Confirmed with Link: Trade! Petersen & Walker & Grans and a 2024 2nd to Flyers : Kings 30% retention on Provorov and get Connauton and Hodgson

[Kurrilino]

Dude, you are the guy who thinks the Central and PAcific EACH have 5 doormat teams.....your takes are clearly not based on anything in reality here.

My sanity is irrelevant to the topic of rebuild.

If your #1 center and defender are 35+years old, you didn't rebuild

 

[Kurrilino]

You know part of this that's kind of funny that I haven't thought of until now

Connauton is 33

Thus that qualifies him to get 20 minutes on the LAK roster while they send toby to the minors.

See: Christian Wolanin

Yeah and we have people seriously asking to get Lucic back.

This would be the Grand Finale of our rebuild

 

[Chazz Reinhold]

It wasn't $7M -- you are ignoring the 30% of Prov's contract that we took on for the next two years.

Edit: In total, over two years, it's about $8.65M in cap space savings for the Kings.

Yes, I was speaking directly to what the Kings had to get rid of (i.e., the contracts the were dumping). Maybe my wording was a bit loose but my intent was to speak to what was leaving the roster.

 

[kilowatt]

Come January, our two highest-paid players will have a combined age of 70

 

[Schrute farms]

Yes, I was speaking directly to what the Kings had to get rid of (i.e., the contracts the were dumping). Maybe my wording was a bit loose but my intent was to speak to what was leaving the roster.

Gotcha. But isn't that misleading? It's the net that matters. Sending out money is one thing; but when you take on > $2M in salary back (for someone not even on the team), that needs to be factored in and netted. It's a big point that is ignored. That is money that hits the cap and with no player attached to it.

 

[Chazz Reinhold]

Gotcha. But isn't that misleading? It's the net that matters. Sending out money is one thing; but when you take on > $2M in salary back (for someone not even on the team), that needs to be factored in and netted. It's a big point that is ignored. That is money that hits the cap and with no player attached to it.

I’m just having a hard time wrapping my head around how the Kings had to affirmatively pay to take on Provorov’s cap hit. Maybe they paid less than they would have if they were only sending out Petersen and Walker, but Grans plus a 2nd wasn’t the price to take on cap hit.

 

[johnjm22]

Yeah I feel this.

To your last point, that's definitely fair too. Maybe the reason for moving Cal this offseason is that this gives the Kings more flexibility to explore more prominent options in net?? With Quick and Petersen both gone now, maybe they really do kick the tires on a top goalie?

It'd be risky, and again kind of proves your point about lacking vision - But could also be pretty fun too.

Like what if this helps allow them to snag a Hellebuyck or Saros like goalie and make it easier to make the cap work while also still resigning Gavrikov and Vilardi?? Sure maybe you'd lose a player like Durzi and a winger like RV, AI, or Moore in the process, but you'd allow the Kings to go into next season with legitimately great goaltending. Getting rid of Durzi also frees up a spot for Clarke to QB the 2nd powerplay unit. And getting rid of a winger opens up a spot for a young player like Kaliyev to finally get off the 4th line for more than just a couple games.

Lets say they actually do that, and they send say Iafallo, Durzi, a prospect, and a pick (not a 1st pleaseeeee) in a deal to WPG for Hellebuyck.

Could be pretty sweet. That would leave us with an opening lineup of say:
Arvidsson - Kopitar - Kempe
Fiala - Danault - Vilardi
Moore - Byfield - Kaliyev
Grundstrom - Lizotte - Prospect/signed UFA with some grit

Anderson - Doughty
Gavrikov - Roy/Clarke
Bjornfot/Moverare - Roy/Clarke

Hellebuyck
Copley

Now tell me that team isn't winning the DAMN cup LETS GOOOOOOOOOOOOO

It's the same team that lost in the 1st round minus Iafallo and Korpisalo in exchange for Hellebuyck.

 

[johnjm22]

Grans + 2nd is cheap as hell to get rid of Petersen's contract.

You add Walker (who also has negative value) and only have to take back 2M?

It's very equitable for LA overall.

 

[KopitarGOAT420]

It's the same team that lost in the 1st round minus Iafallo and Korpisalo in exchange for Hellebuyck.

No <3

An elite goalie instead of an average one. Vilardi a year older. Byfield a year older. Kaliyev a year older and in a top 9 role. 4th line right wing I'd probably sign Perry or Reaves just to be a pest, can rotate Kupari or someone else in if Reaves/Perry really suck. Lizotte playing 4th line where he belongs.

Plus the defense is much better. You have no more Walker, no more Durzi, and no more Edler. Those are all wins. You add in Clarke. Even if he isn't a beast right away he's still an improvement over all three of the guys mentioned above. And you rotate in Bjornfot or Moverare, both of which would've already been improvements over Edler.

If you can't see how that team is at the very least better than last year I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Sol]

Grans + 2nd is cheap as hell to get rid of Petersen's contract.

You add Walker (who also has negative value) and only have to take back 2M?

It's very equitable for LA overall.

I legit love how you are making it sound like the kings had to give Petersen the contract lol

 

[johnjm22]

I legit love how you are making it sound like the kings had to give Petersen the contract lol

What did I say that implied that?

 

[Herby]

An elite goalie instead of an average one. Vilardi a year older. Byfield a year older. Kaliyev a year older and in a top 9 role.

Kopitar a year older, Doughty a year older…

If you are going to project younger players to take another step you have to do the same (except in the wrong direction) with older ones past their prime.

 

[ibleedkings]

Yeah and we have people seriously asking to get Lucic back.

This would be the Grand Finale of our rebuild

Will you wreck your girls interior again? Just wondering.

 

[funky]

Gotcha. But isn't that misleading? It's the net that matters. Sending out money is one thing; but when you take on > $2M in salary back (for someone not even on the team), that needs to be factored in and netted. It's a big point that is ignored. That is money that hits the cap and with no player attached to it.

Are you factoring in that if the Kings kept them for this year Peterson would’ve been in the NHL with a cap hit of $4 million. If they bottom out next summer, he would’ve had a cap hit of $1 mil in 24/25 and $2 mil in 25/26. So that is money that hits the cap with no player that is attached to it.

I hated the Peterson contract when it happened and yes Blake is on the hook for that. I also hated the Moore contract.

It happens to all GM’s they get the burnt. Usually it happens in the UFA realm.

I cannot in good faith use that $2 million and say it was to aquire Gavrikov any more than I can say that the third round pick used to initially acquire him, was for Columbus to eat Quicks remaining salary in Lombardi’s error by signing Quick to a 12 year deal

If you look at the term overall know that Blake has re-signed Gavrikov the term is the exact same term we would’ve had in acquiring Chychrun and we in my mind got the better defenseman. We also upgraded goaltenders in the deal. Even if you wanna throw in the second and the prospect used in the deal, it looks like the following.

Gavrikov for 3 playoff runs
Korpo for 1 playoff run(may still be re-signed)
2 minor league tough players to protect rooks

For

Late 23 1st
A 24 2nd
A 23 3rd - still have another
Grans
Quicks cap damp
Peterson’s cap dump
And an overpaid 3rd pairing Dman blocking rooks.

Think it worked out okay. No way Arizona would have accepted that for Chychrun.

 

[King'sPawn]

The Petersen contract looks like a disaster now, but he did have valid comps, so it was at least defensible.

But with how barren the pipeline was and is in net, it just magnified the problems. And again, the barren pipeline is an issue they've known about for years, considering they tried trading up in the first round for Wallstedt. They then proceeded to go the rest of the draft and all of last one not drafting or acquiring a young goalie. Blake finally traded for one at the deadline this year. But in the past few years, they:
- dropped Bartosak for being a domestic abuser (not lamenting the decision, but more outlining how the pipeline's been depleted)
- didn't re-sign Parik due to his uncooperation with the coaching staff
- had Ingham miss all of last season due to injury
- have parted ways with Hrenak (he signed with a Czech league recently)
- are probably going to part ways with Villalta, as he's not been able to be a reliable starter in the AHL
- traded away Quick
- traded away Petersen
- may have to let Korpisalo walk if they can't come to terms

So assuming they're all gone, that leaves the Kings with 3 goalies in the system: Copley, Portillo, Markkanen

Yes, I expect them to sign a goalie in free agency, but that's still very bare. And it again shows how Blake is more reactionary.

How can a team that "just completed a rebuild" be sorely lacking in two positions: LD and G?

 

[kilowatt]

I’ve been wrong about a lot of players throughout the years so I am by no means an authority, but I just don’t feel confident with Kaliyev taking regular shifts. He doesn’t have the defensive skills or even really the conditioning to play effective big minutes. Lots of roster projections pencil him in but I think he has a lot to prove.

 

[Herby]

I’ve been wrong about a lot of players throughout the years so I am by no means an authority, but I just don’t feel confident with Kaliyev taking regular shifts. He doesn’t have the defensive skills or even really the conditioning to play effective big minutes. Lots of roster projections pencil him in but I think he has a lot to prove.

He isn't perfect, but you need to have finishers in the lineup, and it's hard to find finishers who don't have any issues, they are to valuable.

Teams find ways to get players like this into the lineup and putting them with the right players.

How is it a failed draft pick? Picks are assets, nothing more, used to improve your team. He was probably the BPA on their list or they might've been looking at a dman at that spot and took him. 9 points in 59 games in the AHL doesn't exactly scream top 4. Where does he fit in the big picture, with Clarke,Spence, abd Durzi ahead of him. Only one guy taken after him has played more than 20 games.

You kind of answered your own question in the same post.

Its another guy they brought to the AHL too early.

Yup, the most AHL games played by teenagers.

The Kings have had Byfield, Turcotte, Bjornfot, Kaliyev, Kupari and Grans in the AHL as teenagers since Blake took over. Have any of these players benefitted thus far from that usage? Seems AK is the only one that a case can be made.

 

[Herby]

delete

 

[Herby]

I don't get how people have latched onto the it's his own mess thing. I do get it, because people don't like Blake

So now you are going to go down the Axl, TKF, SurfNutz path that people just have an irrational hatred for Blake and none of these criticisms are based on his actions as GM?

You know, people like RJ and KP were once strong supporters of Blake and many of the moves he made early on, when did these guys suddenly develop an irrational hatred of Blake that is clouding their minds? Or is it just possible they, and many others here don't have an irrational hatred and instead just think he's doing a crappy job?

The people who are critical of Blake are not "haters" and have shown a more balanced view of his rights and wrongs than the people who are calling those people haters. Those are the same people that have defended every move Blake has made, from hiring Stevens, the Byfield and Turcotte picks, the Cal extension and so on.

In the last couple of pages you have seen people calling Byfield a "damn solid pick", questioning how Helge Grans was a bad pick, refusing to admit that everything about Turcotte has been a disaster. And these are the same people who came up with the "Faber wouldn't sign in LA" to try and justify how much of a steal the trade was. I see a lot more of the "haters" giving credit than I see the other side admitting there have been major mistakes.

 

[King'sPawn]

So now you are going to go down the Axl, TKF, SurfNutz path that people just have an irrational hatred for Blake and none of these criticisms are based on his actions as GM?

You know, people like RJ and KP were once strong supporters of Blake and many of the moves he made early on, when did these guys suddenly develop an irrational hatred of Blake that is clouding their minds? Or is it just possible they, and many others here don't have an irrational hatred and instead just think he's doing a crappy job?

The people who are critical of Blake are not "haters" and have shown a more balanced view of his rights and wrongs than the people who are calling those people haters. Those are the same people that have defended every move Blake has made, from hiring Stevens, the Byfield and Turcotte picks, the Cal extension and so on.

In the last couple of pages you have seen people calling Byfield a "damn solid pick", questioning how Helge Grans was a bad pick, refusing to admit that everything about Turcotte has been a disaster. And these are the same people who came up with the "Faber wouldn't sign in LA" to try and justify how much of a steal the trade was. I see a lot more of the "haters" giving credit than I see the other side admitting there have been major mistakes.

What's this bizarro world where criticisms automatically means someone is disliked?

And the other bizarro world where DL didn't get criticisms?

 

[Sol]

What's this bizarro world where criticisms automatically means someone is disliked?

And the other bizarro world where DL didn't get criticisms?

That’s probably my favorite part. DL got lambasted by everyone and all of us for good reason and this was like 2 years after the Kings won the second cup.

Blake hasn’t done and accomplished anything but people argue to give him rope when DL with all his accomplishments was looked at with a fine tooth comb.

DL was rightfully fired too. I wanted DL fired but I do truly think it’s unfair that Blake who’s accomplished nothing gets favorable treatment.

 

[tws38]

The way I see it is (using round numbers)
We gave up:
Walker (minimal value)
Grans (Selling low but difficult path to Kings)
2nd in 2024

We get:
+2 million cap hit from Provorov
-3.8 million cap hit Peterson being in the AHL
Portillo getting more starts in the AHL
-2.6 million cap hit from Walker
Clears one spot on D and assuming Spence/Clarke +0.9 million
=-3.7 million this year

Not exactly a low price for the level of cap relief. The takeaway is likely that it is a difficult environment to offload salary given the cap situation even if there are teams that have space.

With that said, I think we need to evaluate this trade based on how we use this additional cap space in conjunction with the assets we have. It's too late to cry about the awful contract we gave to Peterson or the price we paid to get Gavrikov. We only extended Gavrikov for 2 years. The useful period of Doughty and Kopitar (perhaps lesser extent as his contract is up after this year in which case, we can try to get his cap to match his productivity). Giving up high picks in consecutive years and trading away pipeline depth. We need to be winning with the direction we have chosen. Things we still need to do this summer is resign our RFAs (Vilardi being the big one), addressing the goalie hole and ideally upgrading spots on the roster (preferably adding missing elements).

 

[KingsFan7824]

So now you are going to go down the Axl, TKF, SurfNutz path that people just have an irrational hatred for Blake and none of these criticisms are based on his actions as GM?

You know, people like RJ and KP were once strong supporters of Blake and many of the moves he made early on, when did these guys suddenly develop an irrational hatred of Blake that is clouding their minds? Or is it just possible they, and many others here don't have an irrational hatred and instead just think he's doing a crappy job?

The people who are critical of Blake are not "haters" and have shown a more balanced view of his rights and wrongs than the people who are calling those people haters. Those are the same people that have defended every move Blake has made, from hiring Stevens, the Byfield and Turcotte picks, the Cal extension and so on.

In the last couple of pages you have seen people calling Byfield a "damn solid pick", questioning how Helge Grans was a bad pick, refusing to admit that everything about Turcotte has been a disaster. And these are the same people who came up with the "Faber wouldn't sign in LA" to try and justify how much of a steal the trade was. I see a lot more of the "haters" giving credit than I see the other side admitting there have been major mistakes.

Wouldn't term it irrational, but it's just increasingly not wiling to give anything a chance. And as soon as anything happens, it's bad. Only the downside is focused on. Anything happens, and well that's just Blake trying to fill a glaring hole, or trying to clean up his own mess. Because those are bad things to do. Or bad depending on who is doing it. So he should do nothing, while they clearly want to try and win again, as improbable as it may be, with the 4, then 3, now 2 guys left? That part might be a little irrational. That's the path they've chosen. That was the path they chose when they re-signed Quick to a ridiculous term to reward him for that first Cup, and then everyone else they've paid since. There's never really been any indication of any change from that idea, outside of the start of the 18-19 season.

Irrational would be the consistent dwelling on how they should've traded Kopitar for the last 7 years. DL invested in that 15-16 team, so he wasn't trading Kopitar, no matter how many dollars apart he says they were on the contract. Especially since they were a top 5 team on the day he re-signed. Kopitar wasn't going to be walking either, so if it's $9m, or $10m, that wasn't the difference between a Cup or not. He was the 1C on a 2 time winner, so he was getting the thank you retirement deal if he wanted to stay, period.

If people who are critical of Blake aren't "haters", then the people who might want to just give the team a chance while Blake happens to be at the helm, are not "dick suckers" either. But such is the world of extremes we live in I guess.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Wouldn't term it irrational, but it's just increasingly not wiling to give anything a chance. And as soon as anything happens, it's bad. Only the downside is focused on. Anything happens, and well that's just Blake trying to fill a glaring hole, or trying to clean up his own mess. Because those are bad things to do. Or bad depending on who is doing it. So he should do nothing, while they clearly want to try and win again, as improbable as it may be, with the 4, then 3, now 2 guys left? That part might be a little irrational. That's the path they've chosen. That was the path they chose when they re-signed Quick to a ridiculous term to reward him for that first Cup, and then everyone else they've paid since. There's never really been any indication of any change from that idea, outside of the start of the 18-19 season.

Yes, that's exactly what happens when one compounds bad decisions with further bad decisions.

The rope you get at the start of your tenure is not the same you get 6 years in. It's why Cloutier is a footnote, and Lucic is a banner. It's why Kovalchuk is a funny side quest, and why Petersen is a catastrophe.

You earn or disearn the benefit of the doubt. Blake hasn't given us ANYTHING to think he's playing 4D chess. If anything, it's becoming increasingly clear his 'vision' is now one-year-at-a-time, not even 3-5 years into the future.

 

[All The Kings Men]

The rope you get at the start of your tenure is not the same you get 6 years in. It's why Cloutier is a footnote, and Lucic is a banner. It's why Kovalchuk is a funny side quest, and why Petersen is a catastrophe.

Regardless of how I feel or don't feel about the context or the content...

I just wanted to say I really loved this metaphor.

EDIT: As a rhetorical device I mean. It's just good writing regardless of how one feels about the actual argument.