Noticed right after Scuderi scored that Sutter was right behind him having a word with Scuderi, kind of looked like he was motivating him. Of course according to Terry Murray, these guys are professionals who don't need any motivation.
Noticed right after Scuderi scored that Sutter was right behind him having a word with Scuderi, kind of looked like he was motivating him. Of course according to Terry Murray, these guys are professionals who don't need any motivation.
I never understood that about Murray. Communication between a player and the coach is one of the biggest things, if not the biggest.... especially during game time, imo. I don't like that he didn't do that. I don't want to say it hindered Doughty or Johnson, but I think it plays a role. I can't really say because I'm not there, but just from the difference between Terry and Sutter..I will take the guy that talks to his players after every play or goal (against or for)
Wasn't a cheap or dirty hit, Vrbata rode Gagne into the boards and he just fell hard.
Regardless of dirtiness I question the efficiency of rules that the league has come up with, if that is not a penalty. Every couple of days I see one TERRIBLE penalty given for a hit that is IMHO perfectly clean. The only argument being, well, that it was monstrous hit, highlight reel material. 5 minute penalties for clean hits on open ice where nobody got hurt, except maybe one millionaire's ego. And yet here we see a push from behind with player's head hitting board. Let's leave aside what is legal and what isn't - this looks dangerous to me and those open ice hits (which lead to 5 min penalties) didn't. Here somebody got hurt, there nobody got hurt. Here when I see replay, I cringe, there I say "Hey, that is one MF hit!"
So bottom line, I question the efficiency, the rationalization of the rules if Gagne's situation is a consequence of a completely legal action. On a side note, that looks like boarding to me, illegal. I would definitely give a penalty there but that is just me. Gagne's head was pushed into boards, he didn't just fell on ice.
I never understood that about Murray. Communication between a player and the coach is one of the biggest things, if not the biggest.... especially during game time, imo. I don't like that he didn't do that. I don't want to say it hindered Doughty or Johnson, but I think it plays a role. I can't really say because I'm not there, but just from the difference between Terry and Sutter..I will take the guy that talks to his players after every play or goal (against or for)
I dunno. Sutter hasn't had a lot of time to work with the squad in practice -- game time is really the only opportunity he has, and likely will have -- to explain what he expects or to correct mistakes or point out excellence. Not true for Murray, who had the luxury of coming in before camp and has been coaching mostly the same group for several years.
As for Murray perhaps hindering Johnson or Doughty or whomever's development... After the Crawford fire drill, and the relative youth of the core, a steady hand on the mental tiller is not a terrible thing. Maybe you miss an opportunity to correct a mistake during game time. You'll review it later on tape, without the emotion and energy of the game clouding the view.
Murray was the right coach for the team at the time, making up for Crawford, who was the wrong coach for the team at the time. In an ideal world Murray would have been Dean's first hire and would have been fired prior to the start of this season.
Of course the world isn't perfect and I can't remember the last coach that was fired in the offseason who made the playoffs that same season. It was just a necessary part of the process - although the late change certainly damaged the Kings playoff chances this year. They're hovering around 25% at the moment - they have to go on a prolonged run. Something like peeling off 7-9 wins out of 10 games to get comfortably back in the race.
Sutter is the "right" coach now. Like Murray, but not Murray. That's the best way I can describe him. Still has defense-first mentality, but is a more "active" coach and dispenses with the platitudes when speaking both to the players and the media/fans. I think we all appreciate the change of tune.
__________________
"In a year that has been so improbable, the impossible has happened." - Vin Scully being clairvoyant in 1988.
The Los Angeles Kings - 2012 Stanley Cup Champions
I dunno. Sutter hasn't had a lot of time to work with the squad in practice -- game time is really the only opportunity he has, and likely will have -- to explain what he expects or to correct mistakes or point out excellence. Not true for Murray, who had the luxury of coming in before camp and has been coaching mostly the same group for several years.
As for Murray perhaps hindering Johnson or Doughty or whomever's development... After the Crawford fire drill, and the relative youth of the core, a steady hand on the mental tiller is not a terrible thing. Maybe you miss an opportunity to correct a mistake during game time. You'll review it later on tape, without the emotion and energy of the game clouding the view.
Sutter has always been an active coach on the bench. Being with the Kings a short time has nothing to do with it.
Regardless of dirtiness I question the efficiency of rules that the league has come up with, if that is not a penalty. Every couple of days I see one TERRIBLE penalty given for a hit that is IMHO perfectly clean. The only argument being, well, that it was monstrous hit, highlight reel material. 5 minute penalties for clean hits on open ice where nobody got hurt, except maybe one millionaire's ego. And yet here we see a push from behind with player's head hitting board. Let's leave aside what is legal and what isn't - this looks dangerous to me and those open ice hits (which lead to 5 min penalties) didn't. Here somebody got hurt, there nobody got hurt. Here when I see replay, I cringe, there I say "Hey, that is one MF hit!"
So bottom line, I question the efficiency, the rationalization of the rules if Gagne's situation is a consequence of a completely legal action. On a side note, that looks like boarding to me, illegal. I would definitely give a penalty there but that is just me. Gagne's head was pushed into boards, he didn't just fell on ice.
As I said in the other thread...guys can get concussions from perfectly legal hits. You can't just penalize guys because someone got hurt....
The rules should stay the absolute same as they are now. The league is doing a good job and the only reason that we are seeing this so called
"Concussion epidemic" is because the league is now taking more precautions then ever to figure out if a player has one and keep him out if he does.
Funny. We win, score more than two goals, and there's no tomd or PSP in the thread. I guess PSP got called into work again. Seems to happen alot when we win.
I myself missed the game, so I'm not going to comment much. Hope Gagne is ok and I'm glad we got more than two goals in a regulation game for the first time in 15 tries. Yes, 14 straight without three regulation goals.
I can't imagine how much this will boost the players confidence offensively. Do it again in the coming games and it will work wonders.
To Mssrs. elf and fan... nitpicking appreciated. You are both correct. That's one metaphor save for Mr. Elf and a roster correction by Mr. Fan. Thanks. Ha!
So many players and teams. It's just too much some times. Just too much. I may have been watching a local softball league, btw. Isn't hockey the one with sticks and shorts and softball the one with really really big torso guys? Or is it vice versa?
Softball is the one with the guys that would have made the big leagues if it weren't for that nagging injury or the coach didn't hate him. Don't remind them that they are playing underhand baseball because they take it really seriously. I played 2 seasons of it and had enough. I could not believe such big egos could exist with men playing a girl's sport.
Funny. We win, score more than two goals, and there's no tomd or PSP in the thread. I guess PSP got called into work again. Seems to happen alot when we win.
I myself missed the game, so I'm not going to comment much. Hope Gagne is ok and I'm glad we got more than two goals in a regulation game for the first time in 15 tries. Yes, 14 straight without three regulation goals.
I can't imagine how much this will boost the players confidence offensively. Do it again in the coming games and it will work wonders.
Chicago will be a good test. 2-0-1 under Sutter.
Well I certainly don't want to disappoint you. I've always believed that being negative after a win is bad form.
I will say, however, that Phoenix dominated long stretches of the game and the kings won mainly on the strength (weakness?) of horrible goaltending by JLB.
And you are right - tonight should be a truer test.
Funny. We win, score more than two goals, and there's no tomd or PSP in the thread. I guess PSP got called into work again. Seems to happen alot when we win.
I myself missed the game, so I'm not going to comment much. Hope Gagne is ok and I'm glad we got more than two goals in a regulation game for the first time in 15 tries. Yes, 14 straight without three regulation goals.
I can't imagine how much this will boost the players confidence offensively. Do it again in the coming games and it will work wonders.
Chicago will be a good test. 2-0-1 under Sutter.
While I don't agree with everything those two say, none of our wins can prove their points wrong. This team is far from out of the woods.
Now, if in a few weeks we have won 9 of 10 or have beaten some top teams with conviction then I'd thumb my nose at these guys but until then I say let's just be happy with our win over the Coyotes.
Well I certainly don't want to disappoint you. I've always believed that being negative after a win is bad form.
I will say, however, that Phoenix dominated long stretches of the game and the kings won mainly on the strength (weakness?) of horrible goaltending by JLB.
And you are right - tonight should be a truer test.
While I don't agree with everything those two say, none of our wins can prove their points wrong. This team is far from out of the woods.
Now, if in a few weeks we have won 9 of 10 or have beaten some top teams with conviction then I'd thumb my nose at these guys but until then I say let's just be happy with our win over the Coyotes.
personally, i don't have a problem with the "what". Nothing they say is new nor unaccepted by the general fan.
But I don't agree with how they only have interest in lambasting the team. Their inabilities to see both positive and negative indicates they are wearing rose-colored glasses to their own pre-disposed ideas. I'm not a fan of subjective people, neither for the positive or negative.
Plus, I put out a bet and get no response. They don't want to be held accountable to their views. How about this, let's change the bet not to be for playoffs or not, but that they will place equally or higher than last year. Since they both seem to think that the team gets worst every year, they would have to believe they won't place as high as last year, right? How bout it?
Based on current point projections, 92 points would get the Kings into the playoffs. That means a record of 25-19-2 would get them in right now, which doesn't look nearly as bad as it did a week ago. Obviously that's all subject to change based on how the games play out, but at least it doesn't look like they have to play absolute lights out hockey the rest of the way just to make it.
I would much rather they aim higher than 8th, but at least that's the bare minimum.
25-19-2 would give the Kings 91 points, or a tie with Nashville - to actually lock it down, I would say 25-18-3 (or better, 26-19-1). So, that's a seven-game winning streak followed by .500 hockey.
personally, i don't have a problem with the "what". Nothing they say is new nor unaccepted by the general fan.
But I don't agree with how they only have interest in lambasting the team. Their inabilities to see both positive and negative indicates they are wearing rose-colored glasses to their own pre-disposed ideas. I'm not a fan of subjective people, neither for the positive or negative.
Plus, I put out a bet and get no response. They don't want to be held accountable to their views. How about this, let's change the bet not to be for playoffs or not, but that they will place equally or higher than last year. Since they both seem to think that the team gets worst every year, they would have to believe they won't place as high as last year, right? How bout it?
Bingo! /Ralph Lawler
The one thing I've found is that the "axis of evil" (I'm being sarcastic you sensitive susies) tends to not even be in agreement with each other on plenty of issues yet they'll never debate each other on those issues. They just jump on the **** parade. That's cool though.. every party needs a pooper.
25-19-2 would give the Kings 91 points, or a tie with Nashville - to actually lock it down, I would say 25-18-3 (or better, 26-19-1). So, that's a seven-game winning streak followed by .500 hockey.
Will it hasten Lombardi's firing so the Kings can get back to giving up picks and young talent to acquire exciting stars (past their prime) from other teams? Then when that doesn't work we can rush 19 year olds to the NHL and hope they are the next Luc Robitaille.
When that happens and it's all said and done we'll have glorious memories of being able to buy a ticket in the 300's and move down the to 100's in the 2nd period because there are vacant seats everywhere.
Ahhh, good times!! Can't wait!! As long as Lombardi is fired, because he is the "real" problem for trying to ditch this organization's "anything can happen if you just make the playoffs" attitude.
Well I certainly don't want to disappoint you. I've always believed that being negative after a win is bad form.
I will say, however, that Phoenix dominated long stretches of the game and the kings won mainly on the strength (weakness?) of horrible goaltending by JLB.
And you are right - tonight should be a truer test.
Have I redeemed myself?
Sure have! You showed how the Kings can't win unless the other team puts a big bow on it. Living up to your typical anti-Kings mantra. At least you had the balls to post though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakingsdrummer
While I don't agree with everything those two say, none of our wins can prove their points wrong. This team is far from out of the woods.
Now, if in a few weeks we have won 9 of 10 or have beaten some top teams with conviction then I'd thumb my nose at these guys but until then I say let's just be happy with our win over the Coyotes.
I'm not necessarily against what they say either. It's the fact that they only post the negative and completely ignore the positive that's annoying. Like the quote from tomd above, we win, but let's ignore anything good LA does and state it's largely because of Labs. Labs helped, no doubt, but we still needed to do something right. That's never pointed out though.
Sure have! You showed how the Kings can't win unless the other team puts a big bow on it. Living up to your typical anti-Kings mantra. At least you had the balls to post though.
When the Kings win, it is lucky. When they lose it is because they are an inferior team. Boston beat Phoenix 2-1 last night. That is right, they scored a whopping 2 goals on Jason Labarbara and it took them going to OT to do it.
I was very against hiring him, but so far this crow tastes delicious.
I wasn't either but he has done, so far, what I thought he would which is motivate the players and get them back to the level they were at before and not much better than that. I guess time will tell but I'm not expecting Darryl Sutter to get the Kings into the top 1/3 of the league in offense and I feel that is their biggest need if they want to compete for the Cup. Loved his comment the other day to Hammond about having a raspy voice saying he was "chearleading". I'm not sure if the players ever heard Murray's voice while they were on the bench.
