But bottom line, when it's all said and done, Kings have 2 Cups in 50 years, and Ducks have 1 in 24. Difference is (as a former Kings fan, since they've been around forever) I'll root for the Kings if the Ducks are out of it. I understand the opposite isn't possible.

I'll take my chances with the Ducks. Yes, Kesler, Getzlaf and Perry are getting older. As is Quick, Carter, etc. But I look at the D, and our G, and know they're going to be relevant for the foreseeable future.
- quackup

I do have a genuine question for you though as you seem to be a pretty reasonable guy and don't come on just to do the troll thing. I'm curious as to be thought process behind growing up supporting a team and then completely flipping loyalties once something new pops up. How can someone who is a true fan just not be a fan of that team anymore one day? Like, emotionally you just woke up and that was it? Lol. It's totally not how I operate, so I'm curious as to how that whole process works? How long were you a Kings fan?

[quote=verwustung]Why ever root for a team like the Quacks with such a pathetic and unknowledgable fan base where the only icing they know is the kind they lick off a cupcake. On top of that, the team was named after a silly Disney movie and has always employed cheap shot artists, divers, and pure goons as part of their roster year after year. The Quacks got lucky picking up Selanne when many thought he was done and getting Pronger who was whining about living in Edmonton. They never put anything together, a complete team, like the Kings; and the Quacks will never have the glory, the mistique, and the legends of the Kings. Eventually they will move thankfully because Quack fans are not hockey fans but simply people who go to an Italian Opera and can't understand any of the words but the costumes are cool.

There are a few Kings fans who are pre-Gretzky. Personally, I was at the Fabulous Forum (before Great Western) right after it opened. I'm a long time (used to be Kings now Ducks) fan. My thoughts on Kings fans is that they fall into three camps:
a.) Jumped on the bandwagon when Gretzky joined them in the late 80s
b.) Jumped on the bandwagon when they won the Stanley Cup in 2012
c.) Love the Kings because they love their Raider-esque colors.
I find Kings fans who are either b or c (the majority of the fans) to be as unknowledgeable as any fans in the league.
As far as the glory, "mistique" (actually spelled mystique, moron), and glory, are you referring to the 45 years of mostly mediocrity? Sure you have 2 cups in 50 years. Ducks have 1 in 24 years. Speak to me in another 26 years. In the meantime, enjoy your cocaine and MDMA since we now know that Kings don't golf when they miss the playoff, they party their asses off.
- DiggerCal

That's how we roll female dog! Play hard and party hard. How long did it take your feeble mind to figure that out. So, the next time you are at the Honda Center not cheering your team in an empty arena because you are straddling your boyfriend (likely this "quackup", guy), think of all those great older Kings fans who have shared with me the wonderful stories of Luc's first game and Dave Taylor punching Gretzky before he was a King, and all those guys who knew Jack Kent Cooke; and remind yourself what a pathetic existance you lead.

Side note: go ahead and correct my spelling and grammar all you want. I am usually typing fast and make errors, don't give a (frank).

I do have a genuine question for you though as you seem to be a pretty reasonable guy and don't come on just to do the troll thing. I'm curious as to be thought process behind growing up supporting a team and then completely flipping loyalties once something new pops up. How can someone who is a true fan just not be a fan of that team anymore one day? Like, emotionally you just woke up and that was it? Lol. It's totally not how I operate, so I'm curious as to how that whole process works? How long were you a Kings fan?
- Woodysdemise

He's reasonably stupid.

I do have a genuine question for you though as you seem to be a pretty reasonable guy and don't come on just to do the troll thing. I'm curious as to be thought process behind growing up supporting a team and then completely flipping loyalties once something new pops up. How can someone who is a true fan just not be a fan of that team anymore one day? Like, emotionally you just woke up and that was it? Lol. It's totally not how I operate, so I'm curious as to how that whole process works? How long were you a Kings fan?
- Woodysdemise

My thoughts exactly! Each one of us could have walked away when the Ducks were hatched. I don't get that kind of disloyalty when you walked away from the Kings. Some of you guys are pretty reasonable so after countless failures by the Ducks why not leave them now?

I do have a genuine question for you though as you seem to be a pretty reasonable guy and don't come on just to do the troll thing. I'm curious as to be thought process behind growing up supporting a team and then completely flipping loyalties once something new pops up. How can someone who is a true fan just not be a fan of that team anymore one day? Like, emotionally you just woke up and that was it? Lol. It's totally not how I operate, so I'm curious as to how that whole process works? How long were you a Kings fan?
- Woodysdemise

Interesting question. I was more of a baseball fan. I grew up in the LA area, so of course rooted for the Dodgers and to a lesser extent Kings (played baseball, so naturally my first love). Even after I moved to Orange County, still a Dodger/Kings fan. Baseball loyalty changed with the Ron Cey/Steve Garvey/Davey Lopes departure from the Dodgers in 1982 (or so). Broke my heart to see them leave. They left because the Dodgers didn't want to pay them. Saw Gene Autry trying his hardest to field a winner with the Angels, bringing in Reggie Jackson, Don Baylor, etc., so a new loyalty was born. Bought Angel season seats in 1983 with a buddy of mine. Had those 2 seats until 2015. Hard to believe.

A friend decided to buy Duck tickets their first year, and asked if I wanted to be a 1/4 partner. Went in on the tickets. The rest is history. Became a full SSH in 1999 or so and still am to this day. I'll root for the Kings if the Ducks are out of it. But my loyalty is with the Orange County team. And true fans we are. We go to every game.

Kings fans are, for the most part, okay. I understand the quack hatred. It's people like Verwustung that give the fan base a really bad name though.

Interesting question. I was more of a baseball fan. I grew up in the LA area, so of course rooted for the Dodgers and to a lesser extent Kings (played baseball, so naturally my first love). Even after I moved to Orange County, still a Dodger/Kings fan. Baseball loyalty changed with the Ron Cey/Steve Garvey/Davey Lopes departure from the Dodgers in 1982 (or so). Broke my heart to see them leave. They left because the Dodgers didn't want to pay them. Saw Gene Autry trying his hardest to field a winner with the Angels, bringing in Reggie Jackson, Don Baylor, etc., so a new loyalty was born. Bought Angel season seats in 1983 with a buddy of mine. Had those 2 seats until 2015. Hard to believe.

A friend decided to buy Duck tickets their first year, and asked if I wanted to be a 1/4 partner. Went in on the tickets. The rest is history. Became a full SSH in 1999 or so and still am to this day. I'll root for the Kings if the Ducks are out of it. But my loyalty is with the Orange County team. And true fans we are. We go to every game.

Kings fans are, for the most part, okay. I understand the quack hatred. It's people like Verwustung that give the fan base a really bad name though.
- quackup

What a wonderful story! It makes my heart melt.

1983 huh? You must be getting along in years there, paps. It's probably not right for me to taunt you then. I take back all the names I've called you.

Interesting question. I was more of a baseball fan. I grew up in the LA area, so of course rooted for the Dodgers and to a lesser extent Kings (played baseball, so naturally my first love). Even after I moved to Orange County, still a Dodger/Kings fan. Baseball loyalty changed with the Ron Cey/Steve Garvey/Davey Lopes departure from the Dodgers in 1982 (or so). Broke my heart to see them leave. They left because the Dodgers didn't want to pay them. Saw Gene Autry trying his hardest to field a winner with the Angels, bringing in Reggie Jackson, Don Baylor, etc., so a new loyalty was born. Bought Angel season seats in 1983 with a buddy of mine. Had those 2 seats until 2015. Hard to believe.

A friend decided to buy Duck tickets their first year, and asked if I wanted to be a 1/4 partner. Went in on the tickets. The rest is history. Became a full SSH in 1999 or so and still am to this day. I'll root for the Kings if the Ducks are out of it. But my loyalty is with the Orange County team. And true fans we are. We go to every game.

Kings fans are, for the most part, okay. I understand the quack hatred. It's people like Verwustung that give the fan base a really bad name though.
- quackup

I actually really appreciate the explanation. Sounds like you're a very committed fan who just happened to switch loyalties along the way. Just because I can't envision a scenario for myself that would lead to me being able to switch allegiances doesn't mean that others don't have legitimate reasons for doing so. And frankly that's awesome you go to all of their games. Wish I was able to do the same with all the Kings games. The sport of hockey needs as many legitimate, devoted fans as it can get while fighting for any shred of attention amongst the other more popular, watched sports. Kings and ducks fans should appreciate eachother as we're the ones who make this sport successful in an insanely competitive Southern California sports market. Hockey is the greatest sport there is in my opinion. Period. Whenever the ducks or kings succeed, it only helps to grow the game more.

What a wonderful story! It makes my heart melt.

1983 huh? You must be getting along in years there, paps. It's probably not right for me to taunt you then. I take back all the names I've called you.
- verwustung

Not as old as you might think. No Medicare or Social Security for me just yet. With age comes wisdom. There's hope I guess.

I actually really appreciate the explanation. Sounds like you're a very committed fan who just happened to switch loyalties along the way. Just because I can't envision a scenario for myself that would lead to me being able to switch allegiances doesn't mean that others don't have legitimate reasons for doing so. And frankly that's awesome you go to all of their games. Wish I was able to do the same with all the Kings games. The sport of hockey needs as many legitimate, devoted fans as it can get while fighting for any shred of attention amongst the other more popular, watched sports. Kings and ducks fans should appreciate eachother as we're the ones who make this sport successful in an insanely competitive Southern California sports market. Hockey is the greatest sport there is in my opinion. Period. Whenever the ducks or kings succeed, it only helps to grow the game more.
- Woodysdemise

Thanks. Have friends that are Kings fans. We give each other a bad time. I insist they wear their Kings jerseys if an extra ticket becomes available and I invite them. Wear the jersey with pride. I think we can agree on one thing though. We all hate the Sharks.

There are a few Kings fans who are pre-Gretzky. Personally, I was at the Fabulous Forum (before Great Western) right after it opened. I'm a long time (used to be Kings now Ducks) fan. My thoughts on Kings fans is that they fall into three camps:
a.) Jumped on the bandwagon when Gretzky joined them in the late 80s
b.) Jumped on the bandwagon when they won the Stanley Cup in 2012
c.) Love the Kings because they love their Raider-esque colors.
I find Kings fans who are either b or c (the majority of the fans) to be as unknowledgeable as any fans in the league..
- DiggerCal

This is a flat out lie and just trying to be funny I think? I know a lot of Kings fans, and everyone of them have been Kings fans from day one, never jumped from team to team, and ALL of them liked the Kings the second they got into hockey. NONE of them like them because of ANY of the reason you listed and I am in a lot of Kings groups and NONE of the thousands of fans in them got into the Kings only because of those reason you listed. I have a lot of Ducks friends though that barely know about anything Ducks related prior to 2007 and you don't hear a thing from them until the playoffs. I will say the only fans I see that know very little about hockey are the new female fans, but I will say a lot of Kings fans that are female know a hell of a lot about hockey and have been fans longer then I have, which was 90. I was born in 84 and got into hockey they second I saw my first Kings game when I was 6. And just FYI my favorite players growing up were Jagr, Fluery and Cory Millen.

So ESPN pretty much wiping their hands of hockey writers... for shame, but I probably wont even notice.

So ESPN pretty much wiping their hands of hockey writers... for shame, but I probably wont even notice.
- Stu17

Yeah, ESPN isn't the force they used to be. They've been bleeding viewership for a while now and seem ready to take one giant step backwards. I'm interested to see what sports channel or whatever other entity is going to step in to begin to take their place. They had a solid run at the top, nobody stays there forever.

I took it as going to the net with the puck not going to the net to create traffic. No point in arguing what we thought he meant so I'll just wait until the season starts to see what he meant. Blake had also mentioned the desire to get shots off from high-danger areas, which would be a drastic break from the fling-it-on-net style of Sutter... I'm enthused about what it can be,
- Stu17

I considered that as a possibility, and you could be right, but that's also a hard thing to do and it's much easier in most cases to do option #2 and give the puck to a teammate (particularly a defenseman) and then go to the net without the puck. Either way, and this gets back to my first sentence, it's still not a creative system. Going to the net with the puck is not playing creatively. It's an improvement over the ol' point shot and going to the net is a good thing, but it seems like a similar attempt to create scoring through brute force that they had before and that tired the players out (physically and mentally). When you have the puck in the circles and you're being told to send it to the point or being told to go to the net with it, you're still being told what to do, instead of being encouraged to think for yourself and be creative. That's the concern that I have. I'm concerned that the players aren't going to enjoy Stevens' system much more than they did Sutter's, and, when you don't enjoy the system, you get what we saw this past season.

I considered that as a possibility, and you could be right, but that's also a hard thing to do and it's much easier in most cases to do option #2 and give the puck to a teammate (particularly a defenseman) and then go to the net without the puck. Either way, and this gets back to my first sentence, it's still not a creative system. Going to the net with the puck is not playing creatively. It's an improvement over the ol' point shot and going to the net is a good thing, but it seems like a similar attempt to create scoring through brute force that they had before and that tired the players out (physically and mentally). When you have the puck in the circles and you're being told to send it to the point or being told to go to the net with it, you're still being told what to do, instead of being encouraged to think for yourself and be creative. That's the concern that I have. I'm concerned that the players aren't going to enjoy Stevens' system much more than they did Sutter's, and, when you don't enjoy the system, you get what we saw this past season.
- Osprey

I see what you're saying, but enjoyment can only be considered as a bonus of being a professional athlete. While taking it to the net and getting pounded physically might not be enjoyable, it is highly effective in attaining what they as players are paid to do, namely score goals and win games. Hell, just the threat of taking it to the net will make defenders droop closer to the crease and thus create an opening for other players or just cause general havoc around the goalie, which would be a positive in our favor. I get that they might not enjoy it but they are paid to get results. Obviously every play will not go to the net, but as I said, you do it a few times in the first 20 minutes of play and by the last 20 defenders' heads will be on a swivel.

And I think some winning would make the medicine go down a little easier.

So ESPN pretty much wiping their hands of hockey writers... for shame, but I probably wont even notice.
- Stu17

From what I understand...their ratings are plummeting and they have been forced into a lot of layoffs. That's what happens when you play the political/social juatice game and alienate a lot of people.

I considered that as a possibility, and you could be right, but that's also a hard thing to do and it's much easier in most cases to do option #2 and give the puck to a teammate (particularly a defenseman) and then go to the net without the puck. Either way, and this gets back to my first sentence, it's still not a creative system. Going to the net with the puck is not playing creatively. It's an improvement over the ol' point shot and going to the net is a good thing, but it seems like a similar attempt to create scoring through brute force that they had before and that tired the players out (physically and mentally). When you have the puck in the circles and you're being told to send it to the point or being told to go to the net with it, you're still being told what to do, instead of being encouraged to think for yourself and be creative. That's the concern that I have. I'm concerned that the players aren't going to enjoy Stevens' system much more than they did Sutter's, and, when you don't enjoy the system, you get what we saw this past season.
- Osprey

Enjoyment comes with winning. Anyway, there is the beleif that what Stevens is doing now will result in more grade A opportunities and skill players having the puck on their stick on zone entries.

From what I understand...their ratings are plummeting and they have been forced into a lot of layoffs. That's what happens when you play the political/social juatice game and alienate a lot of people.
- verwustung

That may be, but IMO they've become an all-football all-the-time network... and I could give two poops about the NFL.

That may be, but IMO they've become an all-football all-the-time network... and I could give two poops about the NFL.
- Stu17

NFL, a bunch of overgrown, fat monsters falling all over each other before having to stand up for an hour. Don't know; haven't really watched ESPN for ages but I'm sure Barry Melrose gets his 3 minutes.

According the John Hoven something big is going to go down with the kings on Saturday.

Have no clue what it could be. 🤔

According the John Hoven something big is going to go down with the kings on Saturday.

Have no clue what it could be. 🤔
- KINGS67

That dude is always throwing out spitballs hoping that something sticks. I'll believe it when I see it.

It seems as though Futa may've interviewed for the Buffalo GM position the other day. That seems kind of weird after just taking the Assistant GM job with LA, but perhaps he took it with the stipulation that he still be allowed to do exactly this and interview for vacant GM positions.

http://www.hockeybuzz.com...-Futa-In-The-Door/6/84793

That dude is always throwing out spitballs hoping that something sticks. I'll believe it when I see it.
- verwustung

Yeah I won't believe it either until I see something. We'll see