The Kings are in a precarious position this offseason. They face a ton of uncertainty in various forms, but one thing they do have is a mid-first round selection in one of the deepest drafts in years.
So would you trade it?
Seems like a dumb question with an obvious answer right? No, of course not.
That is, basically, what the reaction was to the latest article at The Hockey Writers by Eric Roberts.
However, it is not a dumb question at all. It is a different approach than what might be the standard view of things right now, but it is not dumb. Give it a read, because we are about to go in depth on why that still may be a short sighted, and altogether bad idea for the Kings.
First off, Eric brings up some worthwhile points. This draft may very well be overhyped at the moment, and that could spell huge returns for teams looking to deal their first round pick or trade down. You also have several teams like Chicago and Pittsburgh who do not have first round picks, coupled with a plethora teams like Edmonton, Buffalo, Toronto, and Winnipeg with multiple picks. Buffalo or Toronto could very easily score a worthy return of multiple picks later in the draft or a decent roster player for one of their first round selections. More to the premise of Roberts' article, the Kings could use the value of the 13th overall pick to deal the most harmful contract (Arguably) on the roster: Mike Richards.
Before you go nuts, it honestly is not the worst idea in the world.
Despite all the hype around the 2015 draft, prospects are never certain. Noah Hanifin could turn into Alex Plante. You just never know. There is little certainty in what a player could turn into. There is, however, certainty in moving a bad contract off the books. With a player like Anze Kopitar coming up for contract, and other members like Toffoli, Tanner Pearson, and Brayden McNabb also needing ink drawn to paper soon, the idea of moving out No. 10's albatross is tantalizing. Richards is also still a useful player on the right roster, and for an NHL team trying to reach the cap floor, he plus a first round selection may be a win-win.
Here is where the armchair GMs are separated from the real deal though. While the idea of saddling the No. 12 pick to Mike Richards in order to get rid of him is nice in the short term, the overall damage it could do in the long term is worse off. The Kings, in a manner of speaking, have made their bed with the current team and the contract situations and now have to lie in it. The Kings have had success over these last few years, thus dropping their picks further and further into the rounds. They have also acquired players by dealing away several higher end prospects and higher round selections. Brayden Schenn and Wayne Simmonds are players that should come to mind. Due to trades, they did not have a first round pick in 2011, in 2013, and they will also not have one in 2016 from the Andrej Sekera trade. Those sort of trades do not have a real immediate effect until about five years down the line when you have to plug roster holes with fourth, fifth, and sixth round picks instead of first, second, and thirds. Some teams also go the route of cheap free agents and you end up having a bottom six made up of other team's spare parts. San Jose experience tremendous difficulty this year in filling out a competitive bottom six, and a lot of that had to do with their lack of higher end picks from the years of 2011-2008.
The Los Angeles Kings had just 17 picks of the standard 21 you are granted from the years of 2010 to 2012. Only four of those picks were in the first two rounds. If you include 2013, a year in which the Kings had one selection in the first three rounds (Valentin Zykov - 2nd), you can start to understand why the Kings cabinet seems a little bare. Fortunately for Los Angeles, at the time of these pick departures, they looked down the line and realized they were going to have a young enough core to sustain during some light pipeline years. A similar approach needs to be taken right now.
The Kings were on the upswing during that era. They were in "Win now" mode so to speak. Right now is a different story. The Kings are not in desperate need of roster players currently, but they are in need of prospects for the future. In four to five years the Kings will miss this first round pick if it is gone. Again, while there is no certainty in any prospect, the way that this draft is being described there is no way you miss out on a top-15 pick.
In regards to Richards, the cap hit will hurt and the potential recapture from a buyout will be equally as harsh, it will not be as harsh as losing a coveted top-6 or top-4 player.
Roberts mentions the Kings "strong pipeline", but is potentially falling victim to something we all do at times. He is overvaluing the Kings prospects a little too much. Brian O'Neill and Jordan Weal are probably not top six NHL players. Michael Mersch is not a top six NHL player. Heck, Adrian Kempe may not even be. Is Colin Miller a top four defenseman? How about Nick Ebert or Zach Leslie? Who knows what these players will turn into, but it is certainly not best to bank on anything spectacular. The Kings system is good, but not great. It has a lot of potatoes but not much meat. If the team is going to need role players in the future they have plenty of potential options. However, if it comes to blue chip, top end guys, then there is not much to pick from outside of Zykov or maybe Kempe or Miller. Project three to five years down the line and ask yourself who will play in the Top 6 with an aging Marian Gaborik and Jeff Carter being on the backside of their career?
Basically, it is time to stop focusing on the now and start focusing on the future. It hurts, but the Kings may be on the back side of the success window, and need to start preparing for the "what next?" While the idea put forth by our THW writer in question is a decent right now move, it is not a good long term move.
Keeping the first round pick for future talent and eating Richards recapture or cap hit is the wiser choice. Is it the easier choice? No. The Kings may very well suffer next year or the year after because of it.
Keep the pick, live with the Richards deal and the fallout from it, and look to the future. It may be a more conservative approach, but it might be the better for long term sustainability. It could end up being a huge mistake to keep the pick. The player might turn into nothing, and the Kings will be saddled with a bad contract when an opportunity presented itself to get out from under it. That is why it is hard to envy the job of a GM. Collectively they would like to believe they are on a level of Nostradamus, but sometimes look more like Miss Cleo. Vice versa can also apply.
What would you do? Would you go with the more conservative play and keep the pick? Or the more aggressive play and trade Richards to apply some roster stability right now?
Outside of the Richards scenario, would you deal the first round pick AT ALL at this year's draft? No doubt it could net some interesting returns. There are probably plenty of GMs out there who would consider it.
Follow me on twitter for news and notes about the Kings and the NHL
++++I AM CURRENTLY LOOKING FOR ADVERTISERS! If you, or anyone you know would be interested in placing an ad on the blog here at HockeyBuzz then send me a PM!+++++