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 @ Wild - 2/1/11 - Postgame THOUGHTZZZzzzzzzzz

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-02-2011, 12:11 PM
  #76
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
... They weren't either, and you know it. Thornton was 14th on the team in scoring, then 18th. Willsie was 11th, then 14th. Conroy was 13th, then gone. McCauley scored one point as a King. ONE POINT = TOP OFFENSE GUY AMIRITE

Why don't you say who the top offensive guys really were, instead? They were Cammalleri, Frolov, Kopitar, Visnovsky, Brown, O'Sullivan - not a bad collection of players at that time. And not only that, the teams under Crawford sacrificed defense to get offense.

... Don't have to "defend" anything. The Kings are an average offensive team and an outstanding defensive team when compared to the rest of the league. Again, if you don't appreciate good defense, that's your problem. Having to resort to things like "McCauley was one of our top offense guys under Crawford" in order to justify your irrational obsession with bashing Murray every day just makes you look dishonest and weakens your point that much more.
Yes, thankfully gone are the days of the easy 2-foot tap in for a goal that Kings' opponents seemed to get once or twice a game under Crawford.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 02:35 PM
  #77
Vic Vinegar
Registered User
 
Vic Vinegar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
... They weren't either, and you know it. Thornton was 14th on the team in scoring, then 18th. Willsie was 11th, then 14th. Conroy was 13th, then gone. McCauley scored one point as a King. ONE POINT = TOP OFFENSE GUY AMIRITE

Why don't you say who the top offensive guys really were, instead? They were Cammalleri, Frolov, Kopitar, Visnovsky, Brown, O'Sullivan - not a bad collection of players at that time. And not only that, the teams under Crawford sacrificed defense to get offense.
To be fair, Kopitar and Brown were far from the players they are today.

Vic Vinegar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 03:06 PM
  #78
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDankness View Post
To be fair, Kopitar and Brown were far from the players they are today.
Brown and O'Sullivan put up their best career numbers during that time period.

Kopitar and Cammalleri's 2nd best offensive seasons also came during that same time.

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 03:14 PM
  #79
Kurrilino
Go Stoll Go
 
Kurrilino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,533
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Kurrilino
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
... They weren't either, and you know it. Thornton was 14th on the team in scoring, then 18th. Willsie was 11th, then 14th. Conroy was 13th, then gone. McCauley scored one point as a King. ONE POINT = TOP OFFENSE GUY AMIRITE

Why don't you say who the top offensive guys really were, instead? They were Cammalleri, Frolov, Kopitar, Visnovsky, Brown, O'Sullivan - not a bad collection of players at that time. And not only that, the teams under Crawford sacrificed defense to get offense.

... Don't have to "defend" anything. The Kings are an average offensive team and an outstanding defensive team when compared to the rest of the league. Again, if you don't appreciate good defense, that's your problem. Having to resort to things like "McCauley was one of our top offense guys under Crawford" in order to justify your irrational obsession with bashing Murray every day just makes you look dishonest and weakens your point that much more.
A) At this time Kopitar was a 50 Point player, Brown was a 40 Point player, Cammy wasn't a 30 goal scorer and O'Sullivan was a 10 goal scorer.
I can't believe that you ignore the fact, that Kopitar and Brown had All Star Games since then and we have 2 more 30 goal scorer in Smyth and Williams.
This is almost doubled firepower and you are telling me these guys creating same goal production is something good ??????

B) Yes i appreciate very good defense, i love it.
But playing a style with just defense is exactly wrong like using just a run and gun offense without defense.
It is very easy to play just defense and that makes Murray so easy to play for.

But if you ever want to win something important you need a mix of brilliant defense and flashy agressive offensive.

Crawford could deliver the offense, Murray can deliver the defense...... both isn't helping. That makes me think Murray is the wrong person.
Crawfords team is one of the best teams in the west and they aren't equal to our talent......
just saying.


BTW i can't believe that you guys are happy with 1 point against a opponent without any talent that directly challenges us for a playoff spot and gets the 2 points out of the game.... serious

Kurrilino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 03:28 PM
  #80
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurrilino View Post
A) At this time Kopitar was a 50 Point player, Brown was a 40 Point player, Cammy wasn't a 30 goal scorer and O'Sullivan was a 10 goal scorer.
Wrong.



And Cammalleri had just put up 34 goals (80 points) the season prior.

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 03:55 PM
  #81
DeeMeck
Registered User
 
DeeMeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,370
vCash: 500
Whoever deleted my post at the beginning of the GDT is responsible for this loss. It wasn't deleted in the 3 prior GDT's which resulted in wins.

Win and you're in.

DeeMeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 04:02 PM
  #82
Herby
Culture Changer
 
Herby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,348
vCash: 500
I don't think Crawford is a bad coach, he was a bad coach for the Kings at the time. His system is more designed for veteran players and is probably going produce a division winner this season. I think he was probably fired because he and Lombardi are in totally different area codes when it comes to what style to play. I think DL and TM are on the same page as far as how they think the team should be built and what style they want to play.

I obviously don't agree with the grinding out 2-1 games, build from the goal line out strategy, but it is what it is and thats the way the Kings are going to play as long as Murray and Lombardi are here. That's why I find it funny how people want Murray gone and expect things to totally change. If Murray is fired all the Kings will do is bring in another dead puck defensive coach like Hitchcock and the system won't change.

Herby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 04:08 PM
  #83
Kurrilino
Go Stoll Go
 
Kurrilino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,533
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Kurrilino
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
Wrong.



And Cammalleri had just put up 34 goals (80 points) the season prior.
Well... this was Crawfords last year.
I'm pretty sure if the player put up these numbers over the last years he wouldn't have been fired.

BTW these stats would prove that all players decreased their scoring since Murrays arrival.
I can't see how the stats speak any good word for Murrays offensive system

I completely agree that Crawford wasn't the right guy at this time. I remember my swearing about him and his love for Armstrong.

But he learned from his desaster and is doing a damn good job in Dallas right now.

Kurrilino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 04:11 PM
  #84
Buddy The Elf
Kings!
 
Buddy The Elf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Belmont Shore
Country: United States
Posts: 9,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herby View Post
I obviously don't agree with the grinding out 2-1 games, build from the goal line out strategy, but it is what it is and thats the way the Kings are going to play as long as Murray and Lombardi are here. That's why I find it funny how people want Murray gone and expect things to totally change. If Murray is fired all the Kings will do is bring in another dead puck defensive coach like Hitchcock and the system won't change.
Aren't you the one calling for DL's head? What makes you think AEG will replace him with anyone better if he is fired?

Buddy The Elf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 04:28 PM
  #85
Herby
Culture Changer
 
Herby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddy The Elf View Post
Aren't you the one calling for DL's head? What makes you think AEG will replace him with anyone better if he is fired?
I don't believe that that grinding out, defensive oriented hockey is the optimal way to play in today's NHL. That is one of many reasons I think the Kings would be much better off with a new management team with a more up to date philosophy for what style of play will be most successful.

I was more talking at the people who are pegging this all on Murray. The Kings knew what they were getting with Murray when he was hired, he is the perfect coach for the style of hockey the Kings believe in. All I'm saying is the people that want Murray fired are going to disappointed when the next guy management brings in is just Terry Murray v. 2.0

Herby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 04:35 PM
  #86
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A. suburb
Country: United States
Posts: 9,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
...
Why don't you say who the top offensive guys really were, instead? They were Cammalleri, Frolov, Kopitar, Visnovsky, Brown, O'Sullivan - not a bad collection of players at that time.

And for the Kool-Aid-hoarders in the crowd: 5 of those 6 were brought here by Dave Taylor.

Not that bad a starting point for Dean Lombardi, I'd say - 5 years ago.

Butch 19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 04:41 PM
  #87
DryIslandBartender
KCCO
 
DryIslandBartender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,291
vCash: 500
I'm starting to become a skeptic on Dean Lombardi's moneyball ways.

Over the years we had several chances through the drafts and through FA to grab a top flight scorer and it's no coincidence this team sucks on 5 on 5 scoring. We got a collection of lunch pail guys that like to grind it out. We need to add some more skill and speed in the top 6.

DryIslandBartender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 05:01 PM
  #88
Herby
Culture Changer
 
Herby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BerniernextRoy View Post
I'm starting to become a skeptic on Dean Lombardi's moneyball ways.

Over the years we had several chances through the drafts and through FA to grab a top flight scorer and it's no coincidence this team sucks on 5 on 5 scoring. We got a collection of lunch pail guys that like to grind it out. We need to add some more skill and speed in the top 6.
And Dean would tell you to take a look at the 95 Devils, 96 Panthers, 99 Sabres, 03 Ducks, 03 Wild, 04 Flames. All teams that were built to win 2-1 games, built from the goal line out with tons of grit, character and guys who fit the team.

Those are the kind of teams the Kings are being modeled after.

Herby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 05:07 PM
  #89
DeeMeck
Registered User
 
DeeMeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herby View Post
And Dean would tell you to take a look at the 95 Devils, 96 Panthers, 99 Sabres, 03 Ducks, 03 Wild, 04 Flames. All teams that were built to win 2-1 games, built from the goal line out with tons of grit, character and guys who fit the team.

Those are the kind of teams the Kings are being modeled after.
Not a coincidence that those are pre-lockout teams.

The league doesn't like 2-1 games, and will continue to adjust the rules to promote scoring.

DeeMeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 05:13 PM
  #90
Herby
Culture Changer
 
Herby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeMeck View Post
Not a coincidence that those are pre-lockout teams.

The league doesn't like 2-1 games, and will continue to adjust the rules to promote scoring.
Oh, trust me I agree with you 100%.

The New NHL is Wrigley with the wind blowing out, and the Kings are bunting and stealing.

Herby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 05:18 PM
  #91
tigermask48
Maniacal Laugh
 
tigermask48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: R'Lyeh, Antarctica
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herby View Post
And Dean would tell you to take a look at the 95 Devils, 96 Panthers, 99 Sabres, 03 Ducks, 03 Wild, 04 Flames. All teams that were built to win 2-1 games, built from the goal line out with tons of grit, character and guys who fit the team.

Those are the kind of teams the Kings are being modeled after.
Not to derail this thread but wasn't TM the head coach of the Flyers that got eliminated by both of those teams?

tigermask48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 05:24 PM
  #92
tigermask48
Maniacal Laugh
 
tigermask48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: R'Lyeh, Antarctica
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeMeck View Post
Not a coincidence that those are pre-lockout teams.

The league doesn't like 2-1 games, and will continue to adjust the rules to promote scoring.
Not really, the Oilers (to a lesser extent,) Ducks, and Flyers could all potentially fit into the mold of defense oriented or built from the net out teams post lockout.

tigermask48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 06:39 PM
  #93
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Herby View Post
I don't believe that that grinding out, defensive oriented hockey is the optimal way to play in today's NHL. That is one of many reasons I think the Kings would be much better off with a new management team with a more up to date philosophy for what style of play will be most successful.

I was more talking at the people who are pegging this all on Murray. The Kings knew what they were getting with Murray when he was hired, he is the perfect coach for the style of hockey the Kings believe in. All I'm saying is the people that want Murray fired are going to disappointed when the next guy management brings in is just Terry Murray v. 2.0
I think you're forgetting that Dean initially wanted to have an uptempo new NHL style system. That's why he hired crawford and had a tendency to draft good skating prospects (lewis, hickey). But at some point he changed his mind.

I remember him getting critisized on here for over estimating the "new nhl."

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 06:56 PM
  #94
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
I think you're forgetting that Dean initially wanted to have an uptempo new NHL style system. That's why he hired crawford and had a tendency to draft good skating prospects (lewis, hickey). But at some point he changed his mind.

I remember him getting critisized on here for over estimating the "new nhl."
Not so sure he changed his mind as much as he is playing the hand he has for the time being. More speed and quickness is on the way in some of the younger guys. He already had Moller and Loktionov in the wings. Recently he went after some bangers in Schenn and Clifford.

Still wouldn't mind seeing Dean inquire with regards to Mason Raymond.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 08:27 PM
  #95
Tadite
Registered User
 
Tadite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rhode Island
Country: United States
Posts: 4,793
vCash: 500
This is how I think a sports team should be run. Not like children jumping at the newest fad but with organization and stability. That's how the Steelers do it and it's also how the Red Wings do it...

It's also why we've been such a unsuccessful team for so long. Moment we have a chance the team would dump its draft picks, dump its youth, pick up some over the hill FA hoping that it would make the difference and when it doesn't work then it's back to firing the coach/GM and yet another rebuild. Ever wonder why failed teams have gigantic turnover and the successful stay the same year after year?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/03/sp...r=1&ref=sports

"More than by any player or coach, the Steelers are identified by the way they have done business for 40 years. They build through the draft, take care of their players, maintain financial discipline, eschew flashy hires and treat people well.

In the win-now world of professional sports, the Steelers have managed a twin bill that only a few other organizations, including the Green Bay Packers, can claim: they win now, and they set themselves up for the future, too. Of the 22 players who are expected to start for the Steelers on Sunday night, 18 were either drafted by the Steelers or signed as undrafted or rookie free agents. For some of those players, it will be their third Super Bowl appearance in six years. "

"The Steelers have hired only three coaches since 1969 Chuck Noll was the first and each has won a Super Bowl. With Noll, Dan Rooney and his brother Art Jr. formed a threesome that recognized the draft as the building block of a team. That philosophy remains. Offensive and defensive systems are not adopted and ripped up every few years, necessitating cyclical remakings of the roster. "

"The continuity means everybody from the owners to the entry-level scout knows what Steelers players should look like. The team is able to draft prospects who will fit its system for years because the system is not going to change giving them time to develop without shoving them into service as the team is made over. "

Tadite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 08:45 PM
  #96
Tadite
Registered User
 
Tadite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rhode Island
Country: United States
Posts: 4,793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurrilino View Post
Well... this was Crawfords last year.
I'm pretty sure if the player put up these numbers over the last years he wouldn't have been fired.

Honestly man. What do you think this is a all star game? Player success doesn't mean a damn thing about team success.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurrilino View Post
BTW these stats would prove that all players decreased their scoring since Murrays arrival.
I can't see how the stats speak any good word for Murrays offensive system
One more time because god knows even you should get it by now: G/G G/A

10/11: 2.71 2.43
09/10: 2.82 2.57
08/09: 2.46 2.72
07/08: 2.72 !3.38!
06/07: 2.72 !3.38!

Are you honestly trying to claim that Marc ****ing Crawfords team with a offense at the same level as now but with almost a full goal given up per game was in anyway something that we should remember with anything else but horror!!! What it also clearly shows is that good defensive teams can still score as well as when we're playing 'open ice hockey' like under that idiot.


I know what happened. What happened was in 08/09 we pick up a new system and a new coach who makes the team actually work. All of a sudden the offense dries up and everyone is up and arms about how much TM is a anti-offense and how much we don't score. Doesn't ****ing matter that a year later we've returned to our original levels now he is typecast by people who don't bother to read.

Tadite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 09:54 PM
  #97
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Not so sure he changed his mind as much as he is playing the hand he has for the time being. More speed and quickness is on the way in some of the younger guys. He already had Moller and Loktionov in the wings. Recently he went after some bangers in Schenn and Clifford.
There's no question that the teams' style changed dramatically after the 07-08 season.

Every move DL made that offseason took the team in a more defensive, tighter checking direction.

Lombardi knew what he was getting with Crawford, and he knew what he was getting with Murray. They're polar opposites. Clearly DL made a conscious decision to take the team in a new direction in terms of playing style.

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2011, 10:36 PM
  #98
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
There's no question that the teams' style changed dramatically after the 07-08 season.

Every move DL made that offseason took the team in a more defensive, tighter checking direction.

Lombardi knew what he was getting with Crawford, and he knew what he was getting with Murray. They're polar opposites. Clearly DL made a conscious decision to take the team in a new direction in terms of playing style.
I think a lot of it had to do with the polar opposites in demeanor between the two coaches more than changing the system. The Kings were going to have to learn to play some team defense at some point. Didn't matter who the coach was.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 03:47 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.