Kings Interested In Alex Tuch

[DryKing]

So this might be spitballing or some degree of tortured logic, but I wonder about the wisdom of swapping Gavy for Tuch.

The idea of getting Tuch is to make a run in the playoffs (at least I think so, although could be viewed as obtaining with eyes on the future).
I guess my point is that getting Tuch while losing Gavy is not consistent. Either you’re all-in or not.

I know the concern about losing Gavy for nothing. And I would made the deal in a heartbeat if it’s one-to-one.
But I can’t see the point if the goal is to get past the first round. Losing Gavy makes it very difficult to see the Kings getting a series win.

Now, if it’s somehow a larger deal that brings a replacement for Gavy then it makes far more sense.

Moore and Gavy for Tuch and ____ might make more sense to me.

Again, I’m just thinking through it. But I’m very much in favor of getting Tuch.

I totally agree. Tuch is signed through 2025-26 though, so he would go beyond just this playoff run and fill a key position next season which could include another playoff run or potential trade prior to the the 25-26 deadline. That's more of where I was going with that idea than just this season's playoff run.

If we are all about a playoff run this season then I 100% agree with you. If we sign Gav past this season than I also 100% agree.

Would be awesome to trade Moore and Gav for Tuch and either Byram or Powers but I'm sure we'd have to include other assets and well to pull that off. May still be worth it though.

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

Shame that Moore is having an off year. Could have been 1 for 1

If Moore wasn't having an 'off year', why would we be trading him?

 

[Dorian20]

Tuch is not enough for this team to make a run.

but it's a good start. Let's be honest, we have barely any cap space, and we know Rob painted himself in a little corner, so he needs to make some realistic, but impactful moves. Let's be honest, unless a GM knocks Rob's socks off, QB isn't going anywhere. Fiala won't be traded in the middle of a season, let alone a good one. Turcotte, Moore, Spence, (maaaybe Gav if he doesn't re-sign), are all decent trade bait.

 

[Dorian20]

If Moore wasn't having an 'off year', why would we be trading him?

Moore is not a 30 goal scorer. He had an anomaly of a season, and alot of things were clicking for us, especially with the Danault/Arvy line. I knew he would drastically come down to Earth, but he's too small and the whole TO native narrative has worn off. I wouldn't mind moving him.

 

[hokiecat]

but it's a good start. Let's be honest, we have barely any cap space, and we know Rob painted himself in a little corner, so he needs to make some realistic, but impactful moves. Let's be honest, unless a GM knocks Rob's socks off, QB isn't going anywhere. Fiala won't be traded in the middle of a season, let alone a good one. Turcotte, Moore, Spence, (maaaybe Gav if he doesn't re-sign), are all decent trade bait.

Exactly. Even if the trade doesn't win a playoff series, it is a good hockey trade if the Kings can add Tuch (size and skill) while giving up a lesser player (Moore) or a guy who is a question mark to be on the team in 6 months (Gavrikov).
I'll also point out that Gavrikov has a NMC and it is probably a HUGE stretch to expect him to waive it to go to Buffalo which is cold and has missed the playoffs for something like 13 years.

 

[jammer06]

Just to point out, I actually said this in this very thread (see above).

Hey if Blake wants to resign Gav then I said from the start not to trade him. But if he does not re-sign Gav and holds on to him past the trade deadline then it was a huge waste of potential assets. Yes Gav is great to have for the playoffs, but it's not worth losing him for nothing.

I don't really worry about Blake overspending on contract extensions these days as it's pretty much a given that he will. It's not an area of strength to his game as a GM.

Apologies I missed that because it seemed that your stance was if there wasn't an extension before the trade deadline that Gav should be traded. I've no idea if they've had talks but there was an article a bit back that implied while Gav had been interested in exploring the market when he was UFA coming out of the Cbus trade, he was more comfortable with the idea of LA as a destination now.

“Trade Deadline Isn’t an Issue For Me”: Gavrikov Eyes Long-Term Deal with L.A. Kings

Vladislav Gavrikov has excelled on the Kings’ blue line this season. The Russian defenseman reveals his thoughts on re-signing in LA.

rg.org

In any case the own rental has a time and place. It made sense with Roy last year. This year would be much more of a coin toss.

 

[DryKing]

I'll also point out that Gavrikov has a NMC and it is probably a HUGE stretch to expect him to waive it to go to Buffalo which is cold and has missed the playoffs for something like 13 years.

That's a really good point, and based on the article Jammer provided it looks like Gav has zero desire to waive his NMC.

Apologies I missed that because it seemed that your stance was if there wasn't an extension before the trade deadline that Gav should be traded. I've no idea if they've had talks but there was an article a bit back that implied while Gav had been interested in exploring the market when he was UFA coming out of the Cbus trade, he was more comfortable with the idea of LA as a destination now.

“Trade Deadline Isn’t an Issue For Me”: Gavrikov Eyes Long-Term Deal with L.A. Kings

Vladislav Gavrikov has excelled on the Kings’ blue line this season. The Russian defenseman reveals his thoughts on re-signing in LA.

rg.org

In any case the own rental has a time and place. It made sense with Roy last year. This year would be much more of a coin toss.

I appreciate you posting that article, it was insightful. The fact that Gav hasn't thought about term (though he wants long term) or AAV yet makes me feel he fully intends to play the market. Curious what Blake and team will offer him. Your point is well taken, though, that Blake really has no power to trade him and it doesn't appear that Gav wants to move this season.

 

[VCRW]

Tuch is not enough for this team to make a run.

But getting Tuch with a game-ready Doughty may just be...

 

[DarkLeftHand]

Aside from that, I suspect Buffalo would be asking for a forward with more upside, like Laferriere and a pick. Not sure many of you could stomach that, given your unwillingness to part with mediocre draft talent like Turcotte, Spence, or Byfield..

 

[MonkeysUncle]

Tuch is not enough for this team to make a run.

He is not, but unfortunately this management group is looking to get out of the first round , then they can continue to tell ownership they are making progress. Now if they can get Tuch for Spence, Moore, Fagemo and 25 1st then they will be a better team and they would not lose money on off the cap, in fact they would gain some and they could still improve team, especially the 4c

 

[Clif]

Aside from that, I suspect Buffalo would be asked for a forward with more upside, like Laferriere and a pick. Not sure many of you could stomach that, given your unwillingness to part with mediocre draft talent like Turcotte, Spence, or Byfield..

“Mediocre” and you list those three. Nice troll job.

 

[DoubleMinor]

I totally agree. Tuch is signed through 2025-26 though, so he would go beyond just this playoff run and fill a key position next season which could include another playoff run or potential trade prior to the the 25-26 deadline. That's more of where I was going with that idea than just this season's playoff run.

If we are all about a playoff run this season then I 100% agree with you. If we sign Gav past this season than I also 100% agree.

Would be awesome to trade Moore and Gav for Tuch and either Byram or Powers but I'm sure we'd have to include other assets and well to pull that off. May still be worth it though.

Yeah, it’s a tough decision. Try to supplement this roster for a run, or plan for beyond this year.
Tuch is a player who would help this team now and next year (possibly more).

I’m not sure I want to get into the Blake thing but these are difficult decisions for any GM. It comes with the territory.

I’ve said that I think this team has done well enough against the good teams that a case can be made to see if they can catch lightning. It’s hard to resist the temptation.
On the other hand, it’s a reach to think they are serious contenders this year.

I honestly don’t know what the correct strategy is. But Blake has shown a tendency to be bold at times, with mixed results. It is one thing I do actually like though.

I have no reason to feel much one way or another about Blake, or whoever the GM is. I have no allegiance or skin in the game, aside from wanting the team to be a contender. Not being afraid is a trait I want in a GM, but I don’t want reckless moves.

I think Tuch is worth pursuing. It is a worthy discussion.

 

[Rog or Reg?]

Yeah, it’s a tough decision. Try to supplement this roster for a run, or plan for beyond this year.
Tuch is a player who would help this team now and next year (possibly more).

I’m not sure I want to get into the Blake thing but these are difficult decisions for any GM. It comes with the territory.

I’ve said that I think this team has done well enough against the good teams that a case can be made to see if they can catch lightning. It’s hard to resist the temptation.
On the other hand, it’s a reach to think they are serious contenders this year.

I honestly don’t know what the correct strategy is. But Blake has shown a tendency to be bold at times, with mixed results. It is one thing I do actually like though.

I have no reason to feel much one way or another about Blake, or whoever the GM is. I have no allegiance or skin in the game, aside from wanting the team to be a contender. Not being afraid is a trait I want in a GM, but I don’t want reckless moves.

I think Tuch is worth pursuing. It is a worthy discussion.

It's got to the point with Blake, when a potential trade is imminent, I get more nervous than this guy:

 

[symbology]

Then the Kings would be wise to do it, unless they plan to resign Gav. I'm not sure Buffalo really needs defensemen though, even though the rumor is they have made Powers available (and possibly Byram).

Gav for Tuch, without Gav resigning with Buffalo is a fleecing, but it wouldn't be the Kings getting fleeced on that deal. Maybe we could get more for Gav as a rental, but I doubt it.

Now if both were signed for the same term, on their current deals, I'd agree with you.

Gav has a NMC, and I do not see him waiving it for Buffalo.

 

[Birdman]

I will drive Moore to the airport with all of his sh*t.

 

[DoubleMinor]

Gav has a NMC, and I do not see him waiving it for Buffalo.

This is probably true. But if the goal for Gavy and his agent is Free Agency it may not be a deal breaker. It’s hard to predict. I couldn’t imagine doing it but if it’s a business decision who knows?

 

[Madness20721]

Aside from that, I suspect Buffalo would be asking for a forward with more upside, like Laferriere and a pick. Not sure many of you could stomach that, given your unwillingness to part with mediocre draft talent like Turcotte, Spence, or Byfield..

Byfield is mediocre? What are you smoking?

 

[Dr. Tran]

Of all the trade possibilities, Tuch is the one I’d like the most. I don’t know what it would take to get him though.

 

[Ice Rhino]

Tuch is not enough for this team to make a run.

At this point I'll settle for just beating the crap out of the Oilers.

 

[Bollocks]

Moore is not a 30 goal scorer. He had an anomaly of a season, and alot of things were clicking for us, especially with the Danault/Arvy line. I knew he would drastically come down to Earth, but he's too small and the whole TO native narrative has worn off. I wouldn't mind moving him.

But when you look at Tuch's stats, he's not a 30 goal scorer either (only one season in his longer career than Moore). What makes us think he will be with the Kings?

Sure, he may fit right in and be great for us, but there are no guarantees. Rob should be careful not to overpay like he did with PLD who we also hoped would fit right in and he didn't.