Page 10 of 24 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 232

Thread: Kings with heavy interest in Landeskog

  1. #91
    1st Scoring Line
    Moog's Avatar
    Karma: 2062659647
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,425
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1222 Post(s)

    Default

    Only a Ladd.....

  2. #92
    1st Scoring Line
    Helvetica's Avatar
    Karma: 1048144647
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    3,932
    Images
    15
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1531 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gretzky99 View Post
    Iginla is a rental. He has 5 goals and 11 points in almost 40 games. Brown has 5 goals and 16 points. It's pretty much a wash in current value on those two.

    They may get a third round pick in a deal for Iginla. So is Kempe worth taking Brown and a third?

    Again, Colorado would add 3 regulars for next year in return for Landeskog. I believe that's how a rebuilding team would look at the deal.

    If they countered with a first instead of Kempe I would probably be ok with that.
    This season notwithstanding, Iginla has performed pretty well. He also hasn't had the C stripped from him and isn't locked into a long term contract. Part of his value is precisely because his contract is expiring. He's a veteran, depth player. Brown on the other hand, has been in noticeable decline over the past 3 seasons, lost his captaincy, and is locked in long term. The only teams willing to take him would be teams in a rebuild phase that can afford to hold him through the length of his contract as their newly established core matures into a contending team. And they'd take him because he'd come packaged with young assets or picks. He's negative value. I don't agree with your assessment of Brown's value relative to Iginla.

  3. #93
    All Star
    gretzky99's Avatar
    Karma: 2042730
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    5,177
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    2252 Post(s)

    Default Kings with heavy interest in Landeskog

    The length of Quick's contract is the issue. The cap hit is great.
    On a defensive team you need a goalie that can win you games. The Pens and Hawks can overcome mistakes with their offense. The Kings can't.
    Quick makes the saves when he has to. The stats don't show that. For as good as the other goalies for the Kings have played in this system, none of them could win a playoff series. It's a totally different game.
    If Quick can stay healthy he is worth the contract. The question is simply can he stay healthy? I don't see how anyone can predict that.
    When Quick is healthy he's the best big game goalie in the league. It's really not that close.

  4. #94
    Inanimate ****ing object
    santiclaws's Avatar
    Karma: 11170502
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    17,152
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    2526 Post(s)

    Default

    Brown not only does not add value, he detracts from value. A lot. Of course they don't want him. If the Kings want to get rid of Brown, it would have to be with an addition of very significant value. Like Muzzin + Brown for a 4th round pick. Or Toffoli + Brown. Or something along those lines. Which I would take every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

  5. #95
    All Star
    gretzky99's Avatar
    Karma: 2042730
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    5,177
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    2252 Post(s)

    Default Kings with heavy interest in Landeskog

    Production wise, Brown and Iginla bring the same. Of course Brown's contract is not good and decreases his value tremendously.

    Colorado is a rebuilding team (trading your 24 year old Captain would prove that). They are very young overall. They have cap space.

    Maybe they aren't high on Kempe? I have no idea. Maybe they take a first instead if Kempe? Maybe they are looking for something else? Who knows?

    Iginla might fetch a late round third, at best. If Colorado can get a first instead by taking on a contract they can afford why wouldn't they? Brown would bring a veteran presence at the very least. Plus they get the young d-man they need so badly on a great contract plus a high end asset (Kempe or first) that helps them in the future.

    Again, I have no idea what they are looking for but that is a deal that seems fair to me.

  6. #96
    Take a big quaff
    NewCastle's Avatar
    Karma: 1269402
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,374
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    100 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moog View Post
    Only a Ladd.....
    ... You really can't blame him.

  7. #97
    Concussed Villain
    Mondo Blando's Avatar
    Karma: 5647204
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    10,880
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    3984 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gretzky99 View Post
    The length of Quick's contract is the issue. The cap hit is great.
    On a defensive team you need a goalie that can win you games. The Pens and Hawks can overcome mistakes with their offense. The Kings can't.
    Quick makes the saves when he has to. The stats don't show that. For as good as the other goalies for the Kings have played in this system, none of them could win a playoff series. It's a totally different game.
    If Quick can stay healthy he is worth the contract. The question is simply can he stay healthy? I don't see how anyone can predict that.
    When Quick is healthy he's the best big game goalie in the league. It's really not that close.
    You have absolutely no idea if any of the goalies who have played here over the past six seasons could win a series or Cup. It's just conjecture, same as saying that any of them could have won the Cup.


    Quick was brutal in their last series, and has suffered another significant injury since his last playoff series. We won't know if he is still capable of heroics until he has another chance to reclaim them. Likelihood is small.due to his team not being as strong as it was in his hero years.

  8. #98
    All Star
    gretzky99's Avatar
    Karma: 2042730
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    5,177
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    2252 Post(s)

    Default Kings with heavy interest in Landeskog

    I should have singled out Jones. He may be the real deal.

    I'm talking about Scrivens (not in the league), Budaj (not in the league for nearly 2 years), Bernier (barely in the league).

    Those guys have done zero outside of LA.

    I agree Quick wasn't good in 2016 playoffs. I don't agree that he can't be great again. We don't know. He is still in his prime age for a goalie.

  9. #99
    All Star
    gretzky99's Avatar
    Karma: 2042730
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    5,177
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    2252 Post(s)

    Default Kings with heavy interest in Landeskog

    Back to Landeskog...

    Does anyone consider Landeskog better than Taylor Hall? I sure don't. Different type of player but Hall is clearly the better offensive player.

    I also think Muzzin is a superior d-man to Larsson. He's accomplished a lot more, without question.

    So Hall only returned Larsson. LW for D.

    That's the market, folks.

    Maybe Colorado wants nothing to do with Brown - that's fine. We may be stuck with him.

    But giving up anything more than Muzzin for Landeskog is a major overpayment. It might be an overpay straight up but worth it because I think Landeskog would be a good fit with Kopitar.

    Sakic is doing the right thing by asking a lot. Maybe he doesn't make a deal if he doesn't get someone to overpay. But any GM that pays much more than what NJ paid for Hall will look foolish.

  10. #100
    All Star
    salami's Avatar
    Karma: 1041072
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    5,177
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    378 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by santiclaws View Post
    Brown not only does not add value, he detracts from value. A lot. Of course they don't want him. If the Kings want to get rid of Brown, it would have to be with an addition of very significant value. Like Muzzin + Brown for a 4th round pick. Or Toffoli + Brown. Or something along those lines. Which I would take every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
    This is a joke, right?

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •