There are some people out there who consider it to be the greatest seven minutes in cinematic history. Others, who are not willing to go that far, are at least willing to concede it is, perhaps, the greatest seven-minute cameo appearance in a movie. After all, it is one of the most quoted monologues ever performed. We quote it around the GameTime, TBD© offices at least once per week (the Chief more frequently), and the chances are you do the same. It is entirely possible you quote it without even knowing it; you heard someone else quoting it once, liked what you heard, and quickly incorporated it into your repertoire. We would not blame you. Yet, sadly, there are those of you who have absolutely no clue what I am even talking about. Shame. On. You. Well, by now, you should know that we are not going to leave you hanging. [Editor's Note: Who loves you? We do. But a word to the wise: the language in that clip is definitely NSFW! So, we advise you too watch it only if you (1) have headphones, (b) have an office door you can close, or (iii) have been looking for a good way to get fired and plan to go down swinging.] It is important you watch that clip before proceeding. We will wait . . .
. . .
"A, always; B, be; C, closing. Always be closing. Always . . . be closings." I challenge any and all of you to come up with a movie quote more applicable to everyday life (seriously though, please do . . . if the Chief responds to one more of my questions with "Always be closing", I just might snap). At work? Obviously. Right before you sink the game-winning shot in beer pong? Naturally. Getting your buddy pumped up before heading out for the night? You know it. Any wingman worth his weight in gold knows a pregame speech that includes the phrases "brass balls" (wait, what?) and "always be closing" is guaranteed to get your buddy cocked, locked, and ready to rock. Then all you have to do is make sure he does not trip over himself the rest of the night, which, assuming you do not ride the short bus to school, should not be too difficult. [Editor's Note: oh, if only that were true . . .] And while I would love to regale you with tales of nights gone fantastically awesome and horribly wrong, (1) I am not one to kiss and tell, (b) you would not believe me even if I did tell you, and (iii) what I really want to talk about is Los Angeles Kings hockey. That is right, my dear readers, it is your 2010-2011 Los Angeles Kings season preview.
Like with other sports, a hockey team's ultimate success or failure is usually directly correlated to its ability to close. As proof, you need look no further than the last two seasons for the Kings. [Editor's Note: Weird how that worked out, right?] The 2008-2009 Kings finished twenty-sixth out of thirty teams in the NHL, and fourteenth out of fifteen teams in the Western Conference, posting a 34-37-11 record. If we break that record down a little more, we find the Kings were 24-4-2 when leading after two periods (80% win percentage), 6-5-5 when tied after two (37.5%), and 4-28-4 when trailing after two periods (11.1%). Much like their finishing position, the eighty percent win percentage was ranked twenty-fifth in the NHL. While we generally try not to make any excuses around here, it is true that the 2008-2009 Kings were the second youngest team in the league with an average age of 25.658 years old (only Chicago was younger, at 25.470 years old). More than a few games slipped away from this young team late in the game. They were not closers.
So, what made the 2009-2010 Kings one of the biggest surprises of the season? Even though they were still the second youngest team in the NHL at 26.290 years old (again behind Chicago at 26.243 years old . . . and, yes, Chicago did win the Stanley Cup), the Kings learned to always be closing. The Kings finished sixth in the highly-competitive Western Conference, ninth overall, with a 46-27-9, and found the themselves in the playoffs for the first time in eight years. Looking at the same stats as we did above, the Kings were 29-0-2 when leading after two periods (93.5% win percentage), 9-4-4 when tied after two (23.5%), and 8-23-3 when trailing after two (23.5%). That is a double-digit percentage increase in each category. Their ninety-three percent win percentage when leading after two was fifth best in the league, and they were one of only five teams to earn at least one point in every game they led after two (fun fact: Buffalo was the only team to be perfect when leading after two, going 30-0-0). The Kings were better both offensively and defensively, ranking ninth in the league in both categories, and, with their new found ability to close, the Kings were winning the close games late, as opposed to losing. [Editor's Note: Do we thank the 2008-2009 Kings for that or all the girls in the South Bay bars?]
While the 2009-2010 Kings were closers during the regular season, they learned a hard lesson come playoff time: it is harder to close when the stakes are higher. Closing during the regular season is like picking up the USC girl at the bar; two drinks and you are good to go. Closing during the playoffs, however, it like picking up the UCLA girl; it is going to take all you have and then some, but, in the end, the victory is that much sweeter. [Editor's Note: also, disease free . . .] In the six games the Kings played against the Vancouver Canucks in their opening-round match up of the 2010 Stanley Cup playoffs, they were 1-2 when leading after two periods (33% win percentage), 1-1 when tied after two (50%), and 0-1 when trailing at two (0%). That is correct; the Kings were leading or tied after two periods in five of the six games they played, and could not even force a game seven.
As the Kings begin their 2010-2011 campaign, I hope they continue to build on the lessons they learned way back in 2008-2009. [Update: 1-1-0 when trailing after two periods early in the 2010-2011 season.] If they do that, a return to the playoffs is definitely in the cards and they can then begin applying the lessons they learned last year. But they will also face a new challenge this season: expectations. With their success last season, big things are expected from the Kings. They are returning the main nucleus of last years team, with the only notable departure being Alexander Frolov, who was known mostly for his consistently inconsistent play. And while the Kings ultimately missed out on signing prized free agent Ilya Kolvachuk, I am part of the minority who thinks they are actually better off without him. Do not get me wrong, having a legitimate fifty-goal scorer makes any team instantly better, and I would have loved to see Kolvachuk in the purple and black. But had the organization signed him, they would have been handcuffed in their ability to re-sign their core players in the coming years. The Kings, instead, were able to sign a solid defensive-defenseman in Willie Mitchell and partially replace Frolov's (lack of) scoring with Alexei Ponikarovsky, a four-time twenty-goal scorer. Plus, Dean Lombardi still has the cap space to add a top-six forward as the season progresses, while also re-signing future-Norris trophy winner Drew Doughty, future-Hart trophy winner Anze Kopitar, and the rest of their young guns to the long-term contracts they deserve. And it is this core group of players that will need to continue their improvement if the Kings are going to take that next step: a deep run in the playoffs and, at long last, a Stanley Cup championship.
There is no denying that, in order to improve on last season, the Kings will have to improve their five-on-five scoring. While the Kings finished tied for ninth overall in scoring, they were nineteenth overall in five-on-five scoring. And while they are now technically only the tenth youngest team in the NHL, some of that scoring burden will fall on a crop of prospects the Kings have been grooming in their farm system. Do not be misled by the Kings average age of 27.337 years old; they feature nine rookies on their opening day roster. Not all of the rookies will be around for the long-term, but rather are keeping roster spots warm for the likes of Scott Parse and Matt Greene, who will start the season on injured reserve. But the Kings will be expecting some of these prospects to stick around for most of the season and for them to make a non-prospect-like contribution to the stat sheet. Yes, Andrei Loktionov, Brayden Schenn, Kyle Clifford, and/or Jake Muzzin, I am talking to you.
And, of course, no Kings' season preview would be complete with my breakout player of the year prediction. And I was obviously spot on with my last two picks of Wayne Simmonds and Jonathan Quick . . . Okay, okay, I did not pick Simmonds and Quick, and yes, my last two picks (Brian Boyle and Teddy Purcell) did not even finish the season as part of the Kings organization. So, in order to salvage any sort of credibility I might have, I am going with, perhaps, the most obviously pick there is: goaltender Jonathan Bernier. I know what you are thinking: "The back-up goalie?" Please, hear me out. Jonathan Quick was, by far, the biggest surprise of the 2009-2010 season for the Kings. For the first in who knows how long, the Kings had a goaltender who was solid in net, night-in and night-out. Quick posted a phenomenal 39-24-7 record for the Kings with 2.57 goals-against-average and .907 save percentage. But Quick played in seventy-two games last season, was part of the U.S. Olympic team, a looked a little tired down the stretch. Jonathan Bernier was long been considered the Kings "goalie of the future" and, but for Quick's breakout season, probably would have gotten his chance to prove it last year. In a short, late-season call-up, Bernier went 3-0-0 with a 1.30 goals-against-average and .957 save percentage. While Quick enters the season as the undisputed number one goaltender on the depth chart, having Bernier backing him up should reduce his workload. And I expect Bernier to seize the opportunity and be the most productive back-up goaltender in the league. Also, it helps that he just signed a contract extension, so at least I know the organization is planning on keeping him around.
And that, of course, brings us to the final question of every Kings' season preview: where will the Kings finish the season? If you believe the experts, expectations are substantially higher for the Kings entering the season. And, to be honest, this might be the first time I agree. The Kings proved last season that they can play with anybody and team chemistry should not be an issue. With all the experience they gained last year, and two legitimate goaltenders backstopping an improved defense, I am expecting great things out of the 2010-2011 Los Angeles Kings. They will return to the playoffs, this time with home-ice advantage as the Pacific Division. A run to the Western Conference finals, at a minimum, would not be unexpected and, if Dean Lombardi is able to finally add that top-six forward he has long been craving (without sacrificing his long-term plan), the Kings just might finally get the chance to raise the Cup. You heard it here first.
Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go get myself a cup of coffee. And when I get back, maybe I will tell you about that one time on the tram from . . .
