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

Why do they get so much better...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-29-2011, 08:26 PM
  #26
Defgarden
Registered User
 
Defgarden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Loma Linda, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,827
vCash: 500
O'Sullivan?

Defgarden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 08:30 PM
  #27
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,799
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMoneyMonkey View Post
All evidence points to yes.

I mean, has anybody been traded from the Kings and then played worse?
That's a great question. I usually feel LA is the place veterans come to wrap up their careers. For the most part they come to the Kings, stink and are never heard from again. This is obviously a sweeping generalization but I'd love to see some names of players who were worse after LA, struggling to remember any names. Gretzky?

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 08:31 PM
  #28
tigermask48
Maniacal Laugh
 
tigermask48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: R'Lyeh, Antarctica
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,994
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMoneyMonkey View Post
So, should the Kings risk more and try to give the prospies more of a chance? It might mean a few dropped games but, we really should be able to have somebody in the running for the calder next year.
Who? look at the current Kings contracts and tell me who exactly is waiting in the wings to be a Calder frontrunner? Loktionov, and Schenn are the only two close. Schenn isn't the be all end all savior some are championing him as but a decent third line center option next year. Loktionov (is he even eligiable next year?) unless he suddenly figures out how to excel as a winger may not even make the opening night roster, oh and he's hurt and will be rehabbing a shoulder this summer...

tigermask48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 08:32 PM
  #29
SMoneyMonkey
Registered User
 
SMoneyMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LA/MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigermask48 View Post
Are you serious? If you are:

Quincey, Priessing, Frolov, (not traded but let go as Moulson was) Visnovsky, Hersley, O'Sullivan all jump to mind as recent ones.
If you weren't serious then ignore the above list...

as for the origional question, Purcell has mostly been touched on already as it's a matter of the system and his linemates. Moulson is just a good player, with the right guys on a really bad team. If he's still here he's basically putting up half the numbers if not less due to the system. Boyle has more to do with his continued development. His improved skating and mobility (over this past off-season) has helped him to be more than just a big body with decent hands on the ice.
Quincey and Priessing weren't really our prospects. And Vis might've taken a while but he's definitely better now. Frolov got injured (poor guy) so it's hard to really tell if he got worse. I agree with Hersley and O'Sullivan and I'm sure there are others.

It was more just an offhand remark than anything serious, though.

...Poor Sully...

SMoneyMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 08:37 PM
  #30
HYORI 1963
Grit & Character
 
HYORI 1963's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Orange County CA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,489
vCash: 500
The biggest name you left off is our smallest and most under appreciated player. The player if still with the kings would easily fill the void on our first line LW:

Cammy!!!

HYORI 1963 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 08:44 PM
  #31
SMoneyMonkey
Registered User
 
SMoneyMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LA/MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigermask48 View Post
Who? look at the current Kings contracts and tell me who exactly is waiting in the wings to be a Calder frontrunner? Loktionov, and Schenn are the only two close. Schenn isn't the be all end all savior some are championing him as but a decent third line center option next year. Loktionov (is he even eligiable next year?) unless he suddenly figures out how to excel as a winger may not even make the opening night roster, oh and he's hurt and will be rehabbing a shoulder this summer...
Pretty sure Lokti is still eligible but I'm not sure.

Schenn could be in the running for calder, it's hardly a "be all end all savior" award.

Kozun, Holloway, Voynov, Hickey, Muzzin all could break out and surprise. That's the whole thing, I'm not saying "Hey look, we could field an all star team with our prospects", I'm saying "Hey, you know, one of these guys is probably a decent 2nd liner just waiting for an actual chance to break out"

Err... Or second pairing.

(Yeah, Kozun is mostly included because I have a huge man-crush on him no-homo)

SMoneyMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 08:44 PM
  #32
tigermask48
Maniacal Laugh
 
tigermask48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: R'Lyeh, Antarctica
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,994
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMoneyMonkey View Post
Quincey and Priessing weren't really our prospects. And Vis might've taken a while but he's definitely better now. Frolov got injured (poor guy) so it's hard to really tell if he got worse. I agree with Hersley and O'Sullivan and I'm sure there are others.

It was more just an offhand remark than anything serious, though.

...Poor Sully...
Talk to Rangers fans, he was worse. There were times when he was probably worse than Poni was this past year. Poni as least brought the hitting almost every game. He doesn't fit in at all in the more free-wheeling East, his skill handling the puck along the boards and working the cycle doesn't mesh there because teams will just let him sit on the perimeter and block off all the passing lanes negating that skill and forcing him to make a move. The game is just too fast and wide open for his skillset to work well there other than against a team like Boston, or the Rangers.

tigermask48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 09:15 PM
  #33
tigermask48
Maniacal Laugh
 
tigermask48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: R'Lyeh, Antarctica
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,994
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMoneyMonkey View Post
Pretty sure Lokti is still eligible but I'm not sure.

Schenn could be in the running for calder, it's hardly a "be all end all savior" award.

Kozun, Holloway, Voynov, Hickey, Muzzin all could break out and surprise. That's the whole thing, I'm not saying "Hey look, we could field an all star team with our prospects", I'm saying "Hey, you know, one of these guys is probably a decent 2nd liner just waiting for an actual chance to break out"

Err... Or second pairing.

(Yeah, Kozun is mostly included because I have a huge man-crush on him no-homo)
More a comment on the Kings current depth. I can't see any of the d-men in the system beating out the current group of Doughty, Johnson, Greene, Scuderi, Mitchell, and Martinez. Even if they do they are making it as 6th or 7th d-man and aren't playing every night. At forward I can't see Schenn or Loki beating out Kopitar, Stoll, and Richardson at center, and neither is a natural winger so it'll be tough to crack a spot there. It'd be great to see someone emerge, but i just don't see where they'd fit in unless of injury or trade right now.

tigermask48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 09:20 PM
  #34
KingPuckChoo
Registered User
 
KingPuckChoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,836
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMoneyMonkey View Post
All evidence points to yes.

I mean, has anybody been traded from the Kings and then played worse?
kyle quincey
patrick o'sullivan
alex frolov
tom preissing (ya he was worse w/ COL than w/ LA)

KingPuckChoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 09:40 PM
  #35
JT Dutch*
Cult of Personality
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsFan7824 View Post
If Purcell is great with one year of 17 goals and 51 points, and 1 goal in a 1st round series, why do we complain about the wingers the Kings currently have?
... Don't remember anyone saying Purcell was great. But - he had 51 points, and how many did Justin Williams have? 57, right? Not much more.

Also, Williams played over 17 minutes per game this season, while Purcell played about 14 per game.

Is Purcell the player that Williams is? Probably not. Is he a damn sight better than the Kings ever thought he was? Absolutely, when you consider Purcell was traded for the great Jeff Halpern.

But please, keep regaling us with these fictional stories about how Purcell had "every opportunity" to succeed with the Kings when he was playing 11 minutes a game here and playing out of position to boot. Those stories are always so entertaining and inspiring.

JT Dutch* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 10:17 PM
  #36
Tadite
Registered User
 
Tadite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rhode Island
Country: United States
Posts: 4,856
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
But please, keep regaling us with these fictional stories about how Purcell had "every opportunity" to succeed with the Kings when he was playing 11 minutes a game here and playing out of position to boot. Those stories are always so entertaining and inspiring.
You can be sarcastic all you want but Purcell had his shot.

You could also start with all those nice stories of Purcell sitting on the periphery scared to take a hit or the ones about how he never bothered to back check. Or how about the ones in which he never won a battle on the boards in his life?

Guy was openly talked about by the GM of a NHL team as a future top-6 player. DL specifically said he thought he'd be a 1st liner on the Kings. He got 91 games on the Kings with a whole hell of a lot of support from management and didn't get it done.

If anything the problem was that back in 09/10 Parse was suppose to turn into the top-6 skills guy making Purcell expendable and he ends up losing a whole season...

Tadite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2011, 10:54 PM
  #37
Muzzinga
Regehr GOAT
 
Muzzinga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,285
vCash: 500
grunch

The east coast is easier to play in
Moulson and Purcell both play on run n gun offence teams
Moulson in particular plays on a team that doesnt defend and just looks to score goals
Purcell got a solid 50 points, but you have to imagine that would translate to an effective 35-40 points in the kings defensive system + being in the more physical West. That isn't too great for someone expected to be a point producer since he doesnt bring much in the way of defence or 'intangibles'

Muzzinga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 01:06 AM
  #38
agentfouser
Playoffs?!?!
 
agentfouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Ireland
Posts: 2,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMoneyMonkey View Post
...
I am personally starting to feel like our prospects don't get enough of a chance. I like Smyth, for instance, but what if somebody had stepped up and been better than Smyth. We'd be able to lose 6mil off the cap and a good prospect would have gotten some good ice time.

I know people are a bit hesitant because there's a theme in HF that every prospect is better than any regular NHLer and what not but, still, I feel like a lot weren't given a chance. Schenn should have been called up when Stoll got suspended, for instance. Clifford should have been given a chance to play with some decent skill. Holloway should really have been given some kind of shot at the NHL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishhead View Post
The way I see it, is the Kings have to find a way to get guys like Hickey, Voinov, Holloway, and so on into the lineup. Not only to see what they can do, but to ascertain their value to the organization and to other teams around the league. Then, you either move them in a package with solid roster players for a top talent, or you trade your roster players if you feel the young guys can replace them.
...
I agree that the Kings should be taking more risks, especially given their prowess at finding good players in the late rounds. The window is opening for this team, and it's the perfect time for a major move with our youth being ready.
Remember five years ago, when we all pined for the day when our prospects would be given the time to develop slowly, playing out their junior or NCAA eligibility before rounding out their game in the AHL?

Of course, you're right, that is the big question, and it's one of risk. How much do you invest in veteran players about whom you have better information but with whom you have to invest more and get less roster flexibility? How much do you trust prospects who are unproven but cheap and can be sent back to the minors? How, ultimately, to make the best use of assets?

I think what has prevented us from seeing more prospects this past year was health, particularly on defense. The Kings were quite healthy, but you have to figure that we're going to lose someone for a big chunk of the season next year. Then whoever of Voynov, Muzzin, or whoever else outplays Drewiske and Harrold (if those two are even around) will find a spot on the big club. I think the same will be true of the forward core. There will be an opening or two, and whichever forward wins a spot coming out of camp will make the team. The others will have to wait for injuries.

After all, it's not like the Kings haven't been integrating prospects into the lineup every year. This year it was Martinez, Clifford, and Bernier--not bad at all to have three prospects claim jobs on the big club and perform well.

agentfouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 01:14 AM
  #39
agentfouser
Playoffs?!?!
 
agentfouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Ireland
Posts: 2,459
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadite View Post
These things happen. Guy finally actually starts to become a professional at 26 years old.
They sure do. I'm really happy for these three as well, you always want to see persistence and dedication rewarded. It's really amazing how you see this same pattern in every industry. I watch it with my students and colleagues every day. The hardest thing in life is to find a way to discipline yourself to perform at a high level every day. Some people are able to do it from a young age, some learn it (like me), and some never really figure it out.

agentfouser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 03:28 AM
  #40
SLang
Registered User
 
SLang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 3,685
vCash: 500
Not to oversimplify but aren't all three of these guys also getting a lot more regular ice time than they ever saw with the Kings? I mean, usually the more you do something, the better you get at it.....not to mention you see more grade A opportunities.

SLang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 03:42 AM
  #41
Cutty Sarkn3ss*
I bet u trade me
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Granada Hills, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,983
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Cutty Sarkn3ss*
Let's keep making a thread like this every month, just like we've been doing for the past year . . . .

Cutty Sarkn3ss* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 05:17 AM
  #42
LombardiTool
Registered User
 
LombardiTool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Fontana, Ca
Country: United States
Posts: 2,808
vCash: 500
My dad always tells me, "If you want to make a King an All-Star, trade him".

LombardiTool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 08:01 AM
  #43
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
KingsFan7824's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 5,324
vCash: 500
Quote:
Basically, what should change to make sure we aren't wasting our prospect pool? We keep talking about our future while giving almost none of it a decent chance. I like that we let players develop but, I think we've got to take a few more risks.
Quote:
I am personally starting to feel like our prospects don't get enough of a chance. I like Smyth, for instance, but what if somebody had stepped up and been better than Smyth. We'd be able to lose 6mil off the cap and a good prospect would have gotten some good ice time.

I know people are a bit hesitant because there's a theme in HF that every prospect is better than any regular NHLer and what not but, still, I feel like a lot weren't given a chance. Schenn should have been called up when Stoll got suspended, for instance. Clifford should have been given a chance to play with some decent skill. Holloway should really have been given some kind of shot at the NHL.
The Kings had 4 guys that played the majority of the year in Manchester in 09-10, and 1 who came right from junior hockey, make and contribute to the team this year. A year that the Kings were expected to make the playoffs. How is that not a chance? A couple more guys made the team in 09-10. The year before that it was Doughty, Quick, Simmonds, and even Moller made the team out of camp that year. The Kings seem to have at least a couple young players make the team every year.

Quote:
So, should the Kings risk more and try to give the prospies more of a chance? It might mean a few dropped games but, we really should be able to have somebody in the running for the calder next year.
Maybe should isn't the right word there. That trophy goes to the rookie of the year, meaning guys that have no proven track record, that have never played an NHL game, or at least very few games, prior to that season. Should is a very strong word.

Quote:
Don't remember anyone saying Purcell was great.
Original post.
Quote:
There's a post on the NHL General forum about Purcell. If you watch him he's great
Quote:
But - he had 51 points, and how many did Justin Williams have? 57, right? Not much more.
Which is why I asked the question of people complaining about our current wingers. It was in the context of the original post. More of a sarcastic question anyway, since I didn't think great was the right word to use.

Quote:
Is Purcell the player that Williams is? Probably not. Is he a damn sight better than the Kings ever thought he was? Absolutely, when you consider Purcell was traded for the great Jeff Halpern.
As was pointed out, Lombardi projected Purcell to be a top 2 RW. He wasn't showing that on the ice for the Kings(for many reasons), and, probably more importantly, had Williams, Brown, and Simmonds ahead of him. Purcell ended up with little trade value, again, for many reasons. He went to a team that missed the playoffs, and was just looking for youth. He wasn't counted on to do anything going into the season, and has paid off nicely for the Lightning. Hats off.

Quote:
The Kings were quite healthy, but you have to figure that we're going to lose someone for a big chunk of the season next year.
Like Mitchell and Martinez this year.

KingsFan7824 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 09:09 AM
  #44
Whiskeypete
Registered User
 
Whiskeypete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: stuck in the middle
Country: United States
Posts: 2,524
vCash: 500
one, it's Murray's D first system even while in the offensive zone. second, it's Murray's constant line juggling in the hopes of manufacturing production. third, it's overall team skill.

ONE
the vaunted F3 that Murray preaches sits higher in the offensive zone than many teams, hell some would say most teams in fact. imo Murray demands the F3 to remain to high in the zone. the F3 is usually sitting from the center hashes to above the faceoff circles. this is to high, because an opposing D will/should have 1 or 2 guys positioned to take away anything feeding the F3.

the F3 also is very static in the O zone and doesnt seem to re-position enough to counter the D. there is a constant cat and mouse game that should be happening here, in an attempt to cause a defensive breakdown. the F3 is to the point he's more of a third dman than a supporting forward. i was always taught that in this role you have a few key responsibilites: breakdown the opponents forwards by constantly moving, take away the cross ice breakout pass and be the third guy back. what i was also taught is to not cheat low or high in the zone, where you become a liability both offensively and defensively. currently i think the Kings F3 is an offensive liability. they provide NO support to the offense the majority of the time.

the Kings offense essentially comes down to two forwards cycling the corner and a pass to the point. nothing more, nothing complicated, easily defended. for LA to get better the F3 needs to be brought lower down to support the other two forwards. until the F3 is breaking down the D by cycling the high slot area in relation to the puck, the Kings will always struggle on offense.

TWO
the constant line juggling does nothing, except to further diminish production. guys either click right away, or it takes time to develop chemistry. chemisty is nothing more than having an internal understanding and 'memory bank' of knowing what your linemate will do given the circumstances. the longer guys play together, the better they can anticipate what they will do, where they will go, where they want you to go to, etc. i cant tell you how many times i skated with new linemates and we were bumping into each other.

Murray uses the juggling two-fold. he uses it as a mechanism for punishment when he isnt happy with a players recent play. he also uses it to try and 'spark' players. the punishment aspect is just stupid imo. if your unhappy with a guy's play then explain what it is that isnt working, if it doesnt correct then bench them. a benching or being scratched will go further and quicker than a line reduction. using it to 'spark' a player is terrific, but it causes a domino effect. it causes one or two other guys to likely get shifted, which causes them to be displaced. that displacement can now lead to them not being familiar with who they are skating with, ala no chemistry.

Murray hopes that by shifting guys around he will be able to produce offense. sorry but it aint happening. the results the past few years bear that out.

THREE
LA lacks skill level, top 6 skill level. everyone knows it. instead of crying about it, wishing for something else.....practice, play and move on. keep looking for that improvement, but trust me that 'guy' isnt going to magically appear.

fans complaints that DL doesn't get the 'guy'. well there aren't many of those guys out there, in fact there are a handful league wide and most are all locked down. locked down and the other 31 teams are trying to secure the same guys. there isn't some magical free agent store that only LA and DL can shop at.

Whiskeypete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 10:28 AM
  #45
KingNick07
Registered User
 
KingNick07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 264
vCash: 500
They are skilled players.... TM system doesn't support that kind of skill unless you're 6'3. Oh and you have to LOVE to grind along the boards and cycle and never go to the front of the net.

KingNick07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 12:03 PM
  #46
JT Dutch*
Cult of Personality
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadite View Post
You can be sarcastic all you want but Purcell had his shot.
... Oh, well there's some conclusive and objective proof, right there. "He had his shot".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadite View Post
You could also start with all those nice stories of Purcell sitting on the periphery scared to take a hit or the ones about how he never bothered to back check. Or how about the ones in which he never won a battle on the boards in his life?
... First of all, nobody in the NHL likes to get hit, so let's get that out of the way right off the bat. As for the rest of this passage, you may as well say "making up things is so much fun!" because that's exactly what you're doing. He definitely back checked, he definitely played a decent enough game defensively. The knock on Purcell wasn't that he hurt the team defensively, because he certainly didn't. It was that he didn't do enough offensively.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadite View Post
Guy was openly talked about by the GM of a NHL team as a future top-6 player. DL specifically said he thought he'd be a 1st liner on the Kings.
... Talk is cheap. What action did the Kings take?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadite View Post
He got 91 games on the Kings with a whole hell of a lot of support from management and didn't get it done.
... This is the action the Kings took: 91 games at a little over 12 minutes per game, with over half of those games playing out of position. Yeah, that's really being well-supported, right there. Besides that, what's 91 games? A little over a season's worth. So, if a guy doesn't pan out in a season's worth of games, he should just be tossed aside? I didn't see Purcell afraid of being hit, or afraid of a battle along the boards, or any of that crap. I saw a player afraid to make a mistake. I saw a player who wasn't confident, and for good reason - because the head coach of the team had zero confidence in him.

Why not call it out for what it is? The team's coach (who was hired by the team's GM, by the way) didn't think he could play. And both of them were wrong. He's on a playoff team in the second round (something the Kings haven't done in a decade, by the way) and he was third on that team in assists, fifth in goals, second in plus-minus, all while playing a comparatively low number of minutes. He was an efficient top six player offensively without hurting the team defensively. So, why not be honest about it? He was traded for essentially nothing because there was a logjam at RW. Which is fine; if it's a numbers game, it's a numbers game. That happens. But there's no reason to be lying and saying "well he got a full shot" when he obviously didn't, and there's no way in hell that the Kings saw Purcell as the player he became in Tampa this season - otherwise he would have seen more than the bare minimum of shifts in L.A. It's that simple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadite View Post
If anything the problem was that back in 09/10 Parse was suppose to turn into the top-6 skills guy making Purcell expendable and he ends up losing a whole season...
... LMFAO. Are you serious with this? Parse was completely an afterthought when he was brought up, and was NEVER considered to be a top six mainstay or "skills guy" at any time. The season before (08-09) Parse scored 38 points in 74 games at Manchester. Does that scream out "NHL top six player" to you??? If he was supposed to be a top six guy in 09-10, he would have played more than 10 1/2 minutes per game that season, right? He would have received more than zero power play time that season, right? Are you just making this up as you go along? Look at Parse's season in 09-10. There were some games he got less than ten minutes of ice time out there - one game he played 5:24, another 8:49, another 9:50, another 8:01, and it goes on and on like that. By the end of the season, Parse wasn't getting ANY time out there - he was under 10 minutes in 10 of his last 12 games. He averaged less than 7 minutes a game in the playoffs. And THIS is the man the Kings wanted to turn into a top six??? Interesting.

Parse was just made the #1 LW in 10-11 by default - Frolov was gone, Smyth was developing more chemistry with the veteran second line, Ponikarovsky wasn't winning the confidence of the coach, Loktionov lacked experience and durability. Who else was left at the time? Parse had a season under his belt and had scored in double figures in that season. He got the nod because of that, then he promptly got injured.

JT Dutch* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 07:03 PM
  #47
HYORI 1963
Grit & Character
 
HYORI 1963's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Orange County CA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
... This is the action the Kings took: 91 games at a little over 12 minutes per game, with over half of those games playing out of position. Yeah, that's really being well-supported, right there. Besides that, what's 91 games? A little over a season's worth. So, if a guy doesn't pan out in a season's worth of games, he should just be tossed aside? I didn't see Purcell afraid of being hit, or afraid of a battle along the boards, or any of that crap. I saw a player afraid to make a mistake. I saw a player who wasn't confident, and for good reason - because the head coach of the team had zero confidence in him.
Correct! And don't forget about 5 to 10 additional games where Purcell had to play alongside Harrold and Raitis.



Quote:
... LMFAO. Are you serious with this? Parse was completely an afterthought when he was brought up, and was NEVER considered to be a top six mainstay or "skills guy" at any time. The season before (08-09) Parse scored 38 points in 74 games at Manchester. Does that scream out "NHL top six player" to you??? If he was supposed to be a top six guy in 09-10, he would have played more than 10 1/2 minutes per game that season, right? He would have received more than zero power play time that season, right? Are you just making this up as you go along? Look at Parse's season in 09-10. There were some games he got less than ten minutes of ice time out there - one game he played 5:24, another 8:49, another 9:50, another 8:01, and it goes on and on like that. By the end of the season, Parse wasn't getting ANY time out there - he was under 10 minutes in 10 of his last 12 games. He averaged less than 7 minutes a game in the playoffs. And THIS is the man the Kings wanted to turn into a top six??? Interesting.

Parse was just made the #1 LW in 10-11 by default - Frolov was gone, Smyth was developing more chemistry with the veteran second line, Ponikarovsky wasn't winning the confidence of the coach, Loktionov lacked experience and durability. Who else was left at the time? Parse had a season under his belt and had scored in double figures in that season. He got the nod because of that, then he promptly got injured.
Yep, that's what Parse was, an afterthought. His numbers were mediocre at best and with his pending RFA status, the management decided to give him a look.

HYORI 1963 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2011, 08:00 PM
  #48
Kurrilino
Go Stoll Go
 
Kurrilino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,598
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Kurrilino
Well... IMO it's like with tehse Brasilian soccer players........



They just wanna play soccer.
They don't see any sense in doing something what's not soccer related.


Same with thew talented hockey players.
They just wanna play hockey and always shine when they are allowed to do.

Murrays hockey is 95% pure grinding and 5% hockey.
I really understand the players who show us the dirty finger at the end of the contract and leave wherever they can play hockey.

Well...... what else can you expect from a coach who spend half of his player career on the waivers list.

Kurrilino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2011, 11:44 AM
  #49
The Butcher
Gutless
 
The Butcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The 5
Country: United States
Posts: 2,504
vCash: 500
Do you think Anze Kopitars defensive game would have flourished under a run-and-gun system such as the Islanders?

The Butcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2011, 12:01 PM
  #50
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
... LMFAO. Are you serious with this? Parse was completely an afterthought when he was brought up, and was NEVER considered to be a top six mainstay or "skills guy" at any time. The season before (08-09) Parse scored 38 points in 74 games at Manchester. Does that scream out "NHL top six player" to you??? If he was supposed to be a top six guy in 09-10, he would have played more than 10 1/2 minutes per game that season, right? He would have received more than zero power play time that season, right? Are you just making this up as you go along? Look at Parse's season in 09-10. There were some games he got less than ten minutes of ice time out there - one game he played 5:24, another 8:49, another 9:50, another 8:01, and it goes on and on like that. By the end of the season, Parse wasn't getting ANY time out there - he was under 10 minutes in 10 of his last 12 games. He averaged less than 7 minutes a game in the playoffs. And THIS is the man the Kings wanted to turn into a top six??? Interesting.
Parse was averaging over a point per game in the AHL prior to being called up.

You're right he wasn't necessarily expected to be a top 6 guy right away, but the org was approaching the situation with an open mind. After 09-10, Lombardi called Parse "one of the top 3 skill guys on the team." Obviously Lombardi and Co. see him as a guy that has top 6 potential. I believe DL compared him to Versteeg.
.

johnjm22 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 01:29 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.