Obligatory Fire Todd MClellan, Rob Blake & Co.

[KINGS17]

Grundstrom got benched after a winning streak and while playing the best hockey of his career. It's so f***ing backwards with this team.

The "media" response?

Bernstein is a dumbass. No, obviously you give Brown's minutes to other players, and a message is sent in the process.

 

[apocalypse]

Tmac isn't the problem.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Tmac isn't the problem.

Personally, I'm not sure he's THE Problem either but he's a big one imo...but there are enough problems going around that I'm always open to hearing what the problems are.

I certainly don't think it's as simple as "fire TM" though.

 

[King'sPawn]

Personally, I'm not sure he's THE Problem either but he's a big one imo...but there are enough problems going around that I'm always open to hearing what the problems are.

I certainly don't think it's as simple as "fire TM" though.

I don't necessarily think TMac is a problem, as players have grown and done well under him. Plus, the same issues have been here since before he came here.

As far as the media, I'm conflicted. I don't work for the media, but I contribute for Hoven. I understand the position he's in.

But I do think it's wrong to question the fandom of critics. I think there are some knee-jerk reactions which deserve pushback, though.

I would love to see some tougher questions. But not even because I expect the Kings to answer. I just would like the idea of having the Kings reflect and think more critically.

Unfortunately there's a lot wrong and it's creating a divide.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Why wouldn’t they just let Dean Lombardi takeover this garbage heap of a franchise?


He is employed by the Flyers after all.

 

[crassbonanza]

Tmac isn't the problem.

TMac is the highest paid coach in the league, he should have higher expectations than not being the sole problem.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I don't necessarily think TMac is a problem, as players have grown and done well under him. Plus, the same issues have been here since before he came here.

As far as the media, I'm conflicted. I don't work for the media, but I contribute for Hoven. I understand the position he's in.

But I do think it's wrong to question the fandom of critics. I think there are some knee-jerk reactions which deserve pushback, though.

I would love to see some tougher questions. But not even because I expect the Kings to answer. I just would like the idea of having the Kings reflect and think more critically.

Unfortunately there's a lot wrong and it's creating a divide.

nothing to be conflicted about, you haven't used your platform--even if it's behind-the-scenes--to mock the fanbase.

Even a simple "I can't share but I've heard some encouraging things" attitude goes a lot further than "lol yeah sure idiot bench dustin brown" does.

 

[cyclones22]

Bernstein has always been a bit of a douche. So his dismissive attitude comes as no surprise. The funny thing is just because you write about hockey doesn't mean you actually you know more than the casual fan.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Bernstein has always been a bit of a douche. So his dismissive attitude comes as no surprise. The funny thing is just because you write about hockey doesn't mean you actually you know more than the casual fan.

I guarantee there are plenty of folks on this forum who have forgotten more about the Kings and hockey than either of those two will ever know, especially those who have played (some extremely) high levels. I know a few here who have played basically all but NHL/KHL level hockey and these chodes are talking down to them.

You don't need to play the game to talk, walk, and love hockey, but you'd better be damn sure able to back up your mouth if you're going to mock an audience of half century old franchise followers.

 

[Fishhead]

TMac is the highest paid coach in the league, he should have higher expectations than not being the sole problem.

Yea, but it might have taken that much money to get someone decent to coach here. The travel sucks, the team is rebuilding, and you need someone both the vets and the young players will respect based on their standing in the league. Not a lot of decent options I'm sure.

 

[Fishhead]

I guarantee there are plenty of folks on this forum who have forgotten more about the Kings and hockey than either of those two will ever know, especially those who have played (some extremely) high levels. I know a few here who have played basically all but NHL/KHL level hockey and these chodes are talking down to them.

You don't need to play the game to talk, walk, and love hockey, but you'd better be damn sure able to back up your mouth if you're going to mock an audience of half century old franchise followers.

This means rec silver, right? You must be talking about me.

 

[kingsfan28]

Bernstein has always been a bit of a douche. So his dismissive attitude comes as no surprise. The funny thing is just because you write about hockey doesn't mean you actually you know more than the casual fan.

He and his blogger bros have become worse since they launched their podcast a few years ago. There is this attitude between them I just can't stand. Like we know everything and more than you, and thats all you need to know. The snarkiness at times towards the front off or players , whether deserved or not got me to stop listening a long time ago.

 

[kingsfan28]

Yea, but it might have taken that much money to get someone decent to coach here. The travel sucks, the team is rebuilding, and you need someone both the vets and the young players will respect based on their standing in the league. Not a lot of decent options I'm sure.

This is true. There are plenty of coaches that play favorite even worse or hold the young guys to an even higher standard. You also have to look at whats available at the time, and their experience was then.

 

[NikF]

Thats a bit misleading. No young player plays in the top six or gets meaningful powerplay minutes.

That was kind of my point. I had this in mind when I said that despite the time transpired, the meat of the rebuild still has to arrive.

What is your opinion of the more recent King Euro draftees?

Chromiak, Nousiainen, Huselius, Grans, Simontaival, Jamsen? Saw your Kupari and Andersson post, thanks!

Thanks!

Hey, I took a break from scouting seriously after 2019 (some personal stuff came up and it was increasingly challenging to juggle a regular job, scouting and my personal life). So I would not be comfortable giving you any serious appraisals about draft picks from 2020 and onwards. But I can go back to 2014 since I scouted pretty much every Kings Europe pick they made in the 2014-2019 window.

Kempe - always a very toolsy player. Even as a prospect he had a great skating stride and already good size. Good but not great skill level, I felt he had maybe better shooting ability than on display right now. He also showed some power forward qualities and would even throw a big hit here and there. It's interesting that skating became such a big part of his game, seems like the puck-carrying skating game translated the best out of the array of his tools. I was almost completely sure he would be a regular NHL player.

Cernak - a physical specimen as a junior player. Physical and tough. Could skate well for his size and on those junior Slovakia teams was used even as an offensive option often, I didn't think it was a natural fit for him but Slovakia didn't have better options. The Slovakian league where he played against men is not very good either, ECHL level. Mediocre skill level, but not bad for a big guy at all. Not mistake-free when I watched him, but hockey IQ was reasonable for a player of that type. I didn't think he would be an offensive option in the NHL, but he was big, competitive, physical and mobile enough and didn't handle the puck like it was a grenade either, there were inklings of "advanced" vision/reads when put into that role on Slovakian teams, even if it was not going to be his main component at higher levels of competition. So based on physical tools and reasonable IQ, he had a chance. After his modest production in Canadian juniors I became a bit more lukewarm on him ever being anymore than a fringe physical defensive D, but he had a great development trajectory after that and he is one of the extremely rare cases of his production in NHL basically matching his junior production.

Dergachyov - like Cernak, this was a DL/Sutter hockey type pick. Big winger with a powerforward game, physicality and could do damage around the net. Some skill. Played in traffic and attacked the net. He played with jump but didn't seem to have a great skating stride when you really looked at it. Mediocre hockey IQ. Could turn into a physical 3rd-4th line wing if lucky and there was the odd skilled moment where if you squinted hard enough you could get excited enough to think of a complementary top 9 winger of Sutter/DL-ink around that time, with the way the game has gone he would probably be more critically scouted at this time.

Moverare - He was a smart defenseman with decent puck skills and good vision for the game. Good size and read the play well across the ice. Interesting combination of smarts and size and reasonable puck skills. Not an offensively dynamic player, but could contribute to a team's offense. Competed defensively but unlike Cernak, he isn't scaring anyone with his size. The by far the biggest issue was his skating, which simply was not good enough to play at the NHL level at that time. Mostly everything would hinge on how his skating got along. I think this was a reasonable pick in 4th round, I liked the value.

Kupari - I already talked about him elsewhere. Toolsy player. Good size, puck skills and great skating. Decent competitor and willing to be responsible defensively. Might be inconsistent, I'm not sure he will figure out what will make him effective on a game-by-game basis at NHL level, tools might be better than toolbox. Reasonable but not great hockey IQ. Could be a "frustrating", middling player.

Shafigullin - this is a pure Russian gamble where you get gold or nothing. In his draft year he was at some insane scoring pace. I scouted him quite a bit actually and to this date it's one of the hardest players to get a clear picture of no matter the amount of viewings. He's a skill forward, his skating and compete level depending on the viewing you were going to get, ranged from subpar to decent. Good vision and playmaking, could score. A clear upside on offensive skills, but the rest of his game varied so wildly from game to game you were never really comfortable with placing him anywhere. Decent size too. In 3rd round, this is a reasonable gamble where you let him stay in Russia for years and come back to it to see what you got. It's one of the cases, where he might not even become an NHL level player before 23 or 24 and comes into the league as a late-bloomer.

Sodergran - I had him as a borderline late pick. Big kid, with reasonable quickness and skating, flashed some skill. Competitive, good pace. In few of my viewings he had some insane shots out of nowhere tha beat goalies. Projected to lower lines.

Bjornfot - talked about him elsewhere, but he was a competitive mobile defenseman with good reads and puck-decisions. Responsible and always was willing to use his body defensively, not big but sturdy. Could either pass the puck or skate it out of trouble with his mobility. Not a big offensive player, but I think he has more offensive upside than he has shown in NHL so far, 20-30ish points should be doable for him at least a few times in his career. I liked this pick.

Fagemo - He was not drafted in his draft year, I would consider him as a late round (6th-7th) pick at that time but would hardly lose sleep if he went undrafted, which he did. He made a big step in D+1 season, basically scoring at 0.5PPG pace in SHL and it was obvious he was going to get drafted, rightly as he clearly become worthy of it as a prospect. His game was always the same: skating, pace, shooting and compete level. He seemed to fit the way the NHL was going very well. His skill was decent but there was not an offensive dynamic or reads in his game that top 6 NHL forwards have other than shooting. At that time, you could project him as a third liner who can score some goals and pushes the pace of the game. Had a tenacity, speed and checking element to his game. I can see the logic to the pick, but I would not use the 2nd round pick on him.

Compared to Fagemo, a guy like Dorofeyev who went in 3rd had more innate talent, although he was physically underdeveloped and a clunky inconsistent skater and so a bigger project. This is the kind of pick I miss from the Kings in the middle rounds from Europe. I thought by late 2nd Dorofeyev had legit value, I loved the value in Jan Jenik (3rd round) and Jacob Peterson (5th round) for example and I think the Kings over that timeframe tended more towards physical tools upside and compete level over a more nuanced underdeveloped, high IQ/skill based picks (although Jenik was highly competitive). In that regard Ruuttu seems to tend more towards the Futa school of picks looking from the outside-in. Not saying one is better than the other, usually when two different ideologies agree on a player, you get a good decision. I've seen this with the person I scouted with, when we agreed on a player whether to upside or downside, we were very rarely wrong.

EDIT:
I forgot about Nousiainen. Nousiainen is quite an undersized defenseman. Good but not elite skating and offensive upside. Good competitor. Tries to play bigger than his size in his own end and actually breaks up more plays than you would expect. Can move pucks but I don't view him as a pure dynamic offensive threat. Plays on his toes rather than on his heels. Good energy level and awareness. Not mistake-free and not a flawless game with the puck. If you squint really hard, you can imagine Torey Krug maybe. Generally I am not a fan of significantly undersized defensemen who aren't exceptional skaters, exceptional decision-makers or have exceptional skill (I'd say you need at least 2/3 if you want to be a NHL net contributor as a sub 5'10 D) and so I would not recommend Nousiainen in the 4th round because I do not think he has even one of those qualities at an exceptional level. I think he will be a very good player, but I doubt that is enough for consistent NHL minutes at his size. Like, I said, I generally don't like gambling on undersized defensemen unless I feel there are multiple elite components there.

Parik is a guy I had only seen with the junior NTs and my memory of his play is so poor here that I can't make a good comment on him. Would have to go back and check the old notes if I have much on him.

Bonus: My colleague took a liking to Andre Lee. I had very limited viewings of him, but he went undrafted his first year of eligiblity, then went to NA the following year and got drafted by the Kings out of USHL.

 

[Matt13]

This means rec silver, right? You must be talking about me.

Ice or Roller? Don’t play that 4v4 and act like you know it all!

 

[LAKings88]

That was kind of my point. I had this in mind when I said that despite the time transpired, the meat of the rebuild still has to arrive.

I agree. In my mind the rebuild is in parts. They are done getting rid of players. They saw an opportunity to upgrade a couple spots. Now integrate youth. Kaliyev is actually ahead of expectation for me. I see the clock starting with Byfield who needs to take the mantle from Kopi eventually.

 

[Johnny Utah]

I like Hoven and Bernstein - I’ve talked to DB at a few games - he always stands in the same place at intermission - always approachable and friendly.

Hoven responds to my tweets and private messages. I think he gets annoyed by me always calling the Kings soft but still responds.

When I started following the Kings in 92’ all I had for news was the LA Times so all this coverage is a bonus.

One thing I keep repeating is the most exciting Kings game I’ve seen in 7-8 years was the pre season game vs the Ducks where the Kings played all the rookies. We won 6-3 - Kayilev had 4 goals, Lemieux 1, and Turcotte 1. Kopitar, Brown, Kempe, Arvidsson, Danault did NOT play in this game.

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

II think he gets annoyed by me always calling the Kings soft

You are kidding.

 

[cyclones22]

Ice or Roller? Don’t play that 4v4 and act like you know it all!

@Raccoon Jesus is definitely talking about me. Hockey Silo in Chino roller hockey league in the 90s on my resume.

 

[eleventy]

@Raccoon Jesus is definitely talking about me. Hockey Silo in Chino roller hockey league in the 90s on my resume.

Ah yes. Loved playing when it was 90+ degrees outside while baking the cow dung in the air.

 

[ibleedkings]

I like Hoven and Bernstein - I’ve talked to DB at a few games - he always stands in the same place at intermission - always approachable and friendly.

Hoven responds to my tweets and private messages. I think he gets annoyed by me always calling the Kings soft but still responds.

When I started following the Kings in 92’ all I had for news was the LA Times so all this coverage is a bonus.

One thing I keep repeating is the most exciting Kings game I’ve seen in 7-8 years was the pre season game vs the Ducks where the Kings played all the rookies. We won 6-3 - Kayilev had 4 goals, Lemieux 1, and Turcotte 1. Kopitar, Brown, Kempe, Arvidsson, Danault did NOT play in this game.

King Arthur had 3 but I definitely agree with you!

 

[BigKing]

Tmac isn't the problem.

The guy lost in the first round to an eight seed after finishing with 117 points, watched as his team blew a 3-0 lead and then was at the helm of one of the bigger meltdowns in recent playoff history when the Oilers gave up a 3-0 lead with five minutes left to the Ducks in Game 5 back in 2017. Oh, and San Jose went to the Cup Finals the year after they ditched him.

He inherited a 100 point, 1st place team in San Jose but has kind of done jack shit.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

@Raccoon Jesus is definitely talking about me. Hockey Silo in Chino roller hockey league in the 90s on my resume.

I peed in the sink there on accident because of the farmhouse style trough

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

That was kind of my point. I had this in mind when I said that despite the time transpired, the meat of the rebuild still has to arrive.



Hey, I took a break from scouting seriously after 2019 (some personal stuff came up and it was increasingly challenging to juggle a regular job, scouting and my personal life). So I would not be comfortable giving you any serious appraisals about draft picks from 2020 and onwards. But I can go back to 2014 since I scouted pretty much every Kings Europe pick they made in the 2014-2019 window.

Kempe - always a very toolsy player. Even as a prospect he had a great skating stride and already good size. Good but not great skill level, I felt he had maybe better shooting ability than on display right now. He also showed some power forward qualities and would even throw a big hit here and there. It's interesting that skating became such a big part of his game, seems like the puck-carrying skating game translated the best out of the array of his tools. I was almost completely sure he would be a regular NHL player.

Cernak - a physical specimen as a junior player. Physical and tough. Could skate well for his size and on those junior Slovakia teams was used even as an offensive option often, I didn't think it was a natural fit for him but Slovakia didn't have better options. The Slovakian league where he played against men is not very good either, ECHL level. Mediocre skill level, but not bad for a big guy at all. Not mistake-free when I watched him, but hockey IQ was reasonable for a player of that type. I didn't think he would be an offensive option in the NHL, but he was big, competitive, physical and mobile enough and didn't handle the puck like it was a grenade either, there were inklings of "advanced" vision/reads when put into that role on Slovakian teams, even if it was not going to be his main component at higher levels of competition. So based on physical tools and reasonable IQ, he had a chance. After his modest production in Canadian juniors I became a bit more lukewarm on him ever being anymore than a fringe physical defensive D, but he had a great development trajectory after that and he is one of the extremely rare cases of his production in NHL basically matching his junior production.

Dergachyov - like Cernak, this was a DL/Sutter hockey type pick. Big winger with a powerforward game, physicality and could do damage around the net. Some skill. Played in traffic and attacked the net. He played with jump but didn't seem to have a great skating stride when you really looked at it. Mediocre hockey IQ. Could turn into a physical 3rd-4th line wing if lucky and there was the odd skilled moment where if you squinted hard enough you could get excited enough to think of a complementary top 9 winger of Sutter/DL-ink around that time, with the way the game has gone he would probably be more critically scouted at this time.

Moverare - He was a smart defenseman with decent puck skills and good vision for the game. Good size and read the play well across the ice. Interesting combination of smarts and size and reasonable puck skills. Not an offensively dynamic player, but could contribute to a team's offense. Competed defensively but unlike Cernak, he isn't scaring anyone with his size. The by far the biggest issue was his skating, which simply was not good enough to play at the NHL level at that time. Mostly everything would hinge on how his skating got along. I think this was a reasonable pick in 4th round, I liked the value.

Kupari - I already talked about him elsewhere. Toolsy player. Good size, puck skills and great skating. Decent competitor and willing to be responsible defensively. Might be inconsistent, I'm not sure he will figure out what will make him effective on a game-by-game basis at NHL level, tools might be better than toolbox. Reasonable but not great hockey IQ. Could be a "frustrating", middling player.

Shafigullin - this is a pure Russian gamble where you get gold or nothing. In his draft year he was at some insane scoring pace. I scouted him quite a bit actually and to this date it's one of the hardest players to get a clear picture of no matter the amount of viewings. He's a skill forward, his skating and compete level depending on the viewing you were going to get, ranged from subpar to decent. Good vision and playmaking, could score. A clear upside on offensive skills, but the rest of his game varied so wildly from game to game you were never really comfortable with placing him anywhere. Decent size too. In 3rd round, this is a reasonable gamble where you let him stay in Russia for years and come back to it to see what you got. It's one of the cases, where he might not even become an NHL level player before 23 or 24 and comes into the league as a late-bloomer.

Sodergran - I had him as a borderline late pick. Big kid, with reasonable quickness and skating, flashed some skill. Competitive, good pace. In few of my viewings he had some insane shots out of nowhere tha beat goalies. Projected to lower lines.

Bjornfot - talked about him elsewhere, but he was a competitive mobile defenseman with good reads and puck-decisions. Responsible and always was willing to use his body defensively, not big but sturdy. Could either pass the puck or skate it out of trouble with his mobility. Not a big offensive player, but I think he has more offensive upside than he has shown in NHL so far, 20-30ish points should be doable for him at least a few times in his career. I liked this pick.

Fagemo - He was not drafted in his draft year, I would consider him as a late round (6th-7th) pick at that time but would hardly lose sleep if he went undrafted, which he did. He made a big step in D+1 season, basically scoring at 0.5PPG pace in SHL and it was obvious he was going to get drafted, rightly as he clearly become worthy of it as a prospect. His game was always the same: skating, pace, shooting and compete level. He seemed to fit the way the NHL was going very well. His skill was decent but there was not an offensive dynamic or reads in his game that top 6 NHL forwards have other than shooting. At that time, you could project him as a third liner who can score some goals and pushes the pace of the game. Had a tenacity, speed and checking element to his game. I can see the logic to the pick, but I would not use the 2nd round pick on him.

Compared to Fagemo, a guy like Dorofeyev who went in 3rd had more innate talent, although he was physically underdeveloped and a clunky inconsistent skater and so a bigger project. This is the kind of pick I miss from the Kings in the middle rounds from Europe. I thought by late 2nd Dorofeyev had legit value, I loved the value in Jan Jenik (3rd round) and Jacob Peterson (5th round) for example and I think the Kings over that timeframe tended more towards physical tools upside and compete level over a more nuanced underdeveloped, high IQ/skill based picks (although Jenik was highly competitive). In that regard Ruuttu seems to tend more towards the Futa school of picks looking from the outside-in. Not saying one is better than the other, usually when two different ideologies agree on a player, you get a good decision. I've seen this with the person I scouted with, when we agreed on a player whether to upside or downside, we were very rarely wrong.

EDIT:
I forgot about Nousiainen. Nousiainen is quite an undersized defenseman. Good but not elite skating and offensive upside. Good competitor. Tries to play bigger than his size in his own end and actually breaks up more plays than you would expect. Can move pucks but I don't view him as a pure dynamic offensive threat. Plays on his toes rather than on his heels. Good energy level and awareness. Not mistake-free and not a flawless game with the puck. If you squint really hard, you can imagine Torey Krug maybe. Generally I am not a fan of significantly undersized defensemen who aren't exceptional skaters, exceptional decision-makers or have exceptional skill (I'd say you need at least 2/3 if you want to be a NHL net contributor as a sub 5'10 D) and so I would not recommend Nousiainen in the 4th round because I do not think he has even one of those qualities at an exceptional level. I think he will be a very good player, but I doubt that is enough for consistent NHL minutes at his size. Like, I said, I generally don't like gambling on undersized defensemen unless I feel there are multiple elite components there.

Parik is a guy I had only seen with the junior NTs and my memory of his play is so poor here that I can't make a good comment on him. Would have to go back and check the old notes if I have much on him.

Bonus: My colleague took a liking to Andre Lee. I had very limited viewings of him, but he went undrafted his first year of eligiblity, then went to NA the following year and got drafted by the Kings out of USHL.

Thanks for sharing, love this

I remember the Fagemo pick being pretty contested due to views on re-entry draftees. Agree he seems to 'fit' what the Kings were putting together.

I also remember being high on Jenik, partially because he seemed to be one of only 2-3 players who had the IQ to help Kaliyev, and they were really working some magic.

I recall Kupari being sort of a Kempe 2.0, tools but frustration, and it's already coming true a bit haha.

I think you absolutely nailed Shafigullin. I've only watched three games in their near-entireties and I remember one he looked like he was possessed by the ghost of Malkin and in the others I had to look to find him.

I appreciate the feedback on Nousiainen. I still feel like he's a darkhorse for a 2nd/3rd pairing role but I definitely agree he doesn't have a real 'defining' ability, sort of the problem 'vanilla' Roland McKeown had. Still, you would think a guy that can handle #1 minutes vs. men would be able to carve something out in the NHL, even if only a bit.

 

[kingsfan28]

I like Hoven and Bernstein - I’ve talked to DB at a few games - he always stands in the same place at intermission - always approachable and friendly.

Hoven responds to my tweets and private messages. I think he gets annoyed by me always calling the Kings soft but still responds.

When I started following the Kings in 92’ all I had for news was the LA Times so all this coverage is a bonus.

One thing I keep repeating is the most exciting Kings game I’ve seen in 7-8 years was the pre season game vs the Ducks where the Kings played all the rookies. We won 6-3 - Kayilev had 4 goals, Lemieux 1, and Turcotte 1. Kopitar, Brown, Kempe, Arvidsson, Danault did NOT play in this game.

It was the rookie team vs rookie team game. It was a fun game to watch, but man there were some big gaffs by both teams. Stuff you can't do in the NHL.