saying I don't have any evidence to suggest he is moved, noone does and this was the reply? That you both don't think DL will pay him what he'll command? That could be true, quite easily, still doesn't mean he is going to be moved....at all.

That is just an opinion and hardly any evidence.

I stated an opinion, so have you. We both don't have any factual evidence to support or go against the other parties opinion at this point. So my statement stills stands strong until someone can provide something factual to sway my opinion...

I have no evidence to suggest one way or the other, noone does, but I am willing to say he won't be moved this year.
Your are correct. This is all speculation on my part and others.

But I'm trying to see the situation through DL's eyes...

IF, he's going to be traded, then surely you agree that his value is higher now than it will be next year.

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 07:52 PM
  #40
AnThGrt
Registered User
 
AnThGrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newport Beach
Country: Germany
Posts: 3,707
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AnThGrt
We can argue back and forth but I am over it. If you want you won I could careless. I think most everyone knows that both you and me are quite stubborn so I'll stop here before we go pages on pages going back and forth. You have your opinion and I have mine, we can keep it at that hopefully. No hard feelings.

AnThGrt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 07:54 PM
  #41
Heske_44
Registered User
 
Heske_44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,361
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
Your are correct. This is all speculation on my part and others.

But I'm trying to see the situation through DL's eyes...

IF, he's going to be traded, then surely you agree that his value is higher now than it will be next year.

Yes I will certainly agree to that. That is common sense for sure. I just disagree he is tradable this year. I'll take it like a champ if I end up being wrong though.

Heske_44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2007, 08:37 PM
  #42
rsaturday
Registered User
 
rsaturday's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tustin, CA
Posts: 245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legionnaire View Post
No. Vanek's doesn't really bring all that much more. His defense is average at best, don't let the plus minus fool you. He lacks speed. He can't carry the puck on the rush. He's got some decent one on one moves, but nothing to write home about. So basically, all you've got left, is size.

Less 2 years younger. 26gp 8g 10a. Not a ppg player either without Drury and Briere's line taking the pressure off.
I agree with you about Vanek. I think he is highly overrated, and was a product of the team's overall success last year. The Sabres drastically overpaid to save face and keep him after they lost Briere and Drury. I think Vanek is going to be around 25-30 goals and 25-30 assists on a regular basis. Still a solid player but definitely not a franchise player or an elite first line type of guy.

rsaturday 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 06:40 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.