How will the season finish for Dustin Brown? He is on page for 28 goals and 57 points, which would be the second-highest totals of his seven-year career — he had 33 goals and 60 points in 2007-08 — but of late, he has bounced from first line to third line to second line, and he had totaled one goal in 16 games before a two-goal breakthrough against the New York Rangers last Thursday. With 20 goals, Brown is tied for the team lead with Justin Williams. Today, Terry Murray was asked about Brown’s production, and talked about his game going forward…
MURRAY: “I don’t put numbers on players. I think that’s very frustrating for the player, whenever you sit down and get very specific on a number like that, for goals, assists, points. In general, it’s just to be a good player. Play the kind of game that he’s known for, as long as I’ve known him. He plays with tempo. He sets a style, he plays hard and gritty, gets going to the net and scores as a result of that. I think, like any player, there are times when his game is really good and there are times where it tails off and there has to be a meeting and get back to it. Sometimes that’s when you change a line, just to get that refocus and that energy level and get that style of game back on track. We’re going to need him, big-time, in these next games. They’re all so important right now, and his style of play is what really would be noticeable in these next couple of games.”
This would be a good time for Brown to reignite his game.
[Reply]
CB14 Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 5:14 pm
@xeropoint, He reignited it against the New York Rangers. Then TM put it out by changing his lines twice in a game and a half.
[Reply]
pr0cess Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 5:28 pm
@CB14, ^^^
[Reply]
kris Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 7:45 pm
@pr0cess, so im so happy everyone just comes on this site to bitch about TM or Dl
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:12 pm
@pr0cess, It’s not like it isn’t a decent point.
CB14 Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:44 pm
First of all, thanks for the support Kenneth. Second @kris, if the Kings were playing well this year you wouldn’t be seeing this many posts complaining about TM and DL. The Kings have been very inconsistant this year, and have regressed since last year, especially on offense. Last year we finished 6th in the conference, 7th in PP%, and 9th in goals per game. This year we are 8th in the conference, 23rd in PP%, and 22nd in goals per game. People complain about TM and Kompon due to these stats. You don’t see anyone complaining about John Steven, who runs the defense and PK. The PK was 20th last year, our goals against per game was 9th. This year our PK is 6th, and our goals against per game is 5th. The stats prove he’s done a teriffic job this year.
On another point, you don’t see alot of people complimenting John Stevens, because people don’t comment as much about good things happening to the team. Just an observation.
HockeyNerd Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:52 pm
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth? Actually, no it isn’t.
If whether or not someone can “reignite his game” depends on who his linemates are, that player should not be playing at NHL level.
Is the price of Gas TM’s fault too?
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 8:56 am
@HockeyNerd, You’re totally MISSING the point. It doesn’t depend on who his linemates are. It depends on how much the coach swaps the lines. How’d you like it if your boss gave you a different work environment with different team members every other day, and told you that you needed to use “teamwork” to do a better job than the guys across the hall, and everyone’s going to pressure you because “you suck” if you don’t beat them? This is the kind of crap Murray is pulling. It doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with preferred linemates, but you should get to work with them for more than a a few minutes at a time if you expect to be a “team.”
puck73 Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:12 pm
@CB14, Exactly…another reason I dont like TM as a head coach. Lets just call him “the extinguisher”…because anytime something good happens with this team, TM will “extinguish” it !
[Reply]
CB14 Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:18 pm
@puck73, LOL, I love it. The “Extinguisher”, he will put out your winning streak in the blink of a line change.
Player-X Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 11:55 am
@CB14, These numbers don’t tell the whole story. Comparing “goals for” of one year to another is looking at offense only, as if in a vacuum. Same thing is true with comparing “goals against”. I mean, it’s true to say we rank lower in total offense this year, but if we won every game 1-0 we would be last in total offense and first in total wins. So total offense alone is not enough, and neither is the total defense stat, because if we won every game 8-7 we would probably be last in total defense with a perfect winning record.
There are so many stats, so how do we judge a coach? Obviously, wins-versus-losses is one way, but that can be unfair. That is to say, for many not winning the Cup means not enough wins; harsh, and I think unrealistic. You can’t say a team is a total failure just because they didn’t win the Cup. Many do, but again I am talking about being reasonable here.
So, you probably end up judging a team using the idea of improvement, or, as you say, regression. If a team does better every year, fans think they are on the right track. If the team does worse, fans are unhappy. But taken to the extreme, improvement can only go so far; if a team wins the Cup five years in a row, does that team suck if they lose in the finals the 6th year? No, so even improvement has limitations as to judging.
So, it is a group of stats, a combination of factors that must provide the basis for an honest appraisal. Many think not winning the Cup is not good enough no matter what the other numbers, but I personally look for progress in pursuit of the goal of winning the Cup. I ask myself, are the Kings improving, are they getting closer?
With the toughest division not only in hockey this year, but probably the closest division race in NHL history, the Kings play 6 games against each of those teams. Points will be harder to come by, so total points is an important number but it must be taken in context of that particular year, and is only one number that contributes to an appraisal of a coach’s overall impact. If the Kings hold their own in this division standings-wise, meaning they stay close to the pack and make the playoffs, that would be success for me. If they can do so while icing a team that plays a style familiar to playoff style, even better. I think the Kings are doing that, and I have numbers to show it.
First, I want to resolve the “goals for” and “goals against” riddle. The fallacy is to look only at goal differential. It would seem to make sense that goal differential is best, but again, a high scoring team might have tons of goals when they win, and also give up a ton of goals, too. A goal differential of 30 when a team scores 100 goals is different then a 30-goal differential for a team that scores 200. Or, to put it another way, winning 82 games by one goal gives an 82 goal differential, but were those games 6-5 or 1-0? Or, as with Phoenix, you can win close and lose big, but still have 75 points with a goal differential of 6, while Boston has 75 points and a goal differential of 43. 43!! So to assess a system, and see whether that system is working and a team is improving, I think you have to go a little deeper.
The NHL keeps a stat showing the ratio of “5 on 5 goals for” divided by “5 on 5 goals against.” I expanded that number to include 4 on 4, and 3 on 3. It is interesting that there have been zero 3 on 3 goals for any team this year; not one in the league, but I digress. The validity of the ratio is that a low scoring defensive-minded team can still win, if they hold their opponents to even lower totals. Put simply, to win games you need to score more goals; this stat shows the EFFECTIVENESS of a teams’ system. It does not rate them according to just output, it rates them according to relative output versus relative “intake.” It uses the idea of goal differential, but separates the differential into specific on-ice situations.
People here talk so often about how the system is killing Kopi’s creative ability, or how Murray is stifling the offense with his “dump and chase” edicts. But if we score more goals than the other team, a 2-1 win is a win. A 6-5 win is also a win, but why would Murray choose a system that is more likely to produce a 2-1 than a 6-5 game? Two main reasons come to my mind: because he knows we don’t have the offensive firepower to consistently produce 6 goals, and because that style does not win Championships. (If I have to explain the tighter game of Playoff-Style hockey, that reader is not gonna agree with anything here)
The Kings right now are scoring with an equal strength ratio when 5 on 5 of 1.114. We score 1.114 goals for every goal we allow. That ranks 6th in the league. 6th is the league is very good, especially in this division. We are the highest in our division, the best division in hockey. Add in 4 on 4 and the ratio is 1.118, ranking 7th. The leader is Boston, at 1.46, then Philadelphia at 1.232, Vancouver at 1.255, Detroit at 1.174, Pittsburgh at 1.139 then Chicago at 1.126 and the Kings at 1.118. Again, best in the division, the only team in the division in the top ten. The top ten finish with Calgary at 1.068, Montreal at 1.059 and New York Rangers at 1.055. Just to give context, the worst is Ottawa, at 0.636, and 15th place is Nashville at 1.028 followed by Minnesota and Columbus at an even 1.000.
So, looking at the best ratios, most are top in their conference, but what is Chicago doing there? And why, if the Kings have such a high ratio, are they not higher in the standings? Because, no single stat tells any complete story. As you say, the Power Play this year has regressed; last year’s 7th ranked Power Play is now 23rd ranked, and that is killing us. The improvement in Penalty Kill and Goals Allowed has not made up the difference. But, the Power Play system is totally different than the equal strength, 5 on 5 game.
Yes, Murray is the head coach and he is ultimately responsible for the Power Play. I agree that it is bad, but I also think it is the single bad element in an otherwise very, very sound team. I also believe that it is foolish to judge Murray according to just one area of the game (using one weakness that was a strength last year, I might add) and condemn him outright in all areas of the game.
Murray came in and said the Kings need to reduce shots against, we are a league leader, top 5 all year pretty much. Defensively in goal totals, same thing, and in ratio to goals allowed, the Kings have been top ten all year, too. We score enough, while not giving up very much at all. Someone decried that lack of Power Play opportunities, as if we played a weak perimeter game, and that is partly true. But, if Terry Murray looks at this line-up at the star of the year, without Sturm, he does not see a ton of goals. He sees 4 top 6 guys and Dustin Brown maybe makes for the 5th when he is “on.” Was it unreasonable to project the need for a defensive system, with no “sniper” and missing a number one left wing?
Last year, it was slow starts. Cured; the Kings are one of the fastest starting teams in scoring goals. This year, the team struggles in the second period most, while last year the second period was their best. Is that Murray’s fault? How? Do you expect him to scream and kick trashcans, or do you accept his effective style of patient coaching? What he focuses on, the team improves. Some things the improvement slacks off when the focus changes. To me, that sounds a whole lot more like a young team responding to coaching as they learn, and not an ineffective coach. Are the Kings supposed to master every nuance of the game and totally dominate in every facet? No, there will be ebbs and flows to each area. He wants more shots on goal, he even writes the number of shots from the previous game on the whiteboard before every game, to encourage something called “shot mentality.” Shot mentality is not a defensive-minded term. He wants guys to “hold onto the puck a little longer and get to the net,” and this is not defensive-minded, either. Yes, he focuses on defense, but not exclusively, and to ignore the balance between offense and defense is to create a biased opinion.
I think that Murray has done wonders with what he has had, I think that the Kings are getting better, and I think Murray has led this very young team onto a path that is the only one leading to a Stanley Cup.
[Reply]
Stuart Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 12:37 pm
@Player-X, started reading your post, half-way through my screen saver flicked on…
Respectfully yours,
LONGWINDED
Player-X Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 2:24 pm
@Player-X, clever, stu, maybe you just read slow.
Player-X Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 2:26 pm
@Player-X, Hey Stu, ever realize you can’t spell Twitter without Twit?
wavesinair Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 2:28 pm
@Player-X,
Tons of good stuff. Took a long time to put together I bet. The first thing I thought of after reading it was, how then is this team so damn streaky? Crazy streaky. The way you break it down, I would never suspect such win-loss swings for this team, yet they’ve been on the Colossus all year long.
My theory, which is in line with your conclusion, is that it’s not Murray’s fault at all, but team leadership. It’s kind of funny too how you put Brown in the ‘tweener’ category of top six/bottom six. I keep feeling like the whole enchilada rests on that guy and that doesn’t make me feel confident as a fan.
Basically I think you’re right on about Murray. And as I’ve pointed out, he has adjusted his system recently to allow for more shots. So I give him credit for being flexible. Systems can be very complicated, and as you say, not one stat can say anything conclusively.
If we don’t make the playoffs, this season will be remembered from the inconsistency more than anything else. Will these next 23 stay true to form? Or will they get off the coaster and take a nice, even keeled sail?
Player-X Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 2:51 pm
@wavesinair, Glad you saw this waves, thanks for the response. Yeah, the whole Brown not vocal as Captain thing kinda makes me wonder. I never really decided about it yet, but I lean a certain way when I think of having Mark Messier look at me, or Steve Yzerman, as a captain if I was a player. Yzerman didn’t speak much, I have heard, but the intensity was unmistakable. Maybe Brown grows into it, I just don’t know. In line with the streaky idea, it’s totally confounding, but it seems so many losses were close games that the Power Play might have been the difference maker in an otherwise even game. Timely Power Play goals, if only we could just count on that even occasionally, we might have four more wins and be at the top of the division. Anyway, thanks for reading it.
Kings – Streakyness – Redux
Just a little reality check for all us junkies…
I just went through all the games since our “Stanley Cup Contending” 4-0 thrashing of the Sharks on December 27th.
Of course, after that win, the team went into a tailspin only to pull up right before they smashed into the ground.
There have been 24 games played since that “perfect game” and it just so happens that the losing streak ended smack-dab in the middle.
In the 12 games between Dec. 29 and Jan. 20 the Kings went…
2-10-0
In the 12 games between Jan. 22 and Feb. 19 the Kings went…
7-1-4
The only regulation loss being against the Islanders.
In those 24 games combined, the Kings went 9-11-4. Not so good.
Now, it just so happens that the Kings have almost exactly the same number of games left in the season as my sample-size above…23.
We’ve also picked a “safe” number of points so the Kings have an excellent chance at making the playoffs. That number is 95. To get there, the Kings need to have the equivalent of this record…
13-9-1 (27points + 68points = 95)
Or they could go 12-9-3, 11-9-5 or even 10-9-7.
But the bottom line is, as Dominick put it, “Any losses that equal more than 9.5 games, between now and the end of the season, and the Kings are done.” So essentially 9 is the magic loss number. If we get 10 then they’re done.
From here on out, we can just tick away at that number and hope that it doesn’t dwindle too quickly. This is exactly why I hated that Islanders loss. The Kings burned one that they can’t get back.
So can they do it? Do you think the safe number is higher or lower? What do you think their record will be?
It’s going to be very close!
[Reply]
bbb7 Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 5:39 pm
@wavesinair, I like your analysis (tho the ‘they could also go” section should read 12-8-3, 11-7-5, 10-6-7).. I think 96 is safer, meaning 12-7-4 or so, but on the other side, it seems like it might only take 101 or 102 pts to win the Pacific – talk about a razor-sharp edge!
[Reply]
wavesinair Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 5:46 pm
@bbb7, Damn, I knew I missed something. I forgot to shrink the loss number. Thanks for the correction!
[Reply]
Dominick Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 6:05 pm
@wavesinair,
I did the math after the loss to the Islanders. 9 would give us 96 points and a 98% chance (I think) of making the playoffs. Realisticly even with 3 point games, 95 should work out to be the case, unless the Kings play an unreal ammount of them. Then I might have to go back and recalculate for the extra points that other teams pick up. I believe that the # will still be the same though. Good work.
Lime Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 5:41 pm
@wavesinair, Nice post. As we’re playing west conference teams here on out I’m skeptical of sneaking in with SO wins. I’d also hate to be out of a playoff spot due to 3 point games.
[Reply]
jonsey Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 5:48 pm
@wavesinair, I honestly see the safe number at 98 points. I think it is more likely the Kings finish with very few OT losses (just like they have few now) and the finish with regulation wins and regulation losses.
@Ducks=win win win 3-2
vs. MIN = OT Loss
vs. COL = huge disappointing loss
vs. DET = huge win
vs. PHX = somehow a win even though we usually lose
vs. VAN = gritty rematch and prep for meeting in playoffs (win)
vs. DAL = win that ends DAL hopes for playoffs
@ DET = revenge for wings
@ CBJ = revenge for them not making playoffs
@ DAL = SO win
@ NAS = tough loss
vs. STL = easy win
vs. ANA = win
vs. CGY = win
vs. SJS = loss
vs. COL = win
@EDM = loss
@ VAN = win
vs. DAL = win
@ SJS = loss
vs. PHX =win
@ Ducks = win
@ Ducks = loss
[Reply]
wavesinair Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 5:58 pm
@jonsey,
That would amazing…14-8-1 (29points)…and the most consistent they will have played all year long! That would leave them with 97 points. That’s almost a guaranteed ticket to the post season.
[Reply]
Token Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 6:02 pm
@jonsey, One could also argue that winning the 10 division games is all it will take to make it and likely win the division.
[Reply]
wavesinair Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 6:06 pm
@Token, That’s an excellent point and a “backdoor” way to get in with more than 9 losses! I love it. However, with every team in the pacific contending, it seems like this way in is pretty unlikely. Still though, it would be pretty cool.
Jesse Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:09 pm
@Token, Token the only mind that works more than any Kings fan or reporter
408kingsfan Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 6:16 pm
@jonsey, We will win one of those SJ games
[Reply]
Cynic Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 5:52 pm
@wavesinair, Dang man…you been hangin around Quisp or something?
Very nice job, even though now it’ll be on my mind every time we lose a game…thanks for that.
I still have that game on my DVR. It shows what this team is truly capable of. I measure all their games against it. That 4-0 SJ beating really was a masterpiece. It should never be forgotten.
[Reply]
USHA#17 Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 5:58 pm
@wavesinair,
96 points. To many Pacific Division and W. Conf. games to need 98.
Plenty time left to mix lines, eh?
[Reply]
Dave's a Killer Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 6:24 pm
@wavesinair, What still scares me the most is a tie. in points, with one or two teams. I feel this is a very real scenario. Unfortunately, except for Calgary, the Kings would probably lose a tiebreaker because of the shoot-out wins. The Kings regulation or OT wins – not shoot-outs.
[Reply]
variable Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 6:52 pm
@wavesinair,
props, babe…props…(!)
if you were to ask any sample of us – the media, so-called experts, bloggers and everyone else in between – in the preseason that this team would be were they are now – fighting for playoff life – most of us would be wrong.
2010-11…(not counting tonight’s games)…
3rd seed: 73(lowest division winner)
4th seed: 72
8th seed: 68
11th seed: 68
4 to 8 diff = 4pts.
but one thing to keep in mind is that there will be separation…eventually.
here’s a look of the separation between seeds 4-11 at season’s end the last few years…:
western conference
09-10…
3rd seed: 103pts. (lowest division winner)
4th seed: 107
8th seed: 95
11th seed: 89
4 to 8 diff = 12pts.
08-09…
3rd seed: 100pts.(lowest division winner)
4th seed: 104
8th seed: 91
11th seed: 85
4 to 8 diff = 13pts.
07-08…
3rd seed: 98pts.(lowest division winner)
4th seed: 102
8th seed: 91
11th seed: 88
4 to 8 diff = 11pts.
06-07…
3rd seed: 105pts. (lowest division winner)
4th seed: 110
8th seed: 96
11th seed:73
4 to 8 diff = 14pts.
05-06…
3rd seed: 103pts.(lowest division winner)
4th seed: 106
8th seed: 95
11th seed: 84
4 to 8 diff = 11pts.
[Reply]
wavesinair Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 10:01 am
@variable, thanks V! It’s amazing how in each of those 5 seasons the 3rd seed had fewer points than the 4th seed. Not sure I like that rule. Too bad for one division winner if they get seeded lower I say. 11 points between 4 and 8 three times. That’s a lot. I’m guessing this year will be less but yeah, separation will probably happen. I think a little gap is forming already with the Sharks and Yotes.
[Reply]
sstephen17 Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:13 pm
@wavesinair, Although the Islanders loss stings, they did get four (I would have been happy with two) points against the Caps and Flyers. Overall, I think most people would say the road trip was great.
April could be huge; all against division opponents with potentially a #3 seed up for grabs if the conference standings remain tight. Fourteen of the remaining 23 games are at home. Not sure if that’s a good thing.
[Reply]
rich Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 11:11 am
@wavesinair, yep the islanders games was huge! lets go kings!!!!! wins baby wins!!!!!
[Reply]
rich Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 11:13 am
@rich, the loss of course
[Reply]
He can stop disappearing. He can rip that C off his chest and let someone take it who will actually be a captain.
[Reply]
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:14 pm
@Alen, One thing Brownie doesn’t do is disappear. If you don’t see him, turn your TV on, or if you’re at Staples turn to the ice.
[Reply]
xeropoint Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 11:06 pm
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth?, Not that I agree with stripping his captaincy but there are times where he goes very quiet for long stretches. This is, of course, assuming you think of Brown as a guy who should be getting top minutes, which he does (second to only Kopitar in minutes played per game by a forward).
[Reply]
Since this looks like a numbers thread, I would just like to throw one out there to the DL bashers, who whined incessantly about us not getting the big sniper, Gaborik or Kovalchuk, the past two summers.
Gaborik 17 goals 21 assists +1
Kovalchuk 21 goals 20 assists -20
Brown 20 goals 21 assists +18
and this is despite a cold 2011.
[Reply]
39scars Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 7:13 pm
@jet, so so true
[Reply]
Dominick Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 7:13 pm
@jet, Ha, ha, ha! That should go for Brown bashers too.
[Reply]
variable Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 7:30 pm
@jet,
take that…(!)
[Reply]
LW Anybody? Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:50 pm
@jet, If you wanna look at it that way then, in the 10 games in the month of February-
Kovalchuk 7 goals 5 assists, for 12 points +9
Brown 3 goals 1 assist, for 4 points +4
[Reply]
jet Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 11:47 am
@LW Anybody?, Unfortunately, Kovi does not get paid %8,000,000.00 a year to play one month.
[Reply]
jet Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 11:48 am
@jet, $ 8,000,000.00
Bkrs-Bud Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 9:58 pm
@jet, Well who is making up for Frolovs 51 points?
[Reply]
puck73 Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:16 pm
@Bkrs-Bud, It sure aint Poni. That being said, Poni is playing for TM….I will just leave it at that…
[Reply]
Bkrs-Bud Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 11:03 pm
@puck73, Jet should be comparing Kovi,Gaborik to poni’s and Sturms combined 8 goals,8 helpers instead of brown who has been on the team for awhile.
puck73 Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:37 pm
@jet, Thanx for the good research Jet…your a good guy on this site.
[Reply]
Maybe I’m mistaken, but I seem to recall TM saying at the beginning of the year that Kopitar could be a 40-goal scorer, and I know it was expected out of Frolov last season so, yes, TM, you do like to put numbers on players.
[Reply]
puck73 Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:16 pm
@deadcatbounce, Are you calling head coach Terry Murray a liar ?
[Reply]
Bkrs-Bud Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 11:20 pm
@deadcatbounce, I think he said we were going to develop our own 40 goal scorer i do not remember him naming anyone.
[Reply]
Sebastian Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 10:41 am
@deadcatbounce, I think Kopi can still score 23 goals in 23 games to be a 40 goal scorer. haha.
[Reply]
Rich since everyone is waiting to see if the Kings make a trade this week , can you look up in the press boxes tomorrrow nite and see if you recognize any general managers or scouts from other teams. That would give us a clue on trades. Thanks
[Reply]
puck73 Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 10:18 pm
@gene, No need for a trade, Westgarth is being promoted to the 1st line….I knew that would make you happy.
[Reply]
should we trade him? does anyone think he will get better? I think he will.
[Reply]
Dominick Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 8:19 pm
@tellmeY, Ha. Trade him while his trade value is at maximum.
[Reply]
“I don’t put numbers on players. I think that’s very frustrating for the player.” No, it’s much better to swap out his line mates every couple games. That’s not frustrating.
[Reply]
Jason4Kings Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 11:05 pm
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth?,
I can’t wait to see if Schenn and Brown have some chemistry next year. I have no valid reasoning, just a gut feeling that could be dangerous. I also like when Brown plays on the left side so we can see his little move that tends to end in a spectacular net crash.
2nd line….
Brown-Schenn-Simmonds
[Reply]
Bkrs-Bud Reply:
February 22nd, 2011 at 11:17 pm
@Jason4Kings, As long as the puck goes into the net before he does lol.
[Reply]
Stuart Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 8:27 am
@Jason4Kings, “just a gut feeling that could be dangerous” – maybe it’s just explosive diarhea?
[Reply]
Jason4Kings Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 9:13 am
@Stuart,
Man, that’s super funny. I think you’re late for school.
Kings will make the Playoffs. Will the most dangerous team to face. I see Kings as the Flyers last year. Kings need to dress talent and speed. Could go all way and win the cup. I think Kings can win the cup this year with the roster that is in place. We all seen Kings go those runs where they cant lose. Go Kings Go.
[Reply]
rich Reply:
February 23rd, 2011 at 11:18 am
@Jesse, hope so…
[Reply]
WE WANT MARTY & LOKTI BACK!
[Reply]
Westgarth is a waste of a roster spot. He can’t skate and of this date has not won a fight. I rather see Loki or Dwight King in his spot.
[Reply]
Brown, last I checked, has more goals than Mike Richards and has had a constant rotation of linemates of questionable offensive skill.
Smyth – Stoll – Brown got very hot last year, albeit after playing together for a few games.
Maybe the captaincy is a burden for DB23, but he never appears to let up for one second.
BTW – Has there been any conversation about the little bust-up between Kopi and Kompon during the second period against the Isles?
Any info on the dispute or reporting on it?
[Reply]
What can Brown do for the kings? its like the UPS commerical. What can brown do for you! hahah
[Reply]