Kovalchuk is a NJ Devil. Now, get over it already.

One problem the Kings had for making the trade was that their young players were better than what the other teams could offer.

Dean couldn't try to hide Simmonds and Jack behind his back while offering up something else. All Waddell was focused on was what Dean had in his hands behind him. Not what he was being offered, which could have helped his team's future.

The Kings were not going to give up chunks of their roster for a rental. So Waddell, not being allowed to get those players, went somewhere else, and got robbed for what he was asking.

Dean held firm. And I will thoroughly enjoy watching Simmonds and Jack play with a crown on their jersey tonight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ianmonsta

Pay the money or don't complain about the high traffic.

---

Thanks, dad.

I'm not paying for a message board (even though I do like coming here.) I know it's cheap, but I really don't have the extra money to spend.

Just heard the news about the trade. My reaction, much relief. Sure, Kovy would have been nice, but the price would have been high. DL stood his ground and stayed the course. The Kings have won 7 games in a row, everything is clicking, why change now? Let's see how far this group can take this. Of course, come July 1st, well, that's another discussion and story.

Trying to process a lot right now, but I'm not really all that outraged as a Thrashers fan. A tumultuous ride is over. The return says to me more about the actual market for a rental Kovalchuk than it necessarily does Waddell. I think Oduya and Bergfors will be good pieces going forward, and should fit in nicely with the young core. Cormier seems to fall in line with the likes of Kane, Bogosian, Klingberg, and Paquette in being a player with a bit of sandpaper to his game and likely to be very tough to play against, a change in culture from the perimeter, soft Euro nature the team is pushing away from.

Probably not the best deal that could be had, but some good additions, and certainly better than holding on to a player that was gone at the end of the season for nothing. Also frees up Waddell to start moving the likes of Max, Kozlov, Lehtonen, Armstrong, Kubina, maybe even White. I'm not expecting much out of those, but a prospect or two or another 1st or 2nd would be very productive moving forward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ianmonsta

I would say

Oduya = Johnson
Bergfors = Richardson
Cormier = Loktionov (had tuebert/hickey but realized Cormier is a center)

---

Bergfors > Richardson

Tough to trade Loki and Hickey because of their injuries.

Like I said no sign, no trade. See you all again in June/July.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gretzky99

2. salmela is also going to NJ - this was not a better return than hossa got. i would argue it's worse. oduya is overpaid at $3.5M hit, bergfors has some talent but he's not currently a top 6 guy, and no one wants to touch cormier and a very late 1st.

---

I agree. In retrospect, the Hossa deal was bad, but at the time it was very solid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gescom

Bergfors is a second liner

---

...at best. He's a 3rd liner on a good team and IMO is pretty much what we can expect Moller to be in two yrs.

Quote:

---

Oduya, despite his minute eating, MAXES out as a 3 and that's pushing it, and Cormier... well there's Rich Peverley with elbows.

---

Nice analysis and I think it's spot on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iron Duke

ges, Bird, an equivalent Kings deal?

-something better than Moller
-Greene
-Clifford?
-1st?

Still probably more than most on here would have given up?

---

That's just about what I was thinking. The problem is that Moller is the next Bergfors but he's 2 yrs younger and that's just not what Waddell wanted. The thing is that to upgrade from Moller is too much. It's Simmonds or Brown or someone like that and that's just too much. DL just doesn't have an equivalent to Bergfors yet and I have little doubt that Waddell wanted the forward he got back to be the best player he got back. In alot of ways Moller + Johnson + Teubert + 1st would have been a better deal. But that's for building a good team from the back end forward and I don't think that was Waddell's goal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Birdman

I'd say they wanted:

Simmonds
Johnson
Hickey or Teubert
1st

If you take Simmonds and Johnson out of that deal, I don't see why we wouldn't have made it.

---

I've come to the conclusion I wouldn't have traded Simmonds in a deal for Kovalchuk. So the question then is whether there is ANY forward you would trade that Waddell would want? I would trade Moller or Richardson but I don't think Waddell would want them over Bergfors.

That said, I think Waddell didn't get enough.

There is no way I would've moved Simmonds in any deal. DL covets hockey smarts and Simmonds and Schenn have it in spades. I would've done Stoll, Johnson, Teubert or Hickey and one of the #2's this year. This way you go find someone to replace Stoll (E-Bel?) and you get that sniper and still cover yourself.

All this being said, with the way they are playing right now, you don't remove anything from the room but find a way to add to it.

Joni Pitkanen/E-Bel/TK/C. Jannssen/K. Tkachuk/Ponikarovski/R. Whitney pick up the white courtesy telephone.

What I am saying is there are lots of guys to add that seem to be available right now.

Oh and jt you are right he didn't get enough. But he never would've as all the interested GMs and Kovalchuk had him over a barrell. Read McKenzie's column on TSN today. IT IS SPOT ON.

http://i.imgur.com/N2XQ2.jpg

Rich Hammond, LA Kings Insider (2/5/10)

Quote:

---

In the end, the Kings simply didn’t want to take players out of their locker room for a rental. Atlanta sniffed around Dustin Brown, Jack Johnson and Wayne Simmonds, at least one of whom would have had to have been the center of a trade package. Atlanta wanted NHL players. The Kings offered prospects. There wasn’t going to be a fit unless one side budged, and neither did.

---

Last thoughts on non-trade