Speculation: Another year of this Bluc **** (The 2024-25 season thread)

[Raccoon Jesus]

I'm more excited BECAUSE Doughty is out for a while. Clarke and Spence should get more ice time, so we'll see what they do with it.

that's a funny way to spell Burroughs

put some respect on our 1RHDs name

 

[Sol]

i have to say, im more excited for this season than i've been in 5+ years...even with Doughty out for a while

I’m excited because doughty isn’t playing tbh because he is a waste of space at this point regardless of how good he still is

 

[Herby]

Kind of late to the game with the Ziemmer discussion, but this guy was drawing a good amount of hype as a mid 3rd round pick during last years camp. He has already put up pretty strong statistical numbers in the WHL in his age 17, 18 and 19 seasons, so it seems a bit off that he returns to major-junior to play a fourth season, as an overager.

I realize he is a post 9/15 b-day and thus a little bit younger than most oa players, but its a bit disappointing to return a pretty high draft pick for an overage year competing against 16-19 year olds. There have certainly been some exceptions (Sean Durzi is one notable recent one), but historically, drafted players playing major junior in their age 20 seasons have not produced strong long-term results at the NHL level, and why many teams don't go down that route with their prospects.

Looking at Ontario's likely roster, it seems like there should have been no issue fitting a 20 year old player taken in the middle of the 3rd onto that roster.

 

[ru4reals]

Kind of late to the game with the Ziemmer discussion, but this guy was drawing a good amount of hype as a mid 3rd round pick during last years camp. He has already put up pretty strong statistical numbers in the WHL in his age 17, 18 and 19 seasons, so it seems a bit off that he returns to major-junior to play a fourth season, as an overager.

I realize he is a post 9/15 b-day and thus a little bit younger than most oa players, but its a bit disappointing to return a pretty high draft pick for an overage year competing against 16-19 year olds. There have certainly been some exceptions (Sean Durzi is one notable recent one), but historically, drafted players playing major junior in their age 20 seasons have not produced strong long-term results at the NHL level, and why many teams don't go down that route with their prospects.

Looking at Ontario's likely roster, it seems like there should have been no issue fitting a 20 year old player taken in the middle of the 3rd onto that roster.

100% Agree.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Kind of late to the game with the Ziemmer discussion, but this guy was drawing a good amount of hype as a mid 3rd round pick during last years camp. He has already put up pretty strong statistical numbers in the WHL in his age 17, 18 and 19 seasons, so it seems a bit off that he returns to major-junior to play a fourth season, as an overager.

I realize he is a post 9/15 b-day and thus a little bit younger than most oa players, but its a bit disappointing to return a pretty high draft pick for an overage year competing against 16-19 year olds. There have certainly been some exceptions (Sean Durzi is one notable recent one), but historically, drafted players playing major junior in their age 20 seasons have not produced strong long-term results at the NHL level, and why many teams don't go down that route with their prospects.

Looking at Ontario's likely roster, it seems like there should have been no issue fitting a 20 year old player taken in the middle of the 3rd onto that roster.

Except the fact that he only played 24 games during his age 19 year, still is 19 doesn't turn 20 to December etc, not sure if the AHL is where you want him finding his game back.

 

[CarlSneep]

Yeah, I think Ziemmer is a rare case where it’s entirely justified to send him down for his overager year. Plus the Kings development team can’t ruin him there so win/win

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Re ziemmer it seems more like it’s about injury and recovery than anything else

At least that’s the optimist in me

But I'm with @King'sPawn about the handling, it's reminiscent of Clarke, just so goofy 4D chess. I have zero problem with him actually going down, but the jerking around is so weird. But yeah, Koehn wants to play like a dick, so go get healthy and stronger rather than coming off an ankle injury vs. men who want to take your lunch.

 

[Statto]

I don’t believe the Kings would be accruing cap space if Kaliyev was on LTIR either. They would still be over the cap. It does open up the possibility of acquiring a player now as you mentioned with the temporary cap space.

The rumblings last week were that Blake was looking to acquire a 4C which makes sense- you know it has to be KILLING him that two under-25yo’s are on the same line in Turcotte/Thomas. If there is a move, I’d expect it to be one that allows them to send one of those two to the press box indefinitely.

The 4c stuff was started by Bernstein speculating. He was very clear it wasn’t based on any inside info or similar, yet other outlets still then turned it into a rumour.

 

[Statto]

Re ziemmer it seems more like it’s about injury and recovery than anything else

At least that’s the optimist in me

But I'm with @King'sPawn about the handling, it's reminiscent of Clarke, just so goofy 4D chess. I have zero problem with him actually going down, but the jerking around is so weird. But yeah, Koehn wants to play like a dick, so go get healthy and stronger rather than coming off an ankle injury vs. men who want to take your lunch.

How has he been jerked around (completely agree that Clarke was). He was with the Kings, then was with the Reign for 7 days (give or take), that’s it. He wanted an opportunity to stick, was given that opportunity and then got sent down. I just don’t see the issue in this case, nothing like Clarke at all. It’s been a pretty linear and direct process with him.

 

[King'sPawn]

How has he been jerked around (completely agree that Clarke was). He was with the Kings, then was with the Reign for 7 days (give or take), that’s it. He wanted an opportunity to stick, was given that opportunity and then got sent down. I just don’t see the issue in this case, nothing like Clarke at all. It’s been a pretty linear and direct process with him.

I'll try not to belabor the point at least from my side anymore, because ultimately, what's done is done and I don't think it was a "bad" decision. I just question the reasoning.

- if it was due to fitness, an extra week with the AHL won't move the needle a lot. Especially when he missed so much time to injury.
- if it was a genuine attempt to give him a chance to make the Reign, he played in their one preseason game (after playing a preseason game with half the Kings early in preseason). He wasn't as good as the season before, but I don't think he was "not good enough for the AHL" bad.
- no takesy backsies on their decision for the next 6+ months, at least, if by some odd twist of fate PG is eliminated from the playoffs in March

So, to me, it seems like their minds were more made up early in training camp. Which is fine, but they also didn't use all avenues for either reasoning. So, just say it.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I'll try not to belabor the point at least from my side anymore, because ultimately, what's done is done and I don't think it was a "bad" decision. I just question the reasoning.

- if it was due to fitness, an extra week with the AHL won't move the needle a lot. Especially when he missed so much time to injury.
- if it was a genuine attempt to give him a chance to make the Reign, he played in their one preseason game (after playing a preseason game with half the Kings early in preseason). He wasn't as good as the season before, but I don't think he was "not good enough for the AHL" bad.
- no takesy backsies on their decision for the next 6+ months, at least, if by some odd twist of fate PG is eliminated from the playoffs in March

So, to me, it seems like their minds were more made up early in training camp. Which is fine, but they also didn't use all avenues for either reasoning. So, just say it.

Just say what...Curious what you want them to say or clarify

The reason why Ziemer was kept a week up, in AHL/NHL vs being sent to Juniors? Genuinely asking, because to be truthful, I don't really care why, it could be one of a dozen reasons, some being on the edge of none of my business at all (they want Ziemer to change his training/eating/health habits, so they wanted to give him more time with their professional staff to instill a regiment that he is comfortable with) to they wanted to give him more up tempo practices etc....

 

[Omni Owl]

I’m excited because doughty isn’t playing tbh because he is a waste of space at this point regardless of how good he still is

I'm sorry but what the f***? Doughty is most definitely not a waste of space. Dude tanks almost more minutes than anyone in the league. We're not talking about a Michael Del Zotto here...

 

[Statto]

I'll try not to belabor the point at least from my side anymore, because ultimately, what's done is done and I don't think it was a "bad" decision. I just question the reasoning.

- if it was due to fitness, an extra week with the AHL won't move the needle a lot. Especially when he missed so much time to injury.
- if it was a genuine attempt to give him a chance to make the Reign, he played in their one preseason game (after playing a preseason game with half the Kings early in preseason). He wasn't as good as the season before, but I don't think he was "not good enough for the AHL" bad.
- no takesy backsies on their decision for the next 6+ months, at least, if by some odd twist of fate PG is eliminated from the playoffs in March

So, to me, it seems like their minds were more made up early in training camp. Which is fine, but they also didn't use all avenues for either reasoning. So, just say it.

I understand the query. It’s just that even if we don’t agree/understand I don’t see it as particularly negative impact keeping him around. Even if the benefits aren’t all that clear to us.

Personally I think it was right to keep him around the pro’s for as long as it made sense to. That bit ‘makes sense’ is incredibly subjective and will be specific to every individual. Unfortunately, I don’t think any of us have the insight to give an informed view. However , I don’t see any real parallels to the dumb shit with Clarke.

I’m sure someone informed will open up on it at some stage (probably Yannetti) so it’ll be interesting to learn what the process was. Even if we have a wait of months….

 

[King'sPawn]

Just say what...Curious what you want them to say or clarify

The reason why Ziemer was kept a week up, in AHL/NHL vs being sent to Juniors? Genuinely asking, because to be truthful, I don't really care why, it could be one of a dozen reasons, some being on the edge of none of my business at all (they want Ziemer to change his training/eating/health habits, so they wanted to give him more time with their professional staff to instill a regiment that he is comfortable with) to they wanted to give him more up tempo practices etc....

Just say that he wasn't able to get in shape (most likely from the injury) and he had an underwhelming training camp. And the plan from the get-go was to spend more time with him before sending him to juniors.

It just sounds insincere to say "we want to give him an opportunity to train with the pros and give him a chance to make the Reign."

It's subtle, but I don't like the pretense of opportunity if a decision was already made. Especially considering how a similar decision was made with Clarke the year before last, and they kept dragging it out.

It's not the same as Clarke, but they have made some odd micromanagerial choices in the past. I'm not comfortable accepting explanations from them when they keep players who arguably could have played pro a little longer, only to send them down to a lesser league.

And if fitness IS the sole reason, to me, that only tells me he should have stayed up more to continue training with the pros. And then we get into the question - if they sent him down to the WHL to not burn a year off, is that decision made in the best interest of the player?

 

[BringTheReign]

I appreciate the response and I promise I'm not trying to be a pain. It's just that sending a player to major junior is a season-long commitment where you lose flexibility.

So, before they sent him down, I was curious of the decision making. If they wanted him to train with the pros and give him a shot at making the team, what blocked them from a conditioning stint, which they have used in the past? It's something they were able to use with Clarke to let his contract slide. And I don't know if I'm missing anything there.

If they didn't think it was worth exercising, why not? Did he accept what he had to do to train properly? Did he not?

These are nuances in developmental decisions, and it's not that it bothers/upsets me as much as it appears, but I'm curious of why. And with me being a fan of Ziemmer, it's interesting to me.

And I feel it would be more productive brainstorming with you all than nagging Hoven on something he probably wouldn't get a straight answer to.

All good questions for sure. I wonder if he wasn't eligible for a conditioning stint since he did come back and play in the WHL playoffs after the injury last season. FWIW, Yannetti also mentioned they typically have great communication with CHL teams with respect to development, but I agree with your general point about if those were the priorities it would be better to extend his stay in LA/Ontario as long as possible.

I forgot I had a Jfresh subscription. These are all the latest cards including last seasons data.

I think it's kind of funny how all our rando defensemen we got for almost nothing (Englund, Burroughs, Jones) all grade out higher than Edmundson.

Thanks for sharing. To your last point, I still can't believe we paid Edmundson as much as we did for as many years as we did.

 

[AbsentMojo]

I forgot I had a Jfresh subscription. These are all the latest cards including last seasons data.

I think it's kind of funny how all our rando defensemen we got for almost nothing (Englund, Burroughs, Jones) all grade out higher than Edmundson.

I dont think anyone realizes just how bad defensively the d-corps is going to be without DD and Roy. What you have is Spence replacing DD, Burroughs replacing Roy, and Clarke replacing Spence.. each of those is a significant downgrade defensively there on the right side.

2nd observation...what rocket scientist thinks Laf is a good fit on the 1st line let alone PP1 - 3rd liner at best. He had 4 primary assists in 81 games - its really hard to be that bad as a play maker and it fits the eye test.

 

[johnjm22]

Thanks for sharing. To your last point, I still can't believe we paid Edmundson as much as we did for as many years as we did.

He seemed to be okay in Toronto.

Maybe he's one of those vet players who half-asses unless he's in a situation where's there's actual stakes.

We'll see.

 

[deaderhead28]