Toggle sidebar

Around the League '18-'19

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
BigKing said:
They played worse, actually. We're a 100 point team the season prior.

Same players as last year, basically. Losing Quick is more important than Carter. Kopitar was trash. Everyone hated Sutter.

Credit to Blake for what he's done pipeline wise, but DL was not trading the Vilardi pick. Pretty sure he said they had to get back to what they had done previously RE: drafting etc. He didn't mortgage anything in his last year here.

The narrative of a drunk Lombardi just blowing through high value futures conveniently omits the '17 season. Hey, I'd like to forget it too so it's understandable.

He made a ton of mistakes. No argument there. The idea that he would never change is an assumption; however, it is gospel on this board.
Click to expand...
I think Dean's biggest problem was he was loyal to a fault. When it comes to critical self evaluation, I think he is very hard on himself. He is an extremely intelligent person, and if given another opportunity I don't think he would make the same mistake twice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kingspiracy, King Trouty, yankeeking and 4 others
I don't consider Dean to be "extremely intelligent." I think his intelligence is average.

He's too emotional and places too much value on non-quantifiables like leadership, character, intangibles ect. Most of those things are greatly exaggerated media contrivances.

Good managers are analytical and don't let their personal emotions influence their decisions.

Contrary to what most people say about him, he did show a willingness to change. I respect that. I respect him and I respect what he did here.
 
Dean Lombardi is very intelligent. He was 3rd in his undergraduate class at New Haven and graduated with honors from Tulane University Law School. That's a high 2nd tier almost 1st tier law school.
 
  • Like
Reactions: King Trouty and KINGS17
johnjm22 said:
I don't consider Dean to be "extremely intelligent." I think his intelligence is average.

He's too emotional and places too much value on non-quantifiables like leadership, character, intangibles ect. Most of those things are greatly exaggerated media contrivances.

Good managers are analytical and don't let their personal emotions influence their decisions.

Contrary to what most people say about him, he did show a willingness to change. I respect that. I respect him and I respect what he did here.
Click to expand...

I don't know how anyone can say that with a straight face after what we witnessed from 2012-2014, particularly 2013 and 2014.

I kind of agree on the idea that a manager has to make cold decisions at times, but emotion is an important part of human management, you can't completely ignore it either. I agree that DL was over-emotional but if his biggest fault is taking care of 'his guys' he can say he went down with his values. And that players went to have a beer with him after his firing tells me everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kingspiracy, King Trouty, BigKing and 1 other person
Lombardi is very intelligent. However, he's loyal to a fault. I also think he put too much weight sometimes on character.

For example, I don't think Lombardi would have signed Cal Petersen. I don't think he would have wanted to chance pissing off Buffalo by signing him, and he might have seen Petersen's lack of commitment to Buffalo as a red flag.

I doubt Lombardi would have tried to sign Kovalchuk. I think he would have traded futures for Skinner/Pacioretty.

Those are just a couple examples.

I do think people are being revisionists or ungrateful for everything Lombardi did. On the other hand, Blake has definitely made savvy moves that are reasonable to assume Lombardi wouldn't have made. The two GMs are very different. But they are definitely strong in different aspects.
 
  • Like
Reactions: King Trouty
Raccoon Jesus said:
I don't know how anyone can say that with a straight face after what we witnessed from 2012-2014, particularly 2013 and 2014.
Click to expand...
What do you mean exactly? That because the Kings had success it proves he didn't place too much value on those things? I don't think it proves that. You can have success and still have a flawed process.

Raccoon Jesus said:
I kind of agree on the idea that a manager has to make cold decisions at times, but emotion is an important part of human management, you can't completely ignore it either. I agree that DL was over-emotional
Click to expand...
I think he's melodramatic at times. I didn't mean to say you should 100% remove emotions. There are people skills involved in this, but I think emotions should mostly be removed from the decision making and evaluation process. Easier said than done of course.

Raccoon Jesus said:
if his biggest fault is taking care of 'his guys' he can say he went down with his values. And that players went to have a beer with him after his firing tells me everything.
Click to expand...
I don't see how this is irreverent. You don't get hired on as a manager to be liked or to take care of your guys. Outcomes are what matters.

Sutter was probably hated by the end of his tenure here. Should he be criticized for that?

Dean should get credit for the successes certainly.
 
Butch 19 said:
Thomas Hickey is a big black eye on Lombardi's tenure.
Click to expand...

Karl Alzner, the consensus top defenseman in that draft, has 129 points in 673 NHL games and is a throwaway player.

Hickey has 111 points in 409 NHL games.

Is he as good as McDonagh, Shattenkirk, Couture, Pacioretty or Voracek? No. Was the consensus right about Alzner being the clear cut best pick in the draft? No.

If we're going to use draft picks to dispute the guy's intelligence, then all GMs are going to look pretty dumb. Especially since you overlook the Kings took Wayne Simmonds in the 2nd round when NO scouting service, had him ranked not even CSS (who ranks hundreds of players).
 
  • Like
Reactions: King Trouty and BringTheReign
johnjm22 said:
What do you mean exactly? That because the Kings had success it proves he didn't place too much value on those things? I don't think it proves that. You can have success and still have a flawed process.

I think he's melodramatic at times. I didn't mean to say you should 100% remove emotions. There are people skills involved in this, but I think emotions should mostly be removed from the decision making and evaluation process. Easier said than done of course.

I don't see how this is irreverent. You don't get hired on as a manager to be liked or to take care of your guys. Outcomes are what matters.

Sutter was probably hated by the end of his tenure here. Should he be criticized for that?

Dean should get credit for the successes certainly.
Click to expand...

To the first point, I was disputing more the idea that character, leadership, 'intangibles' generally are simply media contrivances. I agree that he OVERvalued them to a degree, but he enjoyed much success in doing so, so I can't fault him too much for not backing off his vision, even if it resulted in his canning. Suggesting that they aren't a factor in our teams' successes, though, the idea that intangibles are mythical, was what I took issue with. You're basically suggesting he won in spite of himself instead of cause and effect. It's also very clear how they led to his downfall, though, i.e. with the Lucic trade. Guys like Mitchell, Regehr, Williams, even Stoll and Richards are irreplaceable in that way. Yes, you'll get more production and skill from other players, but I'm never going to question intangibles again after what I saw those years, especially when the zombified corpse of Mike Richards is making clutch plays in dying moments of games and OTs.

Totally agree that outcomes matter, I just think if you're building your organization around those sorts of intangibles anyway, things like loyalty and love go a long way. Standing by your guys in that case was the ultimate 'going down with the ship' move. I respect him for that. Was it the "right move?" f*** no, obviously. And he handicapped himself enough by the end that none of us got to see if he could/would adapt because he had already blown the houses money and the bookies came looking for him.

I think if he carries that same idea into his next position, he'll be putting together another scary team. Shipping out guys who don't have 'it,' bringing in guys to change the culture, building loyalty around a core. Some people seem to get that, some seem to just want to try to raw speed and skill others to death, but the problem is there will always be a team who gets more speed and skill, the real challenge for GMs right now is finding what the 'next model' is to counter it before others do. Washington figured that out this year without being a young especially fast team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: King Trouty
King'sPawn said:
Karl Alzner, the consensus top defenseman in that draft, has 129 points in 673 NHL games and is a throwaway player.

Hickey has 111 points in 409 NHL games.

Is he as good as McDonagh, Shattenkirk, Couture, Pacioretty or Voracek? No. Was the consensus right about Alzner being the clear cut best pick in the draft? No.

If we're going to use draft picks to dispute the guy's intelligence, then all GMs are going to look pretty dumb. Especially since you overlook the Kings took Wayne Simmonds in the 2nd round when NO scouting service, had him ranked not even CSS (who ranks hundreds of players).
Click to expand...

?? why do you assume the #4 pick had to be a dman? Whatever happened to BPA? Why not Couture, Voracek, Subban, or Eller?

And you're defending the Hickey pick by showing his stats with NYI? Who cares about his stats after he was put on waivers / left the Kings?

Can you name any other top 5 pick that was put on waivers before making it to the NHL?
 
  • Like
Reactions: King Trouty
Sol said:
Let's not forget Teubert.
Click to expand...

Teubert became Penner, Penner became Cup, but it was arguably the worst draft pick in franchise history.

It was a trend that I didn't even like at the time and one not only DL was guilty of, though. Every draft there was a rash of high pick stay-at-home defensemen and only the rare ones stuck around at all...Schenn was picked at #5. Alzner right after Hickey. Then you have a large group of dudes like Cowen (#9), Gudbrandson (#3 OA), McIlrath (#10 OA), Gormley (#13 OA), Tinordi (#22 OA), even Logan Stanley is looking like that guy at this point...where they'll be lucky to play at all.

Man, I'm a huge believer in toughness/intangibles, but even I looked at that trend like wtf are you GMs doing? If they're one-dimensional in junior, or barely more than one-dimensional in some cases, how can you believe that will be effective against NHLers? Sounds weird but I've always firmly believed you need a high offensive IQ to be a great defensive d-man. Doesn't mean you need to be great offensively, but unless you can think it, you can't prevent it. It's why someone like Vlasic is amazing, he's obviously not brain dead offensively even if he's not physically able to puck rush it end to end. Erik Karlsson can read plays like a madman when he's focused. Even Brent Burns is good at anticipating early. And so on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: King Trouty
Butch 19 said:
?? why do you assume the #4 pick had to be a dman? Whatever happened to BPA? Why not Couture, Voracek, Subban, or Eller?

And you're defending the Hickey pick by showing his stats with NYI? Who cares about his stats after he was put on waivers / left the Kings?

Can you name any other top 5 pick that was put on waivers before making it to the NHL?
Click to expand...

I didn't say it had to be a defenseman. In fact, I named forwards too. I pointed out how Lombardi got roasted for reaching at #4 over a consensus top player, when in actuality he didn't turn out to be so bad looking at his career.

My biggest problem is your multi-directional argument for why one player doesn't make Lombardi intelligent? Is it the pick itself? Because if yes, I showed you when looking at a career, he turned out pretty good. If it's because they lost him for nothing before he played a game in the NHL, that's a bit silly considering:
1) the Kings won the cup before they lost him
2) players get lost for nothing all the time. If you want a top 5 pick who went to another team before playing in the NHL: Blake Wheeler
3) if Hickey played just a game in the NHL before being waived you wouldn't have this argument. Why are we praising teams for playing young players too soon?
 
  • Like
Reactions: King Trouty
johnjm22 said:
I don't consider Dean to be "extremely intelligent." I think his intelligence is average.

He's too emotional and places too much value on non-quantifiables like leadership, character, intangibles ect. Most of those things are greatly exaggerated media contrivances.

Good managers are analytical and don't let their personal emotions influence their decisions.

Contrary to what most people say about him, he did show a willingness to change. I respect that. I respect him and I respect what he did here.
Click to expand...

You really need to read this book if you truly believe that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: King Trouty
dang it. I want to see a trade somewhere. Pacioretty or Karlsson. At least get something significant and breaking to discuss.

Summer slow season sucks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom