Darryl Sutter’s postgame thoughts…
(on the game…)
SUTTER: “It’s the same as the playoffs. You can say you got so many chances, but you’ve got to bear down. You can say they scored a bad goal, but at the same time, it was a hard game for us. We were coming off those two really physical games, and you could see there wasn’t a lot of energy in our game, but we were doing everything right. We were just trying to dig down in there. A tough one.’’
(on the tight playoff race…)
SUTTER: “It’s the same thing every night. It really doesn’t change, and we’re used to it. It’s not going to change how we play.’’
(on Dustin Penner’s goalie-interference call…)
SUTTER: “We’re in the position where we want every break that we can (get), right? That wasn’t a penalty. It wasn’t a penalty, so it doesn’t matter.’’
(on the officials’ explanation…)
SUTTER: “It doesn’t matter. It wasn’t a penalty.’’
(on the difference in the game…)
SUTTER: “I hate to be short, but the difference was, they scored one goal and we didn’t score any. That’s the difference. Other than that, I wouldn’t say there was a whole lot of difference. I wouldn’t say they’re trying to do something different than we are.’’
I hope the Kings can get a winning streak going…Want to see them forgetting about this game..Every since meeting the Blues the Kings just cant score anymore…
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:35 pm
@KingsFanFTW,
(on the game …)
SUTTER: “It’s just like the first game, or the next game. It was another chance to bear down on the chances we didn’t really create. You can mention it first and blame the goalie for that one, or else you can blame the two hard teams we just had, even though we did everything right tonight. Tough schedule sounds about right.”
(on the tight playoff race just getting a bit looser ..)
SUTTER: “We’re not going to change anything. That’s the masterplan right there.”
(on Penns pen sending him to the pen and taking his eminent effectiveness off the ice for two minutes …)
SUTTER: “If he really was Mark Messier, I’d've been bothered.”
(on the pitiful attempt the zebras made to convince you of that call …)
SUTTER: “It wasn’t what it wasn’t. If that’s a penalty Penns really is Messier. It wasn’t a penalty so it didn’t really happen is the best way for me to deal with it.”
(on the difference in verbage between this question and each sentence of your answer …)
SUTTER: “I hate to give an easy answer, but the difference was there was no difference. There was a differential of one goal and I guess that’s a difference. But it’s no different from the other … differences, right? It looked they were copying our differences and trying to do the same …. differences [gives look of moderate satisfaction with answer]”
(on forgetting this game and attempting to go on a rollicking two game winning streak on home prairie …)
SUTTER: “It’s nice of those teams can fit us into their schedule too. Those guys tonight were pretty happy with us … right?”
[Reply]
JackKentCooke Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:42 pm
@Duncanz,
Don’t go away, Duncanz will be back in a minute.
(you may now quit your day job.)
[Reply]
puckhandler Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 10:56 am
@Duncanz, hahahaha, love these. keep ‘em coming Duncanz.
[Reply]
rogiesbackup Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 12:06 pm
@KingsFanFTW, I voted “other.” The defense was NOT in the game last night!!! Think about it.
Defense DID NOT help the offense in the offensive zone….They didn’t get involved. That WAS the difference.
[Reply]
I love Sutter’s responses. Short and to the point.
[Reply]
paige Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 1:30 am
@CB14, Me too, but this one made me laugh: “I hate to be short…” Since when?
[Reply]
Davey Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:41 am
(on Dustin Penner’s goalie-interference call…)
SUTTER: Sutter smash.
[Reply]
Yes, Darryl, you could say all of that. You could also say that there’s no excuse for this team showing up and playing the game that they did with not very much effort or passion. You could also say that the team looked like they really didn’t care very much because they got very little traffic in front of the net or took the body or did anything else to make it seem like they wanted to get two points.
[Reply]
ForumFan Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 10:56 pm
@Jeff,
I share your frustration but we need 4 more wins and we are in most likely. A win on Wednesday will make all the difference.
[Reply]
jeff Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 6:26 am
@ForumFan, 5 wins our miss playoffs do the math bro we cant lose the beeping sharks at all
[Reply]
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:09 pm
@Jeff, I’m trying to figure out how people think there was no effort. Blows my mind.
[Reply]
Jeff_R Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:19 pm
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth?, It wasn’t anywhere near like the other games that ended 1-0. I thought other then the 1st period, which wasn’t really all that bad, they played pretty well. The effort was there as was the Heart. The problem was maybe the last 2 games took its toll and it is was we got tonight. I expect them to come out with a full tank on Wednesday.
[Reply]
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:27 pm
@Jeff_R, Funny…the TSN crew raved about how it was like a playoff game. I didn’t think it matched the Bruins or Blues game, but then again, neither did the previous five they won. I think this “effort” thing is something fans get away with casually criticizing. I think there have been about ten games this season the requisite effort was not there, about three that deserved healthy criticism, and this was not one.
HockeyNerd Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:45 pm
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth?, Frankly, I think a lot of the bloggers here have a lot to learn about hockey. I remember when I started playing Ice Hockey is when I stopped yelling at the Kings players from the stands. The game looks so easy from there. I know better now. You have 4 other teammates besides yourself when you’re skating and the absolute WORST thing you can do is have all 5 guys chasing the puck carrier. The effort was there tonite, we just ran into a hot goalie. The officiating didn’t help either. You are absolutely correct. There have been some games here and there where the effort wasn’t there. This was not one of them.
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 12:03 am
@HockeyNerd, Beautiful. Now you could try officiating as well. It will open your eyes to a whole new dimension.
Believe me when I tell you, nobody that blindly barracks officials has ever had the guts to be one – and doubtless never would.
Kenny44 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 12:38 am
@HockeyNerd, I have a different view. Most of the consistent bloggers here have taken the time and interest to learn the game. To take your example, I don’t think I’ve read anyone suggest that the Kings need more guys “chasing the puck carrier”. As for the effort tonight, there was desperation at the end, but not a consistent performance by the Kings. I saw a lot of curling away from hits, and our D was giving the Nuks forwards way too much space coming into our zone, instead of stepping up and challenging them. OTOH, our forwards typically had no more than a split second with the puck before a Nuk was on top of them. The Kings did not seize the initiative for most of the game, and did not challenge the opponent enough. I played hockey for more than 20 years, and the curling away and backing off are signs of fatigue. The Kings had a harsh schedule the past week, and they did not bring their best game tonight. Hopefully, they’ll be able to make up some ground by the time of the SJ games.
Luc20 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:32 am
@HockeyNerd, Thank you!!!!! Frankly, tired here of all the complaining after a loss. Thank you Hockey Nerd for keeping it in perspective.
JWRocks! Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 9:18 am
@duncanz, Wrong there, I am in fact a referee and know how hard it can be. But these guys are getting paid a lot of money to make the RIGHT calls. I won’t complain about them missing one, you can’t see everything. But when it’s right in front of you and you blow it, as they did on both the Cliffy and Penns calls, then someone needs to say something. They were terrible calls and the last one at least, could well have cost us the game.
Duncanz Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 12:25 pm
@JWRocks!, Kudos to you. Although I assume (from your verbage) you are not a pro hockey ref, you, more than other bloggers, at least can comprehend the realm.
But you didn’t explain to me how I was wrong. Your answer did nothing to address my point about the “blind barracking” of officials over and above the genuine reasons for a poor result.
I didn’t offer any judgement on the penalties you mentioned. You brought them up.
Also, I can understand you’d consider yourself more of a Kings fan (Justin Williams?) than you would a hockey referee, but I might least have expected you, of all people, to try to bail out an ineffective 60 minutes of 0-1 hockey from the team by blaming the result lock, stock and barrel on the officiating. Kind of weak..
So you earn less kudos than you could have ‘cos the key really here is objectivity.
ta Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 4:22 pm
@HockeyNerd, I feel that there was effort by some players. However, when you’re 3rd and 4th lines are your best lines on the ice you aren’t going to win many games.
I didn’t see much from Richards,Carter, or Kopi. last night.
Kings Fan In Temecula Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:48 am
@Jeff, GO TO THE SLOT!!! D:
[Reply]
I think he’d be lying if he said he’d hate to be short; or if he said this was part of the master plan; or if he said it’s a 3-2 league
[Reply]
number 6 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 5:05 am
@Kenny44,
Just read your comments above. You saw what I saw. The minute a King had the puck there was someone on top of them. I do think the effort was there. One thing I saw is the same thing I’ve harped on about for years….. vs. St. Louis who has speed and the Nucks who have loads of speed, the Kings still don’t have enough team speed integrated into the lineup.
You can just see it. They still seem short to me another two forwards who have ‘trevor lewis like’ speed but who are more competent on the offensive side of the puck than Trevor. I feel that would start to make a difference.
Finally, JR pointed out between periods how the Nucks passing is so sharp and that with their speed and the angles they create it generates speed coming into the zone as well as scoring opportunities and makes them dangerous. I wouldn’t have figured that out on my own w/o him indicating such, but I have noticed for several years the ‘Effect’ of what he said, which boils down to a fast team that is dangerous on the attack.
[Reply]
Difference in the game- “they scored and we didn’t”.
This guy says more in 5 words than 800+ blog posts.
Win or lose, Sutter is a show.
[Reply]
We just lost the first game of a 7 game playoff series. I’m going to try to look at everything positively until we are absolutely out of the playoff race and save the inquest for the off season.
Go Kings!! Let’s get 2 regulation points against Calgary!!!
[Reply]
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:11 pm
@ForumFan, Of course. That’s the silly thing. There are 12 points on the table, and games in hand, and the other guys play each other. They’re not going to win every game.
[Reply]
Jeff_R Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:22 pm
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth?, It was a dream that they could run the table whether it was 14 in a row or 7 in a row. Realistically I knew that most likely out of our last 7 games we would win 5 of them. That is what i thought we would do our 1st 7 game increment and we did one better winning 6. So i will say we will go 5-2. We have a tough game on Wednesday but I believe we will win the next 2 games. The Minnesota game will be the toughest as it is back to back and we don’t get to the Twin Cities until 3am. Our last 3 games should be easy and are very winnable. The last 2 will be awesome especially if it knocks the Sharks out of the playoffs.
[Reply]
I would have liked to have heard what Sutter thought of the power play at the end of the first period. I think that’s when the game was really lost here tonight.
[Reply]
Why has no one commented on Cliffy’s BS “unsportsmanlike” call. Try and not run over Luongo and get called for it. I personally thought he was respectful by not killing him. Lol. Then again had he done so it probably would’ve been a goalie interference call instead.
[Reply]
KingMe20 Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 10:56 pm
@urborg1701,
Penner did… see the previous post.
[Reply]
Jon G Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:08 pm
@urborg1701, I can’t recall the last time I saw a call that was so blatantly wrong.
[Reply]
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:13 pm
@Jon G, How about the interference on Penner? How about the obvious Sedin dive? (It was a cross-check–both should have gone to the box.)
[Reply]
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:11 pm
@urborg1701, perhaps because it was one of a half-dozen bad calls or no-calls?
[Reply]
urborg1701 Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:32 pm
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth?, touché. Still Luongo won them this game not the refs for once.
[Reply]
IceGuy Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 8:12 am
@urborg1701,
Last night’s game was what NASA would call an LBO (Little Bit Off).
The Kings played well, but were just not in sync for whatever reason.
Quick’s moving across his crease on the goal, rather than squaring up to face the shooter set the tone. A little mistake that turned out to be the game.
Clifford’s (non)penalty actually sealed the game. Not so much that the Ref called an unsportsmanlike on him, but it was HOW the Ref called it. If you can, go back and look at his body language. It was aggressive – overly large gestures. The way he signaled Cliffy to the box, I thought for a second he was tossing him out of the game. The old guys (Kerry Fraser or Rob Schick) knew how to manage a game. This guy, very likely unconsciously, was making a statement. And not a good one for the Kings.
If you look back at the game thread here, someone actually called what would happen late in the game. The comment was something like, “Wait ’til the end of the game, and the Refs will give us a make up call with no time left.” Sure enough, 25 seconds to go, and there’s a phantom holding call on Vancouver.
The problem is not just with the Kings, thus eliminating the “fix” idea. The “other” Sedin won’t be playing for a while because the officials missed his cheap shot elbow to the head of Chicago’s Duncan Kieth. Result? “If they aren’t going to protect me, I’ll take care of it myself,” thinks Kieth. He did. Sedin has a concussion, Kieth is out 5 games and $150,000. Why? Poor officiating.
Even our hated Duck brothers got screwed the other night on their “no goal” call from Toronto. The problem is league wide, not just us. For me, it goes back to Clifford’s major penalty back in Phoenix. No need to go through all of that again, but the point is the story on that call was the officials have the “right” to confer about the appropriate call or non-call. I ain’t seen much conferring lately, which can only mean that the four guys in stripes at Vancouver last night all agreed that it would have been better for Clifford to kill Luongo, hitting him at full speed, rather than attempting to stop and avoid a violent collision.
Oh, Canada, can’t you produce some better officials?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying “the fix was in”. I’m not saying the on ice officials cost us the game. The Kings played like it was a Terry Murray Tribute game. F3 high. D-men glued to the blue line. Always circling back into our own zone to “set up” an offensive rush (but giving their defense time to set up as well). Poor passing. And the PP? How many times did we throw the puck back to the point, where Stoll and Voynov couldn’t keep it in?
Luongo won the game for the Canucks – plain and simple.
Rather than get a headache figuring out how many points will get us into the playoffs, or offensive schemes, etc, it really comes down to Sutter’s “Park & Ride”. On to the Flames, and get two more points.
GKG!
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 8:19 am
@iceguy, Awesome take!
This is no time to panic. Our remaining schedule includes two games with the Oilers, one each with Calgary and Minnesota, and two with the Sharks. None of those teams is better than us, and none is as good as the three teams we just played.
[Reply]
JackKentCooke Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:00 pm
@Jon G,
Logic confuses me.
[Reply]
Jon G Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:06 pm
@JackKentCooke, It may be blind faith, but I haven’t survived 30-plus years as a Kings fan by being realistic.
[Reply]
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:13 pm
@Jon G, Fans can panic. The team cannot.
[Reply]
Dominick Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:17 pm
@Jon G,
I agree. Calgary has just recently joined the playoff race. Minnesota has been out of it for a while. Edmonton was never in the race. And the Sharks have been slowly shooting themselves in the foot for a while.
None of those teams have been pushovers in the past, and I would not count any of them out, but the Kings could run the gambit here, and take 1st place. They just have to score. That is it in a nutshell.
Defense will take care of itself, and the goaltending might have to adjust, but if the Kings balance back out to where they were offensively,it will be tough, Because they couldn’t put a 4 game winning streak together before they started scoring, and are only losing now because their not scoring again.
[Reply]
Bonvivant1 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:17 am
@Jon G, We don’t have a good record against the Oilers.
[Reply]
I wasn’t too impressed by Brown or King tonight. Got to call it like I see it. Of course I’d be in a hospital bed if I had Brown’s face/head right now. Perhaps a couple line changes coming due to King. He’s having a harder time digging pucks out. He’s also not getting to the front as much but his linemates don’t have the puck very much lately either.
[Reply]
Sounds like his wallet will be a bit lighter tomorrow.
[Reply]
LA_1968 Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:11 pm
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth?, Maybe Penner too.
[Reply]
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:14 pm
@LA_1968, Quite possibly.
[Reply]
SLIM Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:14 pm
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth?,
Nucks Coach does it all the time..
He just did it again real recently…
He seems to get away with it..
[Reply]
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:23 pm
@SLIM, Different rule book for Vancouver. Surely you know that.
[Reply]
FiG17 Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:30 pm
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth?,
I hope not. It would be a bit silly if he gets fined for calling out questionable calls. I can understand if the manner in which he did so was uncivilized or rude, but it wasn’t. Getting fined for just pointing out that he disagrees with the refs? I hope not.
You would hope the league would hold the refs accountable too. Someone mentioned a points system for refs. Would be cool if something like that could actually happen, but I feel like probably not. lol
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:54 pm
@FiG17,I would imagine the only authority that can objectively grade the officiating is the officiating bureau itself, under the auspices of the league.
This is already done, which is how referees/linesman are promoted/demoted from the panel of officials, and also how they are selected for playoffs duty.
[Reply]
FiG17 Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:59 pm
@Duncanz,
Thanks. Good to know.
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 8:30 am
@FiG17, I’ve seen fines for less. “That wasn’t a penalty” was pretty direct.
[Reply]
Ok here it is Mr Sunshine and Mr Optimistic here to try and bring what is right about our situation. Yes we are in 9th right now but as we know it changes after each game. After Wednesday’s game against Calgary we could be right back in 3rd. You never know. It is going to be this way until April 7th so get onto the car as the roller coaster goes up and down and through loops.
This was game 1 of the 2nd set of 7 out of our last 14 games. The first set of 7 we went 6-1. We are now 0-1 in the 2nd set of 7 with 6 games left. We said we needed to go 5-2 in both sets of 7 to assure a playoff spot. Since we won 6 instead of 5 in the first 7, we only need to win at least 4 to make the playoffs. However we are on track to get to the 5-2 record we felt we needed to get to in the 2nd set. If we do win 5 that would mean we will have won 11 out of 14 and 96 points. That will most likely allow us to win the Pacific Division.
Vancouver – L – 0-1
Last time we lost two in a row we ended up winning 6 in a row. We can easily have this happen again as our last 6 games are much easier then our last 8 games, especially the last 3. With Calgary, Edmonton(2), Minnesota and San Jose(2) I feel that we will win 5 of these games. Also if and when we win all 6 we just might be the team to knock out 2 teams from the Playoffs and the top 8. When we beat Calgary it will effectively end there playoff push as they will have to run the table and get a lot of help as they are basically in the same position as Colorado, not enough games left. They also by beating San Jose both games could effectively knock them out of the playoffs. These last 6 games are huge and it is a sprint to the finish. Hopefully the Kings are across the finish line first, as I feel that they will be. It is a little tougher now that San jose is ahead of us by 2 points. However that can change and hopefully the Ducks help us out again like they did last week.
[Reply]
CB14 Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:25 pm
@Jeff_R, If they lose a game or two lets hope it’s against Edmonton or Minnesota and not against SJ or Calgary.
[Reply]
Jeff_R Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:26 pm
@CB14, Agree. Of course if they win there next 5 games I can forgive them losing the last one to SJ. But I agree with what you said.
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 2:33 am
@Mr_Optimistic,
So who’s this so-called Mr Sunshine?
Is that your new pretend friend?
Guess there’ll be no time in your life for tweeting me anymore then, huh?!
You do tweet, don’t you?
[Reply]
The Kings have a combined record of 5-4-3 against the 3 teams they have left to play this season. Edmonton twice, SJ twice, Calgary and Minnesota one apiece. If they can go 3-2-1 they should get in to the playoffs, but it’s not a sure thing.
[Reply]
Jeff_R Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:29 pm
@CB14, Other then the San Jose game last week where they won 5-2 they haven’t played the other 3 teams since we got Carter. So you can’t really go by that record. We are now 1-0 against those 4 teams since Carter.
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:43 pm
@Jeff_R, I sure hope that doesn’t ammount to hanging our hat on an invisible hook …
[Reply]
Jeff_R Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:56 pm
@Duncanz, i believe the Kings will not be invisible against those teams.
Duncanz Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 2:37 am
@Duncanz, Was referring to JC particularly.
I don’t usually say such stuff, but I predict if they lose to Calgary, it’s over. They beat Calgary, they’re probably in. The way the stats work out, this is a huge game. Too bad Calgary’s ice hasn’t been friendly to the Kings over the last decade. I hope they gut it out (Edmonton will be tough, but the consequences of losing in regulation are nothing like the Calgary game.)
[Reply]
CB14 Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:30 pm
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth?, It’s a HUGE game, much bigger then tonights game.
Wednesday will go a long way into determining who will make the playoffs in the West. Not only do we play Calgary, but Dallas, Colorado, and SJ all play as well. The Kings are at 62.2% to make the playoffs right now, that could go up by 23.8%, or go down by as much as 27.7% depending on the outcome of Wednesday night’s games. Such a huge night of games.
[Reply]
Jeff_R Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:36 pm
@CB14, Yes the Calgary game is huge. If they lose the game then it makes it that much tougher to make the playoffs and possibly won’t be able to win the division. If they beat the Flames it will most likely knock them out of the playoff picture so then there will be one less team to worry about. It also could mean that 4 out of 5 teams from the Pacific could make the playoffs if the Kings win. Depending on all the games Wednesday night if the Kings end up the night in 3rd they would then be the likely winner of the Division as there next 3 games will be against Edmonton and Minnesota and Edmonton.
[Reply]
16,005 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:47 am
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth?,
Couldn’t agree more with you. What is worse: San Jose’s remaining games are all Pacific Division teams — 1 ANA; 1 PHX; 2 DAL; 2 LAK. They hold their own fate.
[Reply]
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 8:32 am
@16,005, Of course, the Kings do too, by virtue of having the Calgary and San Jose games upcoming.
[Reply]
Not that anybody asked me, but I’d just as soon pass on The View From Vancouver.
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:39 pm
@JackKentCooke, How about just stopping in anyway, for the Villainous Invective of Vigneault?
[Reply]
JackKentCooke Reply:
March 26th, 2012 at 11:45 pm
@Duncanz,
He’s so vain.
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 2:41 am
@JackKentCooke,
……. hmmm, perhaps it wasn’t about Warren Beatty after all…
Perro Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:53 am
@JackKentCooke, should check out the Hockey fan vancouver board. Maybe we should all go on it and blast them.
[Reply]
They played 3rd man high with the D glued to the blue line just like the TM days. Big surprise we couldn’t score. Makes us look so slow and inept, I barely watched the third while played on the iPad. Listened just in case they woke up but the preparation, tactics, and execution in this game sucked. We were out classed for the first time in awhile.
[Reply]
FdoFmFull Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 12:40 am
@johnjuan, THIS!
wow, talk about playing conservatively!
Always outnumbered down low, can’t win too many battles that way and get quality chances.
I guess they got it in their minds that the Canucks would kill them on the counter.
How quickly they forgot what made them successful over the recent winning streak – skating as a 5-man unit, supporting the puck and quickly recovering it from the opponent, while playing with urgency and intensity. Also shooting sooner than later, tonight they tried to get cute with the puck way too much.
[Reply]
PP Anybody? Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 9:22 am
@FdoFmFull, Exactly. Looks like the last 3 games against the top teams, they spent more time talking about how careful they needed to be against these teams, instead of how to take it to them. Not a way to go about winning.
[Reply]
I’m going to have a heart attack before the end of the season.
[Reply]
Bonvivant1 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:21 am
@urborg1701, You and me both.
[Reply]
Also don’t forget. ALL of SJ reaming 6 games are against the division. ANA, PHX, DAL, DAL, LA, LA. Now that’s a tough schedule to make the playoffs. As all of those teams even ANA who is out of the race want SJ out as well. I don’t know about DAL or PHX schedule but I’m sure it’s not any easier.
[Reply]
Sutter Knows Hockey; good game.
Luongo with some impressive concentration.. bout time! Good game Quick & Kings.. .
[Reply]
Tomorrow night there will not be any games that affect the Kings. One of the few nights where that will happen in the last 12 days of the regular season. So that leads us to Wednesday night. The biggest night of the Kings season and the Western Conference. Wednesday should show what 3 teams will make the playoffs. Right now Colorado’s loss tonight has pretty much ended their attempt to make the top 8. It would take a miracle for them to make it. If Calgary loses to the Kings, especially in regulation, they will then most likely be knocked out. It would take a miracle for them to make it if that happens. It will then leave the Kings, San Jose and Dallas as the 3 teams that will make it, although there is still a chance Phoenix overtakes one of them. Here are Wednesdays games at a glance.
Kings at Flames – Huge game. Kings win in regulation it sends Calgary reeling. If they win in OT then Calgary will be in the same position as Colorado 86 points with 4 games left. That means they both need to run the table and hope that 2 other teams ahead of them crumble. Kings win and they will either be in 3rd, 7th or 8th knocking out Phoenix who doesn’t play.
Stars – Oilers – We are hoping the Oilers help us out again by beating the Stars and having them swept in their Alberta trip. Dallas wins and they will either stay in 7th or move up to 3rd. If they get 1 point they will then be tied with the Kings with 88, as long as the Kings beat Calgary. We need the Oilers to win preferably in Regulation.
Sharks at Ducks – We need the Ducks to win and lighting to strike twice, as they beat the Sharks last week helping us. It needs to be in regulation. The unfortunate part about us losing our last 2, is the Sharks won there last 2 overtaking us and tying us in ROW. We need to get that edge back and hopefully the Ducks will help us do so.
So we need this to happen Wednesday night. GO KOD!!!! GO KOD!!!!
GO KOD!!!!
KOD!!!!
GO KINGS!!!! GO OILERS!!!!! GO DUCKS!!!!!!
[Reply]
Seems to be Last Call.
[Reply]
G. Spencer Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 12:05 am
@JackKentCooke, Bartender… 7 7.
[Reply]
Nope I work at a bar. I’m stuck here till 2am lol
[Reply]
If we beat CAL on Wed. And SJ can take PHX on thurs that essentially leaves 3 teams fighting for positions 3, 7, and 8. I like our chances honestly. Let’s Go Kings!!!
[Reply]
Jeff_R Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 12:14 am
Chicago is not automatically in so it could work out where possibly all four Pacific Divsion teams make it. Although not realistic but it could happen that way, especially with the hawks goaltending the way it is and Keith out.
[Reply]
urborg1701 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 12:38 am
@Jeff_R, so is Montador and Toews. But they’re deep enough and with enough points that they’ll hold a seed maybe not the 6th. But they’ll stay in.
[Reply]
Kingsation8 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 12:40 am
@Jeff_R, Chicago would have to go about 1-5 in their last 6 for that to happen.
[Reply]
Jeff_R Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 12:52 am
@Kingsation8, Chicago’s last games are against Nashville, New Jersey, St Louis, Detroit, and two against the Wild. Other then the 2 against the Wild those are tough games. With there inconsistent goaltending and missing Towes, Keith and Montador they can easily lose all of those as much as they can win all. You never know which Chicago team is going to show up. The one that lost 9 in a row or the one that won 8 out of 10.
I understand and support the optimism, but last night was a big game and our best players failed to show up again.
When The Stoll line is your best line all night, you don’t usually come away with points.
Once again shutout 2 of the last 3 games. The PP has reverted back to being poor.
Our top 2 centers Kopi/Richards were invisible. How can this happen at this time of year?
I refuse to take anything positive from another 1-0 loss. The refs were terrible and should be disciplined for a poor performance, but they weren’t the difference in the game. We don’t score and therefore give ourselves no chance to win.
Yes there’s still time, but it’s running very short.
[Reply]
I understand and support the optimism, but last night was a big game and our best players failed to show up again.
When The Stoll line is your best line all night, you don’t usually come away with points.
Once again shutout 2 of the last 3 games. The PP has reverted back to being poor.
Our top 2 centers Kopi/Richards were invisible. How can this happen at this time of year?
I refuse to take anything positive from another 1-0 loss. The refs were terrible and should be disciplined for a poor performance, but they weren’t the difference in the game. We don’t score and therefore give ourselves no chance to win.
Yes there’s still time, but it’s running very short.
[Reply]
number 6 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 6:24 am
@nykingfan,
In fact the tsn announcers mentioned that Mike Richards was in his third game without a shot on goal (this in the 2nd period). I didn’t see the third so I assume he got his three shots in the third. That said, two and a half games w/o a shot on goal?
Not sure that when DL traded for him that come crunch time that’s what he had in mind. At times like these that really hurts.
Also, as I had to get up early I couldn’t watch the third period (I’m back east for those of you on the west coast), but it was one of those games like others earlier in the year where they just never looked like scoring.
Also, a few dodgy plays by Doughty as well, out of position and then diving to recoup giving up a three on one.
If your highest paid player isn’t more settled and one of your team leaders isn’t getting shots on goal in a game where you have to at least get a point, you have a problem. We’ll see how it all plays out.
[Reply]
Tough loss last night. Nothing we can do but keep playing. If the Kings don’t score they can’t win. Maybe all these tough games are catching up with them. Talk about being black and blue. The Kings are in round 10 of a heavyweight match. And down goes Frazier {The Flames}. Hopefully the Kings can rebound from these 2 losses and get back to playing the kind of hockey they are capable of. This entire seson has been one of craziness. Why should it be any different now. I hate when the Kings can’t score. It’s like there is a invisable shield over the net that keeps the puck from going in. Plus the call on Penner… Ok who had money on the Canucks. With 3 minutes none the less. Sometimes one must wonder if some of these games are on the up and up. You know the NHL loves these end of the season “playoff matches”.
[Reply]
Canadian King Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:23 am
@King Charles of Salt Lake, Ya that Penner call was terrible, not to mention the call on Clifford. Seems to me that we got a penalty for going anywhere near Luongo or Sedin.
[Reply]
Can we call someone to have the “bear down” term eliminated from the hockey lexicon??
[Reply]
I do not know how many other teams are watched regularly…I try to catch the Devils and Redwings when I can…
Can anyone explain how the other teams that struggle look like? Does it look like their game planse make sense but are not scoring? Does it look like the guys are phoning it in? My point is that what we witness our Kings doing may not be unique to us…
Also: The other struggling teams, unless injured, are their stars still producing even though the teams are not winning? That is the point that bugs me about the Kings…Lower lines showing the intensity and desire that the top dogs are not…
[Reply]
Bonvivant1 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:25 am
@Jack, Confidence. Our top player is still young.
[Reply]
urborg1701 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 5:09 pm
@Jack, Tampa Bay is not going to make the playoffs. However Stamkos will probably win the Rocket Richard this year. So I’d say their stars are producing but their team is not
[Reply]
We have 6 left against teams we can compete with. Boston and Vancouver are simply better than the Kings and we couldn’t manage to upset them. They are better coached with deep rosters and their records reflect that. We can and should compete with Calgary, Edmonton, Minny, and San Jose. Our destiny is in our own hands and there should be no excuses after the next 6 games. The playoffs are ours for the taking and if we don’t make it, it’s nobody’s fault but our own.
[Reply]
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 8:38 am
@40YearKingsFan, Can’t say I disagree, but by your description, the Kings better find a way to finish 3rd seed, or the playoffs will be depressing.
[Reply]
I’m falling in love with Daryl.
[Reply]
nykingfan Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:29 am
@mrbrett7,
If we don’t make the playoffs, I would have a hard time comprehending bringing him back.
If we got rid of Murray for a poor start, how can we be satisfied with a poor finish?
I still believe the Kings will make the playoffs, so the point will be moot..at least it better be!
[Reply]
pr0cess Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:32 am
@nykingfan, I think he would come back but i dont think the others would. Guess will see
[Reply]
nykingfan Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:52 am
@pr0cess,
I won’t disagree with that assessment, but my problem is he’s been here long enough to have turned around whaty Murray failed to do earlier. He did makes strides, but there was plenty of time when he took over to get us to the playoffs.
In my mind anything short of a playoff appearance is a complete failure.
Overall this has been a healthy team all year with the exception of Gagne and Parse to a lesser degree..there’s no excuse for not making the playoffs.
pr0cess Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 8:04 am
@nykingfan, TM’s system is all the core has known for what? 3 years? But yes i think it falls on the player to embrace the changes and fall in line. And for the most i think everyone has done that. But DS has had to do alot in a short time for-sure. There is no doubt this team is better then its record and now is the time to find ways to win, And i will as well be disappointed if we do not make the playoffs.
What's the frequency, Kenneth? Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 8:40 am
@nykingfan, I can comprehend it. He’s never had the chance to make it “his team.” He deserves at least next season, no matter what happens–especially because he did bring a new mindset to this team. Cliché, but “Rome wasn’t built in a day” comes to mind, and there’s been a fair amount of remodeling.
[Reply]
nykingfan Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 9:22 am
@What’s the frequency, Kenneth?,
You’re right..it wasn’t “his team”, but then why make the change at all mid season?
Heck, we could have left Murray in place for the remainder of the season. If he would have failed, he would have been canned and Sutter would have had the whole off season and training camp to make it his team.
It just seems like we decided to experiment in-season, which makes no sense.
Was the change made for change-sakes?
mrbrett7 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 9:27 am
@nykingfan, This team is leaps and bounds better than they were under Terry, and I was a big Terry supporter.
[Reply]
nykingfan Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 11:22 am
@mrbrett7,
Again, I’m not disagreeing with anyone including yourself..but the goal of this team was to make the playoffs and advance.
If we don’t do that, no matter how much better we are, it still has to be considered a failure. The fact that he’s been the coach for a long enough stretch of the season that he could/should have taken this team to the playoffs gives me reason to question whether he should or shouldn’t be retained. the operative word is question.
I’m just presenting another opinion on a subject I hope and believe we won’t have to re-visit anyway.
This team is desperately fighting for a playoff spot and Quick allows yet another soft goal, and the offence can’t get ONE effin goal. A scary thought is this team going back to struggling for goals and now add in the fact that Quick seems to be letting in softies more often, lucky us.
[Reply]
nykingfan Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:53 am
@Canadian King,
He let in 1 goal..soft or not, no goalie should ever lose giving up 1 goal!
We had 57 minuites to get 1 friggin goal and couldn’t do it. You’re blaming Quick because the offense is impotent. That’s not fair!
[Reply]
Perro Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:55 am
@Canadian King, I don’t think it was that soft. Was a godo shot. Hit post and went in. It was the only goal of the game so there is no way we can pin anyhting on the the goalie when we lose 1-0.
[Reply]
16,005 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:57 am
@Canadian King,
The loss is not on Quick. Yes, it was a soft goal, but it was only ONE effin’ goal. His GAA went down with the loss. Not too many goalies that have a loss and lower their GAA. The rest of the team needed to only bury two chances and the soft goal is no longer an issue. Quick is and has been the team’s AllStar all season.
[Reply]
jonsey Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 8:26 am
@16,005, Really VAN only scored one goal so you can’t be mad at the Kings’ offense as much HOWEVER the trailing team always benefits from opening the game up and the Kings’ play is too conservative this year.
[Reply]
Rainman Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 8:36 am
@Canadian King, The guy picked the top corner off the post. I wouldn’t exactly call that soft. Quick may have been slightly off his angle, but give Malhotra credit for a great shot.
[Reply]
mrbrett7 Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 9:28 am
@Canadian King, Soft?
[Reply]
Shakes Reply:
March 28th, 2012 at 8:25 am
@Canadian King,
With all due respect i think you’re missing the forest from the trees.
IF (hypothetically) we’re going to scold Quick for allowing a seemingly stoppable goal, then we should equally admonish the forwards for not converting prime scoring chance(s). I think it’s only fair. If we’re not going to value the other work he did for 59minutes, then we shouldn’t positively value anyone else’s work past a missed chance.
I think whether it’s an amazing goal or a soft goal, no goalie should be held to a standard that they can’t allow more than one goal in all games over the course of the season. if that happened on one particualar game in a vacuum, a discussion is possible, but the lack of any goal support is a consistent problem that’s beyond Quick.
[Reply]
Barf!
[Reply]
DesertKing Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 8:26 am
@jonsey,
I agree. John Candy was really funny in “Spaceballs.”
[Reply]
Lets not forget that Vancouver is a difficult opponent and won on bit of a soft goal. Everybody saying the guys are not bringing it are wrong. Against all the big clubs in this last stretch the Kings they showed they can compete with all those clubs. Why your complaining about our goal producers not scoring why don’t you also complain about the Canuck goal producers not scoring either.
[Reply]
Jack Reply:
March 27th, 2012 at 10:20 am
@Mikey J., well..didnt they score a lot more goals than ours during the season?? Lets see Vancouver scored 230 goals…thats 45 more goals than our guys…
[Reply]
No Daryl, you were not doing everything right. Played 3rd man high with D in reverse or tethered to the blue line all night.
[Reply]