D.J. Smith Hotseat Thread

Defense has generated more opportunities and scoring, though, which was greatly needed (I believe the Kings were among last in that category prior to the HC change). The team is also playing more physical, but that also exposes the slow defense more.

End of day they have been a tougher team to beat on most nights, but still have glaring weaknesses.

As others have mentioned, the vets are still being given too much ice time which isn't a recipe that will work over a 82 game season + playoffs.
I think this sums up DJ’s coaching very well. I think the increased hitting has definitely resulted in some pucks going back the other way that wouldn’t before but Hiller had guys glued to spots on the ice. There is no perfect system or perfect player. You give to get.

There was a (to me) fascinating post on IG I saw yesterday showing the leaders in giveaways league-wide. It’s superstars leading the way:

IMG_9880.jpeg


A big part of this is due to ice time and more opportunity to give the puck away. But the list went down to 91 and there were no Kings listed. Though Fiala has 75 giveaways and would likely make the cut if healthy. He’s not the calibre of the top-end talent but there needs to be some comfort with risk-reward hockey otherwise just ice a whole team of Scott Laughtons.

Why I bring this up is because Hiller forced everyone to play the exact same way and look where it got them this year. DJ is not the solution, but he’s basically coming off like an average coach that at least lets the guys play. That means mistakes, but that also means opportunities. We’re seeing guys play hard, not work hard in service to a suffocating system.
 
The Kings need to stop actually winning their last remaining games this season. Even if they secure the final WC2 spot in the Western Conference, they will clearly get eaten alive by any of the Central Division teams or by Anaheim, Deadmonton, or Vegass once the playoffs are set. Plus, winning their games hurts their draft position even more so they're screwing themselves out of a potential franchise-changing pick and could end up becoming like Columbus after the late 10s (if that's a good analogy).
They have won one out of the last six, so there is a good chance they will keep on losing.
 
You mean the Byfield who has the 2nd most points on the team this season? Seems like, on this team, that wouldn't be such a bad thing.
QB is 3rd (42) at 20 points behind Kempe (62). I have no doubt that Fiala would be ahead of him by now if he hadn’t been injured.

He's been looking better lately, I’ll give him that.
 
The Kings need to stop actually winning their last remaining games this season. Even if they secure the final WC2 spot in the Western Conference, they will clearly get eaten alive by any of the Central Division teams or by Anaheim, Deadmonton, or Vegass once the playoffs are set. Plus, winning their games hurts their draft position even more so they're screwing themselves out of a potential franchise-changing pick and could end up becoming like Columbus after the late 10s (if that's a good analogy).
They will still screw it up--by drafting a "project" that can't skate.
 
Actually it would if the Kings won the lottery and drafted #2 again.

Truly? Why then do only ~46% of 2nd overall picks, since the inception of the NHL, play over 750 NHL games in their career (which is 3rd highest of any draft pick position)?

18% never even make it to 300 games (QB already has 340).

Success Rate Data (2nd Overall):
  • 1+ NHL Games: 93.4%
  • 300+ NHL Games: 82.0%
  • 500+ NHL Games: 72.1%
  • 750+ NHL Games: 45.9%
  • 1000+ NHL Games: 32.8%
You act like every 1st overall pick is a Sidney Crosby and 2nds are all Mario Lemeiux's but if you actually break it down, QB falls within the norm not the outliers on either side of the spectrum.

By your logic only 4 out of the last 10 2nd overall picks could be considered a success, meaning 60% have thus far been failures? If we expand to the last 20 picks that wold be 10/20 = a 50% failure rate.

Something within that logic just isn't adding up. Perhaps it's not logic at all...
 
Truly? Why then do only ~46% of 2nd overall picks, since the inception of the NHL, play over 750 NHL games in their career (which is 3rd highest of any draft pick position)?

18% never even make it to 300 games (QB already has 340).

Success Rate Data (2nd Overall):
  • 1+ NHL Games: 93.4%
  • 300+ NHL Games: 82.0%
  • 500+ NHL Games: 72.1%
  • 750+ NHL Games: 45.9%
  • 1000+ NHL Games: 32.8%
You act like every 1st overall pick is a Sidney Crosby and 2nds are all Mario Lemeiux's but if you actually break it down, QB falls within the norm not the outliers on either side of the spectrum.

By your logic only 4 out of the last 10 2nd overall picks could be considered a success, meaning 60% have thus far been failures? If we expand to the last 20 picks that wold be 10/20 = a 50% failure rate.

Something within that logic just isn't adding up. Perhaps it's not logic at all...

Quite frankly, a lot of us posters here have set our expectations too high when it comes to top-10 draft picks because we expect them to play like they're worth the position they are when drafted by their respective teams. Even I have to admit I'm guilty of this behavior at times. In the case of Toronto fans, it's always "Boom or Bust" in their mentality of whatever picks they selected no matter what the draft round is. That's fandom to you.
 

Now Chirping

Back
Top