Not Dean's burner account.
I do wonder if he is still with the Flyers. FWIW, I was going to reply earlier but was busy at work so I resumed the existing post and hit send. And tbh your reply at 1:57 was light on stuff requiring refuting. But here goes to make you happy...
So the Kings didn't need a 1C (even though you've implied Kopi is old and will be taking a pay cut next summer as he eases into the end of his career). So PLD is a 1C or 2C depending upon how it suits your argument. Blake can't lose if you conveniently move the goal posts for him. IMO for every bargain (like Mikey and Kempe) that Rob signs, he ends up getting married to a player and overpays (PLD and Gavrikov)
The reality of 2023 is Blake has traded Iafallo, Vilardi, Kupari, '24 MTL 2nd (Durzi), Quick, 1st, 3rd-rd picks, Lemieux, a 5th rd pick, Walker, Peterson, Grans, and 2024 2nd Round Pick for the ability to rent a few guys and extend Gravikov at 2x5.875 plus PLD at 8x8.5. An additional depth gutting move will be
required to add a backup goalie.
I think these moves will put the team into another gear, but that gear is Reverse.
PLD would be 1C on some teams, on the Kings, who have Kopitar as 1C, PLD is projected to be a 2C - for now. No goal posts moved. He's clearly not on elite level, but he has the tools and talent to be there in the future. Additionally, he's versatile and can play as a LW, too, giving the team flexibility if QB makes a breakthrough and ends up playing as a center.
On-the-cusp depth can become quite worthless if it stays on-the-cusp long enough. Trading this excess talent for a long-term quality addition (which immediately makes your 2 very good lines into 3 very good lines) is therefore a good move unless you're still in a retool phase, in which case you try to "recycle" them into picks. At this point the Kings aren't in a position to do that, but now that Rob made his splashes he will have to do that, too, in order to avoid a longer period of prospect pool depletion. So it's a TBD on that front.
Cal is Rob's by far the biggest and IMO the only
proper, impactful mistake so far. Definitely makes any bigger mistakes on his part a firing offense, and that's on him.
Let's also add that Vegas has gone significantly further in the playoffs every year since they joined the league, minus last year.
Kings have had 5. 5 playoff GAMES won since Blake took over. In that same span, Vegas has won 51.
Vegas has made moves to push them over the edge. Were they risky? Yes. But were they calculated risks based on some semblance of success? Yes.
These aren't the same calculated risks. It's a strategy of "make the playoffs and anything can happen" minus the team identity or vision that made those teams successful.
It's worse than the black hole, because at least we got a Vilardi-caliber player with first-round picks. Here the Kings are trading Vilardi players away for an even worse pick but not making an impact in the playoffs.
How is this worse than the black hole? The Kings talent level for top 9 and top 4 just improves significantly and goaltending is unlikely to be as bad as last year. This likely means a better seed for the playoffs and considerably better chances of success.
In 2012 it turned out Sutter and Carter were the missing pieces that brought the Kings from being barely a playoff team with bad PO performance to Cup winners. You don't need to completely overhaul your team to become a contender and even in case of complete overhauls (total rebuild) it's VERY often that approach simply doesn't work (case in point - hugely talented Edmonton team). Had Quick not develop into one of the best PO goalies ever, the Kings wouldn't have won 2 Cups. This is a very small, tiny margin of difference in the large scale, isn't it?
For a decade all I hear about playoffs is that once you're in them, anything can happen, yes. Had VGK not made those moves maybe they don't win it this year, next year or ever, despite having an awesome PO record. Maybe they would win regardless. Fact is, it worked and both acquisitions played a major part in their Cup win.
If you disagree about the entire direction of this team, I doubt Rob is the correct recipient of your disappointment, but rather those that pay him. But this move is a good move regardless, it is good now and will be a bad one only in case PLD s**** the bed and Vilardi+Kupari improve significantly, thus putting a big stain on Rob's (and his advisors') judgement. A firing offense. He's willing to risk it and I think that's just the attitude needed to make it with a team like the Kings are now. Other options are being passive (much more likely it turns out to be a black hole team) or aggressive...in rebuilding from the ground up, which after a very successful retooling period would be kinda insane.
I agree with you on the Gav signing, he would likely not have signed here had he not been traded for and has exposure beforehand. I feel, however, that contract negotiations are one of the weaker aspects of Blake's game as GM. He traditionally overpays to get the players he wants which GMs have to do from time to time, but he seems to do more consistently than most. Additionally I have yet to see a player take a home town deal to stay with the team. Additionally he gave McLellan the highest salary of any coach in the NHL with term! That is a pretty crazy spend for a B level coach.
Maybe this changes though in the future as Blake has turned the team into, at the least, playoff contenders within many experts projecting will be Cup contenders within the next couple years.
Also you are right, I personally do worry about the black hole years repeating themselves when we give away home grown talent honestly due to mismanagement of the cap or getting too transfixed on one player to the detriment of the team by overspending / giving up too many assets to get him. I also worry about the team culture which Blake is creating which can work in situations such as Vegas, but only if the team is consistently successful year after year (which the Kings have yet to be by either not making the playoffs, or making the playoffs only to have a 1st round exit).
In the end, I think Blake needs much stronger finance team in order to drive long term success. On the flip side, I think there are few GMs who understand NHL talent as deeply as Blake does. He's great at identifying his targets.
Financials are only really the problem with Cal. As I said, a big mistake that I hope Rob learns from.
Other deals he made are either good value or straight up bargains. Kempe, Anderson, Danault, Fiala and I believe PLD will fall into the same category of very good value for money. Moore is maybe paid too much, but last year he had that injury that surely affected his performance. Gavrikov would worry me as too much of an overpayment if it was a longer deal, but as a 2-year deal I believe he will be very motivated for THE big payday after this contract is up. Definitely TBD.
/me Rubs his eyes……
Did Bollocks just make a post that was fairly POSITIVE regarding the team?
Can’t actually remember seeing that….ever.
BTW, I totally concur. You hit the nail on the head.
You have me confused with someone else lol. I was nearly always the optimistic/positive one, except maybe in the late DL-era.
Who argued with Mondo about Kopitar for years before Kopi won 2 Cups with the Kings?
