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.

 

[kingsholygrail]

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.

Agreed. I'm not sure what the AHL can actually teach Clarke at this point.

 

[KingsOfCali25]

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.

Correct but they don't even use him as a PP specialist! Probably his greatest asset for the team that desperately needs a PP QB and he gets nothing. It's the same thing they did with Kaliyev!

These coaches/management won't even let him be Tyson Barrie and that is the problem!

I remember reading in his first training camp that the coaches, management and Doughty said the kid (Clarke) could play in the NHL right away. Then here we are 3 years later and they struggle to put him in the lineup. They are wasting a major asset. Either run him in the NHL fully or send him back to the AHL to dominate until someone gets their head out of their ass!

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Suggesting Clarke is Barrie when his underlying #s are amongst the best on the team and while his partner's underlying #s absolutely tank when moved away from Clarke and next to Doughty illustrates how 'f*** stats, eye test only bro' is subject to confirmation bias to the narrative in one's head, especially when it's the extreme minority opinion

No one is saying he's flawless, doesn't need work or guidance, or any of the crap--they're just saying he needs to be playing at least moderate minutes, not killing everyone else to give time to Burroughs who can't even hand offensively OR defensively in 5 minutes

 

[tigermask48]

You don't train a thoroughbred by locking it in a barn and forgetting about it. The Kings refuse to let him run and all it's doing is fast tracking him to the glue factory.

 

[Shellz]

Ngl I thought the trade deadline was today. I was wondering why it was so quiet.

 

[kingsholygrail]

It probably will be pretty quiet. I think Thursday will be the unofficial deadline.

 

[Master Yoda]

I found the shill!

Lol. Yea the Kings have a perfect record in the games they've won.
What a moron

 

[bland]

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.

Sure, there is what they SHOULD be doing, which is drastically different from what they ARE doing. They shouldn't be chasing the playoffs, they should have left the Cup core behind years ago, and they should have put their efforts towards a future that would already be here with Faber and Vilardi already outshining what the Kings got for them to stupidly be better for the old timers ten-year-and-counting last hurrah.

This is a bubble team with playoff aspirations. Since their high-end players are low-end producers, every stinking point is necessary and it must be said that even though their decisions are based on immediate results, Hiller has done a damn good job of building while chasing. Byfield is up the middle, Laferriere is a toolsy top 9, Spence is firmly in that Martinez role, Turcotte has been given a hell of a lot more top line time than his production has warranted, and Clarke was given a fantastic opportunity to prove himself. We saw kids cycled through that 4th line and prove that they can contribute.

This has been a year of growth whether anyone wants to appreciate it or not. And I keep harping on growth not being linear. Clarke has been on a downswing for two months now and needs to reset himself. They couldn't give him that opportunity while Doughty was out because they didn't have that support. The timing with the trade deadline here is coincidental, I don't think any reasonable person really believes that they are going to deal him. But Clarke needs to play better regardless of the playoff chase and the sky isn't falling here because they are holding him accountable.

 

[MonkeysUncle]

Lol. Yea the Kings have a perfect record in the games they've won.
What a moron

Never really paid to much attention on what he has to say, he always kinda struck me as someone who's way to into himself and what he says and thinks is gospel and if you dont agree with him, you dont know what your talking about, but give credit he's made a lliving at it.

 

[King'sPawn]

Sure, there is what they SHOULD be doing, which is drastically different from what they ARE doing. They shouldn't be chasing the playoffs, they should have left the Cup core behind years ago, and they should have put their efforts towards a future that would already be here with Faber and Vilardi already outshining what the Kings got for them to stupidly be better for the old timers ten-year-and-counting last hurrah.

This is a bubble team with playoff aspirations. Since their high-end players are low-end producers, every stinking point is necessary and it must be said that even though their decisions are based on immediate results, Hiller has done a damn good job of building while chasing. Byfield is up the middle, Laferriere is a toolsy top 9, Spence is firmly in that Martinez role, Turcotte has been given a hell of a lot more top line time than his production has warranted, and Clarke was given a fantastic opportunity to prove himself. We saw kids cycled through that 4th line and prove that they can contribute.

This has been a year of growth whether anyone wants to appreciate it or not. And I keep harping on growth not being linear. Clarke has been on a downswing for two months now and needs to reset himself. They couldn't give him that opportunity while Doughty was out because they didn't have that support. The timing with the trade deadline here is coincidental, I don't think any reasonable person really believes that they are going to deal him. But Clarke needs to play better regardless of the playoff chase and the sky isn't falling here because they are holding him accountable.

For the most part, I don't think so. And I don't think the benching is indicative on whether or not they will deal him.

But for a GM who traded Faber+ for Fiala, and Vilardi+ for Dubois, I don't trust the judgment of the front office when they have movable currency.

Call that being a drama queen if you want, but people have valid reason to be concerned.

 

[bland]

Suggesting Clarke is Barrie when his underlying #s are amongst the best on the team and while his partner's underlying #s absolutely tank when moved away from Clarke and next to Doughty illustrates how 'f*** stats, eye test only bro' is subject to confirmation bias to the narrative in one's head, especially when it's the extreme minority opinion

No one is saying he's flawless, doesn't need work or guidance, or any of the crap--they're just saying he needs to be playing at least moderate minutes, not killing everyone else to give time to Burroughs who can't even hand offensively OR defensively in 5

First off, the stats you are cherry picking include the first two months of the year when he was producing and having a relatively positive effect on the games. He hasn't offered much since the 20th game of the year, RJ. 12 points in his last 35 games, 4 in the last 19. Its trending downwards with a bullet. End sum stats mean NOTHING, trends are the only stats that actually tell you what's happening at this moment.

He isn't playing well and the answer isn't always the same for every kid. Clarke is CLEARLY one cocky sum sumbitch, and if his confidence has crumbled there is no reason to believe that "more of the same" is the answer. He needs a break, he needs to reset, he needs to play BETTER.

Lets talk practicalities here. Doughty isn't going to sit, Spence has been much, much better than Clarke since before Christmas (and is also a kid who was sat for not performing-except he took it to heart and focuses his game, kinda like what they are trying to do with Clarke), Gavrikov and Anderson have played well and are analytics darlings, and Edmundson has been solid as hell all year.

If they want to play their best defensemen, the question now is Clarke or Moverare. Moverare has played well and allowed Spence to thrive. Ideally we would see three L/R combos, but Doughty's injury screwed that up and Gavrikov took advantage of the role open. I would prefer to see Clarke with Gavrikov or Edmundson too.

The idea that "he needs to play to get better" only works if he takes advantage of that time. Nobody here knows why he was scratched. Burroughs is just window dressing because Thomas is in the doghouse. He isn't taking Clarke's time, and for all we know this is a tough love session for Clarke because other methods haven't worked yet. Conjecture, sure. Maybe is banged up, maybe he has an attitude issue, maybe his practice habits are slipping, who knows. Could just very well be that they want him to watch a few games and work on.a few things without the pressure of a playoff chase.

 

[bland]

For the most part, I don't think so. And I don't think the benching is indicative on whether or not they will deal him.

But for a GM who traded Faber+ for Fiala, and Vilardi+ for Dubois, I don't trust the judgment of the front office when they have movable currency.

Call that being a drama queen if you want, but people have valid reason to be concerned.

I am not calling you a drama queen, you are dead right here. The fear is justified, but others are allowing that fear to mask logic and are flailing around for incoherent bits to support their beliefs that the worst possible outcome will be the reality.

Everybody here should know by now that I called Blake the worst GM in the teams history over 4 years ago now, looooooong before it became the commonality. Nothing has changed, their model is broken and foolish. But I also know that things here HAVE changed for the better this year, by hook or by crook, and I don't think that it really going to be understood en masse until the proof is more tangible.

I don't look at this as a game by game situation, I am looking at WHY things are happening and forecasting the most likely results. Clarke isn't a phenom, he needs to be polished and that won't always happen from lollipops and puppies. His arch isn't being damaged by sitting out a few games. It just isn't, and arguing over why he needs to sit might be fun - but the arguments I am reading are pretty poor.

I don't think that there are as many examples of the cure being worse than the disease here, certainly not as many as being used to question the way that they are handling Clarke. I know some think they ruined Kaliyev, I disagree because I never liked that pick to begin with. Fagemo? Come on. Bjornfort is one I would really like to hear about one day. Turcotte has been riddled with concussions and shoulder problems, but they have given him every opportunity to shine this year. Byfield is still on track for what I have been saying for years - a work in progress until 25. He has played top line as a LW and is flirting with being the top line C while still finding himself.

Its not as bad as being discussed here. If they had prime players in the #1C,D and G spots then this wouldn't be nearly as big of an issue. THAT is the problem here, continually trying to maximize the past, not the way they have handled the kids they kept.