D.J. Smith Hotseat Thread

As I said already - 3 point regulation win, 2 point OT (5 on 5 or 4 on 4) win, 1 point SO win, 0 point ties and 0 point losses - ANY losses.
I don't think going to overtime should result in a loss of point as it's a positive fan experience (and the NHL needs fans).

I'd say:

3 points win (regular or overtime)
1 point for each time in the event of a tie
0 points for a loss (regulation or overtime)

Eliminate 3 on3 overtime and shootout
 
I don't think going to overtime should result in a loss of point as it's a positive fan experience (and the NHL needs fans).

I'd say:

3 points win (regular or overtime)
1 point for each time in the event of a tie
0 points for a loss (regulation or overtime)

Eliminate 3 on3 overtime and shootout

The positive fan experience should be the team battling hard to win in regulation, or at least in the OT...they would play to win instead of playing it safe.
 
The positive fan experience should be the team battling hard to win in regulation, or at least in the OT...they would play to win instead of playing it safe.
Yeah but this gives both battling hard to win (only way to 3 points) and overtime - both being positive for the fan experience.

What you and I both agree on is getting rid of the participation trophy (points awarded just by making it to overtime).
 
Fans only complain about the OT point system when their team is beyond horrific in OT.

Hence, here is where we are.
 
I don't think going to overtime should result in a loss of point as it's a positive fan experience (and the NHL needs fans).

I'd say:

3 points win (regular or overtime)
1 point for each time in the event of a tie
0 points for a loss (regulation or overtime)

Eliminate 3 on3 overtime and shootout
I was showing a work colleague where the Kings were in the standings. He only follows soccer (i think) and doesn't know anything about hockey. But when he saw that the Kings got all those loser points he was like "That's crazy. It should be 0 points for losing in OT or shootout." =o
 
I was showing a work colleague where the Kings were in the standings. He only follows soccer (i think) and doesn't know anything about hockey. But when he saw that the Kings got all those loser points he was like "That's crazy. It should be 0 points for losing in OT or shootout." =o
Wait til you tell him guys don’t roll around on the ice and cover the faces when someone grazes their shoulder.
 
Again, my biggest fear is that we repeat the error with Hiller: we make the playoffs and use it as an excuse to resign a temporary coach.
 
Again, my biggest fear is that we repeat the error with Hiller: we make the playoffs and use it as an excuse to resign a temporary coach.

I'd be willing to give him a 1 year "prove it" deal, depending how they perform in the playoffs. Maybe with a team option 2nd year HC or back to assistant coach or something like that. It's not like there are many head coaching vacancies out there for him...

There seems to be something clicking with Byfield lately. Since 16th of March he has been a PPG player, 13 points with 8 goals in 13 games, and well over 50% at the dot...the "project" is far from over, but there's a clear uptick in his production, confidence etc.

That alone could be worth keeping DJ around for another year to see if this "sticks".
 
I'd be willing to give him a 1 year "prove it" deal, depending how they perform in the playoffs. Maybe with a team option 2nd year HC or back to assistant coach or something like that. It's not like there are many head coaching vacancies out there for him...

There seems to be something clicking with Byfield lately. Since 16th of March he has been a PPG player, 13 points with 8 goals in 13 games, and well over 50% at the dot...the "project" is far from over, but there's a clear uptick in his production, confidence etc.

That alone could be worth keeping DJ around for another year to see if this "sticks".
I have no idea what the Kings should do re the Coach.
But I do know that there has been a noticeable improvement since DJ took over in most areas. Whether that means he should stay, I do not know. Above my pay grade.
But this team is more competitive, a bit more consistent, seems to have bought in to his style and leadership.
Regardless, I appreciate what DJ has done. And I would not object to a short term deal but again, if there are better alternatives they gotta look closely at those.
 
I have no idea what the Kings should do re the Coach.
But I do know that there has been a noticeable improvement since DJ took over in most areas. Whether that means he should stay, I do not know. Above my pay grade.
But this team is more competitive, a bit more consistent, seems to have bought in to his style and leadership.
Regardless, I appreciate what DJ has done. And I would not object to a short term deal but again, if there are better alternatives they gotta look closely at those.

I think he brought what his qualities were supposed to be (as I read back then) - he gave life to struggling players and gave them a chance to build confidence. It seems he knows which buttons to push.

I wonder if Panarin-Kopitar-Kempe line stays together and starts flourishing with Hiller at the helm. Probably not.

Now, winning a Cup kind of coach? Not with that kind of team...but that isn't going to magically change next season, is it?

So seeing that this team has quite a lot of "on the cusp" type of young-ish players (with maybe some others coming in next season, too) I think it would be wise to keep him around to see what he can do with an underdog bunch like that.

Unless there's a clear cut upgrade available.

But for the love of God, no 3 year contracts.
 

Now Chirping

  • No one is chatting at the moment.
Back
Top