Trade Quick? Yep!

Quick isn't getting traded and, barring injury, he isn't getting demoted to the AHL. Can we stop having these silly conversations.
 
Kurisu said:
Quick isn't getting traded and, barring injury, he isn't getting demoted to the AHL. Can we stop having these silly conversations.
Click to expand...

True, and he's also not going to be getting a new contract after this season, not just from the Kings, but any NHL team, unless he somehow dramatically turns things around. The most graceful way for this to play out is for him to continue as the back-up, with an occasional start, (which he has handled well, at least publicly), and then announce his retirement at season's end (or near it).
 
So nobody thinks Copley can hold the position? why not? For this roster, and in lieu of some major trade for a great goaltender, Copley is the answer.

No to trading Quick. For 1, I don't think other teams would see him as an answer to the goaltending question marks. For 2, you dont move him just to move him to free up space...he is a capable back up at this point and let him finish his contract here. If after the contract is out he wants to move on, then he can do that.

Petersen is not the long term answer, that should be obvious. That is a lot of money wasted, but I can see why RB did it. At the time he was looking like the best long term solution. I think RB went with the idea of he is the youngest of the bunch, let's pay him, he will grow into the role and we will have a good #1 at a decent cap hit. Problem is, being thrust into the role it became painfully obvious CP is not the answer and now LAK are back at square 1, however Copley seems to have taken the opportunity and done well with it. He might not be lighting the world on fire, but he is stopping a lot of stoppable shots and for this Kings team, most nights that all they will need, above average goal tending. They don't need a Vezina candidate to be in net night in and night out.

The problem JQ and CP had was they were not stopping very stoppable NHL shots, Copley seems to be doing that most of the time and finds himself getting the starts because he is usually between the pipes and not sliding into the corner like the JQ and CP who are far too aggressive on the puck with the current defense and puck moving of the modern NHL.
 
Bollocks said:
Remember Quick's save pct. that season and most importantly playoffs?
Click to expand...

.929/.946 (with a 1.41 GAA in the playoffs) - still to this day that is the most dominant performance I have ever seen by a goalie through 4 rounds of the playoffs. If anyone thinks we are going to get that out of any of our goalies this season, good luck...
 
DryKing said:
Still not something that would be done to Quick unless he is legitimately injured. Also you do realize Quick outplayed Petersen while they were working in tandem this season right? Seems odd that Petersen would suddenly be our answer.

Likely what happens with Petersen, though, depends on whether or not the Kings feel he has gotten what he can out of the AHL, and whether or not they decide to keep him with the Reign for a playoff run. My guess, though, is that they bring him back up close to the end of the season with enough time to either prove himself again the NHL level or keep him in reserve with the team pending injury.
Click to expand...

Um... both sucked! Peterson was sent down. I didn't say Peterson was the answer but unless he recovered I'd try someone else. I'm certainly not leaving Quick in if he sucks no matter how much loyalty he deserves.
 
I don't think any team will give up 2 firsts or a first and prospect for Quick. Quick is a backup at best now. Edmonton would probably do Campbell for Quick starlight across.
 
DryKing said:
.929/.946 (with a 1.41 GAA in the playoffs) - still to this day that is the most dominant performance I have ever seen by a goalie through 4 rounds of the playoffs.
Click to expand...

I'd go with Patrick Roy in 93. The Kings absolutely dominated 4 out of 5 games in that Cup Final and lost 3 of them because of him. That Cup run was Roy winning it for a fairly average Montreal team.

In 2012, the Kings probably would have won the Cup with just decent goaltending, although obviously not with a 16-4 record. But they were easily the best team in the playoffs that year. They were running teams out of the building. I thought that while Quick was outstanding, Doughty should have won the Conn Smythe, he was the engine driving that team. On the other hand, Quick should have won the Hart that season; the Kings would have never made the playoffs at all if he wasn't standing on his head all season long. He wasn't even nominated.
 
santiclaws said:
I'd go with Patrick Roy in 93. The Kings absolutely dominated 4 out of 5 games in that Cup Final and lost 3 of them because of him. That Cup run was Roy winning it for a fairly average Montreal team.

In 2012, the Kings probably would have won the Cup with just decent goaltending, although obviously not with a 16-4 record. But they were easily the best team in the playoffs that year. They were running teams out of the building. I thought that while Quick was outstanding, Doughty should have won the Conn Smythe, he was the engine driving that team. On the other hand, Quick should have won the Hart that season; the Kings would have never made the playoffs at all if he wasn't standing on his head all season long. He wasn't even nominated.
Click to expand...


John Vanbiesbrouck (.904)as a Panther in '96 would be my non-Roy choice for dominance in a cup run. [Both Roy and John are jackasses as humans but, here I am typing this baloney anyway---conflicted] He played 22 playoff games and lost 1 (Mark Fitzpatrick-who?- was the backup)check the minutes played if you're that kind of person compared to Mark, insane-o. Florida did have Jovanovski clearing the crease ( 221lbs and 137 pims) but still, the rest of the defense was (slow &)questionable at best. It was all Beezer.

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0002341996.html
 
Still wished we would have moved Quick before the season started. Oh well.

I feel the same way about DD. So many of you keep putting loyalty over wins.
 
What party? said:
John Vanbiesbrouck (.904)as a Panther in '96 would be my non-Roy choice for dominance in a cup run. [Both Roy and John are jackasses as humans but, here I am typing this baloney anyway---conflicted] He played 22 playoff games and lost 1 (Mark Fitzpatrick-who?- was the backup)check the minutes played if you're that kind of person compared to Mark, insane-o. Florida did have Jovanovski clearing the crease ( 221lbs and 137 pims) but still, the rest of the defense was (slow &)questionable at best. It was all Beezer.

https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0002341996.html
Click to expand...

Tim Thomas 2010-11 16-9 1.98 .940 Sv % with 4 Shutouts deserves a mention.
 
Hindsight is always 20/20. If I had known that Quick's play would fall off dramatically from last season, and if I had known that some guy named Pheonix Copley would be our starter, then yeah, sure, it might be better to have traded Quick during the offseason (just don't tell me that Petersen would be playing in Ontario). But only someone with a magic crystal ball would have known that. Then again, I think everyone would have been thrilled if the Kraken had taken Quick in the expansion draft, and then there's no way the Kings make the playoffs last year.
I cannot see into the future, either. Maybe having a veteran backup like Quick will come in handy later. We all know how streaky he is. What if (heaven forbid) Copley is hurt?
Anyway, what would Quick have fetched us in a trade? Even after last year, probably not a whole lot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Now Chirping

Total: 11

Share this page

Back
Top