HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

What good are timeouts if you dont use them

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-20-2011, 11:26 AM
  #26
JDM
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
A timeout is not a miracle worker but it could have helped. Ultimately just a retrospect thing. To be honest it didn't even occur to me until I got home and read the pgt here.

JDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:31 AM
  #27
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 16,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
At the time the fans were screaming loudest for a timeout to be called, Smyth scored goal 5. It would have been a terrible time to use it then in retrospect. That goal may have never come.

The Kings had three 2 minute long TV timeouts and it didn't change a thing. I seriously doubt that an additional 30 second timeout wouldn't have changed anything either given the complexion of the game and what was happening on the ice. Their only real chance to salvage what was happening was to get to an intermission.

After the intermission, the Kings got back to what works for them. They just didn't score first.
That's when I would have called it, after the 3rd goal. The 2nd goal was a fluke off Mitchell's stick. The 1st SJ goal, well you don't call a timeout there obviously.

There were plenty of breaks in there to discuss whatever needed to be discussed. I never got the feeling that things were that frenzied until after the 4th SJ goal. Somewhere in there TM should have used his timeout though. Otherwise, what's the point of having it?

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:39 AM
  #28
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,565
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
I would have called it after goal #2, called the entire bench over and then berated them verbally to stop playing like *******. It's time for this team to grow up, they play like children during certain times and it's hard to pinpoint why. I would have threatened a lot of skating today, total loss of their free time and then saw what the reaction was. The nice, cool, calm talks by TM during tv timeouts don't work. This team does not need a players coach, they've proved that repeatedly this year. This team needs a dictator, too many young players for a players coach, too relaxed, too cocky despite almost the entire team having won nothing at the NHL level.

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:50 AM
  #29
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
I wouldn't have minded Murray using it in the 2nd, but I also didn't mind it when he didn't. He's only got one. It's the playoffs and there are NO TV timeouts in OT. In retrospect, he didn't need it late in the 3rd or in OT, but he doesn't know that at the time.
When you're watching your team blow a 4-0 lead, you shouldn't be looking at overtime. You should be trying to settle your team down so they don't have to go to overtime.

TM didn't settle them down, and we went to overtime. We never should have been in OT and maybe, just maybe, we wouldn't have been if TM had called a time out and settled down his team.

That's like saying McLellan did the wrong thing by not saving his timeout for overtime and wasted it trying to get his team going. SJ likely wouldn't be in OT if not for the timeout and goalie switch which clearly appeared to jumpstart his team.

TM did NOTHING to stop the onslaught against his team.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:55 AM
  #30
The Butcher
Gutless
 
The Butcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The 5
Country: United States
Posts: 2,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
At the time the fans were screaming loudest for a timeout to be called, Smyth scored goal 5. It would have been a terrible time to use it then in retrospect. That goal may have never come.

The Kings had three 2 minute long TV timeouts and it didn't change a thing. I seriously doubt that an additional 30 second timeout wouldn't have changed anything either given the complexion of the game and what was happening on the ice. Their only real chance to salvage what was happening was to get to an intermission.

After the intermission, the Kings got back to what works for them. They just didn't score first.
Well said.

Oh my the lunacy around here.

Knee, meet jerk.

The Butcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:59 AM
  #31
SLang
Registered User
 
SLang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 3,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
I understand where y'all are coming from. It's just not anything I'm up in arms about. The team was destined to lose that game with their disastrous mental breakdowns that led to them abandoning their system. Timeout utilization was a footnote.
I think you should be a little up in arms about it. IMO using a timeout isn't just after goals are scored, although that's most common. But literally ANYONE with a brain last night before the first SJ goal could see that the Kings had COMPLETELY gone away from playing their system; neutral zone turnovers, not getting the puck in deep, not forechecking hard, not battling on the boards. The momentum was clearly swinging in SJ's direction. TM had to put a stop to it and using his timeout after that first goal, team play considered, COULD have settled them down. I don't know why he didn't do it.

Honestly, how many of you sat there after the first period, with the Kings up 3-0, and didn't think about how tough and LONG those last 40 minutes were going to be?

That kind of lead with 40 minutes in a game has COMEBACK written all over it. TM needed to be SUPER aware of that....everyone else seemed to be.

SLang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 12:04 PM
  #32
DIEHARD the King fan
Registered User
 
DIEHARD the King fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: blueline to slot
Country: United States
Posts: 6,244
vCash: 500
If someone ever breaks into my house when I'm there I don't think I will shoot them to protect myself, Jr and my things. They will leave soon enough anyway and I might need those bullets for target practice. Better I just sit there passively and let destiny take its course

DIEHARD the King fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 12:10 PM
  #33
saintsnsoldiers
The Nolanator
 
saintsnsoldiers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Logan, Utah
Country: United States
Posts: 2,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
I'm pretty sure they're exactly the same thing.
Nope, not to the players. A time out during game play is different. The coach is calling the team out in front of the fans. Big difference to the players. Its like getting called out at work in front of co workers. Kinda makes ya get your crap in order pretty quick. Which was or would of been the point of the time out.

saintsnsoldiers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 12:27 PM
  #34
JT Dutch*
Cult of Personality
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
... If you go over the GDT in the second period, I was calling for a time out after the score became 4-3, and screaming for one when it became 5-4. I wasn't the only one who did so; at least Bonney was calling for one, too, and a couple others. It just seemed to me to be an obvious decision.

I'm not pinning the loss on Terry Murray, here. It's a team loss. Murray's failure to call time out was, in my view, just one of many mistakes the team made last night.

JT Dutch* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 12:37 PM
  #35
sjmay*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsfan View Post
When you're watching your team blow a 4-0 lead, you shouldn't be looking at overtime. You should be trying to settle your team down so they don't have to go to overtime.

TM didn't settle them down, and we went to overtime. We never should have been in OT and maybe, just maybe, we wouldn't have been if TM had called a time out and settled down his team.

That's like saying McLellan did the wrong thing by not saving his timeout for overtime and wasted it trying to get his team going. SJ likely wouldn't be in OT if not for the timeout and goalie switch which clearly appeared to jumpstart his team.

TM did NOTHING to stop the onslaught against his team.
Different situation with SJ,

His team just gave up back to back goals, 34 seconds apart to go down 2-0, after a game that they got their ***** handed to them, of course you use the TO there.

In TM's case, the goals are so spread out, it's hard to pick WHEN, he should have used one, everyone can say NOW when, but at the time, I doubt anyone was seriously screaming at their TV, "USE THE TIMEOUT, etc"

sjmay* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 12:39 PM
  #36
bobafettish*
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay View Post
Different situation with SJ,

His team just gave up back to back goals, 34 seconds apart to go down 2-0, after a game that they got their ***** handed to them, of course you use the TO there.

In TM's case, the goals are so spread out, it's hard to pick WHEN, he should have used one, everyone can say NOW when, but at the time, I doubt anyone was seriously screaming at their TV, "USE THE TIMEOUT, etc"
the goals where so far spread out? it was 5 goals in one period

bobafettish* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 12:46 PM
  #37
SLang
Registered User
 
SLang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 3,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay View Post
Different situation with SJ,

His team just gave up back to back goals, 34 seconds apart to go down 2-0, after a game that they got their ***** handed to them, of course you use the TO there.

In TM's case, the goals are so spread out, it's hard to pick WHEN, he should have used one, everyone can say NOW when, but at the time, I doubt anyone was seriously screaming at their TV, "USE THE TIMEOUT, etc"
Just seems to me (and over-exaggerating here of course) when your team walks into the first intermission looking like the current Canucks and skates out for the 2nd period looking like the current Islanders you better recognize it and do something. Why does it take goals allowed when the difference in system play is so evident?

SLang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 12:50 PM
  #38
TonySCV
Moderator
Push to the 8th Seed
 
TonySCV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDM View Post
Its a mental message, not a verbal one. A TV timeout sends no mental message. A coach TO does (or, can).
McClellan called a time out after the 2nd goal. Similar circumstances. Didn't help. The Sharks were still a mess mentally and defensively and gave up 2 more goals. If you're asserting that a perfectly-timed timeout would have stopped the bleeding, I assert that it wouldn't have made a hill of beans difference by previous in-game example.

If you want to point to an effective coaching tactic, it was McClellan pulling his goalie. Murray could have pulled Quick after the Sharks 4th goal. Maybe that would have helped, but I see little value in complaining about things that didn't take place.

The use or non-use of a time out is insignificant in the grand scheme of what went wrong with the Kings last night.

TonySCV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 12:54 PM
  #39
SLang
Registered User
 
SLang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 3,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
The use or non-use of a time out is insignificant in the grand scheme of what went wrong with the Kings last night.
You are no fun to Monday morning QB with.

SLang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 12:55 PM
  #40
sjmay*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobafettish View Post
the goals where so far spread out? it was 5 goals in one period
Yes, they were spread out, unless you think a 1/3 of the game goes by in a flash.

pretty much 4-5 minutes between each goal until the last one which was a minute 30 or so, and as someone has said, there were a ton of stoppages etc...

Everyone think's a TV timeout and a called timeout are so far different, they can't be farther from the truth. You really think the players care who called the timeout when their coach is reading them the riot act? Cmon...

sjmay* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 12:58 PM
  #41
sjmay*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLang View Post
Just seems to me (and over-exaggerating here of course) when your team walks into the first intermission looking like the current Canucks and skates out for the 2nd period looking like the current Islanders you better recognize it and do something. Why does it take goals allowed when the difference in system play is so evident?
I agree, and again, you don't know what is being said on the bench, neither do I. I know the lines were mixed up a bit during the 2nd. I know there were plenty of stoppages etc to settle them down, I don't know calling a timeout would have done any different...I definitely don't call a timeout after their 2nd goal, a PP goal from a bad bounce, absolutely no reason to call the timeout there, the 3rd goal, again, we scored 30 seconds after, you call a timeout there, we don't get that 5th goal.

After the 4th goal? Again, at that point, you are making a decision, do you burn the one timeout you have, or do you have faith in your team to make it to the 3rd, he chose to have faith in his team, how do you slam that decision?

sjmay* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 01:16 PM
  #42
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,565
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
Quote:
Originally Posted by DIEHARD the King fan View Post
If someone ever breaks into my house when I'm there I don't think I will shoot them to protect myself, Jr and my things. They will leave soon enough anyway and I might need those bullets for target practice. Better I just sit there passively and let destiny take its course
Now that's funny. Terry Murray would just roll over and go back to sleep.

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 01:41 PM
  #43
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay View Post
Different situation with SJ,

His team just gave up back to back goals, 34 seconds apart to go down 2-0, after a game that they got their ***** handed to them, of course you use the TO there.

In TM's case, the goals are so spread out, it's hard to pick WHEN, he should have used one, everyone can say NOW when, but at the time, I doubt anyone was seriously screaming at their TV, "USE THE TIMEOUT, etc"
I don't care if the goals weren't 34 seconds apart, when 5 goals are scored in 17 minutes, most due to scrambling defensive zone play, you need to reason your team is out of wack and needs to set straight. Five goals in 17 minutes, or a goal every 3+ minutes. Does it have to be less than a goal aminute before a time out is ok? Like other posters have said, call the time out, give the players the riot act in front of the fans, likely on the jumbotron, and make them excrat their heads from their collective keesters. A coach is like a general, so do what needs to be done to rally the troops. TM did NOTHING.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 01:46 PM
  #44
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
McClellan called a time out after the 2nd goal. Similar circumstances. Didn't help. The Sharks were still a mess mentally and defensively and gave up 2 more goals. If you're asserting that a perfectly-timed timeout would have stopped the bleeding, I assert that it wouldn't have made a hill of beans difference by previous in-game example.

If you want to point to an effective coaching tactic, it was McClellan pulling his goalie. Murray could have pulled Quick after the Sharks 4th goal. Maybe that would have helped, but I see little value in complaining about things that didn't take place.

The use or non-use of a time out is insignificant in the grand scheme of what went wrong with the Kings last night.
A lot of timeouts are called after goals are scored. Just because it didn't work with SJ (which to me is debateable because SJ looked a lot better after that until the third goal late in the period) doesn't mean it wouldn't work with LA. It had a chance to work, if it didn't no coach would call a timeout after rapid goals agianst.

I think the real problem isn't so much that TM didn't call a timeout or didn't pull the goalie, it's that he didn't do anything. The way LA was playing just prior to that first goal against is the same way they were playing until the end of the second and TM did nothing to alter that. No timeout, no rant, no goalie pull, no benching of a player or two to send a message, nothing. He did nothing.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 01:51 PM
  #45
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay View Post
Yes, they were spread out, unless you think a 1/3 of the game goes by in a flash.

pretty much 4-5 minutes between each goal until the last one which was a minute 30 or so, and as someone has said, there were a ton of stoppages etc...

Everyone think's a TV timeout and a called timeout are so far different, they can't be farther from the truth. You really think the players care who called the timeout when their coach is reading them the riot act? Cmon...
SJ's first goal was at 3:08 of the second, and the third was at 13:32, so just over ten minutes apart. That's three goals in ten minutes, and more than enough cause to do something. Additionally, why do you have to wait for a goal to call a timeout? It's nt like LA was stellar, outside of three miscues that led to goals. LA was brutal for almost the entire period effectively, why not call a timeout after a bad shift? TM talked about TV timeouts so I assume he said something during one. If LA has a bad shift shortly after the TV timeout, why not call a timeout then and let loose on them, reenforcing the message?

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 01:55 PM
  #46
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay View Post
I agree, and again, you don't know what is being said on the bench, neither do I. I know the lines were mixed up a bit during the 2nd. I know there were plenty of stoppages etc to settle them down, I don't know calling a timeout would have done any different...I definitely don't call a timeout after their 2nd goal, a PP goal from a bad bounce, absolutely no reason to call the timeout there, the 3rd goal, again, we scored 30 seconds after, you call a timeout there, we don't get that 5th goal.
After the 4th goal? Again, at that point, you are making a decision, do you burn the one timeout you have, or do you have faith in your team to make it to the 3rd, he chose to have faith in his team, how do you slam that decision?
So what? How in the world do we factor the 5th goal into whether or not a timeout should have been called after SJ's 3rd goal? TM doesn't know his team will score. React to what is happening is what he should be doing and he didn't. I'd have rather won the game 4-3 than lost 6-5. TM did nothing, nothing, to settle his team down. I'm glad he had faith in them, but he's there to make sure if something goes wrong he can do what is possible to right the ship. He did nothing.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 02:21 PM
  #47
Telos
Moderator
In Dean We Trust
 
Telos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Reno, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 26,919
vCash: 424
Send a message via ICQ to Telos Send a message via AIM to Telos Send a message via MSN to Telos Send a message via Yahoo to Telos
Personally, my opinion is that the timeout is either used as a message to your team or to rest players. I don't care how many tv timeouts there were, Murray needs to understand that the timeout isn't just about re-instruction, it's about lighting a fire under your player's *****. Who knows, if he had used it, they may have not needed to scramble down the stretch or may have even gone back to the system. Though I do agree that pulling Quick would have been more effective.

In the end, it's all coulda shoulda wouldas now. Murray is our coach and he maintains a retro viewpoint concerning the timeout, just have to deal with it and hope our boys can take it to them next game and regain control of the series.

Telos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 02:30 PM
  #48
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Geographical Oddity
Country: United States
Posts: 9,563
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
I never got the feeling that things were that frenzied until after the 4th SJ goal. Somewhere in there TM should have used his timeout though. Otherwise, what's the point of having it?
Somewhere in there, when the score was 5-3 or 5-4, Quick needed to make a game-saving save.

Great goalies can carry a team when asked - Quick had his chance to clean up behind some sloppy play in front of him and he couldn't do it.

After SJ scored a couple, Quick lost his edge - he played waaaay back in his crease and was flopping down everywhere at anytime. All which which helped SJ get a few more goals.

Butch 19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 02:32 PM
  #49
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 16,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telos View Post
Personally, my opinion is that the timeout is either used as a message to your team or to rest players. I don't care how many tv timeouts there were, Murray needs to understand that the timeout isn't just about re-instruction, it's about lighting a fire under your player's *****. Who knows, if he had used it, they may have not needed to scramble down the stretch or may have even gone back to the system. Though I do agree that pulling Quick would have been more effective.

In the end, it's all coulda shoulda wouldas now. Murray is our coach and he maintains a retro viewpoint concerning the timeout, just have to deal with it and hope our boys can take it to them next game and regain control of the series.
I don't get this at all. Quick was NOT the problem last night. You don't throw Bernier in there in that situation and hope it works.

Niemi was taken out because he sucked last night. Two totally different situations.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 02:36 PM
  #50
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 16,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
Somewhere in there, when the score was 5-3 or 5-4, Quick needed to make a game-saving save.

Great goalies can carry a team when asked - Quick had his chance to clean up behind some sloppy play in front of him and he couldn't do it.

After SJ scored a couple, Quick lost his edge - he played waaaay back in his crease and was flopping down everywhere at anytime. All which which helped SJ get a few more goals.
I can't think of a single goal San Jose scored last night that was the result of Quick flopping around. Every goal with the exception of the one that deflected in off Mitchell's stick was off a cross ice pass where Quick had to challenge the man that passed the puck because that player was in a scoring area.

Quick had the shooters. It's the defenses job to take the pass. They didn't do that. The defensive coverage in the 2nd was awful. The defense (forwards included) lost the weakside forward consistently throughout the 2nd period.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:02 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.