Rumor: LA Kings with heavy interest in Landeskog

[KingCanadain1976]

doesn't work with the cap at all. even if it did, those three D are at least 3-4 years away from the NHL and Clague is the only above average prospect among them.

Lintuniemi would be ready next year for a call-up I could see him getting bottom minutes to start. Then later in the year having second pairing with some pk time. Very solid defensively.

Clague would probably be ready in two years max for a cup of coffee call up and playing full time in 3

Moverare (LHD), 18 years old would take 3 -4 years.

 

[YP44]

OK. This one's a bit extreme, but what the hell, right?





Landeskog (50% retained)


...for...


Lintuniemi (LHD), 22 years old
Moverare (LHD), 18 years old
Clague (LHD), 18 years old

1st round pick (in whatever year isn't going to annoy certain nitpickers )






That's THREE young, left-handed defensemen & the opportunity to select another in the 1st round. How is that a "bad fit" ....?



BTW, it's very, VERY easy to immediately criticize & denounce somebody's trade proposal without yourselves suggesting an alternative. If you immediately call out this trade for being "bad" for this, that, or whatever the reason..... if you do these things WITHOUT suggesting an alternative trade, I'm going to call out your intelligence, commitment to the game, and your level of bravery. Got it?

I don't like it because LA would then lose a very good player at expansion. If they get Landeskog they will likely go the 7-3 route as Carter, Kopitar, Toffoli, Pearson and now Landeskog will require protection. That would mean LA could only protect 3 D, with having to protect Drew, A-Mart, and Muzzin.

I am not going to suggests an alternate trade as I have already proposed a couple of deals. They two were no's which I am fine with. I wouldn't want LA to pay anything over what has been already suggested.

edit: and no way that Colorado retains for that long and that much on Landeskog. They have a ton of cap space next year but still doubt this happens

 

[go4hockey]

I like it!



But seriously.....


How about this?




Landeskog
Igninla (50% retained)

...for...

Muzzin
Clague
2nd round pick 2017
1st round pick 2018 or 2019 (Avs choice)


Deal?

No thanks. What are you looking for the Kings to have a 15 year rebuild once we get to that. We need to stop trading 1st round picks and our prospects. Dean over the last couple years is doing the things he said bad organization do when he first got this job.

 

[Cousin Eddie]

I'm absolutely dumbfounded that people think Hall for Larsson has to be the basis of any trade including Landeskog. The GM who traded Hall for Larsson admitted himself he knew he was going to have to take a hit in value to make that happen. It was a year ago, the Oilers HAD to make a move and their backs were against the wall with a minimal market for young defenseman.

When a trade is proposed for Landeskog with multiple young pieces involved people really need to stop saying "well Hall only returned Larsson so...." . That's over. this is a new situation.

 

[YP44]

I'm absolutely dumbfounded that people think Hall for Larsson has to be the basis of any trade including Landeskog. The GM who traded Hall for Larsson admitted himself he knew he was going to have to take a hit in value to make that happen. It was a year ago, the Oilers HAD to make a move and their backs were against the wall with a minimal market for young defenseman.

When a trade is proposed for Landeskog with multiple young pieces involved people really need to stop saying "well Hall only returned Larsson so...." . That's over. this is a new situation.

I think the only relevance is that is shows the market had more forwards than d on it driving the price of D up...getting closer and closer to expansion I am not sure if that has changed or not.

I agree with you though. LA does not have a Larsson, and Landeskog, as good as he is, is not Hall. Two different situations.

 

[go4hockey]

well a first round pick in 2018 or 2019 which are likely better drafts than this year, and potentially when LA is on more of a Decline, and a 2017 2nd are more than I would want LA to give, and that's not even taking into account Muzzin and Clague.

I agree. We need to stop dealing all our top picks and prospects. Go back to the build from within thinking Dean and Co had the first hand full of years here.

 

[YP44]

I agree. We need to stop dealing all our top picks and prospects. Go back to the build from within thinking Dean and Co had the first hand full of years here.

I am not saying that either...if it is a Carter-esk deal (like this could be) I would be interested.

Just no more picks above the 3rd round for rentals please

 

[tomd]

Lintuniemi would be ready next year for a call-up I could see him getting bottom minutes to start. Then later in the year having second pairing with some pk time. Very solid defensively.

Clague would probably be ready in two years max for a cup of coffee call up and playing full time in 3

Moverare (LHD), 18 years old would take 3 -4 years.

Here is my predictions for each:
Lintuniemi nevers sees more than 10 NHL games with the Kings
Clague spends this year and next in the WHL then 1-2 years with Ontario. Four years away from the NHL.
Moverare is a bottom pairing D at the NHL level IF he makes it at all.

We can compare notes in 5 years.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

I'm absolutely dumbfounded that people think Hall for Larsson has to be the basis of any trade including Landeskog. The GM who traded Hall for Larsson admitted himself he knew he was going to have to take a hit in value to make that happen. It was a year ago, the Oilers HAD to make a move and their backs were against the wall with a minimal market for young defenseman.

When a trade is proposed for Landeskog with multiple young pieces involved people really need to stop saying "well Hall only returned Larsson so...." . That's over. this is a new situation.

People are going to use a past trade to base there trade ideas on. In this case Landeskog and hall are pretty even value imo Larsson isn't anywhere near the value of Muzzin So saying the oilers overpaid means to me that a better defense man would be closer to actual value. Hence the muzzin for landeskog trade offer.

 

[Martyros]

I'm ok with dealing futures for Landeskog. He's young, and obviously not a rental.

 

[tomd]

I think the only relevance is that is shows the market had more forwards than d on it driving the price of D up...getting closer and closer to expansion I am not sure if that has changed or not.

I agree with you though. LA does not have a Larsson, and Landeskog, as good as he is, is not Hall. Two different situations.

The other difference is that Edmonton HAD to compete this year given getting McDavid and other pieces. They could not wait. Colorado is in no such position.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

Here is my predictions for each:
Lintuniemi nevers sees more than 10 NHL games with the Kings
Clague spends this year and next in the WHL then 1-2 years with Ontario. Four years away from the NHL.
Moverare is a bottom pairing D at the NHL level IF he makes it at all.

We can compare notes in 5 years.

On Lintuniemi you maybe right on the with the kings part However i would bet he plays more nhl games than that. Kings are proven to develop good defense man

Clague will be in the whl this year The kings will get him to the ahl first chance he gets and depending upon room for him in the nhl within a year after that for a cup of coffee

Moverare again has a shot in the 3-4 year window and as my fellow king fan say will play his 200 ish games

Now what your forgetting is if we trade them that will all get thrown out the window as different teams will give players fast tracking. So if they get traded to the avs or other clubs i could see them in the nhl faster.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

I'm ok with dealing futures for Landeskog. He's young, and obviously not a rental.

Agreed but not as many as were offered imo that to much

 

[tomd]

On Lintuniemi you maybe right on the with the kings part However i would bet he plays more nhl games than that. Kings are proven to develop good defense man

Clague will be in the whl this year The kings will get him to the ahl first chance he gets and depending upon room for him in the nhl within a year for a cup of coffee

Moverare again has a shot in the 3-4 year window and as my fellow king fan say will play his 200 ish games

Now what your forgetting is if we trade them that will all get thrown out the window as different teams will give players fast tracking. So if they get traded to the avs or other clubs i could see them in the nhl faster.

All in all, however, not the kind of package that would realistically get you a young #1 LW especially if they have to retain for the privilege.

 

[Ice Crusher]

Agreed but not as many as were offered imo that to much

You gotta give something that you're not willing to give to be able to get that kind of player. Similar when O'Reilly got traded and Buffalo were all about not wanting to give out Zadorov in any kind of deal.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

All in all, however, not the kind of package that would realistically get you a young #1 LW especially if they have to retain for the privilege.

agreed the retained is not going to happen especially 50%

 

[KingCanadain1976]

You gotta give something that you're not willing to give to be able to get that kind of player. Similar when O'Reilly got traded and Buffalo were all about not wanting to give out Zadorov in any kind of deal.

Muzzin is something i don't want to "give" hes a top pairing defense man on most teams avs included. They are reasons why i can rationalize trading him. We need the offensive winger Landeskog is defensively sound , over 6 foot and signed long term To me it out weighs downgrading the defense. I think the avs are really underestimating him in this thread He was named by the hf the 24th best defense man voted on by the entire hf board. Yes i know that the ranking are biase at times but its voted on from all fan bases. Also yes he has a track record of being a 55 point player in Colorado I am just as concerned he becomes a 35 point player in la as Colorado Muzzin will suck in there system There is risks to both sides

 

[Kingspiracy]

People are going to use a past trade to base there trade ideas on. In this case Landeskog and hall are pretty even value imo Larsson isn't anywhere near the value of Muzzin So saying the oilers overpaid means to me that a better defense man would be closer to actual value. Hence the muzzin for landeskog trade offer.

I don't know, Larsson is a pretty good dman and he plays the elusive right side.

 

[Alex Jones]

I believe that Edmonton considered Larsson a top pairing defenseman when they made the move.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

I don't know, Larsson is a pretty good dman and he plays the elusive right side.

Your quote missed the key word IMO Your free to have your own however im pretty sure most people would have the same as mine based off the hf poll http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2173945 where he was voted 24th best defense man and Larsson not ranked yet (there are 33)

 

[Kingspiracy]

Your quote missed the key word IMO Your free to have your own however im pretty sure most people would have the same as mine based off the hf poll http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2173945 where he was voted 24th best defense man and Larsson not ranked yet (there are 33)

ok, I'd rather have Larsson than Muzzin based on team needs/ depth and age.

 

[Ice Crusher]

Muzzin is something i don't want to "give" hes a top pairing defense man on most teams avs included. They are reasons why i can rationalize trading him. We need the offensive winger Landeskog is defensively sound , over 6 foot and signed long term To me it out weighs downgrading the defense. I think the avs are really underestimating him in this thread He was named by the hf the 24th best defense man voted on by the entire hf board. Yes i know that the ranking are biase at times but its voted on from all fan bases. Also yes he has a track record of being a 55 point player in Colorado I am just as concerned he becomes a 35 point player in la as Colorado Muzzin will suck in there system There is risks to both sides

Sakic wants to get younger. I really doubt trading for an older player is part of the plan right now.

 

[Avs44]

People are going to use a past trade to base there trade ideas on. In this case Landeskog and hall are pretty even value imo Larsson isn't anywhere near the value of Muzzin So saying the oilers overpaid means to me that a better defense man would be closer to actual value. Hence the muzzin for landeskog trade offer.

...Taking age into account, I comfortably take Larsson every time.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

Sakic wants to get younger. I really doubt trading for an older player is part of the plan right now.

Again what a gm says and does are not always the same. As i stated before a top defense man will jump start a rebuild.

 

[member 88115]

Larsson wasn't a month from being 28 either.

Again the Avs are years away from competing for a playoff spot and by the time they are Muzzin is 30+. Bad fit for the Avs.

And Hall was not struggling offensively like Landy is now. + Muzzin has 57 more points than Larsson in the almost the same amount of games (Muzzin has played 14 more games than Larsson) played in their career.