Around the league part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

GoldenBearHockey

Registered User
Jan 6, 2014
10,202
4,289


What is this sorcery of 20 year-olds getting opportunity in the NHL and in the top 6. Must be another one of those cellar dweller tea... oh wait, it's the Panthers. How far did they go again?


So we are creaming ourselves over a bubble player saying hey look?

Jesus Christ.....yes, he has skills, that's why he was a 1st round draft pick....but when your own article says bubble player....and making things tough on the coaches....that doesn't scream top six, let's wait til he plays game 10 in the NHL?
 

KingsFan7824

Registered User
Dec 4, 2003
19,526
7,599
Visit site
They were the 3rd best team in the NHL from the time they hired sutter until the end of the season. They went 25-13-11 with him.

They were 13-9-8, good for 16th overall, and 10th in the west, between the hiring of Sutter and Carter. Which, was slightly better than the 14-13-4, 20th overall, and 11th in the West that they were when they were considered contenders and ready to win at the start of the season. 17th overall, 10th in the West, the day they got Carter.

All I know is that the grand plan, up to that point, wasn't working. I doubt, at the time, we would've said it was working. No not only will they be fine, but they'll run through the playoff competition like nobody has ever done before. This was before the Kings truly made corsi and fenwick and all that really mean something. Through 61 games, they were last overall in GF. 3rd in GA, but a -3 overall. Even when Sutter was all about the goal differential, not the total GF, they were still mediocre. 75% of the way through the year, the year they were supposed to be a contender from day 1.
 

SmytheKing

Registered User
Apr 7, 2007
971
1,407
They were 13-9-8, good for 16th overall, and 10th in the west, between the hiring of Sutter and Carter. Which, was slightly better than the 14-13-4, 20th overall, and 11th in the West that they were when they were considered contenders and ready to win at the start of the season. 17th overall, 10th in the West, the day they got Carter.

All I know is that the grand plan, up to that point, wasn't working. I doubt, at the time, we would've said it was working. No not only will they be fine, but they'll run through the playoff competition like nobody has ever done before. This was before the Kings truly made corsi and fenwick and all that really mean something. Through 61 games, they were last overall in GF. 3rd in GA, but a -3 overall. Even when Sutter was all about the goal differential, not the total GF, they were still mediocre. 75% of the way through the year, the year they were supposed to be a contender from day 1.
Your quote: "They didn't even get better after DL brought his buddy in half way through the year".

They did. You're free to cherry-pick any games you like to try and make it seem like you are/were correct. I'll go with the fact that from the time he was hired until the end of the season, the Kings (including the playoffs) were 41-17-11. I'll argue that's "better" than they were before he was hired.
 

Fishhead

Registered User
Jul 15, 2003
7,306
5,764
PNW


What is this sorcery of 20 year-olds getting opportunity in the NHL and in the top 6. Must be another one of those cellar dweller tea... oh wait, it's the Panthers. How far did they go again?

IIRC, the Kings did fairly well with Kaliyev. I remember him on the 3rd line in his first preseason, but they did have him out there on the powerplay. He was 19 I think. So not terrible. They started playing him lower in the lineup after the AHL stint.

Byfield debuted with top-6 time, and was playing top-6 when he got injured that preseason, and he debuted later that year in the top-6.

So there is some precedence of the Kings doing this in the preseason. It's during the season where the real hesitance kicks in.
 

KingsFan7824

Registered User
Dec 4, 2003
19,526
7,599
Visit site
Your quote: "They didn't even get better after DL brought his buddy in half way through the year".

They did. You're free to cherry-pick any games you like to try and make it seem like you are/were correct. I'll go with the fact that from the time he was hired until the end of the season, the Kings (including the playoffs) were 41-17-11. I'll argue that's "better" than they were before he was hired.

Man, if you're going to quote me, quote me.

They still weren't in a playoff spot when Carter got here.

Because I also said that, literally the sentence before "They didn't even get better after DL brought his buddy in half way through the year". I said that, in reference to the previous sentence. I was talking about the segment of games between Sutter and Carter. Nothing post-Carter. Post-Carter, that's a different issue. Pre-Carter, the Kings, in a contender season, were mediocre for 75% of the year, in a mediocre division. Which was before the just get in Kings ever made believers out of anyone. We didn't have 16-4 in the playoffs yet to fall back on, and prove how good they always were behind the curtain.

That's the beauty of winning cures all though. Whatever you did was right, otherwise you wouldn't have won. Bring in Penner to score, he can't, you still win, doesn't matter. Bring in an injury prone Gagne as a top 2 line LW, he gets hurt, you still win, doesn't matter.
 

Fishhead

Registered User
Jul 15, 2003
7,306
5,764
PNW


So about a $4M bump next year. Should help us as a lot of guys are already locked in for the next 3 years, as well as other teams who don't have a lot of upcoming UFA players. Things don't look terrible down the road either as Fiala and PLD are on long deals signed just before the cap should jump substantially over the next 3 years.
 

kingsfan28

Its A Kingspiracy !
Feb 27, 2005
40,320
9,389
Corsi Hill


What is this sorcery of 20 year-olds getting opportunity in the NHL and in the top 6. Must be another one of those cellar dweller tea... oh wait, it's the Panthers. How far did they go again?


Lets slow our roll here pal. Every NHL team has a 19-20 year who "might make it" during camp. If Kupari done that after his draft year he's still a King.
 

Sol

Smile
Jun 30, 2017
24,359
20,461
I have no idea why Quick hasn’t hung up the gloves by now. No game over 900 save percentage. Don’t go out like this. I know it’s just preseason but he’s been done… come on bro.

Just hang them up and don’t go out team hopping like Tim Thomas.
 

King'sPawn

Enjoy the chaos
Jul 1, 2003
22,846
23,342


So about a $4M bump next year. Should help us as a lot of guys are already locked in for the next 3 years, as well as other teams who don't have a lot of upcoming UFA players. Things don't look terrible down the road either as Fiala and PLD are on long deals signed just before the cap should jump substantially over the next 3 years.

A friend who has a subscription to the Athletic found this:
"In their article today about their interview with Marty Walsh, The Athletic said this:

"Some estimates have the salary cap going from $83.5 million to around $92 million over the next couple of seasons. But with uncertainty surrounding several teams’ regional TV networks due to Bally Sports’ bankruptcy, plus the volatility of the world economy, it’s fair to wonder if those numbers should be set in stone."

It sounds like there are fair reasons to question Bettman's projections.
 

kingsfan28

Its A Kingspiracy !
Feb 27, 2005
40,320
9,389
Corsi Hill
A friend who has a subscription to the Athletic found this:
"In their article today about their interview with Marty Walsh, The Athletic said this:

"Some estimates have the salary cap going from $83.5 million to around $92 million over the next couple of seasons. But with uncertainty surrounding several teams’ regional TV networks due to Bally Sports’ bankruptcy, plus the volatility of the world economy, it’s fair to wonder if those numbers should be set in stone."

It sounds like there are fair reasons to question Bettman's projections.

This is a pretty big deal. More than half the league uses Bally's as a provider. There is no Outdoor Network to bail them out this time.
 

Fishhead

Registered User
Jul 15, 2003
7,306
5,764
PNW
This is a pretty big deal. More than half the league uses Bally's as a provider. There is no Outdoor Network to bail them out this time.
The Sinclair purchase was short-sighted at the time, but it was probably doomed from the start. Antitrust laws always confuse me because there are so many loopholes and it takes so long to actually compile enough info to file an antitrust suit.

I remember Disney buying 21C Fox and the sports networks had to be split off before the purchase went through due to antitrust issues. So they sold it and now many of those same games are broadcast out of market on.... ESPN+. So apparently having many local markets was verboten, but having out of market rights for a lot of those same games is ok? As I said, confusing.

Either way, the NHL is getting the shaft a bit if Sinclair falls apart. I don't think it will affect the cap much next season, but 2-3 years down the road looks iffy. Hopefully someone steps in looking for a bargain.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad