The Kings need him so why would we trade him?

Los Angeles is (overly) patient with their prospects, so just as they waited on Vilardi, and are waiting for Byfield and Turcotte to mature, I think that they will wait on Bjornfot for another season.

Seems like they are pretty full at D without him. If they try to send him down, he'll probably get claimed.

Do you think he slots in over Englund or someone else? Or is he 7D? Seems a lot of Kings acgms here don't have him on the roster.



But how? If he's waived, I assume he'll be claimed.

Seems pretty fair, brother

I've liked the way fairbrother has looked since the rookie camp, I vote we keep him

This is my personal opinion, but both Bjornfot and Moverare looked miles better than Englund in the Australian games. The contract the Kings signed Englund to seems like it was made to be an NHL deal, but I honestly think the thought process was a little more subtle. A 2 year x $1Mil contract will be hard for any team to stomach if the Kings put him on waivers, with minimal impact to their own cap. This allows the Kings to get a LD partner to stabilize the REIGN lineup almost guaranteed, instead of having to juggle whoever might end up there.

If I had my way, my #6 and #7 D would be Bjornfot and Moverare in that order. Waive Englund and place him in Ontario to provide a physical presence/deterrent for the kids left in Ontario. He's nothing more than a tweener, and both Bjornfot and Moverare are better NHL players than him.

Obviously if LA is carrying both LD as #6/#7, that means one of Spence or Clarke is in Ontario. But that's fine by me, because the minutes they'll be getting down there will be massive. And the Kings can deal with that until they decide what to do with Spence (since they aren't trading Clarke).

I watched Englund enough last year when he was with the Avs. He did a nice job but is pretty much tapped out. I would easily play Bjornfot over him if it was up to me, but I have seen others just bury Bjornfot with Englund in the lineup.

Anyway, I could be enticed to pay more for Bjornfot, but I struggle to find anything LA really needs (aside from a goalie) at this point. There just aren't a whole lotta holes on that roster.

Yeah, a lot of people just want to "Get Tuff" at all costs, despite the fact that there are clearly better players than Englund ready to go. The big question is "How much does the organization/coaching staff buy into that philosophy?" There's merit to it... as long as the player is good enough to keep up. In my mind, Englund is not.

I expect England to be in the minor. The 3LD spot will be between Bjornfot and Moverare. I think Bjornfot gets it.