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

Report Card Time: Kings get F

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-15-2007, 12:42 PM
  #1
lumbergh
Registered User
 
lumbergh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Richmond, VA
Country: Taiwan
Posts: 1,655
vCash: 500
Report Card Time: Kings get F

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...rds/index.html

Los Angeles Kings
Analysis Grade
Despite strong performances from their rebuilding blocks, the Kings are significantly worse than last season. Averaging 3.54 goals-against, they're by far the West's worst defensive squad. F
Individual Grades
Head of the class
ANZE KOPITAR: Exceeding all expectations, Kings' first-half MVP has become a franchise cornerstone. A
DEREK ARMSTRONG: Team's unsung hero is rocking a plus-11 with 29 points. A
ALEXANDER FROLOV: On pace for several career bests, only needs consistency. B+

Staying after school
MARC CRAWFORD (coach): Constant line tinkering proves he has no answers for slide. F
ROB BLAKE: Three even-strength points; has lost his physical edge. D
CRAIG CONROY: Non-factor on offense; one of the West's biggest disappointments. F
DAN CLOUTIER: Off-season acquisition boasts NHL's worst save percentage and GAA. F-

Contender or Pretender
The Kings will vie for the first overall pick in June. Look for Blake, Conroy, Armstrong and Scott Thornton to be trade bait.


In particular I like the grades given to Dan Cloutier. Can you get an F-?

Grades for the rest of the team?

SEAN AVERY: C- many threads devoted to sean
DUSTIN BROWN: B learning every game
BARRY BRUST: C+
MICHAEL CAMMALLERI: B effective sniper one minute, invisible the next
KEVIN DALLMAN: D- why?
YUTAKA FUKUFUJI: INCOMPLETE
MATTHIEU GARON: C better if not injured
RAITIS IVANANS: D+ does his job; only no one to fight
TOM KOSTOPOULOS: B- shows up every night
ALYN MCCAULEY: D-/INCOMPLETE
AARON MILLER: D+ lost his edge
MARTY MURRAY: WHO CARES
MATTI NORSTROM: D- lost his game
KONSTANTIN PUSHKAREV: B/INCOMPLETE plays big
BRENT SOPEL: C doing okay
SCOTT THORNTON: D- wasted money
OLEG TVERDOVSKY: D- JMFJ
LUBOMIR VISNOVSKY: A- imagine this team without him
MIKE WEAVER: F
BRIAN WILLSIE: F- worthless


Last edited by lumbergh: 01-15-2007 at 08:16 PM.
lumbergh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 01:45 PM
  #2
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,419
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
Agree with most of the player grades. I wouldn't give the Kings an F though since I expected them to be this bad of a hockey team. This was the plan and Lombardi is sticking to it. If you thought the Kings would make the playoffs and are dissapointed by how the season has gone go ahead and give yourself an F.

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 01:50 PM
  #3
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 30,753
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikkanen View Post
Agree with most of the player grades. I wouldn't give the Kings an F though since I expected them to be this bad of a hockey team. This was the plan and Lombardi is sticking to it. If you thought the Kings would make the playoffs and are dissapointed by how the season has gone go ahead and give yourself an F.
Got to agree with Tikk. Never expected the playoffs this year at all.

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 02:37 PM
  #4
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikkanen View Post
Agree with most of the player grades. I wouldn't give the Kings an F though since I expected them to be this bad of a hockey team. This was the plan and Lombardi is sticking to it. If you thought the Kings would make the playoffs and are dissapointed by how the season has gone go ahead and give yourself an F.
where did Lombardi say it was his intention for us to suck this bad this year? He explicitly said that this is Los Angeles and you can't foot out a losing team. it was his intention to make playoffs this year. When he came to our team, he said one reason he chose here was because he felt the team was good and didn't require a full rebuild. He felt it just needed adjustments. His plan was to rebuild on the run, not reach a high draft pick this year. A team with this record was not in Lombardi's plans.

KingPurpleDinosaur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 03:02 PM
  #5
lakings41
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Orange County, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingPurpleDinosaur View Post
where did Lombardi say it was his intention for us to suck this bad this year? He explicitly said that this is Los Angeles and you can't foot out a losing team. it was his intention to make playoffs this year. When he came to our team, he said one reason he chose here was because he felt the team was good and didn't require a full rebuild. He felt it just needed adjustments. His plan was to rebuild on the run, not reach a high draft pick this year. A team with this record was not in Lombardi's plans.

Agreed. Most posters think it was a grand scheme plotted by Lombardi. Fact is that his moves haven't paid off. He ripped the old brass for having an "old boy cozy network" and himself and Crow brought in all their cronies. So what was so different.
I'll be patient but his breakfast comments about Cammy and how hard it was for him to re-sign Brown and Gleason doesn't give me a lot of hope. He's made one really good deal and has choked on the rest. DT got crucified for one deal on his whole career. I'm really pulling for Lombardi to do well, but he hasn't shown me **** so far.
Now wanting to re-sign Miller would be another joke. We go from bad to worse.

On a side note I also didn't expect us to do that well. But we're beyond pitiful. They also thought that are O would have been the sour spot because of our youth and they've been the only shining light on this team.

The SIX to build around! Kopitar, Cammy, Frolov, Brown, Visnovsky, and Johnson. The rest can go bye bye!

lakings41 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 03:40 PM
  #6
Game Misconduct
Registered User
 
Game Misconduct's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 1,862
vCash: 500
F-! Lmao

Game Misconduct is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 04:22 PM
  #7
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingPurpleDinosaur View Post
where did Lombardi say it was his intention for us to suck this bad this year? He explicitly said that this is Los Angeles and you can't foot out a losing team. it was his intention to make playoffs this year. When he came to our team, he said one reason he chose here was because he felt the team was good and didn't require a full rebuild. He felt it just needed adjustments. His plan was to rebuild on the run, not reach a high draft pick this year. A team with this record was not in Lombardi's plans.
Lombardi traded away the teams best goal scorer in Demitra (25 goals) and Robitaille (15 goals) retired. The Kings lost Corvo (14 goals), Roenick (9 goals) and Parrish (29 goals) to free agency and traded away Gleason (2 goals) and Belanger (17 goals). The only "major" acquistion was Blake. That alone was not enough to offset the 111 goals worth of offense that the Kings lost. The players brought in had these # of goals last year......Blake - 14, Willsie - 19, Thornton - 10, McCauley - 12, Tverdovsky - 3, Dallman - 4. That is a net loss of 49 goals. Add to that the fact that most of the guys who came in are not even producing as well as they did last year. To even expect the team to be as good as last year's squad would have been "extremely" optimistic.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 04:24 PM
  #8
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
I don't know if you're laughing at me or not, but when he did moves like acquire Cloutier for high picks, that's not telling me he's looking for a full rebuild. Say we are in the top 5 draft picks, that means he just gave up a near late 1st round pick. How does that look like a move from a GM thats looking to rebuild?

When he says he acquired Cloutier for average goaltending and got last in the league goaltending, how is it that he is looking for a rebuild? You guys have to wake up listen to what Lombardi admits himself, Cloutier was a mistake and he was NOT expecting to be this bad. This goes the same with our current lackluster underachieving defensemen. They are not performing to his expectations becuase he was expecting us to be better. He admitted all of this at the breakfast and everything he's ever said goes contrary to a full rebuild. I really don't get where you guys are getting this "it's goign exactly to Lombardi's plan" joke from, because it is flat out wrong.

KingPurpleDinosaur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 04:28 PM
  #9
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squidward View Post
Lombardi traded away the teams best goal scorer in Demitra (25 goals) and Robitaille (15 goals) retired. The Kings lost Corvo (14 goals), Roenick (9 goals) and Parrish (29 goals) to free agency and traded away Gleason (2 goals) and Belanger (17 goals). The only "major" acquistion was Blake. That alone was not enough to offset the 111 goals worth of offense that the Kings lost. The players brought in had these # of goals last year......Blake - 14, Willsie - 19, Thornton - 10, McCauley - 12, Tverdovsky - 3, Dallman - 4. That is a net loss of 49 goals. Add to that the fact that most of the guys who came in are not even producing as well as they did last year. To even expect the team to be as good as last year's squad would have been "extremely" optimistic.
Lombardi's goal was to shore up the defense, again, something he explicitly said over and over again. He was not interested in winning the offensive game, which is why he gave up our forwards to beefen our defense. The defense that Lombardi was expecting us to win us games has been poor to say the least. He wasn't expecting us to be as good as last year, but he was not lookign for the full rebuild. From what I take from him, I would have to say he was looking at us hitting another 7th or 8th spot. Thigns didn't go as planned and we bombed, which is fine becuase even HE admits it.

KingPurpleDinosaur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 04:43 PM
  #10
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingPurpleDinosaur View Post
He wasn't expecting us to be as good as last year, but he was not lookign for the full rebuild. From what I take from him, I would have to say he was looking at us hitting another 7th or 8th spot. Thigns didn't go as planned and we bombed, which is fine becuase even HE admits it.
Last time I checked the Kings finished in 10th place in the Conference in 2005-06. If this years team is worse than least year.....How could he have been looking at a 7th or 8th place finish? Doesn't add up.
Also the Kings only averaged 3 goals/game last year. I don't see how he could have expected to win with "defense" while scoring with less than 3 goals/game. Even he was not deluded enough to think this team was capable of holding the oppositition to less than 2 goals/game on a regular basis.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 04:55 PM
  #11
lumbergh
Registered User
 
lumbergh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Richmond, VA
Country: Taiwan
Posts: 1,655
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
Got to agree with Tikk. Never expected the playoffs this year at all.
Yes, but did you expect them to be this bad?

lumbergh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 05:19 PM
  #12
TONGA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 132
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to TONGA Send a message via Yahoo to TONGA
People arguing that offense is the problem are really barking up the wrong tree. Goaltending and defense is what is holding this team back from finishing the 8 or so points out of a playoff spot I thought they might be able to get to at the beginning of the season. Clearly even then I overrated them a bit.

TONGA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 05:23 PM
  #13
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,341
vCash: 500
Averying those grades results in a D/D+, not an F. I'd say that a D+ is about where the Kings are at this point.


Last edited by Osprey: 01-15-2007 at 06:03 PM. Reason: I mistook the grades to be coming from Lumberg
Osprey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 05:23 PM
  #14
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lumberg View Post
Yes, but did you expect them to be this bad?
Yes!

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=273047

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 05:54 PM
  #15
Skebo
Registered User
 
Skebo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Pissin' in the Pond
Country: United States
Posts: 876
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Skebo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
Giving the team an F is an example of being emotional rather than objective. Even an averaging of your grades results in a D/D+. I'd say that a D+ is about where the Kings are at this point.
The F is from the SI.com writer Allan Muir. Are you saying he has some sort of emotional tie to the Kings? He seems pretty objective about the other teams in the conference.

Skebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 05:57 PM
  #16
Albi
Registered User
 
Albi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lavena - Italy
Country: Italy
Posts: 4,627
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Albi
I perfectly know what "F" stands for

Albi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 05:59 PM
  #17
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skebo View Post
The F is from the SI.com writer Allan Muir. Are you saying he has some sort of emotional tie to the Kings? He seems pretty objective about the other teams in the conference.
I think that Osprey assumed that lumberg was grading the team instead of quoting Muir.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 06:00 PM
  #18
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skebo View Post
The F is from the SI.com writer Allan Muir. Are you saying he has some sort of emotional tie to the Kings? He seems pretty objective about the other teams in the conference.
My bad. I didn't see the link. I thought that this was lumberg's own assessment. Thanks for the correction. Still, an F doesn't strike me as an accurate assessment. As I said, if you assign points to his grades and average them out (yes, I wasted a few minutes doing that, heh), you end up with a D/D+, not an F.

Osprey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 06:05 PM
  #19
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 110,757
vCash: 5888
Norstrom "lost his game" gets a D, Pushkarev has been with the team for a week, apparently is one of the Kings best players, and Armstrong gets an A because he has points and is a plus player. Sean Avery gets bagged on despire completely turning his image around and actually becoming a hockey player instead of a superpest and Ivanans gets D+ even though he does his job while Cammy gets a B and is bagged on



This is some of the most ***-backward logic I've seen in my entire life.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 06:05 PM
  #20
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
My bad. I didn't see the link. I thought that this was lumberg's own assessment. Thanks for the correction. Still, an F doesn't strike me as an accurate assessment. As I said, if you assign points to his grades and average them out, you end up with a D/D+, not an F.
Yeah but there are other "intangibles" that the writer might not have assigned a grade to. Still I would say that any objective person would have to rate the Kings season as an "F" ....."D-" if you want to use Kopitar as a little "unexpected" boost.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 06:08 PM
  #21
sueroe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,597
vCash: 500
I am positive Lombardi did not want to tank the season, but was cleaning out the system and was hoping to rebuild from goalie on out. I believe on paper with people like Blake, Lubo, Sopel and even defensive minded forwards like McCauley this year could have turned out to be much more successful than it had if all had gone well. If Blake was playing to his potential, and in particular if Cloutier would have lived up to hopes (not saying expectations at this point), there would have been support needed for the young offensive talent that is there with potential to score big time (such as Frolov, Cammy, and Kopitar). But its a crap shoot and it didn't work out.

Now with the individual rankings you did lumberg, i would say ranking Cammalleri amd Brown a B would be fine, but I think it would stretch it to rank Pushkarev at the same level with a B given the very short time he has been up (although he has been doing well so far).
I found it interesting that they only ranked Demitra a C+, but i guess he was pretty quiet while Gaborik was out with injury

sueroe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 06:15 PM
  #22
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,419
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingPurpleDinosaur View Post
where did Lombardi say it was his intention for us to suck this bad this year? He explicitly said that this is Los Angeles and you can't foot out a losing team. it was his intention to make playoffs this year. When he came to our team, he said one reason he chose here was because he felt the team was good and didn't require a full rebuild. He felt it just needed adjustments. His plan was to rebuild on the run, not reach a high draft pick this year. A team with this record was not in Lombardi's plans.
I'm going on the assumption as a longtime King fan that I'm being lied to in order to get me to buy tickets. I believe Lombardi and Crawford had a plan of getting Luongo and Chara, if they did not get both players there was a plan B in place where they would get grinders so the fans wouldn't jump all over them. Rob Blake was brought in to get fans to buy tickets. For some strange reason King fans seem to like getting ex-Kings back in uniform even though it usually turns out bad. I would rather the team get a high draft pick than get destroyed in 1 round of playoff hockey since a high draft pick, some nice deals at the deadline to cut some fat and maybe a UFA or 2 next season and the Kings will actually have a nice foundation to build on.

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 06:30 PM
  #23
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 110,757
vCash: 5888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikkanen View Post
I'm going on the assumption as a longtime King fan that I'm being lied to in order to get me to buy tickets. I believe Lombardi and Crawford had a plan of getting Luongo and Chara, if they did not get both players there was a plan B in place where they would get grinders so the fans wouldn't jump all over them. Rob Blake was brought in to get fans to buy tickets. For some strange reason King fans seem to like getting ex-Kings back in uniform even though it usually turns out bad. I would rather the team get a high draft pick than get destroyed in 1 round of playoff hockey since a high draft pick, some nice deals at the deadline to cut some fat and maybe a UFA or 2 next season and the Kings will actually have a nice foundation to build on.
I'd be willing to be less than 2% of people who buy tickets buy them to see Rob Blake.


The Kings don't have to engage in a massive overhaul. In a cap world, if you know what you're doing, it can turn around REAL quick. The core is in place. There are a lot of teams who would KILL to have a top 4 unit of Visnovsky-Norstrom-Blake-Sopel on defense. Solid goaltending would make them and the team a lot better. I am not one to point at the goalie a lot, but I don't need to be the first to admit that the goalie sucks, but I will be one of the few to admit that with a competent goaltender the Kings would be a lot better.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 07:15 PM
  #24
jeffreyaa
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: GutFest '89
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by go kim johnsson 514 View Post
Norstrom "lost his game" gets a D, Pushkarev has been with the team for a week, apparently is one of the Kings best players, and Armstrong gets an A because he has points and is a plus player. Sean Avery gets bagged on despire completely turning his image around and actually becoming a hockey player instead of a superpest and Ivanans gets D+ even though he does his job while Cammy gets a B and is bagged on



This is some of the most ***-backward logic I've seen in my entire life.
Agree with this. Pushkarev can only be classified "incomplete", Ivanans has done basically everything asked of him [besides taking the body hard every night]- should be around a B, and Avery has become an incredibly valuable player [albeit, with some kinks still to be worked out]- should be a B.

Matty I'd give a C instead of a D.

Frankly I agree with Armstrong's A [bring on the flames....]. If we're looking at performance vs expectations, people have got to start finally giving Army some recognition. Whether anyone really wants him to be a top-2 center on the team, the guy's done everything asked of him and more; even been taking the body somewhat recently.

jeffreyaa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-15-2007, 07:18 PM
  #25
wabwat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: pasadena, ca.
Posts: 6,682
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to wabwat
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreyaa View Post
Agree with this. Pushkarev can only be classified "incomplete", Ivanans has done basically everything asked of him [besides taking the body hard every night]- should be around a B, and Avery has become an incredibly valuable player [albeit, with some kinks still to be worked out]- should be a B.

Matty I'd give a C instead of a D.

Frankly I agree with Armstrong's A [bring on the flames....]. If we're looking at performance vs expectations, people have got to start finally giving Army some recognition. Whether anyone really wants him to be a top-2 center on the team, the guy's done everything asked of him and more; even been taking the body somewhat recently.

i won't flame you for Armstrong as long as you don't flame me for flaming you about adjusting Norstrom's grade to a C.

wabwat 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 08:55 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.