The Sharks could have been where the Kings are....
- Thread starter fyrescorp
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
The Butcher
Mammoth Mooseknuckles Hockey
Dean Lombardi has mentioned in the past that his firing there made him re-evaluate some of his success and failures and made him a better GM.
Also, the Sharks could still very well beat us in this series. A little premature to talk about SJ's frustrations this year.
KingsKnight
Reset in progress
If you step back and look at what he's done for this team, for the culture of the team, the scouting, and the pipeline, it's pretty unbelievable. I don't think another GM would have taken to pains he has to construct this team the way he has. I remember there being a lot of frustration on the boards when we hit the 5 year mark and hadn't gotten past the first round. But I'm glad AEG was patient and trusted in him to stay the course.
I also remember welcoming new Kings fans to HF boards during the dark years (with my old account) and telling them they should get used to disappointment. I'm so glad I don't have to say that anymore.
I also remember welcoming new Kings fans to HF boards during the dark years (with my old account) and telling them they should get used to disappointment. I'm so glad I don't have to say that anymore.
Axl Rhoadz
Binky distributor
- Apr 5, 2011
- 5,282
- 3,950
That's because all those stupid awards are based on regular season success, something the Kings haven't had a whole lot of under DL, rather than what the team has accomplished by the end of the season which should include the playoffs.
As much as I like Lombardi I think Dave Taylors best move for the franchise was drafting Kopitar. And I don't think Lombardi has topped it yet. Without Kopitar we'd be no where. Btw the sharks core is flawed do I don't think they'd get it done without major changes to the core.
Dave Taylor had a big part of our current team.
Dave Taylor had a big part of our current team.
Kopitar, Brown and Quick were all huge in last years Cup win. I admired Dave Taylor as a player and liked him as a GM too. IMO injuries cost him playoff success as a GM. Would like to see him get another GM job. Thought he'd have been perfect in EDM
IMO the trade for Thornton really turned that franchise around and they have made it to two western finals since. While the Cup is the ultimate goal they have been successful. With Thornton, Marleau and Boyle all becoming UFA in 2014 I think they overhaul the roster if they don't have success this year and move Boyle and Thornton. Those two as rentals would bring huge returns at next yrs deadline or over the summer.
Last edited:
Martyros
Allow me to retort
The problem with Taylor was that he'd rarely ever go for a trade where he needed to give up a promising piece for a proven player. He'd usually go for low risk high reward type of trades (Straka/Audette/Checkmanek) He wasn't even going to give a good player in the Palffy trade.... He would have never made that Richards trade imo. He was good at getting the best possible deal for his rentals though (Blake/Smolinski/Schneider) too bad the draft was not one of his better attributes.
Taylor drafted very well IMO. Yes he had his bad picks like Tukonen and others but every GM has those. I actually think one of Taylor's best attributes was his willingness for big trades. He pulled off deals for Palffy AND Allison. No GM wants to trade top prospects but when it came to making bold moves Taylor was very active
Last edited:
See I think Dave would of traded one of Kopitar of quick and or a would of rushed quick and he wouldn't be what he is today .
Dave drafted 2 of our best players but Dean gave them the tools/coaches to grow.
Dave drafted 2 of our best players but Dean gave them the tools/coaches to grow.
I've seen many say the same thing and while I agree DL has done a very good job in Manchester, anyone who saw Kopitar play in his rookie year new he was bound for stardom. IMO Kopitars Dad had more to do with his development into a top two way player than anyone else. Goalies take time so I really don't think Taylor would have rushed Quick as he was often trading to "bandaid" the roster with vets when youngsters weren't ready
Rorschach
Who the f*** is Trevor Moore?
DL was responsible for the trio of goalies in SJ but it was Wilson who traded Toskala for Couture.
Rorschach
Who the f*** is Trevor Moore?
kingsfan
President of the Todd McLellan fan club by default
Dave Taylor drafted some good players, but when it came to development, he screwed the pooch. Dustin Brown in as an 18 year old is a great example. What may have saved Dustin Brown is the lockout, which forced us to send him to the AHL. No lockout, he's a struggling 19 year old in the NHL. Could have destroyed him.
Taylor's legacy is filled with tons of hyped up prospects who weren't developed properly and a poor drafting philosophy when it came to goaltenders. I thnk he was actually a smarter GM than DL in terms of UFA signings and some trades, but I give DL as much credit for Kopitar and Quick's success as I do DT. He knows how to develop players.
I think some of DT's problem can be linked back to what onership would pay for in terms of a development angle, we didn't always have our own affiliate if I recall right, but overall, DT wasn't very good at getting the promise out of prospects as DL is.
I´m no draft expert but I can´t agree with Taylor being good at drafting. From 2000 to 2005 we had 9 1st and 7 2nd rd picks and it translates into Kopi and Brown... That´s poor drafting
Taylor drafted
97-jokinen and Corvo
99- kaberle and parros
00- visnovsky frolov Lilja
01- steckel and cammalleri
02- Rome
03- brown and Boyle
05- kopitar and quick
That's 11 current nhlers and a couple more that played over 500 games
Taylor other strength is quickly seeing which prospects weren't gonna pan out andoving them for pieces to fill out the lineup. His traded prospects usually faded into prospect oblivion. Unlike guys like Moulson, Purcell, loktionov and Boyle
Disagree. As I've stated in other threads Kopitar is a unique individual and has barely needed any development. Most of it came before landing in LA. Taylor was more astute in free agent signings and as a Kings fan I thank the hockey gods we didn't land Brad Richards, Drury or Gomez. All players pursued by Lombardi. Lombardi and his staff have drafted well but have also rushed players like Clifford IMO. He should have been left in junior to develop his offensive game and maybe another year in the AHL after that. Instead he was fighting and getting concussed in the NHL. I do agree Brown was rushed too and the lockout served him and many other youngsters well.
Lombardi has built the farm system and organization very well I just don't think he has gotten full value out of player moves like trading away Cammalleri, Purcell, Boyle and others. Taylor moved prospects like Aulin, Anshankov and Tambelini for proven players unfortunately they were usually hurt or injured. Injuries really screwed over with Taylor's success. The LAPD line would have had LA in the playoffs much more often
JoeThorntonsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
Apples to oranges. By default, it's a lot easier to be a general manager of a sports franchise in Los Angeles than it is to be the GM of a franchise in San Jose.
tsanuri
Registered User
How, when LA is the town of the Lakers and Dodgers. San Jose is in the same market as other sports but is really the only major game in town. And when you look at the success of West with the Lakers the Kings were always standing in their shadow.
ukyo
Registered User
I think in the most visible roles of a GM, Taylor was an above average GM. This included drafting, having the cajones to pull off big trades, etc. But there is a lot of stuff that Lombardi brought to the Kings organization which, when he described them, made Taylor's staff look like they were still in the stone age. The two biggest ones were player development and using bridge players to build a culture/identity for the team.
What Lombardi didn't have in San Jose was an owner that was willing to give him a large enough leash and budget to implement his grand plan to build a perennial winner. A large part of that was because the version of the plan he is using in LA is an evolution of the plan he had in San Jose. It may never have worked anyways. So the way his career played out there was pretty much how it was going to be.
So yeah, the Sharks COULD have been where the Kings are, but only if the owner was stupid enough to give a GM that has failed not only a mulligan, but more leeway than before, and on top of that, after that GM spent some time doing professional scouting reflecting on how/why he failed the first time. That was never going to happen.
But I don't care. I've lived in the SFBA for almost twenty years now, a decade of which I had to endure the Sharks pretty much having their way with the Kings. I had a yearly bet with a buddy on who would have a better head-to-head record and who would get further in the playoffs every year during that stretch. I'm not even mad that we stopped doing it last year, because I have a pretty good idea of what the alternative universe would look like.
If Taylor stayed another two years, there would have been no Terry Murray. There would have been no Scott Thornton. Avery and Frolov might have stuck around for a couple more seasons. No Greene. No Stoll. We might have signed Gomez, or Richards, or given Kovalchuk the huge contract Lombardi didn't give him. Brown probably wouldn't be captain. Scuderi never comes to LA. Kopitar would probably have ended up being an awesome fantasy player, maybe breaks a point-per-game, but never becomes that complete championship linchpin player. Quick may never have even gotten a shot, and might have been released before breaking out of the ECHL. Bernier wouldn't have even been drafted, and even if he had been, he would have been rushed up and would now be in the same boat as Steve Mason. Manchester would have another revolving door of Lehouxs, Kankos, Pushkarevs, and other could-have-beens that were great raw material at draft time but were not properly developed. More limbo that guys that were here 10 years ago probably can but don't want to remember. Yeeks.
Don't feel bad, Sharks fans. Lombardi was never going to work out for you. But I'm sure glad he was available when the Kings fired Taylor.
What Lombardi didn't have in San Jose was an owner that was willing to give him a large enough leash and budget to implement his grand plan to build a perennial winner. A large part of that was because the version of the plan he is using in LA is an evolution of the plan he had in San Jose. It may never have worked anyways. So the way his career played out there was pretty much how it was going to be.
So yeah, the Sharks COULD have been where the Kings are, but only if the owner was stupid enough to give a GM that has failed not only a mulligan, but more leeway than before, and on top of that, after that GM spent some time doing professional scouting reflecting on how/why he failed the first time. That was never going to happen.
But I don't care. I've lived in the SFBA for almost twenty years now, a decade of which I had to endure the Sharks pretty much having their way with the Kings. I had a yearly bet with a buddy on who would have a better head-to-head record and who would get further in the playoffs every year during that stretch. I'm not even mad that we stopped doing it last year, because I have a pretty good idea of what the alternative universe would look like.
If Taylor stayed another two years, there would have been no Terry Murray. There would have been no Scott Thornton. Avery and Frolov might have stuck around for a couple more seasons. No Greene. No Stoll. We might have signed Gomez, or Richards, or given Kovalchuk the huge contract Lombardi didn't give him. Brown probably wouldn't be captain. Scuderi never comes to LA. Kopitar would probably have ended up being an awesome fantasy player, maybe breaks a point-per-game, but never becomes that complete championship linchpin player. Quick may never have even gotten a shot, and might have been released before breaking out of the ECHL. Bernier wouldn't have even been drafted, and even if he had been, he would have been rushed up and would now be in the same boat as Steve Mason. Manchester would have another revolving door of Lehouxs, Kankos, Pushkarevs, and other could-have-beens that were great raw material at draft time but were not properly developed. More limbo that guys that were here 10 years ago probably can but don't want to remember. Yeeks.
Don't feel bad, Sharks fans. Lombardi was never going to work out for you. But I'm sure glad he was available when the Kings fired Taylor.
JoeThorntonsRooster
Don’t say eye test when you mean points
You didn't even get my point. Where do you think free agents are most likely to go; San Jose or Los Angeles?
And it was Lombardi who botched the 2003 draft for San Jose.
tsanuri
Registered User
You didn't even get my point. Where do you think free agents are most likely to go; San Jose or Los Angeles?
And it was Lombardi who botched the 2003 draft for San Jose.
How many big name free agents have signed in LA?
It no easier for either team in that regard. We both get screwed just for being on the west coast.
fyrescorp
Registered User
- Apr 19, 2006
- 668
- 0
Nefarious
Classless Doty
Latest posts
-
C Hayden Paupanekis - Kelowna Rockets, WHL (2025 Draft)- Latest: Briser la glace
-
-
-
