Why couldn't Gretzky get the Kings a Cup?

[illpucks]

He played the greatest game of his entire career just before the SCF began. He was in top form. Why couldn't he lift the Kings to a win over the Habs? He was the best of all time and in his best form going into the SCF.

 

[BenchBrawl]

If he had won that cup, that would put him permanently over Orr and Howe for me (though he's already there, but that cup with a new team would push him over the top).

 

[The Spaniard]

 

[BraveCanadian]

Kings didn't have the depth, D, or goaltending.

They could never get all the pieces of the puzzle to line up at the same time.

 

[Crosbyfan]

McSorely's stick

https://www.nhl.com/kings/news/mcsorley-tells-his-side-of-93-stick-incident/c-632932

 

[illpucks]

https://www.nhl.com/kings/news/mcsorley-tells-his-side-of-93-stick-incident/c-632932

But Crosby would have the leadership to bounce back from that. How do you lose 1 game and never win again?

 

[K Fleur]

But Crosby would have the leadership to bounce back from that. How do you lose 1 game and never win again?

Crosby has never been in a series against the greatest playoff goaltender of all time. At the peak of his powers no less.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

But Crosby would have the leadership to bounce back from that. How do you lose 1 game and never win again?

If you're up to something, I'd appreciate it if you let us know now.

 

[illpucks]

If you're up to something, I'd appreciate it if you let us know now.

All I'm pointing out is that the team must be incredibly fragile if a stick incident means they never win another game (when they haven't lost one yet)

And Gretzky should have been able to rally the team back from that. It shouldn't have been a big deal.

 

[Crosbyfan]

But Crosby would have the leadership to bounce back from that. How do you lose 1 game and never win again?

Choose the correct answer to your dilemna

A) Patrick Roy and an incredible OT playoff run by the Canadiens

B) Ovechkin did not choke, is not a bad leader, and it would be a waste to make him focus 100% on defence

C) Both A and B

 

[Killion]

He played the greatest game of his entire career just before the SCF began. He was in top form. Why couldn't he lift the Kings to a win over the Habs? He was the best of all time and in his best form going into the SCF.

Because hockey is a team sport, game of mistakes. Didnt have the supporting cast. Depth, Bench, Mgmnt & Ownership savvy lacking.

 

[bobholly39]

Wayne Gretzky in 1993 was *NOT* at his best. He was at his best in the 80s.

If Wayne Gretzky had started his career with LA in 1989 (so if he had been 19 yrs old then) - 100% in my mind he brings at least a couple of cups to them.

That is why.

Roy in 1993 was his best playoff run, possibly one of the best playoff runs of all time by a goalie. I'd argue LA wasn't even favorite to win.

 

[Hockeyholic]

Montreal was on a roll. They were destiny's darling. It was their year. The Sens of this year almost reminded me of them.

 

[MXD]

Because hockey is a team sport, game of mistakes. Didnt have the supporting cast. Depth, Bench, Mgmnt & Ownership savvy lacking.

I'd actually argue that LA's D wasn't that bad.
But Bench... geez, Barry Melrose make Jacques Demers look like some kind of tactical mastermind, and no one ever even thought tactics were Demers' strong suit.

 

[Killion]

Wayne Gretzky in 1993 was *NOT* at his best. He was at his best in the 80s.

If Wayne Gretzky had started his career with LA in 1989 (so if he had been 19 yrs old then) - 100% in my mind he brings at least a couple of cups to them.

That is why.

Roy in 1993 was his best playoff run, possibly one of the best playoff runs of all time by a goalie. I'd argue LA wasn't even favorite to win.

Sorry bob. Disagree. That organization top to bottom lacking several key pieces, too much floatsem & jetsem. Lack of depth, quality. Yes, some good players, excellent, but too many weak links. Gretzky, no single player alone can do what your suggesting.

 

[MXD]

Montreal was on a roll. They were destiny's darling. It was their year. The Sens of this year almost reminded me of them.

With a huge difference though -- the '93 Habs were a legit top team in the league, while I'm not even quite sure the '17 Sens were a legit playoff team (though they did play like one in the playoffs at the very least).

 

[The Panther]

He played the greatest game of his entire career just before the SCF began.

Not even close to his greatest game. Probably around 32nd. (If we're talking just playoffs, maybe it's around 12th or something...).

He was in top form.

He was not even close to top form. His late-prime, after 13 pro seasons, had ended two years prior to the '93 Cup run. His peak was roughly 1981 to 1987.

Why couldn't he lift the Kings to a win over the Habs?

Well, he'd already lifted the Kings to wins over Calgary, Vancouver, and Toronto, all of which were significantly better teams than L.A. that season.

The Kings were better in April than Calgary. They were also better than Vancouver in late April (the Vancouver series was likely the best series the Kings ever had while Gretzky was there). I don't really think they were better than Toronto in that seven-game series -- the Leafs actually played better. But sometimes Gretzky happens (game 7).

Gretzky was also great in game 1 at Montreal, and pretty good in game 2. The Kings were in control of game 2 and were likely to win, taking a 2-0 series lead back to L.A., when the McSorley-stick thing happened. That's when the clock struck midnight on the Kings. They lost three games in a row in overtime.

As a sign of how much the Kings played over their heads in '93, consider that the very next season they were a .390 team that missed the playoffs.

Their defense was atrocious; goaltending average.

 

[MXD]

As a sign of how much the Kings played over their heads in '93, consider that the very next season they were a .390 team that missed the playoffs.

Their defense was atrocious; goaltending average.

Actually their defensive squad was pretty good, but they were not great defensively as a team. Chalk that to coaching.

 

[Killion]

Actually their defensive squad was pretty good, but they were not great defensively as a team. Chalk that to coaching.

Ya, you had Robbie Ftorek in there... "he of the sweaters"... actually Benched Gretzky a couple times.... funny story of how when one time Robbie was droning on about "teaching the kids the right way" or whatever Wayne steps up & tells him in front of the entire room that "thats all well & fine, but were here to win a Stanley Cup".

 

[illpucks]

Not even close to his greatest game. Probably around 32nd. (If we're talking just playoffs, maybe it's around 12th or something...).

Gretzky said it was the best NHL game he's ever played. His best ever was one of Canada Cup ones.

 

[Jag68Sid87]

The Kings weren't a very good team when they had Gretzky. Each move they made to try to upgrade cost them youth, and they kept trading away prospects and picks like they were about to be dispersed from the league. Marty McSorley played WAY too much during that era. They lacked depth in a big way. Todd Elik was their No. 2 center after they dealt Bernie Nicholls to NYR because of a lack of wingers to play with Gretzky. By the time they got Jari Kurri he was a role player who specialized more on defense. By the time they brought back Jimmy Carson, he was done. The defense had aging vets like Larry Robinson, Mark Hardy, Charlie Huddy. Kelly Hrudey saw a ton of rubber. They also did not have a good backup to Hrudey, and their coaching was abysmal throughout.

It always seemed they were missing a piece throughout his stint in LA.

 

[Killion]

I'd actually argue that LA's D wasn't that bad.
But Bench... geez, Barry Melrose make Jacques Demers look like some kind of tactical mastermind, and no one ever even thought tactics were Demers' strong suit.

... well, now MXD..... Jacques an "instinctual" Coach. Highly creative at times. Went on gut... illiterate so couldnt be going on any "playbook" huh?... granted, follically challenged, his head, but see, his scalp, brain could "breathe"..... Barry Melrose on the other hand... too much hair, too much gel, mousse, spray. Pomade.... which may explain my own lack of.... my god.... I'm just like Barry Melrose.

 

[Hockeyholic]

With a huge difference though -- the '93 Habs were a legit top team in the league, while I'm not even quite sure the '17 Sens were a legit playoff team (though they did play like one in the playoffs at the very least).

Eh Montreal was very lucky to avoid Pittsburgh too. Nonetheless, they were the 03 Ducks except they won a cup.

 

[FrozenJagrt]

Roy didn't feel like losing.

 

[Sentinel]

The Panther: objectively you are right, it was not Gretzky's best game. Subjectively though, when you factor in the Gretzky's wear / tear / inferior team, this WAS his greatest game ever. And also the greatest playoff run ever. It's one thing to lead a high-flying stacked squad when you are at the height of your powers, which is higher than any other peak known to men, the Everest of hockey. It's another thing to give it one last howler. Well, second to last (1997 was the last one).

Whoever compared Montreal to 17 Ottawa is off his rockers. There are virtually NO similarities, except they were both willed into a deep playoff run by a single generational talent. But that's where it ends. Montreal's stars actually underachieved that playoffs: Damphousse, Corson, Recchi, Leclair, etc. all gave Roy little goal support... but he needed none. Ottawa didn't have any stars, especially not in goal.