Speculation: 2025 TDL Discussion

[Omni Owl]

The fact that management/Hiller have been handling Clarke this way is completely idiotic and inexcusable.

Its an absolute f***ing atrocity Burroughs is playing over Clarke, its beyond f***ing ridiculous. I won't be going to any Kings games or supporting this org. until Blake, Luc, and Bergevin are all gone. You can add Hiller to that list now too, there's better coaches available and there were when Hiller 1st got the position. Lee and Helenius both got snubbed for their good play as well. Having Lewis and Thomas in the lineup over them is a f***ing insult.

 

[MonkeysUncle]

Its an absolute f***ing atrocity Burroughs is playing over Clarke, its beyond f***ing ridiculous. I won't be going to any Kings games or supporting this org. until Blake, Luc, and Bergevin are all gone. You can add Hiller to that list now too, there's better coaches available and there were when Hiller got the position. Lee and Helenius both got snubbed for their good play as well, having Lewis and Thomas in the lineup over them is a f***ing insult.

this is actually the first year since 1986 that I havent gone to game. The fact is nothing is going to change and it doesn't really matter as long they keep making money, but at least I feel better that I not putting my $$$ towards it and in fact have really found alot of other things to with it and haven't even thought twice about it

 

[Maynard]

You also just can't argue against the facts at this point (re: Clarke).

With Clarke sitting in the press box:
Record: 0-4
Goals against per game average: 3.75
Goals for per game average: 0.5
Differential: -3.25

With Clarke in the lineup:
Record: 31-16-8
Goals against per game average: 2.61
Goals for per game average: 3.00
Differential: +0.39

So not only can this team not score for sh*t when Clarke isn't in the lineup - they also give up significantly more goals against when he's not in the lineup.

Clarke gives the Kings the best chance to win games.

The fact that management/Hiller have been handling Clarke this way is completely idiotic and inexcusable.

Yeah but why put him in the lineup when you can have Spence denting the f*** out of the glass behind the net and Burroughs playing 6 minutes and being a -3?

This team has their own analytics though. We just wouldn’t understand.

 

[KopitarGOAT420]

With Boston looking like sellers, I wonder if Morgan Geekie could be an option for the Kings.

26 years old, right shot. Can play center or wing. 6'3. $2m cap hit and an RFA after this season but could potentially re-sign him if he fits well.

On pace for 20+ goals this year and has slowly been improving over the last couple seasons. Could be a nice budget add assuming the price to acquire isn't anything too crazy.

 

[KingsOfCali25]

With Boston looking like sellers, I wonder if Morgan Geekie could be an option for the Kings.

26 years old, right shot. Can play center or wing. 6'3. $2m cap hit and an RFA after this season but could potentially re-sign him if he fits well.

On pace for 20+ goals this year and has slowly been improving over the last couple seasons. Could be a nice budget add assuming the price to acquire isn't anything too crazy.

That's where I was going last offseason. I was talking to Boston fans about Geekie and Peeke.

The year before was Hague and Roy from Vegas when they need cap space. Also, wanted Kostin and Bjugstad after they left Edmonton.

Management wants those guys but doesn't want to spend there. They either want Top tier guys or bottom of the barrel. Not the young and hungry guys looking to breakout.

 

[King'sPawn]

Clarke can certainly improve, and his quality of play has gone down. But I genuinely think the Kings have a habit of getting in their own way with prospects, particularly skilled ones.

Clarke was great at the start of the season. But once his risky plays were called out (even when there weren't catastrophic consequences), his quality of play dipped.

If you want a player like Clarke, you have to let him be Clarke. Don't try to turn him into Faber. You try to improve areas of the game to complement his style. Or you're wasting everyone's time.

When McLellan was coach, he had the right buzzwords but didn't exactly follow through with it, in my opinion. It was something to the effect of "play your game, but in my system."

I'm concerned the Kings are going to trade valuable prospects, possibly Clarke, for another "go for it" run. And I question the org's ability to do anything meaningful in the playoffs with whatever they get.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

The case for moderate minutes is as strong as it gets.

 

[tigermask48]

Is anyone honetly really shocked by all this Clarke nonsense? Same thing with Kaliev. Same thing with Vilardi. Same thing with Durzi. It's a cycle of ineptitude with these clowns in the front office.

Also let's not forget Clarke looked legit in his NHL debut and then at the start of this year... Until Hiller called him out after a game. But yeah, it's clearly the player that's a problem. Just like with the rest of the young players over this groups tenure

 

[bland]

Clarke can certainly improve, and his quality of play has gone down. But I genuinely think the Kings have a habit of getting in their own way with prospects, particularly skilled ones.

Clarke was great at the start of the season. But once his risky plays were called out (even when there weren't catastrophic consequences), his quality of play dipped.

If you want a player like Clarke, you have to let him be Clarke. Don't try to turn him into Faber. You try to improve areas of the game to complement his style. Or you're wasting everyone's time.

When McLellan was coach, he had the right buzzwords but didn't exactly follow through with it, in my opinion. It was something to the effect of "play your game, but in my system."

I'm concerned the Kings are going to trade valuable prospects, possibly Clarke, for another "go for it" run. And I question the org's ability to do anything meaningful in the playoffs with whatever they get.

He doesn't have to be Faber. But he cannot be Tyson Barrie. This team needs Clarke to be a top pairing defender and not a 3rd pairing PP specialist. If that involves some tough love at the start, fine.

We have no idea how he is reacting away from the cameras, maybe he is banged up, maybe he is sulking, who knows. I have suspected for a long time that the elder statesmen on this team do not appreciate brash players, especially youngsters, so there could be any number of things going on here.

One thing is for absolute certain - the drama queens are out in full force right now.

 

[King'sPawn]

He doesn't have to be Faber. But he cannot be Tyson Barrie. This team needs Clarke to be a top pairing defender and not a 3rd pairing PP specialist. If that involves some tough love at the start, fine.

We have no idea how he is reacting away from the cameras, maybe he is banged up, maybe he is sulking, who knows. I have suspected for a long time that the elder statesmen on this team do not appreciate brash players, especially youngsters, so there could be any number of things going on here.

One thing is for absolute certain - the drama queens are out in full force right now.

When they bench him, he's neither. Which to me is a problem.

People love to say how the NHL isn't a developmental league. I disagree. Most don't enter the NHL as a finished product. They develop their skills and improve, once they show they are capable of holding their own at the highest level.

Remember at this same time last year people were scrambling for Laferriere to be sent to the AHL. He's fine. Perfect? No. But he has continued to build more elements and dimensions to his game.

Clarke should get similar opportunities. Unless fatigue is a factor, I think benching a prospect, particularly a top one, should be minimal/for disciplinary reasons.

You want him to play better defensively? Put him on the PK and in defensive zone faceoffs frequently. Apply appropriate pressure and exposure. If/when he struggles, then it's a teaching moment.