HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Los Angeles Kings (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=42)
-   -   Boyle , Moulson and Purcell (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=891948)

Blackhawkswincup 03-17-2011 01:31 AM

Boyle , Moulson and Purcell
 
I am curious what King fans think of these 3 former Kings

Are you suprised by how well they are playing and did you think these 3 would be playing as good of hockey as they have after being moved?

I view them as similiar to Rene Bourque , James Wisniewski and Tuomo Ruutu all established themselves in other NHL cities after being moved by Hawks as young guys who had failed to fulfill there promise at time of being moved by Hawks

johnjm22 03-17-2011 01:37 AM

:deadhorse

Not surprised by their success at all.

Sometimes things don't start to click for a player until they get a change of scenery. Hickey is next in line.

RonSwanson* 03-17-2011 01:37 AM

http://www.cheezeweezle.com/Warlock-new-thread.gif

Maynard 03-17-2011 01:42 AM

Those 3 names are brought up quite a bit here. Opinions are all over the road. I don't give it too much thought because the team is doing well with plenty of other home grown talent. Seeing Moulson hit 30 stings a little but the Penner acquisition has gone a long way toward making me stop thinking about the need for scoring wingers. If the team was doing worse and none of the other guys had worked out it'd be pissing me off big time.

DIEHARD the King fan 03-17-2011 01:44 AM

I know you didnt come with this intention, but this topic opens the proverbial "can of worms" on this board.

For me, Moulson is the only one who I dont think got a real shot here. And while I am happy to see him suceed elsewhere, I do have the feeling, just like in the days of old, that the Kings let a good one get away and got little (in his case actually nothing) back

Purcell got a fair number of chances but the pressure was such that he couldn't produce and fit in, possibly because he is not a Terry Murray type defensive minded player and probably can't be.

Boyle was an enigma: With his size and hands, goals should come in bunches and there should be bodies littered on the ice in his wake. That he is producing now shows that he can do it, but he didnt display the consistent effort when he was here to produce like he is now. I have to think that with many of the college guys, even though they are older when they get to the NHL they still need more time to hit their stride than players who work their way up through Jrs and the minor leagues.

Shellz 03-17-2011 01:58 AM

Moulson, maybe. As for the rest...nah. I don't miss them. It's whatever. Good to see them having success right now.

Shellz 03-17-2011 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DIEHARD the King fan (Post 31720453)
I know you didnt come with this intention, but this topic opens the proverbial "can of worms" on this board.

For me, Moulson is the only one who I dont think got a real shot here. And while I am happy to see him suceed elsewhere, I do have the feeling, just like in the days of old, that the Kings let a good one get away and got little (in his case actually nothing) back

Purcell got a fair number of chances but the pressure was such that he couldn't produce and fit in, possibly because he is not a Terry Murray type defensive minded player and probably can't be.

Boyle was an enigma: With his size and hands, goals should come in bunches and there should be bodies littered on the ice in his wake. That he is producing now shows that he can do it, but he didnt display the consistent effort when he was here to produce like he is now. I have to think that with many of the college guys, even though they are older when they get to the NHL they still need more time to hit their stride than players who work their way up through Jrs and the minor leagues.

Agree. I think Boyle was the hardest to watch. I still get annoyed thinking about him.

s3machine* 03-17-2011 02:02 AM

Moulson definitely stings.. as for Boyle and Purcell... meh. I think we have more than filled their voids.

KingPurpleDinosaur 03-17-2011 02:06 AM

boyle stunk. he was as good here as he was his first year with you guys. im surprised he made it, he didn't have a guarantee written all over him. but he seemed like a real solid guy, sucked he didnt pan out for us, but glad he did for you guys.

purcell had some confidence issues here. something about the competition or something that made him buckle. lombardi always wrote purcell in as a top 6, so its of no surprise to him. just too bad something here made him scared

moulson was ook here, but surprised he made it out. he seemed like one of those skilled players who just oculdnt cut the top 6, so he'd be left out. kinda like eric belanger or something. but good for him to come out.

i think we're starting to understnad how detorit feels. on a daily, those guys toss out scrubs who become significant players on other teams cause they just have too much depth. it just spills over and either you get something of value for them or you just don't use them. teubert, same ways, will probably be a solid nhler for the oils, but with us, he'd never make it. he probably wouldn't have gotten his shot til 26 or 27 if he's lucky.

it's funny, i remember always acting like "ooh, we got a steal off of detroit!" but fact is, they're the ones winning cups, not us.

vh2k7 03-17-2011 02:11 AM

i'm still not a huge moulson fan but he has more to his game than i originally thought for sure.

boyle wasn't ever going to work here, i think most kings fans agree on that. at least not with our coach and system. i think torts is a great fit for him and i'm glad it worked out.

purcell irks me a bit, because it always felt, to me, like he was closer than murray gave him credit for. extremely happy to see him having success in TB.

Nex06 03-17-2011 02:29 AM

Moulson I regret, other two I don't. I wouldn't take them back. As for actually being surprised, I am surprised by Moulson and Boyle, I pretty much expected that Purcell will put up those numbers on some other team. I still think that Boyle just had a good year and I expect him to have 12+12 next season. This has been his season for the grandkids, when they ask him, did he really play in NHL.

Cutty Sarkn3ss* 03-17-2011 02:44 AM

Don't miss any of them, glad they're doing well . . they didn't fit on this team

BigBrown 03-17-2011 04:05 AM

They all had their chances, they all failed. Getting cut or traded was probably the wake up call they needed to find some success.

lebowski74 03-17-2011 04:17 AM

Name 3 guys on inferior teams.

kingsholygrail 03-17-2011 04:35 AM

I know with Boyle, he actively worked to improve himself to get on the main roster for the Rangers when he was traded. I think that was a case of "oh ****, I better get my act together".

Albi 03-17-2011 04:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigBrown (Post 31721168)
They all had their chances, they all failed. Getting cut or traded was probably the wake up call they needed to find some success.

Excuse me, but Moulson played 10 games with the Kings at the beginning of the 2008-09 season, then got buried in MCH. In the summer the Isles signs him and he has back to back 30 goal campaigns. We lost him for nothing and we didn't give him a proper chance, let's stop kidding ourselves. Saying that he didn't fit in our system is a freakin' joke, come on.

About Boyle and Purcell, they just failed here.

saintsnsoldiers 03-17-2011 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigBrown (Post 31721168)
They all had their chances, they all failed. Getting cut or traded was probably the wake up call they needed to find some success.

See this is what I don't agree with or don't understand. What constitutes a chance. 6 games, 14 games? Boyle was a late bloomer and missed our boat. Purcell meh... Moulson needed a full season playing on the top 6 which we would not give him. I feel Holloway will get the same treatment and we miss out on a goal scorer. Its hard to slide prospects in here and there and expect good things to happen. On the other hand look at Martinez, and Muzzin showed a bit, Simmonds and Clifford maybe performed as expected. But its the diamonds in the ruff that are hard to gauge and get them the time the real time needed. That's is the frustrating part for me. Plus Im a Holloway homer which don't help.

saintsnsoldiers 03-17-2011 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Albi (Post 31721288)
Excuse me, but Moulson played 10 games with the Kings at the beginning of the 2008-09 season, then got buried in MCH. In the summer the Isles signs him and he has back to back 30 goal campaigns. We lost him for nothing and we didn't give him a proper chance, let's stop kidding ourselves. Saying that he didn't fit in our system is a freakin' joke, come on.

About Boyle and Purcell, they just failed here.

Funny thing is Moulson just had his 2nd 30 goal season in a row. :shakehead

Sydor25 03-17-2011 09:38 AM

Since nobody knows what goes on behind the scene, everyone just looks at the numbers instead of the team. Wins and losses are the only thing that matters. That is a team stat. Right now the Kings have back-to-back 40 win seasons (sorry JT, but that is a fact) for the first time in their history, I will take team success over individual success.

Lombardi takes character over skill, some would say too much, and maybe those three players didn't show what Lombardi wanted to see. Lombardi is getting the core players locked up with very good cap hits, so I believe in his ability more than our observations.

All three players are in the Eastern conference, so their damage to the Kings is minimal. Would these three players be able to perform the same in a Murray system and in the Western conference? Maybe, maybe not.

I'm fine with them having individual success and good for them getting it done in the NHL. I don't think they would have had the same success in LA and the Pacific division.

JBernierFan 03-17-2011 10:15 AM

Boyle is only as good as he is now because the Kings traded him, he sucked with the Rangers his first year and realized he needed to get his **** together. Even the Rangers had him penciled in at the start of this year in the minors. He was one step away from being a career AHLer, IMO, and an official bust. I think he'll stick with the Rangers (or some other team here on out), but this year I believe was his career year. He would have never fit on this team, nor would he have pushed so hard in the summer if he was still a King IMO.

Purcell, though doing well, I don't miss him. He was given a chance here, in all situations including the two 6 several times and all that got him was a seat in the press box. I wish him well, but don't miss him, nor would I replace him with anyone on our team today.

Moulson is the one that I think should have been given more of a chance, but I think in the bigger pressure of the Kings trying to find success and in the system that we play he wouldn't have had the 2 30+ seasons like he is doing on the Island. I think he's a great player, but I think he found his niche on that one team. If he were to go to a more talented, older team with a more defensive system, I'm not sure he would be finding the same success. I think Rich Peverley is a great example of that. He has had to play a different role in Boston, than he was in Atlanta, with more pressure, etc. He isn't finding the same success there as he was as a Thrasher that earned him the larger contract. That being said, I love to see Moulson do well, and it's definitely nice for the Kings that he is in the East and only have to play him 1-2 times a year. If he were in the Pacific division, that would hurt just a little more.


This topic is a little sore for some people on these boards. Whenever the Kings are struggling, they search out the stats of these three players. If you were to pick any team in the NHL right now, you could find the same situation with players that have left the franchise for whatever reason. Do other teams constantly talk about players that go off and find success other places?

Pucknut50 03-17-2011 10:26 AM

:deadhorse:deadhorse:deadhorse:deadhorse:deadhorse :deadhorse:deadhorse:deadhorse:deadhorse

KINGS17 03-17-2011 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lebowski74 (Post 31721199)
Name 3 guys on inferior teams.

I wouldn't call Tampa Bay inferior, but I get what you are saying.

pain2007 03-17-2011 10:51 AM

Big guys like Boyle often are late bloomers, not surprised to see him improving.

Purcell got plenty of opportunity in LA, he was just so soft. Is he playing less soft in Tbay now?

TwoForRoughing 03-17-2011 10:57 AM

Moulson is the only one I'm sort of bitter about but if that's the best example we have of letting a player go then I'm happy...

kingsfan 03-17-2011 10:59 AM

I agree to the beating a dead horse analogies, but in the interest of the original poster, my opinion is it sucks, but it happens. Florida just let Michael Grabner walk on waivers this season and he'll likely hit 30 goals as well (at 28 currently).

Moulson is the only one who surprises me. I know some will say he didn't get a fair shot here, and that may be so, but it's rare two teams give up on a guy and then he blooms in another city. Pittsburgh didn't see anything in Moulson and we obviously felt he wouldn't reach anything significant either as we didn't make a big effort to resign him from what I recall. Good for him though and I'm glad he bloomed in NYI and not Anaheim or San Jose or Dallas.

As for Boyle and Purcell, they don't really surprise me. Boyle was a 1st rounder and Purcell was once one of our highest regarded prospects. The Future Watch one year had him as like the 38th best prospect outside the NHL to once, so I knew he had it in him. Purcell would be nice to have back, but he wasn't doing much here when he played, so we took a risk trading him and it backfired. It happens. Once again, glad it happened for him in Tampa Bay and not the Western Conference.

Boyle, I know I'll get flamed again for saying this, but I don't miss him. Nice size, but that's about it. Fans on this board go on and on about him having 20 goals but half were scored in the first 15 games of the season, and I think he has like one goal in his last 15 games or so. According to NHL.com, in his last 33 games (since Jan. 1st), Boyle has six goals and 10 points. He's an effective 3rd/4th line big bodied grinder that got hot for a month or two. We have more than enough bodies to replace what he's been contributing since about November or so.

So in recap, kudos to Moulson, gladly trade Boyle for a 3rd again and it sucks we lost Purcell but it happens.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:48 AM.

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.