Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's true PDF: 90% of the time when a coach/GM gets fired you have to replace the other since they go hand-in-hand. It's unfortunate, but that's the nature of the business. Like I said yesterday I just hope he doesn't land in the Western Conference.
Take for example leaving Sutter until December or January but firing Lombardi like both me & runningliketheives wanted to happen. Rob Blake who is going to be the new GM (who usually makes the coaching hires) might have the coach he wants running the team that is available. If you wait, and keep the coach then you have a lame duck coach who the GM may or may not want, and you have a new GM who's career starts off on the wrong foot because he had a coach(es) that he wanted for the vacancy, that are available in April, but because AEG (ownership) wanted to keep the current coach on board for 1 more year, those coaches are no longer available so now all of a sudden the GM is unhappy with the direction, and that usually spells disaster.
VERY happy with Lombardi's dismissal. I'm okay with moving on from Sutter, just because maybe it's time to move on. I don't think it's an indictment as him on a coach and I think he'll find work this offseason, if he so chooses to continue coaching. During a regime change, new management usually picks their new coach and that's what happened here. Deano will possibly find work this offseason too, if not next. I'm surprised the jackass up in Winnipeg has not been removed yet. I'm hoping the Islanders keep Garth as long as possible, as he's an AWFUL, AWFUL, general manager and I'd take them a little more seriously without a clown like Garth in charge of hockey operations there. Oddly enough, I remember Lombardi being a real candidate for the Islanders GM job back in the Spring of 2006, but he got snagged by the Kings before Millbury was ousted.
Dean did a HOF caliber job for the first 8 years, then ****ed up in the last 3 years. He's still an HOF builder IMO and would be good if he started elsewhere fresh. It was just time to go. I read an Elliotte Friedman column that he was interested in retaining Ben Bishop if he hadn't been fired? WHY?! So Bishop can be a backup?? You think he even wants that? And do they have the cap space for Bishop? That's more Lou Lamoriello dinosaur (Lou lost it in the end with the Devils and was rightfully removed) thinking. How about some ****ing goal scorers? As soon as I read that, I said Praise god!
Anyway, I don't care much for the promotion of Blake as a GM. Didn't we learn anything from Colorado and Vancouver? Having their former star players in big management positions? I'll wait to see how it goes first....
I'll be the first to say it...bad move giving John Stevens the head coaching job. But we'll see how it plays out.
Yeah, I'd like a clean sweep of that staff, especially if Sutter and Payne are out. I remember thinking Stevens was a clown when he coached for Philly in the late 00's.
Not sure if there's other coaches out there with NHL head coaching experience, who are any good. I don't think Lindy Ruff is anything special like his resume would suggest, and Dan Bylsma is terrible and should be kept far away.
They started off the season pretty hot and seemed to have hit a lull once the calendar flipped to 2018. Not even currently in a playoff position anymore. Hopefully this All Star Break this weekend recharges them for the final 20 or so game stretch run.
Alright: Time for the annual "who would you rather play in the playoffs" question. Barring something completely unforeseen they will be back in the playoffs after a 1 year absence. They aren't winning the division as the Golden Knights if they haven't clinched it officially will be the Pacific division winner and probably aren't catching the Sharks for 2nd place meaning they will be road warriors in the playoffs. Which leaves them 3 spots they can end up: Wildcard #1, Wildcard #2, or pacific division #3. Wildcard #1 will end up playing the VGK, Wildcard #2 will end up playing the Preds and Pacific #3 will probably end up playing the Sharks. Normally I'd say bring on the Sharks, the perennial choke artist, but the last time they played the Sharks in the playoffs (16) they took the Kings behind the woodshed, gave them a good ole-fashioned ass kicking and completely embarrassed them. Plus, with the head coach and culture change the last 3 years or so in San Jose they aren't an easy out like they used to be, so I'll pass on them. I want no part of Wildcard #2 and the Preds. It's debatable who's the best in hockey between them (the Preds), the Bruins and the Lightning as it seems like it's changed weekly, but what's not debatable however is to avoid playing them till as late as possible which in their case is the Western Conference Finals, so I'll pass on them to. So that leaves WC #1 and the VGK by default. Don't get me wrong the Golden Knights have had a great year, but this is still an expansion franchise who's roster consists either of: players teams didn't want anymore and discarded to the curb with the other trash or rookies and other younger players with minimal NHL experience. Fleury is a 3 time Stanley Cup winner (and back-to-back Cup winner) but he barely played in the playoffs last year, and when he did play he wasn't that effective. James Neal played in the finals with the Preds last year and while a great player doesn't scare you like a Sidney Crosby or Evgeni Malkin or Steven Stamkos does. I don't see the Kings getting intimindated by the VGK, and the Knights could feel some pressure while the Kings would have none. Of the 3 that's who I'd take as my playoff opponent for the Kings. Will I purposely root against them to end up as the Wildcard #1?? Hell no, but if that's where they end up I wouldn't be too disappointed. Of course I said the same thing back in 2016 where I wanted the Kings to finish 2nd in the division and play the Preds in the first round than win the division and play the Sharks while PDF wanted the opposite (Kings win division and play the Preds) and we all know how that turned out, so take it for what's it worth.
BTW, if the Sharks end up falling out of 2nd, give me the matchup with the Ducks in the Pacific 2/3 game. When's the last time this core group of Ducks players won an important game, or hell beat the Kings in an important game??
Welp, looks like I'm about to bite my tongue again. Three 1 goal games, all 3 wins by the Golden Knights. Hopefully they can get one tonight but if a team can come back from down 0-3 it's definitely the Kings.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
