HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Cammalleri should have been benched...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-17-2005, 04:42 PM
  #26
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jt
People who think coaches can have THAT much influence on actually CHANGING the way those players play are delusional.
Then you agree that Cammalleri's recent production is likely in spite of his scratching, not because of it. I'm shocked, but it's nice to have you onboard, jt

Osprey is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 04:52 PM
  #27
swinginutter*
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Face Wash
I personally don't think JR's 100%. He's not aggressive on the ice at all. Something's wrong with him. Not an excuse, but we've been watching this guy for a long time and he's not playing his game at all.

As far as Cammalleri goes, I loved the goal he scored last night... I've seen him go on streaks, I've also seen him go invisible shortly there after. I just want consistent effort from him each and every night like we get from Dustin Brown. Of course, I want the same from Demitra and Conroy too and haven't felt like we've been getting that from them either.

Let's see how they react to back-to-backs on the road.

The only skaters that have impressed me every night so far are Avery and Brown.
I agree with the JR statements, and he had also mentioned in the papers, that he wouldn't really start talking until he got his game back. If he's nursing an injury, none of us will know about it. Once he gets his weight down, gets back to game shape, and is healthy we'll all know. I think he's playing at 70% right now?

As for the Cammy statements........well I can agree to some point. But his career is still young, and streaks are part of this game. Every top end player goes through them. Cammy had a five game pointless streak, and was demoted to fourth line....where it then continued to eleven games. Funny thing is, we all know when Cammy doesn't score. What about everybody else? The blanket answer is they contribute elsewhere, but I disagree.

As for top players so far. I agree that Brown and Avery have been our two best forwards with Demitra falling not to far behind. On D, i'd go with Gleason and Weaver.

swinginutter* is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 06:19 PM
  #28
bland
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey
He would've put up the points, anyways. It has nothing to do with the benching that was very premature. What it does have something to do with is AM showing confidence in him, especially by putting him on the powerplay. Nine minutes in one game doesn't prove anything or indicate a problem. Nearly every player has had an off-game. I'm sure AM is all smug right now and thinking as you are that Cammalleri's play is all his doing, but he's wrong. It's ice-time, confidence and powerplay time that Mike is reaping the benefits of.
The biggest difference in Cammalleri's game is not physical play, but rather determination. When Cammy is on, he's fighting through checks and making bold, definitive decsions with the puck.

When off, he's knocked off the puck far too easily, and doesn't work his way back into the play. This is exactly what happened in Dallas, and it is most likely why he sat out for a couple of days.

If you don't think that sitting for a few games helped him learn this, then you are hopelessly lost. The "smug" comment is more indicative of your prejudice against Murray than Murray's alleged dislike of Cammalleri.

Honestly, whay ever happened to the notion of motivation.

bland is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 06:29 PM
  #29
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey
Then you agree that Cammalleri's recent production is likely in spite of his scratching, not because of it. I'm shocked, but it's nice to have you onboard, jt
Quote:
Originally Posted by jt
All he can do is prepare the players as much as possible and try to find ways to motivate them.
Scratching Cammy was AM's way of motivating him and it has apparently worked. Evidently Frolov didn't need a benching...he (and the rest of the team) needed a practice of just shooting the damn puck. Different things work for different players and for some players NOTHING works. When the motivation techniques work, the coach gets 100% of the credit for motivating the player...but the player gets 100% of the credit for the results. Cammy's got all the skill to make it in the NHL, he just needs to be motivated to use it the right way AND he needs to stay healthy.

I agree with bland 100%...great post.

jt is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 07:22 PM
  #30
swinginutter*
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bland
The biggest difference in Cammalleri's game is not physical play, but rather determination. When Cammy is on, he's fighting through checks and making bold, definitive decsions with the puck.

When off, he's knocked off the puck far too easily, and doesn't work his way back into the play. This is exactly what happened in Dallas, and it is most likely why he sat out for a couple of days.

If you don't think that sitting for a few games helped him learn this, then you are hopelessly lost. The "smug" comment is more indicative of your prejudice against Murray than Murray's alleged dislike of Cammalleri.

Honestly, whay ever happened to the notion of motivation.
You can go about this two ways. 1.) You can say we have a prejudice against Murray or 2.) You have a prejudice against Cammy.
The main points of this whole subject is that AM coddles certain players. If you can't see that, than that's what I call hopelessly lost. I'm not trying to be smug and I think you have great points. But some of you make it sound like you're in the dressing room and actually know what assignments Cammy is missing. None of us no. For you to claim that Cammy played a bad first game is questionable. But how you decided that in nine minutes is beyond me. I can go down a whole list of nobs that didn't show up that game.
I think AM is a good coach, but you guys back him beyond belief. He should have taken half the blame against Dallas, but he didn't take an ounce. It's his fault that we sat back (excluding penalties). We should have gone right after them, going into the second. He needs to shoulder some of the blame from time to time.
Everybody believes in AM's system, and it could do well. But he needs to adapt to other players also. The dictator **** gets a bit old.
Te person that's smug about this whole scenario is Cammy........and you could see it in his face on his post game comments against Columbus. There was no reason to sit him. Hopefully the BS stops, because other guys deserve to be benched.

swinginutter* is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 07:58 PM
  #31
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Legionnaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 35,533
vCash: 500
Agree with Swinging.

__________________
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Legionnaire is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 08:10 PM
  #32
bland
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by swinginutter
You can go about this two ways. 1.) You can say we have a prejudice against Murray or 2.) You have a prejudice against Cammy.
The main points of this whole subject is that AM coddles certain players. If you can't see that, than that's what I call hopelessly lost. I'm not trying to be smug and I think you have great points. But some of you make it sound like you're in the dressing room and actually know what assignments Cammy is missing. None of us no. For you to claim that Cammy played a bad first game is questionable. But how you decided that in nine minutes is beyond me. I can go down a whole list of nobs that didn't show up that game.
I think AM is a good coach, but you guys back him beyond belief. He should have taken half the blame against Dallas, but he didn't take an ounce. It's his fault that we sat back (excluding penalties). We should have gone right after them, going into the second. He needs to shoulder some of the blame from time to time.
Everybody believes in AM's system, and it could do well. But he needs to adapt to other players also. The dictator **** gets a bit old.
Te person that's smug about this whole scenario is Cammy........and you could see it in his face on his post game comments against Columbus. There was no reason to sit him. Hopefully the BS stops, because other guys deserve to be benched.
Well,

1) Some here (and other places) seem to want Murray to fail.

2) I want Cammalleri to play, and play well. If he needs to be reminded from time to time that he must compete even harder than others to overcome his deficiencies, then so be it.

Some folks have this idea that Murray has pet players that receive some sort of special treatment. This is true, but it is true in every aspect of life. Murray knows that Cammy responds differently than Frolov who is motivated differently than Brown. The only thing they have in common is that they are on the same team. I'll say it again - I'm not an Andy Murray apologist. I've suggested on several occasions that he may not be the right man for the job, but I will give him credit for the way he handles young players. I personally think that Grebeshkov could learn a lot more about the NHL if he stayed up with the big squad where he could have this point hammered home every night in the stands and spend every spare second in the weight room. with professionals who know how to work to succeed.

Secondly, I didn't suggest that you were being smug - that was solely aimed at Osprey's comment. But you do have a point - Cammy does have an air of arrogance around him in the few interviews and practices that I have seen in person. I can't comment for fact because I could be wildly off-base, but that is the impression that I have. If true, that arrogance needs to be justified, and you don't treat overly humble players like Frolov the same way you treat potential attitude problems.

To me, Grebeshkov is in a very similar situation to Cammalleri. Both players have world-class skill sets, but they both need work on the mental aspects of the game. I'd suggest (and I have repeatedly) that you don't let players with hustle, desire or work ethic issues try and work themselves out of their weaknesses. They need to have examples made of them - they need to be "called out". The question is whether they have the fortitude to respond positively, and Cammy seems to have the wear-with-all to succeed. Grebs is still in doubt, but he would be much easier to read at the NHL level.

bland is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 08:56 PM
  #33
swinginutter*
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bland
Well,

1) Some here (and other places) seem to want Murray to fail.

2) I want Cammalleri to play, and play well. If he needs to be reminded from time to time that he must compete even harder than others to overcome his deficiencies, then so be it.

Some folks have this idea that Murray has pet players that receive some sort of special treatment. This is true, but it is true in every aspect of life. Murray knows that Cammy responds differently than Frolov who is motivated differently than Brown. The only thing they have in common is that they are on the same team. I'll say it again - I'm not an Andy Murray apologist. I've suggested on several occasions that he may not be the right man for the job, but I will give him credit for the way he handles young players. I personally think that Grebeshkov could learn a lot more about the NHL if he stayed up with the big squad where he could have this point hammered home every night in the stands and spend every spare second in the weight room. with professionals who know how to work to succeed.

Secondly, I didn't suggest that you were being smug - that was solely aimed at Osprey's comment. But you do have a point - Cammy does have an air of arrogance around him in the few interviews and practices that I have seen in person. I can't comment for fact because I could be wildly off-base, but that is the impression that I have. If true, that arrogance needs to be justified, and you don't treat overly humble players like Frolov the same way you treat potential attitude problems.

To me, Grebeshkov is in a very similar situation to Cammalleri. Both players have world-class skill sets, but they both need work on the mental aspects of the game. I'd suggest (and I have repeatedly) that you don't let players with hustle, desire or work ethic issues try and work themselves out of their weaknesses. They need to have examples made of them - they need to be "called out". The question is whether they have the fortitude to respond positively, and Cammy seems to have the wear-with-all to succeed. Grebs is still in doubt, but he would be much easier to read at the NHL level.
Very good points!

As for the Cammy arrogance.......I may have worded my comments wrong. He seems beyond humble to me. He didn't gloat about his goal, nor does he ever. He simply said "we" got the goal and playing with guys like Demitra and Lubo makes it easy. I think Cammy's arrogance has to due with his abilities.............and I love that! He's cocky because he can back it. His attitude, if any seems to be steered at the coach, more because of a disagreement on being benched.

I think the Cammy benchings this year, has me more frustrated because of the fact that this is year three with the same scenario. This is not new to any of us. You would have to honestly believe that Cammy got the memo, and turned his "overall" game around. It's not only disappointing to him, but the fans also.

swinginutter* is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 11:01 PM
  #34
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,466
vCash: 500
The thing that bothers me (and others, I believe) is the idea that anyone here or behind the bench can identify a pattern from one game of limited ice-time. If Cammalleri had been given 3-4 games at the start of the season and still didn't show hustle or production... fine, bench him... and if he started hustling and scoring when he returned... you did it, coach! I'd be right there with you all in assigning credit to AM.

The fact is, though, that Mike wasn't even given a proper chance (like what Frolov did receive). Limited ice-time in a single game that is a total team collapse is not a proper chance. Not being given the opportunity to bounce back from your bad game is not a proper chance. Cammalleri might've bounced back in the 2nd game of the season. He might've had a multi-point effort in the 3rd game. We won't know. It's unfair to him to assume that his stinky play in the 1st game would've carried into the 2nd and 3rd games if he had gotten the chance to play in them. Other players played stinky in the 1st game and bounced back in the following games. Mike might've done the same.

One bad game is an off-game, not a pattern. Cammalleri should've been allowed at least one extra game to bounce back before being sent to the doghouse. AM gives it to the rest of the players (look at Corvo after Detroit and Frolov after 3 games). If Mike had been given that proper chance to redeem himself first (and failed it), AM would be getting my praise now for this great play. Since he didn't get that opportunity, though, I'm giving Mike the benefit of the doubt. Can you see where I'm coming from?


Last edited by Osprey: 10-17-2005 at 11:20 PM.
Osprey is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 11:33 PM
  #35
Kingz4life
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Armenia
Posts: 2,105
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kingz4life
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey
The thing that bothers me (and others, I believe) is the idea that anyone here or behind the bench can identify a pattern from one game of limited ice-time. If Cammalleri had been given 3-4 games at the start of the season and still didn't show hustle or production... fine, bench him... and if he started hustling and scoring when he returned... you did it, coach! I'd be right there with you all in assigning credit to AM.

The fact is, though, that Mike wasn't even given a proper chance (like what Frolov did receive). Limited ice-time in a single game that is a total team collapse is not a proper chance. Not being given the opportunity to bounce back from your bad game is not a proper chance. Cammalleri might've bounced back in the 2nd game of the season. He might've had a multi-point effort in the 3rd game. We won't know. It's unfair to him to assume that his stinky play in the 1st game would've carried into the 2nd and 3rd games if he had gotten the chance to play in them. Other players played stinky in the 1st game and bounced back in the following games. Mike might've done the same.

One bad game is an off-game, not a pattern. Cammalleri should've been allowed at least one extra game to bounce back before being sent to the doghouse. AM gives it to the rest of the players (look at Corvo after Detroit and Frolov after 3 games). If Mike had been given that proper chance to redeem himself first (and failed it), AM would be getting my praise now for this great play. Since he didn't get that opportunity, though, I'm giving Mike the benefit of the doubt. Can you see where I'm coming from?
I think you would agree Frolov has proved more than Cammalleri in this league so far. I agree he should have gotten a couple of more games but I'm guessing his determination wasn't that high in the pre-season either. Anyways, this is the past...some people might have agreed with it and some people might have disagreed with it but as long as he's on the ice now and producing then that's all that matters.

Kingz4life is offline  
Old
10-17-2005, 11:47 PM
  #36
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingz4life
Anyways, this is the past...some people might have agreed with it and some people might have disagreed with it but as long as he's on the ice now and producing then that's all that matters.
I agree with you there, but don't forget that you're the one who started this thread and resurrected the debate

Osprey is offline  
Old
10-18-2005, 12:00 AM
  #37
bland
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey
One bad game is an off-game, not a pattern. Cammalleri should've been allowed at least one extra game to bounce back before being sent to the doghouse. AM gives it to the rest of the players (look at Corvo after Detroit and Frolov after 3 games). If Mike had been given that proper chance to redeem himself first (and failed it), AM would be getting my praise now for this great play. Since he didn't get that opportunity, though, I'm giving Mike the benefit of the doubt. Can you see where I'm coming from?

So you don't think that a repeat of the same issues that kept Cammy from being a regular in 03-04 is a pattern?

Like it or not, Cammy is a role player. Sure offense is more glamouous than forechecking or penalty killing or winning faceoffs's, but it is a role none the less.

If Cowan isn't hitting, you sit him. If Kostopolous doesn't bring his intensity, he'll sit it out. If Cammy doesn't score, but he shows the effort and fights through tough checking, you keep him in the lineup. If he backs away from physical confrontation, loses the puck too easily, gets caught reaching instead of hustling for body position, and still doesn't score, then he deserves to sit. This is nothing new to Cammalleri, and a one-way ticket to Manchester was the result last time.

You can tell whether a player resorts to the same ineffectiveness within two shifts. Cammy didn't compete in nine minutes, and yes, that is all that it takes.

However, it is to Cammy's credit that he came back strong. It is up to him to keep it going and prove that he belongs in the NHL fulltime.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think that it applies in this situation.

bland is offline  
Old
10-18-2005, 12:50 AM
  #38
Jag68Sid87
Nothing Else Maattas
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 29,100
vCash: 500
This reminds of a situation in Montreal in '03-04 with Mike Ribeiro. Ribeiro overextended a shift one game very early on in the season and was a healthy scratch the next game. It's similar to Cammalleri because both players were expected to "break out" so to speak. Anyways, Ribeiro went on to break out with a 65-point season, leading the team in scoring, etc.

A lot of Ribeiro bashers still point to that benching as the turning point but personally I think Ribeiro was just a player in the middle of his maturation process--and that yes, eventually he was going to break out anyways because of his talent.

I feel the same way about Cammalleri.

Jag68Sid87 is offline  
Old
10-18-2005, 01:57 AM
  #39
swinginutter*
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bland
Like it or not, Cammy is a role player. Sure offense is more glamouous than forechecking or penalty killing or winning faceoffs, but it is a role none the less.
Your points are well taken. But Cammy will never be a role player. He is a natural goal scorer and they don't come around often. He sees the net different than most players in the league. When he shoots, there is a really good chance that he's going to bury. His playmaking skills are also amazing.
If you mean that his role is only to score than you're right. So AM needs to utilize it. But if he goes on a 20 game pointless skid, who cares. We've had tons of top tier forwards that would go on horrendous scoring slumps. It's part of the game. Cammy is not a Gretzky or a Lemieux....so points will be spotty. But 50 - 60 pts is not out of the question, and I could see him having more if he gets the ice time. 50 to 60 pts are leading scorers for their respective teams.
So what are we really looking for with this guy? Besides being 6'3.

swinginutter* is offline  
Old
10-18-2005, 02:20 AM
  #40
Kingz4life
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Armenia
Posts: 2,105
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kingz4life
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey
I agree with you there, but don't forget that you're the one who started this thread and resurrected the debate
True but I did it because I changed my opinion and understood why AM did what he did.

Kingz4life is offline  
Old
10-19-2005, 01:25 AM
  #41
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
bland, you're saying just what I'm thinking in this thread. Along with everything else, I agree that Cammy is a role player in the same way (if he even succeeds in the NHL) that Whitney, Stillman and Val Bure are role players. Their role is to score and not do much of anything else (forecheck, backcheck, play positional defense, win faceoffs, battle in the corners, fight or anything else) but they don't score enough to be considered non-role players like, say, Jagr, St. Louis and Hossa. If he's not scoring he MUST be benched because he contributes NOTHING else and a USEFUL player could be played in his spot.

jt is offline  
Old
10-19-2005, 01:31 AM
  #42
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
http://www.thefourthperiod.com/news/lak051017.html

Quote:
Murray gave clarity after Columbus triumph as to where Cammalleri has picked up his game.

"I take a look at the good small players in the league, like (New Jersey's) Brian Gionta, he plays hard, he's tough to play against in a small body," Murray said. "Doug Gilmour, Theo Fluery, Martin St. Louis, if you're going to be a small player in this league you can't play small. Mike has played big the last three games and when players continue to play big they should be in your lineup."
I don't know why people keep saying that "nobody" knows what AM is thinking or what his criticisms of Cammy are.

jt is offline  
Old
10-19-2005, 01:48 AM
  #43
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jt
I don't know why people keep saying that "nobody" knows what AM is thinking or what his criticisms of Cammy are.
Because that quote is from yesterday. Look at the date.


Last edited by Osprey: 10-19-2005 at 02:13 AM.
Osprey is offline  
Old
10-19-2005, 11:13 AM
  #44
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey
Because that quote is from yesterday. Look at the date.
1) It's not the first time AM's said this stuff.
2) It's re-confirmation of what I've been saying all along that you and others say I'm wrong for saying.

jt is offline  
Old
10-19-2005, 03:53 PM
  #45
took420s
Registered User
 
took420s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Monterey
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 2,205
vCash: 500
In that article, the quote by AM, "If you're a small player in this league you can't play small" really sticks out to me.

Those guys he mentioned are gritty players that I would love to see Cammy emulate. I love the scoring but why can those guys mix it up and Cammy is seen as finess only?

Those guys give me the impression of fire and determination and they do not disappear for long stretches.

That being said, I like Cammy's last couple games and I hope he keeps it up. At this point I think he is who he is and really don't think AM can change him so I give full credit to Cammy for stepping up the last few games

took420s is offline  
Old
10-19-2005, 04:09 PM
  #46
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jt
1) It's not the first time AM's said this stuff.
2) It's re-confirmation of what I've been saying all along that you and others say I'm wrong for saying.
1) Correct. It's also only one of three or four excuses that AM gave at the time. He's finally settled on one version of his story... two weeks late.
2) Incorrect. It's always been our assertion that that was the real reason (that AM dislikes Mike's style of play). We objected to the inability to be honest about it and the notion that it warranted such a premature scratching.

Osprey is offline  
Old
10-19-2005, 04:21 PM
  #47
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,466
vCash: 500
I agree, took420s. Mike is not gritty and never will be. Neither AM nor anyone else will be able to change his game. The best that we can hope for is that he not change his game because of his size... in other words, not shy away from what he's good at just because he might get squashed doing it.

AM seems to think that Cammalleri's success is because he's played "big" (as AM puts it). The fact is that neither of Mike's two points against Columbus had anything whatsoever to do with playing "big." Instead, they had everything to do with giving him major PP time (as both points came on the PP) and the confidence that comes with it.

Osprey is offline  
Old
10-19-2005, 04:25 PM
  #48
swinginutter*
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Italy
Posts: 1,796
vCash: 500
It's funny that we get to hear all these quotes from AM. His comparisons to me are lame. He already knows what Cammy brings to the table, so why try and re-invent the wheel.
For some of you here, if "he doesn't score"....he doesn't deserve to play (or get benched). Again wrong!
So please tell me what Craig Johnson, Brad Chartrand, John Tripp, and all the other fringe nobs brought to the table? Other than follow AM's instructions. Those guys are really prospering right now! In fact most players of that same calibre that AM has had no longer plays in this league.
BTW.........role players? That's the whole league for your information! Every player in this league has a role! Cammy's is to score and create, not to lay someone out. In no way is he detrimental to this club. Playing big in my book is being able to score on a regular basis at such a high level. He's proven that, yet he still has doubters!
These posts will be funny when he doesn't score. Either that or you're going to have to justify every point he scores this year!

swinginutter* is offline  
Old
10-19-2005, 05:16 PM
  #49
skolgoar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey
The fact is, though, that Mike wasn't even given a proper chance (like what Frolov did receive). Limited ice-time in a single game that is a total team collapse is not a proper chance. Not being given the opportunity to bounce back from your bad game is not a proper chance. Cammalleri might've bounced back in the 2nd game of the season. He might've had a multi-point effort in the 3rd game. We won't know. It's unfair to him to assume that his stinky play in the 1st game would've carried into the 2nd and 3rd games if he had gotten the chance to play in them. Other players played stinky in the 1st game and bounced back in the following games. Mike might've done the same.

One bad game is an off-game, not a pattern. Cammalleri should've been allowed at least one extra game to bounce back before being sent to the doghouse. AM gives it to the rest of the players (look at Corvo after Detroit and Frolov after 3 games). If Mike had been given that proper chance to redeem himself first (and failed it), AM would be getting my praise now for this great play. Since he didn't get that opportunity, though, I'm giving Mike the benefit of the doubt. Can you see where I'm coming from?
I am just trying to figure out why you think that Cammy DESERVES this chance. Is it because he was an AHL star? If so, then the Kings might as well have kept Steve Kelly and put him on the top two lines or kept Brad Smyth on the NHL roster. The bottom line is that Cammalleri has not proven himself to be an NHL level player, and until he does, he does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. If the Kings want a flashy offensive player who looks great some nights and floats others, they should just excuse Cammy's lapses, but if they want a guy that is a consistent scorer, then they have to set a higher standard for him. They did it with Frolov (remember when he would get sat after bad performances even in 2003/2004?) and that made him a better, more consistent player.

After the Columbus game (and seeing how bad the BJ's are without Nash, you have to wonder exactly how much of a gauge that can be), the Times wrote ""I don't know if [sitting down] helped, but you want to play," Cammalleri said, smiling." Whether he was upset or not, he has gotten past the benching, I think that it is about time people on this board did as well.

skolgoar is offline  
Old
10-19-2005, 05:25 PM
  #50
skolgoar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by swinginutter
Cammy's is to score and create, not to lay someone out. In no way is he detrimental to this club. Playing big in my book is being able to score on a regular basis at such a high level. He's proven that, yet he still has doubters!
Scoring goals at a high level? He has played in a whole 4 games this season! If you are basing it on his AHL performance, remember that he didn't have to play against Pronger, Blake, Lidstrom, Chara, Neidermayer or over half of the defencemen in the NHL, much less NHL-level goalies or forwards.

Every time you take a step up a level, you have to prove yourself. Every time you succeed the odds are higher at the next step. Cammy has proven himself to be an AHL star, but if he want to be in the NHL, he is going to have to prove himself all over again by earning his ice time at the NHL level - he is never going to be successful in the best league in the world by simply being given the ice time.

skolgoar is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:46 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.