Question from a Sabres fan

[Ziggy Stardust]

The day that changed Kings history:


Bob McKenzie mentions that Lombardi received two legitimate offers for the #2 pick but chose to stay the course.

 

[johnjm22]

I'm a Buffalo Bills fan. So I listen to a lot of WGR (Buffalo Sports Talk Radio). I also spend a lot of time over on the Sabres board, and I read a lot of Buffalo area sports publications. So I can't help but be pretty familiar with the Sabres, and have a good perspective on their rebuild vs the Kings rebuild since I've witnessed both.

There are some key differences.

As for the mentality of the fanbase goes, as I recall, when it was later in the season, and the Kings were eliminated from the playoff picture, not many people around here were rooting for them to win as many meaningless games as possible.

That said, I don't recall the fanbase ever starting a season with the all out tank mentality that a portion of the Sabres fanbase are rooting for. That doesn't mean we had higher morals or anything, it's just that we always had a little bit higher expectations. Even in 2006 after Demitra had been traded, we started the season with Kopitar and O'Sullivan, so there was a lot of hope just because of those two. Blake had also been signed, and Jack Johnson was acquired via trade which sparked huge optimism about the future.

Also, I never blame a front office for going the tank route. I blame the NHL. If you're going to reward tanking, then tanking is what you're going to get.

 

[kingsfan]

I'd honestly like to see the rich get richer, let the best team draft 1st and the worst team draft last. Any tanking risk would be instantly gone.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I'd honestly like to see the rich get richer, let the best team draft 1st and the worst team draft last. Any tanking risk would be instantly gone.

I think it's more fun to see a team lose at the draft lottery. The lottery is supposed to be weighed less in favor of the worst team in the league now.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=728795

The odds of winning the first overall selection in the NHL Draft for the 14 non-Playoff teams will be adjusted to more appropriately reflect the current state of competitive balance in the League. This will result in a more evenly-balanced allocation of odds, with the 10 highest-finishing non-Playoff qualifying teams receiving higher (better) Draft Lottery odds than they received previously and the four lowest-finishing teams receiving lower (worse) odds. The revised set of odds will remain in effect year-to-year in the future.

However, they're maker bigger changes for the 2016 draft where a lottery will determine the first three selections as opposed to the lottery being solely done for the first pick.

Beginning in 2016, the Draft Lottery will be utilized to assign the top three drafting slots in the NHL Draft, an expansion over previous years when the Draft Lottery was used to determine the winner of the first overall selection only.

Three draws will be held: the 1st Lottery draw will determine the Club selecting first overall, the 2nd Lottery draw will determine the Club selecting second overall and the 3rd Lottery draw will determine the club selecting third overall.

As a result of this change, the team earning the fewest points during the regular season will no longer be guaranteed, at worst, the second overall pick. That club could fall as low as fourth overall.

The allocation of odds for the 1st Lottery draw will be the same as outlined above for the 2015 NHL Draft Lottery. The odds for the remaining teams will increase on a proportionate basis for the 2nd Lottery draw, based on which Club wins the 1st Lottery draw, and again for the 3rd Lottery draw, based on which Club wins the 2nd Lottery draw.

The 11 Clubs not selected in the Draft Lottery will be assigned NHL Draft selections 4 through 14, in inverse order of regular-season points.

 

[triplcrown]

Great Teaching-Coaches played an important part as well

Lots of great comments so far, but,
IMO, the (head coach) Terry Murray era (2008 to midseason 2011),
was an important time.

TM was a fantastic teaching coach, IMO, and helped get the team all onto 1 page, as far as playing system goes.

TM was not a coach who had great success in the POs, but he was the guy who was the first to pull most of this current group of Kings into a true TEAM,
and get them to play with some cohesiveness.

Sutter took over around mid-season 2011-12, quickly became the mentor/"father-figure" of this well-trained team, and the rest is history.

Another guy who I think does not get the credit he deserves, is our former minor league coach (at AHL/Manchester), Mark Morris,
who also was an outstanding TEACHING COACH who did an absolutely stellar job of training/preparing our young prospects.

Again and again, young players from Manchester joined the Kings and showed excellent preparation and training as new big-league pros (Martinez, Voynov, Muzzin,
King, Lewis, Nolan, Toffoli, Pearson, etc).

Even re-tread vet Jeff Schultz was able to join the team in the pressure-packed 2014 POs and play our system effectively for a key stretch of games (his 1st stretch in the NHL, in YEARS),
indicating his excellent preparation in his season playing under Morris at Manchester.

When I look at a team like Edmonton, with all their impressive drafted talent, I fail to see that talent
progressing much insofar as completeness-of-game, cohesiveness and team-chemistry.
IMO, they lack what The Kings had---Great teaching/prep from their coaching staff and developmental system.

IMO, top-quality teaching coaches in both Manchester and LA played an important part,
and helped pave the way for our ultimate Stanley Cup successes.

 

[kingsfan]

Great point triplcrown though to add to it, it comes back again to Lombardi. A few guys weren't welcomed in the locker room anymore (Avery, POS from what I recall as well) and DL sided with the coach and got rid of those guys. I'm honestly shocked Eakins failed so bad in Edmonton. I wonder if he wanted certain personalities gone and he wasn't afforded that from MacT.

 

[santiclaws]

I don't get where this is coming from, to be honest. Tanking is illegal, immoral, and unethical. I don't know of any team or players who have actually done this in any sport. You have had scandals in the past, but that was a limited amount of players on some teams that were influenced by gambling interests, not a whole organized tanking campaign.

Pittsburgh tanked, and blatantly. Not the players, of course, but the management traded away what limited talent they had. It worked very well. They got Lemeiux. There's a documentary (or maybe it was a segment on some sports show?) about it. There used to not be a draft lottery in the NHL. Guess why it got put in place?

 

[kingsfan]

Pittsburgh tanked, and blatantly. Not the players, of course, but the management traded away what limited talent they had. It worked very well. They got Lemeiux. There's a documentary (or maybe it was a segment on some sports show?) about it. There used to not be a draft lottery in the NHL. Guess why it got put in place?

Because of Alexandre Daigle actually, not Lemieux.

 

[kingsfan28]

Great point triplcrown though to add to it, it comes back again to Lombardi. A few guys weren't welcomed in the locker room anymore (Avery, POS from what I recall as well) and DL sided with the coach and got rid of those guys. I'm honestly shocked Eakins failed so bad in Edmonton. I wonder if he wanted certain personalities gone and he wasn't afforded that from MacT.

You could also add Belanger,Conroy and Mr Excuse...JR. It was a ugly, badly divided room and DL came in and got rid of them all.

 

[ZeroPT*]

I'm sure everyone had their own personal opinions.

Management has a bigger picture in mind, but coaches and players are there to win games. Watching the Kings between 06-07 and 08-09, when they were a bottom 5 team each year, knowing they weren't going to be good, having no illusions that they would be good, you don't worry too much about wins and losses as a fan. Part of you knows that for the greater good of the franchise, a loss might be better, but at the same time, the players are paid a lot of money to show up and give a professional effort, and they don't care about some unknown 18 year old when they have their own family to take care of, so you can't knock them if they win.

Drafts are a crap shoot, obviously. If you know your team isn't going to be good heading into a season, you watch the year play out, and then you just hope that management knows what they're doing at the draft. You have to get a bit lucky every now and then when it comes to that too.

It takes more than just a high pick or two to ultimately win. You look at the 3 top 5 picks the Kings had, Hickey was lost on waivers, Doughty is obviously still here, and Schenn was traded. Look at the Nordiques back in the day. Sundin, Nolan, and Lindros were all traded before they ever won a Cup.

Lombardi's first trade with the Kings was Demitra for O'Sullivan and a pick in 2006. That pick ended up being Lewis, and O'Sullivan was dealt a few years later for Williams. Both Williams and Lewis have been big contributors to Cup wins. Lombardi's 2nd trade was getting Johnson from Carolina in the late summer of 2006. A few years later, Johnson ends up being the major piece in getting Carter, but only because Lombardi drafted Voynov in the 2nd round, and he developed into a legitimate defenseman.

So many things go into building a team, over a number of years, with twists and turns, and unpredictable events, that I don't think you can be upset at wins, but you can't want losses either. All you can do is hope management puts itself in a position where they're able to take advantage of the given situation they find themselves in, because things are always changing. It's like the rest of life. So much of it is about timing. If you have options, you can wait for the right time.

Really interesting read. Thanks

Yeah, I call bull ****. "Simply hoping we lose games" are exactly what I mentioned in my post about wanting your team to lose. Might as well not be a fan.

I'm a sabres fan, and as a Sabres fan I will always always always root for what's best for the team. If that means firing a GM, so be it. If it's trading a player, so be it. If it's losing games in December to put you in position to get a potential franchise defining C, so be it. Would you rather have the Kings win a bunch of meaningless games which pushes them away from Doughty?

I'd honestly like to see the rich get richer, let the best team draft 1st and the worst team draft last. Any tanking risk would be instantly gone.

How would the worst team get better then? All the stars would on LA or CHI lol

 

[Matt Ress]

Hmmm, I'm gonna have to check with the Sabres mods about this one

I think the other thing about rebuilding that annoyed us for a long time and that your'e on the verge of right now is okay--we stockpiled all these prospects, WHEN do they break thru? Because it's not right away for all of them nor will it be at the same time. One of those two studs would probably walk right in, but do you really want them to? See Edmonton. We got really really lucky with Doughty because even Stamkos was painful at first.

It's true, man. Tough to stay patient and kinda giddy to find out how these guys are gonna look and perform in the Bigs.

 

[Matt Ress]

Yeah, I call bull ****. "Simply hoping we lose games" are exactly what I mentioned in my post about wanting your team to lose. Might as well not be a fan.

Well I know plenty of people who are fans and hope for losses. I happen to not be one of them but, I asked and they didn't seem to worry about your definition of a fan. Either way, it's a frustrating time so I don't want to judge anyone based on how they cope. Also, I didn't want to come off like a dick, most of you guys have been helpful and insightful and I appreciate it.

 

[kingsfan]

How would the worst team get better then? All the stars would on LA or CHI lol

Standings would change. No one stays at the top forever, even if they had 1st overall a few years in a row.

 

[ZeroPT*]

Standings would change. No one stays at the top forever, even if they had 1st overall a few years in a row.

Okay. That doesn't answer the question. The worse team in the league is 90% of the time the least talented. You take away the #1 route for talent, what do they do? How could they possibly improve?

No FA's would want to go. Chances are the studs who they could trade for have NTC's/NMC's and they won't waive. What do they do?

 

[kingsfan]

Okay. That doesn't answer the question. The worse team in the league is 90% of the time the least talented. You take away the #1 route for talent, what do they do? How could they possibly improve?

No FA's would want to go. Chances are the studs who they could trade for have NTC's/NMC's and they won't waive. What do they do?

They do what any other team would and should. Develop your players, draft smart, make good trades and sign smartly. Detroit's had three picks inside the top 20 in the last 24 years and still have four cups and eight trips to the final four in that time. If anything you should glean from this thread is you don't need a top pick to be a good team.

 

[hangons]

It's always hard to "root" against your team... I am a diehard Rams fan... I watched todays game knowing if they lost they would move up a few slots in the 2015 draft... So, to me.... I couldn't lose todays game. If they won, great... If they lost, great...

 

[KopitarFAN]

Already covered.

 

[santiclaws]

Because of Alexandre Daigle actually, not Lemieux.

I don't think it was because of a single player, but because of the obvious advantages to tanking - as exemplified by those two.

 

[kingsfan]

I don't think it was because of a single player, but because of the obvious advantages to tanking - as exemplified by those two.

Toss in Lindros as well. I believe I recall talk of the Nords trying to blow a few games to get the great wonderkid.

Funny thing is of the three, only Lemieux is in the Hall of Fame. Lindros is debatable on if he'd even get in. Yet all three were hyped for years leading up their draft eligibility and teams are reported to have potential thrown games or made efforts to throw games just to get them.

 

[damacles1156]

I think the most important thing is player development. Proper player development.

Look how bad EDM's depth is. That's because their development of players outside the first round is non-existent. It has crippled EDM, even with all their high draft picks.

Now MacT or whoever, has to trade a top pick or player; to stabilize the roster due to poor drafting/development.

 

[PJ Kings Hockey]

On the Sabres board they've been discussing the McNabb/Fasching/Deslauriers trade. They seem pretty happy with the trade at this point, what with Fasching looking good as a prospect and Nic D. improving and having a pretty good showing recently (2g, 2a in the last 3 games). However, the thread needs some assessment of McNabb from our end, imo.

 

[ZeroPT*]

They do what any other team would and should. Develop your players, draft smart, make good trades and sign smartly. Detroit's had three picks inside the top 20 in the last 24 years and still have four cups and eight trips to the final four in that time. If anything you should glean from this thread is you don't need a top pick to be a good team.

Oh so they just have to replicate Detroit. Easy.

Doughty was a top pick. He's arguably one of the Kings top 3 players. You don't NEED them but it's the best way to get talent. Giving the worst team the worst pick in the first round is really counter productive.

The kings don't win the cup if they get Dultan Leivelle instead of Doughty
They don't acquire Richards if they get Kyle Palmieri instead of BSchenn

No matter how well you draft and develop. Top picks are almost always on cup winning teams, and most time they play a CRUCIAL role.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

On the Sabres board they've been discussing the McNabb/Fasching/Deslauriers trade. They seem pretty happy with the trade at this point, what with Fasching looking good as a prospect and Nic D. improving and having a pretty good showing recently (2g, 2a in the last 3 games). However, the thread needs some assessment of McNabb from our end, imo.

We would be ****ed without him


I think McNabb could benefit from sitting for a game or two but we don't have that luxury right now

 

[damacles1156]

On the Sabres board they've been discussing the McNabb/Fasching/Deslauriers trade. They seem pretty happy with the trade at this point, what with Fasching looking good as a prospect and Nic D. improving and having a pretty good showing recently (2g, 2a in the last 3 games). However, the thread needs some assessment of McNabb from our end, imo.

McNabb has been pretty much what you expect. A steady young defender, that hits well, and doesn't cost you goals.

I wouldn't expect too much out of McNabb till his third year on NHL ice.

 

[Buddy The Elf]

Oh so they just have to replicate Detroit. Easy.

Doughty was a top pick. He's arguably one of the Kings top 3 players. You don't NEED them but it's the best way to get talent. Giving the worst team the worst pick in the first round is really counter productive.

I think the point is a top draft pick doesn't equate to future success. You still have to make a good pick and development is even more important. The ability to get good players out of the later rounds is what sets a lot of teams apart. You need to draft good, develop and bolster the roster through trades and UFA signings. The Kings have always struggled to attract free agents so the GM was big on targeting character players for trades who he felt he had a chance at re-signing.

Another important player on the Kings roster is Jonathan Quick and he went through the Kings development system and at one point was playing in the ECHL.