On rumors...

If Gaborik wants to play in LA like the rumors are saying then why not wait and sign him after the season ends. Then he is a free agent and we dont have to give up anything. Its not like we are making a push for the cup and need him right now.

Would the wild take Cloutier (1 mil.) and Calder (2.75 mil.)? That's almost 4 million. Plus, throw in Labarbara because Kings fans seem to hate him and we're almost at 5 million. Now, add Harrold and Moulson and we've got a deal.

Even if they did trade for him, why would they want a guy who is always injured? When he's healthy he's amazing, but I'd rather stick with Brown, Moller and Simmonds and see how these guys develop on RW anyways.

Oh Rich, you're spoiling the fun.

Well said, Rich.

Sadly, regardless of what you have said here, those that have jumped on the Gaborik rumors will be first in line to jump on the next rumor.....

I think the fact that the Kings appear to be creeping up in these types of rumors is a very good sign that Lombardi and company are on the right track.

Like you said, the Kings have the cap room, but in addition to that they have assets that the Wild would covet if they are going to trade Gaborik. We can only hope that the Kings are going to hang on these assets because they just aren't there in terms of rebuilding the franchise. Eventually, the Kings will be in a position where adding a Gaborik type player is going to be a viable option, right now it isn't.

While I agree with you on every single point, and am NOT one of those people who start and/or perpetuate rumors... there is absolutely a CHANCE that the Kings WOULD have an interest in Gaborik, provided they could work out a deal that would prevent his being a free agent at season's end. Slim as it may be, (OK, preposterous as it may be...) why wouldn't Lombardi look into a reasonable 4 year deal that would make Kopitar and Gaborik teammates, and ship off a Hickey or a Teubert along with a Boyle or a Purcell... it doesn't seem as far fetched to me as some might think.

Brown - Kopitar - Gaborik
Frolov - Handzus - Simmonds
Moller - Stoll - O'Sullivan
Calder/Ivanans - Armstrong - Moulson
would not be the worst thing in the world :)

That being said... I still agree it's a snowball's chance in hell, but it's gotta be thought in the realm...

But Rich I'm sure it's an e5 ! An e5 !!!! j/k

I think your logic makes sense and Lombardi will probably stick to his guns.

Marc Nathan - Your lineup makes sense, as does your trade, and it would put Moulson on the line he belongs with. If the Kings traded Boyle and he turned into a monster offensive center it would be tough to swallow, though. Especially with Gaborik's erratic playoff record.

Gaborik cannot help this team where it needs it the most, team defense. This team is too young to bring in a guy who is a known liability. Sure he can score a ton of goals, but we have those players already, we just need to get them going consistantly. And if anything, his agent is throwing out the whole, he wants to play in LA card, because he knows we have the most cap space and that could force a team like the Habs giving him a huge deal. Or maybe the Wild leaked it hoping Monteal will give up a better deal. Either way, I smell a rat!

I love how some of you are still speculating...THIS TRADE WILL NEVER HAPPEN EVER! this would be dumber than the kyle calder signing or that cliff ronning pickup a few years back...remember how awful he was as a king?

Who WOULDN'T want Gaborik?? The Kings are going to compete next season -- as early as next season, I think -- and this guy would go a long way in helping to make our offense elite.

If the deal is right -- and as someone pointed out, obviously, that we get him signed beforehand -- it would be silly for the Kings to sit by and not consider this. Trading Boyle, however, would be a HUGE mistake. This guy is going to be big-time, just watch. Outside of Boyle (and Teubert), I wouldn't mind including a couple of next year's picks (we have a buttload of them), along with a solid prospect or two, like Hickey and Purcell/Quick/your mom.

T

If, and that is a big if in my opinion, we pick up Gaborik, who would play on the first line once Gaborik got hurt. I heard them talking about Gaborik on XM this morning and they say he's played over 50 games once in his career. I wont even mention his playoff performance, as the Kings are re-building and it would not be an issue. I like the look of the team the way it is, my vote would be to allow the kids to play together, develop chemistry and make a push next season for the playoffs.

I think Gaborik is an amazing player, I just don't think if fits on this team right now. Besides he will probably be a trade deadline deal. As many of you have pointed out, if he wants to play with Kopi, we can sign him as a free agent.

You guys are just negotiating with yourselves.

One thing that people should understand about Dean Lombardi and the likelihood that he makes a deal for Gaborik is that such a deal would end up being very much like the deal made for Zigmund Palffy. With this in mind one must then remember how critical Lombardi was of the Palffy deal, and how his whole approach with the Kings would not involve such moves to obtain success now by mortgaging the future. Don't plan on the Kings ever making a high profile trade prior to them establishing themselves as a legitimate playoff team.

I agree with what most have said and Gaborik isn't coming here, but on what could be a sorta related note, please get Moulson off the first line. kthxbai.

Anonymous - Could you explain Lombardi's criticism of the Palffy trade?

Didn't we deal Jokinen and someone for Palffy? Or was it Berg? I forget.

I do recall Lombardi mentioning how while Palffy made that team better for that time, it robbed the Kings of a player who could have grown with and helped the organization in the longer run. I agree, but then again Palffy was one of my favorite Kings'. Ah. Imagine if Palffy could be on Kopitar's wing with Brown...

You guys are too funny.
Gaborik is going to give a huge discount to come to the 29th best team in the NHL last year? Why take a 10 year deal on the open market when the Kings will offer you 4...this would be a good reason for him to bypass UFA. What are we smoking here guys and why haven't I been offered any?
Lets "throw in" Hickey..Teubert..Doughty..all of our young talent. Who needs good young talent when we can have an injury prone veteran? He's averaged playing 63 games over the last 3 years. Which of the 20 games that he'll miss, do we not need him in?
Lets abandon the youth movement..you know, that thing that has excited all of us for the 1st time in how long?

Here's the criticism of the Palffy trade, would you rather have Palffy playing in Europe or Ollie Jokinen centering our second line?
No more trading young assets, Lombardi's going to stick with the youngsters until they mature.

NYKINGSFAN - Gaborik missed 5 games last season and had 42 goals playing for Lemaire. Anyway, most people on here are saying it won't or shouldn't happen and there's really not much point in trading for pending UFA's unless it's for the playoffs. Pittsburgh will give him a good home.

How could we possibley sign him? He has turned down $80M for 10 years. What does he want, 100M? He is going to end up as the only scorer on the team. Oh wait, he already is.

NMKINGSFAN - Is that what Lombardi said?

Gaborik nixed the trade because he wants to play in LA and everyone knows the Kings are moving to Kansas City.

Come on, people.
Nobody is saying 'let's trade the farm for him!'
He is an amazing talent. He is not as injury-prone as some people here believe. He's a perennial All-Star. It makes sense to look into it IF (and that's a huge if), if we do not pay him far more than market value, nor pay him something that messes up our structure (as it relates to other, young & talented players in the system), AND if we don't have to give up more than one of our 'top' prospects (and it would have be the right one, as well).

Who on Earth would agree that trading Doughty would be a good deal? Teubert? I haven't heard anyone mention those names (save for one, misguided mention of the latter). We must realize that great teams build, as we have, and add the occasional star player when he comes available. Gaborik would look fantastic in a Kings jersey, and would help us to get where we are all looking to go.

The player's agents back east frequently throw out the Kings as a potential player destination in order to gain some negotiating leverage.

Thus, ten years of Lindros to Los Angeles rumors.

Cloutier for Gaborik makes sense to me. As long as Gaborik agrees to a long term contract at 3 million a year. We'd also have to take on the Minnesota GM to prevent the then very likely lynching. Or we could just have Phil Graham and George Bush tell those Minnesota fans they are really better off without Gaborik, whiners.

Cristobal

cristobal said:
Marc Nathan - Your lineup makes sense, as does your trade

you agreed with marc Nathan's trade proposal which included Hickey, Teubert, Boyle, Purcell. that's called bankrupting your youth movement.

As far as Gaborik's ability to stay on the ice:
2003-2004 65 games played
2005-2006 65 games played
2006-2007 48 games played
2006-2007 77 games played

I will never say he's not a productive player..he's an incredible talent....but if we're paying $100 mil for a guy, I want him playing 75-80 games a year.

NYKINGSFAN - you forgot the "ands and ors" in marc nathan's trade proposals. Plus, I've never seen Hickey or Teubert play. Finally, you've got to give something to get something. San Jose made the right move trading Sturm and Stuart for Thornton. It's all about the lineup anyway. The deal doesn't make any sense because of contracts and salaries. But marc nathan is the only one who gets that there are more Hickeys and Teuberts and Purcells combined in the world than there are Gaboriks. Unless Hickey is as good as Doughty.

cristobal said:

Would the wild take Cloutier (1 mil.) and Calder (2.75 mil.)? That's almost 4 million. Plus, throw in Labarbara because Kings fans seem to hate him and
we're almost at 5 million. Now, add Harrold and Moulson and we've got a deal.

You can’t be serious, can you? Three guys who are slop and two guys with medium potential for Gaborek? You just lost what little credibility you had left.

But maybe you follow the something for nothing philosophy in your own life?

If I’m Minnesota, a trade involving Gaborek would have to involve the Kings number-one pick in the upcoming draft or else there’s no reason to talk. I’ll take the pick plus Frolov and Moulson if you want, but you’re not getting something for a bunch of nothing.

You're right Cristobal..I did leave out the ands and ors...it made my case look better LOL

I have no idea how good Hickey or Teubert will be, but imagine that trade being offered before the season and losing Doughty? Or think back a few yars ago and someone offering a top talent for the trights to Kopitar before we knew what he could be?
I jsut think we should sticvk with the plan to build with the youth and let it play out.

I can care less about Gaborik, but I loved Pallfy. Gotta be top 3 in my book of Kings I've seen since 93. I have no idea if they gave away the farm for him, but as a player, he was great.

Anaheim SUCKS!

Sorry, I just didnt have anything to add to the conversation.

Duckhunter, the kings traded Mathieu Biron, Josh Green, Olli Jokinen, and their 1999 1st-round pick for Palffy. The NYI had four picks that year, but I don't know off the top of my head which one was the Kings. They drafted Tim Connolly fifth, Taylor Pyatt eighth, Branislav Mezei tenth and Kristian Kudroc 28th.

And if I remember correctly, that assclown, Gary Bettman, made the Kings add Jokinen to that trade.

NYKingsFan...I'd forgotten how eloquent you are...I was going to say the same thing; you beat me to the punch. Bottom line, don't abandon the youth movement for a rent-a-right wing. Even at 4 years, he's overpriced, particularly for what the Kings have in the pipeline.

Stick to the plan, stay focused people!

If you hear rumors of a specific trade, as in, ``The Kings are considering sending Player X to City Y in exchange for Player Z,'' the trade isn't going to happen. Maybe that specific trade was discussed at some point, but by the time it hits public, it's d-e-a-d.

You mean like...

Brad Stuart to the Red Wings for a draft pick (rumored... happened)
Norstrom to the Stars (rumored... happened)

McCabe to Florida (rumored for weeks... finally happened)

Sure, for every 100 rumors, 5 actually happen, but its really cool when that 5% does happen.

There are also those that ARE going to get traded but we never know to which team: Olli Jokinen and Cammalleri for example.

Sure, there are the FUN ones that NOBODY gets (Lubo to Edmonton, Thornton to San Jose) but to dismiss it as a whole is simply inaccurate.

What Kings trades other than Lubo "surprised" you? Gleason and Belanger for JMFJ? But for those TWO, everyone knew Avery would be traded, everyone knew Sopel would be traded, everyone knew Blake would be traded but he squashed that now didn't he, everyone knew Norstrom was gone, Modry too (yes, we expected Thornton too but we later discovered the deal fell through with Dallas once they acquired Richards), Everyone knew Craig Conroy's days were numbered.

So...

I disagree.

If we're going to trade for anyone, it should be a solid young defenseman. We don't need any more scoring.

But just imagine in 2 years when the top 4 on D will be:

Johnson - Doughty
Tuebert - Hickey

Thats a dangerous couple of lines if those 4 reach even half of their potential.

We have enough scoring, which everyone will see when the chemistry becomes strong enough.

Patience guys...We will be cup contenders soon enough.

Bouwmeester

I wonder how anybody could think that if Jay Buowmeester doesn't want to play for a loser in Florida he'd want to play for a loser in Los Angeles?

hahaha. Nice outlook, deadcat.

Cristoball, maybe it's just me, but I really don't want a guy with a drinking problem and off-ice issues on my team. Maybe I'm the only one on here who feels that way, but since you're so free with AEG's money and don't consider character issues then go ahead and trade for him. I'm sure Florida would accept the offer you proposed to Minnesota for Gaborek.

Anonymous...I think you're skipping over a key word there, which is ``specific.''

You mentioned how the Norstrom trade was rumored and happened. Right. But where was the report, pre-trade, that said, ``The Kings are considering trading Norstrom, Pushkarev and picks to Dallas for Modry, Fransson and picks''? It didn't exist, and that's my point. You hear general rumors that certain guys might get traded, and that's fine, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the SPECIFIC trades that people ``report'' as possibilities. Those almost never get out there before the trades happen. No general manager worth his salt will let that get out.

It's fine with me that you disagree, but let's at least make sure we agree on what we're disagreeing about...

deadcatbounce said:

Maybe I'm the only one on here who feels that way, but since you're so free with AEG's money and don't consider character issues then go ahead and trade for him.

Someone sure as heck needs to be free with AEG's money since they obviously are not, so long as it pertains to the Kings, that is.

deadcatbounce - since my response to your insulting comment was deleted, you still may not understand that the "trade" I proposed for Gaborik was sarcastic. I thought it was quite clear, honestly. But since you propose trading Frolov, a no. 1 next year, and Moulson as trade bait for a guy that is a pending UFA, I have to wonder why you think your ideas hold any water? If Minnesota or Florida would take the players I named, Labs - Cloutier - Calder and Moulson, I would make the trade whether its Gaborik or Bouwmeester. I don't know anything about Bouwmeester off the ice, but on it he's performing incredibly well, if stats are anything to go by, despite being in the last year of a contract. If the trade were made now, and Bouwmeester didn't look to be a keeper as far as contract numbers go, you could always turn and trade him at the deadline and get quality players in return. The only player I listed that isn't hated by LA fans right now is Moulson and until he proves he's a very good NHLer, he's just a dime a dozen guy.

On the flip side, you want to give away no. 1 picks and Frolov. I would never part with Frolov. I doubt many Kings fans would want to either. So you'd do yourself a favor to start focusing on discussing sports and get over any animosity you have towards people you don't know because the things you say in anger make you look...

By the way, I've never spent a dime of AEG's money, but they've spent some of mine...

Frolov happens to be one of my favorite Kings, but as I keep on saying you have to give up something to get something in return. Cristobal, why not propose a deal for Gaborek then, since you already proposed your sarcastic one. Be serious and let's see what happens.

Before you trade for people, you'd better look into character issues, too.

Thanks Moondoggie..I always like reading your posts as well.