View Single Post
Old
11-14-2012, 08:40 PM
  #100
Hammer79
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RapidFire View Post
Comparing Boston to LA is laughable. Sure, the Kings weren't as spectacular as the 08 Wings or 07 Ducks, but the Bruins scraping out a cup win with 3 game 7's and the most losses of any cup winner in history is not nearly as good as the Kings who went 16-4 with better competition

LA might have avoided D Sedin/Pietrangelo for a few games of their respective series, Halak for the 2nd round, but the Bruins had the pleasure to not play against Pronger, Markov, Gorges, Pacioretty, Hamhuis (6.5 games), Samuelsson, Kubina, Carter (1/2 series)
I think it's laughable too. The 2011 Bruins would have beaten the 2012 Kings handily. 2012 Kings were the weakest cup winning squad since the 2006 Hurricanes.

Don't forget that Kesler was playing with one arm too (torn labrum, still on IR after surgery), it wasn't just Daniel that was out for most of that first round. Those are two key forwards that were nowhere near 100% The Kings didn't play the same Canucks team that took the Bruins to 7. Take two top forwards out of the Kings line-up (say Kopitar and Brown), and they are out early. (No, Gagne isn't a top forward anymore, hasn't been for a couple of years) For those who cry 'lack of depth!', hypothetically which depth players would have replaced Kopitar and Brown?

For the Blues, a young team that over-achieved greatly during the regular season, losing your #1 Halak and #1 D-man for any stretch is devastating. Elliot had great stats in a sheltered starts behing a stingy Blues system that year, but was mediocre for the Sens. This was a much bigger loss for the Blues than Kings fans would like to admit. The Blues play a low scoring system and depend on goaltending to keep them in games, they weren't built to turn the offense on like that. What luck for Kings fans, although they are loathe to admit it.

Phoenix, really? The Coyotes in the conference final? They were only a couple points up on the 8th place Kings team. Hardly an upset there for the Kings. No wonder most posters were referring to a dull playoffs. That was the weakest WCF since Anaheim vs Minnesota in 2003.

New Jersey, the 6th place team that got taken to game 7 by a Florida franchise with goaltending problems and was just happy to be there. NJ had their own luck, drawing a Philly team that forgot how to play D after the Penguins series in the 2nd round, and got by an exhausted Rangers squad in the ECF. This was hardly a big upset either for the Kings.

First two rounds, Kings draw top seed teams, but with key injuries to their top performers. Deserves an *Asterisk. The last two, they played teams that were much weaker draws than they could have been. What if Nashville had gotten over their chemistry problems? What if NY Rangers had won the ECF? What if the Penguins hadn't imploded defensively in an emotional series against their rivals? What if Tea Party Timmy hadn't become a headcase on the Bruins? All the top offensive-minded teams were out by round 2. That's quite a bit of luck to have along the way.

A cup win is a cup win, but I'm hardly convinced that they are the favorites to repeat going into next season, whenever that ends up being.

Hammer79 is offline   Reply With Quote