HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Los Angeles Kings (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=42)
-   -   what's wrong with our defense? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=171438)

KingPurpleDinosaur 09-14-2005 09:15 AM

what's wrong with our defense?
 
i don't understand the posts that think our defense is bad.

i think our top 4 is pretty good

Aaron Miller
Nathan Dempsey
Mattias Norstrom
Lubomir Visnovsky

with 2 prospects to fill in the rounding 5 and 6.
Denis Grebeshkov
Tim Gleason

Corvo as filler for injuries or prospects if need be

personally, i think we're fine in the back and on the forward lines. its really only the goaltending that worries me

King'sPawn 09-14-2005 09:36 AM

Obviously, we can't win a cup unless our top 6 is:
Lidstrom - Pronger
Gonchar - Niedermayer
Ohlund - Foote

After all, a defensive corps like Tampa Bay's is so elite, we should have engraved the cup for them back in 2003 when the 03 - 04 season started!

[/sarcasm]

Seriously, I agree with you. Our defense isn't spectacular, but it's servicable. With the right chemistry and system to play under, it can be just as effective as most, if not all, the other defensive corps in the league.

KingKong99 09-14-2005 10:22 AM

Agreed - The Kings defense is fine. Go look at other teams depth charts and afterwards you realize that the Kings defensive corps is above average.

KingsCourt 09-14-2005 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingKong99
Agreed - The Kings defense is fine. Go look at other teams depth charts and afterwards you realize that the Kings defensive corps is above average.


I agree, but I would still like to see DT make a deal for a another D-man.

Matt13 09-14-2005 08:07 PM

Some of you are just making too much sense.

When we have unproven goaltending we need more offensive dmen instead of defensive dmen.

Besides that Colorado has Blake and Foote and oh wait.....Dallas has um, ahhh, well sure Anaheim has Neidermeyer, but Salei and Carnie arent Norris cup winners...........

Whatever DT, just answer my letter!

Hatter 09-14-2005 09:29 PM

concur. nah you guys are right there is nothing wrong with our defense. We have

Matty - getting older but plays a solid game . But by no means the number 1 dman we need.
Miller - China doll. How many games are we expecting out of him this season? Far too injury prone. Will definatly miss 20 + games this seasn.
Gleason - Rookie, unproven but in a few years will be one hell of a dman. Now? This year? we will see. top 4 dman? maybe
Corvo - cannot hit the side of a barn with his slapshot and makes horrendous passes in his own zone. by no means a top 4 dman or even a top 6.
Vishnovsky - Our one bright spot and a good point on our PP. (p.s. as much as I love Lubo he soes not put up the numbers a true PP QB)
Dempsey - Can play the point with Lubo on the PP and is decent defensively but by no means a top 4 dman.
Grebeskov - Horrible last year in manchester. Is not living up to expectations
Petiot - unproven. We will have to see


Thats it. Out of our top 8 we have 3 rookies, 1 plain bad dman (corvo), a china doll, and 3 serviceable dmen.

Even DT came into this offseasonrecognizing that we need another dman and with Klatt retireing he should use that money, not by inviting overrated Norton to camp but, to bring in a solid offensive or defensive true top 4 dman. We are at 31.5 or in that area and have enough money to bring in a 3 million dollar defensman and STILL be under 35 million. Just my .02 cents.

We are talking about a team that was 28th in the PK and neither our defense nor our goaltending (more than probably) have been upgraded.

Reaper45 09-14-2005 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatter
concur. nah you guys are right there is nothing wrong with our defense. We have

Matty - getting older but plays a solid game . But by no means the number 1 dman we need.
Miller - China doll. How many games are we expecting out of him this season? Far too injury prone. Will definatly miss 20 + games this seasn.
Gleason - Rookie, unproven but in a few years will be one hell of a dman. Now? This year? we will see. top 4 dman? maybe
Corvo - cannot hit the side of a barn with his slapshot and makes horrendous passes in his own zone. by no means a top 4 dman or even a top 6.
Vishnovsky - Our one bright spot and a good point on our PP. (p.s. as much as I love Lubo he soes not put up the numbers a true PP QB)
Dempsey - Can play the point with Lubo on the PP and is decent defensively but by no means a top 4 dman.
Grebeskov - Horrible last year in manchester. Is not living up to expectations
Petiot - unproven. We will have to see


Thats it. Out of our top 8 we have 3 rookies, 1 plain bad dman (corvo), a china doll, and 3 serviceable dmen.

Even DT came into this offseasonrecognizing that we need another dman.

I still find it hard to believe that a 49 point, 87 PIM season makes last year horrible.
Regular season
75 5 44 49 87
Playoffs
6 0 4 4 2

Same kinds of thigns were said about Sydor, Zhitnik.....

halco 09-14-2005 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt13
Some of you are just making too much sense.

When we have unproven goaltending we need more offensive dmen instead of defensive dmen.

Besides that Colorado has Blake and Foote and oh wait.....Dallas has um, ahhh, well sure Anaheim has Neidermeyer, but Salei and Carnie arent Norris cup winners...........

Whatever DT, just answer my letter!


BTW, Foote signed with Columbus. But as for the Kings, the key as in any year is to stay away from injuries. We must get 75+ games from Visnovsky, Nordstrom, Miller and Dempsey. Lose any one of these guys for an extended period and we go from above average d-men to slightly below average.

Hatter 09-14-2005 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper45
I still find it hard to believe that a 49 point, 87 PIM season makes last year horrible.
Regular season
75 5 44 49 87
Playoffs
6 0 4 4 2

Same kinds of thigns were said about Sydor, Zhitnik.....

No, you are right. I misspoke. I should have said was a dissapointment to the organization and did not play up to expectations. I still belive that he will be a force to be reckoned with in the future and that he will be our number 1 (true #1) in the future but damn near all the brass has stated that he did not have the season that they were all expecting. I don't even think that he will be first on the call-up list this season. I bet that will be Petiot.

Hatter 09-14-2005 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by halco
BTW, Foote signed with Columbus. But as for the Kings, the key as in any year is to stay away from injuries. We must get 75+ games from Visnovsky, Nordstrom, Miller and Dempsey. Lose any one of these guys for an extended period and we go from above average d-men to slightly below average.

Sorry but I say we go from barley average to far below average with Matty,Miller or Lubo getting hurt and if any 2 of them get hurt then we have 3 rookies on our top 6.

Hatter 09-14-2005 10:19 PM

Look guys I am not tring to piss on anyones parade but as much as the doomsayers annoy the hell out of me so to do the "everything is lovely in kings land, DT Koolaid drinkers.

kingbrath 09-14-2005 10:48 PM

lalalalala everything is lovely in kings land lalalalala
The Kings should EASILY win the cup

Matt13 09-14-2005 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by halco
BTW, Foote signed with Columbus. But as for the Kings, the key as in any year is to stay away from injuries. We must get 75+ games from Visnovsky, Nordstrom, Miller and Dempsey. Lose any one of these guys for an extended period and we go from above average d-men to slightly below average.



note where it is says "oh wait" after foote......sacrasm.

The rest of the paragraph is basically comparing our defense to the rest and its just as good if not better than most.

Matt13 09-14-2005 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatter
Sorry but I say we go from barley average to far below average with Matty,Miller or Lubo getting hurt and if any 2 of them get hurt then we have 3 rookies on our top 6.


How about you name all the teams with a better defense.

5-Hole 09-15-2005 03:39 AM

defense
 
let's not forget too how much our defense was improved in one stroke of a pen...




... when Modry signed elsewhere as a FA. (Atlanta I think it was)

George 09-15-2005 10:01 AM

As I mentioned in another thread, what people are forgetting to factor is how much a potent offense can do for your defence. Everything on the ice is related and every factor (attribute/weakness) is dependant on one another. So, a better offence = better defence.
Could we use better Dmen, of course, but so could all teams. I'm suggesting that we give these guys a chance when the offence is a legitimate threat. Once again injuries will play a major factor and I'm hoping for a little luck in that department.

GoneFullHextall 09-15-2005 10:47 AM

The Kings defense is fine.
I am just not sure if Grebs is ready or not.

Hatter 09-15-2005 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt13
How about you name all the teams with a better defense.

How about you do your own homework. I have done enough in this thread. Off the top of my head I can come up with 13 teams with better D. you guys want to belive that our d is fine jsut take a look at last year and look at the stats and then realize that we were not improved.

Matt13 09-15-2005 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatter
How about you do your own homework. I have done enough in this thread. Off the top of my head I can come up with 13 teams with better D. you guys want to belive that our d is fine jsut take a look at last year and look at the stats and then realize that we were not improved.



Im not the one whining that our D is a problem now am I? So how am I going to come up with a list of teams that I think have a better defensive squad? I figured you couldnt come up with a decent answer, anyways. You've done enough in this thread? HA dont make me laugh, you made a couple of weak comments about each player and you think that proves a point.


Why would I look at last year? Name a couple teams that has the same D corps in 2005. Dallas has lost players, Detroit has lost players, Colorado has lost players etc etc. Because of the salary cap no competitive team is the same team as they were.

The short list, yeah Anaheim improved, Columbus impoved, but they didnt have anything to begin with.....The Kings remained realitively unchanged and thats not a bad thing in todays cap atmosphere.

jfont 09-15-2005 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatter
you guys want to belive that our d is fine jsut take a look at last year and look at the stats and then realize that we were not improved.

i agree...we haven't improved (though the subtraction of modry is a good thing though). and a good offense won't make your defense look good. you can't play luc and frolov on defense...they're both LW;)...right now, i see the offense as just abit better than the year before...

i'm curious to know if dempsey and miller played any hockey during the lockout...if not, and i have not heard otherwise, then i would say they're not as good as the year before...but i hope i'm wrong on this though.

Matt13 09-15-2005 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfont
i'm curious to know if dempsey and miller played any hockey during the lockout...if not, and i have not heard otherwise, then i would say they're not as good as the year before...but i hope i'm wrong on this though.


the whole landscape of the NHL has changed since the last time it took the ice. To say any team is going to suck or isnt going to work based on old standards is just wrong. I will agree the Miller and Demps probably arent any better, but I doubt they are any worse.

kingbrath 09-15-2005 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatter
How about you do your own homework. I have done enough in this thread. Off the top of my head I can come up with 13 teams with better D. you guys want to belive that our d is fine jsut take a look at last year and look at the stats and then realize that we were not improved.


I agree with Matt13, looking at last years stats have absolutley nothing to do with this year, especially with all the injuries...last year should be forgotten and definatley not used comparatively with this upcoming season. There is no way of knowing how our D will do in the new NHL until we see for ourselves. Would I like another Dman, sure but im not going to hold my breath waiting for it to happen. If you want to be negative about this season go ahead but just dont try to back it up by comparing it to stats that dont matter.

Glockaxis 09-15-2005 10:25 PM

Hum....what's wrong w/ our defense.....one word------Corvo. Everything else is fine.

Kingz4life 09-16-2005 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfont
i agree...we haven't improved (though the subtraction of modry is a good thing though). and a good offense won't make your defense look good. you can't play luc and frolov on defense...they're both LW;)...right now, i see the offense as just abit better than the year before...

i'm curious to know if dempsey and miller played any hockey during the lockout...if not, and i have not heard otherwise, then i would say they're not as good as the year before...but i hope i'm wrong on this though.

You missed the point about the offence/defense. A better way to put it is, great offense is the best defense. With that said Conroy is one of the best defensive forwards in the league who can put up points also.

TonySCV 09-16-2005 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glockaxis
Hum....what's wrong w/ our defense.....one word------Corvo. Everything else is fine.

Now *that* I agree with :)

I still want a solid 6th D-Man. I do agree with others though that the 5 others we have are fine. We're just a little thin on D, especially if injuries hit.

Forwards on the other hand - good GOD, we're set.

- T


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:58 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.