Yeah, c'mon, yeah
Yeah, c'mon
Oh, yeah, ma
Yeah, I'm a back door Gann
I'm a back door Gann
The men don't know
But the little girl understand
Hey, all you people that tryin' to sleep
I'm out to make it with my midnight dream, yeah
'Cause I'm a back door Gann
The men don't know
But the little girls understand
All right, yeah
You men eat your dinner
Eat your pork and beans
I eat more chicken
Than any man ever seen, yeah, yeah
I'm a back door Gann, wha
The men don't know
But the little girls understand
Well, I'm a back door man
I'm a back door man
Whoa, baby, I'm a back door Gann
The men don't know
But the little girls understand
If you're implying that game was handed to them on a bow, it was not. The Blues had a bad period for sure, but the Kings still had to put in the work and score those goals. We've seen many games where the other team has had a bad period, but we've been held off the scorebaord.
LA earned that win with a great game. Calling it gift-wrapped cheapens the effort in my opinion.
I also would like to know what game you were watching if you think St. Louis dominated the 2nd and 3rd periods. Outside of the last five minutes or so, the Blues barely mustered much of an attack all night.
Gann... I love your articles, but the titles for some of these are just awful.
They dominated the Blues for the first 20 minutes and one the game in one period. That's not something that's gift-wrapped, or something that they're relying on from St. Louis. The Kings could have easily came out flat in the first period as well. They pushed the pace and won.
__________________
"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
Gann... I love your articles, but the titles for some of these are just awful.
They dominated the Blues for the first 20 minutes and one the game in one period. That's not something that's gift-wrapped, or something that they're relying on from St. Louis. The Kings could have easily came out flat in the first period as well. They pushed the pace and won.
The Blues gave the Kings the middle of the ice in the first period. The Kings played well, no question. I think I said that. But the Blues allowed the Kings to waltz down the slot to the front of the net at will in the first period. That's where the "gift-wrapped" phrase comes from. Don't see how anyone can deny that.
Blues were also the better team in the second and third periods. Even the Kings said that.
If you're implying that game was handed to them on a bow, it was not. The Blues had a bad period for sure, but the Kings still had to put in the work and score those goals. We've seen many games where the other team has had a bad period, but we've been held off the scorebaord.
LA earned that win with a great game. Calling it gift-wrapped cheapens the effort in my opinion.
I also would like to know what game you were watching if you think St. Louis dominated the 2nd and 3rd periods. Outside of the last five minutes or so, the Blues barely mustered much of an attack all night.
Even the Kings said that about the second and third periods, so I could ask you the same question. They saw the same thing I did.
It is always going to be a time old debate, for every sporting event. Did a team win on their own skill, or their opponent's ineptitude? When a team like Detroit or Vancouver loses, it will always because they didn't play up to par, but when they win, it is always because they are the best and their talent is undisputed. That's just how it is.
It doesn't matter how it is accomplished, any team can win, and now is a chance for LA to win it all by any means possible. The best team doesn't always win, that's why they play the games, doesn't matter how, who played to their potential, or who choked.
__________________
"It has not been a good day. I lost my glasses early this morning and I had to go buy a pair of 79 dollar reading glasses today. 79 bucks. You can literally get them at Costco, three-for-20." - Darryl Sutter's response to going up 2-0 in the series.
Even the Kings said that about the second and third periods, so I could ask you the same question. They saw the same thing I did.
Quotes from your own article:
"It wasn’t the best, there’s no secret to it,” Kopitar noted. “We had what? Six shots the rest of the way? That’s not good. It didn’t hurt us last night—we had the start we wanted, but you want to stay consistent, and play [like they did in the first period] for sixty minutes.”
"Desperation mode kicked in for them,” Kopitar added. “They came at us hard, and scored an early goal, but we were focused enough to come right back, and answer that, making it a four-goal lead again. That was huge, but the rest of the way, I thought we played OK, [but] we didn’t play up to our standards.”
"I don’t think that was one of our best,” said Carter. “They picked up their game, and we sat back a bit. It was kind of a weird second and third, with all the penalties. There wasn’t much flow, and it took a lot of guys out of the game, with all the penalty-kills.”
"We weren’t very good, especially in the second period, and we took way too many penalties in the third,” said defenseman Drew Doughty. “But we played great in the first, and having a four-goal lead like that, it’s kind of tough to play the rest of the game, mentally, and I didn’t think we did a great job with that.”
“You saw the lapse we had in last year’s playoffs against San Jose, when we let them comeback and win [when the Kings had a 4-0 lead, only to lose Game 3, 6-5 in overtime, on April 19, 2011], so we have to make sure that if we get up to a lead like that again, we don’t give them those chances to get back in the game.”
There's all the quotes from your article. Where in any of those does one player say they were dominated in the second and third periods? They say the could play better, and they sure could, but no one is saying they were dominated. The last quote above, from Doughty, says how they didn't give them the chances to get back into the game like they did against San Jose. Big difference between not playing our best and getting dominated. They didn't get dominated.
If you think the players said they were, you might want to reread what you yourself wrote.
It is always going to be a time old debate, for every sporting event. Did a team win on their own skill, or their opponent's ineptitude? When a team like Detroit or Vancouver loses, it will always because they didn't play up to par, but when they win, it is always because they are the best and their talent is undisputed. That's just how it is.
It doesn't matter how it is accomplished, any team can win, and now is a chance for LA to win it all by any means possible. The best team doesn't always win, that's why they play the games, doesn't matter how, who played to their potential, or who choked.
It's both. you can't win if your opponent plays perfect, so almost all goals are generated from your opponent's mistakes. Yet it still takes skill to capitalize on them. It also takes skill to limit your own mistakes and recover from them in a constructive way which limits the damage.
"It wasn’t the best, there’s no secret to it,” Kopitar noted. “We had what? Six shots the rest of the way? That’s not good. It didn’t hurt us last night—we had the start we wanted, but you want to stay consistent, and play [like they did in the first period] for sixty minutes.”
"Desperation mode kicked in for them,” Kopitar added. “They came at us hard, and scored an early goal, but we were focused enough to come right back, and answer that, making it a four-goal lead again. That was huge, but the rest of the way, I thought we played OK, [but] we didn’t play up to our standards.”
"I don’t think that was one of our best,” said Carter. “They picked up their game, and we sat back a bit. It was kind of a weird second and third, with all the penalties. There wasn’t much flow, and it took a lot of guys out of the game, with all the penalty-kills.”
"We weren’t very good, especially in the second period, and we took way too many penalties in the third,” said defenseman Drew Doughty. “But we played great in the first, and having a four-goal lead like that, it’s kind of tough to play the rest of the game, mentally, and I didn’t think we did a great job with that.”
“You saw the lapse we had in last year’s playoffs against San Jose, when we let them comeback and win [when the Kings had a 4-0 lead, only to lose Game 3, 6-5 in overtime, on April 19, 2011], so we have to make sure that if we get up to a lead like that again, we don’t give them those chances to get back in the game.”
There's all the quotes from your article. Where in any of those does one player say they were dominated in the second and third periods? They say the could play better, and they sure could, but no one is saying they were dominated. The last quote above, from Doughty, says how they didn't give them the chances to get back into the game like they did against San Jose. Big difference between not playing our best and getting dominated. They didn't get dominated.
If you think the players said they were, you might want to reread what you yourself wrote.
They didn't say it, specifically. But from their comments, they know that St. Louis gave them a lot in that first period, and they alluded to it. That said, they took advantage, and get credit for that.
Honestly, I thought it was more of a case of the Kings taking the ice in front of Elliott.
1st goal - Penner with a strong move to the net front, and Richards bangs in a loose puck. Not many players are going to stop Penner when he makes a move like that.
2nd goal - Great forecheck by Brown and a sick move by Kopitar.
3rd goal - Carter attacks the middle with speed and backs off the Blues defender. One lucky bounce and it's 3-0.
4th goal - Another turnover created by hard work and Kopitar beats the defender to the front of the net with his quickness.
They didn't say it, specifically. But from their comments, they know that St. Louis gave them a lot in that first period, and they alluded to it. That said, they took advantage, and get credit for that.
This post, I agree with.
This post is also a fair cry from 'gift-wrapped' and 'dominated.'
Yeah, c'mon, yeah
Yeah, c'mon
Oh, yeah, ma
Yeah, I'm a back door Gann
I'm a back door Gann
The men don't know
But the little girl understand
Hey, all you people that tryin' to sleep
I'm out to make it with my midnight dream, yeah
'Cause I'm a back door Gann
The men don't know
But the little girls understand
All right, yeah
You men eat your dinner
Eat your pork and beans
I eat more chicken
Than any man ever seen, yeah, yeah
I'm a back door Gann, wha
The men don't know
But the little girls understand
Well, I'm a back door man
I'm a back door man
Whoa, baby, I'm a back door Gann
The men don't know
But the little girls understand
5 shots intwo periods is bad, whatever the final score. However, the Kings DOMINATED the blues in the first, probably their best 1 period performance ever under Sutter. So the only gift wrapping done Monday night was on the big box of suck my you know what the kings delivered to the blues. So while it is reassuring to hear the players and coaches talking about getting better after a blowout win, fans of the team (which I think still includes bloggers), should feel pretty excited coming off that game, and pumped for tonight. 7pm can't come soon enough today.
I said "gift-wrapped," and I still stand by that. Someone else said, "dominated."
Once again, from your own article:
"Despite getting a goal from right wing Justin Williams just 1:08 after Blues center Andy McDonald got his team on the board 0:18 into the second period, the Blues dominated the second and third periods, while the Kings sat back in what amounted to a “prevent” defense, resulting in some less-than-stellar play.
Based on these quotes the win was not handed to them in any way. Sounds like the Blues came out aggressive in the 2nd and 3rd periods. This article is ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan
Quotes from your own article:
"It wasn’t the best, there’s no secret to it,” Kopitar noted. “We had what? Six shots the rest of the way? That’s not good. It didn’t hurt us last night—we had the start we wanted, but you want to stay consistent, and play [like they did in the first period] for sixty minutes.”
"Desperation mode kicked in for them,” Kopitar added. “They came at us hard, and scored an early goal, but we were focused enough to come right back, and answer that, making it a four-goal lead again. That was huge, but the rest of the way, I thought we played OK, [but] we didn’t play up to our standards.”
"I don’t think that was one of our best,” said Carter. “They picked up their game, and we sat back a bit. It was kind of a weird second and third, with all the penalties. There wasn’t much flow, and it took a lot of guys out of the game, with all the penalty-kills.”
"We weren’t very good, especially in the second period, and we took way too many penalties in the third,” said defenseman Drew Doughty. “But we played great in the first, and having a four-goal lead like that, it’s kind of tough to play the rest of the game, mentally, and I didn’t think we did a great job with that.”
“You saw the lapse we had in last year’s playoffs against San Jose, when we let them comeback and win [when the Kings had a 4-0 lead, only to lose Game 3, 6-5 in overtime, on April 19, 2011], so we have to make sure that if we get up to a lead like that again, we don’t give them those chances to get back in the game.”
There's all the quotes from your article. Where in any of those does one player say they were dominated in the second and third periods? They say the could play better, and they sure could, but no one is saying they were dominated. The last quote above, from Doughty, says how they didn't give them the chances to get back into the game like they did against San Jose. Big difference between not playing our best and getting dominated. They didn't get dominated.
If you think the players said they were, you might want to reread what you yourself wrote.
I think there are too many words being put in the mouth of the players. If you are getting quotes from them and think something then ask them if that is what they mean or ask them to further interpret their thoughts.
It is cool to give your thoughts and opinions on the game but some of the declarations seems a bit odd.
What do I know though, I can barely spell my name?
Kings play style, effort and heart causes the near-perfect Blues to repeatedly cough up the puck, back off and give space and generally play distracted.
"Despite getting a goal from right wing Justin Williams just 1:08 after Blues center Andy McDonald got his team on the board 0:18 into the second period, the Blues dominated the second and third periods, while the Kings sat back in what amounted to a “prevent” defense, resulting in some less-than-stellar play.
Do you read what you write?
That's insane. There is no way an argument can be make that the Blues "dominated" the second period
you rock man! 
