Moving ahead, here’s the second part of the interview with Dean Lombardi, this time talking about the Kings’ goalie situation, both this season and going into next season. In this part, Lombardi talks about the way Terry Murray handled Jonathan Quick and Erik Ersberg this season, his possible shortcomings in handling the goalie situation and gives a lengthy analysis of Bernier. Here you go!
Question: You played Jonathan Quick 72 games this season, and he set franchise records but at the end of the season, Terry acknowledged that he might have played Quick too much. Looking back on it now, is that criticism fair, and if so, what could have been done to avoid that situation?
LOMBARDI: “I think it’s certainly fair. It’s like anything else, and this is what you do at the end of the year. Everybody here makes a list of the five things you could have done better this year, whether you’re the GM or an area scout. If you expect your players to get better, you have to expect everyone on the staff to get better. So the first thing is to recognize where you might have made a mistake, and not just look to rationalize everything. I think that’s something we looked at, as a group. It’s a viable criticism, that maybe we overplayed him. Now you look at the circumstances of it, where every game was critical, it seemed. I don’t know exactly what the analogy is. It’s almost like a pitcher who needs rest, but you keep throwing him because every game is critical. So you could make the argument and say, `Look, if I didn’t overplay him, we wouldn’t have got into the playoffs in the first place.’ Now part of that gets into, `OK, why didn’t we have a better backup goalie?’
“Well, that’s where Murph has to look at, did he handle Erik right, in terms of getting him playing time and showing him enough confidence to get the job done. So when you sit back and look at it, it’s two-pronged. Overplaying him, and/or did we handle Ersberg properly, to maximize his ability? That starts right at the beginning of training camp, too. Did we give him enough exhibition games? Should we have set up a schedule, where he was playing every fifth game no matter what? So I think it’s a two-pronged thing. Then you look at management. Should we have gotten a veteran guy? That type of guy who is a veteran guy, maybe like a LaBarbera was in Phoenix, that type of thing. So you look at it from a management standpoint and say, `If I wanted to protect Bernier, I should have just got a sure thing as a backup.’ So all of these are viable criticisms. Overplaying him, not handling Ersberg properly and/or maybe having a different m.o. with that backup goalie. One of the things though, with Erik, is that he’s a really competitive guy and he’s a good goalie. Part of our thought process, when we signed him a couple years ago, was that we had no idea who was going to be our No. 1. So we went with the young guy, thinking he could be a No. 1. And who knows, the jury is still out. He won some tough games for us here. He always got the tough ones, too. Going into San Jose twice. Going into Philly, when we get in at 5 in the morning there two years ago. He did a hell of a job.
“So he has shown, at a minimum, that he can be a good backup, but part of our reasoning in signing him was, `Let’s take a shot,’ because we didn’t know about Quick or Bernier or anybody. So let’s take a shot. Instead of getting a proven No. 2, we have to find a No. 1 here, so let’s take a shot at a guy who is unproven, with upside. So that was the other reason we put Erik in the hopper. So all those issues come in, but the bottom line is, we have to look very closely and see if we handled that right. In the end, you never know for sure, because you could make the argument that we wouldn’t have got in without playing him 70 games. But there’s no question that it’s a viable debate. If somebody wanted to look at it from the other perspective, they might be every bit as correct.”
Question: Now you’ve got Quick, just starting his three-year contract extension. You’ve got Ersberg under contract for one more season. Obviously you’ve got Bernier. Terry indicated that Quick is his No. 1 guy. How does this all shake out going into next season?
LOMBARDI: “With what Quicker has done for us, this guy has earned the right to come into camp as the No. 1 goalie. You’ve got to show the player respect for what he has accomplished. Now that doesn’t mean you come in 20 pounds overweight or anything, obviously, but I think it’s the right thing to say, `You’ve earned the right to be No. 1.’ So I don’t know if the term is, `It’s your job to lose,’ so to speak. He gets the benefit of the doubt, and then you let it go from there. Obviously we’re not looking to play him 75 games. I think that’s safe to say, but I think he deserves to be considered the No. 1 going in. Quite frankly, I would love to have the problem of two No. 1s, considering what I had four years ago.”
Question: You kept Bernier in Manchester for almost the entire season because you said you wanted him to grow and get that experience. Are you now past the point where you feel you need to protect him?
LOMBARDI: “Yeah. I think he has done everything for us, with his performance this year and his attitude. There was tremendous growth. They usually go hand in hand, play and attitude. As I’ve said, this falls into one of the top-five dumbest things I’ve done since I’ve been here, the idea of even thinking of playing him when I did, as a 19-year-old. Just the thought itself. It’s like I’m guilty for even thinking of it, let alone doing it. It was absolute stupidity. And I think it set him back a little. He had to go back to junior, and then when he went back (to Manchester) last year, he pouted. Part of it was because we had almost given him something and then taken it away, and he didn’t understand why. He pouted for half the year, and he ended up being the backup. But it was more than his attitude. The whole body language was bad. Then all of a sudden, in February, the lightbulb went on and he started practicing harder. He almost got us in the playoffs down there, single-handedly. But what was great was the way he came in last (September), and when we sent him down we didn’t have to go through this stuff. Hexy and I used to have to sit him down and tell him how Hexy had to do time in the minors and how this is good training and how he is going to thank us. We had to go through all that. This time he came in and said, `I know what I’ve got to do. I’m going to go down there and do it, and I’m going to lead that team.’ And we’re going, `Whoa.’ Then when he went down and saw (Manchester coach) Mark Morris, we asked Mark how his attitude was, and he said, `It’s unbelievable.’ He said, `I didn’t have to say a thing to him.’ He [Bernier] said, `You don’t have to worry about me.’
“And he took it from there, and he was outstanding the whole year. Then when he got called up (to the Kings) and won, and it was time to go back down, you’re thinking, `Well, maybe there’s going to be a problem.’ It was, `No, I get it. I’ll be ready if you call me again.’ The maturity factor was off the charts. So with everything, you can say that he has become a man. You’ve heard me talk about that so much. We forget that they’re 18 years old. Most of us spent the next four years in frat houses and stuff. We expect these guys to grow up right away. So I’m so impressed with his mental growth, as much as I am with his play. So when you talk about needing to protect him, I look at it like he has finished his basic training.”
This is possibly the best Lombardi interview I have read. Dean is nearly naked (symbolically speaking) in it when he speaks of Quick, Ersberg and Bernier.
[Reply]
From what Deano says…it seems almost a certaintly that Ersberg will be traded…maybe for a late round pick…
[Reply]
josh e. Reply:
May 30th, 2010 at 11:07 pm
@josh e.,
*certainty
[Reply]
Kris Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 2:03 am
@josh e., Yep, however we (ok I) have been fooled before.
[Reply]
I think the organization has pretty much conceded that JQ was overplayed. Okay, we all know that. DL’s rationale is noted and credible. JQ’s play was not the only reason why the Kings didn’t advance into the playoffs, but probably was a contributory factor.
In terms of this issue, should be in the rear view mirror. A new season starts in a few months. I want to look forward…
[Reply]
DougS Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 12:10 am
@Steve S.,
I’ll second that, with emphasis. Next season is when the fun will really start.
[Reply]
dMan Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 12:16 pm
@Steve S.,
Not sure Lombardi is saying they played him too much, but maybe an acknowledgement they may have played him too much. As he says, there’s an argument both ways.
As much as I think Murray stiffed Ersberg (and I’m a Murray supporter), I think it did a lot for Quick. Quick proved he could play at the NHL level, not always evident at any age and i think the questions became what’s his breaking point?, how far does he bend?, how does he bounce back? What’s his physical and mental stamina? I think Quick rose to the challenge. He’s dependable. He has the right skill set, the right attitude.
The reality is that management knew the Kings could make the playoffs, but they were probably not going to go deep which is fine and part of the team’s growth.
I think next year, Quick will be #1 and Bernier will be a very dependable back-up. He’ll pay his NHL dues as a backup for a year.
Depending on how the other goalies in the minors are doing, I would say Benrier is anointed #1 in a couple of years and Quick may be traded for some scoring.
All in all, it’s a good situation to be in. I am so glad Lombardi and Murray are leading this team and what they’ve accomplished in the last couple of years is very positive and exciting.
[Reply]
puck73 Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 10:44 pm
@dMan, So well said, succinct analysis and I agree with all of it. A lot of us will be meeting at the draft and we will be putting it together on this site so I hope I see you there !
[Reply]
nykingfan Reply:
June 1st, 2010 at 6:25 am
@dMan,
very well put.
[Reply]
Excellent interview as always. His frankness about playing Bernier at 19 was really interesting. You can tell he’s really impressed with his JB commitment to Manchester this season and how he has the right attitude to play in this league.
[Reply]
His insight on Bernier’s growth and development is well stated. We have a remarkable talent in him on and of the ice now and the right decision was made in sending him to Manchester. He makes valid points about Quick as well. He has earned his position as the Kings No. 1 goalie though that does not mean he doesn’t have to work just as hard to keep his spot. With Ersberg he tells how he’s a great goaltender and often doesn’t get the credit he should for what he gives the team when given the chance. Overall it was a great interview.
[Reply]
Tremendous stuff, Rich.
Now, for everyone who has been clinging like grim death to “Terry Murray said Quick is his #1 so everyone shut up,” I just want to underline the following (I’ll bold what I think are the key bits):
“With what Quicker has done for us, this guy has earned the right to come into camp as the No. 1 goalie. [...] I don’t know if the term is, `It’s your job to lose,’ so to speak. He gets the benefit of the doubt, and then you let it go from there. Obviously we’re not looking to play him 75 games. I think that’s safe to say, but I think he deserves to be considered the No. 1 going in. Quite frankly, I would love to have the problem of two No. 1s, considering what I had four years ago.”
Okay? Boils down to: “Quick is #1 going into camp. It’s his job to lose. We’ll see what happens. Maybe we have two #1s.”
The goalie who plays better is going to get the starts.
[Reply]
Dominick Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 1:41 am
@Quisp,
To he who wins,go the spoils.
[Reply]
RLane420 Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 7:41 am
@Dominick, Thats how it should be. The players dont cry about it why do the fans.
[Reply]
VanKingsFan Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 9:01 am
@Dominick, I think its.. To the Victor! Go the spoils..
[Reply]
Dominick Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 10:47 pm
@VanKingsFan, Your right!I knew it didn’t look right.lol
Moondoggie Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 11:47 am
@Quisp, Bernier is going to be a hellion to deal with in camp; he’s going to be possessed trying for the No. 1 position. Yep, it’s Quickie’s job to lose but with the way Bernier played at Manchester this year and in the playoffs and how Quick looked at the end of the season….
I’ll be very surprised if Bernier isn’t starting opening night…..
[Reply]
Dominick Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 10:58 pm
@Moondoggie,
Don’t count out Quicker just yet.He’s got all summer to recharge the batteries,refocus,and work out.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Quick doesn’t come into camp ready to play at the level he was playing at,before the olympic break.Maybe even more focused.
Hell!I actually expect it.It’s going to be a battle,and I hope we the fans will be able to celebrate these warriors.
[Reply]
luc20rules Reply:
June 1st, 2010 at 6:49 pm
@Dominick, Thats what I’ve been saying. Go with the Hot Goalie. It must be a confidence thing, but one great start usually leads to a streak for most players.
Great Job Rich, I tuned out this site during the Olympic Break and regreted missing a ton of current info. I will be around all year long now.
variable Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 3:02 pm
@Quisp,
it’s what most of us have been saying all along…
d.l. just confirmed it…
RICH…
awesome…yr at the top of the food chain, sir…:)
[Reply]
carol vadnais Reply:
June 3rd, 2010 at 9:47 am
@Quisp,
Anyone who thinks Quisp is bonafide No 1 is deluding themselves. If Tim Thomas can be the best goalie in the NHL one year and the next be riding the bench, anything can happen.
We all saw Quick in the playoffs and we all know that we need better production if we want to step up to the next level. Bernier will have to play exceptionally well to merit that, but he just might do it. As DL says, “he has that ceiling.”
[Reply]
Outstanding, good young players and depth in our sytem and a GM who’s not afraid to admit his mistakes. Nothing like a straight shooter for someone that runs our team. Too bad we have a few more months of waiting to see how things shake out with our goalies, regardless of what happens we are going to be just fine. It’s so great knowing we don’t have the backend problem that we had for so many years.
Thanks Rich for the hard work. 3 Years ago, we would all be starving for this kind of info in the offseason ore regular season for that matter. I don’t get here everyday, but when I get here I read every piece of info you put up. Beats following the NBA or MLB.
[Reply]
It was good to hear that when Bernier was sent back down,he got it,because there were alot of fans who didn’t.I have a feeling 10 years from now Bernier will be thanking DL and Hexy for their patience.I’m sure we’ll all be thanking them.
There’s no gaurantee that Bernier will be the next Broduer,but I believe they got it right,this time.My only concern for our goaltending situation going into next season is,wether we can find EE a team that he can do well with.
[Reply]
“So when you sit back and look at it, it’s two-pronged. Overplaying him, and/or did we handle Ersberg properly, to maximize his ability?”
He’s saying Murray F’d up twice. Way to call him out.
[Reply]
puck73 Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 10:26 am
@uknojata, I agree with you 100%, fact is that Ersberg was never trusted by TM after his first appearrance of the season vs the Rangers in NY. But Ersberg won 2 big games down the stretch in Anaheim and Colorado that were huge when Quick was struggling just like Bernier did in Dallas and Nashville. The thing about these 3 goalies is, they are all extremely competetive ! For a Kings fan its a win win situation, stay tuned !
[Reply]
great interview. Peaks my curiosity as to the other 4 worst decisions D.L thinks he has made.Maybe:
1. Cloutier
2. MacCauley
3. Cammy trade
4. ???????? Hickey pick?????????
[Reply]
EJ Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 7:26 am
@funky,
Not the Cammalleri trade. He continues to be soft and ineffective everywhere but within 30 feet of the opposing net.
[Reply]
Quisp Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 8:39 am
@EJ,
Agreed.
[Reply]
John Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 11:15 am
@EJ,
And WAY overpaid if playing on this team!
[Reply]
jet Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 11:53 am
@EJ, Cammi did manage a minus 6 to lead his team in the playoffs?
[Reply]
variable Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 3:04 pm
@EJ,
cammy is a one-trick pony…
how-ev-a…
he’s played that one-dimension extremely well…
i like to look at cammy as the equivalent of a point guard who averages 20 a game…and doesn’t do much else…
[Reply]
BallPointHammer Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 11:44 am
@funky,
Don’t give up on Hickey. He hasn’t even played 1/3 of a season in Manchester yet. I would like to see him play the entire 2010-11 season in Manchester in order to more fairly evaluate his development.
[Reply]
Moondoggie Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 12:14 pm
@BallPointHammer, According to Hexy, Hickey was one of Manchester’s best defensemen in the playoffs. His future is bright so long as he can stay healthy. If so, he’s going to see some time with LA this year, though I think Muzzin probably has the better shot of making the team…..
[Reply]
puck73 Reply:
June 1st, 2010 at 10:42 am
@BallPointHammer, I think Thomas Hickey has a chance to be as good as Brian Rafalski so long as he stays healthy. This guy has been a plus player on every level he has played at and has good Hockey sense. Plus his skating ability is world class so your right, I wouldnt give up on this guy yet !
[Reply]
Moondoggie Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 12:11 pm
@funky, Pppppppllllllllllleeeeeeeeaaaaaaassssseeeee!
The Cammy trade was one of DL’s best deal – deal’s. He had to trade Cammy. Cammy got his feelings hurt during arbitration, not getting the contract that he wanted. DL was able to get the 12th pick overall in the 2008 draft which they got Teubert for and I believe a 3rd rounder if memory serves. His alternatives were to let Cammy play out the season with LA when he then would have gone UFA and signed with Montreal or someone else. The Kings were not going to be able to keep him, Cammy didn’t want to be a King, pure, plain and simple.
Frankly, when Calgary made the trade I thought “The Flames will be sorry about this move”. I think Calgary really thought they would be able to re-sign Cammy. What they didn’t know was what everyone in the Kings organization did, that Cammy had his own personal agenda he was pursuing.
Yea, I’d have certainly liked to see Cammy lead the Kings to the Western Conference finals but it was never going to happen, not unless DL coughed up 5-6mil per season for Cammy’s services and he just wasn’t worth it. Cammy was still way to inconsistent at that time of his career. To have spent that kind of money on a Fro type of player at the time would have been shear folly.
[Reply]
DougS Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 10:17 pm
@Moondoggie,
Basically, it came down to drawing the line on player salaries in the salary cap era and not so much the fact that Cammy was inconsistent, but that he was young.
It may not be wise and it may not be fair, but players get the big contracts based on past performance as an indicator of future returns. To pay Cammy $6 mil/year at that point in his career would only have set him up for being a bigger salary cap hit when he was up for his next contract. Plus, it would have set a dangerous precedent for the negotiations coming up; DL might just as well have asked Jeff Solomon to tape a “Kick Me” sign to his back before negotiating with Johnson, Kopitar and Brown, and now Doughty.
But basically, yeah, I’m nodding in agreement with you.
[Reply]
tantrum4 Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 12:15 pm
@funky,
The Hickey pick on this list makes me laugh. Going back to that draft and KNOWING we needed to pick a d-man, please go look at the other top ranked d-men in that draft and tell me who he should have picked instead. You’ll be suprised to see who was available that’s doing any better than Hickey is right now. Here’s the answer…NOBODY
[Reply]
quisp Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 10:59 pm
@tantrum4,
also, Lombardi wanted Hickey, and could not find someone to trade down with. No-one wanted to trade up to #4 that year, which should tell you something. Think about the two drafts since; people were tripping all over themselves for top five picks. That year, no sale. And Lombardi had the whatever to take the guy he wanted anyway.
[Reply]
DougS Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 10:03 pm
@funky (and everyone else),
When looking back on the Cammalleri trade, *please*, let’s not miss the point. It was never about whether or not Cammy was a good player. He wasn’t traded because DL thought he wasn’t worth keeping.
He was traded because after the arbitration process (and Team Cammy asking for far more money than a player of his age and track record was used to getting at that time) DL thought he would probably lose him to free agency anyway. It was a question of getting something in exchange now vs. getting nothing in exchange later.
What this means, of course, is that trading Cammy was not a mistake because it was based on an assumption that made sense at the time and the logic of which is still understandable now.
As a matter of basic intellectual honesty, if we’re going to keep revisiting this question, let’s at least get our history right.
[Reply]
Dan H. Reply:
June 1st, 2010 at 12:17 pm
@DougS,
If you’re looking for a bad decision…Valeri Bure could be added. I’m still hoping for the best on Hickey and he has another couple of seasons of healthy hockey before he can truly be judged.
[Reply]
variable Reply:
June 1st, 2010 at 5:21 pm
@DougS,
yr right when you say the arbitration played a key role…but i do think other factors came to a head about his personality and defensive work-ethic…
i think if i remember correctly, cammy was asking for $5-6 mil per, which was ridiculous for anyone to pay then…so, sure, that had as much to do with it as any…
[Reply]
altho im not as close to the situation as you guys are in LA from afar here in manchester , looks like Lombardi is getting it right , ive seen the Kings go to a team with no prospects to a team with prospects all over the place.. to a team with no goalies , to a team with two arguably No. 1 goaltenders in Quick and Bernier with Zatkoff and Jones next up to work on their development in Manchester.. i wish i was there in LA for training camp and pre season games, because i think this camp will be one of the more important camps the Kings have ever had in terms of moving forward to the next level , now if only Deano will get a pure sniper and another puck moving defensemen ..
[Reply]
Moondoggie Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 12:16 pm
@royalmonarch, Camp is going to be fun this year, no doubt!
Question….Out of the Kings defensive prospects, who do you think has the best chance of making the team based upon what you saw this season at Manchester?
[Reply]
David Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 3:09 pm
@Moondoggie, Bernier. If you consider a goalie as a defensive prospect
[Reply]
royalmonarch Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 6:34 pm
@Moondoggie, thats a tough one… they all are in various stages of their development but if I had to pick the d prospects that might have a shot if they come to camp in top shape and perform well .. it would be Slava Voynov.. followed by Alec Martinez and Thomas Hickey..one out of this group could make the Kings if they step up their game especially on the physical side .. and show consistency which you have to have at the NHL Level.
[Reply]
Off topic here but I’d be curious to hear your comments Rich. And forgive me if this question kind of sounds backwards.
During Gary Bettman’s State of the NHL press conference before game 1 of the Finals, Bettman was asked by a reporter for a list of teams that were for sale. All Bettman would do is refute “reports” about teams that were “supposedly” on the market, and one of the teams he mentioned was the Kings.
Now typically it seems to me that Bettman only names teams and says rumors about them aren’t true when in fact they really are. For instance, he certainly didn’t publicly state that the Red Wings or Rangers weren’t for sale, so why would he mention the Kings unless there’s some shred of truth to the “rumor”?
So Rich, any idea if the Kings are or were recently “on the market”?
[Reply]
McDonalds Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 2:05 pm
@Paul From Oxnard,
A couple of weeks back, The Hockey News listed the Kings as one of the teams that will be sold.
I’m assuming that this is baseless rumor, as our Governor as come out in that awesome interview with Rich and said that the team is not going to be sold.
Bettman’s response, i’m assuming, is just putting down a rumor, not stating that at one point the Kings were going to be sold but the deal fell through.
[Reply]
Paul From Oxnard Reply:
June 1st, 2010 at 4:08 am
@McDonalds, Thanks for the info. I must have missed that information. I’m always concerned AEG will move the Kings to KC since they have that big new beautiful empty building in Kansas City.
[Reply]
puck73 Reply:
June 1st, 2010 at 11:00 am
@Paul From Oxnard, Never happen ! The kings and AEG own the building, matter a fact the Lakers and Clippers are tenants and would move before the Kings. And if you use Al Davis as an example of someone who moved to a smaller market then my response would be he had no choice. Fact is, he had several verbal promises that were broken by the L.A Coliseum commission and then when he attemted a deal at Hollywood Park Deal the NFL jacked his price up 30 million and tried to force him to share the new stadium with an NFC expansion team despite the fact that the NFL allowed the Rams to pay a 46 million dollar relocation fee to leave Anaheim. As you can see Davis was in a very bad financial situation, the Kings on the other hand are in place where Davis could only dream !
DL was really transparent without showing his cards. Excellent interview as Rich also asked the correct questions.
DL is a bit too hard on himself about playing Bernier early. Every decision he’s made must be viewed in the context of the situation. It would have been a longshot for JB to have made it right away as an NHL goalie but not out of the question. The organization needed a goaltender and Bernier is an exceptional talent who wasn’t ready at that earlier time. However, he might have been. It is to DL’s credit that he pulled the plug on that expieriment quickly.
DL has been building the team correctly…from the back end on out. Talented youg goaltenders, much more depth and talent on defense and forwards like Schenn, Loktionov, Clifford, King etc. who are going to help.
Keep up the good work DL and once again a tip of the King’s Crown to your scouting staff, Ron Hextall,Jeff Solomon, and the entire organization.
[Reply]
Moondoggie Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 12:21 pm
@Crown Royal, Great comments but I don’t think DL is sugarcoating what he did with Bernier early in his career. He knew the damage he could inflict on Bernier’s head if he sent him back down at such a young age. He did it anyway and the end result was exactly what DL figured would happen. But in all fairness, DL had to go with Bernier. He was the King’s best goalie coming out of camp in 2008. The Kings had no one else who could play.
As DL said, it all ended up working out but I do feel for the decisions he had to make at the time. It truly is lonely at the top…..
[Reply]
Jinx alert…Jinx alert…Jinx alert!!!
“…or get a Veteran Guy like LaBarara…” Whoa, hold it. That losing talk. The best thing that happened to the Kings was “I Will Never Be the Difference” LaBarbara going to Vancouver and Phoenix.
Had they played that Japanese goalie ahead of “No Lead is Safe” LaBarbara I doubt it could have been any worse.
Rogie coming in off the bar would have been better then LaBarbara.
[Reply]
luc20rules Reply:
June 2nd, 2010 at 10:27 pm
@USHA#17, Being a bit hard on Barbs aren’t you. Remember Crawford was Coaching the no D method.
No O and D still a work in progress TM first year.
Barbs since leaving the Kings
Vanc 3-2-2 .915 save percentage
Phx 8-5-1 .928 save percentage.
I don’t know if Hasek or Roy plays get the Kings to the playoffs at that time. Barbs at LA 33-40-8 .904 SP
Now Cloutier was just BAD! (not in cool way)
in LA 8-18-3 .868 SP
[Reply]
I just have to say thanks a million Rich! These interviews…getting the thoughts of the guy who pulls the strings to the team that I live and die with is simply awesome!
A few years ago it seemed like too much to ask for this team to complete at a high level every night and not be the laughing stock of the league. Now it appears we have come full circle and there is finally a product that the players and fans can take pride in, not just for one or two seasons but hopefully for decades.
As for Quick, JB, EE and the 100 other guys I’ve seen in net since the early 80′s when I became a Kings fan…as long as we win, I couldn’t care less about labels and who the #1 goalie is. All that matters is winning and of course who has the coolest goalie mask.
[Reply]
I “heart” our GM!
[Reply]
At least now I understand why they were reluctant to bring up Bernier this year (although they did finally and could have kept him up for the playoffs and…oh well….)–it was all about emotional maturity.
Interesting how Lombardi miscued when he was talking about Quick and said Bernier by way of freudian slip (“If I wanted to protect Bernier, I should have gotten a sure thing for backup….”). Proof that Bernier is on his mind as you would expect. Lombardi also said what I said before about next year–having two #1′s is a good problem to have. We don’t need no stinking goalie controversy amigos!
(Hate to sound like a broken record) but again the real problem was relying solely on Quick…and the fact that the closer you get to the postseason the more important the wins become–and relying on one guy was the trap the brain trust fell into. They should have played Ersberg now and again throughout the season to keep him game ready–you have cast your lot at backup and you have to use all the pieces available to their best potential on the chessboard. Or, they should have traded him for a proven veteran backup who could be counted on to come in and provide occasional relief (although that’s easier said than done).
The wild card in the whole scenario was of course Quick’s fatherhood…of course nobody could have seen that coming (right). It was a complete surprise…ha ha, well I guess the brain trust was more focused on x’s and o’s rather than xx and xy chromosomes and the realistic effect becoming a father can have on a young player….
Speaking of babies, like I said now I understand what the issue with Bernier has been…and you can’t really blame Lombardi for taking a shot on the kid at nineteen when he really had no very good options at all in goal at the time….
You gotta love Lombardi. I hope he stays with the Kings forever.
[Reply]
Thanks, Rich. With all of this goalie talk, I wanted to see how many the Kings have had over the years. 62, from Rogie to Fukufuji.
[Reply]
Wait just a second, 4 years ago we had seven #1s.
[Reply]
“In the end, you never know for sure, because you could make the argument that we wouldn’t have got in without playing him 70 games.”
Yeah, except that Quick didn’t win very many of those games in the home stretch after the Olympic break, and DL knows it. I appreciate the reflective nature of his approach, though.
[Reply]
Great interview Rich……thx!
[Reply]
(First time poster, long time reader. Unbelievable website, with always well reasoned comments.)
DL’s remarks on EE being signed as a potential #1, instead of a solid veteran backup, is potentially revealing. Bernier cannot be the veteran backup, so either we have two #1s splitting games, or we see Quick also traded. Of course that requires Bernier to play well.
I don’t see Bernier playing 25 games next season for two reasons – it takes the right mentality to be a backup, and it will slow his progression to play so little. Similarly, I don’t think Quick makes a good backup.
So maybe next season Quick & Bernier split, with the hot hand in the playoffs. The season after, one gets traded, and a veteran backup is brought in.
[Reply]
Great interview Rich! Would it be possible to have a follow up interview with Tim Lieweke, since he is the voice of Kings Ownership?
Tim previously stated that going into last season, the Kings HAD to make the Playoffs. I think it’s quite plausible that TM & DL overplayed Quick to ensure a Playoff spot, which also ensured their jobs.
It would be nice to hear Ownerships thoughts and expectations prior to the upcoming season rather than the following April.
[Reply]
Quisp Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 11:05 pm
@Rainman,
Their jobs weren’t even remotely on the line.
[Reply]
Rainman Reply:
June 1st, 2010 at 8:23 am
@Quisp,
Keep drinking that Kool-Aid Quispie. I see you’ve got a pitcher full above.
So, hypothetically speaking, if the Kings had missed the Playoffs, “their jobs weren’t even remotely on the line?” I tend to disagree.
[Reply]
jet Reply:
June 1st, 2010 at 10:45 am
@Rainman, 5 years ago the Kings oganizational prospects ranked among the bottom 5 in the league year after year. Now, we are in the top 5 year after year. This is not a random occurance. Next summer DL will be the hottest commodity out there, including players.
can’t wait for Bernier to be in the NHL full time!
[Reply]
Another great interview Rich. Thanks!!
[Reply]
Erik Ersberg is a very underrated and under appreciated goaltender.
I would think long and hard before trading him.
[Reply]
Erik Ersberg is a very underated and under appreciated goaltender.
I would think very long and hard before trading him.
End of Sermon.
[Reply]
Quisp Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 11:02 pm
@Michael G,
[thinking long and hard]
Now trade him.
(I don’t think he’s underappreciated; there’s no room for him)
[Reply]
Dan H. Reply:
June 1st, 2010 at 12:32 pm
@Quisp,
I have to agree with you. Not because I don’t value him but for the first time in team history that I can remember we have a good #1 goalie and a kid coming in that can be as good or better…so there’s no sense in stunting EE. If you actually care for the guys career, the best thing he can do is go somewhere he can compete for the #1 job.
[Reply]
Great interview as always. Can’t express enough how you keep the fans informed about EVERYTHING. Great to hear from the GM. I would expect Ersberg to be traded on draft day,and I would expect him to do well wherever he goes.
[Reply]
Dominick Reply:
May 31st, 2010 at 11:15 pm
@hockeysureshot,
I suspect that EE will have a lot to prove.He’ll be looking to show the hockey world that the Kings made a mistake,and I hope it drives him to be the #1,where ever he is playing next year.
That being said,when ever we play him,I hope we burn him for 5 goals,every time.
[Reply]
Great stuff Rich.
I don’t think it was Quick’s fault that we didn’t advance, but the numbers do speak volumes as to whether he was tired or not. I didn’t think that was an issue, but looking back, it sure does look that way.
It’s all in the past and only good can come from it.
Quick learned what it takes to be a full time goalie in the NHL and got much needed playoff experience.
the workload can only help him going forward in his career.
Now we have a situation where Quick absolutely deserves the #1 ranking coming into camp.
Bernier gained valuable experience and now should be ready to compete in the NHL for a full season. While the #1 job is Quick’s, it certainly doesn’t mean that he’s guaranteed anything once the season starts. I’m sure Bernier will push him to the limit. that’s the way it should be.
We’re well set up to have possibly the best 1-2 goalie combination in the league next year.
That’s something that 3 years ago, was a dream followed by a piss test afterwards.
[Reply]
Don’t forget how well Zatkoff did wen he filled in for Bernier this year. His development has been steady and remarkable. The upcoming year or two should be good for him, then who knows…maybe teamed with Bernier again?
[Reply]
nykingfan Reply:
June 1st, 2010 at 9:11 am
@Tim,
Also, don’t forget Martin Jones in Juniors.
Damn, we are stacked in goal. At some point in the future, someone will become trade bait. Way too early for that though.
[Reply]
jet Reply:
June 1st, 2010 at 10:50 am
@Tim, Zatkoff played a couple of months for the Monarchs 3 years ago and was one of the better goalies in the league. (And DL is worried about Bernier being frustrated?) Expect him to do quite well. Jones should get 62 games for the Reign.
[Reply]
I don’t think you are allowed to take a day off Rich… what the hell
[Reply]
What a position for the Kings to be in vis-a-vis goalies.
Here’s my take.
EE will be traded for the simple reason there’s no room for him. Not a knock on Erik, and he should do well with another team, and we’ll get “something” in return.
Quick and Bernier will have at each other all year long. By the playoffs, the Kings will know who their #1 goalie of the future will be.
Whoever comes in 2nd, will be traded, with the backup coming up from the farm system. Again, the Kings will indeed get “something” in return because we’re talking about a young, experienced player who can lead a team.
Next season is going to be fun to watch, because of the timing of player’s development and contracts. This is going to be the season of Dean Lombardi. The moves he makes between now and the start of the 2011 season will in fact be the culmination of his rebuild efforts. THAT Kings team should be the solid foundation of the LA Kings as a power in the NHL.
Like I said, next season is going to be fun to watch, and I’m already pissed off it’s only June 1st!
[Reply]
Toward the end of last season, there was a lot of bitterness between me and some fans who wanted to heap all the team’s woes on Quick. I said then, and I’ll repeat, that I truly believe Bernier is the better goaltender–it’s just that he and Quick were on different tracks last season.
I find it reasonable that Murray and Lombardi respect Quick’s ability and effort, and go into camp presuming that he will be the number one goaltender. The caveat–and this is the biggest caveat in sports–is that he won’t be number one if another goaltender outperforms him.
This is what I fully expect to happen, and I believe Murray does, too. I expect Bernier to come in, with all that experience he gained over the last season and a half, and play lights-out in goal. This, however, won’t happen in a vacuum. I also expect Quick to shore up the elements that are lacking in his game, and make it really hard for Bernier to take the job away.
There will be a true starting goaltender for the season, but there will also be a jealous contender right behind him who will be willing to put in all the time the starter does, so that when he gets a shot between the pipes, we’ll doubt TM’s choice.
In short, I expect the cream to rise to the top, and the decision to be tough. I wouldn’t doubt one of them–probably Quick–gets traded to start in goal for another team at next season’s trade deadline, in exchange for some real value. That’s probably a really good reason to keep Ersberg around.
[Reply]
Food for thought, but I’m wondering what DL thinks about the emergence of less heralded goaltenders in this year’s playoffs. Neimi, Halak, Leighton, etc. were all backups at some point this year, yet at times they have thrived during the playoffs.
[Reply]
A real in depth interview, something a lifelong king fan can appreciate. The question is what do we do with 2 starters. For one, and I hate to say it, is that the time for the kings to pick up a forward with not only playoff, but cup experience is now. Teams that went far have players w/experience. New Jersey has those players. Elias is an example. Lets trade Quick, who has high trade value from 39 wins (low contract) to N.J., he could lead NJ for years with help from aging Broduer, and give the keys to Bernier. We need players to get dirty.
[Reply]
I dont agree with playing Quick 70 plus games. Ersberg will be traded and we as Kings fans will see how solid he really is. Everytime i see him play he is very smart and really knows were to be in net. i am not as high on Quick as everyone else is, and i would like to see him stay with the Kings.
[Reply]
Trade Ersberg,there is no reason to have him and Teddy Murry in the same team any moore.
[Reply]
bernier will not make in the nhl. he gets to flustered when alot of pucks come at him. saw him in manchester. ahl is not nhl.
[Reply]