Lombardi Evaluation Evaluation
by Quisp on May 11, 2011 12:37 AM PDT
in Too Much Free Time
Email
PrintEvaluation: Dean Lombardi " LA Kings Insider
The good: In terms of drafting the development of young players, Lombardi’s tenure has been a success. He has brought in players such as Drew Doughty, Alec Martinez, Jonathan Bernier, Kyle Clifford, Trevor Lewis and Oscar Moller, as well as developing players such as Anze Kopitar and Jonathan Quick (picks made late in the Dave Taylor era) and Jack Johnson.
Lombardi traded for Johnson,
I don't know why Wayne Simmonds is left off the list of players Lombardi has "brought in." He's also done remarkably well with non-1st round picks; in addition to Moller and Simmonds (both 2nd round), there's Voynov (2nd round), Loktionov (5th round), Maxim Kitsyn (7th round), Linden Vey (4th) and Tyler Toffoli (2nd). Yes, I know those prospects have not graduated to the NHL and anything is possible, I also know that having so many potential steals in later rounds is unusual.
In essence, Lombardi is doing exactly what he said he would, rebuild the team from the back end first. The Kings’ goaltending and defense is fully constructed and would appear to be in strong shape for years to come, and players such as Brayden Schenn and Andrei Loktionov appear ready to boost the forward ranks.
Another thing deserves mention, I think, and that's the number of undrafted UFA signings Lombardi has made. Martin Jones, Jake Muzzin, Peter Harrold, Davis Drewiske, Kevin Westgarth -- those last three guys being pretty useful pieces -- and two other excellent undrafted UFAs Lombardi signed, Teddy Purcell and Matt Moulson. (Don't get me started...)
The bad: Over the past five years, Lombardi has done little to change the "book" on him, that he’s great at drafting and developing but shaky in terms of trades and free agents. To be certain, acquisitions such as Justin Williams, Michal Handzus, Willie Mitchell, Rob Scuderi and Matt Greene have proven to be solid. So are Jarret Stoll and Ryan Smyth, but they’re also being paid a large amount of money for secondary roles.
Ryan Smyth cost us a little more than $3MM a year, because we gave them Tom Preissing. By the way, I just realized that Preissing's contract is done only now. We would still be paying that guy.
Anyway, my point is that the Smyth overpayment is actually underpayment. But, to be fair, you then have to mention the Preissing signing as one of the big busts, along with Nagy, and the Cloutier trade.
[...] Then there’s Dustin Penner. Unless Penner turns things around next season, the most significant trade of the Lombardi era is going to go down as a flop.
Here's how I would rank Lombardi's most significant trades:
- Tim Gleason and Eric Belanger for Jack Johnson.
- Lubomir Visnovsky for Jarret Stoll and Matt Greene.
- Patrick O'Sullivan and a 2nd for Justin Williams.
- Brent Sopel for a 2nd and a 4th, the 2nd being used to select Wayne Simmonds.
- Kyle Quincey and Tom Preissing for Ryan Smyth.
- Pavol Demitra for Patrick O'Sullivan and the Wild's 1st round pick, used to select Trevor Lewis.
- Mattias Norstrom for a bunch of stuff including a 2nd, used to select Oscar Moller.
- Trading up to select Alec Martinez.
- Trading up to select Tyler Toffoli.
- Trading up to select Maxim Kitsyn.
- Trading up to select Derek Forbort.
- 2nd round pick for Brad Richardson.
- Colten Teubert and a 1st for Dustin Penner.
- The last pick in the entire 2010 draft if the Kings win the cup for Fredrik Modin.
- Nothing for Sean O'Donnell.
Going forward: When does it all pay off? The 2011-12 season will be Lombardi’s sixth season, and while back-to-back playoff appearances certainly constitutes progress, more is expected than sixth- or seventh-place finishes in the Western Conference and first-round playoff losses.
Not having to watch a parade of creaky former stars collecting inflated paychecks for half-assed work (e.g. Fuhr, Carter, Roenick, Ronning, Stevens, Parrish, Heinze...) is its own pay-off.
To be certain, Lombardi understands this. In order for the Kings to take another step forward, some of Lombardi’s prospects at forward must start to contribute at the NHL level
Moller is 22. Loktionov is 20. Toffoli and Schenn are 19. As I will be arguing in my next post, Pavel Datsyuk didn't score his first NHL goal till he was 23. And how exactly are the prospects supposed to contribute when there are no top six openings? I don't think the clock even starts ticking for those guys until Smyth and Stoll are gone and they've had a full season with the team. In other words, the "last shot to prove yourself" comments are about two years premature.
Other graduates of the "must start to contribute or else" club: Teddy Purcell, Matt Moulson, Brian Boyle. That's about 90 goals and maybe a cup ring.
-- the Penner trade must work out and, perhaps, Lombardi must make another move for scoring help.
Greene, Stoll and Hickey for Parise.
But I don't really agree with Rich's "must" in that sentence. I think, in order to take another step forward, they have to do what I said they needed to do 8 months ago: play with consistency over the entire sweep of the season and playoffs. They not only did not do this, but they gave us even more of a roller-coaster than 2009-2010. I'm pretty sure I think that's a coaching issue. But that's another conversation.
50 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Stunningly, we didn't sign any college free agents this year
That’s odd…
"If you're looking in my general direction, you're looking the wrong way."
Barca Blaugranes
A little off topic, but the subject of prospects got me thinking...
One thing that puzzled me this past season was the guys who were sent down because they were second line or bust guys. I’m thinking specifically of Schenn, Lotki and Moller, who Murray all said they were. Given Lombardi’s love for the Detroit Red Wings, he has to know how they do things there. No rookies on the Red Wings start on the top two lines. They start on the bottom two as rookies and work themselves up. Would it be so bad to have Moller on the fourth line alongside Richardon and Lewis next year (plugging in Westgarth when you want some toughness)? Get a speedy line as your fourth instead of a collection of grinders who don’t do anything except play agains the other teams collection of grinders? Would it be so bad to have Schenn or Lotki start next season by centering Clifford and Simmonds and seeing what happens? Neither Clifford nor Lewis were ready to be in the NHL at the beginning of last season, but they were both ready by the end. Why? Because in order to be ready to play in the NHL, you have to play in the NHL for a while first.
Lombardi is awesome.
We should be praising his ass every step of the way (except for Cloutier, ugh).
I think DougX said it best several posts ago, but TM has done an excellent job in the capacity for which he was brought in. That is, teaching young kids how to play defense-first hockey. However, it is becoming increasingly obvious that Terry Murray has zero clue how to teach offense. He specifically cannot teach the power-play.
The Kings inconsistency has everything to do with offensive output. It may be time to look at a more offensive minded but not TOO offensive-minded (think Hitchcock, not Crawford) coach for the next phase.
Hitchcock, please
I would do it right now.
But then, I’m just a back-seat driver. Maybe Hitchcock’s a horrible idea and I don’t know it.
Wait till this year.
Isn’t Hitchcock an ass’t. with Philly right now? If there’s a Philly connection, you never know. :-)
Seriously, if he were brought in, I would consider it an interesting move. My understanding is that Hitchcock is a relatively high-intensity coach, an opposite of Murray in that sense. The other reason that Murray was brought in was because of his chronically even keel, because he wouldn’t blow up at a young team that needed nurturing, not yelling. Replacing Murray with Hitchcock, I would read as a sign that Lombardi thinks his young team is all grown up now and doesn’t need Ward Cleaver-type fathering anymore.
"Prepare your bladder for imminent release!" — Invader Zim
Isn’t Hitchcock’s system basically Terry Murray’s? So that would be a temperament move rather than an evolution in philosophy.
I think we could focus a little more on offense as a next step…but I’m not a coach, so what do I know.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
Yeah, it’s the same. The only difference between the two is that Hitchcock will yell at [insert enigmatic left winger here] before he benches him.
Hitchcock has opened it up and shut it down, depending on what he needs, what his team can do etc
compare the Flyers with Gagne scoring almost 50 goals to the Flyers with Roenick; or Dallas with only Modano to Dallas with Modano, Hull, Langenbrunner, Verbeek. Modano didn’t exactly suffer under Hitchcock, production-wise, though there was some tension, if I recall correctly. Modano scored 26 playoff goals and won a cup under Hitch, so he has no reason to complain.
The key to getting more offense is to play more offensive players. And he’s gotten results from some pretty good young players. Hitch had Langenbrunner at 21, Morrow at 20, Mike Richards and Jeff Carter at 20, Patrick Sharp and Justin Williams at 20, Pitkanen at 19.
Also, he’s a superhero. See the link embedded in this story: http://www.jewelsfromthecrown.com/2010/9/17/1695675/i-love-this-so-much-hitchcock-asks
Wait till this year.
compare the Flyers with Gagne scoring almost 50 goals to the Flyers with Roenick
Wasn’t Terry Murray in charge of the forwards on that team?
Murray has had the Legion of Doom line and Pavel Bure scoring 50 goals in the past. He also allows Smyth a lot more freedom to take a risk than he allows, say, Clifford. I think the reason our offensive players don’t get a ton of leeway is because they’re young, not because Murray is incapable of change.
Modano didn’t exactly suffer under Hitchcock, production-wise, though there was some tension, if I recall correctly. Modano scored 26 playoff goals and won a cup under Hitch, so he has no reason to complain.
He is the one credited with making Modano a two way player; I think you’re right, there was tension, but Modano likes him now. That was brought up when he was taking on Zherdev and Nash.
People are saying he’s the frontrunner for the Devils job. That would be interesting to track.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
He is the one credited with making Modano a two way player; I think you’re right, there was tension, but Modano likes him now. That was brought up when he was taking on Zherdev and Nash.
This is also exactly what Murray did to Kopitar. He made him into arguably our best defensive forward (besides Handzus at least) and he still is putting up the same kind of points that he did before Murray came on board. I think Murray’s philosophy is be responsible defensively first and foremost then you can worry about offense once you get the hang of playing responsible defense all the time.
Williams and Sharp were the Purcell and Moulson of their day under Hitchcock.
Still though I would take Hitchcock over TM if for nothing else than having more interesting post game interviews.
Quite possibly the only LA Kings fan living in Brooklyn, New York.
Speaking of Hitchcock
Check out the Google-translated hilarity of this article in a Russian paper:
Russian defender Fedor Tyutin: Beyond the ice Hitchcock – a good uncle!
At first glance, Hitchcock – good-natured uncle. A chubby chubby, smiling … But many of the players about it a different opinion. Here, for example, Nikita Filatov, and Nikolai Zherdeva in Hitchcock’s teams have always been a problem. Easier to say he tortured our attacking forwards!
But the powerful defender Fedor Tyutin into his “Columbus” stuck. So today Fedor – the main spec for Team Canada, playing on the script, “director” with the ominous name of the famous man…
….
“Well, I’ll go!” – Tyutin hurried into the locker room. Ask him a question, whether he watched films directed by Alfred Hitchcock and some of them are my favorite, I have not had time. Oh well! The main thing is our fight with the Canadians do not become another thriller from horror maestro namesake.
I love that so much.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
Greene, Stoll and Hickey for Parise.
I don’t think this would move NJ. And I don’t think they have to, or will want to trade him.
I don’t think the clock even starts ticking for those guys until Smyth and Stoll are gone and they’ve had a full season with the team. In other words, the “last shot to prove yourself” comments are about two years premature.
I find this very irritating as well.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
I Agree
I have never believed that Jersey was going to trade Parise, and unless he refuses to sign and demands a trade, I still don’t see it happening. However, if he were to come on the market, I don’t think the Kings could get him without throwing in one of Quick or Bernier to replace the soon to retire Brodeur, along with some other younger guys – not players like Greene and Stoll.
They need goaltending and puck-moving D, I think. I don’t know if they value that enough to make a big move. I’m betting they don’t.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
I didn’t think they were Brodeur backup/replacement-ready yet. The Goalie Guild doesn’t even have them crack the top 50 prospects?
On the Kings front, Bernier was #2 behind Schneider, now he’s graduated; Jones is #13 now, Berube is #39.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
I would think NJ would want Quick or Bernier in any package to the Kings. And they would also request Simmonds I think.
I’m all for standing pat with the team for this coming season. Use the young players (Schenn, Loktionov, Moller, etc.) to fill in the holes and hope you have some decent health and a big contract year from Penner. If that doesn’t work, you have some big contracts coming off the books (Smyth, Stoll, Penner, and Mitchell) and can sign big free agent or make a trade.
I'd give 'em Brown and trade Murray for Hitchcock
solve your offense, powerplay and leadership problems in one fell swoop.
Wait till this year.
The question is not whether New Jersey wants to sign Parise (they obviously do, as you said)
but whether Parise wants to sign with New Jersey. New Jersey doesn’t have the room to match a huge offer sheet. If Parise wants out (and I’ve read pretty reasonable analyses that argue he does — why would he want to sign up with a team that’s circling the drain…a life of playing with Ilya, Brodeur about to retire…) and we get past 7/1, I think New Jersey might well lose Parise anyway vai the offer sheet route, to Toronto or somebody.
Knowing that this is possible might make Lou talk through some possibilites with Dean. (My actual trade suggestion is Brown and Greene for Parise, but I didn’t want to say that and have to explain myself.)
Wait till this year.
Given the hissyfit Burke threw when Edmonton signed Penner to an offer sheet, I doubt Toronto would offer one to Parise. Burke has been very public about his disdain for going after other teams RFAs – as I think Lombardi has as well. Most GMs feel this way – its why Neal, Ryan, etc weren’t given offer sheets last summer.
I do agree that the closer we get to July 1st without Parise being signed, the more likely it will be he will be traded. I still think New Jersey gets him signed however – not to a long term deal, but for at least another few years.
I have a question
Where the hell is Thomas Hickey by now? Three players from his draft year, including a d-man (Alec Martinez) are all on the big club. How was that not the most ridiculous pick ever if he doesn’t play significant minutes in the NHL?
Also
Did anybody realize there was a dude from Nigeria picked in that draft too? A Russian-speaking Nigerian.
by 88fingerslukee on May 11, 2011 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions
As someone who saw Hickey when he was a teenager — before the unforseen injuries — I understand that pick. We have a lot of defense prospects, which is a good thing, though he is far from done. But no organization bats a thousand in these circumstances, even in the first round.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
Hickey was ranked fourth in the pre-draft rankings by Central Scouting, and that’s just where DL took him. Looking back, yeah, they probably wish they had taken other guys who went lower in the top 10 – Gagner, Vorocek or especially Couture. But as Nisey correctly points out, no one could know Hickey would get injured and have it delay his development, and also trying to predict at at 18 what kids are going to be stars in the NHL is a crapshoot half the time. And Lombardi’s track record is better than most.
lombardi wanted to trade down but couldn't find someone to trade up with
which tells you, by the way, that none of these other bozos wanted couture either, or they would have given their left nut, which is the first time i’ve ever actually used that expression.
i like that lombardi used his pick to take the guy he wanted, instead of taking someone else because the “experts” or consensus or whatever said he was supposed to. Clifford and Toffoli, and Simmonds and Moller, were also “off map.” Clifford especially.
Hickey is not big, and he’s had unforeseeable injuries. But he’s smart and a proven leader. That he’s been dealt a few plot twists is good for the kid. He quietly had a pretty great season in manchester. and people seem to be determined to forget that defensemen take a long time to develop. Kid Hickey was never going to be a prodigy NHL star. But the player Lombardi drafted was Grown-Up Hickey circa 2015. he could make the team this fall. Or be traded. nothing would surprise me.
Wait till this year.
Nice
Consistency. Exactly. This team was so enigmatic this season. Then to have Terry Murray whine about the performance of the team being booed off the ice took the cake. There were at least 5 – 7 games this last season where it didn’t look like anyone came to play. They looked tired and lazy. When this team decides to bring it, they can play with anyone. It’s so frustrating. They are a good team. We’ve seen flashes but they are not able to play like that all of the time.
There were at least 5 – 7 games this last season where it didn’t look like anyone came to play. They looked tired and lazy.
I would argue that even the so-called “elite” teams in the league experience a similar 5-10% failure rate, where they don’t play anywhere near their their capabilities. Or at least, they don’t according to the perceptions of their fans.
"Prepare your bladder for imminent release!" — Invader Zim
This Is Why I Don't Even Read the Kings Insider Anymore
I know this is the minority opinion among Kings fan, but I really think Rich Hammond does a poor job. He is not particularly smart about hockey and he makes a lot of sweeping statements like those Quisp has highlighted here that are nothing more than hyperbolic assertions on his part based entirely on his opinion and not at all in fact (example- “Then there’s Dustin Penner. Unless Penner turns things around next season, the most significant trade of the Lombardi era is going to go down as a flop.” The first thing that came to my mind is the same thing Quisp mentioned- the Jack Johnson trade; the fact that Hammond doesn’t even seem to know that Lombardi acquired JJ is also quite astonishing. Quincey/Preissing for Smyth is also obviously more significant because it brought in a proven leader/winner while moving a bad contract and a young stud defenseman. Suggesting that the Teubert for Penner deal is more significant than any other displays a near-sightedness that borders on stupidity. Trading a start player who had been good for the Kings in Pavol Demitra was also more significant, without question, because it demonstrated the team’s new commitment to rebuilding).
If I want to know what’s going on with the Kings I come here. Quisp and Niesy do a much better job of blogging about the team and their analysis is spot-on.
And the fact that it looks like someone actually proofreads what gets posted here is nice too. That Hammond gets paid for what he writes and it is of such poor quality in terms of writing skill is amazing to me. It would be one thing if he at least read his posts once before putting them up but clearly with as many typos as there are per post he just writes and ’em and shoots ’em off. Since he represents the Kings it looks unprofessional for the team, not just him. I know there is the occasional typo in his blog too, but they happen at a much lower rate!
I like the idea of a “journalist” insider in a role like his, I just think he does a below-average job. But I guess he does “good enough” because people seem to read it. If you wanna know how the team is lined up at practice go read the Insider, but if you want actual analysis of the team, come here (or to Mayor’s Manor, Frozen Royalty, or Battle of California) where the writers know what they are talking about.
It’s not really Hammond’s job to analyze, it’s his job to report. With the season reviews, I think he’s just trying to give a consensus take on how the player’s season went, not what he actually thinks. He doesn’t know hockey forwards and backwards but he doesn’t really need to. It’s no more fair to criticize Hammond for not having hard-hitting analysis than it would be to criticize Quisp for not talking to the players. They’re trying to do different things.
Also, he recognized that Lombardi acquired Johnson through means other than drafting. He lists a bunch of players that Lombardi drafted, then credits Lombardi for developing 2 Taylor picks and Johnson. Hammond’s assuming we know how Johnson got here.
(I think the typos come when he’s transcribing interviews, mostly. I imagine he uses some sort of speech-to-text conversion and proof-reads it rather than actually typing it. You’re more likely to make a mistake that way. Personally, I’d rather he got the interview up quickly with a few mistakes than make me wait 10 more minutes. I need to know what Brown thought about the Kings’ compete, dammit!)
So that explains it
Those typos have always driven me a little nuts given that it’s his job to write correctly, but you raise a good point if that’s what he does. True, they’re worth putting up with for expediency.
Though, I have to say I pretty much tune out Murray at this point, especially his quotes after practice. Not Rich’s fault, but maybe he could lay off the coach dialogue just a little bit.
(I think the typos come when he’s transcribing interviews, mostly. I imagine he uses some sort of speech-to-text conversion and proof-reads it rather than actually typing it. You’re more likely to make a mistake that way. Personally, I’d rather he got the interview up quickly with a few mistakes than make me wait 10 more minutes. I need to know what Brown thought about the Kings’ compete, dammit!)
There are typos in everything. Read through the player evals for this season. There are so many, it’s ridiculous.
It’s not really Hammond’s job to analyze, it’s his job to report. With the season reviews, I think he’s just trying to give a consensus take on how the player’s season went, not what he actually thinks.
And if he was just reporting it would be fine, but he does these evaluations and he does his open fora in which he sets himself up as a Kings and hockey expert, but he isn’t. I find it aggravating. He seems to be to have a very high opinion of himself and it is not merited.
From his Loktionov Evaluation
The good: Loktionov performed well enough in training camp, and showed enough much-needed offensive flair, that the Kings kept him around at the start of the season and gave him a handful of games. Loktionov showed potential at center, both at even strength and on the power play, and showed the ability to creative offensive for himself with bursts to the net. Loktionov also looked comfortable in a defensive role at center and did not look out of place.
He showed the ability to creative offensive for himself, did he? Interesting.
I don’t want to get into bashing Rich but I think it’s undeniable that this blog operates at a much more intelligent level than does LAKI. As an “insider” I never expected Rich to reveal secrets from the corridors of power. When he still blogged on behalf of that newspaper he was highly conservative in his approach, and that certainly hasn’t changed now that the Kings pay his salary. He covers the basics, essentially operating as a relatively non-critical, beat reporter, and that’s certainly useful, given the lack of hockey coverage from the dailys.
Exactly, once they write your paychecks you just give facts and try not to ruffle any feathers. But i did drop by less when i heard he wasn’t even a Kings fan……..
by DodgersKings323 on May 13, 2011 9:34 AM PDT up reply actions
WELL...
It’s no more fair to criticize Hammond for not having hard-hitting analysis than it would be to criticize Quisp for not talking to the players. They’re trying to do different things.
I agree 100% with this.
Re typos:
The thing about typos is, they’re everywhere in everyone’s writing, until you catch them and fix them. When I see typos on a blog, I cut the writer almost total slack, very close to 100% immunity. Professional bloggers (I mean the ones without other jobs) seem to get this criticism far more often than their less well-compensated brethren. There’s a certain amount of envy in that, which is fine. a lot of negatives go with having such a high-profile gig; one is exponentially more trolls, and the other is more criticism of your work.
one of the key advantages of a blog is its instantaneousness. Like Rudy, I think it’s important to get things out quickly. There’s a premium placed on that. also, if what’s he’s saying is interesting, I will cut the writer a lot of slack, even beyond the 100% immunity, if that’s possible.
the thing that rich delivers that no-one else delivers is unprecedented access to the team, nearly up to the minute updates, and a healthy dose of common sense. it’s true that he doesn’t have an encyclopedic knowledge or understanding of hockey strategy, history, microstats, or other minutiae. but as rudy says, so what. he didn’t say that, but he sort of did. rich doesn’t pretend to be mr. hockey. in fact, he’s quite open about not being a kings fan, but a sports writer who now covers a hell of a lot of hockey.
the penner comment someone quoted above is a kind of comment that you are apt to find annoying if you don’t agree with it (I don’t, and I gave my reasons in the post) and won’t bother you at all if you agree. I responded (in this post) for two reasons: (1) I think that’s what blogs are good at; he says what he says there; others respond elsewhere; it’s all connected with links; and whoever cares to read the various posts gets the benefit of all of it. (2) the internet is a permanent searchable record, and opinions — especially ones with readerships in the zillions — have a way of becoming pervasive to the point of being indistinguishable from fact. In that context, I think it’s appropriate to give the search engines something else to “hit” when someone searches for “penner bust.”
I’ll tell you something else about the penner comment (or any other such comment, that reveals an attitude about a player). rich is more than capable of forming his own opinions, but given that he spends all of his time “embedded” I sometimes wonder if some of his characterizations are unconsciously influenced by the fact that he spends a lot of time “inside.” He is “the insider” after all. what i mean is, his comment about penner may be accurate, and it may be nonsense, but maybe he’s (unconsciously?) reporting what he hears at work all day. the fact is, most of the time when rich says something i disagree with, it’s actually a talking point of terry murray’s that I already disagreed with (moller too small, frolov defensive liability, etc.).
and if that’s the case, the fact that he’s offering his opinions of the players is interesting. reading into his opinions i don’t think is too out of bounds.
by the way, did anybody notice that in the middle of the season rich was criticizing people for repeating the doughty out of shape meme, and now at the end of the season, he’s reporting doughty’s conditioning as an issue? I’m pretty sure I’m right in this observation, though I haven’t dug up the original post.
kind of like how terry murray bristled at the suggestion that quick was overworked, distracted and/or tired. and then after the season was over, he says, yeah maybe he was overworked, distracted and tired.
Plus, lest we forget, Rich is the Don Corleone of Kings bloggers (in addition to the fact that he never denied being Anthonyy.)
Wait till this year.
by Quisp on May 11, 2011 7:03 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
by the way, did anybody notice that in the middle of the season rich was criticizing people for repeating the doughty out of shape meme, and now at the end of the season, he’s reporting doughty’s conditioning as an issue? I’m pretty sure I’m right in this observation, though I haven’t dug up the original post.
I’d be interested in finding out if you look that up what he did say (I’m too lazy to do it myself). From what I sort of remember about it was that some people said he failed the conditioning test and he clarified that he did poorly, took it a few days later and did ok. He also said there is no real pass or fail for it just a score that the coaches and management will be happy or upset with.
I’ll tell you something else about the penner comment (or any other such comment, that reveals an attitude about a player). rich is more than capable of forming his own opinions, but given that he spends all of his time "embedded" I sometimes wonder if some of his characterizations are unconsciously influenced by the fact that he spends a lot of time "inside." He is "the insider" after all. what i mean is, his comment about penner may be accurate, and it may be nonsense, but maybe he’s (unconsciously?) reporting what he hears at work all day. the fact is, most of the time when rich says something i disagree with, it’s actually a talking point of terry murray’s that I already disagreed with (moller too small, frolov defensive liability, etc.).
I would not be surprised at all if this was the case. Especially because Rich sees himself as a “reporter” not a “commentator,” i.e., someone whose primary duty is to express his own subjective opinions. That means he spends a lot of time absorbing what other people say and trying to grasp what’s on their mind. A lot of times, I do get the impression that when he seems to be expressing his own opinion, it’s really shorthand for, “This is what I’ve been picking up from the people around me, as well as other observers and the commenters on this blog.”
"Prepare your bladder for imminent release!" — Invader Zim
My only problem with his typos
… is that when he goes back and corrects them, he doesn’t note the corrections. This has a way of making commenters who chimed in before the correction look weird/bad.
"Prepare your bladder for imminent release!" — Invader Zim
I'm sad
You’re future looks bright
"You can't stop him, you can only hope to contain Kent Huskins!" - Randy Hahn 2/13/11
A fleeting thought.
Perhaps the Kings non-first picks are so hot is that DL settled for smaller but very talented players with the intention of trading a number of them to teams that would need said talent and had team size to support a physically smaller player…
Are Teemu Selanne and Melanie Griffith Twins?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Jewels From The Crown
Related FanShots on Jewels From The Crown
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
