Kings News: Kings players tired of Sutter?

[Fishhead]

I am concerned that maybe he has lost the room, however there is no way sutter is not back next year.
That said if LA gets off to a slow start it could mean the end of sutter. He will be in the hot seat to start the year

Sutter is never going to be on the hot seat with Lombardi, I feel. He'll go out on his own terms either way. I think any animosity was short-lived and due to all the crap they had to deal with this year.

Voynov's alleged boxing match
Richards demotion
TV cameras following you around for the outdoor game
Short offseason and general fatigue
Extra media attention as the Champs.

That's a lot of distraction for any team, let alone one that everyone is gunning for. As tight as the room is, you know the Voynov and Richards situations hit some of them hard and a blowup would be inevitable.

I do get the feeling that next year will be Sutter's last either way. I think it's a given if they get that third cup.

 

[YP44]

Sutter is never going to be on the hot seat with Lombardi, I feel. He'll go out on his own terms either way. I think any animosity was short-lived and due to all the crap they had to deal with this year.

Voynov's alleged boxing match
Richards demotion
TV cameras following you around for the outdoor game
Short offseason and general fatigue
Extra media attention as the Champs.

That's a lot of distraction for any team, let alone one that everyone is gunning for. As tight as the room is, you know the Voynov and Richards situations hit some of them hard and a blowup would be inevitable.

I do get the feeling that next year will be Sutter's last either way. I think it's a given if they get that third cup.

I was surprised Sutter didn't retire after last year to be honest. I thought there were rumblings.

 

[Fishhead]

I was surprised Sutter didn't retire after last year to be honest. I thought there were rumblings.

Yea, and the Stevens 'associate head coach' thing. All things point to him retiring sooner than later.

 

[taz346]

I think the funniest of all is that so many poo-poo'ed that article of Brooks, only to find out from DL that it actually did happen. Just think back to how the team looked when they had gotten their fill of Murray. There is a possibility that Sutters system is beginning to lose it's steam with the Kings players. Possibility I said, not a fact. Have to keep an open mind regarding things like this.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I think the funniest of all is that so many poo-poo'ed that article of Brooks, only to find out from DL that it actually did happen. Just think back to how the team looked when they had gotten their fill of Murray. There is a possibility that Sutters system is beginning to lose it's steam with the Kings players. Possibility I said, not a fact. Have to keep an open mind regarding things like this.

It's still a leap from player's only meeting to "Players’ stunning protest of coach aids Kings’ demise." The guy should write for clickbait sites. The only thing missing was "guys hate him--find 15 reasons why after the click!"

Misleading 'journalism' by a guy with an agenda, grain of truth or not.

 

[ddawg1950]

Sutter is never going to be on the hot seat with Lombardi, I feel. He'll go out on his own terms either way. I think any animosity was short-lived and due to all the crap they had to deal with this year.

Voynov's alleged boxing match
Richards demotion
TV cameras following you around for the outdoor game
Short offseason and general fatigue
Extra media attention as the Champs.

That's a lot of distraction for any team, let alone one that everyone is gunning for. As tight as the room is, you know the Voynov and Richards situations hit some of them hard and a blowup would be inevitable.

I do get the feeling that next year will be Sutter's last either way. I think it's a given if they get that third cup.

As an outsider(Canuck fan) I agree with your take on what went wrong this year, but I would add a couple more things.

As the Champs with Cups in two of the last three years, other teams brought their best games against LA. I know this was certainly true with the Canucks. There was no problem with bringing the A game when playing the Kings. Every other team in the NHL brought the same best effort against the Kings. It wears you down.

Secondly, the drama surrounding the Kings with all the points you mentioned, also has a separate cost. One of the things that killed the Canucks after 2011 was all the drama surrounding the team. From the Vancouver riots to the Luongo trade saga followed by firing Alain and hiring Torts...ultimately led to that world class melt down by the Canucks. That kind of drama with Voyonov, Richards, etc. takes an extra toll.

Finally, playing Sutter hockey is not easy. It requires defensive commitment and hard work on every shift. Add that in to all the extra games you've played adds to the physical exhaustion for sure, but more importantly IMO, is the mental exhaustion. Playing with that kind of focus for the last three years is going to take it's toll.

So yeah, you guys miss the dance this year. But you'll get a great draft pick and you have two Cups. All the hate from other fan bases is pure envy.

 

[Reclamation Project]

 

[The Butcher]

I think the funniest of all is that so many poo-poo'ed that article of Brooks, only to find out from DL that it actually did happen. Just think back to how the team looked when they had gotten their fill of Murray. There is a possibility that Sutters system is beginning to lose it's steam with the Kings players. Possibility I said, not a fact. Have to keep an open mind regarding things like this.

I like to poo-poo

 

[417th]

I think the funniest of all is that so many poo-poo'ed that article of Brooks, only to find out from DL that it actually did happen. Just think back to how the team looked when they had gotten their fill of Murray. There is a possibility that Sutters system is beginning to lose it's steam with the Kings players. Possibility I said, not a fact. Have to keep an open mind regarding things like this.

Only it didn't happen or at least not close to how or where Brooks "reported it" to have happened.

 

[Buddy The Elf]

I didn't get a chance to post here when I saw the article but I immediately assumed something like a closed door meeting happened and this guy exaggerated the rest. Sounds like that is exactly what happened.

 

[kingsfan]

I think the funniest of all is that so many poo-poo'ed that article of Brooks, only to find out from DL that it actually did happen. Just think back to how the team looked when they had gotten their fill of Murray. There is a possibility that Sutters system is beginning to lose it's steam with the Kings players. Possibility I said, not a fact. Have to keep an open mind regarding things like this.

It seems the only thing that was correct in the article was that the door got locked on purpose. He couldn't even get the city, date, anything else correct.

It's a piece of **** article with one correct line. It should be poo-poo'ed because it's only value is to be used as asswipe.

 

[JPE123]

Wings fan here but Kings are my team in the west. Silly article. Sometimes players need a heart to heart without coach/management present. What's wrong with that? Maybe players want to challenge each other. Some clowncar reporter pretending he got a big scoop. You guys will be back next year, too much talent not to.

 

[taz346]

It seems the only thing that was correct in the article was that the door got locked on purpose. He couldn't even get the city, date, anything else correct.

It's a piece of **** article with one correct line. It should be poo-poo'ed because it's only value is to be used as asswipe.

haha I'm still laughing at all who still making excuses as to why you jumped to conclusions so fast.
The team won the game the night that they did this so-called closed door meeting. How bout if they played that game just the way they wanted to, instead of Sutters way and wanted to discuss it? Noone knows what goes on behind closed doors, no matter how much you speculate and act as tho your opinion is the Gods truth. No matter how much you dislike what someone says, doesn't necessarily make it wrong. Not that I like Brooks. Just putting out some other possibilities.

 

[Chain]

Wings fan here but Kings are my team in the west. Silly article. Sometimes players need a heart to heart without coach/management present. What's wrong with that? Maybe players want to challenge each other. Some clowncar reporter pretending he got a big scoop. You guys will be back next year, too much talent not to.

Thanks. I think that's right on.

Some reporters will blow things out of proportion to get some attention.

 

[Buddy The Elf]

haha I'm still laughing at all who still making excuses as to why you jumped to conclusions so fast.
The team won the game the night that they did this so-called closed door meeting. How bout if they played that game just the way they wanted to, instead of Sutters way and wanted to discuss it? Noone knows what goes on behind closed doors, no matter how much you speculate and act as tho your opinion is the Gods truth. No matter how much you dislike what someone says, doesn't necessarily make it wrong. Not that I like Brooks. Just putting out some other possibilities.

Except for Larry Brooks?

More than one person has already come out and said that his version of the story isn't accurate. Now who would you like to believe? The people that were there and/or are part of the organization or a well know rabble-rouser?

 

[kingsfan]

haha I'm still laughing at all who still making excuses as to why you jumped to conclusions so fast.
The team won the game the night that they did this so-called closed door meeting. How bout if they played that game just the way they wanted to, instead of Sutters way and wanted to discuss it? Noone knows what goes on behind closed doors, no matter how much you speculate and act as tho your opinion is the Gods truth. No matter how much you dislike what someone says, doesn't necessarily make it wrong. Not that I like Brooks. Just putting out some other possibilities.

A) Brooks was wrong on everything but one line. I'm not making it up, DL, Sutter, Drew, Brown have all said the story is inaccurate beyond the fact the players locked the door. Has nothing to do with whether or not I dislike the guy -and I do dislike him- it has everything to do with those who actually where involved said it's not what Brooks is making it out to be.

B) You say no one knows what goes on behind closed doors, yet you defend Brooks, who was about 1,000 miles away the night of the incident and ignore what DL and Co. have said. You know, the very guys who are behind those very same closed doors.

C) The players couldn't play 'that game just the way they wanted to, instead of Sutters way' because by about five minutes in Sutter would be benching players. Craig Conroy wrote once about how Sutter benched him for a period for disagreeing with Sutter in the locker room. You don't think guys would be getting benched left and right if they elected to do whatever they wanted on the ice?

D) I have no issue with 'other possibilities' at all. I just prefer ones with some semblance of logic or reason, not throwing **** at a wall.

 

[Ron*]

haha I'm still laughing at all who still making excuses as to why you jumped to conclusions so fast.
The team won the game the night that they did this so-called closed door meeting. How bout if they played that game just the way they wanted to, instead of Sutters way and wanted to discuss it? Noone knows what goes on behind closed doors, no matter how much you speculate and act as tho your opinion is the Gods truth. No matter how much you dislike what someone says, doesn't necessarily make it wrong. Not that I like Brooks. Just putting out some other possibilities.

A) Brooks was wrong on everything but one line. I'm not making it up, DL, Sutter, Drew, Brown have all said the story is inaccurate beyond the fact the players locked the door. Has nothing to do with whether or not I dislike the guy -and I do dislike him- it has everything to do with those who actually where involved said it's not what Brooks is making it out to be.

B) You say no one knows what goes on behind closed doors, yet you defend Brooks, who was about 1,000 miles away the night of the incident and ignore what DL and Co. have said. You know, the very guys who are behind those very same closed doors.

C) The players couldn't play 'that game just the way they wanted to, instead of Sutters way' because by about five minutes in Sutter would be benching players. Craig Conroy wrote once about how Sutter benched him for a period for disagreeing with Sutter in the locker room. You don't think guys would be getting benched left and right if they elected to do whatever they wanted on the ice?

D) I have no issue with 'other possibilities' at all. I just prefer ones with some semblance of logic or reason, not throwing **** at a wall.

He made most of the **** up.

 

[Reclamation Project]

This thread. Give me a break.

 

[Ron*]

Thanks. I think that's right on.

Some reporters will blow things out of proportion to get some attention.

There is too much media in 2015. All are competing for stories. So more and more media make **** up to sell newspapers or air time.

If that isn't obvious, I don't know what is.

The story is factually inaccurate. The moron didn't fact-check his source information. Just like that discredited Rolling Stone story. If you don't fact-check your sources, you are bound to get burned, and Brooks did, as usual.

 

[Reclamation Project]

Surprised CNN didn't break this scoop.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

There is too much media in 2015. All are competing for stories. So more and more media make **** up to sell newspapers or air time.

If that isn't obvious, I don't know what is.

The story is factually inaccurate. The moron didn't fact-check his source information. Just like that discredited Rolling Stone story. If you don't fact-check your sources, you are bound to get burned, and Brooks did, as usual.

The difference is accountability. Rolling Stone is at least sacking up and taking their medicine; Brooks will move on without addressing it and go write some more ******** for rabid readers to consume.

He uses big words, so he has to be smart.

 

[kingsfan]

This thread. Give me a break.

The difference is accountability. Rolling Stone is at least sacking up and taking their medicine; Brooks will move on without addressing it and go write some more ******** for rabid readers to consume.

He uses big words, so he has to be smart.

Blame the Post. Brooks clearly doesn't care much, but why isn't his employer holding his feet to the fire? I bet the Rolling Stones writers wouldn't care much either if Rolling Stone simply shrugged their shoulders and moved on. It all starts at the top.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Blame the Post. Brooks clearly doesn't care much, but why isn't his employer holding his feet to the fire? I bet the Rolling Stones writers wouldn't care much either if Rolling Stone simply shrugged their shoulders and moved on. It all starts at the top.

I agree.

And people used to say the same thing about Adrian Dater before the Denver Post finally saw everyone complaining about him. Problem is Brooks has quite a following, so as long as he doesn't actually offend anyone, he's probably fine.

Plus, it's the NY Post, it's become a glorified tabloid with just a strong historical name. They don't care.

 

[Jason Lewis]

The difference is accountability. Rolling Stone is at least sacking up and taking their medicine; Brooks will move on without addressing it and go write some more ******** for rabid readers to consume.

He uses big words, so he has to be smart.

It was the perfect opportunity for traffic for him.

Which to me is disgusting. Instead of writing good content, well thought out content, and well researched content to draw in crowds, he went with made-up and/or second-hand garbage rumors.

About a high profile team that was just eliminated no less.

 

[Ron*]

The difference is accountability. Rolling Stone is at least sacking up and taking their medicine; Brooks will move on without addressing it and go write some more ******** for rabid readers to consume.

He uses big words, so he has to be smart.

Anyone who reads that rag on a regular basis deserves writers like Brooks.

Wait a minute...rag?

The Rangers are called Rags by their fans. (I think.)

Hmmmm....coincidence?

I don't think so!