Why would we give up our best young scorer who is 25 and a first round pick +other assets for Blake Wheeler who is 30... usually rebuilding involves getting younger but this is not the case at all...

the evander kane deal would be milan lucic round two. if we are going to trade for kane it will be martinez for kane and a conditional pick(s) if he doesn't resign with LA

and the miller deal. no. please. Ladue can play that role you have him in and we don't need to throw away 3 decent picks

I'm def down with Shattenkirk, but agree with rmay50 that I wouldn't be moving Toffoli

The answer is simple to your question about toffoli trade. He's not an solidified player in the league yet. He's not consistent as Wheeler is. Pearson score more goals than Toffoli. That's why I chose him instead of Pearson. So, this trade is thinking about the present, not the future, cause Kopitar, Doughty, Quick and Muzzin is no longer young players and don't have much room to win another SC.

Kane like Lucic!?!? Seriously!? Kane made 28 goals in a mediocre team last season. So, no. He's surely better and still younger than goone Lucic.

Collin Miller trade maybe I give much than he really deserves. But it's not bad as you think, in my opinion. Miller is young and brings off to the defense.

PS: It's not a completely rebuild. Just dumping two of the worst contracts of the league and making some necessary moves to your team have another chance to win SC again. Cause, with this team or changing just one or two pieces, u don't have any chance to beat my Pens or even reach SC Finals again. That's my opinion.

Kings are not going to give a pp specialist 7 million a year in Shattenkirk. They don't have the space to do that and it would be a terrible signing.

First off, Toffoli had an injury-riddled season and the season before that he scored 31 goals, so I don't know what you don't see in him but ok... also, last time I checked, wheeler has never hit 30 goals in his career so you are dead wrong if you think he's a great goal scorer

When I said Milan lucic round 2, I meant the contract situation, thought u would be able to pick that up but I guess not. Let me explain what happened just so there's no confusion. Kings traded Martin Jones, Colin Miller (who was a prospect at the time), and their first round pick to boston for Milan lucic. Lucic plays the year with LA, and his contract expires after the season. Los Angeles then gets burned by the fact that Boston trades Martin Jones to a division rival and MILAN LUCIC DOES NOT RESIGN WITH THE KINGS. this is what I was talking about with lucic round two. If the kings trade for Evander Kane, then we want a conditional pick(s) so that if he DOESNT RESIGN LIKE LUCIC DIDNT, we don't get burned again. i didn't even come close to trying to compare their values, which you thought I was...

again, you are nowhere close on what I was saying about colin miller. I was saying that it would be extremely dumb to throw away 3 draft picks for him when we have 3 guys who can play the same exact role you have him in (5th/6th dman so you can understand what I'm saying) just as well and we can keep the pick with them (those 3 players are Paul LaDue, Kevin Gravel, and Oscar Fantenberg, again, so you understand)... I was just trying to say that the Kings need to keep picks and if there are 3 guys that can play that role (2 offensive minded ones), why make an unnecessary trade...

changing one or two pieces actually could be the reason the Kings win another cup, the main thing the kings need is a scoring winger to play with Kopitar. they can do that by trading either Muzzin or martinez, not Toffoli. Last season kopitar had a scoring winger that was still good and he put up 74 points, so actually fixing one or two pieces could be the key...

and if you're gonna say it's not a rebuild you might wanna change the title of your AGM, because "Rebuilding buying out awful contracts to upgrade off (including signing Shattenk" sounds like it will be a rebuild to me and probably a lot of other people too when the first word of the title is "Rebuilding"

the signing of Shattenkirk directly contradicts the idea of "rebuilding".

Two worst contracts? Andrew MacDonald/David Clarkson/Roberto Luongo/Nathan Horton are all much worse.

PS: your pens won't be a playoff team in 4-5 years (WC at best)

THANK YOU

Ok. You make your point now (and I admit it's good arguments). Sorry to the misunderstanding. Maybe you're right. But I don't think my moves are crazy ones. Just probably not better ones. But that's it.

I have no problems at all with those who disagree with me. That's why I'm here. I like to discuss (politely) about hockey.

Thank u for your comments.

Ok. I'll change the title.

As for the contracts...well, they are awful contracts either. I'm not saying Brown's and Gaborik's contracts are the worst ones. But surely they're two of them.

And finally, as for my team not being in playoffs in 4-5 years...I'm not worried about it at all. We're back to back SC Champions and there're good possibities to the 3peat or win another one or two cups in the next 4-5 years. Besides, Sid and Malkin already won 3 cups. And for what I know, Giroux not won even one. So, that's pretty fine to me.

But thanks for your comment either.

I disagree that Shat is just a PP specialist. But maybe 6M would be a better contract for him. I've been thinking about it. But in general, I think he's a very good d-man. Much more than just a "PP specialist".