Winning and Awesome

30 Jan, 2010 | by Keith

Back in studio to talk a little LA Kings hockey, and we just couldn’t think of an appropriate title. Why? The Los Angeles Kings have been doing some winning as of late and are playing like a solid NHL hockey team. In this show we talk about the overall play of the Los Angeles Kings, spend some time on the Ilya Kovalchuk situation and talk about Connie’s new blog. Sit back and enjoy!

 
icon for podpress  Winning and Awesome [28:41m]: Play Now | Play in Popup

Bookmark and Share
  • bgdnbln
    my only question ...is kovalchuk a team player or are we looking at the one man show again if we got him???no way do you give up simmer..i could see fro/purcell or even i know ill get greif for this johnson .his play on the blue line has not been that great i thought that DL's comments would light a fire in him to pick it up..i also dont think this late into the season is the right time to bring in another goaltender this team understands what they have in net and how to play the game for either of the guys in there ...
  • Kovalchuk is the captain of the Thrashers so he has to be somewhat of a team guy, right? Frolov and Purcell will not be enough to get this deal done (even if it's only as a rental).

    If I'm Waddell, I try to get Stoll, one of Schenn or Loktoinov and a 1st. Let's hope Deano doesn't go that far for a rental.
  • Damn it Keith... I read a few comments wondering if he's Kovalchuk is a team guy and I have my "he's the captain" comment all lined up. Then you go and ruin it. Thanks alot.

    Like you said in the comments for the Maple Leaf'd video, I have no idea why Waddell wont let teams negotiate with Kovalchuk before the trade. Wouldnt that increase his trade value exponentially if we knew that it wasnt going to be for 2 or 3 months? Maybe the KHL is a REAL option that NHL teams cant compete with?
  • Radulov was a potential big star to jump to the KHL in his prime. I highly doubt Kovi would. I just don't see it.
  • collector Joe
    you would give up Fro and Purcell, but will Atlanta want the both of them. If i was Waddell, i would hang up the phone and on you and then burst out in laughter. Fro I can see being a major piece in the trade, but Johnson would unfortunately have to be included. there is no way Atlanta would be that stupid to take only Purcell and Fro. From what i have been hearing as of late, Hickey and Teubert are also being mentioned. personally, i think we would be giving up too much. Not only would we lose JJ, who is an already established NHL defensemen and olympian, we would also be losing two more defesemen who are primed and ready to almost step in. (Hickey more than Teubert). If we can persuade Atlanta to select a different person other than JJ and also include Hickey, I am all for the trade. Otherwise, other options are still available that i think will work much better (without having to break up the team chemistry) I suggest we pursue Kovie in the offseason if we are unsuccessful before the deadline that is of course he is still available!
  • bgdnbln
    ....fro...purcell....jack...dont care what order you put them in .....these are theyguys im not worried about losing even moeller.......do i think kovie is worth it NO im not sold on him being on the team but that was the question who would you give any combo of those...look i sit in the stands and watch the so called proven def man bobble puck after puck and turn it over ..i sit and watch twinkle toes and wonder what blunder hes going to do next....it sickens me to wonder where the player that before he got hurt went ..he looks lost i was glad with DLS comments hoping he would wake up... i like him but whats in his head most of this season has the D suffered since this yrs moves yes i still would rather bolster the D than go for more scorers but thats why im in the stands .. drinking to my opinons go kings go
  • By the way, if I sound terrible (which is probably the case) it's because I've been feeling terrible all week. Ugh.
  • In thinking about our discussion on the goalie situation, I'm not convinced that we are totally screwed with Ersberg as a backup going into the playoffs. Quick has shown he can do the work load and Ersberg is probably one of the better backups in the league. I don't know if a goalie is what we need.
  • I disagree; there are vets in the defensive end and with the forwards. The Kings have two kids manning the net. Bring in a vet! But that's only if they're GOING for it.
  • Let's take a look at the last few Stanley Cup Champions. Carolina won in '05-'06 with Cam Ward and John Grahame (Ward was a rookie). Anaheim won in '06-'07 with JS Giguere and Ilya Bryzgalov. Detroit won in '07-'08 with Osgood and Hasek. Pittsburgh won it in '08-'09 with Fleury and Garon (yes, that Garon).

    It's not absolutely necessary to have a veteran to backup Quick. The best point is Cam Ward in 2006. Did anybody expect him to perform that well AND win the Conn Smyth? Quick has bailed us out game in game out. I'm not sure the need is there for a vet.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Chris on Team 990 Montreal Subscribe via iTunes View All

Bad Behavior has blocked 16767 access attempts in the last 7 days.