Fire Todd Mclellan

BigKing

Blake Out of Hell III: Back in to Hell
Mar 11, 2003
11,401
11,596
Belmont Shore, CA
google.com
To be fair, I did wonder if he would pull him because it was getting embarrassing.

On the other hand, it is disrespectful to put any goalie out there behind this defense before the puck even drops so what are you going to do?

Quick is going to put up a few more six spots this season. Campbell as well.
 

crassbonanza

Fire Luc
Sep 28, 2017
3,264
3,137
On the other hand, it is disrespectful to put any goalie out there behind this defense before the puck even drops so what are you going to do?

The Kings are actually middle of the pack when it comes to SCA/60 and HDCA/60 and they are allowing the 3rd fewest SA/60. I don't think the defense is all to blame here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DoktorJeep

BigKing

Blake Out of Hell III: Back in to Hell
Mar 11, 2003
11,401
11,596
Belmont Shore, CA
google.com
The Kings are actually middle of the pack when it comes to SCA/60 and HDCA/60 and they are allowing the 3rd fewest SA/60. I don't think the defense is all to blame here.

Yeah. Quick has been bad. Not blaming it all on them but I would not be surprised to see all Kings goaltenders this year carry a 3+ GAA. If Campbell puts up similar numbers to last year, it will be quite the season.
 

crassbonanza

Fire Luc
Sep 28, 2017
3,264
3,137
Yeah. Quick has been bad. Not blaming it all on them but I would not be surprised to see all Kings goaltenders this year carry a 3+ GAA. If Campbell puts up similar numbers to last year, it will be quite the season.

Not that expected goals are a perfect stat(I have issues with the way they value wraparounds similar to shots from the slot, like all of the fancy stats it leaves a lot to be desired), but the Kings even strength expected goals against is 5.15, meanwhile the Kings have given up 12 even strength goals. I don't think the defense has been all that bad outside of some very noticeable gaffs. However, I do agree that both goalies will likely have 3+ GAA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DoktorJeep

Chazz Reinhold

Registered User
Sep 6, 2005
9,022
2,680
The Stanley Cup
Not that expected goals are a perfect stat(I have issues with the way they value wraparounds similar to shots from the slot, like all of the fancy stats it leaves a lot to be desired), but the Kings even strength expected goals against is 5.15, meanwhile the Kings have given up 12 even strength goals. I don't think the defense has been all that bad outside of some very noticeable gaffs. However, I do agree that both goalies will likely have 3+ GAA.

It will be very interesting to see where these numbers start to settle in once the sample size gets larger (the scoring chance against numbers, that is). If they’re still that good, I don’t see the Kings being a basement team.
 

crassbonanza

Fire Luc
Sep 28, 2017
3,264
3,137
It will be very interesting to see where these numbers start to settle in once the sample size gets larger (the scoring chance against numbers, that is). If they’re still that good, I don’t see the Kings being a basement team.

Yeah, the shocking stat for me is that the Kings lead the league in SF%. Very impressive in my opinion, it likely will stabilize, but this is a promising start for the underlying stats.
 

The Butcher

Mammoth Mooseknuckles Hockey
Sponsor
Mar 6, 2011
4,173
2,327
Mammoth Lakes
Blake isn't experienced enough to know and understand how to get out of this jam

he's clearly shown that he will never get a "Rob (the Magician) Blake" type of nickname because he's average, he's one of us folk that look at the roster and go hide under the bed in fear

that's all, he's an average man that once played professional hockey and now is administering a team like an average person would

yes, he is Robert Bowlby "the Human" Blake

plan? wait and draft players

bravo, i think i can wait and draft players too, hire me!

(and yes this rant about Blake includes his coaching decisions - read between the lines ya big dummmyy!!)
I'm no fan of Blake but this is nonsense.

The guy has been in the front office for 7 years, he's a hall of fame player with 30 years in the NHL and groomed by the man who brought us 2 Stanley Cups. He's far more knowledgeable about building hockey teams than myself, yourself, and anyone else posting on HFBoards.

I still hold some resentment for the times Blake turned his back on us but to paint him as an average man is absurd.
 

Ryan120420

Registered User
Dec 2, 2010
961
1,136
The reason Quick was left in the game was because Campbell played the night before. I think if this wasn't the 2nd game of back-to-backs then Campbell would have been put in the game.

Since when has a back to back ever stopped a coach from pulling a goalie who was sucking?


There is no excuse as to why Campbell couldn't have played the 3rd period. None.


Its quite clear that Quick is done as an NHL goalie, what good dose it do to have our prospect (s) on the bench not getting ice time? What T-mac did to Quick last night was boardline cruel and send the message that if you are sucking, veteran player or rookie, the coach will leave you out to twist in the wind and embarrass yourself.
 

No Name The Nameless

Registered User
Feb 15, 2019
1,337
1,124
Tornado Alley
Since when has a back to back ever stopped a coach from pulling a goalie who was sucking?


There is no excuse as to why Campbell couldn't have played the 3rd period. None.


Its quite clear that Quick is done as an NHL goalie, what good dose it do to have our prospect (s) on the bench not getting ice time? What T-mac did to Quick last night was boardline cruel and send the message that if you are sucking, veteran player or rookie, the coach will leave you out to twist in the wind and embarrass yourself.

He should have fed him orange wedges and Capri Suns. Cruel? Come on. Quick is an adult, not a child.
 

riznat

Registered User
Sponsor
Nov 19, 2005
2,981
1,582
Lake Tahoe
Since when has a back to back ever stopped a coach from pulling a goalie who was sucking?


There is no excuse as to why Campbell couldn't have played the 3rd period. None.


Its quite clear that Quick is done as an NHL goalie, what good dose it do to have our prospect (s) on the bench not getting ice time? What T-mac did to Quick last night was boardline cruel and send the message that if you are sucking, veteran player or rookie, the coach will leave you out to twist in the wind and embarrass yourself.
Grow up
 

Raccoon Jesus

Todd McLellan is an inside agent
Oct 30, 2008
61,794
61,730
I.E.
So we can count on all this hot takery for Campbell too, right?

Sample size says no, given when he was stinking up the preseason all the usual suspects disappeared, and no one seemed to mind when he nearly shat the bed vs. Calgary too, a night-and-day difference in play in the games Quick and Campbell have played in from a game flow perspective.

The venom this board has for Quick while they ignore other issues is borderline insane. The uneven criticism is disgusting.
 

Bandit

Registered User
Jul 23, 2005
32,597
22,485
Unemployed in Greenland
So we can count on all this hot takery for Campbell too, right?

Sample size says no, given when he was stinking up the preseason all the usual suspects disappeared, and no one seemed to mind when he nearly shat the bed vs. Calgary too, a night-and-day difference in play in the games Quick and Campbell have played in from a game flow perspective.

The venom this board has for Quick while they ignore other issues is borderline insane. The uneven criticism is disgusting.
Insanity is the mother of all f***ers.
 

Statto

Registered User
Sponsor
May 9, 2014
4,959
6,756
To be fair, I did wonder if he would pull him because it was getting embarrassing.

On the other hand, it is disrespectful to put any goalie out there behind this defense before the puck even drops so what are you going to do?

Quick is going to put up a few more six spots this season. Campbell as well.
I seriously doubt Quick has ever wanted to be pulled.

In other news now that it’s clearly not ironic this could be one of the dumbest threads I’ve ever seen in this board.

I mean we probably should fire TM for not having 10 points in the standings. I’m not having any excuses about only having played 3 games, he should have found a way.
 

lumbergh

It was an idea. I didn't say it was a good idea.
Jan 8, 2007
6,284
5,529
Richmond, VA
I seriously doubt Quick has ever wanted to be pulled.

In other news now that it’s clearly not ironic this could be one of the dumbest threads I’ve ever seen in this board.

I mean we probably should fire TM for not having 10 points in the standings. I’m not having any excuses about only having played 3 games, he should have found a way.
Someone please close this stupid thread. Trolled.
 

Lt Dan

F*** your ice cream!
Sep 13, 2018
10,925
17,717
Bayou La Batre
youtu.be
Since when has a back to back ever stopped a coach from pulling a goalie who was sucking?
Plenty of times


There is no excuse as to why Campbell couldn't have played the 3rd period. None.
Sure there was. What if Campbell played the third and pulled a groin because his groin was already sore from the night before?

Its quite clear that Quick is done as an NHL goalie, what good dose it do to have our prospect (s) on the bench not getting ice time?
Which prospect is that? Campbell? The Campbell that is 27 years old?
our goalie prospect is the number 1 in Ontario developing instead of getting shelled

What T-mac did to Quick last night was boardline cruel and send the message that if you are sucking, veteran player or rookie, the coach will leave you out to twist in the wind and embarrass yourself.
The puck gets past every other player on to the ice before the player even has a chance to shoot. Did you ever stop to think for a second that T-Mac was letting the team feel what it is like to be crushed after winning a close emotional game the night before to help get them focused on how much improvement that they all really need?
Even if Campbell did play the third and you are willing to risk injury, do you really think for a second that the team would rally around him and win the game?
The answer is "No"
 
Jul 31, 2005
8,839
1,485
CA
Imagine being the owner of the Kings, writing a 5 year check for a new coach then firing him after 3 games?
 

bland

Registered User
Jul 1, 2004
7,262
10,334
4 of the goals Quick allowed were in the last 13 minutes of the game. Its not a case of giving up a bunch early on, which is when you try to save the game or embarrass the skaters. There is no teaching moment there, just ride the last few minutes out.
 
Jul 31, 2005
8,839
1,485
CA
According to the internet Quick's net worth is between 1 and 5 million so I wouldn't expect him to retire. He is a reaction goalie whose reaction times have slowed. He needs to go back to the drawing board, re-invent his game, play farther back in his net. Didn't Potvin go through the same scenario?
 

Vamos Rafa

Registered User
Jan 11, 2010
18,366
1,533
Armenia, California
I am sure having a lower level AHL defense has nothing to do with our goals against.


No more excuses for Quick. He's not what he used to be. No defense can help him become a starting goalie quality again. And no one should be surprised considering his style of play. It was meant to age horribly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YP44

YP44

Registered User
Jan 30, 2012
27,075
7,432
Calgary, AB
No more excuses for Quick. He's not what he used to be. No defense can help him become a starting goalie quality again. And no one should be surprised considering his style of play. It was meant to age horribly.

I agree but my desire to prove the naysayers from other fan bases wrong is overwhelming my sense of logic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LAKings88

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad