KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
- Apr 6, 2006
- 32,593
- 11,785
But can you see St. Louis beating Chicago in a 7-game series? That may be all the Kings need.
Game #46: KINGS embarrassed by REDWINGS 3-1, Gordon Ramsay edition ...
- Thread starter Puck U
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
But can you see St. Louis beating Chicago in a 7-game series? That may be all the Kings need.
Herby
How could Blake have known?
If Chicago gets even decent goaltending no one will beat them. Not the Kings, not St. Louis, not the Ducks (although home ice would help)
They are just so loaded and so deep and Keith is going to win another Norris.
The Kings probably have the best chance of all three because Quick can steal games.
They are just so loaded and so deep and Keith is going to win another Norris.
The Kings probably have the best chance of all three because Quick can steal games.
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
They might just have another Antti Niemi in the making with Raanta. They're the team that worries me the most in the West, not the Ducks nor the Blues.
Whiskeypete
Registered User
same here. living here in Chicago i see plenty of BH's game. they ARE the team to beat. i'm not saying anything the informed and knowledgeable here don't already know.
LA has no answer to them at this point from what i've seen the past few H2H games. LA can only beat them by playing up ice with a tight gap, so they don't let CHI generate speed. the key to CHI's transition game is speed. you let them loose and they will kill you. they have to much skill up front to capitalize on just a few rushes per game.
instead LA plays a semi-passive defense with to much gap between the D and F2 & F3. LA is more worried about getting burned by a long stretch pass than essentially clogging up the Hawks transition. CHI continues to make the 2nd and 3rd passes through the LA defense, because LA keeps their D back to far. the last game LA had a stretch were they began to turn the game their way. they were playing very aggressive up ice as a 5-man unit, which created turnovers in the O and neutral zone. the end result was LA began getting their possession game going, while keeping CHI bottled up.
LA can't match them N - S in the transition game either, they lack the speed and top end skill to match CHI.
LA is built for 'playoff hockey', but they are built to only play ANH, BOS, STL and SJ at this point.
the only way they can get past CHI is with either Quick stealing games, or the BHs having a depleted line-up and injuries similar to LA last year.
the weak spot in the CHI roster is G. Raanta has looked good, but he is as proven as M Jones. neither have any experience in the NHL playoffs. CHI forward depth is deeper and more skilled than LA's. CHI defense depth is the 2nd most skakey area, once you get past their first six. LA fairs a bit better here with the 7th D man in reserve.
Dean and Darryl have time, but they need to start making some adjustments or this team is playing for 2nd in the West again.
Seems to be the same conversation/tone back in 2012 as well,
"Oh this team sucks"
"We need XXX"
Then, when the team won in the playoffs, everyone was shocked,
It all comes down to chances, the Kings are getting theirs, when they STOP getting the chances, then be worried, until then, relax, and enjoy the game.
"Oh this team sucks"
"We need XXX"
Then, when the team won in the playoffs, everyone was shocked,
It all comes down to chances, the Kings are getting theirs, when they STOP getting the chances, then be worried, until then, relax, and enjoy the game.
Face Wash
Registered User
- Mar 17, 2002
- 6,624
- 16
Except in 2012 offensively they were easily the worst team in hockey (so they did suck) and the Kings DID need XXX and went out and got XXX (JC77) and he and the new coach lead the offensive surge that ultimately won them a cup.
Enjoy the games?
Kinda hard to do it when the team has 10 (non-empty net) goals in its last 7 games on 249 SOG. The worst shot percentage team in hockey is Buffalo with a 6.17%. Kings check in at 27th in the NHL with a 7.72% clip and sinking, considering the last 7 games are 4.0%.
The Kings are one of three teams that are in the top-10 in points but not in the top-10 in shooting percentage. The others being SJ & MON and they both are almost a full percentage point better than the Kings in that department.
For the most part, the Kings games have been unwatchable because of the lack of creativity, low percentage shooting, tiny mistakes that wind up in their net (which I guess aren't tiny mistakes) and bad puck luck.
but as I often say, like most things in life...it ain't quantity, it's quality. That is of course unless you're talking about Julius Caesar Milan and chicken wings.
I don't believe 6 goals in 16 games was an leading an offensive surge, that is what Jeff Carter did when he got here, a goal, over 2.3 games or so.
Oh, he added 3 assists,
I do believe however though, his addition let a lot of pressure off of Kopitar, Brown, Williams, Richards, etc, AND the bounces started to come through.
This game is all about percentages, if you don't believe that, why do you think you are bringing up shooting percentage or save percentage etc,
With the number of shots the Kings are taking/getting, the puck will start to turn and they will get a bounce that goes in,
It's unbelievable how hot and cold this fan base is, they beat Boston, it's oh "we are the king of the world, etc, I KNEW we were good" then, they lose to Detroit, the SAME FANS are "oh no, we suck, I KNEW we weren't that good"
They seem to forget that the game is just that, the game. It's always going to be that way, hard work and talent will win, but not all the time, there is another team out there...
Face Wash
Registered User
- Mar 17, 2002
- 6,624
- 16
Totally disagree...Baseball is about percentages... That's why half the stats the fans follow as well as fantasy owners follow are ratios. Hockey....not nearly as much.. I brought up the shot percentage, which neither NHL.com nor hockey reference even list on their site by team much less rank them by team, I had to Google it...because I wanted to point out that not only did the Kings have barely over 1 goal per game over the last 7, but that their shooting percentage was so low in those games, it was lower than the worst team in hockey has been ALL season. To illustrate the lack of quality shots the Kings are taking/able to get/allowing themselves.
by and large the team takes low percentage shots because they lack the creativity to get higher percentage shots, but it's also a matter of philosophy (which is what you're basically saying). I doubt if more than one or two teams take more point shots and half-wall shots than the Kings do (don't have a link for that, totally an anecdotal guess)...I mean, I'm glad they've been getting them on net, I'd much prefer them to go to the net more with the puck. Not enough Kings pay the price in front of the net. King and Clifford's entire game should be predicated on charging the net. They never do and their recent goal totals are indicative of that. If you're not a skill player, you crash the net, PERIOD. Kings play too defensive a style to allow for this apparently.
Whatever...I've stopped watching for now, the team's been unwatchable. 1 more goal last night...woohoo 11 goals in 8 games on 269 shots. But hey! Keep shooting from 35 feet out from the half wall with no traffic boys...1 in 25 of them might go in! GREAT percentages!
Last edited:
