Nick Nickson indicated at the end of Kings Talk that he thinks that if the Kings' struggles continue until the end of December that we may see some changes made.
Dude, Lombardi isn't playing hockey or coaching the team. He brings in the best players he can to help the team win. So if you think Quick, Doughty, Williams, Penner, Richards, Gagne, Richardson, Johnson, Bernier, Mitchell, Scuderi, Greene, Stoll, Voynov, Loktionov, Mitchell and everyone on Manchester all suck, then yes it's Lombardi's fault. But I don't think that so I can't blame Lombardi for the teams play.
Lombardi isn't playing hockey or coaching the team, but he was the one who selected the coach and most of those players. His job is to hire the right coach and acquire and retain the right players to put together a winning team. If the team sucks, it's because his decisions sucked. You can blame the players if you want, but who was it who hired those players to play for the Kings? Who picked the coach?
What exactly do you have after 5 1/3 seasons of the decisions, leadership, drafting, and development of the team by "the smartest man in the room"?
You have the worst offense in the NHL, automotrons on ice going through the motions on a horrendous losing streak, salary budget maxed out to the salary cap, and absolutely no help in the minors.
In Dean We Trust...
I've been saying for YEARS that this is EXACTLY what was going to happen. You were all drinking the DL Kool Aid while slamming me for not appreciating all of the success that DL had in San Jose. It's time to FINALLY open your eyes to reality - there was no success in San Jose that Dean Lombardi was responsible for and the last 5+ seasons have all been a con game. Fillers, bridge players, young team that was going to dominate - just be patient and it will come.
The only thing that has changed under DL is the calendar - and the price of everything to attend a game. After all of the patience and all of the derision and hate directed at the "pessimists", what exactly do you have that's ANY different than it was in 2006?
Nick Nickson indicated at the end of Kings Talk that he thinks that if the Kings' struggles continue until the end of December that we may see some changes made.
So until the Kings have pretty much no shot at making the playoffs then. Would hope the rope starts burning for DL too at that point.
How do you know he's not, as well as the other 2 captains in the room [who btw, always seem to get a pass]. There's not a single person on this boards who knows anything that said behind closed doors by Brown,Kopitar or Greene. Sometimes there's nothing a captain(s) can do as the ship sinks.
Haven't you been watching locker room interviews with Brownie?
Clearly, there's a division of sort in the locker room.
Why does Brownie keep saying in an interview after interview that "we need to come out and play with more effort".
If the effort isn't there game after game, then there's problem.
It's pretty clear that this team is lacking leadership, motivation, intensity, organization, etc., but I've seen nothing to indicate that there's some kind of factional split. The fact that there are problems does not mean that the players are somehow aligned against one another.
Why does Brownie keep saying in an interview after interview that "we need to come out and play with more effort".
If the effort isn't there game after game, then there's problem.
How do you get they lockerroom is divided? I'm sure they aren't having a lot of fun. But, the Kings are a close team. Even Richards has mentioned it. No need to start spewing that bs. Leave it to helene
Lombardi isn't playing hockey or coaching the team, but he was the one who selected the coach and most of those players. His job is to hire the right coach and acquire and retain the right players to put together a winning team. If the team sucks, it's because his decisions sucked. You can blame the players if you want, but who was it who hired those players to play for the Kings? Who picked the coach?
What exactly do you have after 5 1/3 seasons of the decisions, leadership, drafting, and development of the team by "the smartest man in the room"?
You have the worst offense in the NHL, automotrons on ice going through the motions on a horrendous losing streak, salary budget maxed out to the salary cap, and absolutely no help in the minors.
In Dean We Trust...
I've been saying for YEARS that this is EXACTLY what was going to happen. You were all drinking the DL Kool Aid while slamming me for not appreciating all of the success that DL had in San Jose. It's time to FINALLY open your eyes to reality - there was no success in San Jose that Dean Lombardi was responsible for and the last 5+ seasons have all been a con game. Fillers, bridge players, young team that was going to dominate - just be patient and it will come.
The only thing that has changed under DL is the calendar - and the price of everything to attend a game. After all of the patience and all of the derision and hate directed at the "pessimists", what exactly do you have that's ANY different than it was in 2006?
ANYTHING?
NEWSFLASH: San Jose still hasn't won anything in the 10 years since Dean was fired, so I highly doubt the failures in SJ are Dean's fault.
And if you honestly don't think this team is any better than it was in 06 then, well, I'm afraid I can't talk hockey with you because you're obviously only here to be negative and not realistic.
"Doesn't matter what system you are running. Its up to individuals to come prepared to play and Win. If you don't, you are going to lose in this league".
The Kings players have to decide they want that cup. Regardless of coach/system.
They need to play a whole lot better.
NEWSFLASH: San Jose still hasn't won anything in the 10 years since Dean was fired, so I highly doubt the failures in SJ are Dean's fault.
This is some kind of logical fallacy, but I can't remember which one. You're sort of assuming the San Jose is somehow supposed to win and that other factors are preventing them from doing so. However, the fact that San Jose has not won the Stanley Cup since Lombardi was fired only demonstrates that his successor(s?) have not been any more successful. This point of evidence does not support the claim that he is an effective GM.
"Doesn't matter what system you are running. Its up to individuals to come prepared to play and Win. If you don't, you are going to lose in this league".
The Kings players have to decide they want that cup. Regardless of coach/system.
They need to play a whole lot better.
So what you're saying is that there's no accountability in the entire organization to get these guys prepared enough to win games?
This is some kind of logical fallacy, but I can't remember which one. You're sort of assuming the San Jose is somehow supposed to win and that other factors are preventing them from doing so. However, the fact that San Jose has not won the Stanley Cup since Lombardi was fired only demonstrates that his successor(s?) have not been any more successful. This point of evidence does not support the claim that he is an effective GM.
How Ironic is it, that San Jose is pretty much going through the Same thing the Kings are right now.
Who could have predicted that to start the season ?
That the Sharks and Kings would be playing so poorly this early.
What else would you call it if Brownie keeps insisting that not all players are on the same page or that they're not giving enough effort?
I believe there are guys like Brownie, who will back TM til end of time. And then there are probably other players who have had enough.
I don't know, I guess I'd call it the usual rhetoric of a team that is obviously out of synch. Sure, there are clearly guys who are performing better than others, and there are certainly players who are more or less supportive of the coach. It doesn't seem like any of that is actually out in the open though. I have a hard time imagining players in the dressing room saying "you, know, Murray is a crap coach. To hell with anyone who still likes him."
So I guess what I see is a lot of frustration from a team that is basically lost. They don't know how to win games right now. I'm unconvinced that there is some actual split, open (even just among the players) split with the team.
This is some kind of logical fallacy, but I can't remember which one. You're sort of assuming the San Jose is somehow supposed to win and that other factors are preventing them from doing so. However, the fact that San Jose has not won the Stanley Cup since Lombardi was fired only demonstrates that his successor(s?) have not been any more successful. This point of evidence does not support the claim that he is an effective GM.
I'm just saying it's silly to say that because DL didn't win in San Jose has anything to do with what he's done in LA. To me, it looks like whoever the past/current GM of San Jose is can't get the job done either. Just like every past GM in LA. Everyone thinks Brian Burke is this genius GM but the only Cup he won was one he inherited from the GM before him. I just laugh at people who think a GM is the one that's out there on the ice making plays and scoring goals. Some of you need to watch the movie Moneyball to realize a GM doesn't have to bring in the best players to win. It's the players who need to perform and win games. Why the players on this team always get a pass from the fans is beyond me.
NEWSFLASH: San Jose still hasn't won anything in the 10 years since Dean was fired, so I highly doubt the failures in SJ are Dean's fault.
And if you honestly don't think this team is any better than it was in 06 then, well, I'm afraid I can't talk hockey with you because you're obviously only here to be negative and not realistic.
I got reamed on a daily basis for questioning what exactly DL had ever won with San Jose - he never won anything, but kept crowing like his teams had won multiple Cups.
As to comparing the current team with the 2006 team, here's reality - the Kings ON PAPER have much better players than they did in 2006, but the RESULTS aren't any better. It's not how you want them to be or how the should be. Reality means looking at their results NOW.
In the 2005/6 season, the Kings were 17-11-1 after 29 games for 35 points
Currently the Kings are 13-12-4 after 29 games for 30 points
If you honestly think that 30 points is better than 35 points, then I'd suggest that I'm not the one being unrealistic.
Is it being unduly negative to point out FACTS that most people gloss over?
Is it negative to say that the team is LAST in the league in offense?
Is it negative to say that the team can't make any substantive changes because they don't have the salary cap room?
Is it negative to say that there really isn't anyone in Manchester to call up to help the offense?
The truth is rarely pretty, but ignoring it and pretending that these facts don't exist is pretty foolish IMO
How Ironic is it, that San Jose is pretty much going through the Same thing the Kings are right now.
Who could have predicted that to start the season ?
That the Sharks and Kings would be playing so poorly this early.
Not the season I was hoping for, that's for sure. I might just mosey on over to the Sharks board before I go to sleep.
What's strange is that right from the beginning, something about the team just didn't feel right. I remember watching the first few games of the season and it was all so flat, so uninspired. Something has changed with this team.
Not the season I was hoping for, that's for sure. I might just mosey on over to the Sharks board before I go to sleep.
What's strange is that right from the beginning, something about the team just didn't feel right. I remember watching the first few games of the season and it was all so flat, so uninspired. Something has changed with this team.
What to know what else is Ironic ?
The Sharks and Kings BOTH needed to have unreal last half of the season's last year.
San Jose started off poorly, then took off in Jan. Kings started to really get good in Feb.
But it was almost like it is now last year (for both teams).
