- Thread starter
- #1
oxnardkingsfan
Active Member
The less said about this game the better but here's what I saw from my seat at Staples anyways. I really think the Kings were in a game they really didn't deserve to be in. Sure they outshot Nashville something like 35 to 18 but I have reservations about the number of Kings shots on goal. Of those 30-something you could count the number of actual scoring chances on one hand and have fingers left over. I also think some of those shots on goal would have actually been high or wide or both had the Nashville goaltender not gloved them. Of the 17 or 18 shots by the Preds about 12 or 13 were good scoring chances. Yeah you can say Quick needs to be better but so can the defense. And not just the defensemen. The forwards have to play defense also.
Best example of this is on the game winning goal. What is the golden rule on faceoffs for centers? If you lose the faceoff you stay with the opposing center. Somehow Kopitar lost sight of Legwand and guess who was wide open to put the rebound back into the net past Quick. Sure you might say Quick should have sent the rebound away from him or not given up the rebound but that isn't what a goaltender thinks about. All his responsibility is is to stop the shot. His defense is supposed to clear any rebounds. Then all of that could have been eliminated had Green cleared the zone after he made the defensive play to steal the puck. His error there was the weak clearing attempt off the boards that the Predators defenseman easily held in the zone. Then the faceoff that was lost cleanly and the easy putback by Legwand.
You can also say the Kings should have played better through the first two periods and not waited until the third to create some solid scoring chances. The penalty kill unit could have also not given up two goals on two shots in the first period also. There were a lot of things the Kings could have done better to not have had to come back in the 3rd period. In the end they lost a game they very well could have won but didn't play well enough to deserve to.
Ox
Best example of this is on the game winning goal. What is the golden rule on faceoffs for centers? If you lose the faceoff you stay with the opposing center. Somehow Kopitar lost sight of Legwand and guess who was wide open to put the rebound back into the net past Quick. Sure you might say Quick should have sent the rebound away from him or not given up the rebound but that isn't what a goaltender thinks about. All his responsibility is is to stop the shot. His defense is supposed to clear any rebounds. Then all of that could have been eliminated had Green cleared the zone after he made the defensive play to steal the puck. His error there was the weak clearing attempt off the boards that the Predators defenseman easily held in the zone. Then the faceoff that was lost cleanly and the easy putback by Legwand.
You can also say the Kings should have played better through the first two periods and not waited until the third to create some solid scoring chances. The penalty kill unit could have also not given up two goals on two shots in the first period also. There were a lot of things the Kings could have done better to not have had to come back in the 3rd period. In the end they lost a game they very well could have won but didn't play well enough to deserve to.
Ox