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

Terry Murray's "Shot Mentality" Shot Down By Simple & Stubborn Statistics

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-10-2011, 01:03 PM
  #1
Zad
HFB Partner
 
Zad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: OC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,916
vCash: 500
Terry Murray's "Shot Mentality" Shot Down By Simple & Stubborn Statistics

Quote:
“Shot mentality”. If you pay attention to Terry Murray’s quotes, this little gem pervades even the most benign discussion about the difference between winning and losing. “You have to have that shot mentality” he preaches tried and true to his philosophy that has led players to parrot the same tune.

I have written my share of articles about its fallacy. I am not the only one, as Justin Bourne has chimed in and called this out-dated method of offense “a horrible idea.”

If you are not clear about what shot mentality is or means, it goes something like this: the more shots you get on net in any particular game, the more goals you score and the higher chance you have of winning the game.

At first blush, it seems simple enough right? Get shots on net, get more goals. What’s wrong with that? We got over 44 shots on net last night, but only one goal. They got less than half of that (20) and scored three. So, that was a fluke right? I mean, if you look at the statistics over the entire season, you will find those games where the Kings outshot the opponents, they won the far majority, correct?

I have been patiently waiting until the end of the season to answer this question. Biding my time. Actually hoping that Terry Murray would be right but knowing that this theory, like most of his 1976 offensive theories, are outdated and about as “horrible” as Mr. Bourne and I have proclaimed.
Click on the link for the rest of the article...http://lakingsnews.com/2011/04/10/te...rn-statistics/


Last edited by William H Bonney: 04-10-2011 at 03:43 PM.
Zad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 01:05 PM
  #2
Mattias
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,021
vCash: 500
Is there any better coaches out there for hire?

Mattias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 01:15 PM
  #3
TonySCV
Moderator
Two Timer!
 
TonySCV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 12,924
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias View Post
Is there any better coaches out there for hire?
Better in terms of objective stats like wins and losses that would be available this off-season? I can't think of any off the top of my head. Subjectively? It's hard to say as certainly some coaches will be better at the offensive side of the game, but certainly worse on the defensive side.

Riskier? Several. Worse? Absolutely. I don't really feel like rolling the dice, and I have a hard time understanding why others would when everyone knows defense wins championships and we have arguably one of the best defensive corps and system top to bottom in the NHL.

This team should be deadly next season, the defensive system wins a ton of hockey games and their offense will have a big boost thanks to an injection of key new (and healthy) personnel.

Youth and inexperience led to the inconsistency this year as it turns out. It didn't look that way during that 2-10-0 run, but that's what it wound up being. The players didn't tune out Murray.

In the end it's all about results and Murray has delivered with the personnel he's been given. Kompon is another story. Organizational depth is a Dean Lombardi issue, not Murray's.

Great article, BTW. I just think you have to weight the defensive system significantly higher than the offensive system.


Last edited by TonySCV: 04-10-2011 at 01:20 PM.
TonySCV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 01:18 PM
  #4
Scrivezina
AMart Jazz Hands!!!
 
Scrivezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: RSM, CA
Posts: 2,224
vCash: 500
Every now and again there is a fluke goal or soft goal that gets by. Unfortunately, the "shot mentality" relies too heavily on this. They need to develop more quality opportunities and finish them. Thanks for taking the time to write this one.

Scrivezina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 01:19 PM
  #5
Tadite
Registered User
 
Tadite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rhode Island
Country: United States
Posts: 4,789
vCash: 500
You need to do more then that. You didn't do anything to address your H1.

If H1 is:

Lessor shots are better if in more dangerous positions.

or

H2:

More shots are worse then less.

Then what you have to do is find the stats for what type of shot. You can't just use % winning to total shots as that doesn't directly address your H1. Second none of that directly addresses a "shot mentality." Sure we focus on the total but what we also do is have a tendency to think "pass first" so just like everything else you need to have a mix. If a shot is open, take it, something that we have a tendency to not do. You need more to focus on the H2 then simply that you have a slight variation in win % by total shots. Heck you mention 7 teams win more with they shoot more.... which 7 teams? The top 7?

Tadite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 01:21 PM
  #6
Tadite
Registered User
 
Tadite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rhode Island
Country: United States
Posts: 4,789
vCash: 500
Just a quick look. 8 of the top 10 teams have more S/G then SA/G and 8 of the bottom 10 teams have more SA/G then S/G....

Tadite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 01:23 PM
  #7
Zad
HFB Partner
 
Zad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: OC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadite View Post
You need to do more then that. You didn't do anything to address your H1.

If H1 is:

Lessor shots are better if in more dangerous positions.

or

H2:

More shots are worse then less.

Then what you have to do is find the stats for what type of shot. You can't just use % winning to total shots as that doesn't directly address your H1. Second none of that directly addresses a "shot mentality." Sure we focus on the total but what we also do is have a tendency to think "pass first" so just like everything else you need to have a mix. If a shot is open, take it, something that we have a tendency to not do. You need more to focus on the H2 then simply that you have a slight variation in win % by total shots. Heck you mention 7 teams win more with they shoot more.... which 7 teams? The top 7?
Click on the link within the article for the official NHL stats. It's your friend.

I focus on the total shots because Murray focuses on the total. His theory is that the more shots you get on net, the better chance you have to score goals and win. Shoot it, don't wait to make the "cute" play, shoot the puck. He said it again last night. Even with 44 shots on net, he wants more.

It's a simple quality v. quantity issue.

Zad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 01:24 PM
  #8
JDM
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
Yes Tony, defense does win championships. However I don't think Murray is capable of winning a championship because he is incapable of making sound adjustments. In the playoffs, where you play the same team up to 7 times, 4 different times in a cup run, you are going to have to make adjustments along the way, both in game and in general between games. Murray simply sticks with his plan come rain or shine, he'll or high water. The games that this method fails him during the regular season even out to where it is a decent philosophy..w. When you are playing new teams every day.

However when it comes down to specific mathups and playing other coaches who WILL make adjustments to your game as a series goes along, preaching nothing more than 'stay the course' becomes nothing more than a noble thing for the captain of the titanic to say after it's too late.

I appreciate what Murray has done here and i think the defensive lessons he has taught our team will not go away. Kopi will continue to be a selke candidate thanks to Murray and for thati am very grateful. But in don't believe that Murray has what it takes to win a cup. Too many things factor in to the playoffs that make his regular season career wins record virtually meaningless.

JDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 01:36 PM
  #9
Zad
HFB Partner
 
Zad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: OC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tadite View Post
Just a quick look. 8 of the top 10 teams have more S/G then SA/G and 8 of the bottom 10 teams have more SA/G then S/G....
The Kings also have more average shots per game than shot against. I think you are missing the point, brother. When you look at wins and losses with outshooting v. outshot by, you get this with the top 10 teams.

MWOS = more wins when out shot

Vancouver - MWOS
Washington - MWOS
Philadelphia - MWOS
San Jose -
Pittsburgh - MWOS
Boston - MWOS
Tampa - MWOS
Detroit -
Anaheim - MWOS
Nashville -

Nobody is claiming that the team shouldn't shoot but the shot mentality theory as a means of generating goals and wins at the mechanical sacrifice of quality scoring chances is nonsense...and has been so.

Zad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 01:37 PM
  #10
Fishhead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zad View Post
If you are not clear about what shot mentality is or means, it goes something like this: the more shots you get on net in any particular game, the more goals you score and the higher chance you have of winning the game.
I have to disagree with this, it's way too simplistic. I don't think shot mentality means shoot as much as possible. I think it means that when you have a lane, or the opportunity arises, you should opt to take the shot - i.e. take the shot over trying to make that extra pass.

It's not like this team is flying down the wing and shooting into the chest every chance they get ala Craig Johnson. But how many times have we seen the Kings hang on to the puck a little too long and get it blocked because the defense has a chance to get in position? I think that is what TM is talking about.

There are things I don't care for in TM's system, but this is one thing I agree with him on.

Fishhead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 01:44 PM
  #11
JDM
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishhead View Post
I have to disagree with this, it's way too simplistic. I don't think shot mentality means shoot as much as possible. I think it means that when you have a lane, or the opportunity arises, you should opt to take the shot - i.e. take the shot over trying to make that extra pass.

It's not like this team is flying down the wing and shooting into the chest every chance they get ala Craig Johnson. But how many times have we seen the Kings hang on to the puck a little too long and get it blocked because the defense has a chance to get in position? I think that is what TM is talking about.

There are things I don't care for in TM's system, but this is one thing I agree with him on.
But TM DOES want the players to players to wait for the defender to get in their lane because the shot mentality is about shooting with traffic. His problem is that they try to pick corners or look for tips on the side. He actually DOES want the team to just wing at the goalies chest. The real problem is that ur guys can't seem to A) get it through traffic and B) we are almost never around in the right places for rebounds. Hrd to say what that problem is really... We don't crash the net properly... Bad luck... Good rebound control by The goalie... Good defense by the other team to clear them. Either way we need to pounce on rebounds and we don't or can't.

Lst night Ellis gave up a rebound on nearly every shot he faced. We had virtually no rebound opportunities. They were always 3-4 feet to the wrong side or something.

JDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 01:46 PM
  #12
Tadite
Registered User
 
Tadite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rhode Island
Country: United States
Posts: 4,789
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zad View Post
The Kings also have more average shots per game than shot against.
By roughly a single shot. I know it's the cool thing to pick on the Kings but we're the 12th best team in the league and a grand total of 1 point from being a top-10 team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zad View Post
Nobody is claiming that the team shouldn't shoot but the shot mentality theory as a means of generating goals and wins at the mechanical sacrifice of quality scoring chances is nonsense...and has been so.
Yes. Hence the problem with your point. TM doesn't coach "shoot, shoot, shoot" he coaches crash the net, skate the puck in, grind, make the pretty pass, et cetria. He only starts to break out the "shot mentality" thing when we aren't doing ****. When we don't go for the pass, when we don't take the shot, when we don't do anything. The whole idea behind the "shot mentality' thing is just when you don't have a good straight forward option just take the shot. Not that it's the only thing or even the first thing but that it's the best choice when in doubt.

Tadite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 01:50 PM
  #13
mbar
Registered User
 
mbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 675
vCash: 500
I'd rather fire the pp coach rather then murray. Our team this year with even an average power play is a very dangerous team. That would be my first priority in the offseason.

mbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 02:02 PM
  #14
Scrivezina
AMart Jazz Hands!!!
 
Scrivezina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: RSM, CA
Posts: 2,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishhead View Post
I have to disagree with this, it's way too simplistic. I don't think shot mentality means shoot as much as possible. I think it means that when you have a lane, or the opportunity arises, you should opt to take the shot - i.e. take the shot over trying to make that extra pass.

It's not like this team is flying down the wing and shooting into the chest every chance they get ala Craig Johnson. But how many times have we seen the Kings hang on to the puck a little too long and get it blocked because the defense has a chance to get in position? I think that is what TM is talking about.

There are things I don't care for in TM's system, but this is one thing I agree with him on.
That's the problem with Murray's plan. It's too simplistic. If you see the way he runs the defense, he has overlap and pitching in from various positions. This is probably the best defensive system LA has ever seen. Contrast the depth of the defense versus the dump and chase mentality or the physically wear down an opponent until they make a mistake strategy. There is very little offensive overlap.

We don't really see anything outside of the one dimensional simplified offensive strategy. Passing is not the issue because their game of puck possession is rather weak in general. The offensive strategy is so poor because they are so defensive minded. They do not risk or develop and instead make bad quality passes thus resulting to a a poor shot mentality because they don't know what else to do. If their puck possession was better, then I could agree with you more on the passing game theory but I do not see it as such. We see poor shots being taken because the team plays more to the outside as opposed to driving deeper into the offensive zone due to a lack of overlap.

Our greatest strength is also our biggest weakness. We can't play a two dimensional game and that is why our goal scoring is so low.

Scrivezina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 02:03 PM
  #15
Telos
Moderator
In Dean We Trust
 
Telos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Reno, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 26,292
vCash: 3578
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
I would have significantly less of a beef with Murray if he would recognize the issue, take a look at what Kompon is doing, admit that he himself doesn't have the answer, and seeks out a better offensive coordinator. I get that they are all pals and livelihoods are at stake, but that is professional sports. We need results. I know Murray is a decent head coach and is personable with the players, he just needs some work on his contemporary offensive game, and Kompon is not the solution. Lombardi only has control over one person on the coaching staff, and that is Murray himself, the assistant's are Murray's decision, and he needs to make the right one.

__________________

“Every good army needs a couple of criminals.” - Dean Lombardi
Telos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 02:09 PM
  #16
Fishhead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDM View Post
But TM DOES want the players to players to wait for the defender to get in their lane because the shot mentality is about shooting with traffic. His problem is that they try to pick corners or look for tips on the side. He actually DOES want the team to just wing at the goalies chest. The real problem is that ur guys can't seem to A) get it through traffic and B) we are almost never around in the right places for rebounds. Hrd to say what that problem is really... We don't crash the net properly... Bad luck... Good rebound control by The goalie... Good defense by the other team to clear them. Either way we need to pounce on rebounds and we don't or can't.

Lst night Ellis gave up a rebound on nearly every shot he faced. We had virtually no rebound opportunities. They were always 3-4 feet to the wrong side or something.
When I mean defenders, I mean the guys up top that block the shots. Just a poor description on my part.

The problem, I think, is that the players are a step behind and lack instinctual play with each other. I see the same thing happen over and over.

The puck ends up high with a d-man, and no one is usually in front of the net. The D hold the puck, or walk the line, waiting for the forward to get there. The forwards get in front in a couple seconds, but by then the opposing team is in perfect position to block our point shots. This happens constantly, and it's why we have so many point shots blocked.

What really bugs me about this, is when we have possession off a cycle or around the face off dot, the opposite winger is almost always creeping towards the high slot or backing off. Because we like to set up that point shot, this player should be going to the net before the pass to the point is made, creating traffic so the D can shoot immediately. Not only does it create traffic, it opens up options for the passer because the defensive forward on the far side has to drop back to cover the high slot, leaving the far D open for a pass.

This is exactly what the Kings do when they are winning bunches of games. I have no idea why they stop doing it, it's like the players are confused about where to go.

Fishhead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 02:42 PM
  #17
Kurrilino
Go Stoll Go
 
Kurrilino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,529
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Kurrilino
First of all,

great article and thanks for the time you invested.
I completely agree that Murrays system is outdated and depends on lucky bounces.
This is not a hockey system.
Of course i'm pointing on Kompon before Murray but i feel both have to go

What we should looking for is how can we create quality chances instead of quantity.
To be honest Ellis didn't stand on his head to shut us down 2 times.
We had a lot of shots but mostly from the board just thrown to the goal.
Every AHL goalie would look like Roy against us.

We are at a point where we need much more than doing the little things right.
We need a coordinated offense system with creative well trained moves.

If someone asks me, hire an unknown coach in the offseason who is a genious
in game tactiks and 2 way games. Some AHL teams play impressive hockey

Kurrilino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 02:56 PM
  #18
MxK1NGS
Registered User
 
MxK1NGS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 2,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurrilino View Post
First of all,

great article and thanks for the time you invested.
I completely agree that Murrays system is outdated and depends on lucky bounces.
This is not a hockey system.
Of course i'm pointing on Kompon before Murray but i feel both have to go

What we should looking for is how can we create quality chances instead of quantity.
To be honest Ellis didn't stand on his head to shut us down 2 times.
We had a lot of shots but mostly from the board just thrown to the goal.
Every AHL goalie would look like Roy against us.

We are at a point where we need much more than doing the little things right.
We need a coordinated offense system with creative well trained moves.

If someone asks me, hire an unknown coach in the offseason who is a genious
in game tactiks and 2 way games. Some AHL teams play impressive hockey
Pete DeBoer? From what I have been hearing from Panthers fans is that he was a good coach with not many good players to work with.. Could he be the one? Cory Clouston does not interest me one bit however..

MxK1NGS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 03:05 PM
  #19
Sydor25
LA Kings
 
Sydor25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: North Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 21,828
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Sydor25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingsation8 View Post
Pete DeBoer? From what I have been hearing from Panthers fans is that he was a good coach with not many good players to work with.. Could he be the one? Cory Clouston does not interest me one bit however..
I wouldn't be surprised if Ottawa hires him.

Sydor25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 03:13 PM
  #20
DoktorJeep
Original Bandwagoner
 
DoktorJeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: LA
Posts: 386
vCash: 500
Really nice article. I'd like to see how the Kings rank with relation to other teams in terms of their win/loss record when scoring opportunities (as opposed to shots) are compared. The Bourne article you linked to made a claim about how skilled players will hold onto the puck when outnumbered in the offensive zone and wait for help. This is contrasted with the play a less skilled player would make in the same situation, which is chip the puck further down the boards into the defensive zone, which is a typically results in turning over possession of the puck to the other team; or getting off a shot with no traffic in front of the net, resulting in an easy save and the puck going the other way.

You see the Kings play this system, but then you have to look at the roster. How many players do they truly have that can take on multiple defenders, buy time and wait for help? I can count 2, and we all know who they are: AK & JW. Brown tries to do it, and we all know how those plays typically turn out (and then we rag on him for "trying to do to much" and "not playing his game"). But otherwise, who is there?

We've seen Lokti do it this season at times, but then TM and DL made the bonehead moves of taking him out of the lineup and sending him down to the Manch. But beyond that, there isn't much in terms of what who is on the big team now and who is coming available as a prospect. I guess you could put Schenn in this category, but honestly, from what I remember of him in the early part of the season, I don't recall him having the puck on his stick in the offensive zone much. He'll probably get there, but I don't think he'll be able to show as much as Lokti has so far by next year.

It would have been nice to see DL land someone like Ray Whitney. Sure the guy isn't amazing, but he has that ability to buy some time in the o-zone. DL needs to address this issue in the off season. The free agents I see out there that are somewhat realistic to expect the Kings to sign and can play this type of game are:

Vinny Prospal
Kopecky
Simon Gagne (he seem's like he's caught JW-itis these past few years, but he still put up 40pts)
Jussi Jokinen
Milan Hejduk (he get's my vote for who DL should target in the offseason)

DoktorJeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 03:19 PM
  #21
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,411
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
The system needs to complement the players. Up front the system fits. On the blue line it does not. Johnson and Doughty need to be allowed to attack the back door and pinch more often. Having those guys literally stand on the blue line and either fire shots wide or fire shots that don't even come close to getting to the net because they don't have cannons. You have to let the defensemen skate on the PP and you need to attack the middle of the ice more often. You now see teams jumping the dump before the Kings even get into the zone. More movement, bottom line.

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 03:25 PM
  #22
JT Dutch*
Cult of Personality
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zad View Post
“Shot mentality”. If you pay attention to Terry Murray’s quotes, this little gem pervades even the most benign discussion about the difference between winning and losing. “You have to have that shot mentality” he preaches tried and true to his philosophy that has led players to parrot the same tune.

I have written my share of articles about its fallacy. I am not the only one, as Justin Bourne has chimed in and called this out-dated method of offense “a horrible idea.”
... The only problem with the premise of this article is that the NHL hasn't only existed for this season. If you go back a little while, just to the beginning of the "shootout era", and look at the numbers there - you see the merit of what Terry Murray is doing.

This season, the total winning percentage of teams being outshot is .528. That's not dominant, but it IS a winning record.

Last season, teams being outshot had a winning percentage of .503. It was pretty much a flip of a coin; there was no apparent difference whatsoever.

In 08-09, though - teams being outshot had a winning percentage of just .467.

In 07-08, teams being outshot had a winning percentage of .468.

In 06-07, teams being outshot had a winning percentage of .460. Seeing a trend here?

In 05-06, teams being outshot had a winning percentage of .453.

And that's just going back over the last six seasons, including this one.

It's safe to say that this season appears to be an anomaly, and that Terry Murray's shot mentality is usually the right way to approach the majority of games.

JT Dutch* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 03:35 PM
  #23
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
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattias View Post
Is there any better coaches out there for hire?
There BE a couple

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDM View Post
Yes Tony, defense does win championships. However I don't think Murray is capable of winning a championship because he is incapable of making sound adjustments. In the playoffs, where you play the same team up to 7 times, 4 different times in a cup run, you are going to have to make adjustments along the way, both in game and in general between games. Murray simply sticks with his plan come rain or shine, he'll or high water. The games that this method fails him during the regular season even out to where it is a decent philosophy..w. When you are playing new teams every day.

However when it comes down to specific mathups and playing other coaches who WILL make adjustments to your game as a series goes along, preaching nothing more than 'stay the course' becomes nothing more than a noble thing for the captain of the titanic to say after it's too late.

I appreciate what Murray has done here and i think the defensive lessons he has taught our team will not go away. Kopi will continue to be a selke candidate thanks to Murray and for that am very grateful. But in don't believe that Murray has what it takes to win a cup. Too many things factor in to the playoffs that make his regular season career wins record virtually meaningless.
I wont address the defense because for the most part its very good. Offense is another story. (And YES I am keenly aware that we are missing our two most dynamic and productive forwards.) Murray's dump and cycle system keeps the puck on the outside. I should not have to tell you that shots from the outside have a significantly lower chance of finding net than those taken from what are considered high scoring areas [between the dots and down from there on diagonals toward the posts.] In our system it is more difficult to get the puck to those areas because defenders have an easier time keeping the play outside when the puck is more often there than being brought through the center ice of the ice or passed into, while forwards cut or cross through those same high scoring areas.

Example: Can you remember the last time you saw the Kings score a goal like the
Koivu's last night. The closest was Brown to Stoll against Phoenix but even that wasn't really the same -- that was more crash the net and dish than pass across the slot to an open man. We are so busy cycling on the boards (welded to them at times) that we don't get a man in front or in the slot freeing himself up to get a pass and take a quick open shot or dishing to another player as the defenders react to a player with the puck in a high scoring area. Our system plays into the hands of good defensive teams: it keeps the puck on the outside and away from the net, where the defenders want to keep.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JDM View Post
But TM DOES want the players to players to wait for the defender to get in their lane because the shot mentality is about shooting with traffic. His problem is that they try to pick corners or look for tips on the side. He actually DOES want the team to just wing at the goalies chest. The real problem is that ur guys can't seem to A) get it through traffic and B) we are almost never around in the right places for rebounds. Hrd to say what that problem is really... We don't crash the net properly... Bad luck... Good rebound control by The goalie... Good defense by the other team to clear them. Either way we need to pounce on rebounds and we don't or can't.

Lst night Ellis gave up a rebound on nearly every shot he faced. We had virtually no rebound opportunities. They were always 3-4 feet to the wrong side or something.
No, the problem is easy to spot. A workable cylce on the boards usually requires three players, in our case forwards because out coach wants our D standing at the point. Its hard to get to the net when you have to stay on the boards. Our system makes average goalies look good. "Shots from anywhere" is a useless concept UNLESS you get men in front. We don't have men if front that often for two reasons that should be obviously apparent to those watching more than just a few games: 1) Our forwards on the cycle have to stay close to the boards to support the puck ALONG THE BOARDS. and that keeps them away from the slot and the front of the net; 2) Our offensive defensemen, with the exception of A-mart, are so busy playing catch, setting up fake shots, not taking them and passing again, doing pirouettes at the blueline and not getting quick shots through, that by the time our forwards do get in the slot or near the net they are covered so the puck gets dumped down and wash rinse repeat. The forwards dont get to the net quickly enough at other times because A-mart shoots so quickly, surprising the forwards who haven't yet moved into the high percentage areas from the boards. [Add to this that a guy like Penner who we all wanted to see in front of the net has little time there because he's too busy cycling on the boards to set up position in front.]

The system has serious flaws when put into practice with the habits of our current players. Some of those shouldn't be hard to fix. Get DD08 and JJ to learn that quick low shots have just as much chance of getting through as high hard slappers. Getting men to the front of the net off our never ending cycle is not so easy and could work if our D are given the green light to slide down along the boards more to help in the cycle or creep in on the weak side for a shot from the top of the circle or a cross ice pass back down low a la Detroit, Chicago and Nashville and Columbus (we've seen it enough against us, it should be obvious how to get it done)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishhead View Post
When I mean defenders, I mean the guys up top that block the shots. Just a poor description on my part.

The problem, I think, is that the players are a step behind and lack instinctual play with each other. I see the same thing happen over and over.

The puck ends up high with a d-man, and no one is usually in front of the net. The D hold the puck, or walk the line, waiting for the forward to get there. The forwards get in front in a couple seconds, but by then the opposing team is in perfect position to block our point shots. This happens constantly, and it's why we have so many point shots blocked.

What really bugs me about this, is when we have possession off a cycle or around the face off dot, the opposite winger is almost always creeping towards the high slot or backing off. Because we like to set up that point shot, this player should be going to the net before the pass to the point is made, creating traffic so the D can shoot immediately. Not only does it create traffic, it opens up options for the passer because the defensive forward on the far side has to drop back to cover the high slot, leaving the far D open for a pass.

This is exactly what the Kings do when they are winning bunches of games. I have no idea why they stop doing it, it's like the players are confused about where to go.
Your point is valid, and not at odds with what I said above.. DD08 and JJ bear tons of responsibility for the offensive system's ineffectiveness. Quick low shots. It really isn't that hard to see.

What is so perplexing, but not really anymore, is the complete lack of in-game adjustment. I just attribute it to the cant teach an old dog new tricks syndrome. TM knows one way, and more adept coaches see how to play us very quickly. If our defense isn't perfect or Quicker lets in a softie or two, we are toast. Even behind two goals, the mountain is of almost insurmountable height for our plugging, plodding, stuck to the boards offense. And if you thought it was bad before, now, without Anze, if it weren't for Brown, I'm not certain any of our players could, but rarely, skate the puck into the zone. And if we don't skate it in, . . . Well its wash rinse repeat, all with very predictable results.

I know we are in the playoffs, but this team will have to do lots of things very differently if we are to score lots of goals. Barring that, perfect defense and perfect goaltending is the ONLY WAY this team goes anywhere but four and out!


Last edited by DIEHARD the King fan: 04-10-2011 at 03:41 PM.
DIEHARD the King fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 04:19 PM
  #24
Zad
HFB Partner
 
Zad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: OC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishhead View Post
I have to disagree with this, it's way too simplistic. I don't think shot mentality means shoot as much as possible. I think it means that when you have a lane, or the opportunity arises, you should opt to take the shot - i.e. take the shot over trying to make that extra pass.

It's not like this team is flying down the wing and shooting into the chest every chance they get ala Craig Johnson. But how many times have we seen the Kings hang on to the puck a little too long and get it blocked because the defense has a chance to get in position? I think that is what TM is talking about.

There are things I don't care for in TM's system, but this is one thing I agree with him on.
That is exactly what it means. He has said it clearly. I haven't pulled the quote yet, but he has flat out proclaimed that a certain number of minimum shots have to head to the net, something like 60 or 70, etc. and using those odds and getting 1/2 of them or something on net, we increase our chance of scoring goals and winning games. It's almost laughable when one breaks it down but that is precisely his offensive strategy.

Zad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2011, 04:24 PM
  #25
Zad
HFB Partner
 
Zad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: OC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JT Dutch View Post
... The only problem with the premise of this article is that the NHL hasn't only existed for this season. If you go back a little while, just to the beginning of the "shootout era", and look at the numbers there - you see the merit of what Terry Murray is doing.

This season, the total winning percentage of teams being outshot is .528. That's not dominant, but it IS a winning record.

Last season, teams being outshot had a winning percentage of .503. It was pretty much a flip of a coin; there was no apparent difference whatsoever.

In 08-09, though - teams being outshot had a winning percentage of just .467.

In 07-08, teams being outshot had a winning percentage of .468.

In 06-07, teams being outshot had a winning percentage of .460. Seeing a trend here?

In 05-06, teams being outshot had a winning percentage of .453.

And that's just going back over the last six seasons, including this one.

It's safe to say that this season appears to be an anomaly, and that Terry Murray's shot mentality is usually the right way to approach the majority of games.
Thank you for digging that up. I appreciate what you do around here more than you think. There is a difference between a shot mentality that emphasizes quality shots and one that just relies on shoot regardless of position and circumstance. The latter is Murray. The former is sanity. There is in any system some overlap. Of course, when you are in the offensive zone and there is no play there, you take the shot. Can't hurt. But when I see our players literally looking away from open passing lanes for one timers and shooting lanes from high percentage areas that require some stick handling or skating to get open (Stoll did it twice last night, Handzus once, that I saw) to get the shot to the point and fire away, I see a system that is broken...or should I saw, never worked.

Zad 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 04:49 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.