A two-month or so lockout might be the best thing for the Kings' chances of a repeat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ice24

Why not one more.

---

I can think of a few reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuxBeingU

I would rather have the season start on time and the Kings not make the playoffs than lose 2 month of the season. You have to look big picture. Kings have a ton of new fans and will lose most of them with a lockout same goes for the NHL as whole.
The NHL and NHLPA need to settle for the good of the game.

---

If two months without hockey is enough for the Kings to lose "most" of their "ton of new fans", I'll bet missing the playoffs would be too.

I thought this was discussed already in another thread.

As much as i don't want to see it, I belive it would help with any hunger issues that might exist as residual from the hangover.

I support this "two month lockout" thread.

I am confident my candidate will win.

Sorry but, I cannot see any advantage to a lockout. To me, it's about as smart as when TM pulled Quick that time when he was on such a roll.
Finally these guys developed that chemistry and self confidence needed to carry them to that cup. I feel that a layoff would be a curse on that winning attitude.
I'm also wondering what DTV will do about their automatic CI withdrawl from our accounts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taz42

Sorry but, I cannot see any advantage to a lockout. To me, it's about as smart as when TM pulled Quick that time when he was on such a roll.
Finally these guys developed that chemistry and self confidence needed to carry them to that cup. I feel that a layoff would be a curse on that winning attitude.

---

If you don't want to acknowledge the potential advantages to a lockout (extra rest after a long season, more time for Quick to recover, no lack of chemistry or breaking in new players with EXACT same roster returning while every other team has changes), that's fine, but you then in the same post can't go creating some voodoo disadvantage. Why would the team's winning attitude change when something they have no control over happens to them, as it does equally to the other 29 teams?

Oh, look. Pierre Lebrun seems to think the same way:

Quote:

---

I personally wonder whether a delayed start to the season wouldn’t, in some twisted way, actually help the Kings. Players on the past few Stanley Cup champions have told me that the short summer hasn’t allowed their bodies to totally recharge in time for the start of the next season. Heck, Duncan Keith of the Blackhawks told me that the year after they won the Cup his body was never quite 100 percent recovered from the Cup year. So having said all that, perhaps scrapping October wouldn’t be the worst thing ever -- physically -- for the Kings.

---

Kings' Cup celebration dimmed by CBA - Cross Checks Blog - ESPN

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by USCKingsFan31

If two months without hockey is enough for the Kings to lose "most" of their "ton of new fans", I'll bet missing the playoffs would be too.

---

Game 6 was on June 11... that makes 3 months, wonder how many we've lost already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bogey

I support this "two month lockout" thread.

I am confident my candidate will win.

---

Me too!

But I think some might need a third option. How about someone starting a One Month Lockout Might Help The Kings thread? mhihi:

Professional athletes are creatures of habit. They absolutely rely on routine. I'm sure we've all heard one or more of them whine to a reporter when they couldn't get their scheduled nap in on a gameday...

Lockout is bad. Two hours, two days, two weeks, two months, it's ALL bad. It'll screw up their cherished "routine" and throw them off-kilter (or whatever excuse fits). And more importantly (and yes, selfishly) I MISS HOCKEY!