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

Hockey's Future Spring 2009 Organizational Rankings, Kings #4

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-31-2009, 11:13 PM
  #26
Telos
Moderator
In Dean We Trust
 
Telos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Reno, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 26,703
vCash: 424
Send a message via ICQ to Telos Send a message via AIM to Telos Send a message via MSN to Telos Send a message via Yahoo to Telos
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
I guess it all comes down to what you consider to be a "contender"?

I would consider a "contender" to be a top 4 team in the league. Unless something bad happens to the Penguins, Red Wings, Blackhawks, Capitals, Blues and Canadiens over the next 5 years I think it will be difficult for the Kings to surpass many of the above teams to be considered a top 4 team.

Of course trades can change all of that. But until a trade for a top level player happens I cannot see what the Kings have in their current system being able to propel them into the contender category.
I consider a contender to be any team that makes the playoffs and has a chance to win it all (which can be translated to any team that makes the playoffs). If they make the playoffs habitually, then they are a contender in my mind. Anything can happen in the postseason. There were plenty of upsets and teams all over the place this postseason. Only one of the top 4 teams is in the finals right now. Low seeds were taking out upper seeds all over the place.

I see what you are saying. But whether or not the Kings are a constant top 4 team in the league or not in 5 years doesn't mean as much to me as whether or not they make the playoffs constantly and are always in the picture. Both are possible from our standpoint now. We have the platform to achieve these goals, just have to execute them. It is up to DL and no one else, all we get to do is sit back with our popcorn and watch as the exciting events take place, good or bad.

__________________

“This is for you Kings fans wherever you may be. All the frustration and disappointment of the past is gone. The 45 year drought is over. The Los Angeles Kings are indeed the Kings of the National Hockey League. They are the 2012 Stanley Cup Champions!” - Bob Miller
Telos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 11:27 PM
  #27
Kurrilino
Go Stoll Go
 
Kurrilino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,533
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Kurrilino
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
Well.....let's just examine which teams passed the Kings to make them drop 2 spots.

Nashville and Montreal.

Both of these teams finished higher in the standings than the Kings yet they both got better propsects than did the Kings?

I can almost give a pass to Nashville because they had two 1st round selections from last season that did not graduate (Colin Wilson and Chet Pickard) this season.

But the Kings still have Teubert and Hickey from the previous season....so that should be a wash.

Then look at Montreal.....they did not even have a 1st round pick in 2008 and they passed the Kings based on prospects from previous drafts to leap frog over the Kings. Does that mean Dean was not as good with his later picks as we all were led to believe?

can you imagine how mean less a HF Board analyses about Teams future for me is ?????????

Kurrilino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 11:40 PM
  #28
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurrilino View Post
can you imagine how mean less a HF Board analyses about Teams future for me is ?????????
Well considering you sought out this site at some point I would think that you give them some credit for having worthwhile information......They may not always be correct in their assessments. But neither are pro scouts or NHL GMs.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 11:41 PM
  #29
Hooch314
Registered User
 
Hooch314's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,259
vCash: 500
1. You guys are being a little hard on yourselves. While HF considers prospects guys who barely have cracked the NHL, or haven't at all, I think most would tell you guys 1 or 2 years in are still prospects. Which I think in most peoples opinion would be 1. STL 2. LA

LA will be very good, plus they will probably get more points than the central teams while they beat eachother up.


2. Did Tuebert have a bad year? I thought he would have been rated higher than your 4th?

Hooch314 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-31-2009, 11:49 PM
  #30
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EJOSHIE09 View Post

2. Did Tuebert have a bad year? I thought he would have been rated higher than your 4th?
He did not have a great year....but you have to look at the players above him

1 Moller (a 2nd round pick that made a decent impact in the NHL at 19 years old).
2 Hickey (the #4 overall pick from 2007)
3 Bernier (the #11 overall pick from 2006)

Teubert is right where he should be.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 12:01 AM
  #31
VictoryRose
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EJOSHIE09 View Post
Which I think in most peoples opinion would be 1. STL 2. LA
But that doesn't have to do with prospects. That has to do with the big club. No one in their right mind thinks that the Kings, without more forwards in the pipe, are the second best ranked prospect pool in the game. They're probably one of the top 4 or 5 young teams on the rise in the game, but prospects? No way. Even the staff knows that. There are several good prospects. One has shown the ability to score goals at the forward position in Jrs and during flashes in the former RSL. That's it. The rest are defenseman, of which maybe four look like they could see considerable shots at the NHL (bear in mind these are still prospects), and goalies.

The void at forward is still a big problem for the organization.

VictoryRose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 01:00 AM
  #32
DapperDan
Bad Thoughts
 
DapperDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: place
Country: United States
Posts: 2,900
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
I guess it all comes down to what you consider to be a "contender"?

I would consider a "contender" to be a top 4 team in the league. Unless something bad happens to the Penguins, Red Wings, Blackhawks, Capitals, Blues and Canadiens over the next 5 years I think it will be difficult for the Kings to surpass many of the above teams to be considered a top 4 team.

Of course trades can change all of that. But until a trade for a top level player happens I cannot see what the Kings have in their current system being able to propel them into the contender category.
Why the Habs? Frankly, I don't think their prospects are better than ours, even with the graduations. Of them, I think only McDonagh, MaxPac, and maybe Subban have a legitimate chance at being impact players in the NHL. We are much deeper and I'm not being homerish. You have to take these ranking systems with a grain of salt. Also, the Habs just got swept in the 1st round and they're about to lose a bunch of their players to free agency. This is a pivotal offseason for them. Expect them to be a completely different team.

And you can't just say that because they were higher than us in the standings this season and have the "better" crop of prospects they will be better than us in the future too. It's not so cut and dry. Too many variables to consider. Your argument makes the assumption that the guys that just graduated will have the same impact on the team in the future as they did this past season and that's simply not true. Doughty and Simmonds should improve. And while Quick is more of a question mark, my inclination is to say he'll continue to improve as well. My point is the recipe for success isn't some linear equation where you can plug in values for current success and prospect depth to determine future success. There's more to it than that.

DapperDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 01:13 AM
  #33
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DapperDan View Post
Why the Habs? Frankly, I don't think their prospects are better than ours, even with the graduations. Of them, I think only McDonagh, MaxPac, and maybe Subban have a legitimate chance at being impact players in the NHL. We are much deeper and I'm not being homerish. You have to take these ranking systems with a grain of salt. Also, the Habs just got swept in the 1st round and they're about to lose a bunch of their players to free agency. This is a pivotal offseason for them. Expect them to be a completely different team.
Well I try to rely more on these rankings than my own gut feeling because of course I would like to say the Kings are a top 2 team....but the HF rankings are less biased since they are voted on by wrtiers of all teams.

In reference to Montreal being different....I have no doubt of that....but they are also one of the most profitable teams in the NHL.....which means they will have plenty of resources to fill those holes they also have the whole winning history thing on their side....so I do not hink they will have a hard time getting good free agents to replace those that are leaving.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DapperDan View Post
And you can't just say that because they were higher than us in the standings this season and have the "better" crop of prospects they will be better than us in the future too. It's not so cut and dry. Too many variables to consider. Your argument makes the assumption that the guys that just graduated will have the same impact on the team in the future as they did this past season and that's simply not true. Doughty and Simmonds should improve. And while Quick is more of a question mark, my inclination is to say he'll continue to improve as well. My point is the recipe for success isn't some linear equation where you can plug in values for current success and prospect depth to determine future success. There's more to it than that.
You are right that there are a lot of factors to take into account....but without trying to suppose every possible outcome (like injuries and other factors that you cannot accurately predict) I try to make my predictions based on what we do know. We do know that Montreal was better than the Kings this year.....they have more money to add quality free agents this summer and they have what HF writers believe to be a better stable of prospects....so all things being equal that would put them ahead of the Kings for the foreseeable future.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 01:26 AM
  #34
Quattro
Registered User
 
Quattro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 4,301
vCash: 500
how come Doughty and Simmonds "graduate" and Moller doesn't when they all have played 1 season in the NHL?

Quattro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 01:26 AM
  #35
JDM
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
so all things being equal that would put them ahead of the Kings for the foreseeable future.
You have a point, but your argument falls apart with those last two words.

Forget all things considered, just a few things considered, the foreseeable future to any degree worth making broadstroke assumptions about is 2 years, maaaybe 3.

There are too many turning points every 2-3 years with teams too really say this or that team will be better than the other beyond that time frame.

JDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 01:29 AM
  #36
JDM
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quattro View Post
how come Doughty and Simmonds "graduate" and Moller doesn't when they all have played 1 season in the NHL?
Arbitrary games played cut off

JDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 01:37 AM
  #37
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDM View Post
You have a point, but your argument falls apart with those last two words.

Forget all things considered, just a few things considered, the foreseeable future to any degree worth making broadstroke assumptions about is 2 years, maaaybe 3.

There are too many turning points every 2-3 years with teams too really say this or that team will be better than the other beyond that time frame.
You would be correct....except......What are the realistic chances that players drafted in the next 2 or 3 years will have huge impacts on their respective teams 5 years from now?

I think that we would all assume that the Kings draft picks over the next 5 years (sans the 2009 draft) will no longer be in the top 5 and hopefully not in the top 10. So they will probably not an immediate impact on the Kings. So then you look at their current roster and potential to acquire free agents. As of right now Montreal has an advantage in this area. Trades can and will affect the overall outcome....but there are too many possibilities to consider....so I am going with just the information currently available.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 02:03 AM
  #38
KingLB
Registered User
 
KingLB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 7,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
You would be correct....except......What are the realistic chances that players drafted in the next 2 or 3 years will have huge impacts on their respective teams 5 years from now?

I think that we would all assume that the Kings draft picks over the next 5 years (sans the 2009 draft) will no longer be in the top 5 and hopefully not in the top 10. So they will probably not an immediate impact on the Kings. So then you look at their current roster and potential to acquire free agents. As of right now Montreal has an advantage in this area. Trades can and will affect the overall outcome....but there are too many possibilities to consider....so I am going with just the information currently available.
K, where to start with your posts..... First you said Montreal will be upper echelon with Pitts/Wash in the future.... noooo way, they barely made the playoffs this year, on a tie break, add to that half of their team is eligible for free agency this year and they may go into a major rebuild depending on how that fairs.

Your worry how we "slipped" in the rankings, while I usually like the hf rankings almost everyone on the Prospects board believe Montreal is ranked why to high. To add to that, we lost one of the "top 5" prospects in the game with the last graduation, so I would fully expect us to fall. Add to that much of the rankings are based on depth, and while Harrold and Quick aren't top end prospects there graduating affects your overall depth.

Also when you look at HF's own top 50 the Kings have 4 players in the top45, covering all at different positions.(forward,defense,goaltender) The 10, 12, 26, 45 respectfully while Montreal only has 2 in the top 50. (18/34) This just leads me to question how the kings could fall behind them when our 2 best prospects are better then their best and our top 4 are better then their third.

All that being said I wouldn't worry to much about our prospect depth, I mean look at everyone's second love on these boards the Detroit Red Wings, they never have a "top" ranking but always find a way to make sure they get the most out of there players, and make sure there fully developed before moving them on.

KingLB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 03:07 AM
  #39
JDM
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
You would be correct....except......What are the realistic chances that players drafted in the next 2 or 3 years will have huge impacts on their respective teams 5 years from now?

I think that we would all assume that the Kings draft picks over the next 5 years (sans the 2009 draft) will no longer be in the top 5 and hopefully not in the top 10. So they will probably not an immediate impact on the Kings. So then you look at their current roster and potential to acquire free agents. As of right now Montreal has an advantage in this area. Trades can and will affect the overall outcome....but there are too many possibilities to consider....so I am going with just the information currently available.
Well... yeah. I don't know how you narrowed it down to just draft picks.

All I meant is that about every 3 years teams seem to undergo fairly dramatic roster shifts, and not knowing who will end up where down the line, makes it really hard to judge what team will be better.

I will give you that Montreal has a seemingly better chance of being the better team for the next 2, maybe 3 years. After that, who knows what either team will look like?

Does Montral sign a bunch of long term contracts this summer and next? Do they sign a bunch of short term bridge players? Do their prospects ready to make the jump pan out?

Does LA steadily improve? Do Kopitar, Brown, Doughty, Quick become legit all-stars? Do they stay in a holding pattern? Have we seen the best of them? One trade this summer could shift the entire picture of even the next 2-3 years, let alone 5 from now.

Injuries, slumps, disaster, whatever. There really is nothing, besides perhaps making a judgement of the management and ownership, that you can point to and say "they will be better in 5 years."

Only once a team has reached consistent contender or dynasty status can you make a fair judgement about how good the team will be in 5 years.

We can speculate about Detroit because they have already done it over and over with very different rosters. Pittsburgh looks to be almost there.

Who would have thought a few years ago that the Sens and Avs could be going in to full rebuilds?

Who is really to say that St. Louis will be a top team in 5 years?

I would have said the same about the Kings before the injury debacle.

Going with your gut is probably more reliable than trying to determine success that far down the road based on current performance or rankings.

JDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 04:16 AM
  #40
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 Captain Ron View Post
Just think of it this way.....

St. Louis and Chicago look like they will be at the top of the Western Conference (you can probably add Detroit....because they are Detroit) in the not too distant future.....while Pittsburgh, Washington and Montreal look to be the upper echelon of the Eastern Conference.

Considering all of those teams are already currently better than the Kings and a few have a better pipeline than the Kings does that give the Kings a realistic chance at even being considerered a "contender" in the next 5 years?
Montreal will go nowhere. They may have a nice collection of young talent, but they don't have the character or the fiber to do anything past the 2nd round.

We have decided to bring our young talent into the NHL more often than a lot of other teams. Doughty, Simmonds, Quick, could all be prospects for other teams. But we chose a different route.

The Kings may have the best group of young players in the league. Far superior to Montreal, and who knows how our defensive depth will match up against Chicago or Philadelphia. But we haven't done anything ludicrous like give Campbell/Huet 10+ million dollars for their services, or depend on Martin Biron to win us the Stanley Cup.

LAX attack* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 08:22 AM
  #41
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doughty Number 8 View Post
Montreal will go nowhere. They may have a nice collection of young talent, but they don't have the character or the fiber to do anything past the 2nd round.

We have decided to bring our young talent into the NHL more often than a lot of other teams. Doughty, Simmonds, Quick, could all be prospects for other teams. But we chose a different route.

The Kings may have the best group of young players in the league. Far superior to Montreal, and who knows how our defensive depth will match up against Chicago or Philadelphia. But we haven't done anything ludicrous like give Campbell/Huet 10+ million dollars for their services, or depend on Martin Biron to win us the Stanley Cup.
The Montreal players do not have the character of fiber to do anything past the 2nd round....but I could just as easily say that the Kings players do not have the character or the fiber to even make the playoffs. At least the Montreal players can get to that point.

You may call what Chicago and Philadelphia have done "ludicrous" but their GM does not have to try to convince their fan bases that if everything goes right next year they "might" make the playoffs. I am sure that the fan bases of both Chicago and Philadelphia are quite happy they got to see post season hockey this year.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 09:26 AM
  #42
Kurrilino
Go Stoll Go
 
Kurrilino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,533
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Kurrilino
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
Well considering you sought out this site at some point I would think that you give them some credit for having worthwhile information......They may not always be correct in their assessments. But neither are pro scouts or NHL GMs.
i din't mean the writers by themself....or the facts they are using......

I wrote that i couldn't care less about these standings because i read since 10 years that the Kings have a future arround # 2-5

As long as they never reach their potential, i don't care what is projectet.

But still i'm thankfull that someone is writing some Kings stuff

Kurrilino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 04:10 PM
  #43
aegwillnotwinthecup*
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 4,392
vCash: 500
Ugh, stop quoting Captain Ron.

aegwillnotwinthecup* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 04:44 PM
  #44
Johnny Utah
Registered User
 
Johnny Utah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Santa Monica, CA
Posts: 7,084
vCash: 500
I have a feeling at least one of Bernier, Jones, and Zatkoff will be an NHL goalie...

Richard Clune is an underdog prospect...I really think he steals a spot next year.

Johnny Utah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 04:47 PM
  #45
Fat Elvis
Registered User
 
Fat Elvis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Money Pit
Country: United States
Posts: 5,315
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Ron View Post
So you are not concerned that all three teams ahead of the Kings are not only currently better than the Kings....but also have more potential to be better than the Kings in the future?

That does not translate to a team that is on the cusp of a dynasty.
I think part of reason why LA dropped in the rankings is because of where they were at the start of last season. LA was in position to start players like Doughty, Moller and Simmonds because of the direction of the organization was headed. LA was going with a youth movement and had the spots available for those kids. Where the two teams ahead of LA on this "rankings" had less spots open and less NHL ready prospects IMO. I don't think it reads into LA having worse prospects, it's just that they were able to crack the lineups earlier than expected.

Fat Elvis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 04:53 PM
  #46
not tellin*
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,573
vCash: 500
montreal is pretty much a joke at #2. srsly.

not tellin* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-01-2009, 06:40 PM
  #47
Chruceg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boston, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 870
vCash: 500
The reason the Kings dropped in the organizational standings is because they graduated three players out of their top twenty, two of whom were in the their top ten and one who was ranked as the #3 prospect in all of hockey while the two teams that passed them graduated either one or two guys. And the three total prospects that graduated for Nashville and Montreal were all roughly 24 and on the verge of becoming non-prospects.

Chruceg 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 08:07 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.