Predict what happens with Quick this Season

[kilowatt]

Someone just mentioned in a group I am in, Quick for Schneider being bandied about, no idea if it's true, or how serious, or if it even makes sense for anyone....

I just can’t see us doing that to him unless he is a problem in the locker room. Quick doesn’t seem like one of the entitlement guys, but who knows.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Someone just mentioned in a group I am in, Quick for Schneider being bandied about, no idea if it's true, or how serious, or if it even makes sense for anyone....

Doesn't really make sense. Why would we exchange Quick for a guy who has struggled for even longer yet has a higher cap hit AND a higher salary? One year shorter, but I feel like everyone around the org respects Quick enough that even if you consider the deal equal it's pointless. Change of scenery for both guys?

 

[KingPuckChoo]

And IYO, what would that be?

just like last year's hiring of W Desjardins was a disaster and giving up on Pearson for Hagelin was a stupid move
this year... Quick has to either 1) take a forced leave of absence 2) be sent down to the AHL 3) or be part of a carousel 3 goalie rotation (this one is not really recommended but it's still better than anointing Quick the #1G)

and the Kings organization has been more than patient with Quick since 2015 (he's had some good times and a lot of bad), he kept getting injured, if it's not a groin pull it's his back etc

so here we are in 2019, and are we going to really suffer through embarrassing losses after losses after losses? So we see that Quick will NOT thrive under Crawford's coaching system (ie Mclellan), and it's impossible actually.... Quick challenges every shot and there's no defenceman around because all 5 players are pressing. This is a terrible system for a goalie like Quick

this is a business, and fans will stop showing up to games if Quick keeps guaranteeing that at least 1 (if not 2-3 goals) are let in on the first 10 shots. It's actually a thing for years now, don't believe me? check it out yourself, the first 10 shots are always the most brutal for Quick and that deflates a fragile team like the Kings

CONCLUSION: here are your choices

1) Campbell / Quick
2) Campbell / Petersen / Quick
3) Campbell / Petersen / Quick (leave of absence and retry him again in January)
4) Campbell / Petersen / Quick (AHL)

but the absolute worse thing you can do is

5) Quick / Campbell

Now, considering how weak this team is (while considering also how weak our division is), a bad thing to do is to eventually conclude that Quick is done in two months from now. People need to conclude this ASAP, this had to be concluded after Game 1 (if not after last season).

Every game is important for the Kings, and if AT BEST, you want a fun entertaining season (regardless if we make the playoffs or not) you do not start Quick.

 

[The Tikkanen]

just like last year's hiring of W Desjardins was a disaster and giving up on Pearson for Hagelin was a stupid move
this year... Quick has to either 1) take a forced leave of absence 2) be sent down to the AHL 3) or be part of a carousel 3 goalie rotation (this one is not really recommended but it's still better than anointing Quick the #1G)

and the Kings organization has been more than patient with Quick since 2015 (he's had some good times and a lot of bad), he kept getting injured, if it's not a groin pull it's his back etc

so here we are in 2019, and are we going to really suffer through embarrassing losses after losses after losses? So we see that Quick will NOT thrive under Crawford's coaching system (ie Mclellan), and it's impossible actually.... Quick challenges every shot and there's no defenceman around because all 5 players are pressing. This is a terrible system for a goalie like Quick

this is a business, and fans will stop showing up to games if Quick keeps guaranteeing that at least 1 (if not 2-3 goals) are let in on the first 10 shots. It's actually a thing for years now, don't believe me? check it out yourself, the first 10 shots are always the most brutal for Quick and that deflates a fragile team like the Kings

CONCLUSION: here are your choices

1) Campbell / Quick
2) Campbell / Petersen / Quick
3) Campbell / Petersen / Quick (leave of absence and retry him again in January)
4) Campbell / Petersen / Quick (AHL)

but the absolute worse thing you can do is

5) Quick / Campbell

Now, considering how weak this team is (while considering also how weak our division is), a bad thing to do is to eventually conclude that Quick is done in two months from now. People need to conclude this ASAP, this had to be concluded after Game 1 (if not after last season).

Every game is important for the Kings, and if AT BEST, you want a fun entertaining season (regardless if we make the playoffs or not) you do not start Quick.

Why is every game important to the Kings?

 

[Lt Dan]

just like last year's hiring of W Desjardins was a disaster and giving up on Pearson for Hagelin was a stupid move
this year... Quick has to either 1) take a forced leave of absence 2) be sent down to the AHL 3) or be part of a carousel 3 goalie rotation (this one is not really recommended but it's still better than anointing Quick the #1G)

and the Kings organization has been more than patient with Quick since 2015 (he's had some good times and a lot of bad), he kept getting injured, if it's not a groin pull it's his back etc

so here we are in 2019, and are we going to really suffer through embarrassing losses after losses after losses? So we see that Quick will NOT thrive under Crawford's coaching system (ie Mclellan), and it's impossible actually.... Quick challenges every shot and there's no defenceman around because all 5 players are pressing. This is a terrible system for a goalie like Quick

this is a business, and fans will stop showing up to games if Quick keeps guaranteeing that at least 1 (if not 2-3 goals) are let in on the first 10 shots. It's actually a thing for years now, don't believe me? check it out yourself, the first 10 shots are always the most brutal for Quick and that deflates a fragile team like the Kings

CONCLUSION: here are your choices

1) Campbell / Quick
2) Campbell / Petersen / Quick
3) Campbell / Petersen / Quick (leave of absence and retry him again in January)
4) Campbell / Petersen / Quick (AHL)

but the absolute worse thing you can do is

5) Quick / Campbell

Now, considering how weak this team is (while considering also how weak our division is), a bad thing to do is to eventually conclude that Quick is done in two months from now. People need to conclude this ASAP, this had to be concluded after Game 1 (if not after last season).

Every game is important for the Kings, and if AT BEST, you want a fun entertaining season (regardless if we make the playoffs or not) you do not start Quick.

Wow

 

[Bandit]

anointing Quick the #1G

Who has done this?

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

just like last year's hiring of W Desjardins was a disaster and giving up on Pearson for Hagelin was a stupid move
this year... Quick has to either 1) take a forced leave of absence 2) be sent down to the AHL 3) or be part of a carousel 3 goalie rotation (this one is not really recommended but it's still better than anointing Quick the #1G)

and the Kings organization has been more than patient with Quick since 2015 (he's had some good times and a lot of bad), he kept getting injured, if it's not a groin pull it's his back etc

so here we are in 2019, and are we going to really suffer through embarrassing losses after losses after losses? So we see that Quick will NOT thrive under Crawford's coaching system (ie Mclellan), and it's impossible actually.... Quick challenges every shot and there's no defenceman around because all 5 players are pressing. This is a terrible system for a goalie like Quick

this is a business, and fans will stop showing up to games if Quick keeps guaranteeing that at least 1 (if not 2-3 goals) are let in on the first 10 shots. It's actually a thing for years now, don't believe me? check it out yourself, the first 10 shots are always the most brutal for Quick and that deflates a fragile team like the Kings

CONCLUSION: here are your choices

1) Campbell / Quick
2) Campbell / Petersen / Quick
3) Campbell / Petersen / Quick (leave of absence and retry him again in January)
4) Campbell / Petersen / Quick (AHL)

but the absolute worse thing you can do is

5) Quick / Campbell

Now, considering how weak this team is (while considering also how weak our division is), a bad thing to do is to eventually conclude that Quick is done in two months from now. People need to conclude this ASAP, this had to be concluded after Game 1 (if not after last season).

Every game is important for the Kings, and if AT BEST, you want a fun entertaining season (regardless if we make the playoffs or not) you do not start Quick.

Campbell let in the seventh shot of the game vs. Calgary and the literal first shot of the game vs. Nashville.

 

[KingPuckChoo]

Why is every game important to the Kings?

i have a hard time explaining this part in a way that is clear without creating confusion and anger from some...

but because the Kings are a weaker team? they can't afford a slow terrible start without affecting the entire team's morale

but sorry, i know some of you are in it for the cup alone, and i dunno what you guys were doing from 1967 to 2011 but if that's all you live for, it will be an extremely long decade for you

You can suck (ie Montreal last season), end up with a quality pick, still build your team and improve, and present a fun product to the fans. You don't need to have a miserable unwatchable hockey season like the Senators, you know?

I like to watch games where there's a compete level and it's entertaining and fun... i hate it when the puck goes it and Quick is just turning his head and wave his hands in disbelief that he let in another softie, he's soooo defeated right now that it's just pissing me off. He really is acting as if game 1 of the season was Game #83. Everyone else was treating the game like Game #1

why am i watching a game that after 10mins it's already 2-0? to learn more about what? did you have any fun at all watching those games? i didn't and it serves no purpose

 

[KingPuckChoo]

Campbell let in the seventh shot of the game vs. Calgary and the literal first shot of the game vs. Nashville.

ah classic cherry picking out of an entire text of info

i missed you guys this summer!

we're going to have fun this season

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

ah classic cherry picking out of an entire text of info

i missed you guys this summer!

we're going to have fun this season

I mean, you literally said, direct quote:

this is a business, and fans will stop showing up to games if Quick keeps guaranteeing that at least 1 (if not 2-3 goals) are let in on the first 10 shots. It's actually a thing for years now, don't believe me? check it out yourself, the first 10 shots are always the most brutal for Quick and that deflates a fragile team like the Kings

CONCLUSION: here are your choices

1) Campbell / Quick
2) Campbell / Petersen / Quick
3) Campbell / Petersen / Quick (leave of absence and retry him again in January)
4) Campbell / Petersen / Quick (AHL)

but the absolute worse thing you can do is

5) Quick / Campbell

Every game is important for the Kings, and if AT BEST, you want a fun entertaining season (regardless if we make the playoffs or not) you do not start Quick.

You made an argument that letting in goals in less than 10 shots is bad for the 'fragile' Kings and that our 4 best choices include leading with Campbell (which I agree with right now, by the way), presumably because he doesn't do that...but the plot twist is that he does do that (as well as let in 'ugly' goals) and that building an entire argument about going down early in the shot count is actually fallacious.

The facts so far is that the team has utterly dominated games Campbell has started in and hasn't in games Quick has started in but both goalies have shown warts to say the least.

Yes, start Campbell, so one of them can find their game, but stop pretending this Kings season is circling the drain simply because of Quick and will be saved because of Campbell.

 

[Bandit]

I mean, you literally said, direct quote:





You made an argument that letting in goals in less than 10 shots is bad for the 'fragile' Kings and that our 4 best choices include leading with Campbell (which I agree with right now, by the way), presumably because he doesn't do that...but the plot twist is that he does do that (as well as let in 'ugly' goals) and that building an entire argument about going down early in the shot count is actually fallacious.

The facts so far is that the team has utterly dominated games Campbell has started in and hasn't in games Quick has started in but both goalies have shown warts to say the least.

Yes, start Campbell, so one of them can find their game, but stop pretending this Kings season is circling the drain simply because of Quick and will be saved because of Campbell.

Yeah but if a potato rolls a blunt is he a dinosaur?

 

[KingPuckChoo]

I mean, you literally said, direct quote:





You made an argument that letting in goals in less than 10 shots is bad for the 'fragile' Kings and that our 4 best choices include leading with Campbell (which I agree with right now, by the way), presumably because he doesn't do that...but the plot twist is that he does do that (as well as let in 'ugly' goals) and that building an entire argument about going down early in the shot count is actually fallacious.

The facts so far is that the team has utterly dominated games Campbell has started in and hasn't in games Quick has started in but both goalies have shown warts to say the least.

Yes, start Campbell, so one of them can find their game, but stop pretending this Kings season is circling the drain simply because of Quick and will be saved because of Campbell.

sample size for Campbell is what? vs Quick?

do you want to go and find posts of me stating ''the 9th shot boys, get ready the 10th is going in!!'' from 4 years ago?

go ahead, go find them in case you forgot, but i know you didn't...we were always arguing over this

 

[KINGS17]

The idea of a leave of absence, well there is no such thing. I suppose Quick could end up on LTIR at some point, but short of that I see Quick being on the roster until his contract expires.

Hopefully, Campbell starts playing better so he can be traded at some point. I firmly believe Petersen barring some unforeseen circumstance is Quick's heir apparent. I would like to see Petersen lead the Reign in the regular season and deep into the playoffs this season. Given the current state of the organization, Petersen belongs in Ontario this season.

Quick isn't hurting this season at all, unless you think a bunch of vets winning a few more games really matters.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

sample size for Campbell is what? vs Quick?

do you want to go and find posts of me stating ''the 9th shot boys, get ready the 10th is going in!!'' from 4 years ago?

go ahead, go find them in case you forgot, but i know you didn't...we were always arguing over this

I thought we were talking about this season forward? Or is that only when it's convenient?

 

[KingPuckChoo]

I thought we were talking about this season forward? Or is that only when it's convenient?

hmm, if it were only about this season, then i wouldn't be critical at all. It would be pretty silly to bash any player having only 3 bad games, yes?

Is Kempe poor at Center RJ? how would you know? he's played only 5 games! Ohhhh you know this because it's been proven from last season too?

Also, if humans would always press reset, then you can only judge a player after roughly mid season? Doesn't make sense to me, and i always talk about the bigger picture anyway so i don't know what you are referring to about convenience.

However your statement is extremely ironic (because be it only this season or a continuation from past seasons) you still don't have a case either way as Quick has been piss poor in both and Campbell did better in both cases as well.

I recall that you often miss the essence of an argument that counter yours, you become extremely literal when it's convenient for you

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

hmm, if it were only about this season, then i wouldn't be critical at all. It would be pretty silly to bash any player having only 3 bad games, yes?

Is Kempe poor at Center RJ? how would you know? he's played only 5 games! Ohhhh you know this because it's been proven from last season too?

Also, if humans would always press reset, then you can only judge a player after roughly mid season? Doesn't make sense to me, and i always talk about the bigger picture anyway so i don't know what you are referring to about convenience.

However your statement is extremely ironic (because be it only this season or a continuation from past seasons) you still don't have a case either way as Quick has been piss poor in both and Campbell did better in both cases as well.

I recall that you often miss the essence of an argument that counter yours, you become extremely literal when it's convenient for you

You're not posing an argument, you're posting completely subjective thoughts and feelings.

You questioned Jonathan Quick's competitiveness. Subjective, sure, but both obeservers and insiders disagree with that, so...

You suggested that the Kings are weak because Quick lets in goals before shot #10 and that deflates them. Completely subjective, but let's run with that. Campbell has proven to do the same, and you're dodging that point. But do you even know what shot goalies typically let their first goal in for? Let's just look at samples from today:

Holtby let in his first shot.
Grubauer let in his 9th.
Bishop let in his 11th, Carter Hutton shutout.
Greiss let in his 4th.
Binnington let in his 24th--then promptly allowed another, then lost by allowing his 3rd in OT
Schneider let in his first shot.
Bobrovsky let in his second shot.
Anderson let in his 32nd, and lost 2-0.
Gibson let in his 1st.
Rask let in his 24th.

So, out of today's games, half of the goalies let in their 1st goal on less than 10 shots. A couple of goalies didn't let in goals until late double digits, but then fell apart. Ignoring shutouts, the average shots-to-goal was 10.9, the median was 4th shot. Yet most of those guys won. Three goalies let in their first shot, and a fourth let in his second.

If the argument is that the Kings are too mentally fragile to handle it, that's not on Quick.

Why the hell did I go down that rabbit hole again? Oh yeah. You're suggesting something is a problem yet it's insanely common. Yet when Campbell allows a dumb early goal, the Kings still score 5.5 goals and get the vast majority of the scoring chances. That's the biggest difference between the two so far. And if you want to talk about years of history, then you'll have to acknowledge Quick was a Vezina level goalie just over a year ago, so that's a different ballgame altogether.

Now again I'm agreeing that Campbell should start more. Most people are agreeing with that. You don't need to invent reasons to be furious at Quick, there are several of you where he can do no right. No big deal. But no need to make shit up either, just wear it proudly.

The rest of us living in reality will be able to acknowledge we have two goalie issues and the only way out is to play them until they sort it out. LOL at forcing Quick into a 'leave of absence.'

 

[KingPuckChoo]

You're not posing an argument, you're posting completely subjective thoughts and feelings.

You questioned Jonathan Quick's competitiveness. Subjective, sure, but both obeservers and insiders disagree with that, so...

You suggested that the Kings are weak because Quick lets in goals before shot #10 and that deflates them. Completely subjective, but let's run with that. Campbell has proven to do the same, and you're dodging that point. But do you even know what shot goalies typically let their first goal in for? Let's just look at samples from today:

Holtby let in his first shot.
Grubauer let in his 9th.
Bishop let in his 11th, Carter Hutton shutout.
Greiss let in his 4th.
Binnington let in his 24th--then promptly allowed another, then lost by allowing his 3rd in OT
Schneider let in his first shot.
Bobrovsky let in his second shot.
Anderson let in his 32nd, and lost 2-0.
Gibson let in his 1st.
Rask let in his 24th.

So, out of today's games, half of the goalies let in their 1st goal on less than 10 shots. A couple of goalies didn't let in goals until late double digits, but then fell apart. Ignoring shutouts, the average shots-to-goal was 10.9, the median was 4th shot. Yet most of those guys won. Three goalies let in their first shot, and a fourth let in his second.

If the argument is that the Kings are too mentally fragile to handle it, that's not on Quick.

Why the hell did I go down that rabbit hole again? Oh yeah. You're suggesting something is a problem yet it's insanely common. Yet when Campbell allows a dumb early goal, the Kings still score 5.5 goals and get the vast majority of the scoring chances. That's the biggest difference between the two so far. And if you want to talk about years of history, then you'll have to acknowledge Quick was a Vezina level goalie just over a year ago, so that's a different ballgame altogether.

Now again I'm agreeing that Campbell should start more. Most people are agreeing with that. You don't need to invent reasons to be furious at Quick, there are several of you where he can do no right. No big deal. But no need to make **** up either, just wear it proudly.

The rest of us living in reality will be able to acknowledge we have two goalie issues and the only way out is to play them until they sort it out. LOL at forcing Quick into a 'leave of absence.'

yeah Quick definitely has to go there's no LOLZ about that
so fine we'll run with that, you say half? that's 50% correct?
so want to place a bet?
i bet you that Quick will let in a goal on the first 10 shots, not only 50% of the time, nor 60%...im willing to go on abet that would be mathematically to your advantage

i'll bet you that whatever the amount of games played, Quick will let in a goal on the first 10 shots on a whopping 75% of the time

3 games out of 4

let's settle these stats once and for all

3 out of 4 is verrry much in your favor

whoever wins transfers the other person $20? $30? $40? whatever your budget is

 

[Choralone]

I like having Quick leak bad goals. It just encourages everyone to try to outscore the damage, which I'm all in favor for. As we get closer to fielding a competitive team, sure, let's start worrying about a solution.

 

[eleventy]

Holtby let in his first shot.

and 2nd... and 3rd.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Quick has to either 1) take a forced leave of absence

Because he has bad numbers? I can't imagine that's an option simply on stats. No.

2) be sent down to the AHL

Nope. $7m this year. Not a chance. To what end? To bring the Reign down by giving up early goals? To sit on the bench every night in the AHL while making $7m?

3) or be part of a carousel 3 goalie rotation (this one is not really recommended but it's still better than anointing Quick the #1G)

Petersen has the 2 way deal this year for a reason.

If it stays horrible all year, maybe they bite the bullet and buy him out in June. However, they also might have a few other guys they have to buy out at the same time. So many choices. Plus if they did do that, Quick's $4.3m in dead cap for 22-23 would be sitting there as both Campbell and Petersen hit unrestricted free agency at the same time. Although one of them would likely be in Seattle by that point.

There's no good option with Quick. There's no scenario where the Kings come out without scars. In a year that management has said does not matter, absolutely zero expectations from the top, nothing too crazy is going to happen. Nothing too crazy happened over the summer leading up to this season. I didn't expect they would really buy Phaneuf out, but it made sense. Again, come June, ok, maybe they do send him on his way. Until then, at most, he'll be relegated to the backup.

They're not sending him to the AHL, they're not going to banish him, under no circumstance should there be 3 goalies. Just enjoy the hopefully increased GF over the course of the year, and relax. Watch Lizotte scamper around. Maybe Doughty does a Calgary thing again every now and then. Maybe Kovalchuk makes it a cool thing to be able to say, hey, remember when Kovalchuk was here? That was kind of cool, right? Don't worry about Quick though. You talk about the early GA as if they matter for this team.

This is not going to be a quick rebuilding project. There are simply too many old players signed for too many years. Nobody is forcing you to watch Quick games. Go do something else, and then when Campbell gets the start, tune in.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

yeah Quick definitely has to go there's no LOLZ about that
so fine we'll run with that, you say half? that's 50% correct?
so want to place a bet?
i bet you that Quick will let in a goal on the first 10 shots, not only 50% of the time, nor 60%...im willing to go on abet that would be mathematically to your advantage

i'll bet you that whatever the amount of games played, Quick will let in a goal on the first 10 shots on a whopping 75% of the time

3 games out of 4

let's settle these stats once and for all

3 out of 4 is verrry much in your favor

whoever wins transfers the other person $20? $30? $40? whatever your budget is

Why would I bet on that when I'm agreeing with it? Against myself?

Are you even reading my posts?

I don't blame you because they're long, but I'll make it short--I'm not saying it doesn't happen. I'm saying it happens a lot to everyone and it doesn't matter.

 

[KINGS17]

 

[Jason Squirties]

Has anyone asked Bill Ranford what he thinks?

 

[torniojaws]

Has anyone asked Bill Ranford what he thinks?

"Can I play instead of Quick? We might have a chance."

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Kings are not going to be super competitive throughout the remainder of Quick’s contract, anyway. I’ve made my peace with him not playing well for the next few years.