THN picking Sharks in six

[Mattias]

Sportsnet makes no sense to me either:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/l-a-kings-vs-san-jose-sharks-preview-picks/

Best bet: Sharks in six.

Hockey Central insider predictions

Chris Johnston: Kings
Doug MacLean: Kings
Daren Millard: Kings
John Shannon: Kings
Mark Spector: Sharks

Mark Spector is clearly running the show it looks like.

 

[kingsfan]

To be fair...

They went a perfect 8-0 in round 1.

Even more impressive, they nailed the prediction for number of games to win in the Rangers, Black Hawks, and Red Wings series'.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/51514-NHL-Stanley-Cup-Playoff-Preview-Round-1.html

Well then, let's hope they aren't perfect as well in round two.

Sportsnet makes no sense to me either:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/l-a-kings-vs-san-jose-sharks-preview-picks/



Mark Spector is clearly running the show it looks like.

Sportsnet tries hard, they just fail often.

 

[Scottkmlps]

Sportsnet makes no sense to me either:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/l-a-kings-vs-san-jose-sharks-preview-picks/



Mark Spector is clearly running the show it looks like.

Mark Roth, the writer of that article, is picking the Sharks in 6. He just wrote an article on his prediction instead of just saying a teams name.

 

[agentfouser]

The advanced statistical analysis here makes things look pretty grim, to be honest: http://www.jewelsfromthecrown.com/2013/5/14/4329258/sharks-vs-kings-series-preview

It highlights the importance of Kopitar and his linemates in generating possession against the Sharks, and Kopitar and Brown are clearly off-form. Unless those two have healed or somehow improved their play dramatically over the past four days, things could get ugly.

The article also points out how Voynov has struggled against Couture, and Couture had a brilliant series against Vancouver; we'll have to really watch that line. That's a particularly tough matchup for us, because Richards has fared poorly against Thornton in the past.

Finally, there's the Stoll-Pavelski matchup, another one in which our player has traditionally struggled.

Those Sharks in six picks suddenly make a lot more sense.

 

[Reclamation Project]

They don't know anything about hockey in Canada, wouldn't worry about it. Hockey is a California sport.

"The Passion That Connects All Californians!"

 

[etherialone]

They yammer on about how we have met our match on the radio in most of CA. They did the same last year.

I take it for what it is worth.

 

[Ollie Weeks]

Did Button pick us in Round 1?

 

[ScoreZeGoals]

I have no problem with anyone saying the Sharks will win the series, but saying they have more "firepower" than the Kings is a pretty baseless argument. OMG, the Kings struggled to score goals against the best defensive unit in the NHL! No kidding, most teams would.

 

[LAKings88]

Just like when game three last series was LA's last gasp.

 

[ScoreZeGoals]

The advanced statistical analysis here makes things look pretty grim, to be honest: http://www.jewelsfromthecrown.com/2013/5/14/4329258/sharks-vs-kings-series-preview

It highlights the importance of Kopitar and his linemates in generating possession against the Sharks, and Kopitar and Brown are clearly off-form. Unless those two have healed or somehow improved their play dramatically over the past four days, things could get ugly.

The article also points out how Voynov has struggled against Couture, and Couture had a brilliant series against Vancouver; we'll have to really watch that line. That's a particularly tough matchup for us, because Richards has fared poorly against Thornton in the past.

Finally, there's the Stoll-Pavelski matchup, another one in which our player has traditionally struggled.

Those Sharks in six picks suddenly make a lot more sense.

I'm not sure where they are getting their stats, but the conclusion of that article says this:

The Sharks have the best power play in the league.

That is a flat out lie. The Sharks have a very good PP, but it was 7th in the league (.2% better than the 10th place Kings). If they are referring to only the playoffs (which would be ridiculous since they have only played 4 games) their PP is 2nd

 

[BigKing]

Always amusing to see the ESPN power rankings and how the Kings move up or down depending on whether Burnside or LeBrun are ranking.

Of course, Burnside has LA out in 7 games. The man simply does not like the LA Kings.

 

[Asheru]

I'm not sure where they are getting their stats, but the conclusion of that article says this:



That is a flat out lie. The Sharks have a very good PP, but it was 7th in the league (.2% better than the 10th place Kings). If they are referring to only the playoffs (which would be ridiculous since they have only played 4 games) their PP is 2nd

It's in the previous part of the article. They mean best at generating shots on the power play. That's a more reliable indicator of a strong power play unit than just conversion rate (which gets crazy in small samples due to luck and bounces).

Where they get that stat is provided for in a link (http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/teamstats.php?disp=1&db=201213&sit=5v4&sort=SF60&sortdir=DESC).

 

[ScoreZeGoals]

It's in the previous part of the article. They mean best at generating shots on the power play. That's a more reliable indicator of a strong power play unit than just conversion rate (which gets crazy in small samples due to luck and bounces).

Where they get that stat is provided for in a link (http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/teamstats.php?disp=1&db=201213&sit=5v4&sort=SF60&sortdir=DESC).

He says the Sharks were dogged by "poor shooting luck all season on the power play and it looks like that has turned around". I'm sorry, I find this argument laughable. You don't have "poor shooting luck" for a PP over an entire 48 game stretch, that team just takes a lot of easily defended shots. I also find it ridiculous to make a statement that they have turned it around after one four game stretch. Might they have turned it around? Sure, but four games does not tell you that

 

[AstroDan]

If they are referring to only the playoffs (which would be ridiculous since they have only played 4 games) their PP is 2nd

He may be refering to game 3 and 4, SJ had 3 PPG each.
All that said, The Kings are NOT the Canucks! You guys are the Champs and the road to the cup goes through LA, IMHO. Should be an edge of the seat series full of win!

 

[Ron*]

Then there is this:

No. 4 Los Angeles vs. No 6. San Jose

Halford: Kings in 6
Brough: Kings in 5
Yerdon: Kings in 6
O’Brien: Kings in 6
Dadoun: Kings in 7
Tucker: Kings in 6

Jesus.

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2013/05/14/2013-stanley-cup-playoffs-phts-round-2-picks/related/

*Yes I know the no. 4 for the Kings is wrong but I quote them as I see them, PHT has needed a typo editor for YEARS.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

Then there is this:


Halford: Kings in 6

The Judas Priest guy?

**** yeah! We have metal rooting for us

 

[spintheblackcircle]

The Judas Priest guy?

**** yeah! We have metal rooting for us

You got another thing comin'