LOS ANGELES — For many, December is time when their thoughts turn to family and friends and celebrating the holiday season with them. But for long-time fans of the Los Angeles Kings, December often means dread, doom and gloom as their team goes into their traditional, inevitable December Swoon, a month filled with many more losses than wins.
Indeed, in forty seasons on the ice, the Kings have had a winning record in December just eleven times, their best December coming in 2005-06 when they earned a 9-4-1 record, good for 19 out of possible 28 points, a .679 percentage.
But that leaves 29 seasons when they were at or below the .500 mark in December and even then, they reached the .500 mark only five times in those seasons.
To be sure, December has generally been quite unkind to the Kings, who have a 182-227-70 record in December, earning just 454 out of a possible 958 points, a .453 percentage.
Yet when you look at how the Kings have done overall, the December Swoon turns out to be mostly a myth…
Also…
Doughty Getting Early Calder Consideration
Goaltender Diplomacy?
To read the full story, click on: Kings: December Swoon Is More Myth Than Fact
All stories and audio content on this site are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License. You may copy, distribute and/or transmit any story or audio content published on this site under the terms of this license, but only if proper attribution is indicated. The full name of the author and a link back to the original story on this site are required.
December 11, 2008 at 3:57 AM
Wait a minute. You just said that out of 40 years of Kings hockey, they were at or above .500 a total of 16 times (11 winning + 5 even). That means 24 times they were below .500. That sounds like fact to me, not myth.
December 11, 2008 at 7:57 AM
So basically, it’s not that we suck in December so much as we just suck overall ? Nice.
This is actually a good point Gann. Since I started watching the Kings it always seemed like December was a painful time for the team. Not sure why but the focus (to me at least) was always to get past December.
December 11, 2008 at 10:32 AM
As I said, the comparison I made was to their overall record. When you look at those numbers, the Kings haven’t done much worse in December than they’ve done overall.
Of course, it’s all based on perception, really. How do you choose to look at the numbers? Depends on your point of view, which really was my point.
I too thought that December was an especially disastrous month for the Kings…until I did the research for this story.
December 11, 2008 at 10:35 AM
In the days of old, the Kings would have a two week mid December road trip so the Forum could book the Ice Capades. For the ice show the Forum would build up a smaller portion of the ice surface to about 3/4″ and raise the ice temp to make it soft for the performances. When the show concluded and the Kings returned, the Forum staff would shave the ice back down to the standard NHL surface (the Zamboni would be caked in white for weeks from the coloring added to hide NHL lines). It would take a week or so for the ice to stabilize to the lower temperature. The long road trip often was used for an excuse for poor results in December.
December 11, 2008 at 11:14 AM
That’s great stuff JG. I remember the Forum always having the Ice Capades in town, but I didn’t know those details.
December 12, 2008 at 8:02 AM
Hey, at least the Kings are undefeated on February 30th.
December 12, 2008 at 2:23 PM
Interesting article, but not completely accurate. a more appropriate statistic would be comparing the actual win percentages of each month (or win % in december vs. the rest of the season), not win percentage in december vs. how many seasons the kings finished at or below .500.
for example: let’s say this season the kings have a .400% during december vs. .500% the rest of the season; they would finish with a record below .500. according to you, december wouldn’t be a slide, since they finished below .500 for the season. but in reality, it would be only because of that month that the kings finished below .500…
December 12, 2008 at 2:27 PM
Perhaps. But, as I said, when it really comes down to it, it’s really a matter of perception. One could look at the numbers a few different ways and they’d all have some validity.
Another point…is how the Kings do in December really that much worse than they do overall?
December 12, 2008 at 5:43 PM
no, your main point is not to say it’s a matter of perception. the main body of your article clearly says the december swoon is a myth. to be fair, it may very well be. but the data you put forth does not support your conclusion.
December 13, 2008 at 12:19 AM
There is more than one way to define a December Swoon. You can look at it, for example, by not comparing their December record only to their October/November record each season, as some seem stuck on. My analysis used a broader perspective. In other words, there are several different ways to look at the numbers and just as many ways to interpret it. You seem to be stuck on one way. It is NOT the only way.