Willie Desjardins out in L.A

[Sol]

In a span of 2 years, the Kings have gone through 3 different coaches, and are about to get their 4th. Incredible that some King's fans are still blaming coaching after how awful their star players (Kopitar, Doughty, Carter, Quick) have been since the start of the season. Can't blame Willie D. for that.

I can't believe they are actually thinking of McLellen.

3 coaches of the same archetype. While I hold the players accountable, a huge issue was that when they fired Sutter after losing the room, they didn't fire Stevens who was under Sutter, so it was pathetic to even promote Stevens when the Kings had seen him for an eternity already.

Then they go hire WD who didn't even spread ice time. WD was the same archetype of Sutter and Stevens so it's a bit disingenuous to make the connection that the coaches aren't a big problem. It's the shitty hires.

 

[Mats26]

Regardless of who they hire now, this will be Blake's last attempt to hire a coach for this team.

 

[KingsHockey24]

 

[Debrincat93]

why in any world they thought Desjardins would be a practical choice to finish the year is mind-blowing. I agree with another poster, this is probably Blake's last chance at fixing this mess. IMO, McLellan from an outsider POV would be my choice, he'll had stability and knows the west real well. You need to make the right hire IMO.

 

[theMajor]

why in any world they thought Desjardins would be a practical choice to finish the year is mind-blowing. I agree with another poster, this is probably Blake's last chance at fixing this mess. IMO, McLellan from an outsider POV would be my choice, he'll had stability and knows the west real well. You need to make the right hire IMO.

to secure the tank? nothing else makes sense. he's one of the worst coaches in the league and his record is proof. dude sucks. if Blake actually believed in Willie then I dont believe he will last much longer as GM

 

[Osprey]

Desjardins was a straight up tank move. If not, you got to be a little worried about who's making the decisions.

That's what's scary. It's fun to joke about hiring Desjardins being a tank move, but the reality is that it wasn't one. It was only November 4th (and the Kings had "only" a 4-8-1 record) when Stevens was fired and Desjardins was brought in. There was still time to turn the season around. The Kings know that as well as anyone, since they didn't change coaches until around Christmas in 2011 and then made the playoffs and won the Cup.

On top of that, recall that it was after hiring Desjardins that Blake swapped Pearson for Hagelin (in order to shake up the room) and claimed seemingly every other player that crossed the waiver wire. Blake hadn't even given up on the season by early December, since he claimed Scherbak and Leipsic on December 2nd and 3rd. I don't think that he claimed anyone else after that, so you can probably pinpoint the middle of December (just when it became clear that those two additions weren't going to save them) as the earliest point that Blake gave up on the season.

Anyways, the point is that, when he hired Desjardins, Blake was still hoping to turn the season around and make the playoffs. The majority of fans and onlookers knew that the team's problems ran much deeper than coaching and that Desjardins wasn't a coach that could save the season, but Blake apparently thought otherwise. It's troublesome, to say the least, that the man running the team has notions about how good it is and how to turn it around that not even the fans believe.

 

[rajuabju]

Anyways, the point is that, when he hired Desjardins, Blake was still hoping to turn the season around and make the playoffs. The majority of fans and onlookers knew that the team's problems ran much deeper than coaching and that Desjardins wasn't a coach that could save the season, but Blake apparently thought otherwise. It's troublesome, to say the least, that the man running the team has notions about how good it is and how to turn it around that not even the fans believe.

I disagree with this. I believe Blake knew/understood very early on that the season was lost with no hope to turn it around. Thats (a) why be brought on WD... specifically to tank instead of seeking better alternatives [the "betterness" and availability of such alternatives could be debatable] and (b) Why Willie was always designated as an "interim" head coach. I think everyone in the Kings organization, including the players, understood WD was not coming back in 2019-2020, and the goal [even if never publicly stated for obvious reasons such as trying to sell tickets] was to continue to the tank and obtain drafting position.

I do agree with fan sentiment that the next hire better work out, or Blake and/or Luc could be gone.

 

[Osprey]

I disagree with this. I believe Blake knew/understood very early on that the season was lost with no hope to turn it around. Thats (a) why be brought on WD... specifically to tank instead of seeking better alternatives [the "betterness" and availability of such alternatives could be debatable] and (b) Why Willie was always designated as an "interim" head coach. I think everyone in the Kings organization, including the players, understood WD was not coming back in 2019-2020, and the goal [even if never publicly stated for obvious reasons such as trying to sell tickets] was to continue to the tank and obtain drafting position.

As I pointed out, the Kings were only 4-8-1 at the time. I don't understand how anyone could feel that the season was lost at that point, much less the person who was so confident in the team that his only Summer move was adding a 35 year old. GMs just don't bring in coaches to tank, especially not in early November. Respectfully, I think that that's a fan fantasy, much like the notion that teams or individual players tank. Can you imagine if it got out that a GM knowingly picked a coach to fail? He'd lose the respect of the hockey community, and I think that that's something that Blake, especially, cares about.

I believe that the simple reason that Blake hired a bad coach is that those are the only kind without a job on November 4th. The pickings were very slim. Desjardins likely would not have been Blake's first, second or third choice for the job, ordinarily, and I think that that's why he was given only the "interim" title. I'm criticizing Blake for many of his decisions, but at least he had the good sense to not commit himself to Desjardins, so that he could (if Willie didn't work out) conduct a proper search at the end of the season, when the available candidates are much better.

One more point that I'll throw in is that you don't sell low on a player like Pearson, and especially in exchange for a UFA to be, if you've lost hope for the season. You do that only when you're desperate to shake things up. It, otherwise, would've been much smarter to see if he would've rebounded and netted a higher return at the deadline or even just see if he has a better season next year. As far as I'm concerned, selling low on Pearson strongly suggests that Blake was still trying (desperately) to salvage the season at that point (and, for the record, that trade occurred 10 days after the coaching change).

 

[BigKing]

As I pointed out, the Kings were only 4-8-1 at the time. I don't understand how anyone could feel that the season was lost at that point, much less the person who was so confident in the team that his only Summer move was adding a 35 year old. GMs just don't bring in coaches to tank, especially not in early November. Respectfully, I think that that's a fan fantasy, much like the notion that teams or individual players tank. Can you imagine if it got out that a GM knowingly picked a coach to fail? He'd lose the respect of the hockey community, and I think that that's something that Blake, especially, cares about.

I believe that the simple reason that Blake hired a bad coach is that those are the only kind without a job on November 4th. The pickings were very slim. Desjardins likely would not have been Blake's first, second or third choice for the job, ordinarily, and I think that that's why he was given only the "interim" title. I'm criticizing Blake for many of his decisions, but at least he had the good sense to not commit himself to Desjardins, so that he could (if Willie didn't work out) conduct a proper search at the end of the season, when the available candidates are much better.

One more point that I'll throw in is that you don't sell low on a player like Pearson, and especially in exchange for a UFA to be, if you've lost hope for the season. You do that only when you're desperate to shake things up. It, otherwise, would've been much smarter to see if he would've rebounded and neted a higher return at the deadline or even just see if he has a better season next year. As far as I'm concerned, selling low on Pearson strongly suggests that Blake was still trying to salvage the season at that point (and, for the record, that trade occurred 10 days after the coaching change).

He definitely traded for Hagelin because he thought Hagelin would be useful but also because he could still flip him at the deadline.

Agree that it was both a shake up the room and a hockey move. If he is giving up at that point, you see if you can move him for a pick or you just keep him until the deadline.

Stevens doesn't get fired if Blake has already quit: you'd just let him finish the season. If they were so bad under Stevens and you decide you want to tank, just keep Stevens.

 

[Osprey]

Stevens doesn't get fired if Blake has already quit: you'd just let him finish the season. If they were so bad under Stevens and you decide you want to tank, just keep Stevens.

That's a great point that's so obvious that I feel dumb that it didn't occur to me. If you've lost all hope for the season and have decided that you're going to tank the rest of it, why would you fire the coach that delivered the bad results that caused you to lose all hope? What better man for a tank job is there than the one that's already lost the room and put your team in last place?

 

[BigKing]

That's a great point that's so obvious that I feel dumb that it didn't occur to me. If you've lost all hope for the season and have decided that you're going to tank the rest of it, why would you fire the coach that delivered the bad results that caused you to lose all hope? What better man for a tank job is there than the one that's already lost the room and put your team in last place?

I assume only for the optics of it? Fans and media start foaming at the mouth about doing something: always seems like firing the coach is the easiest move before moving players. Everyone would assume Blake has given up if he doesn't fire him?

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

I can see Vigneault ending up in LA if not McLellan.

 

[kingsfan28]

He definitely traded for Hagelin because he thought Hagelin would be useful but also because he could still flip him at the deadline.

Agree that it was both a shake up the room and a hockey move. If he is giving up at that point, you see if you can move him for a pick or you just keep him until the deadline.

Stevens doesn't get fired if Blake has already quit: you'd just let him finish the season. If they were so bad under Stevens and you decide you want to tank, just keep Stevens.

I think Blake, like many of us, saw problems all the way back into training camp. It was disorganized, sloppy, unfocused. It carried over into the preseason straight into the season and never stopped. Steven was the guy running things and had to go because of the poor work habits. Blake legitimately tried to save the season bring in a new voice, and hoped WD was it. He wasn't and turned out, in my eyes, the biggest nhl coaching fraud to ever be behind the bench. Who rolls 4 lines in OT? He did this 5 times and the 4th line got burned in 3 of them.

 

[Debrincat93]

to secure the tank? nothing else makes sense. he's one of the worst coaches in the league and his record is proof. dude sucks. if Blake actually believed in Willie then I dont believe he will last much longer as GM

yea, he would jeopardize his own job by tanking.
not buying it.

 

[King In The North]

I think Blake, like many of us, saw problems all the way back into training camp. It was disorganized, sloppy, unfocused. It carried over into the preseason straight into the season and never stopped. Steven was the guy running things and had to go because of the poor work habits. Blake legitimately tried to save the season bring in a new voice, and hoped WD was it. He wasn't and turned out, in my eyes, the biggest nhl coaching fraud to ever be behind the bench. Who rolls 4 lines in OT? He did this 5 times and the 4th line got burned in 3 of them.

Oh man, I had no idea he did this.

 

[ES]

When he was hired the comments made to think Sturm was going to be head coach at some point and I felt that Desjardins was just covering him from the critics coaches get.

 

[Ollie Weeks]

He was such a good tank commander his nickname should have been Monty.
.

Also, they both sucked.