GDT: 2022-23 season game 38 LA Kings vs Vegas Golden Knights @7:30pm 12/27/22

[Axl Rhoadz]

That’s boilerplate “say the right thing even though you’re not f***ing happy about it”

I’ve gotta give it to ya, there are times I can’t tell if you’re trolling, or legitimately have the mental bandwidth of a potato.

Hell, maybe it’s both.

I believe that the majority of these guys are more than happy to have an opportunity to play in the NHL and realize they have to work for everything they get once they are there.

If that makes me a potato, what does that make you …. a zucchini?

 

[King'sPawn]

Justification based on fondness?

Your whataboutism about Lombardi in defense of Blake ignores details you like to remind everyone else they've overlooked.

In a random hypothetical, say Blake and McLellan get fired after this season. Years later, some other team hires Blake as a GM. And a reporter asks Blake "Could you describe your perfect coach?" Do you think Blake will, by default, say "McLellan"? Because "Sutter" was Lombardi's response to the perfect coach, instead of speaking in abstracts.

Blake and McLellan have a completely different power dynamic, where Blake is a former player of McLellan's. I'm sure Blake likes him and believes he can win the cup, but he's looking at it from the perspective of a former player instead of a former boss.

 

[bland]

Because some are rather quick to declare things as a failure.

In 2006, had someone said the Kings will completely miss on a top 4 pick, and before winning a single playoff round led by a young core, will trade a recent top 5 pick, two other 1st rd picks, and a high quality young forward, would people say that team is ready to win the Cup? You don't even know if that core is good enough, no on-ice proof of it, and you're jumping the gun? We can also never forget that in the first true contender year, the team was out of the playoffs at the trade deadline. And if you want to throw in some extra spice, they also messed up not taking Karlsson because the GM believed in a mean guy.

You have to let the story play out. Even if you're a higher level fan than most.



A seasoned DL called his literal Canadian farm boy buddy to save his job when he started feeling some heat.

Who did DL hire after his first coaching disaster? A guy he knew and worked with in Philly.

Who did DL bring with him when he got the job? A guy he knew and worked with in Philly, and another guy he knew and worked with in SJ.

Winning cures all. Risky moves, comfort hires. If you win, nobody gives a shit. If you don't win, we're back to arguing over the minute details of losing players like Moulson and Purcell.

You have been consistently factually incorrect and decidedly slanted in your opinions about Lombardi for a decade now. Its amazing how the only management figure in the history of the organization who had a vision and fulfilled it would get anybody's Irish up, but there you go again.

 

[bland]

It absolutely was a job saving move, TL flat out said that he forced DL to fire TM.

Listening to ANYTHING Lieweke says without a deed to a salt mine is a mistake.

Lombardi waited for Sutter to get his affairs in order instead of bringing in an interim voice. Murray should have been let go that summer and the malaise definitely affected the team until that hire, but anyone who portrays it as a panic or "job saving" move simply doesn't know what they are talking about.

Nobody in AEG cares enough to put a GMs job in doubt as long as they operate within margin. Lieweke wanted ALL the panic moves and lost out to Lombardi at every turn - for the better.

 

[Sol]

Because some are rather quick to declare things as a failure.

In 2006, had someone said the Kings will completely miss on a top 4 pick, and before winning a single playoff round led by a young core, will trade a recent top 5 pick, two other 1st rd picks, and a high quality young forward, would people say that team is ready to win the Cup? You don't even know if that core is good enough, no on-ice proof of it, and you're jumping the gun? We can also never forget that in the first true contender year, the team was out of the playoffs at the trade deadline. And if you want to throw in some extra spice, they also messed up not taking Karlsson because the GM believed in a mean guy.

You have to let the story play out. Even if you're a higher level fan than most.



A seasoned DL called his literal Canadian farm boy buddy to save his job when he started feeling some heat.

Who did DL hire after his first coaching disaster? A guy he knew and worked with in Philly.

Who did DL bring with him when he got the job? A guy he knew and worked with in Philly, and another guy he knew and worked with in SJ.

Winning cures all. Risky moves, comfort hires. If you win, nobody gives a shit. If you don't win, we're back to arguing over the minute details of losing players like Moulson and Purcell.

I think using the Kings as an example isn’t all too great either since most teams win off the back of their home grown talent. How quickly do we forget that the Kings won the cup twice while being mediocre in the regular season. The Kings success was undeniably bizarre. I admit I might be a bit early but when I look at Doughty and Kopitar, then look at Byfield and Clarke. It’s not anything close where they were at at their age. I’m not going to pretend they’re going to get there. There’s very few Tage Thompson stories in the NHL for a reason.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I think using the Kings as an example isn’t all too great either since most teams win off the back of their home grown talent. How quickly do we forget that the Kings won the cup twice while being mediocre in the regular season. The Kings success was undeniably bizarre. I admit I might be a bit early but when I look at Doughty and Kopitar, then look at Byfield and Clarke. It’s not anything close where they were at at their age. I’m not going to pretend they’re going to get there. There’s very few Tage Thompson stories in the NHL for a reason.

The problem is, you are looking at Byfield as if he should be a young Kopitar, and Clarke as he should be a young Doughty,

Those players, Kopitar, Doughty etc, are extremely RARE in the league......but people on this board think every pick is that.....

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

The problem is, you are looking at Byfield as if he should be a young Kopitar, and Clarke as he should be a young Doughty,

Those players, Kopitar, Doughty etc, are extremely RARE in the league......but people on this board think every pick is that.....

Right, Sol thinks every top ten pick is a franchise defining player - except for the Kings because they can’t develop them.

Alex Lafreniere blows Sol kisses.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

And what of the other TM? All that work, with plenty of time, and DL just happens to go with the guy he knows?

Today we look back and say that TM was just a stepping stone to better things. Sutter was the championship level coach. Was that the case in Oct 2011, or just in Dec 2011? The Kings were seen as a contender that Oct, coach and all. Whereas today, they've been calling for Sutter's head in Calgary, because he plays Lewis and Lucic. Same guy. Maybe that's the problem though. Or, do you want consistency? When the Kings won, they were pretty famous for always playing the same way, no matter what. Winning, losing, do the same thing, the same way, every time, all the time. That was a positive. Then when they were losing, they were criticized for doing the same thing, the same way, every time, all the time. It both won the GM and coach a Cup, and cost them their jobs. It got DL that Team USA job, and resulted in a crappy team at the same time.

Maybe the current TM is a stepping stone. Maybe Blake is a stepping stone GM. Maybe 6 years from now is when the Kings are a true contender, based in part on things Blake did right now, but won't get to see because he'll be gone in 2 years. Who's to say?

What's wrong with that though? I already pointed it out--if they did due diligence, which they clearly did--I don't have much problem with going with the tiebreaker being the devil you know. TM developed the team's system and individual games in short order and had results to show for it with a clear identity and the massive development of our blue chippers games, especially Kopitar and Doughty.

This TM, in contrast, has spent the first nearly-half of the year halfway into his tenure wondering aloud what the identity is, and almost all of our blue chippers are floating around relatively aimlessly while the young roster players look lost. I have beef with that because Blake hired him as if he was a sure thing--making him the highest paid coach with a five year f***ing tenure--in short order without even looking around, and here we are spinning wheels on identity and development. Or maybe we aren't, maybe this is what Blake envisioned as well--either way it demonstrates unnecessarily risky decision making in the name of the devil you know. I can admit sure, we haven't seen the whole show yet, and I'd love to be horribly wrong, but early returns are exactly what they were in San Jose and Edmonton--a coach who completely underachieves relative to the talent of the roster and doesn't even develop youth.

To the last boldfaced I've told you before I don't mind this nihilistic musing but it doesn't preclude us from criticizing what's going on in the meantime.

 

[KINGS17]

What's wrong with that though? I already pointed it out--if they did due diligence, which they clearly did--I don't have much problem with going with the tiebreaker being the devil you know. TM developed the team's system and individual games in short order and had results to show for it with a clear identity and the massive development of our blue chippers games, especially Kopitar and Doughty.

This TM, in contrast, has spent the first nearly-half of the year halfway into his tenure wondering aloud what the identity is, and almost all of our blue chippers are floating around relatively aimlessly while the young roster players look lost. I have beef with that because Blake hired him as if he was a sure thing--making him the highest paid coach with a five year f***ing tenure--in short order without even looking around, and here we are spinning wheels on identity and development. Or maybe we aren't, maybe this is what Blake envisioned as well--either way it demonstrates unnecessarily risky decision making in the name of the devil you know. I can admit sure, we haven't seen the whole show yet, and I'd love to be horribly wrong, but early returns are exactly what they were in San Jose and Edmonton--a coach who completely underachieves relative to the talent of the roster and doesn't even develop youth.

To the last boldfaced I've told you before I don't mind this nihilistic musing but it doesn't preclude us from criticizing what's going on in the meantime.

Above all in his time with the Kings I believed Terry Murray was a teacher. Guys like Kopitar, Brown, Doughty and Quick, etc. learned what he had to teach them, but Murray seemed to have a problem holding them fully accountable.

Accountability is what changed the most when Sutter took over. As an example, I understand Sutter had no problem telling Doughty to STFU and do it Sutter's way.