LA KINGS 2023/4 Regular season discussion

[Raccoon Jesus]

Isn't this not exactly what happened to Fiala at the end of last season? Got hurt one game, missed a couple, came back and then got sidelined again and for even longer?

This happens repeatedly with this team

oh they'll be fine
*comes back and plays*
ahhh day to day
sorry, now month-to-month, we have to perform a lobotomy then see where it goes

 

[Fishhead]

This happens repeatedly with this team

oh they'll be fine
*comes back and plays*
ahhh day to day
sorry, now month-to-month, we have to perform a lobotomy then see where it goes

Well, that would explain why Fiala got a bit worse defensively after his injury last year.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

And again, this is one of the dangers of the cap-constrained short roster on an east coast trip--they felt compelled to let Gav give it a go on a back-to-back on 5 in 8 nights instead of putting in a ready and fresh LHD.

Just f***ing stupidity. It's aggravating.

 

[Ollie Weeks]

And again, this is one of the dangers of the cap-constrained short roster on an east coast trip--they felt compelled to let Gav give it a go on a back-to-back on 5 in 8 nights instead of putting in a ready and fresh LHD.

Just f***ing stupidity. It's aggravating.

Seriously. Go 13-5 if you have to and roll Kopi back there for 5 minutes. Play a man down. Don’t play injured players in a game that does not matter whatsoever.

 

[Fishhead]

And again, this is one of the dangers of the cap-constrained short roster on an east coast trip--they felt compelled to let Gav give it a go on a back-to-back on 5 in 8 nights instead of putting in a ready and fresh LHD.

Just f***ing stupidity. It's aggravating.

Yeah, that part of it was dumb. It's not like he couldn't have tested it out on a rink. Or maybe he did and declared himself good, then aggravated it. I guess in the grand scheme of thing it wouldn't have mattered, he probably would have picked up 10 minutes for looking at the ref wrong.

 

[SaltyElkHunter]

He shoulda taken lizzo's when he was out, or laf's

Then what back to the ahl to get pounded

 

[Statto]

Also Vilardi last year. Three is a trend.

We have no idea if it was the same injury. ‘We’ assumed it was… and forum speculation is now fact.

 

[BugEater]

Yeah, that part of it was dumb. It's not like he couldn't have tested it out on a rink. Or maybe he did and declared himself good, then aggravated it. I guess in the grand scheme of thing it wouldn't have mattered, he probably would have picked up 10 minutes for looking at the ref wrong.

I was surprised he went on Sunday. Was at the game and watched him in warmups. He didn't look right and was definitely tentative. He flexed the leg often (maybe wearing a brace?). He spent a lot of time on the side boards not skating and a good amount of time talking to the trainers. Watching that in warmups, I did not think there was any chance he was playing.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

We have no idea if it was the same injury. ‘We’ assumed it was… and forum speculation is now fact.

Ok, but if not the same injury, playing the next night after being injured and getting reinjured differently while tired is still stupid.

 

[Nasti]

Seriously, this has happened multiple times in the calendar year and people are still finding ways to make excuses/justify it.

 

[Statto]

Ok, but if not the same injury, playing the next night after being injured and getting reinjured differently while tired is still stupid.

I was talking about the Vilardi injuries at the back end of last season. He got hurt missed games (3?) then came back for a couple before sitting out again. That’s the one people assumed was the same injury (which it might have been) and that assumption gets discussed on here as if it were fact.

Gavrikov is a different story and I agree it’s stupid.

I’m not taking sides or making excuses (not directed at you) but slamming anyone based on our speculation on Vilardi makes no sense. It’s only fair assumption if it suits a narrative.

 

[King'sPawn]

Ok, but if not the same injury, playing the next night after being injured and getting reinjured differently while tired is still stupid.

Sounds like being up against the cap and having a shortened roster has risks of injury when you can't (or won't) swap people out who may be injured. Who knew?

 

[Brownie to Pancakes]

Then what back to the ahl to get pounded

That's what happened anyway! Woulda been nice to see what he had at the NHL level when there was a chance, now there isn't one and may never be one again

 

[Piston]

But, I thought Gavrikov was hurt, not injured, /sarcasm off. There is no reason at all he should have suited up against the Rangers. That was piss poor schedule management. A game that would have been difficult to win under the best of circumstances, against an out of conference opponent with two days off to follow. McLellan deserves much of the blame for this especially if the injury was aggravated in the back-to-back.

 

[Nasti]

I was talking about the Vilardi injuries at the back end of last season. He got hurt missed games (3?) then came back for a couple before sitting out again. That’s the one people assumed was the same injury (which it might have been) and that assumption gets discussed on here as if it were fact.

Gavrikov is a different story and I agree it’s stupid.

I’m not taking sides or making excuses (not directed at you) but slamming anyone based on our speculation on Vilardi makes no sense. It’s only fair assumption if it suits a narrative.

As I stated on the previous page, Vilardi went into the boards hard against the Flames on March 20th. He missed the rest of the game. He played the next two games against the Jets and Blues on the 25th and 26th before missing the rest of the regular season and Game 1 of the playoffs. Do I know for a fact that it was the same injury? No. Is it pretty obvious what the issue was? Yes.

 

[Fishhead]

Re: Gavrikov. Bad decision obviously, but just to think about the other side, what if Gavrikov insisted he felt OK and wanted to try it? That's what trainers usually ask because they can only do so many diagnostics and strength tests.

I've never seen a SPC, but I wonder if this type of thing is addressed in there. After the Eichel thing where he disagreed with the team I'm sure it's become a touchier subject.

 

[King'sPawn]

Re: Gavrikov. Bad decision obviously, but just to think about the other side, what if Gavrikov insisted he felt OK and wanted to try it? That's what trainers usually ask because they can only do so many diagnostics and strength tests.

I don't know about you, but whenever I've gone to physical therapy or was seen by a physician about something that hurt, the physician would actually test my range of motion and gauge my reaction.

I'm not arguing that the training staff is incompetent or screwed up - I spent years working at various cardiology practices, and know medicine is imperfect. But there's no way a team worth hundreds of millions of dollars and their own medical staff won't just go exclusively by the word of an athlete after a knee-on-knee collision.

 

[Brownie to Pancakes]

I think they should have sat him as a precaution. I also think it's possible/maybe probable that week-to-week status was inevitable just from the original impact and coming back to play the rest of that game. The real problem is the dipshit who kneed him

 

[Fishhead]

I don't know about you, but whenever I've gone to physical therapy or was seen by a physician about something that hurt, the physician would actually test my range of motion and gauge my reaction.

I'm not arguing that the training staff is incompetent or screwed up - I spent years working at various cardiology practices, and know medicine is imperfect. But there's no way a team worth hundreds of millions of dollars and their own medical staff won't just go exclusively by the word of an athlete after a knee-on-knee collision.

I totally agree, and they know their business. It's absolutely an imperfect science and I don't worry so much about the day-to-day and week-to-week thing because of that very reason.

Just thinking about how much stock they put into player feedback and if it's contractual at all about who has the final say. Not Gavrikov in particular because it's minor, but more for any injury of significance. Certainly player feedback is part of their evaluation, but without a scan it's just educated guesswork and it's not like they carry MRIs around with them.

 

[kingsholygrail]

Re: Gavrikov. Bad decision obviously, but just to think about the other side, what if Gavrikov insisted he felt OK and wanted to try it? That's what trainers usually ask because they can only do so many diagnostics and strength tests.

I've never seen a SPC, but I wonder if this type of thing is addressed in there. After the Eichel thing where he disagreed with the team I'm sure it's become a touchier subject.

You appreciate his compete level and desire to win, but remind him that it's a long season and this isn't game 7 of the Final. He can rest a few and make sure the injury doesn't escalate.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

You appreciate his compete level and desire to win, but remind him that it's a long season and this isn't game 7 of the Final. He can rest a few and make sure the injury doesn't escalate.

So if everything coming back says it's a contusion, you are gonna sit out a top #4D because of a contusion?

Man, it shows how many of you guys have actually coached a game.....

 

[Skinnyjimmy08]

How has Laferriere been for you guys this season?

Offensive stat wise, his numbers don't really jump out but I see he regularly dresses for games

Is he a main stay with the club all season you figure?

 

[mysterman2]

Jim Fox talks a lot about 'game management'. There is also the subject of 'schedule management' and TM blew it yesterday. The NHL schedule is a brutal grind of 82 games. It is impossible to win every one. Some losses are less painful than others. Losing to the Rangers, a top 5 team coming off a shut out loss, an out of the conference opponent, and after a tough game the day before against the Islanders is one of those losses you chalk up to the schedule. Given that, why was Vlad Gavrikov in the lineup? You give him a day off and he has three days before the next game to recover. By putting him the lineup in a game that was going to be tough to win under the best of circumstances, you risk aggravating his injury and then playing shorthanded when he couldn't go anymore. This was baffling. Kudos to Danault for coming back, but losing a few teeth is different than a knee injury. Gavrikov should have been scratched.

Question is....whose call was it? agreed tmac should never have played him knowing his importance but if Gavrikov being a warrior insisted he wanted to play would be hard to say no.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Question is....whose call was it? agreed tmac should never have played him knowing his importance but if Gavrikov being a warrior insisted he wanted to play would be hard to say no.

Naw, you don't get it, coach has ultimate say, and WTF cares what players think or say, if it's best for the team, it's best for the team, it doesnt matter that it shows you don't trust your players.....it doesn't matter that it pisses guys off.....its best for the team to sit your top 4 D because what ifs

 

[YP44]

The thing we do not know is how many times players play through inuries and don't make them worse. I don't fault anyone here, sucks but happens. I like when players push to stay into lineups.