ok what's wrong with QUICK!?

[driller1]

Why on earth would a backup goalie with nearly no experience in the NHL get a raise to 3.3m?

...

You understand that would make him he 26th highest paid goalie in the league ahead of names like Crawford, Nabokov, Mason, and Thomas... Heck Brodeur would only make 700K more. All of whom have been actual full season starters and nearly all of them have had playoff success.

Lets try to not just make up numbers to support arguments...... This could be the first season Bernier gets a change to show what he can do at the NHL level but lets not just start to pretend that he isn't ridding on hype a bit more then production.

Because someone will use Schneider as a comparable, and he makes over $4mm.

Crawford will get a raise if he keeps playing the way he's been playing.

If Bernier goes free agency, someone will pay him to be their starter. Hence he should be in the top 30 of payments for goal tenders. Hype or not, Bernier is young and has proven himself adequately in the NHL and AHL, warranting a shot as a #1 somewhere.

 

[GKJ]

Quite honestly, I would rather pay Bernier $3M than some 3rd or 4th line scrub.

He's proven to be more valuable this season.

Ask yourself this: Who has been more valuable to the Kings this season? Bernier or Stoll?

3rd line center is pretty damn important. They do have Carter or Richards who can slide down, but they're still going to pay that position at least $3M.

 

[RonSwanson*]

3rd line center is pretty damn important. They do have Carter or Richards who can slide down, but they're still going to pay that position at least $3M.

Without Bernier, L.A. would be in last place right now.

 

[Winger23]

Without Bernier, L.A. would be in last place right now.

This simply is not true and can't be proven. Stoll gets so much crap around here. He's a great 3rd line center.

 

[kingsfan]

Without Bernier, L.A. would be in last place right now.

Bernier has a winning percentage of .750 (percentage based on decisions only). Quick is .526. If Quick had recieved the decision in the games that Bernier earned the decision, and if Quick maintained a .526 winning percentage in those games, then Quick would have gone 4-4 in those games (almost 4-3-1 actually), so Quick would have likely cost us two wins, or four points.

Those four points would have dropped us to a tie of some sort for 9th, two points out of the playoffs. We wouldn't be dead last without Bernier.

 

[MSRinkRat]

Bernier has a winning percentage of .750 (percentage based on decisions only). Quick is .526. If Quick had recieved the decision in the games that Bernier earned the decision, and if Quick maintained a .526 winning percentage in those games, then Quick would have gone 4-4 in those games (almost 4-3-1 actually), so Quick would have likely cost us two wins, or four points.

Those four points would have dropped us to a tie of some sort for 9th, two points out of the playoffs. We wouldn't be dead last without Bernier.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Do you read what you post? You calculations leave out the ever popular HORRIBLE goals Quick lets in. Has quick made more than 3 big saves all year? Has he been within 3 feet of position for longer than 13 seconds a game? We all love Quick here, but come on, seriously he sucks more than Paris Hilton on Prom Night.

 

[kingsfan]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Do you read what you post? You calculations leave out the ever popular HORRIBLE goals Quick lets in. Has quick made more than 3 big saves all year? Has he been within 3 feet of position for longer than 13 seconds a game? We all love Quick here, but come on, seriously he sucks more than Paris Hilton on Prom Night.

Do you read what you write?

I supported my post with actual stats. If Quick has sucked that bad, he wouldn't be 9-8-2. Not a great record, and not a very good save percentage either, but the bottom line is he has won games, and to state this team would be dead last if Quick had played the games Bernier did is factually incorrect.

My goodness its sickening how quickly you, and others, throw a guy under bus around here. Is he playing not so great right now? Yes. Is Bernier deserving more starts? Yes. But that's a far cry from saying Quick is downright terrible, sucks more than Paris, and would have us in the leagues basement if he had played every game.

And you guys call yourselves fans? Shouldn't that embody some level of loyalty, especially to the players who helped you realize a dream of seeing the Kings win a cup?

 

[jml87]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Do you read what you post? You calculations leave out the ever popular HORRIBLE goals Quick lets in. Has quick made more than 3 big saves all year? Has he been within 3 feet of position for longer than 13 seconds a game? We all love Quick here, but come on, seriously he sucks more than Paris Hilton on Prom Night.

Do you have some sort of horrible goal calculation or big save measure? The post makes perfect sense. The winning percentage with Quick is .526 so continuing on that pace would leave us in around 9th place without Bernier.

And Quick has had good games this year. He's had bad ones too, but if you look at his game log he's also had nights where he's been great. And yes, I've watched all the games too, and he hasn't been as bad as you think he has even with the defense struggling without their top 2 defensemen.

 

[RonSwanson*]

This simply is not true and can't be proven. Stoll gets so much crap around here. He's a great 3rd line center.

Wait, when did I give Stoll crap? I just said that Bernier is worth the same $ that Stoll is being paid.

 

[RonSwanson*]

Bernier has a winning percentage of .750 (percentage based on decisions only). Quick is .526. If Quick had recieved the decision in the games that Bernier earned the decision, and if Quick maintained a .526 winning percentage in those games, then Quick would have gone 4-4 in those games (almost 4-3-1 actually), so Quick would have likely cost us two wins, or four points.

Those four points would have dropped us to a tie of some sort for 9th, two points out of the playoffs. We wouldn't be dead last without Bernier.

Bernier is 6-2-0. Take 12 points away from the Kings for those 6 wins, and what place are they in?

They currently have 32 points. Colorado is in last right now with 24.

Do the math.

And you guys call yourselves fans? Shouldn't that embody some level of loyalty, especially to the players who helped you realize a dream of seeing the Kings win a cup?

My loyalty is to the team for the most part, not the players. Players come and go.

 

[Master Yoda]

Bernier is 6-2-0. Take 12 points away from the Kings for those 6 wins, and what place are they in?

They currently have 32 points. Colorado is in last right now with 24.

Do the math.



My loyalty is to the team for the most part, not the players. Players come and go.

Wait, are you assuming the kings would have lost every game if Quick played those 8 games?

 

[RonSwanson*]

Wait, are you assuming the kings would have lost every game if Quick played those 8 games?

You guys need to learn to read. I never said anything about Quick at all.

I said "Without Bernier, LA would be in last place." And without those 6 wins by Bernier, they would, in fact, be in last place.

If you want to get into a pissing match over hypotheticals, by all means go ahead. But understand that Quick is being badly outplayed by Bernier this season, and most of Bernier's games have been in situations where Quick would have had a difficult time (i.e. back-to-back games)

Look at this past series with San Jose for a good example of Quick ******** the bed, and Bernier dominating the Sharks.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

You guys need to learn to read. I never said anything about Quick at all.

I said "Without Bernier, LA would be in last place." And without those 6 wins by Bernier, they would, in fact, be in last place.

If you want to get into a pissing match over hypotheticals, by all means go ahead. But understand that Quick is being badly outplayed by Bernier this season, and most of Bernier's games have been in situations where Quick would have had a difficult time (i.e. back-to-back games)

Look at this past series with San Jose for a good example of Quick ******** the bed, and Bernier dominating the Sharks.

I hope you see, though, why it's a faulty assumption that whoever was in net instead of Bernier for his 6 wins would have automatically gone 0-6. I also don't remember ANY goalie STEALING us a win this season.

Not that I disagree at all about Bernier being the better goalie thus far this season. The 2nd goal SJ scored on Quick was just horrendous.

 

[jml87]

You guys need to learn to read. I never said anything about Quick at all.

I said "Without Bernier, LA would be in last place." And without those 6 wins by Bernier, they would, in fact, be in last place.

That doesn't make any sense. If you are taking out those 6 wins then that means someone else was in net and that someone else would be Quick. And you are saying that we would win none of those 6 games. So Quick would be 0-6 in those games.

You can't just take out 6 wins and say we would be in last place. You do that on any team it will be the same way.

 

[RonSwanson*]

That doesn't make any sense. If you are taking out those 6 wins then that means someone else was in net and that someone else would be Quick. And you are saying that we would win none of those 6 games. So Quick would be 0-6 in those games.

You can't just take out 6 wins and say we would be in last place. You do that on any team it will be the same way.

If I said "Without Carter, L.A. would not be in a playoff position," would you argue with that as well because his replacement would be the top goal scorer in the West?

Seriously, I love Jonathan Quick. But I'm just saying that Bernier has been money this season in his starts, and at times has saved a sinking ship. Last game is a great example of it.

 

[kingsfan]

Bernier is 6-2-0. Take 12 points away from the Kings for those 6 wins, and what place are they in?

They currently have 32 points. Colorado is in last right now with 24.

Do the math.



My loyalty is to the team for the most part, not the players. Players come and go.

You guys need to learn to read. I never said anything about Quick at all.

I said "Without Bernier, LA would be in last place." And without those 6 wins by Bernier, they would, in fact, be in last place.

If you want to get into a pissing match over hypotheticals, by all means go ahead. But understand that Quick is being badly outplayed by Bernier this season, and most of Bernier's games have been in situations where Quick would have had a difficult time (i.e. back-to-back games)

Look at this past series with San Jose for a good example of Quick ******** the bed, and Bernier dominating the Sharks.

Here's some math for you by your logic.

Without Quick we'd have 12 points and be handing Columbus the 1st overall pick.

 

[kingsfan]

If I said "Without Carter, L.A. would not be in a playoff position," would you argue with that as well because his replacement would be the top goal scorer in the West?

Seriously, I love Jonathan Quick. But I'm just saying that Bernier has been money this season in his starts, and at times has saved a sinking ship. Last game is a great example of it.

Big difference between saying we wouldn't be in a playoff spot without Bernier and deadlast without Bernier.

 

[KingKopitar11*]

Honestly, saying quick would go 2-2 is quite the assumption. Most of the games quick has won or half of them have been high scoring games, it was our offense getting us the wins.

Bernier has really helped this team and hell if let's say quick did go 2-2 we'd be out of a spot, but every team is doing good and every point counts.

I'm not harping quick but he's not been doing good and bernier really helped us. The only time I'd choose quick over bernier as of now is if our Defense gets better so they can support him better, but with our defense now they need bernier.

Again I like quick but I'm more critical than some of you.

 

[RonSwanson*]

Here's some math for you by your logic.

Without Quick we'd have 12 points and be handing Columbus the 1st overall pick.

Strawman.

Can you just admit that those 12 points from Bernier's 6 wins are crucial to this team without taking it as some kind of slight against Quick? Holy ****.

 

[RonSwanson*]

Big difference between saying we wouldn't be in a playoff spot without Bernier and deadlast without Bernier.

I already explained the dead last thing. If you want to imagine Quick getting 2 wins in extra 6 games while playing EVERY SINGLE game this season (meaning that his current 9-8-2 record doesn't suffer), then go ahead. I doubt it.

 

[losingsand]

Looks like Quick starts tonight.

i'm ok with this ONLY if bernier gets the start FOR SURE tomorrow

 

[kingsfan]

Strawman.

Can you just admit that those 12 points from Bernier's 6 wins are crucial to this team without taking it as some kind of slight against Quick? Holy ****.

Hahaha, settle down.

All I'm saying is that your idea that we'd be deadlast without Bernier is a total piece of ****.

Someone would have played in Bernier's place. Odds are, it would have been Quick. Based on Quick's winning percentage, we'd have 8 points instead of 12, meaning Bernier gave us an extra 4 points. We'd fall down the standings without Bernier, but not be dead last, as you put it.

I'm not taking it as some slam on Quick, I'm taking it as a totally Pejorative Slured theory that has zero merit or place in reality, which is what it is.

 

[RonSwanson*]

Hahaha, settle down.

All I'm saying is that your idea that we'd be deadlast without Bernier is a total piece of ****.

Someone would have played in Bernier's place. Odds are, it would have been Quick. Based on Quick's winning percentage, we'd have 8 points instead of 12, meaning Bernier gave us an extra 4 points. We'd fall down the standings without Bernier, but not be dead last, as you put it.

I'm not taking it as some slam on Quick, I'm taking it as a totally Pejorative Slured theory that has zero merit or place in reality, which is what it is.

You don't think Quick's winning percentage would suffer if he plays every single game, including both games of all of their back-to-backs?

 

[kingsfan]

I already explained the dead last thing. If you want to imagine Quick getting 2 wins in extra 6 games while playing EVERY SINGLE game this season (meaning that his current 9-8-2 record doesn't suffer), then go ahead. I doubt it.

2 wins in 6 games is a .333 winning percentage, or almost 200 points below his current winning percentage. Yeah, I think he'd have a real good shot at that.

 

[kingsfan]

You don't think Quick's winning percentage would suffer if he plays every single game, including both games of all of their back-to-backs?

Sure it could. But even if dropped slightly, he wouldn't go 0-6.