News Article: Top 14 centers can lead to Cup championship

[KingPurpleDinosaur]

funny how slanted this board's views are if i'm the lone believer that Lundquvist outplayed Quick. so you guys are telling me that quick played better when in only 5 games, Lundqvist faced nearly 50 more shots (that's just talking quantity, quality was hell of a lot harder as well) while still limiting 4 out of 5 games to a 1 goal differential? That the rangers weren't completely outmatched in every facet of the game except in goaltending? That it's just coincidence that the playoff leading Kings offense just happened to dry up against Lundqvist while still putting insane amount of shots on net?

it's not always about who wins. it's not always about who gives up less goals. It's like the olympics. I felt Quick outplayed Price in Can vs USA even though Price got a shutout. It's about what goalie would you rather have at the end of the day. you guys need to start seeing things as they are instead of with Kings colored glasses.

 

[Reclamation Project]

"He is going to give the Kings that big hometown discount and sign for under $8 million"

How did I do?

I know it's big shoes to fill, but I hope I did a good job.

I'm aware of what you did there.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

"He is going to give the Kings that big hometown discount and sign for under $8 million"

How did I do?

I know it's big shoes to fill, but I hope I did a good job.

Great impression, but your avatar needs some work

 

[Ron*]

funny how slanted this board's views are if i'm the lone believer that Lundquvist outplayed Quick. so you guys are telling me that quick played better when in only 5 games, Lundqvist faced nearly 50 more shots (that's just talking quantity, quality was hell of a lot harder as well) while still limiting 4 out of 5 games to a 1 goal differential? That the rangers weren't completely outmatched in every facet of the game except in goaltending? That it's just coincidence that the playoff leading Kings offense just happened to dry up against Lundqvist while still putting insane amount of shots on net?

it's not always about who wins. it's not always about who gives up less goals. It's like the olympics. I felt Quick outplayed Price in Can vs USA even though Price got a shutout. It's about what goalie would you rather have at the end of the day. you guys need to start seeing things as they are instead of with Kings colored glasses.

No matter how purple my glass lenses are, it doesn't discount the fact that you completely ignored the point I made about Lundy vs. Quick in regard to 3rd periods and overtimes.

Given how you like to take the Sutter-presser tongue-in-cheek approach and value losses more than wins, one can argue that if it wasn't for goal-line snow piles, Lundy would have lost five straight games to Quick in the series.

But I guess clutch "match-play" doesn't mean much to you and your cherry-picked-stat analysis.

Perhaps you need to check your Lundy-crush at the door and look at the facts more objectively.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

funny how slanted this board's views are if i'm the lone believer that Lundquvist outplayed Quick. so you guys are telling me that quick played better when in only 5 games, Lundqvist faced nearly 50 more shots (that's just talking quantity, quality was hell of a lot harder as well) while still limiting 4 out of 5 games to a 1 goal differential? That the rangers weren't completely outmatched in every facet of the game except in goaltending? That it's just coincidence that the playoff leading Kings offense just happened to dry up against Lundqvist while still putting insane amount of shots on net?

it's not always about who wins. it's not always about who gives up less goals. It's like the olympics. I felt Quick outplayed Price in Can vs USA even though Price got a shutout. It's about what goalie would you rather have at the end of the day. you guys need to start seeing things as they are instead of with Kings colored glasses.

It's always about winning.

I am going to send Charlie Sheen to your house to shake some sense in to you

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

funny how slanted this board's views are if i'm the lone believer that Lundquvist outplayed Quick. so you guys are telling me that quick played better when in only 5 games, Lundqvist faced nearly 50 more shots (that's just talking quantity, quality was hell of a lot harder as well) while still limiting 4 out of 5 games to a 1 goal differential? That the rangers weren't completely outmatched in every facet of the game except in goaltending? That it's just coincidence that the playoff leading Kings offense just happened to dry up against Lundqvist while still putting insane amount of shots on net?

it's not always about who wins. it's not always about who gives up less goals. It's like the olympics. I felt Quick outplayed Price in Can vs USA even though Price got a shutout. It's about what goalie would you rather have at the end of the day. you guys need to start seeing things as they are instead of with Kings colored glasses.

Not satisfied with the goalie who has won two Cups with the Kings? I'm sure the Devils fans were moaning over their Stanley Cup wins with Brodeur in net as well, since y'know, Giguere outplayed him in 2003 and his form isn't as attractive to the eyes as other goalies who play a perfect butterfly.

 

[Reclamation Project]

There's a troll living among us! *crowd erupts in terror*

 

[Ron*]

There's a troll living among us! *crowd erupts in terror*

I don't necessarily think KPD is a troll; in any event, I haven't seen this behavior from the Dinosauria prior to today.

I just think maybe Dinosauria is a bit misguided. A few counseling sessions may be able to clear up the confusion; barring that, a few 9-iron smashes to the skull may be in order.

 

[Rorschach]

Carter should be on that list above some of those guys.

 

[cyclones22]

funny how slanted this board's views are if i'm the lone believer that Lundquvist outplayed Quick. so you guys are telling me that quick played better when in only 5 games, Lundqvist faced nearly 50 more shots (that's just talking quantity, quality was hell of a lot harder as well) while still limiting 4 out of 5 games to a 1 goal differential? That the rangers weren't completely outmatched in every facet of the game except in goaltending? That it's just coincidence that the playoff leading Kings offense just happened to dry up against Lundqvist while still putting insane amount of shots on net?

it's not always about who wins. it's not always about who gives up less goals. It's like the olympics. I felt Quick outplayed Price in Can vs USA even though Price got a shutout. It's about what goalie would you rather have at the end of the day. you guys need to start seeing things as they are instead of with Kings colored glasses.

Here's your problem, outside of shots faced, Quick statistically had a better series and won 4 out of 5 games. Had Hank bested Quick in any other category other than shots faced, I'd entertain an argument for "completely outplaying Quick". What have you got outside of the eyeball test and volume? Quick's save percentage was .932 vs .923. That's a clear advantage.

Let me remind you of what Quick did in the Final. .932 save percentage, 1 shutout and 1.63 GAA. Your description of what transpired is a bit of hyperbole. If you think the difference between the Kings and Rangers series was the same as USA vs. Canada in the Olympics, might I suggest you get some glasses and check your eyesight. The Kings were not as dominant as that Canadian team was for all 5 games. The Canadian defense was a quantum leap over any other country's defense. The Kings defense, while excellent, does not have that kind of advantage over the rest of the league. Not to that extent.

As Ron pointed out about 3rd periods and overtimes, how many clear breakaways or partial breaks did Quick stop in crunch time? If you're completely outplaying your counterpart, you have to win at least 1 out of those 3 OT games. And it's not like the Rangers didn't have chances, they did. Clear cut chances, but Quick stoned them.

 

[KingPurpleDinosaur]

lol, so let me get this straight. first, somebody posts a picture of lundqvist being scored on that's somehow supposed to rile me up as if i were a rangers fan (that was a grand moment for me, thanks for the trip down memory lane). Then somebody accuses me of being a troll just for having a dissenting opinion that's more in line with the knowledgable hockey world than the people here. This is comical, it's like a cult in here.

anywyas, it's clear that i'm not going to get anywhere with these arguments. People say it's all about wins only when it's convenient to their argument. It is quite possible for someone to have a better series than their counterpart and still lose. It's a team game and Rangers aren't even in close to competitive against the Kings, except for Lundqvist. There's a reason why everyone knew the cup was won in the chicago series.

But yes, I think Quick is clutch (if you're clever enough, you'd notice quick as my icon) and I do think he's probably the #3 most critical player on the team. But to look at him with such unrealistic slants is something even I, a fanboy, can't do. I don't think he played well this year's playoffs, and I don't even think he was worthy of the conn smythe in 2012 (should have been Brown IMO). but he's still my favorite kings goalie of all time.... right after cechmanek.

 

[Reclamation Project]

If this site has taught me anything is that morons flock together and save percentage is the end all stat. Quick posted a .929 and Lundqvist posted a .907.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

it's like a cult in here.

 

[Ron*]

lol, so let me get this straight. first, somebody posts a picture of lundqvist being scored on that's somehow supposed to rile me up as if i were a rangers fan (that was a grand moment for me, thanks for the trip down memory lane). Then somebody accuses me of being a troll just for having a dissenting opinion that's more in line with the knowledgable hockey world than the people here. This is comical, it's like a cult in here.

anywyas, it's clear that i'm not going to get anywhere with these arguments.

Did you ever pause to consider that you are just on the wrong side of the argument?

People say it's all about wins only when it's convenient to their argument. It is quite possible for someone to have a better series than their counterpart and still lose. It's a team game and Rangers aren't even in close to competitive against the Kings, except for Lundqvist. There's a reason why everyone knew the cup was won in the chicago series.

But yes, I think Quick is clutch (if you're clever enough, you'd notice quick as my icon)

It's called an avatar, if you were clever enough you would know that.

and I do think he's probably the #3 most critical player on the team. But to look at him with such unrealistic slants is something even I, a fanboy, can't do. I don't think he played well this year's playoffs, and I don't even think he was worthy of the conn smythe in 2012 (should have been Brown IMO). but he's still my favorite kings goalie of all time.... right after cechmanek.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

I don't even think he was worthy of the conn smythe in 2012 (should have been Brown IMO)..

I missed this the first time. Thanks Ron

Dude...really?

If Brown played like he did in the first two rounds...maybe. I think you are forgetting that his scoring almost completely dried up in the final two rounds.

 

[kings11]

someone should do more research, the kings still maintained a 3 goals per game avg against Henrik and the rangers, also as far as shots faced if memory serves me correct Quick faced more breakaways and opens shots and came up huge when it mattered most so lets just simply say what really happened and that is that the BEST GOALIE came out on top period!!!!

 

[Ron*]

someone should do more research, the kings still maintained a 3 goals per game avg against Henrik and the rangers, also as far as shots faced if memory serves me correct Quick faced more breakaways and opens shots and came up huge when it mattered most so lets just simply say what really happened and that is that the BEST GOALIE came out on top period!!!!

The only breakaway I remember on Lundy was Dustin Brown and he made Lundy look foolish.

And although Williams' overtime shot wasn't a breakaway, he quick-sniped Lundy before he had a chance to reset.

The more I think about it, the more I think Dinosauria is just trolling us. There is not one reasonable person outside of Ranger country that really believes Lundy outplayed Quick.

As an aside, here is a quote from former hockey goalie and current NHL Network analyst Kevin Weekes (made before the playoffs began):

The Kings have depth, talent, experience and the best goalie in the world, Jonathan Quick. He does things you think are impossible to do, and he does them all the time. He's a violently aggressive athletic goalie. He's like a crab — any direction he moves, he's impressive and competitive and balances a surfer-dude calm with a stone-cold competitiveness.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

The more I think about it, the more I think Dinosauria is just trolling us. There is not one reasonable person outside of Ranger country that really believes Lundy outplayed Quick.

KPD has been here a LONG time. Even though ,we don't agree with it and think that he might be under the influence of a hallucinogen. He is entitle to his opinion.

 

[kings11]

The only breakaway I remember on Lundy was Dustin Brown and he made Lundy look foolish.

And although Williams' overtime shot wasn't a breakaway, he quick-sniped Lundy before he had a chance to reset.

The more I think about it, the more I think Dinosauria is just trolling us. There is not one reasonable person outside of Ranger country that really believes Lundy outplayed Quick.

As an aside, here is a quote from former hockey goalie and current NHL Network analyst Kevin Weekes (made before the playoffs began):

Ron i think you misread my comments i meant Quickie faced more breakaways than Henrik and he came up huge... Quick made the saves that stopped momentum and just gave more confidence to our guys..that IMHO is what makes Quick the best go lie in the world period...

 

[Herby]

I don't get why you guys are attacking him so much, to be honest Quick was not at the megastar level he was at in 2012.

Quick was far and away the Kings best player in 2012, it really wasn't even close. This years post season, I have him behind Kopitar, Doughty, Williams, Gaborik, Muzzin for sure, and then maybe Carter to.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Quick's turn around in the opening round against the Sharks is one of the biggest reasons why the Kings stayed alive in the first round. He frustrated the Sharks with his play, and he even got in their faces too. He got in their heads, and his teammates fed off of his performances.

 

[Ron*]

I don't get why you guys are attacking him so much, to be honest Quick was not at the megastar level he was at in 2012.

Quick was far and away the Kings best player in 2012, it really wasn't even close. This years post season, I have him behind Kopitar, Doughty, Williams, Gaborik, Muzzin for sure, and then maybe Carter to.

The argument was quick vs Lundy not where quick was in regard to the rest of the team.

 

[Ron*]

Ron i think you misread my comments i meant Quickie faced more breakaways than Henrik and he came up huge... Quick made the saves that stopped momentum and just gave more confidence to our guys..that IMHO is what makes Quick the best go lie in the world period...

No, I got your point, was just enhancing it with my observation that when faced with a breakaway Lundy performed poorly.

 

[Pucknut50]

If your a Kings fan Quick edges Lundqvist by a nose. If your the rest of the Hockey world Lundqvist edges Quick. This includes experts all over Hockey. Quick is not the most consistent Goalie but he can be spectacular. Lundqvist the most consistently sound goalie. Personally to me there are 5 other goaltenders so close that the Kings would not miss a beat with any of Lundqvist, Rinna, Smith, Price, or Rask.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

And if you're a fan of a goalie who wins big games, then you aren't going to complain about having Jonathan Quick in net.