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

a hypothetical situation for discussion

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-25-2004, 05:45 PM
  #1
agentfouser
Playoffs?!?!
 
agentfouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Ireland
Posts: 2,459
vCash: 500
a hypothetical situation for discussion

let's say that one of the goalies available in the next draft (let's say thomas greiss because then i could read german hockey sites about him) has his stock rise tremendously and is the clear-cut number one netminder available in june and he's projected to go in the top ten. not marc-andre fluery hype, but a highly-thought-of bluechip netminder prospect. let's also say that we make the playoffs and that our draft position is in the high teens.

now, in the coming draft we've all heard about how the talent drops off suddenly after the first group of elites, so we probably won't be getting any real high-quality prospects on draft day.

what if, hypothetically, a team offers us their top ten pick for michael cammalleri?

so, the questions to the most enlightened kings fans out there are these:

1. would you do this trade?
2. would you do another one like it (rome for a top-ten, gleason for a top-ten, etc.)?
3. what if it was a prospect to swap picks, meaning that we would only get one first rounder?
4. should the kings organization look to move up on draft day to get a bluechip goalie, and if so, at what price?

in answering these questions, lets just postulate that no one wants our crap- that is, no offering lehoux and a fifth to move up or some nonsense like that.

agentfouser is offline  
Old
02-25-2004, 05:55 PM
  #2
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by navigator
let's say that one of the goalies available in the next draft (let's say thomas greiss because then i could read german hockey sites about him) has his stock rise tremendously and is the clear-cut number one netminder available in june and he's projected to go in the top ten. not marc-andre fluery hype, but a highly-thought-of bluechip netminder prospect. let's also say that we make the playoffs and that our draft position is in the high teens.

now, in the coming draft we've all heard about how the talent drops off suddenly after the first group of elites, so we probably won't be getting any real high-quality prospects on draft day.

what if, hypothetically, a team offers us their top ten pick for michael cammalleri?

so, the questions to the most enlightened kings fans out there are these:

1. would you do this trade?
2. would you do another one like it (rome for a top-ten, gleason for a top-ten, etc.)?
3. what if it was a prospect to swap picks, meaning that we would only get one first rounder?
4. should the kings organization look to move up on draft day to get a bluechip goalie, and if so, at what price?

in answering these questions, lets just postulate that no one wants our crap- that is, no offering lehoux and a fifth to move up or some nonsense like that.


I'll bite. I wouldn't do it unless it were for a situation that couldn't happen. For example, say that the Pens (or hawks etc) wanted to deal the number one pick for Pushkarev,Camms and Zizka. I would do that sort of a deal because Ovechkin IS a franchise type of player/prospect. I wouldn't do it to nab a prospect that wasn't a true blue chipper with gobs of upside. In other words, there isn't a team that would make that kind of a deal.

We know that given a full season on a top six line that Camms will likely score in the nieghborhood of 20 goals and maybe as many assists. To deal him for a could be wouldn't work for me unless that could was more like a probably. I also wouldn't make that kind of a move for a goalie unless he were a top ten pick and then, he would have to be a truely outstanding one. In a "soft draft" it is hard to judge his value. Would he be a top ten in last years draft? Things like that.

I wouldn't go after a goalie (unless they were one of those franchise kids) but would do the "best player available". You could nab another Frolov. Look at the Sens. They went that route and have been able to make it with thier "less than top ten" goalies.

punchy1 is offline  
Old
02-25-2004, 06:05 PM
  #3
kingsfan25
Registered User
 
kingsfan25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,835
vCash: 500
I'll go out on a limb and include myself in the "enlightened" category.

I am of the opinion that if such an oppurtunity presents itself, the Kings should jump on it. We are all aware of the fact that this organization is in desperate need of a high-end goaltending prospect and if we have to dip into our considerably well-stocked forward and D reserves to get it, then I have no problem with that.

That being said, I don't know if I would trade someone as high up on our depth chart as Cammy. I'm also not entirely sure that it would cost that much to move up a few spaces in the draft order; a package of picks and one of our more solid D prospects could be enough to get into a position to draft the type of goaltender you're talking about.


Last edited by kingsfan25: 02-25-2004 at 06:17 PM.
kingsfan25 is offline  
Old
02-25-2004, 06:10 PM
  #4
Sydor25
LA Kings
 
Sydor25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: North Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 21,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Sydor25
Two words: Jamie Storr

There are always Goalies available through FA.

If a team wants our 1st and Jason Holland for a top 10 pick, then sure do the trade.

Sydor25 is offline  
Old
02-25-2004, 06:15 PM
  #5
agentfouser
Playoffs?!?!
 
agentfouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Ireland
Posts: 2,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by punchy1
I also wouldn't make that kind of a move for a goalie unless he were a top ten pick and then, he would have to be a truely outstanding one. In a "soft draft" it is hard to judge his value. Would he be a top ten in last years draft? Things like that.

I wouldn't go after a goalie (unless they were one of those franchise kids) but would do the "best player available". You could nab another Frolov. Look at the Sens. They went that route and have been able to make it with thier "less than top ten" goalies.
a bluechip goalie prospect was realy the focus of the question. the goalies in our system are alright, but none that would be regarded as A-list; but that's not necessarily a terrible thing, because as we all know, they develop slowly and unsteadily, and we may yet see our kids develop into excellent number one goalies. so i guess in answering this question one has to wiegh the value and upsides of our current goalie prospects against the value and upside of a hypothetical prospect and then again against what it would be worth to aquire said hypothetical prospect.

i think that i would go after a deal like this. perhpas not cammalleri (i just used him because we've been talking about trading him lately), but to me it would be worthwhile to aquire a possible fanchise goalie. success is built from the net out, and huet is alright, but i wouldn't call him a "franchise" keeper. that, coupled with cechmanek's age (consistancy issues aside), leaves us with a potential hole there. if that potential hole could be filled by giving up one of our other bluechippers, then i think i would go for it.

agentfouser is offline  
Old
02-25-2004, 10:03 PM
  #6
Fat Elvis
Registered User
 
Fat Elvis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Money Pit
Country: United States
Posts: 5,410
vCash: 500
I wouldn't think that Camms could get us into the top 10 alone, he still has question marks or he would be playing as often as Frolov imo. Camms is good but maybe not proven enough for teams to look at something like that.

Fat Elvis is offline  
Old
02-25-2004, 11:16 PM
  #7
jfont
Registered User
 
jfont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 15,438
vCash: 500
Awards:
goalie prospects are a crapshoot...its not worth any of your current can't miss prospects you have in your system. if the goalie draft prospect is a can't miss goalie, like MAF, then go for it...other than that, you best just stay where you are and draft the best player available...i would continue to develop what you have or, trade for a ryan miller or maxime quellet....but thats my opinion...oh, and goalies take a hell of a long time to get up to the big show...you never know if anyone of your goalie prospects in the system busts out...

__________________
Due to budget cuts, the light at the end of the tunnel will be turned off
jfont is offline  
Old
02-25-2004, 11:52 PM
  #8
lakings87
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 69
vCash: 500
If he's still availabale when the Kings draft, get Al Montoya, I think he will be a pretty good goalie. However, we shouldnt trade up to get him.

lakings87 is offline  
Old
02-26-2004, 12:26 AM
  #9
swinginutter*
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KING ELVI
I wouldn't think that Camms could get us into the top 10 alone, he still has question marks or he would be playing as often as Frolov imo. Camms is good but maybe not proven enough for teams to look at something like that.
Well since i'm the only one arguing Cammy's case 100% of the time, I feel it would be a huge mistake to let Cammy go. Obviously i'm a big fan of his, and since we have all seen what he can do, why do we all want to live in fantasy land for another five years, to see what maybe someone else can do, if that person even makes it into the big's! I don't know what it is here, but people love to bicker (not that you're bickering) about this guy. I don't know if it's a "size thing" or just what we're "led to believe" thing? The guy produces..PERIOD! What does everybody want here? Frolov before tonight was on a slump that everyone forgot to talk about. So what do we do? Send him to Manchester, because it was more than ten games that he didn't have a goal. It's excuses folks especially on management's side. He's a waterbug out there, and we need him. Plus he's very young, and he has tremendous upside. If Cammy does get dealt, i'm hoping it's simply the fact that the deal was tremendous, and not that himself and AM butt heads! Believe me teams that would scout him, if he were to get dealt know what they would get.........someone with huge offensive upside, if given the playing time. 60pts out of this kid is not out of the question!

swinginutter* is offline  
Old
02-26-2004, 09:44 AM
  #10
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfont
goalie prospects are a crapshoot...its not worth any of your current can't miss prospects you have in your system. if the goalie draft prospect is a can't miss goalie, like MAF, then go for it...other than that, you best just stay where you are and draft the best player available...i would continue to develop what you have or, trade for a ryan miller or maxime quellet....but thats my opinion...oh, and goalies take a hell of a long time to get up to the big show...you never know if anyone of your goalie prospects in the system busts out...

Thats pretty much exactly what I were saying as well. The thing for me is the gamble. Manny Legacy is always a reason to me, to shop for goalies. They take a long time to develope and unless you get a maf or even that lad they have in Atl (Lehtonen?) who are thought to be franchise goalies early on then a, the gamble is grand and you end up waiting longer to find out if you made the right call and b, there are loads of success stories of teams finding solid net minders in other ways.

That said I would also add that if the best available player we could take with our number one pick were a goalie then I would take him. No more a gamble then any other young player. Its just that for me, the only way I would deal any of our solid and developing young talent for an unproven one would be if it were one heck of a talent.

punchy1 is offline  
Old
02-26-2004, 12:17 PM
  #11
agentfouser
Playoffs?!?!
 
agentfouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Ireland
Posts: 2,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfont
goalie prospects are a crapshoot...its not worth any of your current can't miss prospects you have in your system. if the goalie draft prospect is a can't miss goalie, like MAF, then go for it...other than that, you best just stay where you are and draft the best player available...i would continue to develop what you have or, trade for a ryan miller or maxime quellet....but thats my opinion...oh, and goalies take a hell of a long time to get up to the big show...you never know if anyone of your goalie prospects in the system busts out...
so lets discuss what makes a goalie a "can't miss." lets say al montoya plays really well in the playoffs for his team this year, wins playoff mvp, and is projected to go in the top ten. would he then become a "can't miss"? or, even better, would you then be willing to deal a bluechip prospect to get him?

on a related note, what kind of asking price would ouellet or miller demand?

agentfouser is offline  
Old
02-26-2004, 12:36 PM
  #12
Old Hickory
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
With a few exceptions, I don't think a prospect is ever "can't miss". There are too many variables. The difference between Jamie Storr and now, is that we finally have a legit farm system and for the first time in the history of the franchise we are actually developing prospects

 
Old
02-26-2004, 12:43 PM
  #13
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Good questions.

I would give picks for Oullet or Miller at this point. Equal to thier value when taken plus a throw in where we are deep. Maybe sending Rullier,Rosa,Lehoux or that type of prospcet along. My reasoning is that Oullet is one of many for his team and that while we are edgy and want to rush our kids, lots of other teams are more patient and might find Rosa a right solid pick up. I would. If I were the Caps I might like to have him. He can score in the NHL and isn't as bad as Murray thinks in his own end either.

Lehoux is slowly showing some signs of life but not so much that if he were to turn his game on that it would make us feel bad about having dealt him for a top prospect in net.

I would say "Cant miss" is reserved for the "maffys" and Lehtonens of the world. Players who, if handled propperly and given ample time to develope (something we have yet to do with our goalies) should develope into smart number one goalies. Of course, they could easily miss as well, just that they have a better shot at making it then the rest.

Storr would have been an example at the time of a dead solid young goalie prospect. In our system, he didn't stand a chance. Allot has changed since then and who knows what would have happened had he been ours today but, as he were a high first pick, dealing anything more than a first (I would expect mid) and a decent prospect would be overpaying. IF it were to nab a player like Di Pietro or one of the other truly special goalie prospects then you could add a better player to your first rounder. I wouldn't move at this point, anything that I would regret losing right now.

I would place Montoya in the very good but not as great as maffy and lehtonen range. Worth the first and a Lehoux or maybe a Petiot if a fourth were coming back our ways.

Something to consider though is that I am truly rubbish at these sort of things and while I love a chatter about hockey and especially prospects, I in no way feel that my opinion has any merit. Just an opinion.

punchy1 is offline  
Old
02-26-2004, 02:42 PM
  #14
agentfouser
Playoffs?!?!
 
agentfouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Ireland
Posts: 2,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by punchy1
I would give picks for Oullet or Miller at this point. Equal to thier value when taken plus a throw in where we are deep. Maybe sending Rullier,Rosa,Lehoux or that type of prospcet along. My reasoning is that Oullet is one of many for his team and that while we are edgy and want to rush our kids, lots of other teams are more patient and might find Rosa a right solid pick up. I would. If I were the Caps I might like to have him. He can score in the NHL and isn't as bad as Murray thinks in his own end either.
there is no way a team would trade a fantastic prospect for picks - they made that pick a few years ago and did well with it, but trading it for an equal pick and a throw-in would be abysmal asset management. it would be like trading cammalleri for a second-round pick and a throw-in.

no, i think that if you're going to trade for a prospect you have to either (a) give up a prospect of equal value in a different position (like swapping goalie for forward) or (b) give up a proven, experienced nhl player. so, if we were going to go after a goalie prospect, picks, unless we were talking like 2 1st-rounders or something, aren't going to get it donw. skating prospects, i think, could.

agentfouser is offline  
Old
02-26-2004, 02:48 PM
  #15
agentfouser
Playoffs?!?!
 
agentfouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Ireland
Posts: 2,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsjohn
With a few exceptions, I don't think a prospect is ever "can't miss". There are too many variables. The difference between Jamie Storr and now, is that we finally have a legit farm system and for the first time in the history of the franchise we are actually developing prospects
so would you then just stick with the usual "best player available" policy and not try to invest particularly in one big prospect?

that's a good policy, but we've all heard that maxim that "success is built from the net out." if we are unable to develop that strength in goal, then we would have to trade for it; it just seems to me that the point at which a goalie would be cheapest is on draft day and they get progressively more expensive as time goes by and they get better. therefore, if we can get a grade-a netminder when he's cheapest, then should we not go for it?

agentfouser is offline  
Old
02-26-2004, 02:56 PM
  #16
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
That is my point though. If asked what I would do that is what it is. It doesn't mean that the other team would go for it. I have said that I don't feel we should go out and in particular try to get another teams prospect goalies unless it is like we did with Choinard or in some ridiculous deal. I feel that we can fill that position via trade if needs be or by signing the best available UFA. For example, Kolzig is available right now. IF we had a healthy team and no confidence in our current goalie we could get him. For awhile there, we could have had Cujo for cash.

I feel that at this point other systems do a much better job at developing goalies then we do so I would either draft our own with our own picks (unless like I said, we could deal our first round pick plus a prospect, mid level, to move up into the top ten to draft a dandy) or wait and see for certain that we haven't already drafted a good one. With our trappish system, we might have already gotten the right goalie. Choinard were a very high first rounder who got into trouble with his team and we nabbed him. We have a couple of interesting young prospects and there are three in this coming draft (one first rounder and two who knows where) we might have a shot at drafting.

Thats what I think on it.

punchy1 is offline  
Old
02-26-2004, 02:58 PM
  #17
agentfouser
Playoffs?!?!
 
agentfouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Ireland
Posts: 2,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by navigator
there is no way a team would trade a fantastic prospect for picks - they made that pick a few years ago and did well with it, but trading it for an equal pick and a throw-in would be abysmal asset management. it would be like trading cammalleri for a second-round pick and a throw-in.

no, i think that if you're going to trade for a prospect you have to either (a) give up a prospect of equal value in a different position (like swapping goalie for forward) or (b) give up a proven, experienced nhl player. so, if we were going to go after a goalie prospect, picks, unless we were talking like 2 1st-rounders or something, aren't going to get it donw. skating prospects, i think, could.
trade board thread check out post #11

okay, so maybe i'm totally wrong...

agentfouser is offline  
Old
02-26-2004, 03:03 PM
  #18
Old Hickory
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by navigator
so would you then just stick with the usual "best player available" policy and not try to invest particularly in one big prospect?

that's a good policy, but we've all heard that maxim that "success is built from the net out." if we are unable to develop that strength in goal, then we would have to trade for it; it just seems to me that the point at which a goalie would be cheapest is on draft day and they get progressively more expensive as time goes by and they get better. therefore, if we can get a grade-a netminder when he's cheapest, then should we not go for it?
Not in this case. We need a goaltending prospect big time. I would totally be in favor of trading up to get one.

 
Old
02-26-2004, 03:24 PM
  #19
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsjohn
Not in this case. We need a goaltending prospect big time. I would totally be in favor of trading up to get one.

I only wanted to point out again that Choinard were a 15th overall selection of the Sens who felt he, like Gleason were dead on to be grand players. So much so that after being unable to work a deal with him the first time they drafted him they did it a second time (15th,45th). He were a first and a second round pick by one of the best in the game. He is young and big and plays a good mix game (CS) so I would think that we might have our goalie. With Munce MVP and Gold Medal Winner for team Canada I would say we aren't as poorly off as some think. Of course, to nab a Montoya or a goalie like that to work along and develope behind what we have would be very nice.

punchy1 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 11:38 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.