Confirmed with Link: Kings Sign Kopitar (2 Years/ $7m AAV)

Kurrilino

Go Stoll Go
Aug 6, 2005
8,730
2,081
Calgary
Making the playoffs: bad.
Tanking: good.

That's the only way to build a successful team. There is absolutely no other way to accomplish this.

Correct, nobody will trade away a #1 center or defense to our benefit.
Also a rebuild has the purpose to get the old core out of the team when they have proven they don't have what it takes anymore and the youngsters take over.

I don't want to imagine where Byfield could be by now if he would have centered the 2nd line with Fiala and Kaliev without any interruption or punishments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KINGS17

Ziggy Stardust

Master Debater
Jul 25, 2002
63,178
34,296
Parts Unknown
improving in one area while getting weaker in another is not an overall improvement. sure they have improved at 3C with the PLD add (likely PD moving down one spot). But we're weaker at Goalie, arguably weaker at the 4th line, still haven't improved lack of toughness/size and our two main guys are yet another year older (not getting better...and WILL get worse..just a matter of time).

Honestly, i see us about the same as last year.
I think goaltending is TBD, Talbot was a fine goaltender prior to his arrival in Ottawa. I view him as a potential Darcy Kuemper, who bounced back after going from a cellar dweller in Arizona to Colorado.

The Kings are now three lines deep versus just two lines deep, and the fourth line might get better with the addition of Lewis. They certainly haven't addressed the physicality part of the fourth line, but that's where you'd hope that the signing of Englund can help address that area.

Unfortunately, not too many options out there to fill that role who can still play a meaningful role. It might have to come internally with the likes of Helenius and Lee, who could hopefully some day be the next Dwight King/Jordan Nolan types on the team.

The PP improved significantly from 2021-22 to 2022-23, but the PK was the same crappy, passive unit. That's the biggest area of concern for me. Jim Hiller made a big difference to how the team performed offensively, but the same can't be said with Trent Yawney and whatever it is he was seeing out there. These coaches kept putting Sean Durzi on the friggin' PK.

I've said it countless times, the coaching is the big hang up for me. Todd McLellan's system has been exposed in the playoffs, but I think the way the roster is composed can be competitive and can come out on top of the Western Conference with some competent coaching.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chazz Reinhold

Ziggy Stardust

Master Debater
Jul 25, 2002
63,178
34,296
Parts Unknown
They have only "improved" once in the last 6 seasons. Last year saw no upper movement, the results were the exact same but with the so-called improvements of Fiala, Gavrikov and Korpisalo - which only goes to help the theory that the roster isn't the biggest problem here.

What "improvements" have been made this off-season? A net loss of goals, a loss of depth, worse goaltending (on paper) than what they ended the season with, and a stretched out cap that will prevent them from moving forwards.

Honestly, do you think Dubois is going to make that big of a difference? He is a career middle ground scorer with long lapses in top effort.

I do think he will mesh well with Fiala, but Fiala is a bit of a paper tiger whom the Kings had a better record and played better hockey without last year.

The Kings are paying extended, high-dollar contracts to players that have never been top level performers or trusted to be first liners on their previous squads. There is an awful lot of hope there, which very well could pan out. They are over-stuffing the middle of their roster while their top players are no longer significant forces in their positions. Its not a recipe for success.
Having a big point producing center who is going to log around 20 minutes is going to make everyone else on the ice better. It's going to favor the Kings when it comes to on-ice matchups. Of course, this is a Todd McLellan coached we are also talking about, but two centers who can produce 60-70 points, and a checking center who can also pop in 40-50 points is the kind of center depth this team hasn't had since their Cup runs. That's what has me looking forward to what this team can accomplish.

I think we're also going to see improvement from the likes of Byfield and Kaliyev, not to mention Clarke who is going to help the transition game. Many have been bemoaning about the lack of opportunities given to young players, but those three in particular are going to be put in critical situations.

They've moved on from quite a number of weak links from the roster with the departures of Durzi and Edler. Walker and Kupari skated well, but they were are liabilities on the ice. I don't think they'll be missed, at all.

What happens in net is a big question mark. Copley was good in stretches, but can he perform at that level again, and can Talbot bounce back to the netminder he was in Minnesota? I think both can happen. I also think we'll see a better overall defense with a full season of Gavrikov in a top 4 role.

This isn't like the 2017-18 Kings who got embarrassed in the first round and added Ilya Kovalchuk to solve their scoring problems. That is when the team was going backwards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chazz Reinhold

KINGS17

Smartest in the Room
Apr 6, 2006
32,368
11,224
Drafting well: good
Developing players: good
Making playoffs and winning: good
Making playoffs but losing in 1st round each year: bad
Spending cap space wisely and managing such properly: good
Upward trajectory of team each year building toward a SC run: good
Having a bad GM/Coach: bad
What the Kings are currently doing are a recipe for

sgr%20A%2A%20ESO%20and%20M.%20Kornmesser%20690.jpg
:
 

Schrute farms

LA Kings: new GM wanted -- inquire within
Jul 7, 2020
2,256
3,983
Speaking of improvement from last year -- Clarke is a great talent. But expecting him to immediately come in and seamlessly play big minutes and be an impact player is overly optimistic. There will be plenty of downs and growing pains. That is assuming the Blake has him in LA and TM plays him (& properly utilized).
 

Vote4Lubo

Axl's other other account
Feb 28, 2016
90
120
Antarctica
You haven't seen Englund play much, I gather?
Lol unfortunately not, only seen him give Turcotte his 5th concussion.. This reminds me of Ciarelli aquiring Manning after taking out McDavid. I'm a Blake supporter but this seems like a bad locker room move....But back on topic, i feel kopi could have taken a bit of a discount. But Killorn signed for 6 sooooo IT OK.
 

Herby

Now I can die in peace
Feb 27, 2002
26,318
15,243
Mullett Lake, MI
Speaking of improvement from last year -- Clarke is a great talent. But expecting him to immediately come in and seamlessly play big minutes and be an impact player is overly optimistic. There will be plenty of downs and growing pains. That is assuming the Blake has him in LA and TM plays him (& properly utilized).

Others have done it, it's not out of the realm of possibility. Power was a total stud last year. Faber's sample size was small, but he also made a nice impact right away, Hughes also a small sample size but both guys (Faber and Hughes) will be counted on to be pretty impactful right away for playoff teams.

But ya, it sure would have been nice to have Clarke with a seasons worth of games under his belt coming into this season. With Doughty very likely to continue falling off offensively and Roy unlikely to match his 9 goals from last season, the Kings really need Clarke to produce some offense from the back end.
 
Last edited:

KINGS17

Smartest in the Room
Apr 6, 2006
32,368
11,224
Others have done it, it's not out of the realm of possibility. Power was a total stud last year. Faber's sample size was small, but he also made a nice impact right away, Hughes also a small sample size but both guys (Faber and Hughes) will be counted on to be pretty impactful right away.

But ya, it sure would have been nice to have Clarke with a seasons worth of games under his belt coming into this season. With Doughty very likely to continue falling off offensively and Roy unlikely to match his 9 goals from last season, the Kings really need Clarke to produce some offense from the back end.
Doughty's contract still has four years to run at an AAV of $11 million. I hope BLuc isn't still around in three summers when they can extend him.
 

johnjm22

Pseudo Intellectual
Aug 2, 2005
19,664
15,074
We need Clarke to come in and play like Quinn Hughes did in his rookie year. Which isn't really that far fetched.

But Hughes was on the Canucks first PP unit, and led all their dmen in PP time. It's pretty unlikely the Kings do that with Clarke.

If Todd doesn't have him out there in 3-on-3 situations he'll look really stupid IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raccoon Jesus

Herby

Now I can die in peace
Feb 27, 2002
26,318
15,243
Mullett Lake, MI
Doughty's contract still has four years to run at an AAV of $11 million. I hope BLuc isn't still around in three summers when they can extend him.

I didn't like the Kopitar multi-year extension, but I thought he had a decent chance to be pretty good through most of this current contract which runs through his age 36 season. I don't have the same optimism for Doughty's contract, which will run through his age 37 season. Those last couple of years are going to be really ugly.

Lol unfortunately not, only seen him give Turcotte his 5th concussion.. This reminds me of Ciarelli aquiring Manning after taking out McDavid. I'm a Blake supporter but this seems like a bad locker room move....But back on topic, i feel kopi could have taken a bit of a discount. But Killorn signed for 6 sooooo IT OK.

There were similar concerns with bringing in Fiala who had injured Roy, or going either further back in history bringing in Aaron Miller who had injured Glen Murray on 2 different occasions. I doubt anyone in the lockerroom cares about stuff that happened in the AHL.

We need Clarke to come in and play like Quinn Hughes did in his rookie year. Which isn't really that far fetched.

But Hughes was on the Canucks first PP unit, and led all their dmen in PP time. It's pretty unlikely the Kings do that with Clarke.

If Todd doesn't have him out there in 3-on-3 situations he'll look really stupid IMO.

You're right, that should be the type of player the Kings expect. Clark is actually probably more physically gifted than Hughes.

But do to the stuff spread by certain people in the organization there is a belief that it's impossible for players of this age to be impact players (despite it happening all over the league). Either because the Kings intentionally slow-play all the youth or because they are making excuses for their failures (it's bad whatever side you believe).

This organization needs to begin turning the page on Drew Doughty as someone who can be counted on to generate offense, Doughty is still a good all-around defenseman but being on the #1 PP, playing 3 on 3 OT and being on the ice in the final minute with the goaltender pulled should not be things that are just guaranteed to a declining Doughty anymore.
 
Last edited:

BaileyFan

Registered User
Jun 14, 2023
406
772
We need Clarke to come in and play like Quinn Hughes did in his rookie year. Which isn't really that far fetched.

But Hughes was on the Canucks first PP unit, and led all their dmen in PP time. It's pretty unlikely the Kings do that with Clarke.

If Todd doesn't have him out there in 3-on-3 situations he'll look really stupid IMO.
3-on-3 lineup:
Kopitar-Kempe-Doughty
Dubois-Fiala-Roy
Danault-Moore/Arvidsson-Gavrikov

Take it to the bank. When Clarke hits UFA eligibility then Todd might let him touch the ice in OT.
 

Herby

Now I can die in peace
Feb 27, 2002
26,318
15,243
Mullett Lake, MI
It's just tough to try and say the Kings cup winning teams are comparable to this current team.

You had arguably the best goalie and best defenseman in the NHL and a #1 C who was considered one of the best all-around in the NHL. All of these players were in the primes of their career.

This current Kings team doesn't have a high end 1C, 1D or 1G. It's a big difference.
 

Ziggy Stardust

Master Debater
Jul 25, 2002
63,178
34,296
Parts Unknown
The Kings also had to make a major coaching change and an additional major trade.

Think Blake would fire McLellan and has assets and cap room to make another big trade?
And everyone on the boards was bitching about the coach who was coming in, just as they're doing now with the direction the team is heading in. We heard the same when they traded a young Patrick O'Sullivan, they also gave away Michael Cammalleri for a complete bust, traded away a package of future assets for a lazy Dustin Penner, wasted assets on a washed up Mike Richards, and somehow things worked out okay for them.

If the Kings underperform, perhaps Blake would stick his neck out and can McLellan. After spending all these resources, they have to improve, and on paper, they have improved, and they've opened opportunities for some young players to take on scoring roles. I thought that's what everyone is complaining about? The lack of opportunities for young players. Guess what, now they have those opportunities, and it's time to sink or swim.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kingsfan28

Ziggy Stardust

Master Debater
Jul 25, 2002
63,178
34,296
Parts Unknown
It's just tough to try and say the Kings cup winning teams are comparable to this current team.

You had arguably the best goalie and best defenseman in the NHL and a #1 C who was considered one of the best all-around in the NHL. All of these players were in the primes of their career.

This current Kings team doesn't have a high end 1C, 1D or 1G. It's a big difference.
It's also a different league now versus then. What superstar goaltender was in net for Colorado, or Vegas? The #1 dman in Vegas is the same age as Doughty, and both have been producing similar numbers.

Vegas had three centers who produced 50-60+ points in Eichel, Stephenson and Karlsson. Their strength was down the middle, and that was too much for opposing teams to handle in the playoffs. It would help to have a Mark Stone or Marchessault or Barbashev, the Kings have Kempe, Fiala and Arvidsson as their biggest offensive threats on the wings, and are going to have to count on Byfield and Kaliyev to explode offensively, and hope that Moore can bounce back with a healthy and productive season. Grundstrom can also surprise us, given how productive he's been in a grinding role.

This isn't anywhere close to the 2012-2014 Kings, especially the blueline, but can anyone argue the fact that this is the deepest set of centers this team has had since those teams?
 

KINGS17

Smartest in the Room
Apr 6, 2006
32,368
11,224
And how many high draft picks did that Kings team have from that rebuild? Can you name the only one in the lineup on that team?
You have to include in the assessment assets used from the rebuild, like Jack Johnson who while not drafted by the Kings was very much part of the rebuild, which were used to acquire other missing pieces.

This idea that a rebuild only consists of draft picks is BS. Rebuilds also include assets acquired when you dump aging stars for other teams top prospects, which are assets to be used later by your own team or traded to get missing pieces. BLuc has not set the Kings up to do any of this .

I will give you a little insight into the 2012 roster as well. In addition to multiple high 2nd round draft picks on that roster, there were a total of nine 1st round picks, five of which were drafted by LA and four which were taken by Philadelphia.

Any argument that Blake is doing something comparable to what Lombardi did in terms of roster construction is nonsense.
 

Ziggy Stardust

Master Debater
Jul 25, 2002
63,178
34,296
Parts Unknown
You have to include in the assessment assets used from the rebuild, like Jack Johnson who while not drafted by the Kings was very much part of the rebuild, which were used to acquire other missing pieces.

This idea that a rebuild only consists of draft picks is BS. Rebuilds also include assets acquired when you dump aging stars for other teams top prospects, which are assets to be used later by your own team or traded to get missing pieces. BLuc has not set the Kings up to do any of this .

I will give you a little insight into the 2012 roster as well. In addition to multiple high 2nd round draft picks on that roster, there were a total of nine 1st round picks, five of which were drafted by LA and four which were taken by Philadelphia.

Any argument that Blake is doing something comparable to what Lombardi did in terms of roster construction is nonsense.
So Faber for Fiala, a former 1st rounder, isn't using assets? Or acquiring Dubois for a couple of former 1st rounders and a college free agent that they signed in exchange for a former 3rd overall pick? We really are getting selective with our memories.
 

SmytheKing

Registered User
Apr 7, 2007
823
1,160
And everyone on the boards was bitching about the coach who was coming in, just as they're doing now with the direction the team is heading in. We heard the same when they traded a young Patrick O'Sullivan, they also gave away Michael Cammalleri for a complete bust, traded away a package of future assets for a lazy Dustin Penner, wasted assets on a washed up Mike Richards, and somehow things worked out okay for them.

If the Kings underperform, perhaps Blake would stick his neck out and can McLellan. After spending all these resources, they have to improve, and on paper, they have improved, and they've opened opportunities for some young players to take on scoring roles. I thought that's what everyone is complaining about? The lack of opportunities for young players. Guess what, now they have those opportunities, and it's time to sink or swim.
That's because the things you mentioned prior aren't exactly true and the circumstances were completely different from this team.

People did hate the trade for Justin Williams (I was one of them and was completely wrong). Reason was because he was coming off of injuries and O'Sullivan was young and a 25 goal scorer already. Williams helped right away and O'Sullivan wasn't missed.

No one really cared about Cammalleri being traded. It was pretty much a meme by the time he was and everyone knew it was going to happen because of his contract and what he wanted. Cammalleri and a pick is as much a part of Kings message board lore as Corvo shooting the puck wide and Kopitar being a passenger.

The trade for Penner was a bad trade. One goal doesn't change that. He didn't live up to expectations at all and the only reason Kings fans like him (besides that goal against PHX) is because he got injured eating pancakes. That's it.

Absolutely NO ONE thought Mike Richards was washed up and absolutely NO ONE thought that was a bad trade. I have zero idea where you think that. He was a fantastic two way center who finished 8th in Selke voting the year prior and was an amazing get for the Kings.

The MAIN difference is that we're seeing what amounts to an 8-year continuation of trying to make "one last run" at a cup. This team is nowhere closer to winning it all than they were in 2015 (when they should have known it was over).
 
  • Like
Reactions: King'sPawn

Ziggy Stardust

Master Debater
Jul 25, 2002
63,178
34,296
Parts Unknown
Absolutely NO ONE thought Mike Richards was washed up and absolutely NO ONE thought that was a bad trade. I have zero idea where you think that. He was a fantastic two way center who finished 8th in Selke voting the year prior and was an amazing get for the Kings.
You're not new here, you should be aware that there are quite a few posters on here who did not like Richards at all and felt that he was nowhere near the player he was with the Flyers.
 

King'sPawn

Enjoy the chaos
Jul 1, 2003
21,908
20,855
You're not new here, you should be aware that there are quite a few posters on here who did not like Richards at all and felt that he was nowhere near the player he was with the Flyers.
The biggest question with Richards was the "Dry Island" nonsense. People were expecting a lot more from the Kings after the Richards trade. That's why Murray was fired 2 months into the season when they weren't there.

Nobody was calling him washed up.
 

bland

Registered User
Jul 1, 2004
7,297
10,405
It's just tough to try and say the Kings cup winning teams are comparable to this current team.

You had arguably the best goalie and best defenseman in the NHL and a #1 C who was considered one of the best all-around in the NHL. All of these players were in the primes of their career.

This current Kings team doesn't have a high end 1C, 1D or 1G. It's a big difference.
Those teams saw the value of doing the reverse Dubois trades, the higher caliber players dealt for the right fits while in building process. Then when the GM learned what he had in his top players, after two successive first round exits, he correctly made the right moves to address the weaknesses.

There was a discernable logic to Lombardi's moves, even the ones that didn't work out. There was a plan in place with steps taken forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SmytheKing

bland

Registered User
Jul 1, 2004
7,297
10,405
The biggest question with Richards was the "Dry Island" nonsense. People were expecting a lot more from the Kings after the Richards trade. That's why Murray was fired 2 months into the season when they weren't there.

Nobody was calling him washed up.
I am actually expecting a similar mutiny on McLellan if he insists on 1-3-1-ing from camp. Wouldn't surprise me one bit if he is lame duck canned after a slow start.

The players tired of and quit on Terry Murray. Undoubtedly Murray would have been let go that previous summer if Sutter was ready. Dean picked his man and waited for him instead of going the Desjardins route.
 

Ziggy Stardust

Master Debater
Jul 25, 2002
63,178
34,296
Parts Unknown
The biggest question with Richards was the "Dry Island" nonsense. People were expecting a lot more from the Kings after the Richards trade. That's why Murray was fired 2 months into the season when they weren't there.

Nobody was calling him washed up.
Richards had his numbers drop off from being a 75-80 point center to a 62-66 point center in his last two years in Philly. Not every fan was in favor of the trade at that time, and it isn’t too dissimilar to the fans upset with these recent moves.
 

KINGS17

Smartest in the Room
Apr 6, 2006
32,368
11,224
So Faber for Fiala, a former 1st rounder, isn't using assets? Or acquiring Dubois for a couple of former 1st rounders and a college free agent that they signed in exchange for a former 3rd overall pick? We really are getting selective with our memories.
You are selective with your memory. Lombardi made all those moves while he already held Kopitar, Doughty, Quick, and Brown in his hand, and they were all under the age of 25.

BLuc isn't doing the same thing, but nice try.
 

SmytheKing

Registered User
Apr 7, 2007
823
1,160
Richards had his numbers drop off from being a 75-80 point center to a 62-66 point center in his last two years in Philly. Not every fan was in favor of the trade at that time, and it isn’t too dissimilar to the fans upset with these recent moves.
He also saw his ice time drop by 3 minutes a game.

The only thing people were "upset" about was that Schenn was included in the trade. People wanted the younger version of Mike Richards and didn't get that what that Kings team needed was the current Mike Richards.

I can't stress enough that that trade and the one for PLD are both good trades in a vacuum. But the circumstances are INCREDIBLY different and the logic for the most recent moves are of desperation, not of correct timing. When Richards was traded for, the Kings best players were 24, 21, and 25 years old. Those same players, who happen to still be the best (or close to the best) players on the team, are now 35 and 32 years old.

It's just not the same thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KINGS17

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad