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

Wow. Just wow.

Originally Posted by jt

You know, I thought the same way a few years ago and then a very wise poster convinced me that getting the kids into the playoffs so they could get experience and test their mettle was just as important an "asset" as trading a prospect for the high profile player that gets the kids that experience.

i think they're going to make the playoffs as they are today. i realized, not as the season has played out mind you, but immediately afterward, my comfort level with a step down deal like the Ryan Smyth trade... still a big player, but you know what i mean.

that said, that trade has proven insofar the punctuation in Dean Lombardi's oft stated apprehension in bringing in crutch players.

in the end, i don't know if i'd have felt (or feel) as iffy if the "high profile player" acquisition was or eventually turns out to be someone like Vincent Lecavalier... a lot tougher to bag another center, i know, but...

don't get me wrong, i'd love love LOVE to see Ilya Kovalchuk here. as much as i would have loved to have seen Marian Gaborik here. in fact, i'm the one who started a thread at the beginning of the season with a photoshopped image of Kovi sporting the Watti Blacks (courtesy of teh Puck Monkey). though with Gaborik, i'd have not dealt Frolov to do it. but i'd absolutely s*** myself silly if Atlanta took Alex in a deal for Kovi. i just don't see that as a possibility - i wouldn't do it, and i don't think Waddell would either. he shouldn't. in fact, dare i say that even someone like Teddy Purcell would bring about more interest to me as the "throw in" portion of a deal because he's younger, more malleable, and i'd still have his rights at the end of the year... and let's be honest, Alex Frolov, regardless of anyone's opinion, is going to free agency in almost every conceivable situation that see's him traded and easily half of those that don't. so he'd be the "throw in."

Atlanta doesn't draw as it is. trading Kovalchuk for a return that doesn't at least indicate CONSIDERABLE promise over the next couple of years during a clear directional shift will be a disaster at the gate and cost Waddell his job. Heatley, Hossa, and now Kovalchuk, with only one most embarrassing post season appearance? by the time this is all said and done, if not done right given all things, his pink slip is going to be f***ing fuchsia.

the Thrashers are going to want young players... one of whom WILL be a defenseman.

that's - Johnson, Hickey or Tuebert.

then they're likely going to want a top young forward or forward prospect.

that's - Brown, Simmonds or Schenn

then, you're looking at the kicker(s)... an offset or "throw in," another "rated" prospect type depending on the principle return, and a pick.

that's - Frolov, Stoll, Purcell, Drewiske/Martinez, Moller, Bernier, and (likely) a conditional 1st round pick.

i just can't see any of that happening. not that any of these won't be moved...

and in Bernier's case...

So let's say that DL has concluded that Quick is the real deal and wants him to settle in and be their Nabokov for the next 10 years. What do you do with Bernier? Make him a career backup until he's a UFA instead of trade him for something you need more than the next Kiprusoff-in-waiting? Now if DL has concluded that Quick is the next Theodore (looks good but can't win) and Bernier is the REAL future #1, I completely agree with you.

you have a tremendous ability to compare and contrast and bring up many a woulda, coulda, shoulda players. however, every once in a while you need to draw back and play the other side because sometimes those woulda, coulda, shouldas, become do, does, did.

Bernier was not drafted as a potentially good or #1, he was drafted as a potential franchise goaltender. and unless they are dead certain about him... or Jon Quick for that matter, they shouldn't even consider moving him yet.

i honestly don't think they even need to begin thinking about where to go until after training camp.

One of Jeff Marek's guests today on HNIC Radio was Helene Elliott. After they discussed Doughty (glowingly), Kopitar (50/50) and Brown (meh), Marek asked Helene who was the face of the Kings. Both decided that if it was anyone, it would be Doughty but that there was not really an immediately recognizable franchise guy right now.

The conversation then segued to Kovalchuk. Helene stated that interest is high in L.A. and the timing is now right to bring in a player like Kovalchuk. Marek stated that the Kings were the most obvious alternative to staying in Atlanta citing the team's upward direction and embarrassment of riches in the prospect pool. He specifically mentioned Johnson, Martinez and Teubert as well as Brown as part of a trade package. Kovalchuk would immediately become the missing face of the franchise and instantly crystalize the team around his incredible talent.

Maybe he has a spy reading LGK...

When and if this team actually finishes a season with a winning record the "face of the franchise" will become clear all on it's own.

Nobody in LA who doesn't already follow hockey knows who the **** Kovalchuk is... so getting a "Face of the franchise" really only helps TSN when they need to talk about the Kings for 30 seconds.

I'm not opposed to Kovalchuk... but if they're going to acquire him I want it to be to improve the team on the ice.

Not because they're worried about boosting their visibility or getting fans attention.

Originally Posted by Dr. Naysay

When and if this team actually finishes a season with a winning record the "face of the franchise" will become clear all on it's own.

Nobody in LA who doesn't already follow hockey knows who the **** Kovalchuk is... so getting a "Face of the franchise" really only helps TSN when they need to talk about the Kings for 30 seconds.

I'm not opposed to Kovalchuk... but if they're going to acquire him I want it to be to improve the team on the ice.

Not because they're worried about boosting their visibility or getting fans attention.

Nice diatribe, Doc. But that's not what they were saying at all and I think I made that clear. It has everything to do with his talent as a hockey player and being the missing center piece on a team that is on the way up.

Originally Posted by gescom

i think they're going to make the playoffs as they are today.

I agree, but if they can get a Kovalchuk-type who is the right guy (and maybe a rental Kovalchuk at the right price IS the right guy), they could probably go deeper in the playoffs than without that guy. And IMO that's an asset just as sure as Bernier is.

that said, that trade has proven insofar the punctuation in Dean Lombardi's oft stated apprehension in bringing in crutch players.

Ok, but he's also stated a clear willingness to bring in a Kovalchuk type - Gaborik. But it's gotta be the right guy at the right price at the right time.

in the end, i don't know if i'd have felt (or feel) as iffy if the "high profile player" acquisition was or eventually turns out to be someone like Vincent Lecavalier... a lot tougher to bag another center, i know, but...

Hey, I'd love for him to get a Lecavalier type...just not Lecavalier - he's WAAAAY too expensive. But Marleau? Sure.

the Thrashers are going to want young players... one of whom WILL be a defenseman.

that's - Johnson, Hickey or Tuebert.

If Kovalchuk is the right guy (and I'm still not convinced he is), that's ok.

then they're likely going to want a top young forward or forward prospect.

that's - Brown, Simmonds or Schenn

Definitely not Schenn...at this point, there's too good a possibility that he's the #2 center they need. But I could see them want Bernier instead. Lehtonen is always hurt and Pavelec seems to have stumbled badly.

then, you're looking at the kicker(s)... an offset or "throw in," another "rated" prospect type depending on the principle return, and a pick.

that's - Frolov, Stoll, Purcell, Drewiske/Martinez, Moller, Bernier, and (likely) a conditional 1st round pick.

And I'd put Moller and the conditional 1st. in the deal. That's pretty much the trade I originally posted...

i just can't see any of that happening. not that any of these won't be moved...

I agree.

and in Bernier's case...

It all depends on whether DL sees Quick as "the guy". If so, trade Bernier for something you need more than a great backup goalie.

you have a tremendous ability to compare and contrast and bring up many a woulda, coulda, shoulda players. however, every once in a while you need to draw back and play the other side because sometimes those woulda, coulda, shouldas, become do, does, did.

Ok, but more often those woulda, coulda, shouldas become Al Montoya, Pascal Leclaire, Brent Krahn, Brian Finley, and Patrick DesRochers (all high 1st rounders).

Look, I like Bernier just fine. But it doesn't matter what a guy was drafted to be. If Quick was drafted to be a #2 in the NHL but plays as well as Kiprusoff (5th rounder), who cares? And if Bernier was drafted to be a franchise player but gets passed by Quick, so what? Keep the guy who's your #1 and trade the other guy for something you need more than a great #2 goalie. Don't you think the Ducks wish they'd moved Giguere instead of Bryzgalov when they had the chance? But Giguere "was supposed to be their #1" and Bryzgalov was just a #2...

Bernier was not drafted as a potentially good or #1, he was drafted as a potential franchise goaltender. and unless they are dead certain about him... or Jon Quick for that matter, they shouldn't even consider moving him yet.

I pretty much agree, although even if they're sure Bernier can be a #1 but they can move him for a player they need more then do it - if they're confident Quick is the #1 they need.

i honestly don't think they even need to begin thinking about where to go until after training camp.

Probably not. But if they can acquire "the right guy" NOW and it costs Bernier to do it (and they're confident Quick is a #1)...then I say do it.

JT....... It would take to much time to sift out the info to quote each piece so I'll just give a blanket response

A. If you are getting this information from a paid professional scout and people who get paid to work for an NHL club why wait until now to say so. Why not say specifics of why they aren't worth the draft picks they used on them? Say legit reasons why Moller is already on his down cycle at 20 ?

B. Didn't O'sullivan have attitude issues supposedly too. He is now playing as a top 6 on an NHL roster. Hell Avery has attitude issues and he's playing on an NHL roster. Having issues as a prospect is normal. They all have plenty of things to work on. I'm sure he will work on that if he wants to play hockey for a living. He is still a kid after all.

C. Who do you think are the Kings top 6 prospects right now? If Moller isn't in there where do you place him ?

D. I'm placing values on prospects that have nothing to do with people on here. I'm placing value by the information available to read and roles the players are put in.

E. Yes I consider taking 2 of the first round draft picks from the last 3 years and an additional first round pick the next year raping the cupboard. On top of that you are saying to send the only RW prospect that has a shot at making an NHL roster at the moment.

F. With 8 teams from each conference making the playoffs that is 16 total teams that could be in the market for a rental player. I can't see 16 teams looking for a high end rental player. IMO I can't see 10 teams looking for a high end rental player especially if they are cusp teams.

Off the top of my head, I can't remember a time when a non top tier team traded the farm for a high end rental player. Cusp teams picking up a high profile vet for a couple picks sure, but cusp teams aren't usually big movers and shakers. If I am forgetting a few particular trades oh well, but as a whole I think that holds true.

That being said if you factor all of the other variables in like Salary cap, Assets worth trading, what Atlanta actually wants, etc. It hardly seems like a huge market for high end rental players with a hefty price. It seems like a limited market to me. If you add a trade where the team is able to sign the player the market can't do anything but grow.

G. I would like to think I'm realistic about the prospects value. I don't think they are worth more then the Kings did when they drafted them nor over the current roles they are being put in. You still said that potential doesn't equal value and I can't disagree more. If that was true draft pics would hold no weight in the league at all. From what I have read players picked in the first 2 rounds succeed more often then ones drafted in the lower rounds. While you can find diamonds in the rough (Simmonds) that is rare.

H. I'm not assuming that the Kings would trade for Kovy as a rental player first of all. That's why my response was that money would have to come off the books. I was assuming that they would just want prospects and pics. They are going to want someone who can play on that team and make an impact too. I just don't see prospects and picks getting done. I don't see the Kings remotely close to shipping bernier and if they did putting that little value on him in a trade.

I. In response to what you said about DL's statements.... Negatives about Moller, Tuebert and Bernier.....? Links please. I want to see where he isn't just pointing out things to work on and actual problems.

J. On Armstrong...... He filled a first line role for the games when Palffy wasn't playing that first season. Since I have to spell it out.... Player A (Palffy) isn't playing so Player B (Armstrong) takes his role on the first line. That is all Palffy has to do with him. I don't really care about his fantasy stats... The real numbers back up what Im staying. His average TOI was 16:50 followed by 15:24 his final season before the trade . Those aren't first line minutes. At the time of the trade Armstrong never had more then 40 pts in a season. He still hasn't for that matter. He never put up impressive numbers in the AHL for that matter. I'm still waiting for something to back up how highly you say he was rated at that time. Top 9 winger yes, Top 6 perhaps, Top 3 not so much.

I'm basing his value on what I was watching and what the Penguins had to pair with him in the trade. They had to give up another young forward, a number one pick and a Highly rated prospect. If Armstrong was projected to be a solid top 3 forward they wouldn't have had to give up so many other things. Again I say basically 4 prospects with no roster players seems improbable. They would have to get someone going that way that will play for them.

K. On Christensen ......by no means was I saying he was bad, but I hardly think Atlanta saw a top 6 forward coming back in that deal. WHL numbers really hold that much weight ? Lappy had back to back 40 + goals season and 100+ points back to back in the QMJHL. Watch out Robitaille , Laperriere is going to steal your spot on the roster ?

L. I'm not saying Moller will stick, I'm saying he has value in a trade greater then Christensen for many reasons. He is younger then Christensen, is only in his 2nd season pro season, was drafted higher, etc. How can you think his upside makes him worth less ?
He is completely trade bait worthy, but he shows no less potential then he did when he was drafted. At 20 and only 1 full pro year he is way ahead of most prospects. Other then a shoulder injury I can't see how he has shown any negatives yet.

M..... As a whole I just don't see why you see the Kings have to give away that many prospects. The guppies up the street have had 2 blockbuster style trades in less then 5 seasons without giving up a ton. If San Jose can do that then there shouldn't be anything keeping other teams from doing that.

N. Something not mentioned by you in the Hossa trade is this. The Pens didn't just get Hossa. They got Pascal Dupuis who still has a roster spot on Pens. Christensen postion was essentially a swapped for a younger player in the same role. He however didn't keep a roster spot so that could mean he was more of a throw in then a key asset.

Originally Posted by bubbaganoush

A. If you are getting this information from a paid professional scout and people who get paid to work for an NHL club why wait until now to say so. Why not say specifics of why they aren't worth the draft picks they used on them? Say legit reasons why Moller is already on his down cycle at 20?

Because people get in hot water when specifics get said and it gets known who said what.

Moller is not on his down cycle, that sounds permanent and it's not. He could pull out of it, but the fact is that he was given a roster spot in camp then showed up not prepared and then didn't work hard enough to earn that spot. It was pretty much just like Boyle and Purcell in 08-09 camp and DL was awfully disappointed - at least that's what I've been told. You see he's playing on the 4th line, right? And that's with Williams' open spot ready for the taking. You know why that is? He's not working hard enough to earn that spot...and he didn't in Manchester.

B. Didn't O'sullivan have attitude issues supposedly too. He is now playing as a top 6 on an NHL roster. Hell Avery has attitude issues and he's playing on an NHL roster. Having issues as a prospect is normal. They all have plenty of things to work on. I'm sure he will work on that if he wants to play hockey for a living. He is still a kid after all.

Actually, O'Sullivan was in the bottom six and had such big problems with Pat Quinn that Quinn has called him out publicly and said his effort is just awful. Many Oilers fans are already sick of him. And Avery's issues were so bad the Stars are PAYING THE RANGERS TO PLAY HIM.

But I agree issues are normal for kids. He's only 21 (in 14 days) and he's got time to mature. But surely you can admit that it's possible for pro hockey folks to judge some 20-21 yr olds about whether they really can mature or not in time for them to be useful. Keep in mind that these guys are UFAs at very early ages now - unless I have it wrong, he'll be a UFA in just 5 yrs.

C. Who do you think are the Kings top 6 prospects right now? If Moller isn't in there where do you place him?

I guess it depends on how you define "prospect", but I'd say it includes anyone who could realistically be sent to Manchester. I'd still put Parse (after all, he has been demoted) in that category and I think he's passed him. Same with Drewiske, but it's less likely with him. But I'd say this is my list (in no particular order): Bernier, Schenn, Parse, Drewiske, Hickey, and Martinez. I think the real argument would probably be Moller vs Martinez and that's a fair argument to have. But you asked me my opinion and I think Martinez is more likely to make an impact in the NHL than Moller. Muzzin might also pass him pretty quick but the Kings blueline looks pretty crowded.

D. I'm placing values on prospects that have nothing to do with people on here. I'm placing value by the information available to read and roles the players are put in.

Good to know.

E. Yes I consider taking 2 of the first round draft picks from the last 3 years and an additional first round pick the next year raping the cupboard. On top of that you are saying to send the only RW prospect that has a shot at making an NHL roster at the moment.

Ok but even "raping the cupboard" isn't emptying it. Any cupboard with Hickey, Schenn, Voynov, Teubert, Loktionov, Martinez, and Muzzin isn't close to empty.

F. With 8 teams from each conference making the playoffs that is 16 total teams that could be in the market for a rental player. I can't see 16 teams looking for a high end rental player. IMO I can't see 10 teams looking for a high end rental player especially if they are cusp teams.

Well although 16 teams make the playoffs it's more than that making a push for the playoffs. Looking at things now, I'd say it's 24 but maybe as many 27 if Toronto can get it together. But I agree that all of them won't be after Kovalchuk. It may be only 5, but you can bet they'll all be willing to mortgage an awful lot of their futures. The thing is that an impending UFA can be acquired by teams who can't acquire a signed guy because they're at the cap.

Off the top of my head, I can't remember a time when a non top tier team traded the farm for a high end rental player. Cusp teams picking up a high profile vet for a couple picks sure, but cusp teams aren't usually big movers and shakers. If I am forgetting a few particular trades oh well, but as a whole I think that holds true.

That's a fair point. Ironically, Atlanta gave up Coburn for Zhitnik and also a 1st, a 2nd, and a 3rd for Tkachuk. And don't forget the Canes were on the bubble when they traded Pitkanen for Fedotenko. The Preds traded Parent, Upshall, a 1st and a 3rd for Forsberg and they were on the bubble. But since the best teams are almost always the ones willing to pay the most to get the best players at the trade deadline (because lesser teams have less chance to win), we'll probably always see what you're saying.

That being said if you factor all of the other variables in like Salary cap, Assets worth trading, what Atlanta actually wants, etc. It hardly seems like a huge market for high end rental players with a hefty price. It seems like a limited market to me. If you add a trade where the team is able to sign the player the market can't do anything but grow.

It's limited to an extent, but I don't think it's as limited as you do.

G. I would like to think I'm realistic about the prospects value. I don't think they are worth more then the Kings did when they drafted them nor over the current roles they are being put in. You still said that potential doesn't equal value and I can't disagree more. If that was true draft pics would hold no weight in the league at all. From what I have read players picked in the first 2 rounds succeed more often then ones drafted in the lower rounds. While you can find diamonds in the rough (Simmonds) that is rare.

I know. Everyone thinks they're realists. I'm involved in defensive driving courses and there isn't a single driver on the road who thinks he/she isn't a safe driver.

I think some prospects are worth more than when the Kings drafted them. Bernier and Schenn probably are, and I'd guess Voynov and Martinez are.

But to clarify, I absolutely do not think that potential doesn't have value. Potential definitely does have value - but that value is limited and as prospects get older, their value ALWAYS changes...it either goes up or down. In Moller's case it appears to have gone down.

H. I'm not assuming that the Kings would trade for Kovy as a rental player first of all. That's why my response was that money would have to come off the books. I was assuming that they would just want prospects and pics. They are going to want someone who can play on that team and make an impact too. I just don't see prospects and picks getting done. I don't see the Kings remotely close to shipping bernier and if they did putting that little value on him in a trade.

Well that makes more sense. I think there's almost no way DL trades for him unless he IS a rental (or at least at rental value) because I don't see him paying almost 20% of his cap to one guy.

I. In response to what you said about DL's statements.... Negatives about Moller, Tuebert and Bernier.....? Links please. I want to see where he isn't just pointing out things to work on and actual problems.

Sorry, I can't give links to in-person conversations and emails I've had with people.

J. On Armstrong...... He filled a first line role for the games when Palffy wasn't playing that first season. Since I have to spell it out.... Player A (Palffy) isn't playing so Player B (Armstrong) takes his role on the first line. That is all Palffy has to do with him. I don't really care about his fantasy stats... The real numbers back up what Im staying. His average TOI was 16:50 followed by 15:24 his final season before the trade . Those aren't first line minutes. At the time of the trade Armstrong never had more then 40 pts in a season. He still hasn't for that matter. He never put up impressive numbers in the AHL for that matter. I'm still waiting for something to back up how highly you say he was rated at that time. Top 9 winger yes, Top 6 perhaps, Top 3 not so much.

And I don't care about fantasy stats either, in fact I never mentioned them. I said that because he was on my team I followed him very closely.

So being that my point was that Bernier would be the required improvement over Armstrong in a trade for Kovalchuk instead of Hossa, what's your point?

I'm basing his value on what I was watching and what the Penguins had to pair with him in the trade. They had to give up another young forward, a number one pick and a Highly rated prospect. If Armstrong was projected to be a solid top 3 forward they wouldn't have had to give up so many other things. Again I say basically 4 prospects with no roster players seems improbable. They would have to get someone going that way that will play for them.

Look, I'm not saying Armstrong was Crosby's Kunitz, but he DID get alot of playing time with him - did you know they were roommates and just about best friends the year he was traded?

So let's go around the horn with some links and quotes:

11/27/07: Pens' Armstrong, Crosby happy together - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

coach Michel Therrien has Armstrong playing the right wing on a line with Crosby and left wing Ryan Malone.

we understand each other because we've played together before," Crosby said.

During his rookie year, Crosby centered a line with Armstrong, and the latter had his best offensive season with 40 points in only 47 games. (you can blame the Palffy injury all you want but the fact is he WAS a first liner with Crosby and scored almost a point a game).

11/20/08: Crosby, Armstrong cross paths again tonight in Atlanta

They were quite a pair as Penguins teammates, road roommates and sometimes linemates the past few seasons, shackled together by laughter and shenanigans.

Read more: Crosby, Armstrong cross paths again tonight in Atlanta

Well let's see what Waddell himself had to say:

Don Waddell insists Thrashers not 'packing it in' with Marian Hossa trade - USATODAY.com

Waddell...said the most important additions were Armstrong, 25, and Christensen, 24.

"The current players played a bigger role in getting this deal done than the other pieces," Waddell said.

And just because so many hold HF in reverence:

Penguins 2001 draft evaluation - Hockey's Future

A highly-touted prospect since becoming the Penguins opening round pick in the 2001 draft, Colby Armstrong finally got to enjoy his coming out party in the NHL in 2006.

K. On Christensen ......by no means was I saying he was bad, but I hardly think Atlanta saw a top 6 forward coming back in that deal. WHL numbers really hold that much weight ? Lappy had back to back 40 + goals season and 100+ points back to back in the QMJHL. Watch out Robitaille , Laperriere is going to steal your spot on the roster ?

Well let's see what Waddell actually had to say: Waddell's demands for Hossa compensation chased Wings from sweepstakes | Snapshots - MLive.com

At the end I wanted to take one of those guys out but Don made it quite clear that if they both were not in then we weren't going to be part of the deal,"

Is that the kind of thing you do over some scrub 2nd or 3rd tier guys?

And there's also this quote from the above link:

Comparatively speaking, the Penguins gave up a package quite similar to Filppula, Franzen, a prospect (Allen says Smith and/or Ericsson) and a 1st-rounder. That's an astonishingly high price to pay for a player who seems destined to test the open market on July 1st.

Apparently I'm not the only one who thinks those guys were very good.

L. I'm not saying Moller will stick, I'm saying he has value in a trade greater then Christensen for many reasons. He is younger then Christensen, is only in his 2nd season pro season, was drafted higher, etc. How can you think his upside makes him worth less?

Not less. About the same. This is from my original post:

Bernier > Armstrong
Moller = Christensen
Teubert = Esposito
'10 1st rounder = '08 1st rounder

He is completely trade bait worthy, but he shows no less potential then he did when he was drafted. At 20 and only 1 full pro year he is way ahead of most prospects. Other then a shoulder injury I can't see how he has shown any negatives yet.

That's where we disagree. When he was drafted there was all kinds of talk about him being a potential 1st liner. He then made the team and flopped. Then he flopped in his second camp to the point that he lost the spot on the roster he'd been given. Now he's playing on the 4th line with Williams hurt and you know who's getting his playing time? Brandon Segal (if you think that's the 2nd line) or Scott Parse (if you think that's the 2nd line). What does that tell you???

M..... As a whole I just don't see why you see the Kings have to give away that many prospects. The guppies up the street have had 2 blockbuster style trades in less then 5 seasons without giving up a ton. If San Jose can do that then there shouldn't be anything keeping other teams from doing that.

Because that's market value IMO. The Kings don't "have" to give away ANY prospects. But if they're going to beat the offers I believe will be out there (if he's even traded), they'll have to give up something along those lines.

N. Something not mentioned by you in the Hossa trade is this. The Pens didn't just get Hossa. They got Pascal Dupuis who still has a roster spot on Pens. Christensen postion was essentially a swapped for a younger player in the same role. He however didn't keep a roster spot so that could mean he was more of a throw in then a key asset.

That's true. They also got salary dump Gill at $2.1M who just about equalizes what they got in Dupuis.

As for Christensen, don't believe me - believe Penguins GM Ray Shero.

sooo you were bar hopping with Heidi?