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 you criticize this team?

View Poll Results: Why do you criticize this team?
Because I truly believe in this team and it is a contender given minor changes. 27 64.29%
Because I think this team needs a lot of work and it is a fringe playoff team at best. 6 14.29%
Because I am cynical and I will let you know the many reasons why as we lose time & time again. 1 2.38%
Something else. 8 19.05%
Voters: 42. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-23-2012, 12:49 PM
  #26
Buddy The Elf
Kings!
 
Buddy The Elf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Belmont Shore
Country: United States
Posts: 10,036
vCash: 500
I'm an eternal optimist and I am critical of this team at this point. The organization and fans have invested a lot of time and money into this rebuild and when the team is performing the way it is, I think it is only natural to start questioning things. There are stats like what Face Wash pointed out in his thread and plenty of us have dug up over the past year or so in regards to offense. Fans see it, the announcers see it and even the GM of the team has mentioned it as a concern. The Kings can try to become the first ever in the modern era to win a Cup without a solid offense but I wouldn't be holding my breath that it will happen when history suggests otherwise.

I'm going to the game tonight. It will be about the 10th game this season that I've been to. I had season tickets right through some of the Kings worst seasons and attended 30+ games a year. Spending money and time watching a season as abysmal as that will change your perspective. That and being called a fairweather fan by your season ticket rep. I'm not emotionally vested in the team anymore. It is entertainment to me which is what it always should have been. If they lose, they lose, If they win, they win. I'm always happier when they win but I don't really care when they lose anymore. I only care because I'm honestly bored sometimes when they lose. I'll always go to games because I love hockey and I love the Kings but I've learned to not take this crap too seriously. It will give you a heart attack otherwise.

Buddy The Elf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 12:59 PM
  #27
DaAnimal
Registered User
 
DaAnimal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Pasadena
Country: United States
Posts: 1,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddy The Elf View Post
I'm an eternal optimist and I am critical of this team at this point. The organization and fans have invested a lot of time and money into this rebuild and when the team is performing the way it is, I think it is only natural to start questioning things. There are stats like what Face Wash pointed out in his thread and plenty of us have dug up over the past year or so in regards to offense. Fans see it, the announcers see it and even the GM of the team has mentioned it as a concern. The Kings can try to become the first ever in the modern era to win a Cup without a solid offense but I wouldn't be holding my breath that it will happen when history suggests otherwise.

I'm going to the game tonight. It will be about the 10th game this season that I've been to. I had season tickets right through some of the Kings worst seasons and attended 30+ games a year. Spending money and time watching a season as abysmal as that will change your perspective. That and being called a fairweather fan by your season ticket rep. I'm not emotionally vested in the team anymore. It is entertainment to me which is what it always should have been. If they lose, they lose, If they win, they win. I'm always happier when they win but I don't really care when they lose anymore. I only care because I'm honestly bored sometimes when they lose. I'll always go to games because I love hockey and I love the Kings but I've learned to not take this crap too seriously. It will give you a heart attack otherwise.
pretty much in the same boat as you. You summed up what I was going to say too.

We all want this team to be successful. We know eventually SOMETIME in the near future we will win the cup

DaAnimal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 02:20 PM
  #28
DoktorJeep
Original Bandwagoner
 
DoktorJeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: LA
Posts: 388
vCash: 500
None of the first three poll choices fit for me. On a game by game basis, I think this board tacks pretty consistently with how the Kings did in that specific game. On the nights where they stink up the ice, you'll see the usual suspects with the usual complaints. Then there are those nights like NYE, where the Kings b**** slap the Canucks, most of us are ready to give out free tuggies to eachother at that point.

For me personally, the angst of this season has been that I bought into the rebuild that DL sold to the fans, and I expected a better team at this point this season. Did I expect them to be challenging for the Presidents trophy half way through? No, I expected them to be challenging for the Pacific division title, and lodged in the 3-5 spot of the western conference playoff seeding. The main expectation I had for the season was to make it past the first round of the playoffs, and that is still very much possible. The Kings have underachieved, but it's not like they are the Ducks this season.

It has been well over a decade since the 2000-01 season, when Eric Belanger gave us the conclusion to the Frenzy on Fig. There have been many bad seasons, coaches, players and games in that decade plus of time. At the end of the day, the Kings are entertainment. I think if you take the time to watch the games, you know the players and management and you choose to come on the internet to share your thoughts about the team, then you can't be considered anything other than a fan of the team. Even if your opinions about their current performance, make up or management isn't positive.

DoktorJeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 03:47 PM
  #29
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoreZeGoals View Post
Just looking at last years team, Smyth is on pace for 10-15 more points then he did last year while Poni already has more points then he did last year
Poni has one more point in 11 less games, it's hardly what I'd call a noticably better season. Plus he's still well below his career averages during his time in Toronto.

Smyth meanwhile has always been hot to start the season, did the same thing here. Prior to that two point effort the other night against Calgary, in his previous 20 games he had three goals and six points. After 47 games last year as a King, Smyth had 29 points.

Also, Poni is getting 2:16 more per game in ice time, while Smyth is getting 1:55 more.

I don't think either has really had a much more impressive season this year over last year, especially considering how much more ice time they are getting.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 03:52 PM
  #30
Jason Lewis
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Jason Lewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Utah View Post
Hatter, you're my boy but did you see the Flyers game tonight? Schenn has 5 hits and 2 were game changers...the Flyers got size, youth and grit in Simmonds and Schenn...we got 5'10" Richards who has been invisible recently and makes quite a chunk of money. Our depth is depleted on the 3rd line, in the AHL and in next years draft because of this deal.
Wow. You've gotta be ****ing kidding me.


Really? Man some people....


Oh yea Simmonds > Richards. Pshht my god.....

Jason Lewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 03:55 PM
  #31
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
You're viewing this through a (free) TV/streaming lens. There's a pay per event live lens you're completely missing the context on.

Most folks (not all) complaining loudest on here aren't folks who are watching the Kings for free on television. They've paid for tickets and are getting tired of going to games where the team is boring as sin or doesn't show up. Those who do pay for tickets aren't paying to watch a boring/frustrating team. They're paying to be entertained.

When this team is playing well, they are highly entertaining, but those games have been few and far between this season, so the complaints roll in.

I watched the Colorado game on TV. I would have been complaining a hell of a lot louder if I had actually paid to watch that game live. That said, some of the complaints and sweeping statements after a loss go completely overboard, but it's somewhat understandable given this entire season has been a disappointment in terms of expectations vs. reality.
Once again, who is making you pay to watch a boring team? If anyone (JU in this case) signs up for that pay-per-view knowing he is going to be watching a team he considers boring, then whose fault is that really? If I purchase a pay-per-view movie with the expectations it is going to be boring, and then it is boring, whose fault is that?

All that the team is obligated to do is put forth what it feels is the best effort to win games and push towards the goal of a Stanley Cup. How they choose to do it is their objective. If you don't like that objective, that's fine, and within your rights to not like it. But why you'd want to watch (or in your example, pay to watch) a team that bores you is beyond me. Simply don't watch if it's that annoying.

And yes, some of the all-encompassing negative nancy comments on here are getting to much, I agree. I'm disappointed they aren't meeting the goals we set out for them as well, especially offensively, but the way some posters go overboard it's as if they just lost the family home wagering on these guys. Some people really need to relax. It's a long season that's roughly half over and the real tense stuff is coming up. I half expect some strokes the way some fans carry on on here.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 03:57 PM
  #32
Jason Lewis
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Jason Lewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
And yes, some of the all-encompassing negative nancy comments on here are getting to much, I agree. I'm disappointed they aren't meeting the goals we set out for them as well, especially offensively, but the way some posters go overboard it's as if they just lost the family home wagering on these guys. Some people really need to relax. It's a long season that's roughly half over and the real tense stuff is coming up. I half expect some strokes the way some fans carry on on here.

A-****ing-men

Jason Lewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 04:05 PM
  #33
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoktorJeep View Post
Then there are those nights like NYE, where the Kings b**** slap the Canucks, most of us are ready to give out free tuggies to eachother at that point.
I almost spit out my drink.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 04:35 PM
  #34
Chazz Reinhold
Registered User
 
Chazz Reinhold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Stanley Cup
Country: United States
Posts: 6,952
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
It's not an easy solution, nor is it even viable - we're fans of the team. It's hard to not watch the games, but most games, save for a few here and there, have been tough to watch this season.

Boring certainly describes some of the games. Painful or frustrating are the words I've used more often though. Whether it be the parade of talent on this team that cannot finish worth a damn, or the ridiculous amount of low-percentage perimeter shot-taking.

Puck possession time has improved significantly. We should be scoring more, but we're not.

To answer the OP's question - it's because the players have been underachieving so badly. As Jaygokings said, some of the talent on the ice have been total disappointments this season so far. It's causing Dean to have to change coaches and probably make more trades to deal with a problem the players on the roster today should be able to fix themselves.

The shining star has been team D, although the cornerstone of that D, Quick, is being overplayed. It's not surprising given Sutter rode his #1's hard before, but we've all seen how a fatigued Quick plays in the postseason from 2 seasons ago. I sure hope Quick is able to play effectively with about 10 more regular season games under his belt than last season. He's well on that pace now. Again, frustrating. Those who don't learn from prior mistakes...

- T
This mirrors my thoughts exactly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
Sorry, yes it is. Why would anyone watch when they find it boring? JU didn't say a game or two, he said this team is boring to watch. This entire team. Everyone. Boring.

If that's what you think, fine. But why watch? If I thought The Big Bang Theory was boring to watch but still watched it every week, I'm sure my complaints would fall on deaf ears as well.

If this team to you (you being JU) is boring game after game, don't watch or find another team to watch. It really is that simple.
No, it's not. I can't just flip a switch within myself that will make me stop loving the Kings. You're looking at it from a completely emotionless stand point. Maybe it's issue that I am emotionally attached to the team, but it is what it is. That's not going to magically disappear. I have a history of rooting passionately for this team for 16+ years now. Just because they're boring an underachieving now won't make me stop watching and stop caring.

If I was watching a Colts-Rams game on tv, chances are it would be boring and chances are I would turn it off pretty quickly. However, if the Kings were playing the Azerbaijan Sultans at 3 a.m. PDT, I would do everything in my power to watch the game, even if it was via some piss-poor internet stream where I wouldn't be able to differentiate between the puck and the pancakes Penner brought with him to the bench as a snack. THAT's the ineffable emotional factor that you're not taking into account when you tell Tony or Johnny to stop watching if they think the team is boring.

I watched this team through some pretty lean years, and I remained incredibly optimistic throughout. I just knew this team would turn the corner and would become a perennial Cup contender because it was being built the RIGHT way. I questioned anyone who believed otherwise. However, here we stand 6 seasons into the rebuild, and the product on the ice shows the Kings are nowhere closer to being a Cup contender than they were 3 seasons ago. Overall, the team has not improved since they lost to Vancouver in the first round. Sure, the team defense is better, but now the offense is by far the worst in the league. The team finished with less points last season than it did two seasons ago, and they're on pace to finish with less this season than they did last season. The majority of the "core" has stalled in its development (minus Quick, who continues to progressively improve at an impressive rate).

I didn't expect the team to be an elite team this season, but I felt it was at least reasonable to assume they could start to compete with the elite teams in the league. I don't see why a fourth or fifth place finish in the Western Conference was out of the question. I don't buy the "youth" excuse, either. Several key members of the "core" are established veterans in the league. This is Kopitar's 6th season in the league. Hell, he's almost to 500 games played. This is Brown's 8th season. Johnson is in his 6th season. That is some pretty solid NHL experience there in the core, and yet this team still remains a fringe playoff team. Face Wash and Buddy have covered a lot of the reasons why I feel this team is more than just a couple wingers from all of a sudden being a contender, so I won't rehash them here.

Anyway, regarding my initial response to kingsfan, despite everything I listed above, I can't just stop watching the Kings. I can't give a specifically scientific reason as to why, but like a bad girlfriend who you keep going back to no matter what, I'm attached to this team. The passion just isn't going to disappear because they are not consistently very exciting to watch.

Chazz Reinhold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 04:39 PM
  #35
BallPointHammer
Franchise Enforcer
 
BallPointHammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Maryland, USA
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 807
vCash: 500
I criticize the team - players, coaches, management, owners - when they do the same stupid things over and over again that don't work, but they also do the right things often enough - and it works - and then they eventual drift back to doing the same stupid stuff again. It is very frustrating at times.

The offense sucks because:
1. Transition game way to slow, too much d-to-d passing, too slow getting shots from point off and on net
2. Guys rarely force the puck down the middle of the ice, WAY WAY WAY too much go wide and end up in the corner with nowhere to go
3. Too much resorting to just batting the puck around the boards instead of trying to create little plays here and there to penetrate the slot
4. Every forward should be strapped to a chair and forced to watch 4 hours of Tomas Holmstrom hi lights in order to absorb the concept of "screening the goalie"
5. Overall the team has to play with more fire, more gusto, more of an edge, more instigating confrontation and more INTENSITY - without having to be poked, prodded and cajoled to do it.

BallPointHammer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 04:46 PM
  #36
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,994
vCash: 500
Anyone that watched the Kings during the last little bit of the Gretzky era and immediately following that knows what it feels like to want to stick a needle in their eye.

This team is exceedingly frustrating for the very reason Tony provided. These players should be able to fix the problem with the offense themselves, but they don't. This may force moves to be made that will not be for the long term good of the franchise.

For better or worse Dean has cast his lot with Kopitar and Doughty. Two players most of us would agree needed to be kept in the fold long term. If these two don't wake up and take ownership (like Quick has) of this team's success, it will continue to be frustrating.

I for one only want to see any trades or hockey deals that are focused on success beyond this season, say for the next 3 or 4 years. The window for success is just now opening.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 04:57 PM
  #37
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chazz Reinhold View Post

No, it's not. I can't just flip a switch within myself that will make me stop loving the Kings. You're looking at it from a completely emotionless stand point. Maybe it's issue that I am emotionally attached to the team, but it is what it is. That's not going to magically disappear. I have a history of rooting passionately for this team for 16+ years now. Just because they're boring an underachieving now won't make me stop watching and stop caring.

Anyway, regarding my initial response to kingsfan, despite everything I listed above, I can't just stop watching the Kings. I can't give a specifically scientific reason as to why, but like a bad girlfriend who you keep going back to no matter what, I'm attached to this team. The passion just isn't going to disappear because they are not consistently very exciting to watch.
I hear what you are saying, but there's a difference between loving a team and taking a break and walking away. I've been a diehard Kingsfan since 1988 (I was an Oiler fan before but I followed Gretzky here. Forgive me, I was 11). I've seen a lot of lean times as well, and only once did I walk away from watching the Kings. It was mid-way through the 2005-2006 season and it wasn't because we were losing or rebuilding or anything of the likes. it was all about Sean Avery and the fact I grew so tired of saying I cheered for a team that had that A-hole on it. I even went as far as to write a letter to the team explaining that as long as Avery was there, I wasn't watching.

Thankfully, he was traded only six weeks later (and no, I don't have some misguided belief my letter stirred the heart of DL into moving that waste of a locker stall) and I was back to watching the games.

In no time there did I stop loving my Kings team. I'd still check to see the scores and watch highlights of games. But when the game gets to be unenjoyable, which is what I take it to be when JU says the team is boring, you need to walk away. You may not be able to flip off that switch inside yourself but you can flip off the switch on your TV. It really is that simple.

No ones saying turn your back on the team like a jilted lover or suddenly transform into a Ducks fan, but take a break and get away for a bit. Come back when the game and the team is fun again. You said yourself Chazz, we've watched this team through some VERY lean years. Some years we watched we could hand pick on the schedule months ahead which games we were likely to watch our team get its collective ass handed to it by the Colorados and Detroits of the league. But we watched.

This season we have an underachieving team, but by no means the worse team we've watched. We have a team that is in the playoffs if the season ended today with arguably the greatest goalie in franchise history, two very good centres, a widely respected and beloved defensive core and a decent cupboard of prospects. We have fewer holes in this line up than we've had in most of the years we've been watching.

So to then turn around and call this team boring is beyond me and seems to insist upon a more significant problem. If that's the case, just walk away for a while and come back when you start to miss the team. It's ok. No one would call a guy like JU a bandwagonner if he came back in the playoffs, same with guys like Herby and PSP as much as I dog them at times for being pessimistic. Herby walked away, but I have no doubt he loves the Kings the same as the rest of us.

Flicking off your TV does not mean you don't love the Kings.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 05:10 PM
  #38
Buddy The Elf
Kings!
 
Buddy The Elf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Belmont Shore
Country: United States
Posts: 10,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Anyone that watched the Kings during the last little bit of the Gretzky era and immediately following that knows what it feels like to want to stick a needle in their eye.

This team is exceedingly frustrating for the very reason Tony provided. These players should be able to fix the problem with the offense themselves, but they don't. This may force moves to be made that will not be for the long term good of the franchise.

For better or worse Dean has cast his lot with Kopitar and Doughty. Two players most of us would agree needed to be kept in the fold long term. If these two don't wake up and take ownership (like Quick has) of this team's success, it will continue to be frustrating.

I for one only want to see any trades or hockey deals that are focused on success beyond this season, say for the next 3 or 4 years. The window for success is just now opening.
Yeah as mediocre as Doughty has been, I cringe at thinking of trading him. I also never want to see Kopitar wear another jersey other than a Kings jersey.

Replacing Stoll with Loktionov and losing Penner's salary gives the Kings roughly $7m in cap space to find some offense. I know Parise is a pipe dream but the money is there to try. If they have to go the trade route, I think they should look at moving Jack Johnson.

Buddy The Elf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 05:33 PM
  #39
fsanford
Registered User
 
fsanford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,437
vCash: 500
Because this team has not won a playoff series in a decade.

Because we suck offensively

Because the only team more futile than the Kings in Los Angeles have been
the Clippers and they may soon pass that torch of futility to the Kings.

Because we suck offensively

We rank 30th in goal scoring, its like watching soccer on skates at times.

Because we suck offensively

Because Dustin Brown is not a sniper and misses opportunity after opportunity

Because we suck offensively

Because we drafted defense in the first round every year (that we had a number one pick) since Lombardi has been here and we are in dire need of forwards. I am all for building from the back end out, but a some point you need to put a roof on the house.

Because we suck offensively.

That we traded away guys with offensive skill for grit. We should just rename the team the L.A Sandpaper. Grit, Grit, Grit the Kings have Grit.

Because we suck offensively.

Because our players do not consider Saturday a workday when they are home and consistently do not show up. The only consolation made some good $$ betting against the Kings on Saturday afternoon games.

Because we suck offensively.

Because the Kings have not figured out every time Davis Gaines sings the National Anthem we lose. Its hard enough to win when you score less than 2 goals a game.
Bring Gaines out there is the equivalent of putting the team down 5 on 3

Oh and we suck offensively

Guess that is enough for now.

fsanford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 05:44 PM
  #40
Johnny Utah
Registered User
 
Johnny Utah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Santa Monica, CA
Posts: 7,078
vCash: 500
You know what bothers me, the loss of size and grit. And I'm not talking fighting.

The past two seasons in the playoffs we had Modin, Poni, Handzus and Simmonds on a line. We essentially replaced that line with Lewis-Loki-Richardson.

When we played Vancouver two seasons ago, Kings were loaded with Modin, Zeus, Clune, O'Donnell, Greene, Simmonds and Brown.

When we played San Jose we had Clifford-Richardson-Simmonds line and Westgarth on the 4th line.

Now we trade Schenn/Simmonds for a 5'10" Richards....Both Wayne and Brayden are over 6'-0" and play on the edge and perfect for the playoffs. Not saying Richard's can't, but he doesn't have the size and nastiness as these two players.

We never replaced that big third line. We replaced Gagne with Smyth and Gagne doesn't even play Smyth's gritty in front of the net game and he still got hurt just playing his perimeter game.

Handzus, Poni, Modin, Simmonds, Smyth and OD are all gone. All were big, cycled or played physical and a few of those guys were good leaders.

Now what? Brown is way less physical. Penner is the stay puff marshmellow man. Clifford is on the 4th line and the 3rd line looks like the Montreal Canadians.

Johnny Utah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 05:52 PM
  #41
Buddy The Elf
Kings!
 
Buddy The Elf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Belmont Shore
Country: United States
Posts: 10,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Utah View Post
You know what bothers me, the loss of size and grit. And I'm not talking fighting.

The past two seasons in the playoffs we had Modin, Poni, Handzus and Simmonds on a line. We essentially replaced that line with Lewis-Loki-Richardson.

When we played Vancouver two seasons ago, Kings were loaded with Modin, Zeus, Clune, O'Donnell, Greene, Simmonds and Brown.

When we played San Jose we had Clifford-Richardson-Simmonds line and Westgarth on the 4th line.

Now we trade Schenn/Simmonds for a 5'10" Richards....Both Wayne and Brayden are over 6'-0" and play on the edge and perfect for the playoffs. Not saying Richard's can't, but he doesn't have the size and nastiness as these two players.

We never replaced that big third line. We replaced Gagne with Smyth and Gagne doesn't even play Smyth's gritty in front of the net game and he still got hurt just playing his perimeter game.

Handzus, Poni, Modin, Simmonds, Smyth and OD are all gone. All were big, cycled or played physical and a few of those guys were good leaders.

Now what? Brown is way less physical. Penner is the stay puff marshmellow man. Clifford is on the 4th line and the 3rd line looks like the Montreal Canadians.
And the Kings won jack **** with those players. I agree that that Kings could use some more size and grit but I disagree that the Kings aren't a winning team because they lack the players you mentioned. They need more offensive skill and a system that embraces it.

They lost to the Canucks in the playoffs because the Canucks had more skill. They lost to the Sharks in the playoffs because the Sharks had more skill. No amount of size or grit is going to overcome the Kings offensive woes. Boston has some big tough players but they also have a **** ton of players that can score. So do all of the past cup winners in the post lockout era.

Buddy The Elf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 05:52 PM
  #42
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 BallPointHammer View Post
I criticize the team - players, coaches, management, owners - when they do the same stupid things over and over again that don't work, but they also do the right things often enough - and it works - and then they eventual drift back to doing the same stupid stuff again. It is very frustrating at times.

The offense sucks because:
1. Transition game way to slow, too much d-to-d passing, too slow getting shots from point off and on net
2. Guys rarely force the puck down the middle of the ice, WAY WAY WAY too much go wide and end up in the corner with nowhere to go
3. Too much resorting to just batting the puck around the boards instead of trying to create little plays here and there to penetrate the slot
4. Every forward should be strapped to a chair and forced to watch 4 hours of Tomas Holmstrom hi lights in order to absorb the concept of "screening the goalie"
5. Overall the team has to play with more fire, more gusto, more of an edge, more instigating confrontation and more INTENSITY - without having to be poked, prodded and cajoled to do it
.

This, this and this................

they were asked to do so since 5 years.
Plus the bonus that our key players had the luxury to grow and learn their hockey
from Armstrong's, Willsie's, Roenick's and Blakes and whatever crap crouched on our team.

So now we have the result.........
extreme usefull and skilld locker room guys without any clue how to play hockey.

There is a reason why i always point on the Datsyuk,Zetterberg example.
These guys were growing between Hulls, Shanahans, Yzermans.......
See what fine hockey players they turned into.
A perfect example of educated 2 way players instead mistake the word 2 way fro 1 way hockey guys.


One major problem i always pointed out was to enter the o-zone at the boards.
This leads to the opponent know there is just one way to go.... from outside to inside or stay with meaningless cycles at the board.

This system was punshed into the young fellows until they puked and had enough or adapted to it.

We get exactly what we were asking for 5 years.

0 creativity, 0 identity, 0 hockey sense and 0 understanding of 2 way game.
The only reason we are a playoff team is the individual talent.

Kurrilino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 09:29 PM
  #43
RonSwanson*
Gadfly
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Food 'N Stuff
Country: United States
Posts: 8,769
vCash: 500
Because they are a bunch of underachievers.

RonSwanson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 09:45 PM
  #44
Jason Lewis
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Jason Lewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Utah View Post
You know what bothers me, the loss of size and grit. And I'm not talking fighting.

The past two seasons in the playoffs we had Modin, Poni, Handzus and Simmonds on a line. We essentially replaced that line with Lewis-Loki-Richardson.

When we played Vancouver two seasons ago, Kings were loaded with Modin, Zeus, Clune, O'Donnell, Greene, Simmonds and Brown.

When we played San Jose we had Clifford-Richardson-Simmonds line and Westgarth on the 4th line.

Now we trade Schenn/Simmonds for a 5'10" Richards....Both Wayne and Brayden are over 6'-0" and play on the edge and perfect for the playoffs. Not saying Richard's can't, but he doesn't have the size and nastiness as these two players.

We never replaced that big third line. We replaced Gagne with Smyth and Gagne doesn't even play Smyth's gritty in front of the net game and he still got hurt just playing his perimeter game.

Handzus, Poni, Modin, Simmonds, Smyth and OD are all gone. All were big, cycled or played physical and a few of those guys were good leaders.

Now what? Brown is way less physical. Penner is the stay puff marshmellow man. Clifford is on the 4th line and the 3rd line looks like the Montreal Canadians.
Boy you really have an axe to grind against Richards and his shorter then Schenn statistics.

Richards is PLENTY nasty and tenacious. And he is a proven worker, fighter, hitter, point producer, and captain. Something those 2 guys have yet to become.

I'll take that and his sligher height.


Are you like 5'6 or something?

Jason Lewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-23-2012, 09:47 PM
  #45
Jason Lewis
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Jason Lewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddy The Elf View Post
And the Kings won jack **** with those players. I agree that that Kings could use some more size and grit but I disagree that the Kings aren't a winning team because they lack the players you mentioned. They need more offensive skill and a system that embraces it.

They lost to the Canucks in the playoffs because the Canucks had more skill. They lost to the Sharks in the playoffs because the Sharks had more skill. No amount of size or grit is going to overcome the Kings offensive woes. Boston has some big tough players but they also have a **** ton of players that can score. So do all of the past cup winners in the post lockout era.
Exactly. This board is so full of ridiculousness man.


People scream and yell how we don't have enough skill. Now people are deciding to yell that we don't have enough grit and size and that we should go back to how we used to be.

argh

Frustrating.

Jason Lewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2012, 10:08 AM
  #46
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fsanford View Post

Because we drafted defense in the first round every year (that we had a number one pick) since Lombardi has been here and we are in dire need of forwards. I am all for building from the back end out, but a some point you need to put a roof on the house.
Guess you forgot about Schenn?

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2012, 10:18 AM
  #47
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Utah View Post

Now we trade Schenn/Simmonds for a 5'10" Richards....Both Wayne and Brayden are over 6'-0" and play on the edge and perfect for the playoffs. Not saying Richard's can't, but he doesn't have the size and nastiness as these two players.
Where are you getting this 5'10 figure for Richards. All of these sites list Richards at 5'11 or 6'0:

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p....php?pid=59738
http://kings.nhl.com/club/player.htm?id=8470617
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players/bio/?id=3483
http://espn.go.com/nhl/player/_/id/2387/mike-richards

And while he might be a few inches shorter than Simmonds, Simmonds is listed as about 10 pounds lighter than Richards on those above listed sites. Schenn meanwhile, I have no idea why we are including him since he's had no impact on the Kings prior to his trade.

I agree with your overall post about us needing to add size, which is why I've been pushing for guys like Moen and Gaustad to be added, but to say Richards is a problem with our grit is really off-base IMO.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2012, 11:17 AM
  #48
TonySCV
Moderator
Two Timer!
 
TonySCV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,169
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chazz Reinhold View Post
I didn't expect the team to be an elite team this season, but I felt it was at least reasonable to assume they could start to compete with the elite teams in the league. I don't see why a fourth or fifth place finish in the Western Conference was out of the question.
Still entirely possible. I know everyone loves to live in the moment, but some perspective here is really important.

Last season the Kings **** the bed in January and went 2-10-0. All these same threads and arguments popped up then. They needed to go .700 the rest of the way, .700, and they did it, finishing 22-8-5 and most of those 8-5's were after Kopitar broke his leg. They were at 94 points when that happened (game 76), and finished the season 6 games later with 98 points.

This team gets hot late in the season. (Coincidentally once Kopitar emerges from his annual mid-season slumber) After 50 games:

2011-2012 58 points (finished with ?)
2010-2011 55 points (finished with 98 - 22-8-5)
2009-2010 59 points (finished with 101 - 18-8-6)

Assuming 102 points gets them 4th or 5th spot in the conference, they need to go 20-8-4 to get there.

TonySCV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2012, 11:24 AM
  #49
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
Still entirely possible. I know everyone loves to live in the moment, but some perspective here is really important.

Last season the Kings **** the bed in January and went 2-10-0. All these same threads and arguments popped up then. They needed to go .700 the rest of the way, .700, and they did it, finishing 22-8-5 and most of those 8-5's were after Kopitar broke his leg. They were at 94 points when that happened (game 76), and finished the season 6 games later with 98 points.

This team gets hot late in the season. (Coincidentally once Kopitar emerges from his annual mid-season slumber) After 50 games:

2011-2012 58 points (finished with ?)
2010-2011 55 points (finished with 98 - 22-8-5)
2009-2010 59 points (finished with 101 - 18-8-6)

Assuming 102 points gets them 4th or 5th spot in the conference, they need to go 20-8-4 to get there.
Considering we are 9-2-6 under Sutter, more than possible. The real question will be how we fair when we play 14 of 18 games on the road just after returning from the All-Star break. If we can go something like 8-5-1 in those road games, we should be fine to get into the playoffs. If we can hold steady with San Jose until the final two games of the season, we should still be in position to grab the Pacific title from San jose during that home-and-home to close out the season.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-24-2012, 04:53 PM
  #50
jonrazor12
Palffy for President
 
jonrazor12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,031
vCash: 500
Because the Kings are actually not as good as I thought they were going to be.

Doughty plays with no composure.

Kopitar still cant take over a game.

Penner sucks for what we had to give up to get him.

And Im still mad at McSorley for the curved stick.




Also forgot Kompon. He needs to be fired.

I think the Kings need to create a new coaching position. We can call it a shooting coach. Baseball has hitting coaches. We need a shooting coach. I nominate Pallfy


Last edited by jonrazor12: 01-24-2012 at 05:03 PM.
jonrazor12 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 03:07 AM.

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.