I don’t see all the need for the negativity toward O’Sullivan. Williams has been a good outcome of the trade so far, and likewise O’Sullivan has similar point production in Edmonton, doing that on a team that has been seriously flu ridden, and consistently injured, and playing on make shift lines sometimes game to game. He will suffer much more intense scrutiny, and time will tell how that boy manages, but i truly hope he realizes his potential.

-Quisp

So you didn’t follow Rich’s blog 2 months ago when he was working for the Daily News? Get off your alternative hockey high horse guy.

Please tell me where Sully said something negative about his old team as you claim. You can’t because he didn’t, and I’m trying to figure out why you choose to take it that way. If anything he was talking smack on LA as a hockey market and how it compares to Edmonton. What can you do in Edmonton during the winter? Drink, screw and watch/play hockey.

HOCKEY IS BIGGER IN CANADA. Not sure what point your trying to make.

Not exactly Mike Tyson, but their are parallels.

I didn’t say anything about ratings or about the Lakers. I actually don’t care about ratings at all. Because I don’t work for Fox.

I don’t know where you’re getting the “hater” thing from. It does seem to be the label du jour for anyone who doesn’t agree with you (by you, I mean the person who is using the term “hater”).

I don’t hate POS. I always liked him. I think negative comments about your old team lack class. Why? Because you’re going to move on from your current team eventually, and then it’s their turn for the snide comments. I think many commenters are right to point out that he’s simply stating an accepted “fact.”

My point is two-fold:

(1) his experience of LA is extremely limited and not representative or interesting. Mostly he’s talking about how many reporters put mics in his face after the game (and, as others have mentioned, how many people recognize him on the street — p.s. I know what he looks like and I had trouble recognizing him in his own picture — see the NHL.com pic; is that really him?).

(2) I don’t think the media coverage is lacking. Because I don’t read newspapers or watch local news or even national news like ESPN. Why not? Because that’s not where the coverage is. I have no doubt that the Lakers have a bigger following, get higher ratings, make more money, etc.. So what? Is the coverage of the Lakers more thorough than the Kings? I doubt it. If you limit yourself to newspapers and Stu Nahan (if he is even still alive, which I don’t think he is). I don’t think that coverage (big outlets, papers, TV) is in any way preferable to what we have right here and elsewhere on the web. You have to go where the coverage is. And where the coverage is, I find it hard to imagine better.

(is the lakers coverage “better” because it gets more national attention? I would be surprised. network announcers and national writers never know a team the way the locals do, do they? and where is the knowledgeable coverage of the Kings? It’s right here.)

Guess who else doesn’t care?

This guy.

Oh, he meant the team, not him.

Are you trying to tell me that the Kings draw comparable local television ratings to the lakers, or any of the above teams mentioned? Yes the Kings obviously have a loyal fan base…us. But come on guy. Look I’m familiar with your tag line, and you usually have something reasonable to say. This time you and many others are too quick to jump on the hater wagon.

Hockey is the national sport of Canada. Thats all Sully was trying to say. When you walk in to any bar anywhere in Canada, everyone wants to buy you a drink. People talk about hockey at the water cooler. Its not a knock on LA, its just the reality. Why be offended?