Sheng Peng: Stevens Hired; Get to Know Oscar Fantenberg Stevens takes over for Sutter; KHL sources on Fantenberg's NHL ceiling + video highlights

Stevens is a good coach.

I think that hiring Stevens is a mistake. As I said last week, the players are too comfortable with him. When you feel too secure in your status with authority figures and you've heard everything that they could ever say before, you start to tune them out. That's what happened with Sutter. They learned and heard everything that they could from him and tuned him out.

They may listen to Stevens for a time, but they've learned and heard just about everything from him, as well, so it's just a matter of time before he's next to be tuned out. Even if they don't, I don't see Stevens as the answer for meeting the expectations that the organization has. He may be a good coach, but he's been with the team too long to motivate it and get the results expected of it, IMO. I'm afraid that Blake will end up having wasted the last few years of this core's prime and, by the time that he fires Stevens and brings in the needed fresh voice, it'll be a little too late.

I think it's the right move. It's obvious the Kings will continue with the possesion game, Stevens know that game. He's been here from day 1 implementing this style. The key here is getting the right assistant coaches that can right the offense and power play.

I think players tune out coaches when they don't believe in the message. Stevens has been a messenger of the message but, not the writer of it. That is a difference, and a big one. The room doesn't need an entirely new message from a coach that has not been there with them through the system philosphy. Since the management is gung ho on keeping the system core in place, Stevens is the logical choice. Again, the key will be the asst. coaches.

See puckhog's comment.

I think it's the right move. It's obvious the Kings will continue with the possesion game, Stevens know that game. He's been here from day 1 implementing this style. The key here is getting the right assistant coaches that can right the offense and power play.

I think players tune out coaches when they don't believe in the message. Stevens has been a messenger of the message but, not the writer of it. That is a difference, and a big one. The room doesn't need an entirely new message from a coach that has not been there with them through the system philosphy. Since the management is gung ho on keeping the system core in place, Stevens is the logical choice. Again, the key will be the asst. coaches.
- puckhog

If Stevens couldn't right the team as an assistant coach because he was just the messenger, not the writer of the message, how are the new messengers expected to? That doesn't seem terribly logical to me. Either the assistants should be expected to make a difference (which begs the question of why Stevens didn't these last three years) or they shouldn't be expected to make a difference (in which case, the assistants really aren't key; the head coach is).

I think that hiring Stevens is a mistake. As I said last week, the players are too comfortable with him. When you feel too secure in your status with authority figures and you've heard everything that they could ever say before, you start to tune them out.
- Osprey

You may prove to be right, but Blake, being closer to the locker room, should know whether or not Stevens's message will resonate or fall on deaf ears.

I am surprised LA didn't expand the search at all, just to hear what ideas other candidates have to keep defensive structure/add offense. Would've thought Bylsma would at least be a candidate, given his credentials and relationship with Blake. But maybe Stevens's thoughts really were in line with Blake's? And/or they were worried they'd lose Stevens if they looked around?

If Stevens couldn't right the team as an assistant coach because he was just the messenger, not the writer of the message, how are the new messengers expected to?
- Osprey

As far as I understand it, Stevens executed Sutter's gameplan. That was his job. He might have offered his own suggestions to Sutter to fix this and that, and might've been shot down. I'm sure Blake didn't hire Stevens to continue to execute Sutter's gameplan.

It's obvious the Kings will continue with the possesion game, Stevens know that game. He's been here from day 1 implementing this style. The key here is getting the right assistant coaches that can right the offense and power play.
- puckhog

Especially the power play. If Payne really was a problem, as some have surmised, squeezing some more goals out of the PP is one way to increase offense without compromising the defense in the least.

Just guessing, but I also expect some tinkering with the 5v5 game and a reduced possession dominance. Less Clifford flinging the puck from the point, trying to wear down opposition, that kind of stuff. Not to say possession won't matter, it'll probably still be the focus, but there'll be more freedom and emphasis to create around high-danger shooting areas (which can also mean losing the puck and not establishing zone time). In theory, there will be more creative players, more players you might trust to "look for a play."

If Stevens cN change the 1 sided defensive minded game into a more offensive structure I'm ok with it but if it's the same philosophies as Sutter I am definitely not ok with it.


Even though he worked under Sutter I believe he may have had a different solution to the scoring than what Sutter had all year long and never changed.

still concerned about power play

still concerned about contracts

still concerned about playing favorites to waning talent

still concerned about not slotting kids in top positions

Especially the power play. If Payne really was a problem, as some have surmised, squeezing some more goals out of the PP is one way to increase offense without compromising the defense in the least.

Just guessing, but I also expect some tinkering with the 5v5 game and a reduced possession dominance. Less Clifford flinging the puck from the point, trying to wear down opposition, that kind of stuff. Not to say possession won't matter, it'll probably still be the focus, but there'll be more freedom and emphasis to create around high-danger shooting areas (which can also mean losing the puck and not establishing zone time). In theory, there will be more creative players, more players you might trust to "look for a play."
- Sheng Peng

Yes, I truly believe the possession game will still be a big part. If you look at the current games in the playoffs, you can really see how lousy some (if not all) teams are at keeping the puck in the offensive zone and retrieve it in the defensive zone. That's kings current identity and they are really good at it. What's always been lacking is the freedom of creativity. Their game plan became very easy to counter and I blame that on Sutter. The hope here is that Stevens will open up the creativity chest a bit and let the players take a chance. Yes, you probably have to ease up on the possession game a little to be more creative, and I think that is what thy're going for.

Remember when Richards came in? He was very creative in his approach...took about 10 games and then that was gone. That's what we need more of.

Hmmm...Mike Kitchen was let go by the Hawks...wonder if Blake is making a call?

You can play a possession game without carrying over a Sutter-esque defensive system. Nashville does. It shouldn't have been a binary choice between "continue possession dominance by hiring Stevens" or "abandon possession dominance by hiring someone else."

As for creativity, I have doubts that Stevens, a former defenseman with a career high of 20 points (in the AHL) and who coaches defensemen, is the best man for that. He may want to encourage creativity by funneling it through the defense, which isn't much different than what they were already doing.

You may prove to be right, but Blake, being closer to the locker room, should know whether or not Stevens's message will resonate or fall on deaf ears.
- Sheng Peng

Blake can know whether they like Stevens and are receptive to having him as coach, and I'm sure that he got affirmative responses from some of the team leaders, but that doesn't mean much, IMO. From all accounts, the players really liked Terry Murray, too, but that wasn't enough for him to get the most out of the team, especially that '11-'12 team.

time to hunt the puck

time to hunt the puck
- Just5

And time for cake!