Erik Portillo is literally the only goaltender in the Kings system after this summer, they're not going to trade him. He's played really well in Ontario this season.

Danault has a NTC and has been fantastic for the Kings. Likewise, he's not available. As I said recently in another post, aside from the untouchables (Makar, MacKinnon, Rantanen), the only player Colorado has that might get them to reconsider is Devon Toews, but I don't know why Colorado would do that.

LAK has their C's all locked down. They'd probably just extend Gavrikov too

If Byram is moved, it can't be for a guy on the wrong side of 30. I don't care how good Malinski looks or how encouraging Gulyayek's season has been. It just doesn't make sense imo.

Annunen IS a young goalie which is why he's going back the other way. He's also closer to ready for a shot at the big time, which I would have thought with two 30+ goalies in LA would be ideal whereas Colorado seem ok with Prosvetov so a little younger G would be ideal. Danault can waive his NTC if he chooses in the hypothetical. This gives the Kings a cap saving with numerous players to re-sign next year and they deal from a position of strength. Dubois, Kopitar and Byfield all being natural centres (plus others) is something of a logjam. Not sure why the Kings would want Toews when Byram may become so much more (and indeed was arguably the best Avs D in the cup run!) I can understand not wanting to lose Danault but.....

Danault is probably the only one I'd do it for as his contract is low end and for four years and runs close to ideal for Ritchie. Beyond that I can't think of one other than possibly Crosby if he were available but even then I'd have to think about it. This is more going with the 'everyone is trading Bo' idea lol.

Fair unless you count Lizotte, Anderson-Dolan, Byfield. I don't know whether they plan to continue with some of them on the wing however.

None of the Kings centers are on the trade block.

I like Byram, but he wouldn't be suited for 3D behind Mikey and Gavrikov. And you don't send that much capital out for one NHL-ready player who will play that far down in your lineup, especially when you're a team with Cup-contention aspirations THIS year.

Well...not sure where the trade block comes into it but ok lol. Where Byram would fit is another argument altogether. As for capital out I assume from that you mean assets and I'd say that's arguably more coming in than going out (though I tried to make it pretty even).

The Kings window is open now. They're not interested in the future potential of players. Danault helps them now. Toews would help them now. Byram might become better than Toews in the future, but right now he's not. He'd be a 3LD on the Kings.

The Kings top three centers of the future are Byfield, Dubois, and Danault. Byfield will stay on Kopitar's wing while the latter is still playing like a top line player, but eventually Kopitar will Joe Thornton his way to the bottom six. Lizotte is the 4C for the near future. JAD is a nice redundancy, but he's essentially the Brad Richardson on this team. A nice guy to have that can play any and all positions, but likely not part of the long-term plan.

So I have to ask the question....where would Toews fit on the Kings D corps in your opinion? Just out of curiosity as I find this line of argument a little odd.

"Trade block" as in the list of players the Kings have as pieces they'd be willing to trade.

And yes, the assets going out from the Kings side are much more likely to have a higher impact on the Kings in the present than what's being returned.
1) Danault has a higher impact than Byram would on the LA roster, because Byram would slot in at 3LD. A spot taken up perfectly adequately by Englund at the moment.
2) Bjornfot is an NHL player without a spot on the roster. I'd argue he's probably a tradeable piece, but the Kings are more likely to hold on to him for depth purposes in the event of injuries around playoff time. I equate him to the first round pick, which likely won't be an NHL ready roster player for 3+ years, seeing as Colorado isn't going to be picking near the top of the draft for some time.
3) Portillo and Annunen are I guess close to an even swap, but Portillo currently has better stats in the AHL, is a year younger, and the Kings just recently traded assets for him. Not sure why they'd be interested in already moving on.

I'm not saying your value is off. I'm saying the Kings don't make the trade because it doesn't effect their immediate Cup-contention capabilities in a positive way. I'd argue it actually makes them worse right now. Danault just makes a greater impact on this team than Byram would, and losing Bjornfot means hurting the depth of the immediate team in case of injuries. It just doesn't make sense for LA.

The argument was they were all 'locked down'.

"LAK has their C's all locked down."

They aren't, and even less so if Byfield is one of the future top 3 and Lizotte is #4. Cost controlled to a degree certainly but most definitely not locked down! But thank you for the clarity on how you personally believe the Kings will use them.

Very fair and well reasoned. Thanks!

1LD or 2LD. The Kings have been in need of quality two-way LHD that can play on the PP. They've been missing that element for years since Jake Muzzin was traded. All of their current guys are defense-first. It would also allow for them to reduce the minutes that Doughty has to play every night. Toews would probably play on a pair with Matt Roy and get 22-24 minutes per night, including both special teams. In situations where they need a late goal, Toews and Doughty would play together.

I'm not saying the Kings should move Danault for Toews. However, it would be one of the only players that Colorado could offer that would be even remotely worth it.

I'm not sure what your definition of "locked down" is. My understanding of that term means that they're already on the team and not going anywhere, which is true.

The next one of their top three guys to move will be Kopitar, and that will likely be to retirement.

I find that odd as I'd much rather the Avs gave Byram the PP time as I don't think Toews ever looks that comfortable on the PP (and that's not just me trying to push Byram lol). Toews as an offensive threat is much more often slipping in at the back door 5v5 or point shots 5v5. Byram is much more of a PP QB in my eyes but as they say 'eye of the beholder' and I don't know if the stats back that up. Toews is the reliable compliment to Makar on their pairing that allows him to do 'his thing' whilst getting in there when he can. That's probably why I find it curious. I can understand wanting Toews, it's just that I don't view him in the same manner you do. I'm glad we have him and wouldn't want to trade him (unless we get Jaccob Slavin somehow, who is probably the only guy I think would be a better foil for Makar and even then it's unproven) but the perception of the players is definitely different.

Again different perception, to me 'locked down' means you've got them all signed for multiple years of term.

Does LA need a dynamic puck mover like Byram when they have Clarke (who has no injury history)?

Lefty vs Righty and Proven vs Unproven so we'll see what the future holds I guess. I hope it's bright and uninjured for Clarke's sake. Making a bit too much of the 'injury history' there though really.