View Single Post
11-14-2012, 09:55 PM
Triple Crown Line
Docgonzo's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Chino, Ca
Country: United States
Posts: 622
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Hammer79 View Post
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.
Yup 16-4 in the playoffs is the weakest cup winning team since the Canes. If Phoenix and St. Louis weren't that great, how come they got past the 1st rounds? If Chicago was so good this year how could they not stop the juggernaut that was Antoine Vermette? The Sharks lost 4-1 to a team that lost their #1 goalie, but yet beating St. Louis 4-0 is somehow a negative.

Phoenix also went on to beat the mighty Predators 4-1 after the Preds beat the Red Wings 4-1. So I fail to see the logic that Phoenix wasn't a tough team.

People need to get over the fact that the "traditional" hockey teams stunk this year and lost to 2 lowly teams from the South West.

Docgonzo is offline   Reply With Quote