I think the team is missing a hunger and killer instinct (2 goal leads blow, horrible tailspin) and I see what kind of player Clarke is.. he's a winner and has moxie like Durzi did. I think the condensed schedule exposed Kopi and DD in January.. 10 games in 17 days coming up. Maybe RV will add a spark but my feeling is roster needs a youth and skill injection.
Hey don’t get me wrong, I completely agree and am sold on what Clarke brings. It’s why he needed more reps earlier in the season so that needing him presented lower risk than it does now. If he plays now part of that risk is adjusting to the NHL game and its speed and figuring out how to get the best from him. Now with so little NHL game time it represents a much bigger gamble.
The Kings really need to get away from sitting back and playing prevent defense (1-3-1) when they have a 2 goal lead. This tendency leads to waves of attack by the opposing team and lets them back in the game. Instead of playing to not let the other team score the next goal, they should be playing to score the next goal.
Ding ding ding. 100 out of 100 for the exact list of prefigured synapses that have permeated the Blake/Koala regime.
But dont leave out they are like 2-8 ahead in 2 goal games - that cant be all on the system - the players lack the determination it seems. 100% agree the 1-3-1 has to go and def is a part of the problem.
Yea I hope the Kings 1-3-1 era is over. It stopped being effective.
Most teams don’t beat the Oilers without their goaltender having a stellar outing. That’s why they’ve won like 18 of the last 19.
I'm gonna let you in on a little secret. That whole "tilting the ice" thing doesn't much matter in terms of who wins the game. Corsi For %, Shots For %, even Expected Goals For %, all those stats that advanced stat nerds rely on to see who is "tilting the ice"? Very little correlation if any to who actually scores more goals than the other.
Statto would argue the exact opposite of what I just argued. That's how you know.
This is like looking at the weather report from yesterday when it snowed and saying that you shouldn't look to weather forecasts for later in the week because we know what's going to happen since it snowed yesterday. PDO correlates to what happened in any one game because it's literally descriptive of what happened on the ice. It has little to no value when it comes what to reasonably expect going forward. The other ones you list might not be descriptive of the result in any one game but the longer that teams pile together advantages in each of those categories you list, the more likely they are to be at the top of the league.
I got nothing
Again, good teams win more games, and good teams also have high PDO. PDO is highly correlated with goals for and of point percentage for teams. About two months ago everyone was weirding out about how unsustainable Vancouver's start was. I posted at the time that they're a good team winning with a high PDO against weak competition. Here we are, Vancouver is still tops in PDO, and leading the league in point percentage.
PDO is descriptive of what has happened. It has absolutely no means of differentiating shot quality for or against. It has minimal—if any—value in telling you how a team might perform going forward based on a team’s ability to control game flow over a larger period.
There is plenty that can be measured discretely in hockey. For example, we have enough information now on all goals scored over at least a couple of decades to know how often a shot from any location goes in the net. In many ways it’s similar to launch angle and exit velocity in baseball. If I hit a ball with a 100 mph exit velocity at a launch angle of 15 degrees, we can measure the probability of what the outcome will be with that ball. That doesn’t mean it will result in a particular outcome that single time, but if I keep hitting balls a 100 mph with a launch angle of 15 degrees, I’ll very likely have a baseline level of success with those outcomes.
