Trade Quick? Yep!
- Thread starter HTK
- Start date
D
DarkLeftHand
Lurker
I mentioned this in the off-season thread, but it’s more relevant here. Unfortunately that Peterson was signed too early, because had Blake waited to extend him, we would be looking closer to 2.5-3 mill per. That based on the free agent signings today and also Quick essentially asserting his goal crease dominance… that wasted money is rough at this point, and the contract is terrible unless Peterson absolutely pries that crease from quick and wins 35-40 games this year and posts a .915 or greater. Then maybe it’ll be worth it in the final year or two, otherwise it’s just bad to be paying a backup or tandem guy what a Stanley cup winning starter is earning.
J
jgs
Lurker
Blake really messed up on paying Peterson big money just to warm the bench.
HTK
3rd Line Winger
So who do you move? Quick or Peterson? I don?t think Peterson has any value.
Seems unlikely that DD or Kopi can be moved.
H
hockeygolucky
Lurker
Quick will elevate Peterson's game, trading him will not. Also, goalies like Quick don't come around often. Now if you wanted to trade Iafallo...
This is my Quick Reply.
This is my Quick Reply.
I
Ice24
Lurker
It's a gamble, Blake felt like Peterson was ready to take the next step. We found out he wasn't ready. Maybe he figures it out and does take that next step and then Quick comes off the book. I would like to see Quick retire as a King, four players should never wear another uniform, Doughty, Quick, Brown and Kopitar.
D
DarkLeftHand
Lurker
Fully agree. If Quick has a solid season this year I would love to see him take a 2.5 mill backup type contract for at least a year. Kopitar has two years left at big money, but if he still looks like a 2c or even a 3c then by all means bring him back at an appropriate amount. To be clear, those deals should be a bit of a hometown discount, not the Kings overpaying for ‘legacy’. Kopi and drew are actively being paid their legacy money in years that were basically throw aways, where their performance was anything but elite.
A
Annapurna
Lurker
Trade Quick.
W
What party?
Lurker
L
LAKingSteve
Lurker
And the reality is that it's probably not Blake driving this decision though he is ultimately responsible. There's a plethora of coaches and advisors that are telling him Peterson was ready.
And yes, agree with you on Doughty, Quick, Brown and Kopi retiring as Kings.
HTK
3rd Line Winger
They traded Gretzky and Luc AND Blake. Blake of all people should get this. I just can?t wrap my head around the willingness to remain mediocre at the cost of loyalty. So odd to me. The board sure seems to agree with you for the most part.
I think the willingness to accept and scholarship players sends the wrong message to the team. The message that winning is not the #1 priority. Loyalty is more important than winning. Sounds like college sports, not pro.
J
jgs
Lurker
very bad Gamble. Campbell was playing good and carrying the team while Quick was injured. You don't trade what you know you got for what you don't know what you will get. That is a bad gamble to take.
DryKing
Power Forward
How's the zero loyalty to players, win at all costs, approach working out for Vegas?
https://www.yahoo.com/video/nhl-how...f-hockey-most-hated-franchises-145604770.html
https://thehockeywriters.com/golden-knights-no-longer-nhl-cinderella-team/
https://www.reviewjournal.com/sport...ts-remain-dogged-in-pursuit-of-title-2456433/
P
Pickle_Pucks
Lurker
Campbell played "well" on a top 5 team and lost in the first round of the playoffs...
Peterson could have done the same without breaking a sweat on Toronto.
Jury is still out on Peterson, he's played with a huge CLUSTER in front of him and shown flashes. The Campbell deal could end up looking ugly and the Peterson deal could end up looking sage.
Did someone really say they'd take Campbell back over Thousand Oaks???
Goaltenders are a dime a dozen. Good D and overall team in front of you is what makes a goaltender in the modern NHL. Mike Smith is hot garbage but when your team controls the puck so well it's flattering.
That said, the Peterson contract was always at least 1.5m too much. Head scratcher. But he can still evolve into a #1 .
Peterson could have done the same without breaking a sweat on Toronto.
Jury is still out on Peterson, he's played with a huge CLUSTER in front of him and shown flashes. The Campbell deal could end up looking ugly and the Peterson deal could end up looking sage.
Did someone really say they'd take Campbell back over Thousand Oaks???
Goaltenders are a dime a dozen. Good D and overall team in front of you is what makes a goaltender in the modern NHL. Mike Smith is hot garbage but when your team controls the puck so well it's flattering.
That said, the Peterson contract was always at least 1.5m too much. Head scratcher. But he can still evolve into a #1 .
HTK
3rd Line Winger
I am not advocating to trade them all. But one of them? Yep. I am all for balance. Trading one aging vet would not kill the entire team?s chemistry. If it does then the team is too fragile to begin with.
I
Ice24
Lurker
Campbell has been on much better teams than LA has had in the past 3 years. What could have he provided to LA than what he did for some good Toronto teams? He was 10-14 on a bad team. Then 8-10:until he was traded to a decent team. He was 17-3 and 31-9 on a very good team. He is 6-8 in the playoffs on a very good team. So for the Kings he would have been 2-8 possible 3-8. Or 3-4 this past season.
I would take Toronto’s defense over LA at this point.
I would take Toronto’s defense over LA at this point.
Last edited by a moderator:
S
Statue4Deano
Lurker
Last season the Kings allowed 232 goals tied with the Colorado Avalanche and 9th fewest goals allowed in the league. Toronto allowed 252 goals.
The Kings also allowed just 28.5 shots per game. Which was #2 in the entire league.
I
Ice24
Lurker
That probably has something to do with the offensive production of Toronto. What kind of scoring did Toronto?s defense provide?
