Though Mike Richards referred to Jonathan Quick’s performance against Chicago as “outstanding”, the Kings’ goaltender wasn’t exactly ready to pat himself on the back the morning after he stopped 34 of 37 shots in a 3-2 loss.
On the performances in net from the past week raising the team’s goaltending ceiling:
“It’s just every time either one of us are in there, you’re trying your team a chance to win and trying to win games. Obviously I wasn’t able to do that last night. You’ve got to regroup after the loss and just get ready for the next one.”
On whether the 34 saves on 37 shots was a positive in the larger picture:
“It [was] good enough for a close game. It wasn’t good enough for a point, though. You’ve just got to keep moving forward.”
On what the past week of practice meant to him:
“You get to work on things. With the schedule the way it is, you don’t get as much time as you’re used to to be able to work on little parts of your game. It gives you that step back back for a couple days, and you just kind of hammer out those little parts of the game.”
I just watched the game and what a growth game. The four new defenders could almost keep up with the hawks by the 3rd period, compared to looking like AHLers early on. If the 4 young guns can continue this growth we may be albe to stay in the race for 8th. Great game. It will be interesting to see how we do against another fast team.
[Reply]
KC23 Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 3:51 pm
@jet, A refreshing post after reading those that would throw DS under the bus so soon after a masterful season last year.
[Reply]
fsd1 Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:29 pm
@KC23, agree, and agree Jet, this team is growing and getting better every game. It takes time to get the train rolling! I actually think we wore them down as the game went on and could take them in a 7 game series.
[Reply]
Deke'r Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 8:16 pm
@fsd1, ….appears Chicago ain’t no train…..
kissmyblarneystones Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 5:40 pm
@KC23,
I agree. Makes my sick.
[Reply]
kissmyblarneystones Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 5:42 pm
@kissmyblarneystones
Makes me sick
number 6 Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 6:31 pm
@KC23,
Are there people out there being critical of DS? If so they should get a life.
TM was a wonderful defensive coach and true gentleman, but when things were going badly he didn’t look at ease behind the bench. DS always looks to be in control whether they’re losing 3-0 or winning 3-0.
Did I say Winning 3-0? Not so much this year so far. If they’re winning it seems to be by a goal.
Anyway, you get the point. DS doesn’t come in last year they don’t win the cup. It’s that simple.
[Reply]
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:36 pm
@jet, peeps as is always the case when one team is leading 3 – 0 going into the third , typically the team with that lead will sit back and get defensive …………. chicago took their pedal off the medal ………. dont read anything into how well the kings played in the 3rd period ….. we were smoked by the hawks – even if the scoreboard didnt reflect it ……….. and last i checked we only have 3 new defenders that were playing
[Reply]
jimmyo777 Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:45 pm
@phil sykes, I wish your computer would crash or you went on a six month vacation. I’m sick of reading your garbage
[Reply]
fsd1 Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:52 pm
@jimmyo777, +1
Gustavo Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 5:26 pm
@jimmyo777,
+1000
kissmyblarneystones Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 5:42 pm
@jimmyo777,
He’s a duck fan.
CB14 Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 8:37 pm
@jimmyo777, Who forced you to read them? That’s what I thought, NO ONE. Just skip over his comment if you have a problem with what he writes. There’s no need to insult him just because you don’t like what he writes.
HockeyNerd Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 9:01 pm
@jimmyo777, The guy drives me up the wall too but your post was completely uncalled for.
Duncanz Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:53 pm
@phil sykes666, +1
[Reply]
jet Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 6:49 pm
@phil sykes, I guess you consider a defenceman with 54 games experience a veteran?
[Reply]
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 7:15 pm
@jet, oh yur talking about voynov … no i dont consider him “new” considering he was a mainstay in or run to the cup
Harrison Merkin Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 7:37 pm
@phil sykes, Problem is gang……he’s right.
[Reply]
HockeyNerd Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 10:05 pm
@Harrison Merkin, No he isn’t.
A refresher course if I may: what do Chess, Tennis, Football and Hockey have in common that Track, Golf, and Figure skating do not?
The answer of course is that you have an opponent who is actively trying to make you lose. Oh, you may have an opponent in Golf but it is basically you against the course. You cannot credit your good play as being a primary reason your opponent played poorly.
There were 2 teams out there yesterday, not one.
And Chicago is undefeated in regulation for several reasons, most if which have nothing to do with how poorly their opponents have played.
To say the Kings stunk up the joint for 40 minutes then scored 2 goals “only because Chicago went into a defensive shell” is to totally disregard the fact there were TWO teams out there. He is saying that Chicago won ONLY because the Kings played a bad game. So Seabrook, Keith, Sharp, Toews….. those guys are chopped liver? We couldn’t use them on the Kings right now? We would have won 10-1 if we just wouldn’t have had an off day? This explains Chicago’s record against not just us but EVERYONE ELSE exactly how?
Some people around here need to stop analyzing things so much that they forget to watch what is ACTUALLY HAPPENING. We played an outstanding last 20 minutes and that is NOT in doubt. Yes, I’m well aware DS has issues to address. But we did SOME good things too. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. Correct the mistakes AND know what you did well.
Harrison Merkin Reply:
February 19th, 2013 at 10:27 am
@HockeyNerd Lighten up Francis. You’re trying way too hard. Teams with the lead by nature if not by instruction will “tend” to defend. The team playing catch up will press and send the house. The resulting shift in momentum often results in the trailing team ” Making a game of it” and on occasion (as we Kings fans have can attest to) that momentum can earn you at least a point if not two. I can tell you that if you think our boys and especially DS are patting each other on the back for coming out flat for 40 and showing a little urgency and intensity for the final 20, then this team has far greater problems than a young D-Corp. ” We” are the defending SC Champions. We will see every teams best effort regardless of their place in the standings. Chicago Has taken us to the wood shed twice this season. That’s the long and short of it my friend. GKG.
luc20rules Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:54 pm
@jet, I also think the forwards & refs weren’t that sharp as per usual in a afternoon game. The Kings in general have been slow starters in day games. The shot at the refs they play Quicks stick and knock him over in another goal. I am pretty sure there are penalties for that.
[Reply]
number 6 Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 6:22 pm
@luc20rules,
There Are (or should be) penalties for that. No question about it. Quick reacted immediately.
[Reply]
I only saw a few highlights from yesterday’s game, but does it look like Quickie is almost back to his normal self?
[Reply]
xeropoint Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 3:25 pm
@Robyn, He’s still overplaying his angles. Just a tad. I think he’s suffering from Brad Doty Syndrome. Trying to do too much, instead of playing within one’s self.
[Reply]
Robyn Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 3:32 pm
@xeropoint, I saw him diving to make the saves on a couple plays so that makes sense.
[Reply]
Mars Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 3:51 pm
@Robyn, What was odd to see was JB in net. During the CBJ game he would just stand up and watch. It was so weird to see that, it took me back a few years. I guess I am really use to seeing Quick and his style now a days.
On the flip side of that, it seems the defense is really revved up with JB in net, not so much with Quick. I think that speaks volumes about the goalies and the teams and how it all turned out too.
Last year at this point, I felt we were beating teams we should not, and were losing to teams we should not as well, this year sadly its turning out another oddity. For the first time, we cannot blame the coach or Kompon, we are highly critical of they players, with so many out, its coming down to minute mistakes and making it know whom should be where etc
Cannot wait for another game. Non game days I watch too many replays and wait with too much time to think.
Drip drip drip aaaaaahhhhhhhh
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:38 pm
@Robyn, yea still way too aggressive
KC23 Reply:
February 19th, 2013 at 8:32 am
@Robyn, He is mostly suffering from 3 new rookie defensemen in front of him.
[Reply]
Damn Jon you are on a freaking tear today!
I can hardly keep up!
[Reply]
I agree with Quick that he wasn’t good enough for a point. I believe his bavk surgery has set him far behind in being ready for this season and he is just getting his timing back. I do not worry about him reaching last year’s level of consistency.
I am concerned about the uneven effort being put in by Kopitar. Sometimes I wonder if we are experiencing the Eastern European syndrome…..some games I play hard some I do not. When Kopitar is working his hardest then virtually no one can stop him. To play Chicago without any shots is embarassing. With his size he MUSt go to the middle and then the front of the net. To watch him hang out on the wall on every shift is depressing, knowing how well he played through the playoffs last year. I do not want to say it, but he is starting to look a little like Frolov. When he works GREAT. Just doesn;t do it enough. Until he realizes every game deserves the same effort, he can not be considered one of the elite. Talent alone does not do it.
[Reply]
Might have had 35 saves if the Hawks hadn’t cheated or if the refs had a clue on the first goal.
[Reply]
Mars Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 3:57 pm
@Seitz, A while ago I read an article the NHL should have a 4th ref above for the hard calls.
That should have been one.
I know it has worked for and against us, but guys getting shoved into the netminders by their own team should not count as goaltender interference. Its their own teams fault. It drives me crazy, its as bad as the guys dislodging the net on purpose, just cheap and unsportsmanlike.
As for the Sharts coach bitchin about pad size. Well I say lead by example. Put up or shut up.
[Reply]
HockeyNerd Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:29 pm
@Mars, Referees are only human and will obviously miss things here and there. I blame these continued problems not on the officials themselves but the National Hockey League who simply WILL NOT lift a finger to make any meaningful changes despite how many times these things occur. Headed by Mr. “If I don’t do anything about it than it isn’t a problem” Mr. Bettman himself, why should we expect anything to be any different? This is 2013, not 1913. We have cameras, instant replay, any video review. Put a process into place that actually USES these tools. I for one would rather have a 10 minute delay and have them get it right. Maybe Jon Rosen or someone who knows the rules better than I can chime in, but if Quick KNOWS the stick got knocked away, we have the means to LOOK AND SEE what actualt happened AFTER it has already taken place and still the goal stands means something is badly wrong somewhere.
[Reply]
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:44 pm
@HockeyNerd, nah . it happened way before the goal …….. judgement stuff … like penalties , offsides , icing should be left up to the on ice refs .. bad calls or non calls are part of the game ….. every team must deal with it on a nightly basis ……. whichever team handles it the best over the long haul of a season or series usually comes out on top ………….. see coyotes ….. not coming out on top
Seitz Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:51 pm
@phil sykes,
I was referring to the interference that should have been called after Quick had already lost his stick. A defenseman had tried to play it back to JQ, and as he went to reach for it, Bollig knocked it away. That’s clear cut interference, and should have been called. Then seconds later, they score on the stick side. Just piss poor officiating and JQ never had a chance.
HockeyNerd Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:58 pm
@Phil Sykes, I would prefer a game to be won by the team that played better, not who got the most “breaks” from the referee. This kind of thing happens far too often for my taste when we have the ability to drastically improve it WITHOUT major rule changes or delays. A little creativity is all is needed. You could give each team 1 or 2 “free” video reviews a game, after that they can still call for one but they get a delay if game penalty if they are wrong. There are lots of things we CAN do. Why sweep it under the rug and pronounce it a lost cause? I would rather the NHL do the right thing slowly than the wrong thing to(o) Quick. Or should we just flip a coin and award the winner 2 points based on that. Which is what Bettman would just love BTW.
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 5:19 pm
@HockeyNerd, the game is always won by the team that played better …… when its not , its about a team that cant finish their chances , so the worse team steals the game
you sound younger than me ………. and if you are let me just say i was exactly like you when i was your age .. always complaining or worrying about the refs judgment calls … yelling …….. but through my years of experience i have realized there is going to be bad calls every single game …. thats just the way it is … u just have to accept that …………. i mean practically every penalty that is called is ticky tac bs crap ….. so u just have to accept judgment calls and move on ………… the sooner u accept it …. the better off youll be as a team
i am 42 ……….. if you arent younger than me …. my apologies
HockeyNerd Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 5:54 pm
@phil sykes
What is good for the Kings as a TEAM and what we need to do for the SPORT OF HOCKEY are 2 seperate issues. I happen to care about both. As a team you try to get the refs to hear you out at the moment, after that you let it go and move on.
As someone who simply loves the sport this happens far, far too often for me to just accept it. In 1999 a STANLEY CUP WINNER was decided when NHL officials had no guts to apply a rule that was in place at the time.
Last season the Sharks finished ahead of the Kings because FOUR OFFICIALS SAW A PLAYER PLAY A PICK FROM
THE BENCH AND NOBODY DID ANYTHING. ***NO****OTHER****Major Sport would *****EVER**** have allowed this to take place without disciplinary action.
There are examples, examples, and still more examples of this ALL THE TIME that is UNIQUELLY ignored in THIS sport.
No, I am not going to accept this and move on. I love this sport too much for the stupid idiots we have that we call NHL presidents, comissioners, and owners enforcing (or not enforcing) rules so many times as to make a mockery of it.
And since it seems to mean something to you, yes I am older than you are.
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 6:33 pm
@HockeyNerd, all the points you brought up are well and good …. but the fact remains judgement calls are part of the game – good and bad …. u better learn to deal with because thats never going to change
99 … thats toronto …. not what im talking about , which by the way was the correct ruling , but people didnt understand the in the crease rule – which was a horrible rule in the first place …. they should have just never had the in the crease rule in the first place obviously
ryan clowe – again , thats the leagues stupidity for no disipline
im talking about judgement calls ……….. you dont stop the game to see stuff like that ……. only if a puck was in the net – like we have now is fine
just my opinion , and we disagree – and thats fine …. moving on … i understand the points yur making …. but we just disagree …. no big woop
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 6:55 pm
@HockeyNerd, and no the 4 officials didnt see clowe touch the puck or they would have called a too many men on the ice penalty …. unless they just chose to look the other – which happens all the time in this sport ………… just like the other night when the dude was kneeling on browns back while columbus went down and scored a goal ….. lol lol lol …… nhl , gotta luv it
HockeyNerd Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 8:59 pm
@HockeyNerd, It is very frustrating to use examples to make a point, and instead of you TRYING to understand the point be told unrelates things I already know about the examples!!!!
Can you please make an ATTEMPT to understand my point: these things are NOT “judgement calls”!!!!!! 50 years ago yes. If the referee didn’t see the player play a puck from the bench, the skate in the crease, the stick knocked away then yes, that was that. Nobody had video tape.
A player playing a puck from the bench is NOT a legal play. It is not a judgement either that it happened or should have been penalized.
A goal scored when a player was in the crease is NOT a judgement play. It did happen and should not have been counted by the rules at the time.
A player sucker punching another player or swinging a stick at his head is NOT a judgement play. It did happen and for the good of the game these players should have been banned for life.
And having a stick knocked away by an opponent and letting the goal count is NOT a judgement call. It did happen and the rules say it should not have counted.
If you want to argue it isn’t worth the time to continually go to replays for everything and it is more important to play the game quickly I don’t agree but it’s at least an ARGUMENT I can accept. But don’t tell me things are judgement calls SIMPLY BECAUSE A POORLY RUN LEAGUE DECIDES AGAINST ALL LOGIC AND THEIR ***OWN**** RULES that they are. Either enforce a rule or don’t have one. Not having a rule is far, far better than randomly and selectively enforcing it WHEN THERE IS NO REASON IT ****NEEDS**** TO BE THAT WAY.
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 9:08 pm
@HockeyNerd, if indeed the ref did see the clowe play …… it was his judgement to “look the other way” …. happens all the time ………. get used to it ……………….. and by the way , didnt i say i understand yur points youve made and we disagree , so lets move on
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 5:07 pm
@Seitz, yes i know all about the play . i was talking to hockey nerd …. but u leave judgement calls up to the on ice refs
[Reply]
brian spain Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 5:17 pm
@phil sykes, Phil Sykes, his stick was knocked out of his hands, thats not the penalty, the penalty was latter when the Hawk in front of the net hit Quick’s sticks farther away from him with hgis stick, you can’t touch a stick on the ice.
[Reply]
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 5:21 pm
@brian spain, i know man , damn ….. thats still a judgement penalty . no need for toronto to get involved
GKG Reply:
February 19th, 2013 at 5:25 pm
@brian spain, hey man, long time no see…what you are all missing is this…it was illegal for the hawk to play the stick away from Quick, but it was also illegal for Doughty (I believe it was) to play it back toward him. It is done ALL THE TIME, but it is against the rules. Skaters also may not drop their stick and pick up the goalies stick, because the goalie stick would be considered an illegal stick for a player. This is why Brodeur had to chase his own stick on that play where the Pens goalie almost scored from his own zone a week or 2 ago.
GO AVANGERS…Andy N.
Anyone notice something about Quick?
If the Kings give up 50 shots and win 1-0 the quote from
Quick is “I couldn’t have done it without all the help”.
If he loses that same game 1-0 “I let them down”.
Honestly, how many Goalies around the league have that kind of attitude?
Quick will be fine and we will be fine.
[Reply]
Mars Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 3:52 pm
@HockeyNerd, Agreed he is humble as all pies.
He has a great attitude and is a positive role model.
[Reply]
xeropoint Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:21 pm
@HockeyNerd,
HockeyNerd: [sounding official] Uh, everything’s under control. Situation normal.
Angry Bloggers: What Happened?
HockeyNerd: [getting nervous] Uh, we had a slight goaltending malfunction, but uh… everything’s perfectly all right now. We’re fine. We’re all fine here now, thank you. How are you?
Angry Bloggers: We’re sending a(HL) squad up.
[Reply]
HockeyNerd Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:31 pm
@xeropoint, Star Trek officer with Red Shirt Martin Jones please report to engineering to be killed off by the end of the episode….. Uhhhhh I mean to play Goal…….
[Reply]
HockeyNerd Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:46 pm
@xeropoint,
Obi-Lombardi:I’ve had this Goaltender for 3 years as a backup. He’s available for a 30 goal scorer or defenseman”.
Official: We’re looking for a Goaltender named Quick. Please show us your papers with the save percentage.
Obi-Lombardi: “You don’t need his statistics”.
Official: We don’t need his statistics.
Obi-Lombardi: This is the same Goaltender who won the cup in 2012 with a GAA under 1.5.
Official: This is that same Goaltender.
Obi-Lombardi: Your best starter is this man named Bernier.
Official: Right, we’ll take Bernier.
Obi-Lombardi: Call @Poorman. Give us Richards, Nash, and Del Zotto as compensation.
Official: Right, @Poorman agrees.
Obi-Lombardi: Move along.
Official: Move along.
[Reply]
wow …….preds and avs scored goals 50 seconds apart ………… and then to top it off , two minutes later they scored 3 goals in 29 seconds ….. say what ??? ….. avs 2 in 13
no empty netters …… wow
[Reply]
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 7:24 pm
@phil sykes, or powerplays i dont think
[Reply]
It just might be that FAST(H) is moving around his crease speedier than QUICK.
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 5:19 pm
@King John, Or as I like to say, Fast(h) is the new Quick..
[Reply]
SLIM Reply:
February 19th, 2013 at 3:47 pm
@Duncanz,
Creep…You did that on purpose..
I see you’re game..
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
February 19th, 2013 at 5:45 pm
@SVELTEY
Where does that leave Bernier? In slow-mo?
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 4:52 pm
@King John, Berning rubber?
[Reply]
soo-do-nihm Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 6:03 pm
@Duncanz, I hereby crown thee King of Puns
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 6:10 pm
@soo-do-nihm, Some people call it pun-king, but do you know something? I thought you were Vietnamese until I just paid attention to your moniker right now.
Ha ha ha ha!
soo-do-nihm Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 7:44 pm
@Duncanz, haha, I’m being foh-net-ihk
(ok sorry, couldn’t resist)
“You’ve got to regroup after the loss and just get ready for the next one.”
Oh-oh..
[Reply]
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 6:36 pm
@Duncanz, so u really think im satan
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 6:59 pm
@phil peeps, it was a riff on the guy’s tag who paid you the cheap compliment ….. no big woop … lol …. well maybe ….do you dance …. are you in a blue dress …. did you play 6 career games for the sd gulls …. czech that out for a cool mysterious reference peeps!
[Reply]
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 7:06 pm
@Duncanz, yes , i have no response ….. because i am lossssssssssssst …. damn u did it to me again ……… never toil with yoda
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 7:09 pm
@Duncanz, unless its miroslav satan of which u speak
Duncanz Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 8:14 pm
@phil sykes, si correctamundo … he played briefly for the gulls in ’94/95 …. your prize is a night in a limo with cathy lee crosby ………………. but you ve got to go back to 1982 to get it!
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 8:26 pm
@Duncanz, no thanks …… she was having a threesome with fran and john inside that limo …… plus shes ugly
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 8:27 pm
@Duncanz, fonzarelli
phil sykes Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 8:31 pm
@Duncanz, lol i just thought of something … speaking of the 90s ….. pro beach hockey ……… lol lol lol …….. i used to play with some of those guys …. sweet programming espn …..err …. espn2
Off topic, since we need some hard hitting and energy, instead of Tiffoly I think we should send Gagne packing and bring up Pearson
[Reply]
soo-do-nihm Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 7:46 pm
@ravens, Like Pearson but sooooo not ready. He and Toffoli need to go through a full camp before they attempt to take on the NHL. Otherwise I think we’ll just confuse the hell out of them. Though I would gladly trade Kinger for Pearson. Kinger has been super absent this season.
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 8:18 pm
@soo-do-nihm, Pearson’s definitely not ready. Caught a little of him playing at the Worlds and I’d say he’s got a huge amount of developing to do before any possibility of bringing him up is contemplated.
[Reply]
Off topic, since we need some hard hitting and energy, instead of Tiffoly I think we should send Gagne packing and bring up Pearson
[Reply]
Quick was excellent…the ref didn’t call a penalty that should have been…we have to move on…bring someone up…or dont….the team was, or wasnt suffering from the SC “hangover” to start the season. The disagreements will continue but instead of getting into these, I think it definitely comes down to this: how r we going to make the playoffs without Mitchell and Greene or players of that caliber on “D”? IMO, we’re not! And I just don’t c any way that DL could pull off a trade that could provide at least the “Mitchell” part of it. We can’t change the style we play (or get the offensive players needed to do it) in such a short time frame even if DL wanted to. So unless WM or MG were to make a miraculous recovery n come back tomorrow I don’t like r chances. But hey, we won the cup n if we have to write off this season (not saying we should…yet), so b it. I don’t think I’m being pessimistic….just realistic.
[Reply]
soo-do-nihm Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 8:58 pm
@linny, It’s a long shot but we’re getting progressively better with each game. At the moment, we’re only 4 points out of the 8th spot and we’re a couple games behind everyone. Chicago is the #1 team in the league. They outskated everyone on our team and they worked a lot harder than our team. They are literally the best team in the league so the fact that we even got close, I say, speaks volumes.
IMHO, what needs to happen, is that the guys need to regain their confidence. Been watching a few highlights from last season and I could see that their confidence was absolutely soaring. I just hope they can look back on those guys and go, hey, I was that guy once.
[Reply]
linny Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 9:38 pm
@soo-do-nihm, I agree n I’m not giving up on em making it yet but maybe even the confidence issue is partly because of the “D” man situation. When they found out Mitchell wasnt going to b around for who knows how long, their confidence must have ebbed a bit, then Greene too? Wowzers! But you’re right about us getting better. Dominated Detroit n St. Louis. I think A-Mart went down around that time. Another whammo!! Everyone knows we’re “D” oriented n that r d-men must get the puck out quickly n accurately for us to have continued success not to mention what WM n MG mean to the pk and clearing out in front of the goalies. If an “O” man goes down (like Gagne n Richards) last year I think its less devastating. But hey…I watched em through thick n thin for 45 years n I usually don’t start crying until we’re mathematically eliminated. But my eyes r starting to water a little already
[Reply]
soo-do-nihm Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 9:59 pm
@linny, Don’t give up hope yet. Strong evidence suggests that a Win in Calgary is entirely probable. Last time we went up against Edmonton, I thought we were fairly evenly matched (although we had Marty at the time). The defense just gave up in the last few seconds of the game (literally) thinking we had the W in the bag only to lose in OT.
At the time, the whole team was looking poor and sluggish and Quick didn’t seem like himself either. Quick is getting better, our D is getting better and I think it’s a good probability that they’re going to beat the Oilers.
I, too, am nervous, but I’m not giving up yet. Not until we are officially, completely out of the playoffs will I cry. Until then, I blink back the tears LOL.
HockeyNerd Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 10:20 pm
@linny, Keep that head up. We’re looking a lot better the last few games, Quick can and will win games by himself and Mitchell may not be gone much longer. And we have plenty of pieces another team would want if push comes to shove. This team is SPECIFICALLY built for playoff hockey. Yes, we gotta make them first. We still can and we will. I think we all thought we would tear it up like Chicago from the start. The longer you’ve been a Kings fan the more you realize it will NEVER be that easy. Worry not. This team knows what it is capable of and has too much pride. It WILL turn around. It’s already started.
[Reply]
soo-do-nihm Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 10:33 pm
@HockeyNerd, I love your positivity! I’ve been a Kings fan since I was a kid (albeit, a very casual, semi-disinterested fan, though turning into a nerd now) and all I can recall from then when I was a kid is how much they were an up and down team. One year, they’d get hot and start going on winning streaks. Then, the next year it’s like nothing. When your team is on a losing streak, sometimes it’s hard to remember they’re the DEFENDING STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS. Sometimes I think these guys forget too LOL.
If any fans in Edmonton are going to the game tomorrow, remind these guys how much they rock.
Thanks for keeping it positive on here, HockeyNerd
[Reply]
linny Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 11:50 pm
@HockeyNerd, thanks to u n “soo-do”…seriously! I mentioned a few days ago that I thought we were due to go on a winning streak based on the effort against “wings n blues”, then A-Mart went down n I’m goin ‘here we go again”. I didn’t think we’d beat Chicago, but we need these next two n that should go a long way with the “confidence” issue ‘soo-do’ mentions. And man. r u ever so right about being a long time die-hard. It was only a few years ago that i was watching Ersberg get a shutout after we were mathematically eliminated. And who could ever forget the Sheldon Kanegeiser (sp) years? LOL So all in all, considering we get to look at that CUP banner, it ain’t so bad! Have a good night! GO KINGS GO
[Reply]
I’ve made a decision to start posting drunk
[Reply]
soo-do-nihm Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 10:33 pm
@Ravens, I’m intrigued
[Reply]
Any fans up late trolling the site out of boredom? I am…
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 11:04 pm
@soo-do-nihm, A boy named soo?
You might not be old enough to know that one.
Ok, I’m going to interview you.
Is this the first time you’ve been on the blog and what do you think of it so far?
Also, have you been/are you on other blogs?
Frank answers now, no one can see who you are..
[Reply]
Real 7 Reply:
February 19th, 2013 at 1:15 am
@DumDumDuncanz, you scared him off! oh well, he was boring anyway…
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
February 19th, 2013 at 2:26 am
@Re(medi)al 7, It’s a tough game, is hockey (blogging).
You need staying power!
Hard to believe it’s been damn near twenty years since a Canadien franchise has won the Stanley Cup. And it doesn’t looked likely again this year.
[Reply]
Mikey J. Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 11:09 pm
@Mikey J., look, dough!
[Reply]
Duncanz Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 11:15 pm
@Mikey J., Griefs? Flabs? Shucks?
[Reply]
Mikey J. Reply:
February 18th, 2013 at 11:48 pm
@Duncanz, LOL! quality
[Reply]
put the hot goaltender in….come on DS….the HOT ONE, not the GREAT ONE…
[Reply]
HockeyNerd Reply:
February 19th, 2013 at 2:13 am
@Real 7, C’mon, this is not rocket science. Quick is a BETTER goaltender than Bernier.
Therefore, he should PLAY MORE OFTEN than Bernier.
Bernier is NOT “red hot”. He played well but at the same time had much more help in his games than Quick has had in his.
And even if you don’t understand any of that, the next 2 games are back to back and DS will split the starts.
When and if Bernier gets 2 or 3 shutouts in a row and faces more than 30 shots in them I PROMISE YOU we can talk about who should be #1. Until then, it’s very clearcut.
[Reply]
LT21 Reply:
February 19th, 2013 at 5:11 pm
@HockeyNerd, Totally agree. Only facing 13 shots and still letting in one of them does not make a “hot” goalie. Don’t get me wrong, Bernier has done his job when called upon in those games but he is not better than Quick. The team has said time and time again they “don’t worry” when Quick is in net. This has been showing because they let down more when he is in there and play harder with Bernier. This needs to be addressed. Quick has had multiple years of consistent play and unless Bernier does what HockeyNerd said with multiple shutouts in a row with 30+ shots in each game then he is not knocking Quick from #1 status.
[Reply]