Enough bluster. Enough talk of a different future.
Enough mediocre/simply bad hockey.
It is time for Philip Anschutz to sell the Kings. Time to wave goodbye.
Before you ask, no, Bill Plaschke did not write this article. Who the hell reads a Plaschke article and decides to copy that writing style, anyway?
Yep, this is completely his fault.
Billionaire Phil is a veritable recluse living in Colorado, running an international empire that's believed to include more than 100 companies.
If the Kings are more than some toy, more than an anchor for his Staples Center and downtown development, he should say so. Better, he should prove it.
I don't understand what you want him to do. Sure, he's kind of weird and doesn't like the public, but what the fuck does that have to do with the Kings' performance? Are you saying the Kings need a hands-on owner like Mark Cuban or Al Davis, because if you are I will punch you in the balls.
He has the country's largest cattle and farm property, its largest theater chain, largest oil fields, a railroad, a telecommunications firm, arenas in London and Berlin and Kansas City, a movie production company, newspapers and Celine Dion to worry about.
He'll bring in David Beckham for his Galaxy. Build "L.A. Live" and the Home Depot Center. All while the Kings flounder, again. While the organization rebuilds again and gamely speaks of better days to come.
HE BUILT THE STAPLES CENTER FOR THE KINGS. He did that, like, in 1999? Remember? It's where the Kings play every day. Also, he built them a state-of-the-art training facility El Segundo around the same time. Also, he bought an AHL and ECHL franchise to streamline the organization. But he didn't sign David Beckham to play for the Kings, so he's a piece of shit.
Time to sell the team to somebody whose focus is not spread so thin. Who is less concerned with running the world than winning an NHL championship.
Disney was another world-wide company that owned and failed at running a hockey team. They sold the Ducks to Henry and Susan Samueli in 2005, and two years later Anaheim hoisted the Stanley Cup.First, I don't understand why you would wish for an owner who is poorer than the one you currently have.
Second, that's a really good point. Remember that great goal Henry Samueli scored in Game 3 of the Finals? The Samueli's hired Brian Burke, who then created a great hockey team. For that, they deserve some credit. Do they deserve nearly as much credit as Burke, the players, and everyone on the coaching staff? I sure don't think so. Also, didn't the Ducks make the Finals when Disney owned the team?
It's not like it can't be done. The Kings need someone less fractured and more involved, need an owner whose connection goes beyond some weekly report and approval of expenditures.
(Emphasis mine) Okay, but then you say this:
Two years ago, this culture of losing was supposed to all change. The NHL finally adopted the salary cap that the team's then-president, Tim Leiweke, had long championed....
Leiweke announced it was a new day, and fired almost everyone of significance in the organization, including - sort of - himself.
"We've had one playoff win in 10 years," Leiweke said then. "Ownership is angry. We're tired of losing and want to win."
Aren't they forsaking possible revenues to build the team correctly? The Kings only have 1 playoff win in the last 10 years (fuck you, Detroit!) because they only cared about making money. They could have kept Demitra, Norstrom, and Conroy 2 years ago and continued to barely make the playoffs, but they decided to instead step back and build for a championship. That's good, right? I'm honestly lost. Where am I? I see pitchforks, am I in Hell?
And Lombardi has drafted well, built a promising core for the future. The veterans he signed to complement that youth have not been as successful, but he has pretty much done what he was hired to do.
This is great. I wonder who hired him...
Meanwhile, Billionaire Phil remains on his ranch and the Kings continue to stumble. They haven't made the playoffs since 2002, and of course, won't this year either.
Would it make you feel better if he bitched more? I genuinely do not understand what you're mad about, Steve Dillbeck.
Anschutz is not what is best for the Kings. Los Angeles - and the NHL - deserve a winning franchise here. Deserve an owner whose focus is on his team.
WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO BUILD RIGHT NOW!!!@! Fuck!
That's pretty much the whole article (there's a pun at the end, read it yourself). The whole thing just seems pointless to me; people complain that Anschutz is looking for the quick fix but also complain that the Kings aren't winning right now. I don't see how he can win.*
The Kings' situation would be any better if Anschutz was at every game. The best thing an owner can do is hire a good person to run the team and then stay out of the way. Phil Anschutz gives off a Daniel Day-Lewis in There Will Be Blood vibe, and the team wasn't run very well in the past (thanks, Dave Taylor), but things seem to be going pretty good now. We're going to get a high draft pick, we have an outstanding forward core and a 21 year-old defenseman playing 23 minutes a night. If everything works out and the Kings do become a "winning franchise," I'll be ecstatic and extremely grateful to Dean Lombardi and the players on the Kings. I may give a quick tip of the cap to Phillip Anschutz, but that's it. Why? BECAUSE NOBODY GIVES A FUCK ABOUT THE OWNER ARGHHH!!!!!!!
*Just a quick note: I read this last night and there was a spot in the article that talked about how Dave Taylor was fired two years ago and then went on to take Dallas from mediocre to Cup contenders. That is so mind-blowingly wrong (he was still with the team last year), ironic (because it's his fault the Kings didn't have any farm system to speak of when Lombardi took over), and retarded (when has Dallas ever been mediocre?) that I won't even try to write too much about it because I think my head would explode. All I'll say is that it was a damn good thing that passage was gone this morning.