Podcast (Audio) ATKM Director of Player Development, Glen Murray - AVAILABLE NOW

[SaltyElkHunter]

I'm not asking him about his equipment or Rob Blake's equipment. I'm talking to him about his role as Director of Player Development and the development of players and how he helps direct it!

Maybe ask what his role is apart from other members on the staff. Do they all
Concentrate on specific parts of development?

 

[All The Kings Men]

Or dinosaurs.

I absolutely will ask about dinosaurs.

 

[Fishhead]

Looking back on the path you took through Sudbury to the NHL, what do you view as the main challenges prospects today face compared to what you did, and how is development different compared to what you experienced as a rookie/young player? How much do these mental aspects of a player's growth overlap with the physical development part?

 

[Herby]

The Kings have had more junior age (u-20) games played in the AHL than any team in the NHL over the past four seasons. Is this a development strategy or just the way it worked out?

What are the development pros and cons that are weighed when it comes to playing a teenager in the AHL as opposed to keeping them in Europe or the NCAA?

Is the system used throughout the organization one that he would consider complex and difficult to learn in comparison to the rest of the league?

Sorry my questions are all kind of similar, would just love to know their reasoning for the heavy AHL usage for very young prospects compared to other teams around the league.

Thanks again for doing these!

 

[All The Kings Men]

Recording at 11 today so get em in now or forever hold your peace

 

[tws38]

I don't know if I'm too late but:
Is there more of a focus on improving weaknesses or strengths or is it a process of molding players into Kings type players? Although it may sound critical, I have seen the Kings do a better job of developing defensive play and puck possession more than other elements of the game and that seems to be regardless of what the player had traditionally been.

 

[Lt Dan]

f*** I saw this too late

 

[All The Kings Men]

Here's the episode.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

It is nice to get a definitive answer on what’s going on with Turcotte.

 

[Herby]

Listening now.

Seems a bit strange to think that McDavid and Crosby were the only guys he can think of who were plug and play right away.

I understand being patient but plenty of 18, 19, 20 year old players have played big roles in the NHL this century. Two on the Kings.

 

[Sol]

Okay. I paused this podcast because some of the things that Glen Murray said were just very.. uhmm.. very unaware from the sound of it.

1. How can he use the one good season Kempe had when he was drafted 8 years ago as the last pick of the first round.. The fact they're using Kempe as a sign of patience rather than missing the fact he's a complete anomaly is really mind blowing to me. Using Kempe as your scape-goat for over-cooking prospects because they will turn in 35 goal scores is so delusional. If Kempe didnt have this anomalous season, what proof would you have at forward that this bullshit is working???

2. Okay listening to him dodge the question about the Development team being bad at developing top end forwards is very funny. Politician like. Then in the same breath talking about how Kopitar and Doughty have been great as a reason why our top end players are getting shafted from ice time is really backwards. Doughty and Kopitar thrived instantly because they were given the icetime to. Also, how he casually uses age as an excuse when many players hit the ground running in the NHL (top picks). He makes it sound like the Kings have been drafting 3rd round picks. So bad.

3. Sounds like some of the answers Murray is giving with their approach explains why they are very uninspired from the sound of it to develop these players since Kopitars carcass is still being thrown out for 25 mins a night.

I will edit as I continue to listen.

A lot of milquetoast answers given to really good questions.

 

[Schmooley]

Listening now.

Seems a bit strange to think that McDavid and Crosby were the only guys he can think of who were plug and play right away.

I understand being patient but plenty of 18, 19, 20 year old players have played big roles in the NHL this century. Two on the Kings.

I think it just proves what many on here say. It wouldnt matter if they took Zegras or Stutzle over who they got. Both would have been in the AHL or bottom six learning how to grind and play on the wall in their own zone.
There is no room on Kopitars team right now and you have to learn how to be a bottom six winger if you want to slot in.

Here's the episode.

Thanks for doing this!

 

[Sol]

I think it just proves what many on here say. It wouldnt matter if they took Zegras or Stutzle over who they got. Both would have been in the AHL or bottom six learning how to grind and play on the wall in their own zone.
There is no room on Kopitars team right now and you have to learn how to be a bottom six winger if you want to slot in.


Thanks for doing this!

Reading between the lines of everything he said is essentially they are in this really bad mindset with forward development because they are too comfortable with Kopitar getting minutes. And either they are aware and want to transition away from this or they’re comfortable with the top picks being grinders because we have vets which is the dumbest thing they could possibly do yet they’re doing it

 

[Schmooley]

Reading between the lines of everything he said is essentially they are in this really bad mindset with forward development because they are too comfortable with Kopitar getting minutes. And either they are aware and want to transition away from this or they’re comfortable with the top picks being grinders because we have vets which is the dumbest thing they could possibly do yet they’re doing it

Yea its kind of disappointing to be honest. It doesnt seem like they are interested in taking a top prospect and turning him into a top player and the best version of himself.
They are taking their picks and turning them into LA Kings property on and off the ice. Its a one size fits all approach.

 

[Herby]

I hear the word patience a million times but then you see Kupari pulled from Finland at 19 for the AHL, you see Turcotte pulled from Wisconsin at 19 for the AHL, you see Vilardi with very little pro experience put into the NHL at a position he clearly can’t play, you see Bjornfot in the AHL at 18.

It seems like he only preaches patience because so many of the high picks have just not delivered and they are buying more time. If they truly preached patience and the long-game they would have let these kids develop and dominate more in Finland, Wisconsin, wherever.

This interview really didn’t ease any concerns about the Kings ability to develop high end players.

Untraditional development paths compared to other teams, and poor results thus far. It’s not a good mix. Like RJ said, if you want to reinvent the wheel and do it your own way, like these guys have done, be prepared for criticism if the results aren’t there. I think things are pretty different if we just do the normal way of developing as opposed as the Kings way.

 

[tbrown33]

This interview was pretty enlightening. If there's a problem with forward development, perhaps the problem is Murray. Good points raised above. Kinda the opposite of what someone like Jack Han would espouse.

 

[Sol]

Yea its kind of disappointing to be honest. It doesnt seem like they are interested in taking a top prospect and turning him into a top player and the best version of himself.
They are taking their picks and turning them into LA Kings property on and off the ice. Its a one size fits all approach.

Yup. His answers to all questions was all of the above to everything. What does that indicate? A one size fits all approach. Deduce that more, they have no idea what they’re doing with high end forwards.

I hear the word patience a million times but then you see Kupari pulled from Finland at 19 for the AHL, you see Turcotte pulled from Wisconsin at 19 for the AHL, you see Vilardi with very little pro experience put into the NHL at a position he clearly can’t play, you see Bjornfot in the AHL at 18.

It seems like he only preaches patience because so many of the high picks have just not delivered and they are buying more time.

This interview really didn’t ease any concerns about the Kings ability to develop high end players.

Unconditional development paths compared to other teams, and poor results thus far. It’s not a good mix. Like RJ said, if you want to reinvent the wheel and do it your own way, like these guys have done, be prepared for criticism if the results aren’t there.

I don’t think they eased anyones concerns. In fact they confirmed our concerns with essentially “we just need more time than other organizations with our very high top picks”.

This interview confirmed for me they have no idea what they’re doing with top prospects.

This interview was pretty enlightening. If there's a problem with forward development, perhaps the problem is Murray. Good points raised above. Kinda the opposite of what someone like Jack Han would espouse.

Enlightening in a bad way unfortunately

 

[All The Kings Men]

Maybe I'm just a rube but I came away from the conversation with some interesting new insights that I had never considered before...

 

[Herby]

Maybe I'm just a rube but I came away from the conversation with some interesting new insights that I had never considered before...

I thought it was a good interview and Glenn was fairly candid, which is nice.

But I can’t help but thinking everyone else has iPods and the Kings are still burning CD’s when it comes to prospect development.

The game is a lot different than when these guys played, a lot younger too. I think it was you who mentioned a players peak being 24-27, that is peak, not making the league but peak. The making the league age is much younger. Hard to get guys in that peak when you can’t get 1st round picks to even show a pulse at the NHL level at 23 and 21 with the 2019 and 2017 examples.

Thanks for the interview.

 

[Sol]

Maybe I'm just a rube but I came away from the conversation with some interesting new insights that I had never considered before...

Some interesting tidbits and insight but a lot of the bigger issues with forward development was at the minimum confirmed that they’re having big issues with developing high end forwards. You can’t objectively listen to that podcast and think that what he made sense. However thank you for the interview. I know sometimes when you yourself are a part of the conversation you can miss some things that someone who has the ability to just listen will pick up on. Happens to me.

As simple as the fact that his only “success story” was Adrian Kempe and he was drafted before the rebuild right after a cup win. The point of a rebuild is to draft high end players and let them perform. The Kings haven’t done that. None of them have performed and yet the rebuild is supposedly done.

It simply does not work the way he explained it. The fact he has nothing to show for it is proof itself

 

[Schmooley]

As simple as the fact that his only “success story” was Adrian Kempe and he was drafted before the rebuild right after a cup win.

Also when Kempe was asked how his game suddenly blossomed he said more ice time and better linemates were the reasons. Nothing about development or learning to be a two way player. Just he finally got a chance to run with it and play like he always knew he could.

 

[All The Kings Men]

I thought it was a good interview and Glenn was fairly candid, which is nice.

But I can’t help but thinking everyone else has iPods and the Kings are still burning CD’s when it comes to prospect development.

All I can really say about that is... while the results may not be to your liking and you may disagree with the strategies or their implementation

I assure you they're not just burning CDs. I'm lobbying for the ability to say more than that.

The game is a lot different than when these guys played, a lot younger too. I think it was you who mentioned a players peak being 24-27, that is peak, not making the league but peak. The making the league age is much younger. Hard to get guys in that peak when you can’t get 1st round picks to even show a pulse at the NHL level at 23 and 21 with the 2019 and 2017 examples.

I think people need to allow for the possibility that individuals should be treated as individuals.

as Ted Lasso once said... all people are different people.

Thanks for the interview.

My pleasure

 

[King'sPawn]

All I can really say about that is... while the results may not be to your liking and you may disagree with the strategies or their implementation

I assure you they're not just burning CDs. I'm lobbying for the ability to say more than that.

I think people need to allow for the possibility that individuals should be treated as individuals.

as Ted Lasso once said... all people are different people.

My pleasure

I want to begin by saying I greatly appreciate all these interviews. And I understand there are facets we, as fans, are not privy to. It's awesome you are trying to get clearance to tell us more.

I have, at multiple times, raised issues and complaints about development. FWIW, I 100% believe they are up to date on technologies and have resources available.

As much as I enjoyed the interview, I echo the sentiments that it didn't alleviate the anxiety much, and this isn't by any fault of you. But there are a few things others have brought up, as well as a few observations of my own, which I find troubling.

- Like Herby said, they are preaching patience, but it seems sometimes they cannot pull players out of other leagues fast enough to put them in Ontario. So, I'm not sure if this is a matter of patience, but an issue of having a particular recipe for what they feel is best for the player. In some ways, it's understandable. A player who excels in Europe might benefit from coming over here to learn playing in North America. So, I'm not saying all decisions to move players over are bad. Just that it seems to contradict the preaching of patience.

- As you mentioned, individuals should be treated as individuals. I agree. Yet, it seems they follow nearly the same pattern for all players, which is my biggest critique; while it's undeniable that top-six time is hard, they treat every player like they will automatically not be able to handle it. And earlier in the conversation, Murray says that great players just "get it" within a couple months. So... if the belief is that it takes a great player to "get it" as a pro, but they always put players in lower pressure situations, it just doesn't make sense. How can a player ever "get it" if they don't even get an opportunity?

- As Sol mentioned, I agree Kempe is a good success story and a reminder of the importance of patience. But do they think waiting 8 years for your top picks to START actualizing their potential is a viable strategy?

- Finally, Murray mentioned that the roster is taken into consideration when it comes to playing time prospects get (sorry, I don't remember the exact quote; I split the podcast up and got distracted at work; so had to pause). But how does a player "earn" his way into the top six when he's competing against 6 veterans who have top-six talents? How is Kaliyev supposed to beat out Kopitar, Kempe, Fiala, Moore, Danault, and Arvidsson? What is the strategical disadvantage of, if you have a supposedly deep team, dividing up the skillsets and buoying the prospects with some additional experience?

I'm not expecting you to answer the questions, but as enlightening as it was, it also reinforces concerns of development; and it appears that the overall developmental schedule is:
- Pull the players into the AHL as soon as possible
- Play them in the AHL until they stand out as the best among teammates (or an injury occurs)
- Promote the player into the NHL. Keep him in the bottom six until he outplays six capable and experienced veterans. If he doesn't, then he's "clearly not ready". There's no in-between in interpretation there. Or the prospect has to "hope" for an injury for a player so a spot will open up for him.

This schedule just offers very little room for flexibility, or to try different approaches with different players.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Some thoughts as I'm listening to it

First reaction is wow people going in hard on Murray But I know a lot of people in various careers who are excellent at the job but not great at verbalizing it to outsiders. Not that he was bad by any means, I just get the feeling his specialty isn't elaborating to the general public.

I really like hearing--I mean, you kind of know anyway, but still nice to hear--that development is holistic, that they're really trying to get to know them as people not just players, finding out what makes them tick. I'm sure that's where the organizational continuity come in to some degree as well, having a guy like Danault help Durzi get to and from the rink, around town, as a pro, living on his own in a foreign city.

will just add to this post

 

[All The Kings Men]

Some details that I think I could have done a better job at highlighting...

Murray has only been the Director of Player Development since 2018.

Rob Blake has only been the GM since 2017.

Ontario has only been the AHL team since 2015.

Yes these guys were in the organization and yes Ontario was an affiliate but the current structure is stil a work in progress. Part of that is because the very notion of player development is a new concept within the industry. Part of that is because technology is constantly improving. Part of it is because their staff is changing.

Part of preaching patience, I believe, should be applied to the organization too.

Adrian Kempe's career spans 2 GMs, 3 head coaches and he's played for the Monarchs, Reign and Kings.

I don't even really have a point I'm building too I'm just tossing stuff out there I guess.