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

Mike Richards

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-27-2013, 11:33 AM
  #126
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
How do you know this?

The Kings were playing at a ridiculous level during the playoffs. It's hard to know what the end result would have been if you pull one player out of the equation not named Quick.

I feel comfortable saying this though; without Darryl Sutter the Kings don't win the cup. He, more than anyone, is the x factor that got the Kings over the hump. Not Mike Richards.
The thing with the Kings' victory was everyone made a difference. Do you think Kopi's line would have had as much impact if Stoll was the second line centre?

MsWoof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:02 PM
  #127
Live in the Now
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Live in the Now's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: LA
Country: United States
Posts: 31,437
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
How do you know this?

The Kings were playing at a ridiculous level during the playoffs. It's hard to know what the end result would have been if you pull one player out of the equation not named Quick.

I feel comfortable saying this though; without Darryl Sutter the Kings don't win the cup. He, more than anyone, is the x factor that got the Kings over the hump. Not Mike Richards.
Because our second line center would be Stoll, and because we wouldn't have even been in the playoffs without Richards early performances. Every single player who was played in the clincher pulled their weight in the playoffs, we wouldn't win the Cup without any of them.

Live in the Now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:02 PM
  #128
Ollie Weeks
Registered User
 
Ollie Weeks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sioux Lookout, NWO
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,718
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
How do you know this?

The Kings were playing at a ridiculous level during the playoffs. It's hard to know what the end result would have been if you pull one player out of the equation not named Quick.

I feel comfortable saying this though; without Darryl Sutter the Kings don't win the cup. He, more than anyone, is the x factor that got the Kings over the hump. Not Mike Richards.
Trading for Richards, firing Murray, hiring Sutter, calling up King and Nolan, trading JJ for Carter, it all mattered.

Entertaining the notion of removing Richards from the team at this junction, rather than letting him find his game and conditioning, is profoundly retarded. (not directed at you, just at the sheeple in general)

Ollie Weeks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 12:57 PM
  #129
Whiskeypete
Registered User
 
Whiskeypete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: stuck in the middle
Country: United States
Posts: 2,376
vCash: 500

Whiskeypete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 01:02 PM
  #130
funky
Registered User
 
funky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Saskatoon, Sask
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,056
vCash: 500
Richards is a perfect 2nd line center on a playoff team. Plays a cerebral two way game. Plays all situation, doesn't back down, great pedigree.

funky is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 01:04 PM
  #131
damacles1156
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 12,268
vCash: 500
Mike will be fine after about 10 games. He will be back to his old self.

It's just painful to watch atm.

damacles1156 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 02:35 PM
  #132
Scottkmlps
Moderator
 
Scottkmlps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
How do you know this?

The Kings were playing at a ridiculous level during the playoffs. It's hard to know what the end result would have been if you pull one player out of the equation not named Quick.

I feel comfortable saying this though; without Darryl Sutter the Kings don't win the cup. He, more than anyone, is the x factor that got the Kings over the hump. Not Mike Richards.
Yes, and it takes every player to buy into the system that Sutter implemented, and it takes leaders like Richards who have won at every level to lead the team. Richards was an big part of that cup win, just like every player that played for the Kings on that 16-4 run.
The Kings have a solid 1-2 punch at center and after one cup some people want to trade Richards. There are many players in the league right now who are struggling due to the fact they haven't played competitive hockey in 7 months. Add the fact no training camp and you've got a recipe for players struggling. Give it more than 4 games before you start lambasting certain players.

Scottkmlps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 02:52 PM
  #133
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,457
vCash: 500
You guys are just proving my point. It's a team sport. The Kings weren't any better with Richards in the lineup until Sutter, Carter, Nolan, King, Fraser all came along.

That's why you can't unequivocally say that we don't win the cup with out him. You just don't know. Richards all on his own isn't enough of a force to make or break a season.

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 02:55 PM
  #134
Chazz Reinhold
Registered User
 
Chazz Reinhold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Stanley Cup
Country: United States
Posts: 6,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
You guys are just proving my point. It's a team sport. The Kings weren't any better with Richards in the lineup until Sutter, Carter, Nolan, King, Fraser all came along.

That's why you can't unequivocally say that we don't win the cup with out him. You just don't know. Richards all on his own isn't enough of a force to make or break a season.
I think it's fair to say that the Kings weren't going to win the Cup with Stoll as the second line center, though.

Chazz Reinhold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 03:06 PM
  #135
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsWoof View Post
The thing with the Kings' victory was everyone made a difference. Do you think Kopi's line would have had as much impact if Stoll was the second line centre?
I've been watching Kopitar long enough to know that when he gets on his game he's a force, and he's going to score PERIOD. I've seen him be hot, and cold, with all types of different lineup variations around him.

Statically speaking he had the best year of his career when Stoll was the 2nd line center.

I remember when people were crediting Smyth for Kopitar's success. Now it's because of Mike Richards? Gimme a break.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Chazz Reinhold View Post
I think it's fair to say that the Kings weren't going to win the Cup with Stoll as the second line center, though.
Probably, but I think Dean would have figured something out. We had a ton of prime assets. I do wonder if we would have been able to get Carter, if we didn't already have Richards. IMO, Carter is more important to the team right now.

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 03:43 PM
  #136
RonSwanson*
Gadfly
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Food 'N Stuff
Country: United States
Posts: 8,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsWoof View Post
Spoken like someone who is clueless about hockey. I guess 2 way play, pp, pk, hitting, occasionally fighting isn't important.
I get it. You're a Richards homer.

I like Richards too. But I am not blind to the fact that he's putting up less points than he did with Carcillo and Nodl as his linemates. Hell, even you posted a few pages back that he's being outplayed by an over-the-hill Doan.

As for my comment that you quoted above, I'm far from clueless about hockey. All I was saying is that DeeShamrock using Richards' 65 pts in 82 games stats wasnt very impressive by itself and certainly not indicative of a guy getting paid near max like Richards is. Anyone, even those who happen to be clueless about hockey can understand that.


Last edited by RonSwanson*: 01-27-2013 at 03:52 PM.
RonSwanson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 03:49 PM
  #137
RonSwanson*
Gadfly
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Food 'N Stuff
Country: United States
Posts: 8,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoreZeGoals View Post
Jesus, I know the slow start has taken an effect on some of you, but are some of you seriously in favor of trading away a key piece of what brought this team it's only Stanley cup ever? Our two way center play is one of the best in the league and those who think a four day span by a player who is obviously rusty means we should trade him should get their heads examined. Who is going to step in and play second line center? Stoll? Please. Also, we would not get a better center to replace him in a deal for Richards. Look at a list of centers and decide which ones you think are better than Richards. Guess what? Those teams are not trading those centers! Regardless, Dean isn't trading him, so people need to stop wasting their time. If I was Gagne or Penner though, I wouldn't be feeling to comfortable come trade deadline time.
No one is advocating trading Richards. The OP isnt a Kings fan.

RonSwanson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 04:36 PM
  #138
deeshamrock
Registered User
 
deeshamrock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,546
vCash: 500
Quote:
But I am not blind to the fact that he's putting up less points than he did with Carcillo and Nodl as his linemates.
His point production was 11 G and 20 points in 24 games last year, thru Nov 30. His regular season ended Dec 1 with a head injury. PERIOD. If you watched the Kings last year, you saw the noticable drop in his game after the injury, Sutter mentioned post Cup taht Richards didn't 'start' to recover from it until the end of March.

Quote:
As for my comment that you quoted above, I'm far from clueless about hockey. All I was saying is that DeeShamrock using Richards' 65 pts in 82 games stats wasnt very impressive by itself and certainly not indicative of a guy getting paid near max like Richards is. Anyone, even those who happen to be clueless about hockey can understand that.
I said 65 points in 82 playoff games and it is an impressive stat , esp when you figure he generally plays against the top lines, does PK time and is a physical force. Most knowlegable hockey analysts, Bob McKenzie and Pierre LeBrun two that talked of it, pointed it out last year. That MR is 'money' in the playoffs due to that production and everything else he brings.

And TSN noted that Richards is 3rd in playoff scoring in the NHL ove r the last 3 years.

But i guess winning the Stanley Cup isn't important to you. To most Kings fans, MR earned every cent in that Cup run.


Last edited by deeshamrock: 01-27-2013 at 04:44 PM.
deeshamrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 06:46 PM
  #139
kingsfan28
Viva Los Cucarachas!
 
kingsfan28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Earth
Country: United States
Posts: 11,558
vCash: 500
Richards is a proven playoff performer.That's why you have him on your team. That hit he laid on Burrows in the playoffs set the tone for the entire playoff run.

kingsfan28 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-27-2013, 11:23 PM
  #140
RonSwanson*
Gadfly
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Food 'N Stuff
Country: United States
Posts: 8,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deeshamrock View Post
His point production was 11 G and 20 points in 24 games last year, thru Nov 30. His regular season ended Dec 1 with a head injury. PERIOD. If you watched the Kings last year, you saw the noticable drop in his game after the injury, Sutter mentioned post Cup taht Richards didn't 'start' to recover from it until the end of March.

I said 65 points in 82 playoff games and it is an impressive stat , esp when you figure he generally plays against the top lines, does PK time and is a physical force. Most knowlegable hockey analysts, Bob McKenzie and Pierre LeBrun two that talked of it, pointed it out last year. That MR is 'money' in the playoffs due to that production and everything else he brings.

And TSN noted that Richards is 3rd in playoff scoring in the NHL ove r the last 3 years.

But i guess winning the Stanley Cup isn't important to you. To most Kings fans, MR earned every cent in that Cup run.
You've said it multiple times now, but it's not true that MR's season ended Dec. 1. If you want to say that his injury made him less of a player, he also played injured on that line with Carcillo and Nodl.

The Kings won the Cup, not Richards alone. I'm amused by how you like to attribute it solely to Richards.

RonSwanson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-28-2013, 12:17 AM
  #141
Scrivezina
AMart Jazz Hands!!!
 
Scrivezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: RSM, CA
Posts: 2,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonSwanson View Post
Richards is overrated. He's a glorified 2C because he cherry picks on the PK for shorthanded goals and occasionally he hits people.
Hi Ron. I'm going to disagree with you on the cherry picking part. I think he aggressively follows through with his checks on players who shoot from the point during the PP and creates opportunities so it throws players off and makes them vulnerable. See the "the Shift" and also the hit on Burrows in the playoffs. While we were not on a PP against the Casucks, it is the same mentality. Vancouver had an empty net and Burrows was not expecting it. Even Fox recognizes it in his commentary at 1:04.

I guess my point is, I don't see him as a cherry picker. Just part of the PK that creates opps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mVgeoqoP58
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bs_3PeQQUxc

Scrivezina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-28-2013, 12:56 AM
  #142
KingKopitar11*
Drew Doughty Eh?
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: staples center
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 16,319
vCash: 500
the only thing I can agree on is that he's really good on the PK but other than that I dont think he was the game changer or set the tone in the playoffs. The whole team was better during the run, saying that he was a big key seems very unlikely to me. Brown, Kopitar, Doughty, 4th and 3rd line, and then Carter, Penner, then Richards. Richards did score well during our run but he wasn't necessarily "cannon" after the Vancouver series. Just me 2 cents about his real contribution to our run. Yes I do think he's overrated.

Brown was the legitimate "cannon" along with Kopitar through the whole thing. IMO. And no matter how much you disagree it wont change my perspective, this is to the extreme richards fanatics.

this is the old richards, this is who i thought he was gonna be. Wish he played like this as a king.

Last but not least, No Im not saying this cause of the first 4 games of the new season. I wouldn't trade him now, i think his conditioning is off, If he doesn't improve by the end of the regular season then you dangle him in the market, well that would be what i'd do.


Last edited by KingKopitar11*: 01-28-2013 at 01:18 AM.
KingKopitar11* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-28-2013, 01:37 AM
  #143
WhatTheFox
Jacha-chacha-chachow
 
WhatTheFox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: the Black Hole
Posts: 2,201
vCash: 500
Game 1 of the Vancouver series, Mike Richards was everything I thought we were getting. No doubt it's impossible to do that every game, night in and night out, but I wish we'd see that more frequently.

I also thought he would be able to create more offensively.

That being said, you can't deny this guy just wins. It's no coincidence that he's won almost every major championship there is to win for a hockey player. Whether or not LA would've won the Cup without Richards is impossible to know. All that matters is that LA did win and he played big minutes for the team in doing so.

WhatTheFox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-28-2013, 02:41 AM
  #144
Scrivezina
AMart Jazz Hands!!!
 
Scrivezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: RSM, CA
Posts: 2,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer View Post
Game 1 of the Vancouver series, Mike Richards was everything I thought we were getting. No doubt it's impossible to do that every game, night in and night out, but I wish we'd see that more frequently.

I also thought he would be able to create more offensively.

That being said, you can't deny this guy just wins. It's no coincidence that he's won almost every major championship there is to win for a hockey player. Whether or not LA would've won the Cup without Richards is impossible to know. All that matters is that LA did win and he played big minutes for the team in doing so.
This. Close thread.

Scrivezina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-28-2013, 04:33 AM
  #145
KingKopitar11*
Drew Doughty Eh?
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: staples center
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 16,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatty View Post
This. Close thread.
I second that

KingKopitar11* 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 10:41 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.