BuzzerBeater Forums

That's true...the Kings came pretty close that year to winning it. However, it wasn't just Gretzky that turned around the Kings. It was really Bruce McNall, who purchased them from Lakers owner Jerry Buss. He was the one that engineered the Gretzky deal and surrounded him with talent that the Kings had never had. I was in college in LA at the time and hockey was quite the buzz for a few years.

McNall signed Gretzky, but really Gretzky came to the Kings because of any reason that doesnt include the name Janet Jones. It wasnt just Gretzky, as you say, it was also guys like Blake and Robitaille, to name a couple. I went to game three of the finals vs Montreal at the Fabulous Forum and screamed until I was hoarse, good times.

In reality I was just trying to be funny (I'll keep working on it) but except for the few years Gretzky was here, and a couple after, the Kings have a long history of not being very good.

Edited to keep an international incident from erupting over why Gretzky agreed to come to the Kings instead of Detroit or Vancouver. Certainly something that happened decades ago needs to be fought and argued over, but I will leave it to people who still care why.

(p.s.- Janet hypnotized Wayne and made him buy the Coyotes)

Last edited by Heathcoat at 9/24/2009 6:17:47 AM

Did this ever happen in any sport that a number was retired for the whole league?

Yes, Jackie Robinson's number 42 is retired for all teams. However sometimes on April 15th all players (and umpires) are allowed, even encouraged, to wear #42 in honor of JR

Clemente's 21 has been considered for league retirement a couple of times, but it hasn't happened (yet)

Still, hockey in California is still way behind the other major teams sports in popularity.

I grew up in California and never played hockey or ice skated once. There is no ice :P

There are Ice Skating rinks but.......

Easier to get addicted to Hockey if you come from a place where people skated and played hockey on a local lake or something like that.

Eh, that just gives Knicks fans another reason to be mad at Pat Riley.

Janet Jones had ZERO to do with the trade. NOTHING. I really hate it when people continue to spread that particular nonsense.

Gretzky had to be traded because of the absurd contract he was signed to. Pocklington(then owner of the Oilers) screwed himself. LA was one of the few teams willing to void the contract for and was the only one offering cash considerations. In short, McNall was willing to give up the most financially for him.

I need to say something about people on here wanting to compare Jordan to Gretzky. What the hell are you talking about?

All-time scoring in the NHL:

Gretzky Goals - 894 Assists - 1963 Points - 2857

Number 2 all-time(Messier) Goals - 694 Assists - 1193 Points - 1887.

Gretzky put up about 50% more points than anyone else in history. You could take away all 894 goals and he would still be number one in points.

To accomplish the same thing Jordan would have had to average around 54 points a game.

The you have the people who keep pointing at rings. Last time I checked basketball and hockey were team sports. If you want to count rings then you need to remember that Jordan does not have the most rings. Hell even Robert Horry has 7 rings.

Jordan was great, and I loved him, but to say he was anywhere nearly as dominant as Wayne Gretzky simply means you have no clue what you are talking about. Of course other players think Jordan was dominant, but Gretzky had other players wondering if he was some sort of hockey alien from another universe.

Jordan was possibly the greatest player in the NBA, but Gretzky is the god of hockey. That is why Gretzky's number was retired from the NHL but Jordan's should not be retired from the NBA.

Well hell, it took you one post to make the point I've spent days blathering about.

I just finally read this thread today, and it was very frustrating to see what some people were saying.

Plus I'm Canadian.

Last edited by TigerUnderGlass at 9/22/2009 6:04:39 PM

Janet Jones had ZERO to do with the trade. NOTHING. I really hate it when people continue to spread that particular nonsense.

It is true that the trade was the doings of Pocklington. Gretzky was leaving Edmonton, and being shopped to the Kings, Detroit, and Vancouver. While on his honeymoon with his new wife Janet Jones they met with McNall and Gretzky insisted on the trade including McSorley and another player. I never said Gretzky left Edmonton because of his wife, but I do believe he choose to deal first with McNall before the team could make a different deal because he and his wife were allready planning on spending their offseasons in LA as much as possible because of his wife's career being based in LA so Gretzky made sure it was the Kings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_Gretzky#.22The_Trade.2...

....and from Janet's point of view;

http://web.archive.org/web/20030910084927/http://slam.can...

Sorry to bring up something you hate so much, and to have angered you in such a way. However to say she had NOTHING to do with him coming to the Kings seems an overstatement. I had forgotten how much that trade stung certain people, eh? My apologies.

I'm not saying that No. 23 should be retired everywhere, but for the record, at least one guy in New York at the time liked him....

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/news/2003/04/...

Nice... :)
But that's probably because the heat at that time had no one's Jersey to hang...
They were envious of everyone else, so they chose his Royal Airness to help them

So what part of any of your post shows that Gretzky left Edmonton because of his wife???????

I repeat, she had NOTHING to do with him being traded away from Edmonton. Pocklington needed money and Gretzky's contract was a problem - therefore Gretzky had to be traded.

Where does Janet fit into that? Did the fact that worked in LA make it easier for them to agree to go there? Sure. Did she cause it in anyway? No. Did she instigate it in any way? No.

The idea of going to LA was not even a consideration until MCNALL pushed the discussions.

Posting links to articles which don't even contradict me is not the way to change my mind. You have no idea what you are talking about and are simply spouting the same crap that too many people think is true.

Until you have something to say that actually contradicts anything I am saying then just stop. Please. It is irritating.

...and by the way, saying you hate something is a figure of speech - stop thinking you've deeply hurt and angered someone every time they use a common phrase. It's even more annoying than your non-contradictory method of argumentation.