New York Times is at it again...

[DyePack]

In 1993, the Kings made it all the way to the Stanley Cup semifinals. We were lining up outside bars in the afternoon to watch the Kings play the Toronto Maple Leafs. Back at the office, even Lakers fans were drifting over to offer encouragement. At parties, people knew what I was talking about. It was all coming together for us Kings fans, like something out of a movie.

But it didn?t last. With the Kings poised to take a two-games-to-none lead, one of their players was penalized for using an illegal stick. Toronto scored on the subsequent power play. The Kings went on to lose the game, then the series.

One of their players? Try Marty McSorley, only one of the most beloved players in franchise history.

Hockey still sucks, though.

Hockey sucks, design sucks, do you have any other dead horses you'd like to beat?

The 2006 Yankees come to mind.

 

[Double J]

Oh, give Gilmour the Oscar.

Look, I'm a Gretzky fan, but even I remember Gilmour BLEEDING. Shoulda been a four-minute penalty, let alone two-minute minor!

PS - I hate the Buds, so I couldn't have cared less at the time.

Under the rules at the time, he should have gotten five minutes and a game.

Of course, we always knew there was a different set of rules where the Grate One was concerned.

 

[suburbia]

And if you're a Leafs' fan, you don't forget Wayne Gretzky circling the net with the puck in Game 6 (I think) looking down to find a skate to shoot the puck off of -- which he did, as it promptly went into the net to virtually clinch the series

Actually, all that did was force Game 7 back in Toronto, where Gretzky had the hat trick to send the Kings to the finals.

Although if you believe the Kings forcing Game 7 brought back Cubs-esque demons for the Maple Leafs (since they haven't even been to the finals since '68), then you might be correct that the Game 6 win clinched the series.

 

[hockeybeat]

Oh, give Gilmour the Oscar.

Look, I'm a Gretzky fan, but even I remember Gilmour BLEEDING. Shoulda been a four-minute penalty, let alone two-minute minor!

PS - I hate the Buds, so I couldn't have cared less at the time.

Under the rules at the time, he should have gotten five minutes and a game.

Of course, we always knew there was a different set of rules where the Grate One was concerned.

Different rules for Gretzky and pals (Mark Messier comes to mind)...

 

[Double J]

Oh, give Gilmour the Oscar.

Look, I'm a Gretzky fan, but even I remember Gilmour BLEEDING. Shoulda been a four-minute penalty, let alone two-minute minor!

PS - I hate the Buds, so I couldn't have cared less at the time.

Under the rules at the time, he should have gotten five minutes and a game.

Of course, we always knew there was a different set of rules where the Grate One was concerned.

Different rules for Gretzky and pals (Mark Messier comes to mind)...

Exactly. The kind of thing that would get Messier lionized as "a warrior" would have gotten pretty much anybody else vilified and/or suspended.

 

[Birdscribe]

I felt kind of bad reaming the dude in my Kings blog, but seriously... calling yourself a fan, then getting the facts of THE most important series in the career of the franchise...

Ream away, Mateo. He deserves Starman justice.

$#^%&#%&$% McSorley, for the first of his blinding moments of idiocy.

@#$T%@%^#& candyass Demers

F^%@%^&#^%&*$&* Smirking Melrose, for running what was a Cup-contending team into the ground because he had a hard-on for goons.

But no. I'm not bitter or anything. . . just because that freakish arriviste team That Shall Not Be Named from Orange County is probably going to win a Cup before mine.

 

[Editude]

We make a big deal out of checking all names, adding middle inititals when needed, but this is the kind of embarrassing goof that's adjusted, if you're lucky, only by a fan or an expert. Not mentioning Marty makes it obvious this guy isn't a diehard. What a whiff.

 

[EE94]

And if you're a Leafs' fan, you don't forget Wayne Gretzky circling the net with the puck in Game 6 (I think) looking down to find a skate to shoot the puck off of -- which he did, as it promptly went into the net to virtually clinch the series

Actually, all that did was force Game 7 back in Toronto, where Gretzky had the hat trick to send the Kings to the finals.

Although if you believe the Kings forcing Game 7 brought back Cubs-esque demons for the Maple Leafs (since they haven't even been to the finals since '68), then you might be correct that the Game 6 win clinched the series.

Gretzky scoring from behind net off Dave Ellett's skate was Game 7, his third goal of the game, to clinch the series.

What Gretzky did in Game 6 was high-stick Gilmour, not get penalized, and then score winning goal in OT to force Game 7

 

[puckhead19]

Mark Pargas is a friend of mine. I knew that something was wrong here, as he's the least likely person I know to make a mistake like this. I asked him about it, and he sent me this reply to a BLOGGER who'd ripped him:

Several paragraphs were trimmed to fit the layout and then restored when the layout changed. An editor blended a few stories and so the mentions of dirty play by Doug Gilmour in the Campbell Conference finals, etc., were trimmed and, as you read in the print edition or the first half-day of its posting on the Web, the Campbell finals and the Cup finals were merged.

Yes, it was my byline, but it was not my mistake. So it is with some disappointment that I have been treated with such a lack of fairness by a fellow journalist. Granted it is a blog and people are free to write or post, if you will, without having to observe general journalistic standards of fairness. Blogs are supposed to add to the conversation, but many contain all too much ranting and silly name-calling, prompting our executive editor, in a speech this week, to call them "ambient noise."

And here is the correction the NYT ran:

Correction: December 8, 2006, Friday
> Because of an editing error, the Rituals column
> last Friday about hockey fans in Southern California
> misstated the round of the National Hockey League
> playoffs that the Los Angeles Kings reached in 1993.
> The Kings reached the finals, not just the
> semifinals. The column also misstated in which game
> an illegal stick penalty occurred. It was in a
> finals game against the Montreal Canadiens, not a
> semifinals game against the Toronto Maple Leafs.
>
>
> Copyright
> 2006
> The New York Times Company


Anyway, I just wanted to set the record straight. I've known Mark 15 years. He doesn't check in here, but I thought his point ought to be heard.

And, no I'm not Mark. I'm a long-time poster here, putting this in under an assumed identity.

 

[deportes]

i know mark, too. great guy. i always laugh when folk on here blame writers for every error, because there are times copy editors insert mistakes into stories. it happens. it shouldn't, but it does.

mark is a huge hockey fan. too bad his former shop, the los angeles times, is not.

 

[Double J]

Mark Pargas is a friend of mine. I knew that something was wrong here, as he's the least likely person I know to make a mistake like this. I asked him about it, and he sent me this reply to a BLOGGER who'd ripped him:

Several paragraphs were trimmed to fit the layout and then restored when the layout changed. An editor blended a few stories and so the mentions of dirty play by Doug Gilmour in the Campbell Conference finals, etc., were trimmed and, as you read in the print edition or the first half-day of its posting on the Web, the Campbell finals and the Cup finals were merged.

Yes, it was my byline, but it was not my mistake. So it is with some disappointment that I have been treated with such a lack of fairness by a fellow journalist. Granted it is a blog and people are free to write or post, if you will, without having to observe general journalistic standards of fairness. Blogs are supposed to add to the conversation, but many contain all too much ranting and silly name-calling, prompting our executive editor, in a speech this week, to call them "ambient noise."

And here is the correction the NYT ran:

Correction: December 8, 2006, Friday
> Because of an editing error, the Rituals column
> last Friday about hockey fans in Southern California
> misstated the round of the National Hockey League
> playoffs that the Los Angeles Kings reached in 1993.
> The Kings reached the finals, not just the
> semifinals. The column also misstated in which game
> an illegal stick penalty occurred. It was in a
> finals game against the Montreal Canadiens, not a
> semifinals game against the Toronto Maple Leafs.
>
>
> Copyright
> 2006
> The New York Times Company


Anyway, I just wanted to set the record straight. I've known Mark 15 years. He doesn't check in here, but I thought his point ought to be heard.

And, no I'm not Mark. I'm a long-time poster here, putting this in under an assumed identity.

Good thing the bit about Doug Gilmour was excised. Writing that he played dirty in that or any other series would have been libelous.