Forum answers I
One sign that free agency might be dying down? On its website, TSN has moved on to promoting this week's CFL games! Go Roughriders!
Here's the first set of answers. Thanks for all the great questions. Hopefully I can do a good job of answering them. Keep them coming, if you'd like, on the original post...
----------
Question: The focus has been on defense, but do you see the Kings looking at any of the remaining forwards out there? Jagr, Shanahan, Fedorov, Naslund?
Answer: I think Lombardi has made it fairly clear that he's not looking at forwards. I specifically asked him, Tuesday night, whether he was looking at anything other than defenseman, and he said no. I thought maybe the Kings would look at a winger to add to the second line, but it appears that they're content with letting some of the prospects battle it out for that job.
-----
Question: Hey Rich, at this point would you go after Jay Bouwmeester, via trade or offersheet, and why or why not?
Answer: No, because a trade or an offer sheet involves giving up prospects and/or draft picks, and those are two things that Lombardi cherishes more than life itself. Bouwmeester would be a good get, but I imagine the price would be steep, as a few teams out there would love to get their hands on him. I can't see the Kings getting in a bidding war and giving up these assets they've spent three years building. I'm pretty sure that's how Lombardi would see it.
-----
Question: What is the likelihood of an extension being signed by Kopitar and Johnson this summer? Is there any indication if any of the players who were qualified will be accepting their qualifying offers? If Lombardi does add another left handed defenseman, are they still planning on bringing Rob Blake back? Say they do sign another dman, in addition to him they will have 7 defensemen with Johnson, Doughty, Preissing, Greene, Gauthier and Harrold. Add Blake and that brings it up to 8. Do you sense that Preissing or Harrold will be moved or is it possible that Blake does not come back?
Answer: 1) If it happens, it would be late summer, probably even during training camp. There are just too many other things going on right now. Free agency, the coaching search, this summer's restricted free agents... I understand the anxiety about getting guys locked up, but there's some perspective involved. 2) It's much more likely for some of the younger guys, like Moulson, Gauthier, etc. I'm not singling them out...just saying they're more likely than an O'Sullivan, for instance. But no word on that yet. 3) Yes, bringing back Blake is an idea independent of bringing in a left-shot defenseman. 4) Yes, I do, and Preissing would almost certainly be the likely odd man out there.
-----
Question: What seems to be the appropriate price range for Patrick O'Sullivan? Does Lombardi have any more SPECIFIC targets, even if it's just an "i like this guy, he could fit our plans"? Can you do a quick sum-up of our cap situation? and finally, have you heard anything about Oscar Moller and whether he has any feelings about Lombardi's refusal to give him up? That seems like the kind of thing that would really motivate a guy...
Answer: 1) That's a tough question, because...appropriate for whom? The Kings' idea of appropriate is probably much different than O'Sullivan's idea of appropriate. They'll meet somewhere in the middle. Backes is the only name that Lombardi mentioned in terms of possibly impacting the O'Sullivan situation. 2) Stuart and Orpik were the only ``big-name'' targets Lombardi had. Now it has moved on to another tier of defensemen. I'm sure that list is a lot longer. Modry is always the name that the Kings can come back to. 3) As far as cap numbers, I would encourage you to go to www.nhlnumbers.com or www.nhlscap.com. Not because I'm lazy and don't want to do it -- well, not totally -- but because you can run the numbers in a lot of different ways. It depends a lot on whom you think will make the team, etc. And don't forget to factor things like bonus money, new contracts for RFAs and Doughty's contract. 4) No, I haven't heard anything about Moller's feelings on that. Might be a good question for the prospects camp. Thanks for the idea there.
-----
Question: How are the negotiations going with Sully and Stoll. Are you aware of other teams offering a contract to Sully. Do you see DL making any more trades to improve the team. Do you see him making any trades to reach the minimum cap requirement. What's the situation with Cloutier. Are we stuck with him next season.
Answer: 1) Proceeding as normal, it seems. Obviously nothing is done but if there's any panic out there, I'm sure not seeing it. They've had Stoll for less than a week, so I'm sure there's a feeling-out process there. 2) No, none. 3) I could definitely see Lombardi trading a lower-level prospect and/or later-round draft pick for a ``bridge'' defenseman. Actually, as I look at the list of remaining free-agent defensemen, that almost seems more likely than a signing at this point. 4) No, I don't see Lombardi making any trades specifically to reach the cap floor. Doesn't seem as though that will be necessary. 5) Cloutier's contract situation is ``on hold.'' It's likely headed to an arbitrator. Either way, he won't be playing anywhere. Either he's bought out or he's on a long-term injury situation.
-----
Question: I read on another message board that the ticket reps for the Ontario Reign and telling people that the Kings are dropping the Reading Royals as an affiliate. After checking the web for any kind of confirmation this was found... Any idea on this?
Answer: I don't really have any contacts in those circles but I'll see what I can find out. AEG owns a chunk of Reading, and it was my understanding that the Kings would continue to supply some prospects, but perhaps Reading has found another full-time affiliation.
-----
Question: Why the contract delay on O'Sullivan? Does Lombardi let Jeff Soloman do most the negociation? When does Dean get involved? Soloman's title is director of legal affairs and hockey operations. How does his role break down? How much is legal and how much is hockey? Lombardi seems to rely on him a lot for CBA and salary cap issues for the team. But most fans do not know who he is, but he seems to provide a crucial role in palyer contracts.
Answer: Yes, I get the impression that Jeff Solomon is a name that some people aren't familiar with. He's a crucial part of the contract process, and every team has someone like him working the numbers. He's Lombardi's right-hand man in terms of the numbers and making sure everything fits together with the budget and the salary cap, not only in the current year but for five or six years to come. Contracts, especially in this era, can get complicated, so Solomon is there to keep things straight. Lombardi is unquestionably the one who decides which players to go after and how much to pay them. There's no doubt about that. I hope I explained that sufficiently...
-----
Question: I've never been to the prospects camp. When and where is it and can I just show up? Any whispers of coach's names in the air? I remember DL saying at the draft that he would interview Johnston again soon. Did that happen (assuming I remember correctly)? Who do you see making the jump from juniors or Reading to Manchester this next season? It seems like if a few or all of Martinez, Purcell, Boyle and Moulson get promoted that leaves that team a great deal weaker.
Answer: 1) Hopefully today, I will get the official schedule for the camp. I believe that on-ice workouts will start Tuesday and finish on the following Sunday. That's how it has worked in the past. And yes, for the workouts you can just walk on in. I'm not sure if they plan on charging anything for the scrimmage that is usually held at the end. I'll get details on that. 2) No real whispers on coaches, because the Kings are still in the early stage of getting their list together. Perhaps once they start actually interviewing people, names will begin to surface. 3) The Kings haven't talked to anyone since their two initial interviews with Johnston. They will talk to him again during the formal interview process. 4) There were a ton of young players in Manchester last season, so while that team might be a little weaker by losing the three forwards, that's pretty much the point. In the AHL, you're much, much less concerned about winning and more concerned about getting guys ready to the NHL. If holes are left by guys moving up to the NHL, that's a tremendously positive thing. In terms of filling those holes, there should be good competition in training camp.
-----
Question: I'm curious how many words per minute you type? What is your feeling about Kings ownership and their commitment to the youth? I am fully on board with the strategy of building a team the right way, but with Lombardi talking a lot lately about ownership pushing even more to the youth movement, I can't help but feel they might be really pushing for the "cheap" movement.
Answer: Good question. I don't think I have ever taken a typing test. But my mom is an amazingly fast typist so I'm sure I got that skill from her. I do think ownership has made the commitment to ``youth,'' but I think you raise a good point about the ``cheap'' movement. Do I think that's their motivation? No. But I think AEG always has one eye on hockey and one eye on finances, to put it politely. That's why I think fans should always be aware of what's happening. That's why it surprised me when I posted a poll and 60 percent of people said they didn't care that the Kings were losing money. Really?
-----
Question: when do u think the rebuilding plan will start bearing fruit? This year, next year or beyond? Is part of Lombardi's plan to not be active in the UFA mkt bc he wants to not only give the kids a chance, but also to put us in a position for a top 5 pick in next year's draft as well? Thanks for all you do!!
Answer: It should start bearing fruit this year. But that's largely a matter of what you consider ``bearing fruit'' to mean. If you think it means making the playoffs...well, you might end up being very disappointed and angry in April. If you think it means seeing some of these young players develop and turn into legit NHL players...well, you definitely should see that happening this season. If it doesn't start happening with some of these guys, that's a big problem. As far as the second part of the question, it sounds as though you're asking if the Kings would intentionally be bad to get a high draft pick. That's not even a possibility. I've been around pro/college sports for more than a decade, and these are incredibly competitive people in these fields. They don't intentionally lose. But I understand your question and why you ask it.
17 Comments
Leave a comment
About Rich Hammond
Rich Hammond has covered the Kings, on a full-time or part-time basis, since the 2000-01 season. He was the beat writer for the entire John Torchetti era and has witnessed Bob Miller singing country music in a Nashville honky-tonk bar. A native of Los Angeles, Rich has worked at the Daily News since 1999 and also serves as the paper's deputy sports editor. E-mail Rich at rich.hammond@dailynews.com.
Rich, To answer your question I really do not care if AEG loses money according to their accountants. The Kings were Anschutz's stepping stone to Staples and LA Live. Maybe they do not contribute to the bottom line directly but there is no way he accomplishes any of those things without first getting the Kings.
I've met Jeff Solomon on a couple of occassions through one of my good friends who, in turn, is very good friends with him and actually used to work with him on various immigration issues. Jeff b/4 his job with the Kings was a longtime hockey agent, with a decent clientele, including Tony Granato, Brian McCabe, Paul Martin, Colin White, and, I think, some former Kings like Steve McKenna. He tended to focus on collegians. More importantly, he went to law school, is a member of the bar, and has an accounting degree (might be a CPA). So he has negotiated contracts over the last 20 odd years on the other side as an agent, has a good working knowledge of the CBA, a good nose for numbers and valuation of talent.
I agree with Anonymous. And I would add that most people probably just assume that AEG is lying by employing fancy Hollywood-style accounting to the numbers. As when Forrest Gump, which cost $60 million to make was still officially not in profit after it had grossed 3/4 of a BILLION dollars.
That makes me think of a question, however: in the movie business, a huge chunk of the profitability comes from concessions, i.e. popcorn and soda. Exhibitors make basically ALL of their money from concessions. AEG is essentially an exhibitor as well as a distributor and a studio (to use the movie analogy). The question is, how much money do they make in concessions from Kings games and how does it figure into the bottom line? Simpler, more direct question: when AEG says it's losing money, are they figuring in concessions? What about licensing? Etc...
Rich,
You should have an "inside the kings" get together party the day of prospects camp.
Maybe we all meet at a bar after the scrimmage to discuss? Be fun to meet everyone.
On that note, how bout an "inside the kings" tailgate section at staples!
In looking at the moves teams have made so far this summer and I'm wondering what Western Conference teams you think have really improved themselves and which ones have gone belly-up. In my estimation, the Sharks have dropped down a few notches losing Campbell for nothing, while the Avalanche could be in major trouble replacing Theodore with Raycroft, especially if Sakic and Forsberg do not return. On the other hand, I think Edmonton and Chicago have both turned themselves into contenders with the moves they have made.
In losing Rolston, I would say the Wild are not as strong as they were last season. And in acquiring Avery, the Stars may have made a big mistake, but only time will tell on that one.
If Sundin signs with Vancouver, I think they might be a team to watch next season. And of course Detroit just got even better in adding Hossa.
Having done nothing except add young players who may or may not play next season, and even if they do, probably won't contribute much for their rookie seasons, will the Kings compete for a playoff spot next season? Or will they be in the John Tavares sweepstakes at the end?
Hey Rich, wanted to give a little feedback, at least in terms of my thinking, on the "do you care the kings are losing money" question. Considering the fantastic job you do here covering the team, please don't take this as harsh criticism or anything, but I think the way the question was asked was rather poor.
I mean, what were you trying to get at? Am I simpathetic to their plight? Am I concerned about the future of the franchise and the impact it has on what talent I see? Do I think it's an acceptable excuse for not winning? There were so many different ways to answer that question as either "yes" or "no" and basically express the same sentiment.
If mainly I'm annoyed hearing the excuse again after the Kings were one of the big vocal pushers of the new CBA structure that would let them run their business the way they most wanted, do I answer "yes" because I'm annoyed (and that does qualify as caring to some extent) or "no" because I don't really sympathise with them after they did get everything they wanted and are now still complaining?
From my POV I think the team telling fans they are losing money and need to raise ticket prices or whatever is inappropriate for three reasons. The first is what I already mentioned, they made this bed for themselves and now don't want to sleep in it. They claimed on their mother's graves that if only the players gave up everything and the owners got it all their way they would make money and be a winner. Okay, now where are we with salaries and everything? Why was there a lock-out again when now you are telling me you have the same problems?
Second is the profits and losses are largely about accounting practices more than the actual loss of money. You can't tell me PA is lossing money on the larger umbrella of ventures that the Kings are under (Staples, real estate development of downtown, etc.). It's mostly about economic jerrymandering than actual losses in POV. You can't tell me this guy got rich by making bad business decisions, and for some reason I don't see him running for the hills and cutting his losses on the concept of owning the team. (But I'm an engineer and not an economist or finance pro, so I'm more than open to someone explaining to me what I'm getting wrong here if they can do in terms that make concrete sense.)
Lastly, and most directly speaking to your initial question and why I answered "no" to it, I don't really care about profits and losses. I care about winning. If you want me to care about the business side where is my ownership in the team or in the decisions? You (the team, not you, Rich) are asking me to act like I have a stake where I clearly don't. I'm part of the team when it comes to taking a hit and biting the bullet to pay for higher ticket prices and parking and such, but I don't recall anyone sending me a check or lowering my ticket prices when we are winning and making money, right?
The business is yours to run. If you are lossing money, you are running it poorly aparently. That's not my problem. I'm not a decision maker, I'm part of your business environment; I'm your market. Win and I come to more games, am more willing to pay higher prices, etc. The exchange for fans is about how much we get back for what we put in. That is the transaction for us.
I'm not 100% sure I'm articulating that correclty (again, I'm a technical guy, not a communicator) but it places the fans in a position inside the organization (we have ownership of the failing business) where in fact we are outside and a customer of that organization in reality, and that is inappropriate.
It's very similar to the way I see fans treat players compared to ownership that I think is inappropriate. It's perfectly okay for the team to act with ruthless business efficientcy when making decisions on player contracts and such, but for some reason players owe loyalty to the team and fans to take hometown discounts to stay here or to not ask for too much money or whatever? That is not a balanced equitable relationship.
It's a double standard and it's the same thing the team is doing crying to fans about lossing money like we should care. Okay, the team is lossing money...well win more or otherwise put a better product out there and you won't hear fans complain or backlash when you charge more to make up the difference and you won't have to make lossing money an excuse to me for when you do so.
So, does that mean I care or don't?
Anyway, hopefully I got across the basic concepts. I just think the question was too wide open. On many levels I think fans are concerned about the team lossing money. On many levels I think they aren't. It mainly depends on what you are really trying to ask, because taken as asked the question can be answered either way to express identical sentiment.
And again, you are doing a fantastic job here. I'm usually reluctant to post just saying "thanks" because the amount of positive feedback you should be recieving rightly would fill up your email box and these comment sections to overflowing on a daily basis. If you and Lyle Richardson recieved the praise you both deserve for the work you are doing in giving fans good coverage of this sport we tend to be so exceptionally passionate about, you'd both be surely crushed under the wieght of it. And we want that to happen, right? :)
CFL? Is that even a league?
HA HA HA
I agree with Captain Material. I'm not even sure I understand WHY they would bother telling us they're losing money. I mean, literally, what did they think they would get by saying that? What effect did they think that would have? That's something you do with your employees (we can't give you that raise, etc.) not your customers.
Hey Rich, do you think that forward Wayne Simmonds is gonna crack the roster this year because this team REALLY lacks grit on out 3rd and 4th line. If not him, then do you think Dean might go after a banger for one of those lines?
"The exchange for fans is about how much we get back for what we put in. That is the transaction for us" Bingo!
I understand why some people don't care they losing money with the Kings, but I don't think many understand the correlation.
This team has not turned a profit one single season since AEG purchased the club, AND they inherited over 150 million in debt from the previous ownership group.
What does this say? Putting a winning team on the ice in LA may just not be a viable option...think about it.
The only way Detroit made money under the old system was to make it to the cup finals, and I will gaurantee you that if you really looked at their books right now, the same happened this year.
So, should you care if the Kings or any other team are losing money? Yes, you should, if you like hockey and the NHL, your damn straight you should. If the league keeps throwing out 4 million/year to guys like Jeff Finger, the NHL will struggle to last another 10 years.
Rich,
The fourth period is reporting that Carolina is shopping Frantisek Kaberle & list the Kings as a possible trading partner. After trading Lubo, Karble would be a nice replacement, plus with 2 years & $2.2 million cap hit he'd be a nice "bridge" player. Do you think the Kings are interested?
As far as AEG losing money on the Kings. Just for argument's sake let's say AEG is NOT cooking the books...
In the old NHL beyond the Wings, Habs, Wild, Leafs and Rangers a team had to make the playoffs in order to make money. It looks as if maybe in the new NHL those rules still apply.
There aren't many teams beyond those five that could draw 16,600 a half dozen years removed from a playoff game the way the Kings did this year. So the fans are doing their part. Would we trust AEG to build a winner if six years removed from a playoff game they still are able to turn a profit?
As a fan, I am 100% behind Lombardi's slow but steady rebuilding process. For once, it's being done right (and for once thanks to this site, it's being covered right). The great thing about the playoffs is it's a giant carrot for ownership who wants to get into the black and a sweet reward for the long suffering fans.
Hail Kings Fans:
My question is this: If our "owner" is TL, and the "hockey plan" must be in sync with the "business plan", how much money do the kings have to spend against the "cap" this year for the 23 players who will make the roster? I would assume that Harrold and Martinez and Teubert would not make the roster and that Blake (at$2.5M?) and someone like Kalinin (at $2.5M?) would make the roster. I see a number of approximately $44-$47M as befitting the second largest market in the NHL and "right" for the youth movement now on-going and entering the third season. What do you think?
Go KIngs!!
Goldentoe
In reference to TSN's site, the CFL is huge up here in Canada. Particularly with the Riders winning the Grey Cup last year (think Cubs winning the World Series). Go Riders, indeed!
Anyway, in my opinion, the Kings are nothing more than a plaything for Uncle Phil. He may not be making money off the team, but I hardly think he's starving or looking for a place to sleep at night. And that's why I don't care if he manipulates the ledger to make it appear as if the club is losing millions.
Rich,
Can you ask Jeff Soloman how the new annual cap figures are determined? If the economy hits a rough patch, coiuld the cap go down? There seems to be a disconnect between cap increases with inflation and even with ticket price increases.
sasKing,
The popularity of the CFL in Canada is huge but I wouldn't say "particularly with the Riders winning the Grey Cup" It would be more appropriate to say "In spite of the Riders winning the Grey Cup"
LOL just kidding:) Go Blue!!!