<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for The Throne Room</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com</link>
	<description>Hockeyanalysis.com's Kings team blog by J. Smith</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:29:22 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Will Kopitar score 40? by puremetal33</title>
		<link>http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2010/03/07/will-kopitar-score-40/#comment-6469</link>
		<dc:creator>puremetal33</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:16:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/?p=166#comment-6469</guid>
		<description>William has an appointment today and may get clearance to participate in contact drills, with a return in game play very soon. Terry Murray has already said that when Williams returns, the Smyth-Kopitar-Williams line will be put back together as it was early in the season.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>William has an appointment today and may get clearance to participate in contact drills, with a return in game play very soon. Terry Murray has already said that when Williams returns, the Smyth-Kopitar-Williams line will be put back together as it was early in the season.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Will Kopitar score 40? by BCapp</title>
		<link>http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2010/03/07/will-kopitar-score-40/#comment-6468</link>
		<dc:creator>BCapp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:11:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/?p=166#comment-6468</guid>
		<description>Hey,

Leaf fan here so I'll try to put in that "don't follow the Kings regularly" opinion.

I have known been keeping an eye on Kopitar for probably about 2 years now.  But I was disappointed in his numbers last year and avoided him in fantasy drafts.  Thats when I noticed he started ice cold, and without it he had a good season in 08-09.

I think Kopitar will reach the pace he is on now which is 85 points or so.  I think the spread of those points will depend on who he plays with.  Playing with a guy like Smyth, he'll see more assists as Smyth'll get down and dirty and finish his goals around the net.  If williams returns, Kopitar's G's will increase to a higher pace.

My guess is something along the lines of:

37 G 48 A 85 pts</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey,</p>
<p>Leaf fan here so I&#8217;ll try to put in that &#8220;don&#8217;t follow the Kings regularly&#8221; opinion.</p>
<p>I have known been keeping an eye on Kopitar for probably about 2 years now.  But I was disappointed in his numbers last year and avoided him in fantasy drafts.  Thats when I noticed he started ice cold, and without it he had a good season in 08-09.</p>
<p>I think Kopitar will reach the pace he is on now which is 85 points or so.  I think the spread of those points will depend on who he plays with.  Playing with a guy like Smyth, he&#8217;ll see more assists as Smyth&#8217;ll get down and dirty and finish his goals around the net.  If williams returns, Kopitar&#8217;s G&#8217;s will increase to a higher pace.</p>
<p>My guess is something along the lines of:</p>
<p>37 G 48 A 85 pts</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Passing on Kovalchuk Was the Right Move by puremetal33</title>
		<link>http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2010/02/04/why-passing-on-kovalchuk-was-the-right-move/#comment-5887</link>
		<dc:creator>puremetal33</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 18:26:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/?p=162#comment-5887</guid>
		<description>Hi Ian,
I think if Atlanta would've given Kovalchuk up for that, it would've been a done deal a week ago. Rich Hammond reported &lt;a href="http://lakingsinsider.com/?p=3934" rel="nofollow"&gt;HERE&lt;/a&gt; that Atlanta was asking for one of Brown, Johnson or Simmonds. Given Johnson's history with Lombardi I thought he would be the linchpin of any deal for certain. Apparently though, Lombardi isn't willing to part with Johnson in what would essentially be a rental deal. Purcell has never really led up to expectation and at 25 is the equivalent of a spare part. Realistically, if you're trying to find an equivalent to New Jersey's package on the Kings' org chart, you're probably looking at Johnson/Moller/Schenn(or Hickey)+ pick(s). As much as I tend to think Johnson is expendable, that just seems too steep a price for a guy who is likely to head for Russia in several months.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Ian,<br />
I think if Atlanta would&#8217;ve given Kovalchuk up for that, it would&#8217;ve been a done deal a week ago. Rich Hammond reported <a href="http://lakingsinsider.com/?p=3934" rel="nofollow">HERE</a> that Atlanta was asking for one of Brown, Johnson or Simmonds. Given Johnson&#8217;s history with Lombardi I thought he would be the linchpin of any deal for certain. Apparently though, Lombardi isn&#8217;t willing to part with Johnson in what would essentially be a rental deal. Purcell has never really led up to expectation and at 25 is the equivalent of a spare part. Realistically, if you&#8217;re trying to find an equivalent to New Jersey&#8217;s package on the Kings&#8217; org chart, you&#8217;re probably looking at Johnson/Moller/Schenn(or Hickey)+ pick(s). As much as I tend to think Johnson is expendable, that just seems too steep a price for a guy who is likely to head for Russia in several months.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Passing on Kovalchuk Was the Right Move by Ian</title>
		<link>http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2010/02/04/why-passing-on-kovalchuk-was-the-right-move/#comment-5885</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 17:39:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/?p=162#comment-5885</guid>
		<description>if we look at what the Devils gave up and then look at something comparable off the Kings then perhaps it may be reasonable to say that Moller, Purcell, Johnson and a pick would've got this done.  it's pure speculation on my part but that looks like a deal that the Kings could've done and not seen a blip in their production this season.  isn't something like that reasonable?  again, it's pure speculation on my part.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>if we look at what the Devils gave up and then look at something comparable off the Kings then perhaps it may be reasonable to say that Moller, Purcell, Johnson and a pick would&#8217;ve got this done.  it&#8217;s pure speculation on my part but that looks like a deal that the Kings could&#8217;ve done and not seen a blip in their production this season.  isn&#8217;t something like that reasonable?  again, it&#8217;s pure speculation on my part.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 8 Straight: Duck Hunting by BCapp</title>
		<link>http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2010/02/05/8-straight-duck-hunting/#comment-5883</link>
		<dc:creator>BCapp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:47:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/?p=163#comment-5883</guid>
		<description>A Leaf fan here.  I really love watching the kings.  They are everything you want to see in an up and coming team.  While they are definitely contenders this year, no doubt about it, I am just psyched to watch them over the next 2-3 years.

With guys like Schenn, Mikus, Bernier coming through the system and so many others; Kopitar reaching his potential; and Doughty and Johnson probably IMPROVING for another 3-4 years before they reach their potential they are going to be just crazy.

I am calling a cup to LA in the next 4 years.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A Leaf fan here.  I really love watching the kings.  They are everything you want to see in an up and coming team.  While they are definitely contenders this year, no doubt about it, I am just psyched to watch them over the next 2-3 years.</p>
<p>With guys like Schenn, Mikus, Bernier coming through the system and so many others; Kopitar reaching his potential; and Doughty and Johnson probably IMPROVING for another 3-4 years before they reach their potential they are going to be just crazy.</p>
<p>I am calling a cup to LA in the next 4 years.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Kings Overcome Officiating Incompetence for Shootout Win by PeterS</title>
		<link>http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2010/01/22/kings-overcome-officiating-incompetence-for-shootout-win/#comment-5680</link>
		<dc:creator>PeterS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:44:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/?p=156#comment-5680</guid>
		<description>Nice summary. As a Sabres fan (and the local blogger here) on the east coast, I couldn't stay up to watch the game, but did watch most of the first period. While the Sabres out-played the Kings early, the Kings had the better play late in the period. 

I didn't see the game, but did watch the highlights on NHL.com. I disagree with your comment on Vanek's goal. Vanek and Doughtry were both pushing and shoving in front of the net. What Vanek did to Doughtry was no worse than what he was doing back. To call it a cross-check in the back is overstating. Could it have been a penalty? Perhaps, but to call it "bad officiating" I don't agree. Also, after Vanek scored, Doughtry got up and cheaply slashed Vanek across the ankles and had to limp off the ice. He was called for 2 minutes for it, but slashing players after the play is over should call for a harsher penalty in my view (2 minutes + 10 minute misconduct?) Maybe that's the bad officiating?

The goal that was called back, the NHL was being consistent there...since there is no way to really tell "intent" from a video replay, they typically call it "no goal" if the glove strikes the puck while it was moving in the direction of the goal. That was the case here. I would agree with you, I don't think Moller was intending to hit it in with his glove...but he DID hit it in with his glove while it was moving towards the net. The NHL was very consistent with past calls on making that call. If it was my team, I probably would have been annoyed by the call too, but when I saw it, I thought it would be overturned, and it was. (I get those right 9 out of 10.) The second reviewed LA goal was clearly a goal, and was rightly called as such.

Overall though, from what I saw the Kings played a very strong game, and certainly deserved the two points. (Though you could easily argue either team played well enough to win.) Quick made some great saves along the way, too. 

Also, I need to compliment the two Kings shooters that scored in overtime, extremely nice moves in each case, especially the first one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice summary. As a Sabres fan (and the local blogger here) on the east coast, I couldn&#8217;t stay up to watch the game, but did watch most of the first period. While the Sabres out-played the Kings early, the Kings had the better play late in the period. </p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t see the game, but did watch the highlights on NHL.com. I disagree with your comment on Vanek&#8217;s goal. Vanek and Doughtry were both pushing and shoving in front of the net. What Vanek did to Doughtry was no worse than what he was doing back. To call it a cross-check in the back is overstating. Could it have been a penalty? Perhaps, but to call it &#8220;bad officiating&#8221; I don&#8217;t agree. Also, after Vanek scored, Doughtry got up and cheaply slashed Vanek across the ankles and had to limp off the ice. He was called for 2 minutes for it, but slashing players after the play is over should call for a harsher penalty in my view (2 minutes + 10 minute misconduct?) Maybe that&#8217;s the bad officiating?</p>
<p>The goal that was called back, the NHL was being consistent there&#8230;since there is no way to really tell &#8220;intent&#8221; from a video replay, they typically call it &#8220;no goal&#8221; if the glove strikes the puck while it was moving in the direction of the goal. That was the case here. I would agree with you, I don&#8217;t think Moller was intending to hit it in with his glove&#8230;but he DID hit it in with his glove while it was moving towards the net. The NHL was very consistent with past calls on making that call. If it was my team, I probably would have been annoyed by the call too, but when I saw it, I thought it would be overturned, and it was. (I get those right 9 out of 10.) The second reviewed LA goal was clearly a goal, and was rightly called as such.</p>
<p>Overall though, from what I saw the Kings played a very strong game, and certainly deserved the two points. (Though you could easily argue either team played well enough to win.) Quick made some great saves along the way, too. </p>
<p>Also, I need to compliment the two Kings shooters that scored in overtime, extremely nice moves in each case, especially the first one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on A Huge Character Win by Twitter Trackbacks for The Throne Room » Blog Archive » A Huge Character Win [hockeyanalysis.com] on Topsy.com</title>
		<link>http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2009/12/08/a-huge-character-win/#comment-5084</link>
		<dc:creator>Twitter Trackbacks for The Throne Room » Blog Archive » A Huge Character Win [hockeyanalysis.com] on Topsy.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 08:24:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/?p=149#comment-5084</guid>
		<description>[...] First Tweet: 5 minutes ago       kingsthroneroom The Throne Room    A Huge Character Win: http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2009/12/08/a-huge-character-win/ http://bit.ly/4FSxRF   retweet [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] First Tweet: 5 minutes ago       kingsthroneroom The Throne Room    A Huge Character Win: <a href="http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2009/12/08/a-huge-character-win/" rel="nofollow">http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2009/12/08/a-huge-character-win/</a> <a href="http://bit.ly/4FSxRF" rel="nofollow">http://bit.ly/4FSxRF</a>   retweet [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on A Huge Character Win by Twitted by KingsThroneRoom</title>
		<link>http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2009/12/08/a-huge-character-win/#comment-5083</link>
		<dc:creator>Twitted by KingsThroneRoom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 08:22:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/?p=149#comment-5083</guid>
		<description>[...] This post was Twitted by KingsThroneRoom [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was Twitted by KingsThroneRoom [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Simmonds and Greene Star as Kings Win in Oil Country by Gucci</title>
		<link>http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2009/11/25/simmonds-and-greene-star-as-kings-win-in-oil-country/#comment-5034</link>
		<dc:creator>Gucci</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 09:06:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/?p=144#comment-5034</guid>
		<description>good</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>good</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Schenn to Debut Tonight by thewordbird</title>
		<link>http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/2009/11/26/schenn-to-debut-tonight/#comment-5031</link>
		<dc:creator>thewordbird</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 07:35:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kings.hockeyanalysis.com/?p=145#comment-5031</guid>
		<description>wow, very odd - and cool.  I am a big WHL fan and have seen Schenn play a number of times.  Good post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>wow, very odd - and cool.  I am a big WHL fan and have seen Schenn play a number of times.  Good post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
