Tuesday, April 13, 2010

The LA Kings Are Bad

Dustin Brown is bad.

We are but a mere two days away from the beginning of Vancouver's 2010 cup run and I'm sure I speak for the entire province when I say I'm finding it hard to focus on other important things in my life. My marriage, my wonderful cat... though all will suffer considerable neglect over the next (hopefully) couple of months, each has seen dependable ol' Harrison check out mentally pretty early. No love springs from this Canucks fan; I've spent the last few days honing my hatred for the Los Angeles Kings.

It's hard. Obviously, I want the Kings to fail miserably, but it's nice to see them in the playoffs again. And Wayne Simmonds has been a nice addition to the forward corps of the all-black team (The Winnipeg All Blacks) I always wind up making on EA's latest NHL game. It used to be tough to fill out that lineup. Peter Worrell is not a top-six forward. And Drew Doughty is one Hell of a hockey player.

But I digress. For the next four to seven games, at least, the Los Angeles Kings are bad. BAD. If you think they are good, you obviously have them confused with some other kings. Perhaps the Brandon Wheat Kings? Sharon Jones & The Dap-Kings? Maybe you like those kings, but you don't like the LA Kings. The LA Kings are bad.

Martin Luther King is good. Maybe that's who you're thinking of. The LA Kings are bad. Perhaps you're a member of the secret political consortium that conspired to destroy MLK's reputation with allegations of extramarital affairs and, ultimately, assassinate him? Well, if you think he was bad, the LA Kings are

King Richard Brodeur? Good. King Clancy? Why he's a hockey legend, a trophy, and a Canadian sex act. All of those things are good. The LA Kings are bad.

King penguins are cute. Cute is good. King cobras are bad. But not as bad as the LA Kings.

Evelyn "Champagne" King? Pretty good. Ben E. King? Hecka good. King Crimson? Wholly underrated, and so, so good. If you're thinking of good kings, you might be thinking of In the Court of the Crimson King. That's a prog-rock classic. Prog-rock classics are good. The LA Kings are BAD.

King Triton refused to let his daughter find true love because of a prejudice against bipeds. How selfish! King Midas is just as selfish. He turned his own daughter into gold
for no reason. King Lear treats all of his daughters like garbage for his own self-aggrandizement! And King Henry VIII didn't even want a daughter! He killed all of his wives just for giving birth to girls! The LA Kings are more selfish than these kings, and they hate women just as much.

Don't confuse the LA Kings with King Edward the Confessor, the patron saint of kings. King David? King Solomon? Yeah, they were obviously good.
Don't confuse the LA Kings with Jesus Christ, the King of Kings. He was good. The LA Kings crucified him. Well, we all did, but you see what I'm getting at. The LA Kings are bad. The King James Bible is good. Unless you're Christopher Hitchens, in which case, the King James Bible is bad. Just like the LA Kings.

Good King Wenceslas is known for his goodness, and it was certainly a truer quality than his kingliness. He was only a duke. The LA Kings are, likewise, not even real kings.

King Koopa? Why, he's bad, unless you're talking about King Koopa's Kool Kartoons. Or if you're playing Mario Power Tennis, in which case, his powerful forehand is a godsend against other heavyweights like King Boo (also bad, and, like Dustin Brown, he'll hit you from behind) and Donkey Kong. And speaking of Kongs, King Kong is pretty bad (especially if we're talking about the Jessica Lange version). Or is he? I guess, in all seriousness, it's man that was kind of the villain there. But let's agree that he still did a lot of damage. And either way he's better than the LA Kings. So is Kirby's foe, King Dedede (who looks a bit like Kyle Wellwood) and Donkey Kong's archnemesis, King K. Rool, who had a wicked theme song, but snatched a lot of bananas.

This seems like a good lead-in for a Billie Jean King reference, but I can't think of one. She's good, unless you're Dr. James Dobson, for instance. Then she's bad.
Just like the LA Kings. King of the Hill? Burger King? Stephen King? I am indifferent to these kings. The LA Kings? I know for a fact that they are bad, bad, bad.

In closing, the LA Kings are bad.


  1. Agreed. I think it is clear to any independent observer that the Vancouver Canucks are ethically and morally superior to the LA Kings. Anyone who disagrees is also bad.

    To clarify, I do not mean bad in the Michael Jackson sense. Or, to quote John Reuben, "Not bad meaning good, but bad meaning bad."


  2. Yeah, yeah, yeah, the Kings are BAD. I'm going to focus on the first paragraph.

    RE: Hockey-Head Husbands

    It was around this time last year that I came to a decision. This is one situation where "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" truly applies.

    What I'm trying to say is, I'm excited for the playoffs. WHEEEEEEEEEE!!!

  3. This is one of my favourite posts. I'm reviewing it now in hopes that a "The Chicago Blackhawks are BAD" post is secretly in the works.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...