March of the West, Day 4

Yesterday’s Western Conference games, from the Kings’ standpoint…

Colorado 4, Minnesota 3: LOSS. I don’t think this one was going to make a huge impact either way, but it did allow Colorado to pass the Kings for third-most points in the West, while Minnesota stays a safe distance back (10 points, one game in hand).

San Jose 4, Dallas 2: WIN. I know there’s some debate about this one, but I feel that the Kings’ chances of staying ahead of Dallas, Phoenix and Anaheim are more realistic than their chances of finishing ahead of San Jose. This game prevented Dallas from pulling within four points of the Kings, still with one game in hand.

St. Louis 7, Edmonton 2: LOSS. St. Louis continues to climb up from the bottom of the West. The Blues are in 11th, 10 points back of the Kings, with two games in hand. Edmonton is at the bottom of the West.

Phoenix 5, Columbus 2: LOSS. The Coyotes pull within one point of the Kings. Both teams have played 37 games.

That puts the Kings’ “break record,” in my estimation, at 8-6. Today’s games are San Jose at Chicago, Anaheim at Colorado and Nashville at Vancouver. The “Kings’ picks” would be Chicago, Colorado (under the theory that they’ve played one more game than the Kings and aren’t a division rival) and Vancouver.

30 Comments

  1. Mike says:

    St Louis – Edmonton is really a wash, and is a good thing that it was not a three point game.

    [Reply]

  2. Mike says:

    I beg to differ — much as we hate it, we need to root for the Ducks.

    [Reply]

  3. OneTimer says:

    Overall- this break has gone swimmingly well for the Kings. IMHO

    [Reply]

  4. EASportsMgt says:

    I see Hammee’s (my new nickname for Rich) point on that one, whereby Colorado by virtue of being in a different division can be ahead of the Kings regardless because of their division, and keeping the Ducks down below the Kings is more important. I agree with that. I would rather keep the Ducks as low as possible, and they seem to being a good job of that themselves.

    [Reply]

  5. Matt Reitz says:

    Great idea Rich….

    I’ll admit. Most games in the West, I don’t even care who wins. I’m just rooting against the dreaded three point games….

    [Reply]

  6. What's the frequency, Kenneth? says:

    So here’s this morning’s “estimate” of what the top ten teams in the standings could look like on the morning of Dec 26 (or, for that matter, Dec 24.) It is calculated based on teams winning an average of 1.3 points per road game and 1.6 points per home game, while the Kings don’t play at all. Amazingly, there still haven’t been any “3-point games” amongst the western conference top ten, so the estimate for other has edged down a bit overall (mostly affecting the teams lower in the standings.)

    Pos Team     Games Pts
      1 Chicago     36  52
      2 San Jose    37  50
      3 Colorado    39  50
      4 Nashville   37  48
      5 Los Angeles 37  47
      6 Phoenix     38  48
      7 Calgary     36  46
      8 Dallas      37  43
      9 Detroit     37  43
     10 Vancouver   37  42

    [Reply]

  7. KingsKnight says:

    Mike says: “I beg to differ — much as we hate it, we need to root for the Ducks.”

    I may have mentioned this before, but we NEVER ever have to root for the Quacks. If you really need to take a side on that game, just root against the other team, but never for the Ducks. There’s a subtle but important difference :P

    example: “Go Not Colorado!”

    [Reply]

  8. What's the frequency, Kenneth? says:

    As you can see, I screwed up and forgot to bump Phoenix past the Kings. This is the correct order:


    Pos Team     Games Pts
      1 Chicago     36  52
      2 San Jose    37  50
      3 Colorado    39  50
      4 Nashville   37  48
      5 Phoenix     38  48
      6 Los Angeles 37  47
      7 Calgary     36  46
      8 Dallas      37  43
      9 Detroit     37  43
     10 Vancouver   37  42

    [Reply]

  9. USCG says:

    Im always gonna be afraid of the “crappy team from anaheim”. Im not ruling them out. They have a tendency to pick it up FAST and the kings have a tendency to suck after the first half of the season. This year seams like its gonna be awesome for us, but the “crappy team from anaheim” is pretty hot right now and they usually don’t get cold for too long so I really think we need to OBVIOUSLY be rooting for teams playing against the ducks, no matter the current standings.

    [Reply]

  10. USCG says:

    CORRECTION: I actually said “ducks” once…change it to crappy team from anaheim. There I go again…the du***.

    [Reply]

  11. Fyzzix says:

    I think Rich’s nickname shouldn’t be “Hammee”, it should be “Hammer”.

    You know I’m right about this.

    [Reply]

  12. DuckHunter says:

    I kindly disagree with everyone. I want the Quacks to do well. It’s the only way we can kick the s*^t out of them in the playoffs. How great would it be to destroy them in the playoffs? That’s my take.

    “Hammee” sounds girly.

    “Hammer” sounds perfect.

    [Reply]

  13. 54FIGHTING says:

    Chicago/Analhiem/Vancouver are my picks. I’d rather see S.J. lose, Colorado lose and Nashville (who’s been very hot) lose.

    Also, Rich’s nickname is ‘Nard dog’ after his exceptional performance each week on ‘The Office’ as Andy Bernard.

    [Reply]

  14. Shakes says:

    Top 10 Nicknames for Rich Hammond:

    1) Hammy (EASports I know goes with the “Hammee” spelling but that reminds me of a women’s soccer player for some reason – namely Mia Hamm)

    2) William Miller (this was the name of the reporter kid in “Almost Famous” who got to follow around and report on his favorite band even though he could never tell the band they were his favorite. Given Rich’s new role of being able to travel with the band/team I think the parallels are pretty easy to see)

    3) 5th Liner

    4) Blue Line (a tribute to Rob Stauber really in the sense that Rich usually aggressively attacks instead of hanging back in the crease)

    5) Anthony (I once had a theory on the old blog that Rich actually used the moniker “Anthony” to stir the point and cause endless debates)

    6) Deep Throat (get your minds out of the gutter – I’m thinking of a Nixon-esque insider. Plus he has a deep voice)

    7) Not-Heidi. (no offense, but you’re not Heidi)

    8) I love Wayne Simmonds (this isn’t a Rich nickname at all. I just wanted to say that I love Wayne and will not rest until I see a sign at Staples that says “Wayne’s World” in the crowd)

    9) Richie Rich

    10) Deano’s Doppleganger (or “DD” for short)

    [Reply]

  15. Shakes says:

    @ 54fighting : your Andy Bernard references to Rich just kill me every time I read them… especially at work. Surely Rich also sang on the Cornell glee club

    [Reply]

  16. jeforkings says:

    I hate the the team from O.C. & I live there. Most of there fans suck!Last season at a Sharks game they spit on my friends WIFE & SON because yhey were wearing Shark jersys. When they lose they are a bunch of cry babies & the local paper does the same. Helen in L.A paper tells it like it is.The Kings dont have beat them in playoffs it would be better for O.C. TO MISS & KINGS ADVANCE.The O.C.team are not 500 like they claim with all the O.T. loses. GO KINGS! O.C Hockcy team stinks waaaaa! JE San Clemente

    [Reply]

  17. Quisp says:

    We can’t have three DDs. It’s enough were have Drew-D and D-Drew.

    I’ll take Not-Colorado over Colorado, as well.

    [Reply]

  18. jeforkings says:

    Sorry some bad spelling

    [Reply]

  19. What's the frequency, Kenneth? says:

    The team from Anaheim is not “pretty hot right now.” They’re 4-3-3 in their last ten. They’ve recently beaten the teams that are generally not in playoff contention, and lost to teams that are. They did squeak one out against Phoenix.

    [Reply]

  20. Dominick says:

    I like the name Rich.It’s to the point,and everyone knows who your talking about.The debate on a nick name is fun,but why force it.Eventually one will stick.If I had to vote Richie Rich sounds cool.If anyone wanted to shorten it out of laziness it would still be Rich.

    [Reply]

  21. Tom says:

    @ Matt Reitz:

    I’m with you…I watched the ends of the COL-MIN and SJ-DAL games last night, praying to the hockey gods that there were no tying goals. And I actually cheered when Vishnevskiy put it in his own empty net.

    NO OVERTIME GAMES !!

    [Reply]

  22. Cross Check says:

    It benefits us for Colorado to beat the Duckies. The leaders of the other two divisions are invisible to us unless we are leading our division. We can have more points than CO and still be behind them in the standings because they lead their division. A win by them does not affect us, so it is better for us if they beat the Duckies. Now tomorrow when the Duckies play Phoenix on the other hand…that’s when we will have to suck it up and hope for a Phoenix loss in regulation.

    [Reply]

  23. Shakes says:

    Lets give Dominick a nickname.

    [Reply]

  24. What's the frequency, Kenneth? says:

    I won’t rule out the possibility of the Kings leading their division. From that standpoint, I wouldn’t necessarily cheer for the teams in other divisions to beat the teams in the Pacific. I’m mostly concerned about the dreaded three-point games. WRT to those, we’ve seen zero!

    [Reply]

  25. Cross Check says:

    Not “teams” in the other divisions, only the division leaders, Chicago and Colorado (as of the standings today) we still compete with the non division leaders for playoff spots. I wouldn’t rule out the Kings leading the division either, but as we stand today, we are not leading so a Colorado win over the Ducks is more beneficial to the Kings.

    [Reply]

  26. What's the frequency, Kenneth? says:

    I wouldn’t necessarily cheer for other divisions’ leaders either. I, for one, set my sights very high, and if it’s Chicago vs (whoever’s in 10th or 12th) I’ll root for the underdog!

    [Reply]

  27. Cross Check says:

    I’m dealing with reality of where we are today, not where we might be next week. The team in 10th or 12th is the threat to the Kings playoff spot today, not Chicago.

    [Reply]

  28. What's the frequency, Kenneth? says:

    Reality of where we are today is within two points of leading the division.

    [Reply]

  29. Cross Check says:

    Which is a compelling argument to root against San Jose, not Colorado or Chicago and still does not discount my opinion that a Colorado win is more beneficial to us than an Anaheim win.

    [Reply]

  30. What's the frequency, Kenneth? says:

    I’m simply saying that the competition the Kings are concerned about is at the top, not the bottom. I don’t see how anyone can miss that. I, for one, expect the Kings play to improve late in the season, not drop off. I know that goes against past history, but these are not the coaches or players involved in the past history.

    [Reply]

Leave a Reply