Kings are 3-3-1 in their last seven with only 12 goals scored. That's 1.71 goals per game.
And some are okay with that?
Dean and Murray are lucky they have jobs in LA. No one cares about the Kings in the media. Lakers will be back soon and the Kings are back to losing.
I don't think DL is lucky to have a job. If anyone with AEG was curious and asked around the league, they'd be told by those in the know that DL has assembled a pretty solid team that likely could use one or two pieces on the wings. TM on the other hand I doubt would have the same level of support if asked whether or not he's made the most of what he's been given to work with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay
I wasn't counting today's game,
And since when? They won 2-0 and 2-1, so yea, that was enough.
San Jose scored 3 tonight, AND LOST.
Dallas scored 4 tonight, AND LOST
Edmonton scored 3 tonight, AND LOST.
You really need to be done with this "win 3 and we win all the time" BS.
If a team scored 82 goals in a season, would you be happy if they won the President's trophy?
Yes, but that'd be because we had a team that must have pitched about 60ish shutouts, which would mean he'd be the greatest goalie to have ever existed. In history. On any planet.
Since that's not the case and we are back from la la land, I'd rathe focus on the stats of hockey, which are factual and possible, unlike your fictious President's Trophy team.
You average three goals per game, you win a lot. Not always (and no one in this thread has ever said you win all the time). Look at the Kings record when we don't score three goals versus when we do. Same with anyone in the league. You get three goals a game, not only do you win a lot, you likely are guaranteed of a top four seed and very likely the conference.
Our offense on the other hand is going the wrong way. 12 goals in 7 games and we are 3-3-1. if you think we'll stay .500 (which isn't good enough to make the playoffs btw) while scoring 1.71 goals per game, then all the power too you. If you think our offense is ok because we scored two goals per game in our last two wins, go ahead.
We have a great team, but we have one glaring weakness. We don't need a juggernaut offense to win, we just need a middle of the pack offense. That's not asking too much with this group. We are 27th, and falling backward, not getting better. That's a big weakness.
Why is it every loss turns in to this giant philosophical discussion involving why the team is doomed until some major trade/firing/ownership change occurs? They lost today. So did every other team in the division. It was a gigantic wash in every regard.
The Kings suck when they play afternoon games. That's the start and end of the game analysis. Moving right along.
Right?
You would think people would get tired of playing monday morning quarterback all the time or arm chair gm about it. I know I have.
People like herby getting so ****ing uptight about it that he actually "quits"
I mean grow up people. Teams win and lose. Yea things are a problem here and there and we disagree with some stuff....but it's a damn sports team. Just enjoy being a fan win lose or draw. isn't that what it's about?
Nice book ya got there lol, anyways you made an excellent point,
The Kings take too long to get the puck up the ice, that is something that the CBC crew touched on that Stevens addressed, that the Kings D needed to make better/faster passes, then get their ***** up the ice to follow the play,
When they do that, then they are an extremely formidable team
Lol, sorry. I get longwinded in PGT's.
Glad to see Stevens acknowledge it, but it's an ongoing problem and it's not changing from anything I've notiuced this season, so that leads me to believe the coaching staff has no solution for it. Which is worse than not knowing the problem IMO.
Yesterday's game sums up the 3 needs of the team.
1 - 5 on 5 scoring (issue last year as well)
2 - puck management (we are second last in turnovers)
3 - team speed (another issue not addressed)
Unless managment adrresess these issues we will never get out of the first round if we make the playoffs.
He only has 2 goals and 8 points so far, has he been unlucky or is he not playing to the standard he's capable of?
Both. No one on the team is getting any bounces to go there way so far this season and he's not up to snuff. His real problem is making reads on the PP, he's not taking shots when he needs to and often overplays the puck. On top of that every team now knows how good he can be. He's still very immature on top of it all, not worthy of 7 million yet, not even close.
Some people think that 2 goal is enough? No one has ever said that scoring 3 goals is a guaranteed win, it just increases the odds significantly.
There were 12 games yesterday in the NHL:
Of the 24 teams playing, 14 of them scored 3 goals. The record of those 14 teams? 11-3. I would call that success rate significant. The record of the teams that scored less than 3 goals? 1-8-1.
Some people still think that three goals scored is not important? Total goals are dropping each season since the lockout, 3 goals is now the new benchmark. It used to be 4 goals, but now you only need 3 goals to be an elite team. 2.27 goals per games isn't even close to 3 goals per game.
It doesn't matter if it is the system or the players, the fact is that the Kings are getting worst the past 2+ seasons and it is easier (and quicker) to get rid of the coach than to trade significant players. Do you think AEG wants to give Dean another 5 year plan or another coach? If Dean insists on keeping Murray, then AEG will let both of them go and allow another management team to decide the direction of the team. The Kings are sitting 15th in points percentage, 9th in the West. The Kings have very little room for error and just lost 2 significant pieces to injury.
Glad to see Stevens acknowledge it, but it's an ongoing problem and it's not changing from anything I've notiuced this season, so that leads me to believe the coaching staff has no solution for it. Which is worse than not knowing the problem IMO.
It's not a coaching staff problem though, it's a defensive player's confidence problem, the coaches have identified what they need to do, it's up to the players at this point to actually do it.
Some people think that 2 goal is enough? No one has ever said that scoring 3 goals is a guaranteed win, it just increases the odds significantly.
There were 12 games yesterday in the NHL:
Of the 24 teams playing, 14 of them scored 3 goals. The record of those 14 teams? 11-3. I would call that success rate significant. The record of the teams that scored less than 3 goals? 1-8-1.
Some people still think that three goals scored is not important? Total goals are dropping each season since the lockout, 3 goals is now the new benchmark. It used to be 4 goals, but now you only need 3 goals to be an elite team. 2.27 goals per games isn't even close to 3 goals per game.
It doesn't matter if it is the system or the players, the fact is that the Kings are getting worst the past 2+ seasons and it is easier (and quicker) to get rid of the coach than to trade significant players. Do you think AEG wants to give Dean another 5 year plan or another coach? If Dean insists on keeping Murray, then AEG will let both of them go and allow another management team to decide the direction of the team. The Kings are sitting 15th in points percentage, 9th in the West. The Kings have very little room for error and just lost 2 significant pieces to injury.
I don't think you realize just how much credit Lombardi has with AEG, they aren't going to let him go any time soon, especially if they talk to anyone in the hockey world first about such a move.
If you think the Kings are getting worse the past two seasons, I don't know what to tell you, I know you don't want to hear it's part of the game, and you sure as hell don't want to hear that the Kings aren't going to go 82-0.
As far as the goals, why stop at 3? I mean, hell hasn't Philadelphia proved you can score 8 and still lose? Why stop there, we should be shooting for an average of 10, screw that, 20 goals per game, if we are going to turn this into an offensive machine, let's go all the way or none at all, defense be damned, we can win the cup if we win 20-19 every damn game, right?
Of course.....we can win the Cup if we win...2-1 every game to....I dunno, such a tough decision.....can I take a minute? I mean, scoring 20 goals definitely means your offense is working, but really, I mean, 20 is a lot, what if a few games we only get 15, we are just setting ourselves up for a let down then,...
I have an idea, how about we don't worry about how much we score, as long as we score more than the other team, that means, we have to take care of our own zone first, and play defense first, I mean...we can do that...right, that way I don't have to worry if I hit the post, as long as they can't get a quality shot off...
Yea...I know....what if we have that odd game where we can't stop them...should we tell anyone in advance that we aren't going to go 82-0? I mean, it seems kind of defeatist to realize that doesn't it? Yea, it does, screw that, we are going to go 82-0, and win games 10-0, how did I come to that? I split the difference...
What? Statistics can prove anything? Not true, I mean, stats can't prove what wins games....can they? Hell you mean the team we are playing next week scores on average 6 goals a game, and we only score 2? Screw that then, you guys have fun, I am gonna go enjoy my pina colada and not stress, it's an automatic loss anyways, didn't you hear? The Stats told me...
Greene did have a blowout, but Montreal created that high quality chance with speed entering the zone, passing skill, and scored on a great one-timer that Bernier didn't have time to set up on. Greene had the blowout trying to get back quickly, but he couldn't
I'm 99% sure Quick makes that save though.
Last edited by Butch 19: 12-04-2011 at 01:39 PM.
Reason: caps lock key decides to work
For those of you who bemoan the importance of 5-on-5 scoring, here are the combined records of the top five 5-on-5 scoring teams and the bottom five 5-on-5 scoring teams (I took shootout wins and losses out since those aren't relevant to 5-on-5/even strength play or the playoffs):
For those of you who bemoan the importance of 5-on-5 scoring, here are the combined records of the top five 5-on-5 scoring teams and the bottom five 5-on-5 scoring teams (I took shootout wins and losses out since those aren't relevant to 5-on-5/even strength play or the playoffs):
Top 5
65 W - 42 L - 4 OTL
Bottom 5
46 W - 53 L - 10 OTL
I bet you, if I took those same teams, if you wish to name them, that the top 5 that combined for the 65-42-4 record, would be some of the top defensively adept teams as well...
Here's a spreadsheet I made that includes 5-on-5 scoring, every team's record not including shootout games, and the type of pace that would put them on over the course of an 82 game schedule. Make of it what you will. If you have any questions about it, feel free to ask.
EDIT: I added some shading and borders to hopefully make it easier to read.
Last edited by Chazz Reinhold: 12-04-2011 at 01:30 PM.
I bet you, if I took those same teams, if you wish to name them, that the top 5 that combined for the 65-42-4 record, would be some of the top defensively adept teams as well...
Hmm..any takers?
Not really, no. Those teams (in order) are: Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, Washington, and Phoenix. In terms of overall defense, those teams rank (respectively): 1st, 19th, 21st, 25th, and 9th.
Not really, no. Those teams (in order) are: Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, Washington, and Phoenix. In terms of overall defense, those teams rank (respectively): 1st, 19th, 21st, 25th, and 9th.
Right after I typed that, I thought about Philadelphia lol,
But ok, the 5-5 on scoring, besides Boston and Chicago, does anyone believe the other 3 are contenders or, "elite" of the league this year?
The 2 things I've come away with are the Kings are boring and they should be better. I came into this season expecting to watch some exciting hockey with the players the Kings brought in but I've been let down almost every game. I did laugh though when Montreal made a defensive adjustment and had all 5 guys stand on their blue line. 1 small adjustment and you can out coach Murray because he doesn't make any adjustments. The Kings couldn't dump the puck in and it's like what the hell do we do now coach? We can't dump it in, now what? No answer.
It's not a coaching staff problem though, it's a defensive player's confidence problem, the coaches have identified what they need to do, it's up to the players at this point to actually do it.
That's assuming the coaching staff has found adjustments to be made. Considering our scoring is continuing to go south and no changes are being noticed in play, I have no confidence the coaching staff is either A) making adjustments, or B) making adjustments which are having a positive affect on the counter-attack.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay
If you think the Kings are getting worse the past two seasons, I don't know what to tell you, I know you don't want to hear it's part of the game, and you sure as hell don't want to hear that the Kings aren't going to go 82-0.
As far as the goals, why stop at 3? I mean, hell hasn't Philadelphia proved you can score 8 and still lose? Why stop there, we should be shooting for an average of 10, screw that, 20 goals per game, if we are going to turn this into an offensive machine, let's go all the way or none at all, defense be damned, we can win the cup if we win 20-19 every damn game, right?
The Kings are getting better on paper, but we haven't got better in terms of performance. Can you tell me exactly how we have gotten better on the ice? Even resorting to wins and losses, we have the same number of points 25 games into the season as we did last year and the year before, but we have the fewest number of wins of any of those years this season. If you count OTL/SO losses as just losses, we are 13-13 right now. How is that getting better?
And while I get what you are saying about scoring three goals not guaranteeing wins, you know you are simply manipulating what Sydor is saying. No one, not even Sydor, said scoring three goals is a guarantee to win. Just like, as you pointed out, scoring 8 goals isn't a guarantee of victory. The same can be said of allowing just one goal, it doesn't guarantee us victory. But we know it is a good thing and we should be striving for it. The same applies offensively, we should be striving to score more, and from what i see on the ice, we aren't.
The difference in winning percentage between teams who score three goals per game on average and those who don't is dramatic. The fact we are getting further away from that benchmark is the biggest concern for me.
I have yet to find stat which is better associated with winning teams than five on five goal scoring success. Sydor can illustrate that better with his arsenal of stats he has on hand, I don't have them with me and I'm not about to go look them up. I encourage Sydor to post them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmay
Right after I typed that, I thought about Philadelphia lol,
But ok, the 5-5 on scoring, besides Boston and Chicago, does anyone believe the other 3 are contenders or, "elite" of the league this year?
I consider Philadelphia and Washington contenders. Philly, when healthy, has a good goaltending duo, a solid defense and is very deep, up front. Wasington has Ovie, Semin, Backstrom, Green and Vokoun. If they can get their heads out of their collective *****, they would be a significant challenge to anyone. Phoenix is about the only team I would actually want to face in the playoffs of those five teams mentioned.
The 2 things I've come away with are the Kings are boring and they should be better. I came into this season expecting to watch some exciting hockey with the players the Kings brought in but I've been let down almost every game. I did laugh though when Montreal made a defensive adjustment and had all 5 guys stand on their blue line. 1 small adjustment and you can out coach Murray because he doesn't make any adjustments. The Kings couldn't dump the puck in and it's like what the hell do we do now coach? We can't dump it in, now what? No answer.
Yeah, I noticed that too. Montreal did that the last 7-8 minutes last night and how many chances did we really generate? Once again, if LA was able to transition quicker and get the puck up the ice with speed before Montreal can get all five guys lined up across the blueline is much easier to gain access. Instead, Montreal had time to discuss voodoo curses and gifts Bull Durham style before LA finally got their rear-ends turned around with the puck in tow.
Here's another spreadsheet ranking the teams by points-per-game percentage. I've also included each team's 5-on-5 scoring rank in the league.
Of note, of the teams currently in the top 8 in the East, the average 5-on-5 scoring rank of those teams is 8th. The average ranking of non-playoff teams in the East in 5-on-5 scoring is 18th.
In the West, the average 5-on-5 scoring rank for the top 8 teams is 13th. The average ranking in 5-on-5 scoring for the non-playoff teams is 24th (!!!).
What does this tell us? On average, the East is the better 5-on-5 scoring conference. Also, the strong majority (12 of 15) of the top fifteen 5-on-5 scoring teams currently occupy a playoff spot. Another strong majority (11 of 15) of the bottom fifteen 5-on-5 scoring teams do not occupy a playoff spot.
Last edited by Chazz Reinhold: 12-04-2011 at 02:33 PM.
Yesterday's game sums up the 3 needs of the team.
1 - 5 on 5 scoring (issue last year as well)
2 - puck management (we are second last in turnovers)
3 - team speed (another issue not addressed)
Unless managment adrresess these issues we will never get out of the first round if we make the playoffs.
I would say that #1 is pretty much a symptom of #2 and to a lesser degree #3. For weeks this team has been unable to string 3 or 4 passes together. The breakouts from their own end have been terrible. Because the passing has been so atrocious the forwards seldom enter the opponent's zone with speed and are therefore unable to make room for themselves or room for trailing defensemen on the attack.
The Kings are not coming up the ice as 5 players and that limits the offense.
He only has 2 goals and 8 points so far, has he been unlucky or is he not playing to the standard he's capable of?
Doughty is trying to do too much. A trend that developed last year.
I think it's partly a snake bitten kind of thing but also of his own undoing.
I fear Doughty has been arrogant and careless in his play since his sophomore season.
Think about it, 21 year old kid, gets nominated for the highest honor of a defensemen in his 2nd professional season. He gets a swagger to him and slacks off on his training, and thinks he can do more on ice. He came in last off-season out of shape, and it showed. He has missed camp this season and it shows.
Doughty can do himself a favor, and stop trying to stick handle and carry the puck so often. Just make the quick outlets, and play heads up hockey. He should watch tape of Duncan Keith for the rest of the year.
