HFBoards

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

The long tedious process of building through the draft: It will pay off

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-07-2008, 06:20 PM
  #1
BurningBright
 
BurningBright's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dont worry bout it
Country: United States
Posts: 580
vCash: 500
The long tedious process of building through the draft: It will pay off

The Kings are my favorite sports team, but I am also a San Diego Chargers fan. There is a huge similarity between these two teams, they both built their team through the draft(I know that the Kings have not built their final team, and it wont be built for a few years).

Also just like the Kings, the Chargers took their lumps(probably even more lumps) for many years. Now the Chargers are one of the best teams in the league, and a favorite for the super bowl.

I think this goes to show that although the process of building through the draft is a long and tedious process, it pays off. And I am positive it will pay off for the Kings, as we have already got a great core of young players on the team(Kopitar, Brown, O'Sullivan, Frolov, and Johnson). And we have a great core of young players coming up(Doughty, Purcell, Boyle, Bernier, Hickey, Moller, and Simmonds). While it is hard to swallow all the losses right now, it will pay off.

As I said the Chargers built their team through the draft: Ladainan Tomlinson, Phillip Rivers, Shawn Merriman, Louis Castillo, Quentin Jammer, Antonio Cromartie, Sean Phillips, etc.

DL has done some questionable things, but there is always more going on behind the scenes then what we can see. I think the one thing that can ruin the Kings shot at greatness is AEG. I believe in DL, but im sure AEG is causing problems.

Anyways, I believe the Kings are going in the right direction, and I see them making the playoffs in 09-10.

BurningBright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2008, 06:41 PM
  #2
MxK1NGS
Registered User
 
MxK1NGS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 2,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BurningBright View Post
The Kings are my favorite sports team, but I am also a San Diego Chargers fan. There is a huge similarity between these two teams, they both built their team through the draft(I know that the Kings have not built their final team, and it wont be built for a few years).

Also just like the Kings, the Chargers took their lumps(probably even more lumps) for many years. Now the Chargers are one of the best teams in the league, and a favorite for the super bowl.

I think this goes to show that although the process of building through the draft is a long and tedious process, it pays off. And I am positive it will pay off for the Kings, as we have already got a great core of young players on the team(Kopitar, Brown, O'Sullivan, Frolov, and Johnson). And we have a great core of young players coming up(Doughty, Purcell, Boyle, Bernier, Hickey, Moller, and Simmonds). While it is hard to swallow all the losses right now, it will pay off.

As I said the Chargers built their team through the draft: Ladainan Tomlinson, Phillip Rivers, Shawn Merriman, Louis Castillo, Quentin Jammer, Antonio Cromartie, Sean Phillips, etc.

DL has done some questionable things, but there is always more going on behind the scenes then what we can see. I think the one thing that can ruin the Kings shot at greatness is AEG. I believe in DL, but im sure AEG is causing problems.

Anyways, I believe the Kings are going in the right direction, and I see them making the playoffs in 09-10.
Sadly I really can't wait anymore
Any chance you think playoffs could be this year?

MxK1NGS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2008, 07:01 PM
  #3
King Blazer
Registered User
 
King Blazer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 6,420
vCash: 500
When I look at a couple of teams (Washington & Pittsburgh) that have built through the draft recently and where they are in relation to actual payroll and the Upper Limit of the CAP, I wonder if AEG is going to have the stomach to see this thing through. Both teams are above $51M in actual salary with Washington at $56.6M. We'll see if AEG goes there. I certainly have my doubts at this point...

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/cap-central/

King Blazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2008, 07:10 PM
  #4
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 34,148
vCash: 500
Hard for that to happen if you get into contract battles with significant young players, and have to trade them. Looks like more of a vicious cycle of suck to me.

Legionnaire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2008, 07:18 PM
  #5
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
When I look at a couple of teams (Washington & Pittsburgh) that have built through the draft recently and where they are in relation to actual payroll and the Upper Limit of the CAP, I wonder if AEG is going to have the stomach to see this thing through. Both teams are above $51M in actual salary with Washington at $56.6M. We'll see if AEG goes there. I certainly have my doubts at this point...

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/cap-central/
They had no problem paying guys without cap. How much did Jason Allison, Adam Deadmarsh and the rest of that team make? I dont see why it'll be a problem. When the team is good enough that the salaries of the players calculate up to that number, the revenue should be enough to cover.

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2008, 07:18 PM
  #6
Quattro
Registered User
 
Quattro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 3,874
vCash: 500
yeah, the Chargers did kind of remind me of the Kings today

Quattro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2008, 07:50 PM
  #7
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
I dont see why it'll be a problem. When the team is good enough that the salaries of the players calculate up to that number, the revenue should be enough to cover.
That would be nice...

King Blazer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2008, 08:02 PM
  #8
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 28,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legionnaire View Post
Hard for that to happen if you get into contract battles with significant young players, and have to trade them. Looks like more of a vicious cycle of suck to me.
Thus far under the new regime, we've seen two home grown players be dealt (and not lost via free agency like Boucher was). Lubo is a unique case since he came in as an overager at 24 and he was dealt at 32. Cammalleri's move was a foregone conclusion among most Kings fans who saw this coming a year ago. His contract demands did not fit in the grand scheme and with his impending free agency next summer, it would have been a challenge to retain him.

They locked up Brown long term and are in the process of doing the same with O'Sullivan, Kopitar and Johnson. I don't think there is a pattern of this so-called vicious cycle that you claim, unless I'm seeing things differently than you are...

Ziggy Stardust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2008, 08:22 PM
  #9
hans
Registered User
 
hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: westwood
Posts: 2,215
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to hans
I think that most, if not all, agree that building through the draft is probably a good plan that most likely will pay off in the future. The concern is in putting all our eggs in one basket - why can't we build through the draft while still at least trying to be competetive right now?

In 2007 we took Simmonds, Moller, and Martinez out of that draft at #56 and later. In 2006 we took Zatkoff, Meckler and Holloway out of that draft after the first two rounds. I know none of them have proved themselves at the NHL level but based on their progression and Lombardi's history, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt. Lombardi has been and appears to still be a good drafter, late rounds included. We don't have to have high draft picks to draft well. Don't forget that it was the black hole where Kopitar, Brown, and Bernier all came from, or that it was after a playoff berth we found Frolov. Good scouters and drafters can find good prospects in any round. You don't need to be bad to draft good players.

The only team right now that's really built out of top-5 picks is Pittsburgh. I think Washington is a more sensible and realistic build-through-the-draft team. Backstrom and Ovechkin are top picks, but other than that? Mike Green at 29, Alex Semin at 13, Shaone Morrisonn at 19, Jeff Schulz at 27. Or if you want to look at winners, how about Jiri Hudler at 58, Valtteri Fippula at 95, Nik Lidstrom at 53, Dan Cleary at 13, Nik Kronwall at 29?

I do believe we can, should, and will build through the draft. I do not believe we need to continue taking lumps to do that.

hans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2008, 09:39 PM
  #10
BurningBright
 
BurningBright's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dont worry bout it
Country: United States
Posts: 580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hans View Post
I think that most, if not all, agree that building through the draft is probably a good plan that most likely will pay off in the future. The concern is in putting all our eggs in one basket - why can't we build through the draft while still at least trying to be competetive right now?

In 2007 we took Simmonds, Moller, and Martinez out of that draft at #56 and later. In 2006 we took Zatkoff, Meckler and Holloway out of that draft after the first two rounds. I know none of them have proved themselves at the NHL level but based on their progression and Lombardi's history, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt. Lombardi has been and appears to still be a good drafter, late rounds included. We don't have to have high draft picks to draft well. Don't forget that it was the black hole where Kopitar, Brown, and Bernier all came from, or that it was after a playoff berth we found Frolov. Good scouters and drafters can find good prospects in any round. You don't need to be bad to draft good players.

The only team right now that's really built out of top-5 picks is Pittsburgh. I think Washington is a more sensible and realistic build-through-the-draft team. Backstrom and Ovechkin are top picks, but other than that? Mike Green at 29, Alex Semin at 13, Shaone Morrisonn at 19, Jeff Schulz at 27. Or if you want to look at winners, how about Jiri Hudler at 58, Valtteri Fippula at 95, Nik Lidstrom at 53, Dan Cleary at 13, Nik Kronwall at 29?

I do believe we can, should, and will build through the draft. I do not believe we need to continue taking lumps to do that.
I agree, should be competitive, and I wouldnt be suprised at all if the kings made a run for a playoff spot this year. And even if they did not make the playoffs, I would be suprised if the Kings finished in the bottom 5 this year.

BurningBright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2008, 11:33 PM
  #11
greengiant91
Registered User
 
greengiant91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 264
vCash: 500
Playoff time

I just can't wait for them to be in the playoffs every year then at least you have a chance to go deep and that is when the real excitement comes, oh How I miss the roller coaster ride of a playoff game and the hype between them, those are the days I look forward to.

greengiant91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 12:10 AM
  #12
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
Thus far under the new regime, we've seen two home grown players be dealt (and not lost via free agency like Boucher was). Lubo is a unique case since he came in as an overager at 24 and he was dealt at 32. Cammalleri's move was a foregone conclusion among most Kings fans who saw this coming a year ago. His contract demands did not fit in the grand scheme and with his impending free agency next summer, it would have been a challenge to retain him.

They locked up Brown long term and are in the process of doing the same with O'Sullivan, Kopitar and Johnson. I don't think there is a pattern of this so-called vicious cycle that you claim, unless I'm seeing things differently than you are...
A 3 to 4 year contract is not long term IMO.

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 12:19 AM
  #13
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 28,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
A 3 to 4 year contract is not long term IMO.
Since when and says who? Look at most press releases when they refer to a deal as long-term.

Ziggy Stardust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 12:23 AM
  #14
BurningBright
 
BurningBright's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dont worry bout it
Country: United States
Posts: 580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
Since when and says who? Look at most press releases when they refer to a deal as long-term.
3 to 4 years is long enough for me. By the time his contract would be up, we'll know if the rebuild worked. If it did Sully would be very likely he would stay.

BurningBright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 12:34 AM
  #15
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
Since when and says who? Look at most press releases when they refer to a deal as long-term.
“The one thing that has become a little bit more clear in the process is that our focus now is going to be directed at a three or four-year deal.”

-Jeff Solomon on contract negotiations with O'Sullivan

http://frozenroyalty.net/2008/09/07/...e-signed-soon/

Very disappointing IMO.

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 12:40 AM
  #16
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 28,943
vCash: 500
Why is it disappointing? He'll be with the team until 2011 and by that time he'll be entering his prime and will proven exactly where he stands as an NHLer.

You do realize that his agent would prefer a one or two year deal, correct? If they reach a four year deal that is hardly disappointing.

Ziggy Stardust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 12:42 AM
  #17
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
Why is it disappointing? He'll be with the team until 2011 and by that time he'll be entering his prime and will proven exactly where he stands as an NHLer.

You do realize that his agent would prefer a one or two year deal, correct? If they reach a four year deal that is hardly disappointing.
For me it's disappointing because I was hoping for a 5 or 6 year deal, similar to Frolov and Brown.

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 12:45 AM
  #18
Mr Irreverent
Thiago who???
 
Mr Irreverent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3,226
vCash: 500
Gotta agree with Ziggy here, A four year deal would be fantastic!

Mr Irreverent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 12:46 AM
  #19
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 34,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post

They locked up Brown long term and are in the process of doing the same with O'Sullivan, Kopitar and Johnson. I don't think there is a pattern of this so-called vicious cycle that you claim, unless I'm seeing things differently than you are...
I don't see any of those guys signing long term. You don't think they saw, and or talked about Brown (or Frolov) and what happened with his contract? The O'Sullivan deal would have been done a long time ago if he were offered anything appealing in terms of length and dollars of contract.

And just so we're clear, long term to me means locking a player up INTO his UFA years.

Legionnaire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 12:48 AM
  #20
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 34,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
For me it's disappointing because I was hoping for a 5 or 6 year deal, similar to Frolov and Brown.
Exactly. That's the benefit of locking players up long term. Yeah, it's a gamble, but if you can get those players locked up at a reasonable price going into their UFA years, that's what you need to aim for.

Legionnaire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 12:50 AM
  #21
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 28,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legionnaire View Post
I don't see any of those guys signing long term. You don't think they saw, and or talked about Brown (or Frolov) and what happened with his contract? The O'Sullivan deal would have been done a long time ago if he were offered anything appealing in terms of length and dollars of contract.

And just so we're clear, long term to me means locking a player up INTO his UFA years. So if O'Sullivan comes back with a four year deal, I will not consider that long term.
So it is just your opinion then, since there is no basis to go off of that indicates that Kopitar, Johnson or O'Sullivan don't want to be here. Negotiations aren't as easy as you think. At the very least things have not gotten ugly as they did with the whole Cammalleri arbitration process.

And your definition of long term is your opinion. Crosby was locked up long term and he'll be unrestricted at 27, the age Gretzky was when he was traded. You wouldn't consider his contract a long term deal?

Ziggy Stardust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 12:58 AM
  #22
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
And your definition of long term is your opinion. Crosby was locked up long term and he'll be unrestricted at 27, the age Gretzky was when he was traded. You wouldn't consider his contract a long term deal?
Crosby's situation is unique. Although my definition of long term is 5 or more years.

Judging by your earlier post, I'm assuming you don't consider a 3 or 4 year deal to be "long term."

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 01:05 AM
  #23
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 28,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
Crosby's situation is unique. Although my definition of long term is 5 or more years.

Judging by your earlier post, I'm assuming you don't consider a 3 or 4 year deal to be "long term."
No, I consider 3-4 year deals long term. One or two years is short. Beyond that shows more commitment. And don't lay it all to be managements fault for not getting a longer deal. His agent doesn't want O'Sullivan to commit long term after one good season because if he signed such a deal now the Kings could get him at a bargain, and believe me, the Kings would love to have that done.

But if the players' side is seeking a shorter term, then I see no problem signing off on a 3-4 year deal as long as he isn't grossly overpaid. Fair deal for both sides; O'Sullivan can continue to progress into a top line forward and when the time comes he will be due for the contract he has earned when he is eligible to become a free agent.

Ziggy Stardust is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 01:10 AM
  #24
BallPointHammer
Franchise Enforcer
 
BallPointHammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Maryland, USA
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 776
vCash: 500
When DL talks about drafting, the reserve list and giving the prospects time to develop, he also talks about the Kings becoming a good team and staying good for a long time. It seems like some fans look at the "long and tedious process of building through the draft" as a build up to maybe 2 or 3 or 4 years of being a contender and then sliding back into mediocrity, or worse.

The Kings are building through the draft and accelerating the process by trading for players - Johnson, O'Sullivan, Stoll, Greene, Richardson and Cliche, trading for more and/or higher draft choices - Lewis, Moller, Simmonds and Teubert and signing free agents - Purcell, Moulson, Ersberg, Piskula, Bagnall, Zeiler and Westgarth. Also, the Kings have 13 draft choices in 2009 and 9 draft choices in 2010.

I totally agree that the Kings need to show marked progress this season. We might not make the playoffs or break .500 but we should play at a much higher level and more consistently than last year. IMO this will be a fun, exciting and interesting season. The guys are going to start making a name for themselves and the team. There's going to be some buzz this year.

Also, Lombardi was hired on April 21, 2006. That's 2 years and 4 1/2 months on the job. Look back at what a pathetic state this team was in at the end of the 2005-06 season. I think this franchise has come a long way in a very short amount of time.

BallPointHammer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2008, 01:40 AM
  #25
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 34,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
So it is just your opinion then, since there is no basis to go off of that indicates that Kopitar, Johnson or O'Sullivan don't want to be here. Negotiations aren't as easy as you think. At the very least things have not gotten ugly as they did with the whole Cammalleri arbitration process.

And your definition of long term is your opinion. Crosby was locked up long term and he'll be unrestricted at 27, the age Gretzky was when he was traded. You wouldn't consider his contract a long term deal?
No, it's not just my opinion. The long term deals that Frolov and Brown showed that if they sign a long term deal before they've hit their proverbial stride, they will get less money. Johnson knows he's going to be good, and Kopitar's clearly going to lead the team in scoring, so it's not that hard to surmise that either or both, based on either their agents opinon or their own, would not sign long term if they are looking for maximum dollars. And certainly they're not going to take less money to lose either. Johnson has already said he's sick of it already.

You're really splitting hairs here. Like John said, Crosby is a unique case. He's the youngest Hart trophy winner ever, and a player whose cap hit determines the entire personnel you can add. We don't have ONE single player like that. Kopitar is a stud, but he won't recieve anything close to the max.

Legionnaire 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 08:26 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.