Thread: Speculation: Armchair GM
View Single Post
12-16-2010, 03:48 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Country: United States
Posts: 264
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
... You're contradicting yourself here. If the Kings don't make the playoffs or tank the season, are things "going good"? Not unless you're in Bizarro World. And, if the Kings miss the playoffs, that would make four out of five seasons with no playoffs in the Lombardi era, right? At what point do you say it's time to let go of the guy? Are you not willing to hold the man to any standards of ACTUAL success here? At what point do you say "enough's enough"?

... The problem is that you're being misleading here. The team is 14-11 with 3 shootouts. Last season at this time, they were 13-10 with 5 shootouts. There is virtually no difference. This season they've scored 75. Last season at this time, they had scored 80. Last season at this time, the Kings were allowing 26.6 shots per game. This season it's 28.4. I would think it's really a stretch to say that the Kings are better this season than they were last season. The only difference is that last season at this time, Quick had a save percentage of .900. This season, it's .933. That's really all it is. And is that going to last? Is Quick REALLY that good? There's no way of knowing, but I'd hate like hell to have to rely on that.

... Edmonton I'll grant you, but Calgary won't? What justifies that assumption? Their goal differential is better than Anaheim's right now, they just haven't had the same luck in the close games as the Ducks have. Kiprusoff certainly can play better than he's played thus far. I think they have just as much of a chance to get in as Dallas does, or Columbus, or Phoenix, or Nashville.

... You're reaching here, giving credit for what hasn't happened yet, and comparing your expectations of future goalies to actual performance of past goalies. Quick has not proven he's a great goalie, not after 21 games. Quick had a pretty good half season and a bad full season coming into this one. If he can prove he is a true number one after a full season, then OK, but he hasn't done that yet. Just because Quick is young does not mean he's a sure thing. Robb Stauber had three playoff wins by the age of 25, yet faltered.

Bernier has not proven himself as a goaltender, and it remains to be seen if this organization will even give him an opportunity. Zatkoff and Jones aren't part of the discussion, no matter how high you are on them.

The Kings have had pretty good goaltending pairings since Hrudey/Berthiaume, by the way. In 1998-99, Fiset/Storr/Legace played well. In 2001-02, Potvin/Storr was pretty good as well.

... The prospect depth is better because the Kings sucked for three seasons, and they let established players go to acquire picks. I would expect the prospect depth to be better after that - wouldn't you? And, beyond that, look at the people who are leading the team this season. Kopitar (Taylor's draft), Williams (acquired by trading O'Sullivan, who was part of the return for trading Demitra), Stoll (acquired by trading Visnovsky),Brown (Taylor's draft) and Quick (Taylor's draft). Lombardi had some pieces already in place when he got here, didn't he? The current success of the Kings has largely been a result of the talent base that was in place, trading some of the talent that was in place for other talent, and signing talent in free agency. He hasn't expanded the Kings' talent base all too much, or at least not to anything that's translated to success at the NHL level, aside from the obvious Doughty pick and the admittedly good Simmonds pick.

Lombardi hasn't been a bad GM. But he hasn't been an overly good one, either, and I don't see where he's exempt from expectations to produce on the ice after a certain amount of time. Can you tell me how many GMs would be allowed to keep their jobs after two playoff wins in five seasons? I would think the Kings NEED to improve over last season's showing if Lombardi's gonna keep his job, and right now that is not a foregone conclusion.

... The only message Lombardi would be sending if he did that is "I am an idiot who doesn't care about having good players on my hockey club lol" because it wouldn't be long before Doughty saw his way out of L.A. if that happened.
JT, please see above where I said I've been reading these boards for a long time. LGK too. Please go back to your Rob Blake and LA Dodger love and leave the hockey talk to us KINGS FANS.

DL isn't going to be fired anytime soon. The Kings will make the playoffs. When they don't I'll start to think about changing GM's. Until then I'll ride the wave of winning. And then next year when we make the playoffs AGAIN I'll wait and see how we do in them to tell you if I think DL needs to be let go.

Now, I really don't care about DL, I care about the Kings. I just don't see any reason to fire the guy. You don't either unless they start to suck so, spell it out for me - tell me why DL gets fired. That's what this is all about. Convince me. I'll tell you that you can't because the entire arguement will be based on 'if this and if that'. Right now you're in the same boat as Kurrilino - not good company. It's what I've come to expect from you however because you're always negative. We are on pace for another 100+ point season and you find the bad stuff to post. Typical JT. Some things never change.

MIDSHIPMAN is offline   Reply With Quote