Simmer has the same amount of even strength points he had in a Kings uniform at the same point in the season.
The bulk of his points are coming in PP minutes. Simmer didn't play the PP in LA. So remove his PP time and points, he is on pace for a career average.
The same can be said for Purcell.
Moulson just never got a Legit shot to play in LA. So no one knows what he would have done.
Nolan and King have created plenty of chanes in two games. Manchester plays the same system.
It's system AND PLAYERS. If people are not willing to go to scoring areas it doesn't matter what system you are running(you won't score). Linemates HAVE ALOT to do with production. See Mike playing harder last two games? wonder why that is....
The Kings lost a ton of size and net PRESENCE in Smyth,Zues,Simmer. I went back and watched a lot of games from 2009-10 season (Drew's best season). A lot of goals were created by Zues/Symth.
It's not always going to show up in the score sheet. But those two guys made goalies, and D men's lives very hard.
Moulson, Simmonds, Purcell had plenty of time in Los Angeles to produce, you can't tell me that these guys didn't have a chance to play.
As for Nolan and King, I'm not going to judge their play just by watching TWO games. I'll agree with the fact that its the players as well but its up to the system bring the production out of the players by utilizing their strong points and talents in a way that maximizes their production.
Look at Stoll, Penner, Williams, Brown, Doughty, Richards, look at their prior year(s) stats, none of them are having career years. That is WAY too much talent to be that offensively inept. They have MORE than enough surrounding talent to produce more than ONE-TWO goals a game.
You can bring some of the most talented players here in LA and they'll still be average, just like all the talent who came here and left.
Moulson, Simmonds, Purcell had plenty of time in Los Angeles to produce, you can't tell me that these guys didn't have a chance to play.
As for Nolan and King, I'm not going to judge their play just by watching TWO games. I'll agree with the fact that its the players as well but its up to the system bring the production out of the players.
Look at Stoll, Penner, Williams, Brown, Doughty, Richards, look at their prior year(s) stats, none of them are having career years. That is WAY too much talent to be that offensively inept. They have MORE than enough surrounding talent to produce more than ONE-TWO goals a game.
You didn't even read the Post did you ?
Moulson was the only one I pointed out not getting a Legit shot.
Simmonds and Purcell have better numbers cause of their PP time. You take away their PP time they are posting the type of numbers they put up in LA.
Simmonds/Purcell are NOT PP options for LA(when they played here). So how did the system stiffle those guys ?
Last edited by damacles1156: 02-13-2012 at 01:15 PM.
Brayden Schenn - 28 games, 8 goals, 3 assists, 70 hits.
Age: 20 years old
Salary: 3.1 million
Wayne Simmonds - 56 games, 18 goals, 16 assists, 97 hits.
Age: 23
Salary: 1.75 million
vs.
Mike Richards - 14 goals, 13 assists, 75 hits.
Age: 27
Salary: 5.75 million
Those are the facts boys.
Here's some more facts:
Kings defense: 2.07 goals against (3rd in league)
Philly defense: 2.93 goals against (25th in league)
Schenn - +/- -1
Simmonds +/- 0
Good to know Simmonds and Schenn can score more since it's obvious they don't play defense. Some of you guys really need to get off of Richards and jump on the Stoll and Penner sucking bandwagon. If Schenn or Simmonds had to play with these 2 their numbers would be far worse, but hey, lets only use box scores to determine things.
Really don't care, LA is stuck with Richards. I can yank my season tickets but no point in crying about it. Lombardi is not going anywhere, I am pretty sure he has already sold AEG on next year.
Kings defense: 2.07 goals against (3rd in league)
Philly defense: 2.93 goals against (25th in league)
Schenn - +/- -1
Simmonds +/- 0
Good to know Simmonds and Schenn can score more since it's obvious they don't play defense. Some of you guys really need to get off of Richards and jump on the Stoll and Penner sucking bandwagon. If Schenn or Simmonds had to play with these 2 their numbers would be far worse, but hey, lets only use box scores to determine things.
There are long time Flyers fans posting that (a) Schenn looks better as a 20 year old then Richards did and (b) Simmonds has become a beast to play against and is scoring.
Project what they will be like in 2-3 years and weep for what could have been. Meanwhile, Richards is not likely to get any better and, in fact, his stats have been declining over the past couple of years. More weeping.
Really don't care, LA is stuck with Richards. I can yank my season tickets but no point in crying about it. Lombardi is not going anywhere, I am pretty sure he has already sold AEG on next year.
Then you have settled for mediocrity. Welcome to LA hockey.
I've been a fan since the early 70s...tough addiction to break. The difference, however, is that i view the team objectively now rather than through purple colored glasses. I had hope that the organization would do things right this time but I was wrong. oh well. We can all live vicariously through the Flyers organization for the next decade though. Too bad Lombardi didn't stay there.
I've been a fan since the early 70s...tough addiction to break. The difference, however, is that i view the team objectively now rather than through purple colored glasses. I had hope that the organization would do things right this time but I was wrong. oh well. We can all live vicariously through the Flyers organization for the next decade though. Too bad Lombardi didn't stay there.
I know you would have preferred to have kept Simmonds and Schenn. Now if that had happened and Schenn had been plugged in as the 2nd or 3rd line center and struggled or been injured as he was with the Flyers, and Simmonds was not given the PP time that is getting him points in Philadelphia, then what would you have wanted to do?
I am sure the answer either way would be fire Lombardi.
I know you would have preferred to have kept Simmonds and Schenn. Now if that had happened and Schenn had been plugged in as the 2nd or 3rd line center and struggled or been injured as he was with the Flyers, and Simmonds was not given the PP time that is getting him points in Philadelphia, then what would you have wanted to do?
I am sure the answer either way would be fire Lombardi.
It is all about building a core and building depth. The Richards trade did neither. Holes everywhere and Lombardi goes out and adds what should have been the "final" piece. Total incompetence.
To think Richards stats have dropped between 25-27 and now imagine what it will be like in 3 years when he is 30 and that size and in average shape.
At that point Schenn will be only 23 and Simmonds 26. How can you be happy with that?
Because I'm willing to see how it plays out.
Side note...Richards has looked much better lately. I thought he was injured. Who knew all he really needed was the removal of those two ugly growths, the one on his left side, and the other one on his right.
It is all about building a core and building depth. The Richards trade did neither. Holes everywhere and Lombardi goes out and adds what should have been the "final" piece. Total incompetence.
I will agree with the bolded part. I think the jury is still out on the other statements.
The Kings added a piece of the puzzle they had been looking to get for a very long time. You have to give up something to get that piece, and it isn't cheap. Again, I seriously doubt that Schenn would have had a huge impact as a 2nd line center THIS season, or that Simmonds would be putting up much in the way of numbers.
If that had happened, what would your reaction been? I am sure you were going to say everything was fine and the development of the team was going according to the plan, right?
See, the thing is you have been bashing the GM since way before the Richards trade ever occurred. Excuse me if I doubt that there is a move that the Kings make that is good in your book.
I will agree with the bolded part. I think the jury is still out on the other statements.
The Kings added a piece of the puzzle they had been looking to get for a very long time. You have to give up something to get that piece, and it isn't cheap. Again, I seriously doubt that Schenn would have had a huge impact as a 2nd line center THIS season, or that Simmonds would be putting up much in the way of numbers.
If that had happened, what would your reaction been? I am sure you were going to say everything was fine and the development of the team was going according to the plan, right?
See, the thing is you have been bashing the GM since way before the Richards trade ever occurred. Excuse me if I doubt that there is a move that the Kings make that is good in your book.
Two points:
1. It was never about "this" season...it was about building the depth and core to compete for the SC every year. I was willing to wait another 2-3 years for it to all come together.
2. I began bashing Lombardi after the Penner trade. You would have to look pretty hard to find me bashing him before that.
If the trade would have never been made, the Kings would probably be worse off RIGHT NOW. Meaning there's a good chance we'd miss the playoffs.
That said, we'd probably be better off in the coming years if we still had Schenn & Simmonds. They will continue to improve, while Richards has plateaued and will probably decline from here on out.
My issue with the trade, is that if you're going to give up PRIME assets, you should be getting a game breaking 1st line player in return, not a 60 point, 2 way, 2nd/3rd line center.
I'm still reserving judgement on whether it was the right move or not, but I'm skeptical. Time will tell.
Two points:
1. It was never about "this" season...it was about building the depth and core to compete for the SC every year. I was willing to wait another 2-3 years for it to all come together. 2. I began bashing Lombardi after the Penner trade. You would have to look pretty hard to find me bashing him before that.
Fair enough. I too am patient. I just think Richards was too enticing to pass up.
I love everyone's argument that the Kings would be worse....
Richards missed a handful of games and has been invisible for 12 over the past 14 games....so technically they are without him and without Schenn and Simmonds.
If the trade would have never been made, the Kings would probably be worse off RIGHT NOW. Meaning there's a good chance we'd miss the playoffs.
That said, we'd probably be better off in the coming years if we still had Schenn & Simmonds. They will continue to improve, while Richards has plateaued and will probably decline from here on out.
My issue with the trade, is that if you're going to give up PRIME assets, you should be getting a game breaking 1st line player in return, not a 60 point, 2 way, 2nd/3rd line center.
I'm still reserving judgement on whether it was the right move or not, but I'm skeptical. Time will tell.
Six years into the Lombardi era and we might have missed the playoffs if the Richards trade had not been made. That in and of itself is a harsh indictment on the Lombardi era. Quick fix to make playoffs in year 6. And even if they do make the playoffs they will sneak in as one of the bottom seeds.
