I know that for whatever reason the Kings lost faith in Cernak, but he was just voted by the OHL coaches in his conference as the best defensive defensemen. That is really gonna hurt if he turns into a steady NHL player for a one month rental of a back up goaltender. Time will tell.
- Regulate

I can't help but feel that it's largely because Cernak is still "just" a defensive defenseman. They seem to want every defenseman in the organization to be a two-way defenseman or play defense by supporting the offense. Perhaps they thought that playing in the OHL would develop his offensive game and turn him into that type of player, and, when that didn't happen, they soured on him. I think that that's less of an indictment of him as a player and more a reflection of the organization's particular idea of the ideal defenseman. He could be the best defensive defenseman prospect and they'd still likely not be happy because he wouldn't fit their mold.

I think that that's a dangerous philosophy, much like drafting on the basis of need. I understand the value of fit, but you're taking things way too far if you think that a defense-first defenseman wouldn't fit your system (whatever the system). After all, they fit in very well in this system when this team was winning two Cups, and look at the results since moving away from that and towards this "every defender must play a similar game" model.

I can't help but feel that it's largely because Cernak is still "just" a defensive defenseman. They seem to want every defenseman in the organization to be a two-way defenseman or play defense by supporting the offense. Perhaps they thought that playing in the OHL would develop his offensive game and turn him into that type of player, and, when that didn't happen, they soured on him. I think that's less of an indictment of him as a player and more a reflection of the organization's particular idea of the ideal defenseman. He could be the best defensive defenseman prospect and they'd still likely not be happy because he wouldn't fit their mold.

I think that that's a dangerous philosophy, much like drafting on the basis of need. I understand the value of fit, but you're taking things way too far if you think that a defense-first defenseman wouldn't fit your system (whatever the system). After all, they fit in very well in this system when this team was winning two Cups, and look at the results since moving away from that and towards this "every defender must play a similar game" model.
- Osprey

That's bull. You need guys like Cernak, especially killing penalties and providing support to a defenseman who like to jump into the play and such. Plus he was going to the AHL next season where they can work with him on other facets.

That's bull. You need guys like Cernak, especially killing penalties and providing support to a defenseman who like to jump into the play and such. Plus he was going to the AHL next season where they can work with him on other facets.
- verwustung

That's my argument (just in case you misinterpreted me). I'm a big fan of defensive defensemen and having a diverse and balanced defense corps, but I get the impression that this management team (from Lombardi down through Sutter) isn't so much, at least any more. They seem to have a particular way that they want every defenseman to play, and if you don't play it, you don't "fit" their system and you don't play for them. It wasn't always this way, as I noted above. I suspect that they're trying to adapt to the newer, faster NHL and believe that putting an emphasis on mobility, puck skills and defense through offense (i.e. Corsi) over actual defensive smarts is the best way to do it. A lot of good that that's done, though...

If kopi, gabi, and toff play to expectations we're probably not talking about this.
- arh777

If two of those three, perhaps even one of those three has a solid season, we're probably not talking about this.

And with Versteeg part of me says that Sutter just did a poor job slotting him into the lineup, but the other part admits that Lombardi probably shouldn't have made the move knowing that Sutter would do that.
- PancakesPenner

I would've thought that Lombardi-Sutter were more lock in step, but this and Purcell suggest differently. Anyway, I agree, both share culpability.

I know that for whatever reason the Kings lost faith in Cernak, but he was just voted by the OHL coaches in his conference as the best defensive defensemen. That is really gonna hurt if he turns into a steady NHL player for a one month rental of a back up goaltender. Time will tell.
- Regulate

Good fact about Cernak, thanks. I've liked his tools when I've seen him in development camp/World Juniors. Maybe like Forbort, he's a long-term project?

Budaj doesn't deserve all the credit for that W, just like Bishop doesn't deserve all the credit for those L's.
- tkecanuck341

Sure, sure. At the very least, it's very debatable who's been better. FWIW, by many accounts, Budaj singlehandedly won the game that he won.

I've been hearing a lot of thia bogus crap coming from the Kings camp about this kid not developing as expected and losing faith and such and such.
- verwustung

It's not bogus, insofar as it's something just made up to make trading him seem more palatable. They've been less than thrilled by him this season. I'm not sure exactly why.

Of course, it doesn't mean that they're right.

If the suggestion is that Lombardi doesn't quite deserve to be stuck holding the bag because many fans were also wrong, that's not much of a defense.
- Osprey

That's not what I'm saying at all. I am saying Lombardi exercised a reasonable patience, even though it may ultimately doom him.

As for deserving or not, I used the phrase "for better or for worse" for reason. I'll be unspooling my thoughts on Lombardi and company soon enough.

I can't help but feel that it's largely because Cernak is still "just" a defensive defenseman. They seem to want every defenseman in the organization to be a two-way defenseman or play defense by supporting the offense.
- Osprey

I don't think this is their reasoning. Forbort is very much a defensive defenseman, and in fact, the improvements in his game this season, according to LA, have been mostly defensive.

They kept Greene around this year. They traded for Schenn and Scuderi last season. I don't see any evidence that there's a prejudice against stay-at-home D within the organization.

They kept Greene around this year. They traded for Schenn and Scuderi last season. I don't see any evidence that there's a prejudice against stay-at-home D within the organization.
- Sheng Peng

you could argue those examples are blueprints to ship cernak off sooner rather than later!

If two of those three, perhaps even one of those three has a solid season, we're probably not talking about this.
- Sheng Peng

We're probably talking about Lombardi's performance because those players had poor seasons, but one or two of them had poor seasons most likely because of Lombardi's performance. If he'd gotten a suitable winger for Kopitar either during the Summer or after the Purcell experiment failed, Kopitar would've likely had a better season and both players would've possibly also elevated Gaborik's performance. Players are responsible for trying their best, but it's also the responsibility of the GM and coach to give them the opportunity and support to get the best out of them.

They kept Greene around this year. They traded for Schenn and Scuderi last season. I don't see any evidence that there's a prejudice against stay-at-home D within the organization.
- Sheng Peng

They kept Greene around because he's under contract and no one would dare take his contract after he missed an entire season. Regardless, I don't see how him being around proves that they value his style of play when he's been scratched so much and given leftover minutes when he has played. As for Schenn and Scuderi, that was over a year ago and neither was brought back or replaced. I'm talking about the methodology that went into this year's disastrous team.

They kept Greene around because he's under contract and no one would dare take his contract after he missed an entire season. Regardless, I don't see how him being around proves that they value his style of play when he's been scratched so much and given leftover minutes when he has played. As for Schenn and Scuderi, that was over a year ago and neither was brought back or replaced. I'm talking about the methodology that went into this year's disastrous team.
- Osprey

i wonder how things may have changed had the kings been able to trade for purcell/schultz at the deadline last year (, more because of the latter player. if schultz plays halfway decent in LA, he may get extended a contract, and now you have a right shot young mobile defenseman for the third pair, maybe second. granted perhaps that keeps someone like ladue or gravel from getting nhl minutes, but perhaps allows the focus to be less on breaking in more young d and more focus on breaking in more young fwds.

It's not bogus, insofar as it's something just made up to make trading him seem more palatable. They've been less than thrilled by him this season. I'm not sure exactly why.
-Sheng Peng

They have become complete morons thay's why. All the brilliant moves Lombardi has made, excluding bringing in Gaborik (definetly not the contract), have been during the Terry Murray years:
Williams
Richards
Mitchell
Stoll
Greene
Penner (more or less)
Carter
All guys that came in during the Murray years. It's been downhill from there..

I'm in no way qualified to be a GM or coach but how did I know so many of the Sutter years deals wouldn't work out? Sutter probably demands some things and Lombardi is like "yes sir: because he respects him so much.

I hope.Sutter is gone after this season so maybe Lombardi can find his brilliance again.[/img]

more info on Cernak

http://www.dobberprospects.com/erik-cernak/

They have become complete morons thay's why. All the brilliant moves Lombardi has made, excluding bringing in Gaborik (definetly not the contract), have been during the Terry Murray years:
Williams
Richards
Mitchell
Stoll
Greene
Penner (more or less)
Carter
All guys that came in during the Murray years. It's been downhill from there..

I'm in no way qualified to be a GM or coach but how did I know so many of the Sutter years deals wouldn't work out? Sutter probably demands some things and Lombardi is like "yes sir: because he respects him so much.
- verwustung

Carter was acquired while Sutter was coach (though while Sutter was only tweaking Murray's system and hadn't replaced it yet, so you might not count it as a true Sutter-influenced acquisition), but I do see the point that you're getting at. The team was most successful when Sutter used the players that he inherited. Once he'd been around a while and put his stamp on the team and Lombardi started going out to get players who he thought "fit" his system, things started slipping.

Come to think of it, remember what Flames fans said when the Kings hired Sutter? They raved about him as a coach, but warned never to let him GM, since he was awful in his stint as GM of the Flames. Well, he did great for the Kings when he was just coaching inherited players, but could it not be argued that, as time has gone on and Lombardi has re-sculpted the team to fit Sutter, that his influence on Lombardi's personnel decisions has made Sutter sort of a virtual co-GM at this point? Is the current team really much different than Sutter might've put together, himself, if he were Kings GM? Perhaps the organization didn't need to promote him for us to get a little taste of what Flames fans warned about.

Everything is fine. Keep it exactly the way it is.

Carter was acquired while Sutter was coach (though while Sutter was only tweaking Murray's system and hadn't replaced it yet, so you might not count it as a true Sutter-influenced acquisition), but I do see the point that you're getting at. The team was most successful when Sutter used the players that he inherited. Once he'd been around a while and put his stamp on the team and Lombardi started going out to get players who he thought "fit" his system, things started slipping.

Come to think of it, remember what Flames fans said when the Kings hired Sutter? They raved about him as a coach, but warned never to let him GM, since he was awful in his stint as GM of the Flames. Well, he did great for the Kings when he was just coaching inherited players, but could it not be argued that, as time has gone on and Lombardi has re-sculpted the team to fit Sutter, that his influence on Lombardi's personnel decisions has made Sutter sort of a virtual co-GM at this point? Is the current team really much different than Sutter might've put together, himself, if he were Kings GM? Perhaps the organization didn't need to promote him for us to get a little taste of what Flames fans warned about.
- Osprey

2 minutes to ga in the game; you"re down by 2, and who does he have out on the ice? Andreoff and Clifford. Seriously? I also really love when he has Shore out on thr ice with the goalie pulled? WTF is thia guy thinking? It makes me think that these are the kind of players he would genrally employ. I mean Kempe had a very good training camp but look what we got instead.

Everything is fine. Keep it exactly the way it is.
- yzermaneely

Duck trolls are back. HORRAY!!!!

4 percent chance ? so you say we got a chance

Fun fact: The Predators and Panthers both scored more goals tonight than the Kings have scored in their last 5 games combined.

Fun fact: Bishop was acquired to get wins in the remaining back-to-back games and in the 6 back-to-back games since the trade, the Kings have gotten... *drumroll*... 6 losses.

🍺🍻🍻🍺🍻🍺🍻🍺🍻🍻🍻🍻🍻🥂🍻🍻 here's to kings getting higher than 8th pick

4 percent chance ? so you say we got a chance
- rubberduckies

I would love to see the Ducks try and make the playoffs without a number 1 goalie. You act like the kings have iced a full team all season. It's laughable. Season was lost when when Quick went down

I would love to see the Ducks try and make the playoffs without a number 1 goalie. You act like the kings have iced a full team all season. It's laughable. Season was lost when when Quick went down
- KINGS67

Keep telling yourselves that. Budaj had better stats than you give him credit for. You were in the thick of the playoff race when Quick came back. Quit blaming it on the fact you were missing him. Maybe you should look at the teams total inability to score any goals as the main reason they'll be sitting home after April 9. Instead of trading for Bishop, maybe a more prudent move would have been to get a scorer. Imagine Eaves on your team instead of on the Ducks. It's no accident the Ducks improved once he joined the team.

As one of your posters said, if the Kings were totally dependent on one player (Quick), then this team isn't very good to begin with. The Ducks have been without their #1 goalie for almost a month now, and they haven't missed a beat. Missing Quick was not your main problem. Maybe, just maybe, throwing Budaj away after he kept your team in the playoff race was one huge mistake. Ironic that the team has cratered with Quick back and Budaj gone.

For all those who don't follow Kings hockey, Sutter hated Budaj and likely forced the trade. Then again, Sutter will scapegoat anyone he wants for losses and Budaj was his main man. When Quick came back he likely forced Lombardi's hand into getting rid of his scapegoat possibly beleiving foolishly that 2-1 losses will suddenly become 1-0 wins every night. Of coarse it's not like the farmer is without scapegoats. He has now turned towards rookies and inexperienced players to put blame upon. Fire the farmer and to all a good night.

Keep telling yourselves that. Budaj had better stats than you give him credit for. You were in the thick of the playoff race when Quick came back. Quit blaming it on the fact you were missing him. Maybe you should look at the teams total inability to score any goals as the main reason they'll be sitting home after April 9. Instead of trading for Bishop, maybe a more prudent move would have been to get a scorer. Imagine Eaves on your team instead of on the Ducks. It's no accident the Ducks improved once he joined the team.

As one of your posters said, if the Kings were totally dependent on one player (Quick), then this team isn't very good to begin with. The Ducks have been without their #1 goalie for almost a month now, and they haven't missed a beat. Missing Quick was not your main problem. Maybe, just maybe, throwing Budaj away after he kept your team in the playoff race was one huge mistake. Ironic that the team has cratered with Quick back and Budaj gone.
- quackup

spot on, goaltending wasn't the problem. scoring continues to be.

For all those who don't follow Kings hockey, Sutter hated Budaj and likely forced the trade. Then again, Sutter will scapegoat anyone he wants for losses and Budaj was his main man. When Quick came back he likely forced Lombardi's hand into getting rid of his scapegoat possibly beleiving foolishly that 2-1 losses will suddenly become 1-0 wins every night. Of coarse it's not like the farmer is without scapegoats. He has now turned towards rookies and inexperienced players to put blame upon. Fire the farmer and to all a good night.
- verwustung

Where did you get he hated Budaj?

Where did you get he hated Budaj?
- LAkings96

Most of his posts are angry blather. He hates Sutter for bringing us two Cups!