HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Kings vs. Rags: Post Game Malaise

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-14-2009, 11:23 PM
  #51
dabeechman
Registered User
 
dabeechman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by riseandfall9 View Post
Ersberg looked like crap should have been pulled after the 2nd goal even if it wasn't his fault he was like a deer stuck in headlights all night.
I knew it was going to be a long game when he was swimming in the first 5 minutes.

dabeechman is offline  
Old
10-14-2009, 11:24 PM
  #52
HookKing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 794
vCash: 500
Lundquist was good but not great -- he didn't need to be. The Kings fired every shot right into his chest. Goaltending was the difference -- Ersberg was awful.

HookKing is online now  
Old
10-14-2009, 11:37 PM
  #53
William H Bonney
Registered User
 
William H Bonney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sierra Nevada
Country: United States
Posts: 19,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dabeechman View Post
Sean "I should be on the US diving team" Avery? Welcome...

Thanks for Matty.
You mean Canadian diving team

William H Bonney is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 12:03 AM
  #54
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,761
vCash: 500
Strangely enough, the second like has the most overall scoring chances on the team. I'm not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing.

no name is online now  
Old
10-15-2009, 12:09 AM
  #55
redbranch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: bridgewater,nj
Country: United States
Posts: 381
vCash: 500
I have to say, I'm impressed with a lot of your posters. I disagree with the comments about the refs having money on the rangers, and that lundqvist not having to play well though. But the comments overall here show a pretty good hockey knowledge, and a few Kings fans showed up post game in our thread to be very gracious.

This was really the first game this season where lundqvist had to bail his team out, and he did. If he didn't play well, and make some very key saves, the Kings run over the Rangers in this game. You guys did to us, what we've been doing to most other teams this season. The difference is we had a hot goalie, and you had a rookie(who I think played very well overall)

Good luck against Detroit, and lets' try and meet up in the playoffs

redbranch is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 12:15 AM
  #56
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,761
vCash: 500
My take on the PP dmen is that Williams needs to be a first line PP forward instead of the point. I think the Kings have the most PP scoring chances when JJ is on the ice but I don't think JJ and Doughty pair well in that regard. Put Stoll and Doughty at the number one PP with JJ and Harrold manning the second line. The thing is that JJ has got to see more PP time. The disrepencies are pretty glaring.

If I may add, I would like to replace Brown with Simmonds on the second li=ne PP. I think Brown needs to earn his time. His game is starting to come around but things shouldn't be handed to him.

no name is online now  
Old
10-15-2009, 12:17 AM
  #57
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbranch View Post
I have to say, I'm impressed with a lot of your posters. I disagree with the comments about the refs having money on the rangers, and that lundqvist not having to play well though. But the comments overall here show a pretty good hockey knowledge, and a few Kings fans showed up post game in our thread to be very gracious.

This was really the first game this season where lundqvist had to bail his team out, and he did. If he didn't play well, and make some very key saves, the Kings run over the Rangers in this game. You guys did to us, what we've been doing to most other teams this season. The difference is we had a hot goalie, and you had a rookie(who I think played very well overall)

Good luck against Detroit, and lets' try and meet up in the playoffs
Thanks man.

no name is online now  
Old
10-15-2009, 12:22 AM
  #58
Mr Irreverent
Misunderstood
 
Mr Irreverent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by no name View Post
My take on the PP dmen is that Williams needs to be a first line PP forward instead of the point. I think the Kings have the most PP scoring chances when JJ is on the ice but I don't think JJ and Doughty pair well in that regard. Put Stoll and Doughty at the number one PP with JJ and Harrold manning the second line. The thing is that JJ has got to see more PP time. The disrepencies are pretty glaring.

If I may add, I would like to replace Brown with Simmonds on the second li=ne PP. I think Brown needs to earn his time. His game is starting to come around but things shouldn't be handed to him.

Agree with everything.

Mr Irreverent is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 12:22 AM
  #59
LAX attack*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Danger Zone
Country: United States
Posts: 14,543
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LAX attack*
We did get scoring chances though... maybe not the "hitting the goal post/over the net" kind, but rather the "deflected just wide/1 more pass" kind. I know it's hard to see, but it's there

LAX attack* is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 12:28 AM
  #60
SomE
Registered User
 
SomE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,789
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by William H Bonney View Post
You mean Canadian diving team
Like he will be on a team full of french canadians (who are great divers btw. See Luongo)

SomE is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 12:41 AM
  #61
Defgarden
Registered User
 
Defgarden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Loma Linda, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbranch View Post
I have to say, I'm impressed with a lot of your posters. I disagree with the comments about the refs having money on the rangers, and that lundqvist not having to play well though. But the comments overall here show a pretty good hockey knowledge, and a few Kings fans showed up post game in our thread to be very gracious.

This was really the first game this season where lundqvist had to bail his team out, and he did. If he didn't play well, and make some very key saves, the Kings run over the Rangers in this game. You guys did to us, what we've been doing to most other teams this season. The difference is we had a hot goalie, and you had a rookie(who I think played very well overall)

Good luck against Detroit, and lets' try and meet up in the playoffs
The NHL would totally have a huge boner for that scenario.

Defgarden is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 01:32 AM
  #62
Brad Doty
Moderator
Compliance Hero
 
Brad Doty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: I.E.
Country: United States
Posts: 10,304
vCash: 250
Re: the team attitude following the loss (as evident in inteviews and postgame)...On one hand, I'm upset that they're writing this off as 'just one game' when the expectations are higher.

On the other hand, though, the fact that the team sees what they did wrong, is ready to put it behind them and expects a WIN next game is a far different attitude than last year.

Brad Doty is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 01:38 AM
  #63
123slam
Registered User
 
123slam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,008
vCash: 500
I laughed when avery got clipped. hate that little piece of ****.

**** that prima donna Boyle. little ***** complaining about us screwing him over when he's the one who couldnt cut it.

ersberg sucked. quick should have played. murray ****ed up.
williams sucked (get him off the point on the pp).
richardson played very well.
purcell is an NHLer..it's final.
the checking line is still the cure for erectile dysfunction.
smyth is god.
brown is a selfish player..i'm starting to see it now noname. he's starting to twist my nips.

yeahh i'm upset but only cuz the kings outplayed the rags and got the loss. excuse the french. peace!

123slam is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 01:46 AM
  #64
redcard
Registered User
 
redcard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,418
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbranch View Post
I have to say, I'm impressed with a lot of your posters. I disagree with the comments about the refs having money on the rangers, and that lundqvist not having to play well though. But the comments overall here show a pretty good hockey knowledge, and a few Kings fans showed up post game in our thread to be very gracious.

This was really the first game this season where lundqvist had to bail his team out, and he did. If he didn't play well, and make some very key saves, the Kings run over the Rangers in this game. You guys did to us, what we've been doing to most other teams this season. The difference is we had a hot goalie, and you had a rookie(who I think played very well overall)

Good luck against Detroit, and lets' try and meet up in the playoffs
You're catching us after an unexpected 4 game winning streak. Even the most optimistic posters here didn't see us starting the season 4-1-0. If you invert those numbers the result would probably not be the same.

That being said, I am fairly confident we can take Detroit tomorrow.

redcard is online now  
Old
10-15-2009, 02:28 AM
  #65
backhander
Registered User
 
backhander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 1,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 123slam View Post
I laughed when avery got clipped. hate that little piece of ****.

**** that prima donna Boyle. little ***** complaining about us screwing him over when he's the one who couldnt cut it.

ersberg sucked. quick should have played. murray ****ed up.
williams sucked (get him off the point on the pp).
richardson played very well.
purcell is an NHLer..it's final.
the checking line is still the cure for erectile dysfunction.
smyth is god.
brown is a selfish player..i'm starting to see it now noname. he's starting to twist my nips.

yeahh i'm upset but only cuz the kings outplayed the rags and got the loss. excuse the french. peace!
totally agree...quick was riding on the win streak. murray come on...it's so much easier to say now that we lost.

backhander is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 02:37 AM
  #66
redcard
Registered User
 
redcard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,418
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by backhander View Post
totally agree...quick was riding on the win streak. murray come on...it's so much easier to say now that we lost.
Hindsight's 20/20, but Detroit's struggling and the Rangers on are on a hot streak. Seems like starting the hot goalie against the better team would be the better decision. Maybe Murray feels like putting Quick against the rags and Ersberg against the wings would put us in a position for 2 loses whereas we have a pretty good chance against the wings with Quick in.

redcard is online now  
Old
10-15-2009, 02:40 AM
  #67
JDM
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcard View Post
Hindsight's 20/20, but Detroit's struggling and the Rangers on are on a hot streak. Seems like starting the hot goalie against the better team would be the better decision. Maybe Murray feels like putting Quick against the rags and Ersberg against the wings would put us in a position for 2 loses whereas we have a pretty good chance against the wings with Quick in.
Everyone has been saying "Western Conference game is more important" and all that, but a different thought occurred to me about the decision to play Ersberg tonight, quite a simple one. Better goalie for the game when the team will be more tired.

Though I agree with you. Soon as I heard Ersberg was starting this game I thought it would prove unwise. I still think we can win tomorrow, but the way Detroit is playing, I feel like we had a better chance at 4 points with Quick playing the Rags.

JDM is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 03:27 AM
  #68
redcard
Registered User
 
redcard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,418
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDM View Post
Everyone has been saying "Western Conference game is more important" and all that, but a different thought occurred to me about the decision to play Ersberg tonight, quite a simple one. Better goalie for the game when the team will be more tired.

Though I agree with you. Soon as I heard Ersberg was starting this game I thought it would prove unwise. I still think we can win tomorrow, but the way Detroit is playing, I feel like we had a better chance at 4 points with Quick playing the Rags.
Oh yeah, we can't expect our team to light fire and take out the hottest team in the East and then the Western conference champs the next night. With Quick in net tomorrow we have a great shot at taking 2 points out of a back-to-back on the road. Thankfully, Tomorrow is only our second "bounce back" game of the year.

Another question based on Ersberg's performance today: Should we be expecting our back-up goalie to be shaky after spending 2 weeks on the bench? Or should our back-up be playing like he has something to prove and seizing every opportunity?

redcard is online now  
Old
10-15-2009, 03:28 AM
  #69
LAMoFoKANGS*
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: not there
Country: United States
Posts: 114
vCash: 500
ivanans should NEVER play "hockey" again....that is all

ps ersberg sucks.....

ok NOW that is all

LAMoFoKANGS* is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 03:33 AM
  #70
aegwillnotwinthecup*
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 4,392
vCash: 500
Yeah, you really can't excuse Ersberg too much. That Gaborik goal was completely ridiculous. Five Kings were back and Ersberg was completely non-square to the shot. That was just a lazy play that took the team out of the game emotionally.

This game pissed me off really bad for some reason. The reffing was horrible, Lundqvist bailed out the Rags time after time, and we could barely connect a pass in the last ten minutes. I was just completely unimpressed by "the hottest team in the East" and I'm pissed off that a couple really soft goals cost this team two points they clearly should have had.

Whatever. The Wings are going to be much tougher tomorrow night.

aegwillnotwinthecup* is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 03:41 AM
  #71
redcard
Registered User
 
redcard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,418
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegwillnotwinthecup View Post
Yeah, you really can't excuse Ersberg too much. That Gaborik goal was completely ridiculous. Five Kings were back and Ersberg was completely non-square to the shot. That was just a lazy play that took the team out of the game emotionally.

This game pissed me off really bad for some reason. The reffing was horrible, Lundqvist bailed out the Rags time after time, and we could barely connect a pass in the last ten minutes. I was just completely unimpressed by "the hottest team in the East" and I'm pissed off that a couple really soft goals cost this team two points they clearly should have had.

Whatever. The Wings are going to be much tougher tomorrow night.
I didn't think the reffing was too bad, hell we got away with a couple in my opinion. But the PP was definitely uninspiring. Even when they could make a pass to a stick the receiver bobbled it. It was sloppy and the effort wasn't there.

redcard is online now  
Old
10-15-2009, 05:40 AM
  #72
aegwillnotwinthecup*
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 4,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcard View Post
I didn't think the reffing was too bad, hell we got away with a couple in my opinion. But the PP was definitely uninspiring. Even when they could make a pass to a stick the receiver bobbled it. It was sloppy and the effort wasn't there.
When I say "the reffing was bad" I don't always mean for the Kings. Some horrible calls went both ways. The ref behind the net on the Rangers second goal who waved it off should be fired. Immediately. That call was bad for both Rangers and Kings fans alike, which is incredible when you think about it. Bad for the Rags in that it was clearly a goal and the puck was never dead; bad for the Kings that they decided to review a non-reviewable play.

Such a display of ineptitude is remarkable and only the beginning of the sad joke that is NHL reffing.

aegwillnotwinthecup* is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 05:51 AM
  #73
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Legionnaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 35,403
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by no name View Post
My take on the PP dmen is that Williams needs to be a first line PP forward instead of the point. I think the Kings have the most PP scoring chances when JJ is on the ice but I don't think JJ and Doughty pair well in that regard. Put Stoll and Doughty at the number one PP with JJ and Harrold manning the second line. The thing is that JJ has got to see more PP time. The disrepencies are pretty glaring.

If I may add, I would like to replace Brown with Simmonds on the second li=ne PP. I think Brown needs to earn his time. His game is starting to come around but things shouldn't be handed to him.
We definitely need to see Jack and Drew on the power play together. It should be an option any time we need to establish or regain a lead.

Legionnaire is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 06:58 AM
  #74
Chruceg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boston, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 868
vCash: 500
I try to avoid posting immediately after losses. Due largely to my reactionary profanity laced tirades. But in hindsight that was about a good of a loss as there could be. (If there is such a thing) The Kings simply out played the Rangers and only lost because of goaltending. This is to be expected from backup goalies.

Let's hope they continue the good play against the Wings tonight.

Chruceg is offline  
Old
10-15-2009, 07:20 AM
  #75
4ndr3y*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 1,026
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to 4ndr3y*
Quote:
Originally Posted by aegwillnotwinthecup View Post
When I say "the reffing was bad" I don't always mean for the Kings. Some horrible calls went both ways. The ref behind the net on the Rangers second goal who waved it off should be fired. Immediately. That call was bad for both Rangers and Kings fans alike, which is incredible when you think about it. Bad for the Rags in that it was clearly a goal and the puck was never dead; bad for the Kings that they decided to review a non-reviewable play.

Such a display of ineptitude is remarkable and only the beginning of the sad joke that is NHL reffing.
+ there was a horrible penalty call on Harrold crashing the net.
+ why didn't Avery got 2min for diving (unsport. conduct)
+ there were atleast 3 situations where the reffs didn't call a penalty on rags where they were holding Kopitar.

other than that there is this rumor: The Rangers NHL team has been invited for the USA diving qualifications. e4

4ndr3y* is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:09 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.