Toggle sidebar

Scurried recalled

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
It's just inexplicable.

Need leadership? We have Greene, and they spent all summer gushing about how Doughty and Muzzin are taking that over.

Greene gets hurt? THEN call up Scuds to be #7.

McNabb isn't some uber-experienced d-man that nullifies Gravel getting playing time, Scuderi doesn't replace him in the lineup unless Sutter literally plans on playing him with Drew again at which point I throw my remote and silverliningsplaybook.gif my way out of watching the team for a while.

I've defended DL lots but this is a bad bad move even from a developmental angle. Gravel isn't going to get destroyed with a cup of coffee.
 
kingsholygrail said:
If they're performing that poorly in the AHL, why would we call them up?
Click to expand...

Why call up a player who hasn't played a single minute in the AHL this season? Hell does anyone know if Scuderi has been practicing for the Reign? Even if Gravel or Mersch aren't playing well, at least they are getting minutes and playing games. There's no logical reason to call up Scuderi.
 
Great move. It'll be good for Doughty to have someone to anchor the top pair!


Good to let the youth play big minutes and develop.
 
SO we are recalling the guy who has been scratched in Ontario. Who the hell does that? DL, your days might be numbered or that is his way of quiting on the team
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dear Kings,
Too bad about all the injuries. This is a cyclical league, you go through rough patches every once in awhile.
But, an ingenious move to bring up Scuds.
Signed,
Every other GM in the league.
 
BigKing said:
I'd keep the pitchforks in the closet until Sutter actually puts him in the lineup.

Even then, read Sutter's quotes about this team today. Sounds like a guy that knows he is in a poker game with a bad hand and he isn't even going to try to bluff.

Management wants to keep the youth that is knocking on the door down in Ontario for as long as possible as leaders on that team. When you know that Gravel is not the difference between this team competing for a Cup or missing the playoffs, you err on the side of development and you take that high draft pick for the big club.

Now, I think that Gravel is ready for NHL minutes but I thought Dowd should of stayed up last year too. Like it or not, Kings management are pit masters when it comes to development: you can't rush BBQ and it's done when it is done.

They aren't going to pull that brisket out 45 minutes early just because the guests are hungry. You do that and you get a Nick Shore on your plate.
Click to expand...

Nick Shore spending more time in the AHL wouldn't have made him more prepared.

Kyle Clifford is the example you should have used.
 
The Tikkanen said:
Dean and Darryl have jumped the shark.
Click to expand...

It sounds like both guys know this team will be lucky to stay above water this year. Maybe they called Scuderi up since they're still paying him to sit at home, because they didn't want him taking away any minutes from any of the other defensemen in Ontario. If you're paying him his full salary, and he hasn't officially retired, might as well bring him up knowing the team isn't going anywhere anyway.

That's all I got. Maybe Gravel or LaDue haven't played great or enough. Ok, that's fine, I get that. Maybe MacDermid is in the same boat. I'd rather see a nothing journeyman like Trotman over Scuderi if that's the case. Or even LoVerde, being captain of the Monarchs/Reign for a few years.

They talked to Scuderi at the end of camp and then sent him down. Greene had played his way to the press box, and was somewhat close to being bought out. Then McNabb gets hurt for however long, and apparently they're now set on Greene or Scuderi playing? The team looks shaky in various ways for various reasons, and maybe they're giving those guys a way to go out with some dignity?
 
Scuderi shouldn't play anyways with what's already up in the NHL. If he plays than you know the Kings have giving up on the season.

Forbort--Doughty
Muzzin--Gilbert
Martinez--Greene
Scuderi

I'm pretty sure with that defense and our goaltending situation; we are looking good for a top 5 pick :laugh:
 
KingPuckChoo said:
as per thn.com

LOS ANGELES KINGS
The best possession numbers in the league year in and year out can only take you so far if you just…can’t…score. The Kings average a paltry 2.06 goals per game despite doing what they always do: pepper the opposing team’s net with shot attempts. They’ve sputtered to a 4-5-0 start. With Jonathan Quick’s groin injury costing him multiple months and Jeff Zatkoff also shelved short term, the Kings must rely on third-stringer Peter Budaj to stop pucks for them. Even if he’s looked competent so far, the sample size will expand in a hurry, and we know what Budaj is: an AHL goaltender. He’ll turn into a pumpkin soon enough, a la Mike Condon last season.

So should Kings fans thus feel extremely nervous? Not quite. Bad luck is as responsible as anything for the Kings’ start. They’ve scored on a league-worst 6.8 percent of their shots so far. Lack of finish has been a problem for them in recent seasons, yes, but even the “bad†Kings shooting percentage hovered at 8.5 percent last season. The league’s worst was 7.6. Los Angeles is due for positive regression. It should get hot as a result, especially because it still owns the possession game. The guess here is the Kings do enough to stay afloat until Quick returns, and they make the playoffs as a low seed.
Verdict: Go back to sleep. There’s no such thing as ghosts.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/which-slow-starting-teams-should-be-scared
Click to expand...

Tired of this bad luck argument. The Kings have had a low shooting percentage for years. Why? Because they have few players that are dangerous and can shoot the puck. They play most of the game along the boards and far away from the places on the ice you can score from. They've made up for it by shooting more than their opponent, but that only gets you so far. The Kings' success rests on the back of great goaltending and team defense.

Since Quick took over the starting job in 2009, the Kings have ranked 26th in shooting percentage in the league, right down in the dumps with the Coyotes, Canes, and Sabres. That's six and a half seasons. All those other teams don't make the playoffs very often. The Kings have because they have great goaltending and team defense.

People who use "regression" use it to mean a team is due to break out. Let's be honest. The Kings have had a bad shooting percentage for years. They will continue to have a bad shooting percentage. Now that the Kings don't have great goaltending, things are gonna look really grim until Quick gets back.
 
It's positive either way you look at it. He either doesn't play because he's terribad or he does and the Kings get Gravel and LaDue the top minutes they need in Ontario. We all know this is a transition year and those guys will get a cup or two later in the season when and if the Kings are totally out of it.
 
lumbergh said:
Tired of this bad luck argument. The Kings have had a low shooting percentage for years. Why? Because they have few players that are dangerous and can shoot the puck. They play most of the game along the boards and far away from the places on the ice you can score from. They've made up for it by shooting more than their opponent, but that only gets you so far. The Kings' success rests on the back of great goaltending and team defense.

Since Quick took over the starting job in 2009, the Kings have ranked 26th in shooting percentage in the league, right down in the dumps with the Coyotes, Canes, and Sabres. That's six and a half seasons. All those other teams don't make the playoffs very often. The Kings have because they have great goaltending and team defense.

People who use "regression" use it to mean a team is due to break out. Let's be honest. The Kings have had a bad shooting percentage for years. They will continue to have a bad shooting percentage. Now that the Kings don't have great goaltending, things are gonna look really grim until Quick gets back.
Click to expand...

It's regression because it's historically bad, unless you truly think this team is less talented than bottom of the barrel teams that you mentioned. Even our "normal" shooting % is 2% higher, and our goaltending is typically below average by the percentages, not league worst (it's not anymore but close). Our PDO was 3rd worst in the league at 969 (can't check the update now) which is 25 points lower than our worst season-ending IIRC.

Anyway, the point is unless you really believe this Kings team is worse at shooting and goaltending than the worst teams in the last decade, regression is expected (i.e. Tyler Toffoli, a career 12% shooter, is shooting 6%). I, for one, have a hard time buying they're historically terrible, especially as the goaltending has already started trending up.

Agreed that "luck" isn't the right term entirely, but some of it is literally bounces and breaks.
 
lumbergh said:
Tired of this bad luck argument.
Click to expand...

It's a little of this, and a little of that. If teams score on an average of about 1 out of every 10 shots, which is even the case with Quick in net and the Kings keeping shot totals low, if you get 30 shots, you should get about 3 goals. Somewhere between 2.5 and 3. You're right though, in that too often the Kings don't get to the middle of the ice in the O-zone. What compounds that issue is that they now give up too many middle of the ice chances defensively. We can see that with Budaj this year, and Quick the last few years. If a goalie has to come up with 2 or 3 big saves a game, or 4 or 5 big saves a game, that's a huge difference. Keep giving guys point blank chances, eventually they'll score.
 
How does it do that?

The follow up question is who is going on LTIR and why--Quick, Gaborik, McNabb? Maximizing benefits for...trade?
 
LOL, damage control mode with tweets now; guess the org realizes they should have led with that promise that it was a precursor to other moves instead of just leaving the recall notice out for hours.

Don't blame people for being upset. We had a contending team last year, and they took Scuderi off Chicago's hands and out of the AHL and put him on the top pairing. They had ample evidence that it was dragging Doughty down, and they stuck with it. Try to think of another contender that would have done that. I was so depressed by that move, I stopped posting.

So, faith in management has taken some hits for a reason.

This contract is still causing us problems, unfortunately. Now we have to wonder what they'll do.
 
Is that just in case they have to put someone on LTIR at some point, or is someone going on LTIR? Gaborik and Quick are coming back. Is McNabb out for the year? Probably just an in case move.

So we were all wrong. It had nothing to do with Lombardi or Sutter loyalty or stupidity, it had nothing to do with how any young guys have played in the AHL or how they feel, it was just a day to day cap complexity thing.
 
Scottkmlps said:
Yes, because it's a knee jerk reaction when a d-man is injured, and another is recalled.
Click to expand...

he hadnt even played a game and everyone was freaking the **** out. that is a knee-jerk reaction. sadly enough, its becoming kind of normal around here
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom