Kings fire Sutter & Lombardi

[kickazz 5,459]

From Holland's latest interviews it seems Blashill will stay. 

[kliq 3,763]

2 hours ago, frankgrimes said:

Like I said and I even agreed with you, I'm sure other fanbases would and guess what? I would be happy for them AND Holland. Sometimes a voice can became stale and it's time for new ideas and personally I think that's exactly where the Wings are right now. The core of the golden age minus Z and Kronwall is all but gone, the front office - as of now hasn't really changed - and that's all I'm saying.

Do I believe other teams would be thrilled to sign a guy with Holland's curiculum? For sure but I would also be thrilled to see the as you call it "LAs garbage" running the Wings.

And no, the grass isn't always greener but when there is an obvious upgrade a franchise that's serious about returning to the golden days has to at least talk to these guys. Only exception being if the captain would be willing to return in 1 year to fix and then spend a lot of time fixing this team.

 

You misinterpreted my post Frank, I do not believe those two are actually garbage. My point is that some LA fans thought they were garbage, just as some Wings fans think Holland/Blashill are garbage, I'm drawing parallels here. The reason for the "quotes" are because I am pointing out that perception from one teams fan-base are not always in touch with the perception of others as a team's own fan-base generally forms opinions based on emotion opposed to logic and facts.

LA fans wanted to fire these two while Detroit fans are screaming to sign them. Do you see my point? So which is it? Is LA correct and they deserved to be fired? Or are they not "garbage" and LA is refusing to accept the true realities of today's NHL? IMO its the latter. With all this being said, who knows what actually happens behind the scenes.

I am actually a fan of Lombardi and Sutter and believe that LA made a mistake firing them. Hence my grass is always greener comment.

Maybe we should swap GM's lol, Holland is one of the best ever at keeping a good team good for a long time, but has very little experience in re-building. Lombardi has appeared to struggle to keep LA good for more then a few years, but has a track record in re-building.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

9 hours ago, F.Michael said:

No doubt.

These firings are an example of how some franchises lack the loyalty that the Red Wings exhibit...Under performing?..You're fired!

Would you prefer this?

 

I like the Lakers ripoff as well as the jerseys the Kings wore in the early 2000's, but these jerseys you posted were clearly the best they've ever had.

The ones they're wearing now are clearly the worst jerseys the Kings have ever had.  Just another franchise that wanted to sell hideous crap instead of preserving tradition.

10 hours ago, BadgerBob said:

Maybe it's the Packer fan in me, but my god these things are hideous. Worst color scheme ever.

Nah, those were great jerseys.  Sure, they ripped off the Lakers, but it was a unique style for the NHL and a great logo.  

6 hours ago, kliq said:

I agree with this. I am open to change when it is an upgrade or at worst a lateral move. My issue is when certain people make it sound like change is ALWAYS better regardless of who you are bringing in.

How can things be any worse?  Are we going to fall out of last place?  

[frankgrimes 1,836]

You misinterpreted my post Frank, I do not believe those two are actually garbage. My point is that some LA fans thought they were garbage, just as some Wings fans think Holland/Blashill are garbage, I'm drawing parallels here. The reason for the "quotes" are because I am pointing out that perception from one teams fan-base are not always in touch with the perception of others as a team's own fan-base generally forms opinions based on emotion opposed to logic and facts.
LA fans wanted to fire these two while Detroit fans are screaming to sign them. Do you see my point? So which is it? Is LA correct and they deserved to be fired? Or are they not "garbage" and LA is refusing to accept the true realities of today's NHL? IMO its the latter. With all this being said, who knows what actually happens behind the scenes.
I am actually a fan of Lombardi and Sutter and believe that LA made a mistake firing them. Hence my grass is always greener comment.
Maybe we should swap GM's lol, Holland is one of the best ever at keeping a good team good for a long time, but has very little experience in re-building. Lombardi has appeared to struggle to keep LA good for more then a few years, but has a track record in re-building.

Maybe the LA fanbase just wants different voices, ideas running the Kings I don't know. I've tried hard to find a Kings Podcast but couldn't.

Changing GMs seems to be a very good idea, Holland knows better than anyone how to keep a team together and even figure out ways to add depth but he has zero rebuild experience which Lombardi does. Maybe both fanbases would be happy with that. I know I would be

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 hour ago, frankgrimes said:

 

Maybe the LA fanbase just wants different voices, ideas running the Kings I don't know. I've tried hard to find a Kings Podcast but couldn't.

Changing GMs seems to be a very good idea, Holland knows better than anyone how to keep a team together and even figure out ways to add depth but he has zero rebuild experience which Lombardi does. Maybe both fanbases would be happy with that. I know I would be

 

Change is almost always bad, in most situations in life. It causes chaos. Staying the course is more than often the best choice. Changing GMs and/or rebuilding creates unknowns. Unkowns are different. Different is scary. Scary is bad. Veterans are reliable, and if we can put the right combinition of vets around our current core, we can probably squeak into the playoffs next year and restart the streak again. Just look at guys like Matt Cullen who were an important part of Pittsburghs cup win last year. Our young core just needs the right complimentary pieces.

[Buppy 1,720]

13 hours ago, frankgrimes said:

Well some franchises want to win the cup more than anything, others have fallen down the priority line thanks to a baseball team I guess...

I bet that isn't the reason at all. They were crap for almost 2 decades and then their "glory days" lasted 3 years. Two years and a couple months really.

Holland is garbage because he couldn't keep the Wings a contender forever. Lombardi is one of the best even though he couldn't keep the Kings a contender for even a handful of years.

I guess there is no amount of failure that won't be overlooked as long as it happens somewhere else.

[Buppy 1,720]

5 hours ago, frankgrimes said:

Changing GMs seems to be a very good idea, Holland knows better than anyone how to keep a team together and even figure out ways to add depth but he has zero rebuild experience which Lombardi does. 

Not true. From 2002 to 2008, the Wings rebuilt almost the entire roster other than Lidstrom and Holmstrom. (There were a few others still on the team, but none really in the same role.) That is as much of a rebuild as any GM has ever done. We just got lucky and didn't have to suck while we did it. Lombardi started with Kopitar, Quick, and Brown (plus maybe some other stuff). 

[kliq 3,763]

53 minutes ago, Buppy said:

Not true. From 2002 to 2008, the Wings rebuilt almost the entire roster other than Lidstrom and Holmstrom. (There were a few others still on the team, but none really in the same role.) That is as much of a rebuild as any GM has ever done. We just got lucky and didn't have to suck while we did it. Lombardi started with Kopitar, Quick, and Brown (plus maybe some other stuff). 

It's actually much more impressive as he did it without any high draft picks.