I’ve been strolling down memory lane, in the form of the archives of Rich Hammond’s first Kings blog, Inside the Kings. I believe I found my first three comments on the blog, which are interesting (if only to me) because of how naively optimistic I was about the 2007-08 season, and because of how different and sad that version of the Kings was. We were all so much younger then!
I don’t think Crawford/Lombardi want to make the Cloutier mistake twice by favoring him over better prospects who aren’t “ready.” On the other hand, isn’t that what they call, in investing, the “sunk sum” fallacy? Something about valuing money you’ve already blown more than what you have right in front of you, such that you continue to over-value your past mistake, in hopes of redeeming it?
Anyway, Kings fans and the rest of the NHL have already written off the Cloutier mistake. Time to move on to NEW mistakes! The Bernier mistake!
Or would that be the Bernier Cup?
No reward without risk.
If he’s the best in camp, he deserves to be number one. Otherwise, what kind of message does that send?
September 18, 2007 5:16 PM
Bernier, of course, played a handful of games before being returned to juniors, not earning a spot on the Kings for several years.
If Bernier truly has been the best goalie in camp — then as pretend GM I have to give him the job to lose for 10 games. The other thing I’m thinking as pretend GM is that I don’t really know what kind of team is going to hit the ice in October. I may be SAYING all the right things about rebuilding, but I’m also looking at a roster of which a full 2/3 is either new via free agency, is a rookie for ’07 or is a otherwise new face since last October (e.g. Zeiler). Will this team be 2-8 after ten games? 5-5? 7-3? What I’m saying is, the TEAM has as much to prove as Bernier does, and while I think it’s highly unlikely that I as pretend GM will be keeping Bernier around for the season if he is personally great but the team goes 1-9, I also will find it hard to justify sending him down if the Kings go 7-3 or better in those ten games. or, for that matter, if they go 3-0-7. However, you ask, what if the Kings go 5-5 and Bernier has a 3.00 Goals Against and a .899 save percentage? I say, if that’s the worst he can do, he can stay and the future is now.
As fans, I think we’re suffering a bit from knowing that the Kings are in fact a better team this year than last year, but not knowing HOW MUCH better. I don’t see any reason why we can’t at least finish with ninety four points, beat Vancouver in the first round, before, you know, losing to Anaheim in seven games after having a two goal lead in the second period.September 24, 2007 2:16 AM
Quisp said:I expect (and will enjoy) another log-jam from 5th to 10th at the end of the year. Honestly, I think the question should be, will the Kings be a part of that log-jam. I think they will. Whether that means landing at #5 or #10, it’s impossible to predict meaningfully. But I think they will be there. Wishful thinking has me guess they will be #7 and play Anaheim in the first round. Kopitar will lead in points. Brown might give him a run for his money, if he collects assists from Kopitar and Cammy all year. In goal? Bernier. 50 games. Also, I predict the Kings’ final point total will equal the number of goals this year by the following five players: Nagy, Handzus, O’Sullivan, Calder and Murray. i.e., if the three veterans have career years (25 goals apiece) and the rookies get 20 and 10 each, that’s 105 points. If they crap out (15 goals apiece for the veterans, 10 and 5 for the rookies) that’s 60 points. Short version, if those guys are good, the team will be good. If they suck, look out below.September 27, 2007 9:35 PM
They sucked. And we picked Drew Doughty with the second overall pick.