LA KINGS 2023/4 Regular season discussion

[King'sPawn]

Only addressing the bolded, because plenty of people, I believe you included, feel free to correct me, are absolutely pitching fits about how LA can't develop offensive players, let the Zegras's be the Zegras's instead, they tell Kaliyev and Vilardi, and Turcotte, and Byfield to check check check.....

And now....you WANT players like those? Again, you in the general sense.....but I find it hypocritical to complain about how LA can't develop offensive talent, then go bitch about the offensive talent we have (Fiala, Kempe) making mistakes etc....and wishing they were more like Danault.

I know a lot has been said and so I understand where some wires may be crossed - I'l try to explain my personal stance as clearly as possible.

- I am a proponent of letting the prospects be the players they were drafted as. I think it's important to let them learn to integrate their skillset at the NHL level and build upon it once they have, for lack of a better word, graduated. I've been very critical of Zegras in particular as a prospect, even before Anaheim drafted him, because I saw him as a style over substance type of player - flashy, skilled, and fun to watch, but ultimately very one-dimensional players.
- I am not a fond of the "slow boil" method, at least having it universally applied. This is my biggest criticism of anything with Kings development (I'll touch on your other point about developing offensive talent as well, but I want to emphasize this point). In the different jobs I've worked, I've usually ended up being one of the trainers, because I love to help bring people along and teach them. In those years, it's pretty apparent that people learn in different ways. I think a deeper commitment to putting all the players through the same curriculum is flawed. Some thrive more with challenges, and I'd like to see that be used more. So, yes, as far as "letting Zegras be Zegras", I feel like it's easier for players to build on skills once they're comfortable instead of trying to shape them to play one particular way, then having them shift to play in another way.
- I do think the Kings have a problem developing high-end offensive talent out of players. Believe it or not, I don't want the Kings to build up 5 first-overall picks like Edmonton, but they also need to help building skillsets of responsible players to take their game up to the next level. Kopitar's probably my favorite player ever, and that's because he has offensive talent, but he doesn't cheat for points. I don't expect every player to be as good as Kopitar, but I like players who are as dangerous offensively as they are defensively. So, to me, I don't think it's hypocritical to want defensive players to have a wider offensive skillset to use at their disposal while wanting offensively skilled players to be willing to do the dirty work.

As drafts only get about 2-3 NHL players (if you have a good draft), having a 7-year game plan like what happened with Kempe isn't a good long-term model. Likewise, since I don't want the Kings to amount several seasons of top-5 picks, I think it's imperative for the Kings to continue to develop the offensive ability of players in the later rounds on a somewhat reasonable basis.

One thing I'll gladly give Kempe credit for is his willingness to develop his shot on his own. It's honestly elevated his game a lot and I'm glad the Kings have him. It's also why I've shut my trap about trading him, because he has added to his game. But I'd be remiss if I acted like everything was okay with his play (or anyone else's). To me, there are certain things I see in different players that I find unsatisfying. Watching one player more often than not hang out while your two linemates do big battles along the boards much more consistently is one of those things. PLD's disappearing acts drive me nuts. Fiala's recklessness is a double-edged sword.

But a player like Trevor Moore plays in all situations and he's an offensive threat. He's not a game-breaker as far as raw talent, but the dude's mixture of tenacity and relentlessness, along with his versatility, makes him an amazing forward that I am 100% willing to back each and every night. Blake Lizotte suffers from size issues, but he also creates opportunities through his relentlessness. Heck, I was one of Byfield's biggest defenders since he was drafted, and aside from me saying "he needs to produce more as he matures", I have said many times how NOT worried I was because of how he was growing his game.

Kempe and Fiala have a ways to go before I'm willing to shower that level of praise on them. To me, I don't think that's unreasonable. Particularly in a discussion board.

People are free to call it "bitching" if they want, but these are measured criticisms meant to provoke discussion.

 

[SaltyElkHunter]

In best ringer voice…. When the f*** did we get BJ’s?

 

[johnjm22]

But a player like Trevor Moore plays in all situations and he's an offensive threat. He's not a game-breaker as far as raw talent, but the dude's mixture of tenacity and relentlessness, along with his versatility, makes him an amazing forward that I am 100% willing to back each and every night. Blake Lizotte suffers from size issues, but he also creates opportunities through his relentlessness. Heck, I was one of Byfield's biggest defenders since he was drafted, and aside from me saying "he needs to produce more as he matures", I have said many times how NOT worried I was because of how he was growing his game.

Kempe and Fiala have a ways to go before I'm willing to shower that level of praise on them. To me, I don't think that's unreasonable. Particularly in a discussion board.

People are free to call it "bitching" if they want, but these are measured criticisms meant to provoke discussion.

Kempe also plays in all situations. In fact, he spends more time on the PK than Moore does.

Kempe has even passed Moore in net penalty differential.

Adrian also leads the team in plus/minus at +10 while being the teams leading scorer.

There's just not much left to criticize about Kempe's game.

Fiala on the other hand. I trade him for a Moore-type player any day. He's got to be one of the dumbest players in the league.

 

[FSL KINGS]

In best ringer voice…. When the f*** did we get BJ’s?

Quote the Ringer all the time.
No one gets it
WTF is wrong with people?

Kempe also plays in all situations. In fact, he spends more time on the PK than Moore does.

Kempe has even passed Moore in net penalty differential.

Adrian also leads the team in plus/minus at +10 while being the teams leading scorer.

There's just not much left to criticize about Kempe's game.

Fiala on the other hand. I trade him for a Moore-type player any day. He's got to be one of the dumbest players in the league.

Interesting. I see Fiala & raise you a Risto. Wait, Nurse with his crap play & headbutts in the playoffs has to be up there.

Ok, top 5 dumbest players in the league? Go!

Speaking of
How many goals did the famous striker Nelson Mandela end up with?

 

[King'sPawn]

Kempe also plays in all situations. In fact, he spends more time on the PK than Moore does.

Kempe has even passed Moore in net penalty differential.

Adrian also leads the team in plus/minus at +10 while being the teams leading scorer.

There's just not much left to criticize about Kempe's game.

Fiala on the other hand. I trade him for a Moore-type player any day. He's got to be one of the dumbest players in the league.

I understand what the metrics suggest. But this is why there's still plenty of value to the eye test (edit: I also love to see objective data, but I don't think we've found the dataset to properly discuss this particular topic). In my opinion, he has bigger areas of improvement than Moore, who punches above his weight as far as effort.

 

[BigBrown]

Fiala isn't what he was pre-injury last season. He was a consistent dynamic threat that easily outweighed a bad penalty every now and again. He's still putting up some numbers but to my eyes he ain't even close to what he was. Whether it is due to him being a slow starter (which he has a history of being) or lingering effects of the injury I don't know but patience is what is needed in either case.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I know a lot has been said and so I understand where some wires may be crossed - I'l try to explain my personal stance as clearly as possible.

- I am a proponent of letting the prospects be the players they were drafted as. I think it's important to let them learn to integrate their skillset at the NHL level and build upon it once they have, for lack of a better word, graduated. I've been very critical of Zegras in particular as a prospect, even before Anaheim drafted him, because I saw him as a style over substance type of player - flashy, skilled, and fun to watch, but ultimately very one-dimensional players.
- I am not a fond of the "slow boil" method, at least having it universally applied. This is my biggest criticism of anything with Kings development (I'll touch on your other point about developing offensive talent as well, but I want to emphasize this point). In the different jobs I've worked, I've usually ended up being one of the trainers, because I love to help bring people along and teach them. In those years, it's pretty apparent that people learn in different ways. I think a deeper commitment to putting all the players through the same curriculum is flawed. Some thrive more with challenges, and I'd like to see that be used more. So, yes, as far as "letting Zegras be Zegras", I feel like it's easier for players to build on skills once they're comfortable instead of trying to shape them to play one particular way, then having them shift to play in another way.
- I do think the Kings have a problem developing high-end offensive talent out of players. Believe it or not, I don't want the Kings to build up 5 first-overall picks like Edmonton, but they also need to help building skillsets of responsible players to take their game up to the next level. Kopitar's probably my favorite player ever, and that's because he has offensive talent, but he doesn't cheat for points. I don't expect every player to be as good as Kopitar, but I like players who are as dangerous offensively as they are defensively. So, to me, I don't think it's hypocritical to want defensive players to have a wider offensive skillset to use at their disposal while wanting offensively skilled players to be willing to do the dirty work.

As drafts only get about 2-3 NHL players (if you have a good draft), having a 7-year game plan like what happened with Kempe isn't a good long-term model. Likewise, since I don't want the Kings to amount several seasons of top-5 picks, I think it's imperative for the Kings to continue to develop the offensive ability of players in the later rounds on a somewhat reasonable basis.

One thing I'll gladly give Kempe credit for is his willingness to develop his shot on his own. It's honestly elevated his game a lot and I'm glad the Kings have him. It's also why I've shut my trap about trading him, because he has added to his game. But I'd be remiss if I acted like everything was okay with his play (or anyone else's). To me, there are certain things I see in different players that I find unsatisfying. Watching one player more often than not hang out while your two linemates do big battles along the boards much more consistently is one of those things. PLD's disappearing acts drive me nuts. Fiala's recklessness is a double-edged sword.

But a player like Trevor Moore plays in all situations and he's an offensive threat. He's not a game-breaker as far as raw talent, but the dude's mixture of tenacity and relentlessness, along with his versatility, makes him an amazing forward that I am 100% willing to back each and every night. Blake Lizotte suffers from size issues, but he also creates opportunities through his relentlessness. Heck, I was one of Byfield's biggest defenders since he was drafted, and aside from me saying "he needs to produce more as he matures", I have said many times how NOT worried I was because of how he was growing his game.

Kempe and Fiala have a ways to go before I'm willing to shower that level of praise on them. To me, I don't think that's unreasonable. Particularly in a discussion board.

People are free to call it "bitching" if they want, but these are measured criticisms meant to provoke discussion.

Again, using the word you as generalized as possible, but I agree to an extent, right now, Fiala is a tire fire inside a dumpster fire, you can visibly see the frustration on his face, and he's holding the stick way too tight.....having said that, before the start of this year, people were questioning Moore's long term viability for the team, cap space vs productivity,

I think this team right now, has an extremely good blend of pure talent (Byfield, Fiala, Kempe, Dubois) 2 way monsters (Kopitar, Danault, Moore) energizer bunnies (Lizotte, etc) and grinders and players who are improving, Lewis, Grundstrom, Kaliyev etc.....it's a blend that NOT a lot of teams get to, and even the ones who do, not a lot find success.

Everyone (again generalizing) is saying, yea but it's not playoff success, so it doesn't count....that's pure bullshit....you have to sludge through the grime, to get to the playoffs, and yea, half the league makes it......half the league doesn't however, so you have to succeed where they are now, to get to where they want to be, if you can't do that, you ain't making the playoffs...

I don't know if you can win with a team full of Moores, and those types, true types, are probably my favorite players, I see Byfield growing into that role, I see Kempe in that role, but less....water bug type, more fluid.....while Moore is like Lizotte, with more offense etc.

My main point was, you....generalization you.....can't bitch about not being able to develop offensive talent by letting them be who they are, ala Fiala, Kempe etc, then bitch about....who they are and wanting them to be Moore types....

 

[tkb81]

But that’s expected behavior for being a ‘fan’. These dudes that are nothing but negative FROM THE START is what is bewildering. I don’t care what anyone says, it’s f***ing weird.

right if something makes you that miserable .. its not hockey thats the problem

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

right if something makes you that miserable .. its not hockey thats the problem

<thumbs up>

 

[Sol]

Saw the trolls are out on patrol

 

[tny760]

Saw the trolls are out on patrol

i think this might be the first time i've seen all 3 alts in a row

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Saw the trolls are out on patrol

Talk about having ZERO self awareness....

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

Saw the trolls are out on patrol

Just sitting here patiently for a loss or two so you can re-kindle your magical posting skills. Been awhile since we’ve tossed around the ‘FIRE TM’ narrative, need to bring that back!

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Quote the Ringer all the time.
No one gets it
WTF is wrong with people?



Interesting. I see Fiala & raise you a Risto. Wait, Nurse with his crap play & headbutts in the playoffs has to be up there.

Ok, top 5 dumbest players in the league? Go!

Speaking of
How many goals did the famous striker Nelson Mandela end up with?

top 5?!?

Wait is Risto still in the league?!? Edit: oh god he's with philly haha

Just perusing rosters:
Nurse is tops, Risto for sure. Athanasiou, Fiala, Jack Johnson, Gudbrandson, Hartman, Mike Hoffman, Austin Watson, Tyler Myers, the Ritchie bros. Hoffman's probably the nearest Fiala though, super high skill, zero brain. Some of those guys are just bricks.

Now if it's just ones I don't like let's add Binnington and Huberdeau and Rasmus Andersson haha

 

[King'sPawn]

Again, using the word you as generalized as possible, but I agree to an extent, right now, Fiala is a tire fire inside a dumpster fire, you can visibly see the frustration on his face, and he's holding the stick way too tight.....having said that, before the start of this year, people were questioning Moore's long term viability for the team, cap space vs productivity,

Understandable. I openly disagreed with them about Moore. I understand it's generalized "you", but please know I'm limiting my own responses based on my own perspective. Others who want to defend their own perspective are encouraged to do so, as that's the point of these boards - to discuss issues even if we dislike or disagree with the opinion.

I think this team right now, has an extremely good blend of pure talent (Byfield, Fiala, Kempe, Dubois) 2 way monsters (Kopitar, Danault, Moore) energizer bunnies (Lizotte, etc) and grinders and players who are improving, Lewis, Grundstrom, Kaliyev etc.....it's a blend that NOT a lot of teams get to, and even the ones who do, not a lot find success.

I 100% agree with you. It's a good blend of different skills. That doesn't mean some of us don't have varying types of players we like. I'll throw an example out there: Durzi. He's an offensive defenseman. Of course - offensive d-men aren't as strong defensively.

There are people lamenting Durzi's performance on the Coyotes. My perspective - good for him, but I wasn't happy with his general performance based on other players on the team and my own expectations and preferences. Relative to other players, he had some of the most egregious mistakes and unforced errors, that I was happy when he was moved off the team to make room for Spence or Clarke. Spence has a lower offensive ceiling, but I'm much more comfortable with him on the ice.

Wouldn't you agree that, even if a team has a blend of talents, there's room for improvement on an individual basis and in the minutiae to elevate the team further and to minimize flaws? Not eliminate, as that's unrealistic.

Everyone (again generalizing) is saying, yea but it's not playoff success, so it doesn't count....that's pure bullshit....you have to sludge through the grime, to get to the playoffs, and yea, half the league makes it......half the league doesn't however, so you have to succeed where they are now, to get to where they want to be, if you can't do that, you ain't making the playoffs...

Where I will agree with others on this (and part of my apprehension) is that regular season success doesn't amount to playoff success, so my enthusiasm is tempered until we see playoff success. We've seen it with teams like Toronto and San Jose - paper tigers who look great in the regular season but they're bounced early in the playoffs.

I want to see the Kings win in the playoffs. Like, 16 times per season. But we can agree the playoffs just play out differently than the regular season. In order to achieve success in the playoffs, it requires a collective commitment to elevate personal performances. I think the glaring unforced errors from Fiala, and the inconsistent effort to dig in the trenches from Kempe, are two specific issues that can be a problem in the postseason.

I don't know if you can win with a team full of Moores, and those types, true types, are probably my favorite players, I see Byfield growing into that role, I see Kempe in that role, but less....water bug type, more fluid.....while Moore is like Lizotte, with more offense etc.

As you said, there's a blend of players. I don't expect a literal team full of Moores. Or Kopitars. But I do believe the effort and buy-in from Moore goes much further along in the playoffs compared to raw talent from Fiala. So during the season, I'd like to see these tweaks before they become a bigger issue.My main point was, you....generalization you.....can't bitch about not being able to develop offensive talent by letting them be who they are, ala Fiala, Kempe etc, then bitch about....who they are and wanting them to be Moore types....

My main point was, you....generalization you.....can't bitch about not being able to develop offensive talent by letting them be who they are, ala Fiala, Kempe etc, then bitch about....who they are and wanting them to be Moore types....

I disagree. Prospects, rookies, and journeymen should get more leeway to learn the game and improve. I expect better judgment and effort from veterans who understand the rigors and demands in the NHL. Once players like Byfield and Laferriere become vets, I'll expect more from them compared to the next wave of youth.

You're certainly welcome to hold diffetent players to different standards than I do. Then we can continue to discuss it on a forum that acts on a discussion board. I think pretending there are no flaws on this team by refusing to talk about them is faulty.

But I also agree there are times when people have too high of a demand. Hopefully Sol doesn't mind me bringing him up, but it's the freshest example I can give, but him and I disagreed vehemently on how Byfield was playing leading up to this season. I was satisfied with Byfield, as he was growing elements to his game. Sol wasn't satisfied, as he expects more from a second overall pick. Right now, it appears things have shifted - he seems much more satisfied with Byfield's performance and I'm ecstatic.

We have different degrees of tolerance and expectations. And it's the hashing out of where these differences lie between us that is fun. And interesting.

Which is why we push back on comments of "the Kings are winning. Why are you bitching?" Because it also gets accompanied with "you're whining after ONE loss? We can't go 82-0." And it reaches the point of "just be patient. You expect too much too soon." This isn't directed specifically at you.

But it's generally a suppression of discussing flaws in something we know CAN'T be perfect that, to me, keeps the forum interesting. I talk about things I like and things I dislike. RJ talks about his. You talk about yours.

Then as time goes, we look back and evaluate. Wow. Shit. I jumped the gun on thinking Kempe should be traded. I'm going to try to remember him in future discussions when the context is right. To me, it's still appropriate to bring up flaws in the developmental system, because I don't believe giving a 7-year window to all prospects is viable.

But it also helps remind me there are strengths to the Kings developmental policy, because it does excel at bringing along NHL players in general. Then I can get excited and talk about it with you all on these boards, because my fiancee would commit seppuku if I droned on about hockey to her the same way I do with you all.

So, yes. I'm sorry this is a long post. I'm sorry if you or others consider it "bitching". I just love talking about hockey.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I don't like the idea that we're chest thumping, either. I've been wrong plenty of times, and I'll own it.

I thought Sanderson pre-draft was a glorified Forbort
I thought Petersen was going to be a good 40-50 game guy and had a strong mental game
I thought the Sekera trade was excellent for so many reasons, replacing Voynov and keeping him away from Chicago (who would go on and win playing 4 D anyway)
I'm pretty sure I thought Simon Gagne was going to be a huge difference maker for the 2012 Kings
I was stupidly high on Kale Clague, thought he'd be a poor man's Duncan Keith

Just off the top of my head, i'm sure there's plenty more, but the idea is discussion isn't about owning people, and I'll never be able to wrap my head around the folks who can't see that we're chatting good and bad no matter how the team is doing.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

What's crazy to me is today is going to only be the third game vs. the division for the Kings. They've played 4 vs. each Eastern division, and 7 vs. the central, but only 2 vs. the pacific and both were vegas

In exceptional artistic format, highlighted are the teams the Kings have played

And consider how some of those teams were playing when we played them, too. Sens were the only 'bad' team. Wild were streaking when we played them.

Only three teams in the BOTTOM HALF of the league and only one in the bottom 10, zero tankers, and many on the road/b2b.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Understandable. I openly disagreed with them about Moore. I understand it's generalized "you", but please know I'm limiting my own responses based on my own perspective. Others who want to defend their own perspective are encouraged to do so, as that's the point of these boards - to discuss issues even if we dislike or disagree with the opinion.

I 100% agree with you. It's a good blend of different skills. That doesn't mean some of us don't have varying types of players we like. I'll throw an example out there: Durzi. He's an offensive defenseman. Of course - offensive d-men aren't as strong defensively.

There are people lamenting Durzi's performance on the Coyotes. My perspective - good for him, but I wasn't happy with his general performance based on other players on the team and my own expectations and preferences. Relative to other players, he had some of the most egregious mistakes and unforced errors, that I was happy when he was moved off the team to make room for Spence or Clarke. Spence has a lower offensive ceiling, but I'm much more comfortable with him on the ice.

Wouldn't you agree that, even if a team has a blend of talents, there's room for improvement on an individual basis and in the minutiae to elevate the team further and to minimize flaws? Not eliminate, as that's unrealistic.

Where I will agree with others on this (and part of my apprehension) is that regular season success doesn't amount to playoff success, so my enthusiasm is tempered until we see playoff success. We've seen it with teams like Toronto and San Jose - paper tigers who look great in the regular season but they're bounced early in the playoffs.

I want to see the Kings win in the playoffs. Like, 16 times per season. But we can agree the playoffs just play out differently than the regular season. In order to achieve success in the playoffs, it requires a collective commitment to elevate personal performances. I think the glaring unforced errors from Fiala, and the inconsistent effort to dig in the trenches from Kempe, are two specific issues that can be a problem in the postseason.

As you said, there's a blend of players. I don't expect a literal team full of Moores. Or Kopitars. But I do believe the effort and buy-in from Moore goes much further along in the playoffs compared to raw talent from Fiala. So during the season, I'd like to see these tweaks before they become a bigger issue.My main point was, you....generalization you.....can't bitch about not being able to develop offensive talent by letting them be who they are, ala Fiala, Kempe etc, then bitch about....who they are and wanting them to be Moore types....


I disagree. Prospects, rookies, and journeymen should get more leeway to learn the game and improve. I expect better judgment and effort from veterans who understand the rigors and demands in the NHL. Once players like Byfield and Laferriere become vets, I'll expect more from them compared to the next wave of youth.

You're certainly welcome to hold diffetent players to different standards than I do. Then we can continue to discuss it on a forum that acts on a discussion board. I think pretending there are no flaws on this team by refusing to talk about them is faulty.

But I also agree there are times when people have too high of a demand. Hopefully Sol doesn't mind me bringing him up, but it's the freshest example I can give, but him and I disagreed vehemently on how Byfield was playing leading up to this season. I was satisfied with Byfield, as he was growing elements to his game. Sol wasn't satisfied, as he expects more from a second overall pick. Right now, it appears things have shifted - he seems much more satisfied with Byfield's performance and I'm ecstatic.

We have different degrees of tolerance and expectations. And it's the hashing out of where these differences lie between us that is fun. And interesting.

Which is why we push back on comments of "the Kings are winning. Why are you bitching?" Because it also gets accompanied with "you're whining after ONE loss? We can't go 82-0." And it reaches the point of "just be patient. You expect too much too soon." This isn't directed specifically at you.

But it's generally a suppression of discussing flaws in something we know CAN'T be perfect that, to me, keeps the forum interesting. I talk about things I like and things I dislike. RJ talks about his. You talk about yours.

Then as time goes, we look back and evaluate. Wow. Shit. I jumped the gun on thinking Kempe should be traded. I'm going to try to remember him in future discussions when the context is right. To me, it's still appropriate to bring up flaws in the developmental system, because I don't believe giving a 7-year window to all prospects is viable.

But it also helps remind me there are strengths to the Kings developmental policy, because it does excel at bringing along NHL players in general. Then I can get excited and talk about it with you all on these boards, because my fiancee would commit seppuku if I droned on about hockey to her the same way I do with you all.

So, yes. I'm sorry this is a long post. I'm sorry if you or others consider it "bitching". I just love talking about hockey.

Dude, my ADHDAHDADAd is gonna be compromised......but yea....

First point about Durzi, I loved him as a King, he was also redundant as a King, which I get, but man it sucked getting rid of him, it made sense, and still does, and yea he's having a great season...on a team where winning 20 games is considered successful....I think we are almost in agreement, but with Durzi I was willing to be patient and let him grow into the defense, because his offense is just so much higher than Spence, but for a team view, I can see they had to get rid of one, just not sure it was the right one, but it is what it is.

With bringing up the blend of talent, it was more saying management has gotten it right, more than, well we have these types so we are all good, it's not so much as being all good, EVERY player in the NHL can ALWAYS improve.....the work ethic and passion is literally what separates NHL players apart, you can see the difference between a McDavid and say a MacDermid.....that's easy, but say a Lizotte from a Amadio etc, the difference is so goddamn slight, that it's literally the willingness to work is what gives players that NHL edge....and I'm probably saying that all wrong....but agreed, players can always improve on something.

I know you bring up SOL because of recency, but man, come up with someone better who at least understands the game, his takes are so goddamn awful, that's literally painful to read most of them....he hasn't been right ONCE.....but you bring up a good point, most people will have different tolerances, expectations etc, my comment to that is, absolutely, but they have to be based in reality. I haven't seen him post in a while, but Kings17 was always advocating trading Doughty, trading Kopitar instead of re-signing them, that's a vision that is not even remotely based in reality, so yea that's gonna get a lot of push back at least from me....your view of expecting more from vets vs rookies, based in reality, we might disagree slightly on it, but at least it's a reasonable view.

Herby and his development, we've been around the block several times, we disagree on some, most....but again at least his view is steeped in reality etc.

Someone earlier maybe in this thread etc, said something about opinions and my response was and still is, great, have an opinion, but you have to base it in reality, to have an opinion that isn't, I don't even know what to call that,

My opinion is that everyone bitching about TM, is just bitching to bitch, they have to be pissed at something, so they take generic look and jump on someone's back saying see...he's the reason etc.....TM is a good coach, he absolutely MUST have some success in playoffs though this year, for him to remain as the Kings coach....but overall, he's done a bangup job with the group that he has had, and I know that's gonna piss more than a few off here, because they don't want to admit that

And that's as far as my ADHAHDAHD gets me along here...

 

[bland]

Why do you guys keep letting a handful of malcontents with nothing interesting to say derail every thread?

Block them and move on. Your responses only validate their need for attention.

Rule of thumb: those who talk about hockey, regardless of knowledge or experience, should always be welcome. Those who choose to post about those who do talk about hockey should be ignored.

 

[Schmooley]

I think we are almost in agreement, but with Durzi I was willing to be patient and let him grow into the defense, because his offense is just so much higher than Spence, but for a team view, I can see they had to get rid of one, just not sure it was the right one, but it is what it is.

Getting rid of Durzi was in part because of having Spence and Clarke but also I dont think they could afford his cap and bring in Dubois.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Why do you guys keep letting a handful of malcontents with nothing interesting to say derail every thread?

Block them and move on. Your responses only validate their need for attention.

Rule of thumb: those who talk about hockey, regardless of knowledge or experience, should always be welcome. Those who choose to post about those who do talk about hockey should be ignored.

As opposed to....yourself, who shits on the team every chance you can?

 

[Nasti]

Getting rid of Durzi was in part because of having Spence and Clarke but also I dont think they could afford his cap and bring in Dubois.

Besides the cap issues, the 2nd rounder they got in the Durzi trade was used in the Dubois deal.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Getting rid of Durzi was in part because of having Spence and Clarke but also I dont think they could afford his cap and bring in Dubois.

Correct....forgot about the cap aspect of that, for me it was Durzi vs Spence, with me...Durzi staying.....but when you bring up the cap aspect, then yea, I can see why Spence was the right move.....but I feel/think Durzi will get the defensive zone figured out to stay relevant in all situations and not be a MA Bergeron type.

 

[Nasti]

As opposed to....yourself, who shits on the team every chance you can?

Bland gives very reasoned and thorough explanations for why he believes what he believes and is consistent. Agree with him or not, he’s one of the most interesting posters here. There are some folks here whose opinions on hockey related issues I’m still trying to figure out due to their need to critique other posters.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Bland gives very reasoned and thorough explanations for why he believes what he believes and is consistent. Agree with him or not, he’s one of the most interesting posters here. There are some folks here whose opinions on hockey related issues I’m still trying to figure out due to their need to critique other posters.

He does, I was probably being a bit more blaise than I should have, I will give you that,

But almost none of is shit is steeped in reality.