No.

Another Roy trade that doesn't include Knies or Cowans.

No, the Kings aren't going to give their best defensive player up for futures when they're in the middle of battling for a playoff spot the year they made their all-in trade.

What "all-in" trade? You guys gave up two middle-6 (who are now solid top-6) players for an overrated center that is having a horrible season. Even if Dubois was playing to his expectations, how could you call that an all-in trade when it was literally just a player swap?

It really doesn't make much sense for the Kings to keep Roy, given he'd be a rental, and you have two solid players that could instantly replace him at that position this season. In this case, you'd also be using those assets to acquire a top-5 goalie in the league for at least 2 playoff runs at a reasonable cap hit. This year, Saros would likely cover up any defensive sacrifice you guys make by losing Roy. Next year, unlike having to lose Roy in FA, you get to have Saros for a full season while having Brandt Clarke and Spence develop even more. Let's be honest, Clarke could easily be better than Roy as soon as next season.

Playoff contenders don't trade their best defensive players just before the playoffs start, regardless of their contract status.

Clarke and Spence are solid offensive defensemen, but neither of them can take the PK load that Roy does (he's the team leader in PK TOI by a large margin), or play those important defensive minutes. They'll eventually turn into quality defensemen, but they're not there yet.

Roy will play for the Kings in the playoffs. They will make every effort to extend him. If they can't come to terms, then he'll sign elsewhere on July 1. In that situation, the Kings may trade his negotiation rights at the draft.

It's certainly unlikely a trade like this would ever happen. But I'm making this in the context that you guys trade for Saros. In other words, I only think this would happen if it was a 3-way trade involving Saros.

This might be impossible to quantify, but I do feel like having Clarke/Spence stepping up in that role with Saros in the net will at least make it a lateral move for this season, but a major improvement next season. Perhaps I'm overrating Saros' ability, but I don't think this maneuver would make the Kings any less competitive this season.

Why wouldn't the Kings just send their own 1st round pick to Nashville and keep both Roy and Saros?

They could. But a move would still have to be made to clear cap. Perhaps doing that w/ Arviddson is easier than I originally thought, but I don't think LA would be keen on that either. I'm not sure how much it would cost for them to get NSH to retain, but I assumed it would be much more than what LA would want to give up (otherwise, I'm fairly confident it would have happened by now).

Arvidsson is out again with an injury. He's being evaluated right now and is expected to be week-to-week. Adding Saros and sending one of their current two goalies out (either to the AHL or to another team) will cover his cap hit.

Regardless, 1 year and a few months of Saros, who is having a down season, is not what I would want to spend that kind of assets on anyway.

(1) What "2 years of Saros"?!? It's two playoff runs plus one season.

(2) I just can't see how Juuse Saros is worth more than Jack Eichel, even given the factors surrounding Eichel's trade.

(3) Note that the only way to fit Saros in under the cap ceiling is by trading Matt Roy. That's an essential step too far.

I agree. And I'd just like to say that I don't think a Saros trade would require THIS much value. It's always kind of hard to determine because every scenario is so different. I still think a deal centered around Roy and a 1st round pick is a fair deal for a top 5 goalie in the league on a reasonable cap hit, no matter how much term they have. And I still see the loss of Roy being negated by Saros' ability to single-handedly win games, regardless of who's in front of him.