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

Why did we get Brad Richardson

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-09-2008, 08:25 PM
  #1
LAX attack*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Danger Zone
Country: United States
Posts: 14,543
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LAX attack*
Why did we get Brad Richardson

He has been a healthy scratch, and DL never trades picks usually...

what gives?

what does he bring to this team?

LAX attack* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2008, 08:44 PM
  #2
redcard
Registered User
 
redcard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,572
vCash: 500
Because Wayne Simmonds and Oscar Moller were not expected to be playing on the team this year.

We had lots of picks, but not 14 nhl ready forwards.

Deal from areas of strength, to areas of weakness.

redcard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2008, 09:05 PM
  #3
MxK1NGS
Registered User
 
MxK1NGS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 2,830
vCash: 500
lets get rid of him or something..
No offense towards him put he hasn't done anything and won't get any playing time on the kings..

MxK1NGS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2008, 09:10 PM
  #4
redcard
Registered User
 
redcard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Palffy33 View Post
lets get rid of him or something..
No offense towards him put he hasn't done anything and won't get any playing time on the kings..
Its a long season. say Gauthier gets hurt next game, Harrold is moved back to defense and Richardson/Army are back rotating in the 4th line.

Richardson is depth, there is no need to get rid of him.

redcard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2008, 09:18 PM
  #5
LAX attack*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Danger Zone
Country: United States
Posts: 14,543
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LAX attack*
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcard View Post
Its a long season. say Gauthier gets hurt next game, Harrold is moved back to defense and Richardson/Army are back rotating in the 4th line.

Richardson is depth, there is no need to get rid of him.
But what does he bring that Armstrong doesnt bring?

I would rather have another prospect than Richardson sitting on a bench, no matter how marginal or uncertain that prospect is.

What position does he even play? Center? Winger? I dont even know!

So many players provide something that Richardson apparently doesnt, Ivanans can fight/hit (ignoring whether he actually does), Boyle has size and much more talent, Armstrong provides leadership and grit.

LAX attack* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2008, 09:46 PM
  #6
redcard
Registered User
 
redcard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAX attack View Post
But what does he bring that Armstrong doesnt bring?

I would rather have another prospect than Richardson sitting on a bench, no matter how marginal or uncertain that prospect is.

What position does he even play? Center? Winger? I dont even know!

So many players provide something that Richardson apparently doesnt, Ivanans can fight/hit (ignoring whether he actually does), Boyle has size and much more talent, Armstrong provides leadership and grit.
Probably nothing, but again, when DL made that deal he was expecting Moller to be in Juniors and Simmonds to be in Manchester. We had plenty of picks and were short players of Richardson's age group and role. That's the reason the deal was made.

At this point Richardson is insurance, if we get hit with injuries, we don't have to scrape manchester of talent (they're struggling enough as it is) in order to fill a roster or meet the cap floor. And if we are lucky enough to avoid injuries, oh well, we gave up one of our 11 picks for the guy.

redcard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2008, 09:47 PM
  #7
LAX attack*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Danger Zone
Country: United States
Posts: 14,543
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LAX attack*
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcard View Post
Probably nothing, but again, when DL made that deal he was expecting Moller to be in Juniors and Simmonds to be in Manchester. We had plenty of picks and were short players of Richardson's age group and role. That's the reason the deal was made.

At this point Richardson is insurance, if we get hit with injuries, we don't have to scrape manchester of talent (they're struggling enough as it is) in order to fill a roster or meet the cap floor. And if we are lucky enough to avoid injuries, oh well, we gave up one of our 11 picks for the guy.
Would he be picked up if he were waived?

LAX attack* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2008, 09:55 PM
  #8
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Legionnaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 35,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcard View Post
Because Wayne Simmonds and Oscar Moller were not expected to be playing on the team this year.

We had lots of picks, but not 14 nhl ready forwards.

Deal from areas of strength, to areas of weakness.
Yes, but apparently Richardson is not NHL ready either.

Legionnaire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2008, 09:56 PM
  #9
redcard
Registered User
 
redcard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAX attack View Post
Would he be picked up if he were waived?
Don't know. Buffalo took Ellis, TB is playing circus with their roster, any team could suffer an injury to a 3rd/4th line forward the night that he's waived and see it as a quick way to take care of the hole without creating one in the minors. We would have claimed Quincy regardless, but if that wasn't the case, with JJ getting hurt right when Quincy was waived it made the decision easier and we didn't have to pull anyone up from Manchester to fill the spot. The same could hypothetically happen with Richardson. And if he was picked up....that would be a complete waste of a pick.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legionnaire View Post
Yes, but apparently Richardson is not NHL ready either.
Possibly. But I think that has a lot to do with Moller showing that he is NHL ready.

redcard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2008, 10:14 PM
  #10
Beauty, eh?
Not sure if serious.
 
Beauty, eh?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Southern California
Country: United States
Posts: 5,367
vCash: 500
Richardson sucks in NHL 09 too. I sent his ass to Manch and called Purcell up.

Beauty, eh? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2008, 10:25 PM
  #11
LAX attack*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Danger Zone
Country: United States
Posts: 14,543
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LAX attack*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beauty, eh? View Post
Richardson sucks in NHL 09 too. I sent his ass to Manch and called Purcell up.
I know! he has a lot of speed, he can get around defenders, but he can't hold onto the puck/deke/shoot

LAX attack* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2008, 10:51 PM
  #12
Muzzfan
Registered User
 
Muzzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 928
vCash: 500
Faceoffs, Speed, Gritty play...

Well, for one, Richardson has won 61.3% of his faceoffs. I know he hasn't played in very many games and hasn't taken too many faceoffs, but that is very good.

He was touted to have a good wrist shot, speed, and isn't afraid to go into the corners by some Avs fans that chimed in. He is slighted for not having the strength to deal with larger defenders & lack of consistency. He is only listed as a 3rd Line Player on Sportsnet.ca although some Avs fans thought he could make the 2nd line (I'm really out to jury on this).

Richardson was one of the players that Mike Futa (one of our Co-Director of Amateur Scouting) saw in his time with Owen Sound (OHL). I'm sure that he was impressed with Richardson in his time there. He must think very highly of him to have the Kings spend a 2nd Rounder in a good draft year.

While he hasn't cracked our line-up, I'm not sure that I'm done with him yet. He certainly different things than Army does to the line-up. I'm pretty happy that the Kings aren't having to rely on Army to be a 2nd line center any longer. Heck, Army hasn't even been in the line-up this week.


Last edited by Muzzfan: 11-09-2008 at 10:52 PM. Reason: forget to slight him for his consistency.
Muzzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2008, 12:10 AM
  #13
elicw10
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 354
vCash: 500
ur just lucky there's the son at the end of his name (+/-)

elicw10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2008, 12:16 AM
  #14
hans
Registered User
 
hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: westwood
Posts: 2,215
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to hans
Brad Richardson has been given zero chance to impress so it's hardly surprising he hasn't impressed anyone. He's fast, an excellent penalty killer, youngish (younger than Boyle and Moulson, for instance) and has offensive potential - he scored 14 goals in his rookie season 2006-07. I'd like to see him in on the 3rd line while Simmonds goes to Manchester to get his spark back.

hans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2008, 12:17 AM
  #15
Beauty, eh?
Not sure if serious.
 
Beauty, eh?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Southern California
Country: United States
Posts: 5,367
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAX attack View Post
I know! he has a lot of speed, he can get around defenders, but he can't hold onto the puck/deke/shoot
And he gets hit off the puck like crazy....that's my biggest gripe with him in the game.

Beauty, eh? is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2008, 12:39 AM
  #16
LAX attack*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Danger Zone
Country: United States
Posts: 14,543
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LAX attack*
Quote:
Originally Posted by hans View Post
Brad Richardson has been given zero chance to impress so it's hardly surprising he hasn't impressed anyone. He's fast, an excellent penalty killer, youngish (younger than Boyle and Moulson, for instance) and has offensive potential - he scored 14 goals in his rookie season 2006-07. I'd like to see him in on the 3rd line while Simmonds goes to Manchester to get his spark back.
Yeah I would think this was the best course of action

LAX attack* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2008, 02:08 AM
  #17
DiehardKingsFan
Registered User
 
DiehardKingsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 825
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcard View Post
Its a long season. say Gauthier gets hurt next game, Harrold is moved back to defense and Richardson/Army are back rotating in the 4th line.

Richardson is depth, there is no need to get rid of him.
A 2nd round pick seems like a ridiculous price for 4th line depth

Then again, we did give up a 2nd rounder for Beachball...

DiehardKingsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2008, 10:26 AM
  #18
xavi4life
Mr. Irreverent
 
xavi4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hans View Post
Brad Richardson has been given zero chance to impress so it's hardly surprising he hasn't impressed anyone. He's fast, an excellent penalty killer, youngish (younger than Boyle and Moulson, for instance) and has offensive potential - he scored 14 goals in his rookie season 2006-07. I'd like to see him in on the 3rd line while Simmonds goes to Manchester to get his spark back.
I completely agree. I see him at TSC every week and the dude can skate really really well. He needs a chance, just like Purcell.

xavi4life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2008, 01:06 PM
  #19
Soapdodger
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 148
vCash: 500
I thought that the trade was a mistake the minute I read about it.
Richardson is a nice debth forward but simply not worth a 2nd round pick, especially in a deep draft.
A low 3rd round or 4th round pick would have been good.
That being said I don't think that he is such a bad player as some seem to think.
Great skater, good face off skills, can score some goals - good versatile 3rd/4th liner.
Plus he is young and inexpensive.he will get his chance during the course of the season.

Soapdodger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2008, 01:32 PM
  #20
wabwat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: pasadena, ca.
Posts: 6,755
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to wabwat
he's still a kid.

wabwat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2008, 01:44 PM
  #21
Johnny Utah
Registered User
 
Johnny Utah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Santa Monica, CA
Posts: 7,083
vCash: 500
I loved how some of you geniuses penciled Richardson in the 2nd line this past summer...Ha.

This guy sucks. Harrold looks better at forward than this guy...what does that say?

Johnny Utah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2008, 01:49 PM
  #22
xavi4life
Mr. Irreverent
 
xavi4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Utah View Post
I loved how some of you geniuses penciled Richardson in the 2nd line this past summer...Ha.

This guy sucks. Harrold looks better at forward than this guy...what does that say?
It doesn't say anything because you're hilariously wrong. Harrold a better winger than Richardson??? Negro please! My grandma in a wheelchair is better than Harrold.

xavi4life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2008, 01:59 PM
  #23
Johnny Utah
Registered User
 
Johnny Utah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Santa Monica, CA
Posts: 7,083
vCash: 500
The funny thing about Harrold is that he gets plastered once a game.

I would like to see Richardson-Boyle-O'Sullivan instead....But I see Terry Murray's point now...I don't like it but I see it...

With all the stay at home guys...ie....OD, Gauthier, Greene, when the Kings go on the power play they have limited options...

Doughty-Stoll on the 1st unit and Preissing-Quincey/Harrold on the 2nd....It gives them an extra D shot at the point in case they use Stoll at forward or something happens to Preissing, Quincey or Doughty.

Johnny Utah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2008, 02:00 PM
  #24
Primakov!
Registered User
 
Primakov!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Yesteryear
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiehardKingsFan View Post
Then again, we did give up a 2nd rounder for Beachball...
Correction. We gave up a 2007 2nd round pick *and* an additional 3rd round pick in 2009 that was conditional on whether we signed him to an extension or not.

Primakov! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2008, 07:48 PM
  #25
DIEHARD the King fan
Registered User
 
DIEHARD the King fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: blueline to slot
Country: United States
Posts: 6,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TearsOFaClown View Post
It doesn't say anything because you're hilariously wrong. Harrold a better winger than Richardson??? Negro please! My grandma in a wheelchair is better than Harrold.
Does your grandmother have target on her like Harrolsd seems to?
Either way, she must be one tough old lady!

DIEHARD the King fan 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 08:04 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.