Toggle sidebar

Kings Article: How Did the Best Possession Team in Hockey Miss the Playoffs?

Good article. The Kings aren't a bad team by any stretch. That's why I'm not panicking. It was an imperfect storm of a number of things when added together was too much for them to overcome. The Kings are much more likely to bounce back with a few shrewd moves than get worse.
 
you-miss.jpg
 
Fatigue caught up to the Kings after 3 years of extra hockey against physical teams

As a Canucks fan, my opinion is as follows:

The Kings were simply fatigued/exhausted/jaded this year, and simply didn't have that extra gear. Given the travel, physicality, wear, tear, etc., I'd argue that the NHL is the toughest league to play in in all of pro sports. With players getting bigger, younger, and faster with each passing year, we are constantly seeing increasing levels of parity.

The Kings made the Western Conference and/or beyond for three straight years, combined with many of their players participating in Sochi. On top of that, many of the teams that they faced were very physical (San Jose, St. Louis, Anaheim), and so the mind and body can only take so much.


If anything - I think missing the playoffs will be a blessing in disguise for the LA Kings and their players. They can use this time to rejuvenate, while also dealing with a few players' contracts (i.e. Mike Richards, Slava Voynov, etc.).

I think the Kings will be a dangerous team against next year and given their line-up, I would not be surprised to be Stanley Cup Champions (or "champians" as Brad Marchand would say) in 2016.
 
Possession is only 9/10's of making the playoffs.

Shoot the puck Kopitar!!
 
I think if you breakdown how many players met the following criteria, you'll see what the root of the Kings' problems were this season.

- How many players exceeded their career average in performance?

- How many players matched their career average?

- How many players performed below their career average?

A lot of big salaries players will fall under the last category, which led to their downfall. The subpar performances from these players could be attributed to a number of factors, but simply put, they weren't good enough this year.
 
Ziggy Stardust said:
I think if you breakdown how many players met the following criteria, you'll see what the root of the Kings' problems were this season.

- How many players exceeded their career average in performance?

- How many players matched their career average?

- How many players performed below their career average?

A lot of big salaries players will fall under the last category, which led to their downfall. The subpar performances from these players could be attributed to a number of factors, but simply put, they weren't good enough this year.
Click to expand...

Allow me...

Exceeded - Toffoli, Doughty (by far the Kings best player this season and it's not even close), Muzzin, King, Lewis, McNabb, Pearson, Clifford, Regehr, McBain, Nolan, Shore.

Matched - Carter, Gaborik, Martinez, Sekera, Jones.

Below - Kopitar, Williams, Brown, Stoll, Richards, Greene, Quick.

(Not based on points, but how I believe they performed.)
 
Quick is at least matched. He did well most nights while playing in 71 games.

Muzzin was terrific this season. If he could just put everything together and be more consistent defensively next season, he'd be looking very good.
 
I did think Quick played poorly, but he certainly wasn't at the level we expect. We've been spoiled.

Muzzin proved once again that he's the Kings second best defenseman and that's why he's on the top pairing.
 
**** me. I meant "I didn't think Quick played poorly, but he certainly wasn't at the level we expect." Not being able to edit blows.
 
Connor McHindu said:
As a Canucks fan, my opinion is as follows:

The Kings were simply fatigued/exhausted/jaded this year, and simply didn't have that extra gear. Given the travel, physicality, wear, tear, etc., I'd argue that the NHL is the toughest league to play in in all of pro sports. With players getting bigger, younger, and faster with each passing year, we are constantly seeing increasing levels of parity.

The Kings made the Western Conference and/or beyond for three straight years, combined with many of their players participating in Sochi. On top of that, many of the teams that they faced were very physical (San Jose, St. Louis, Anaheim), and so the mind and body can only take so much.
Click to expand...

I think it's a valid theory, but they were still barnstorming possession numbers the whole second half of the season. They started out really bad and made up all that ground and had the best shot differential in the league. Getting actual scoring from it has been an issue though since this run began, and burning the candle on both ends caught up to them, plus they've still done enough to make it in almost any other year except this one.

I think Andrew does a great job highlighting the distribution of goals, something very little can be done to control. A lot of the times they did score, came at times when they didn't need them. A great record in games decided by 2+ goals, and not so great when they were decided by 1 goal.

They ultimately need better production from depth players too.
 
2.42 GA/G. Worst number in 5 seasons. More defensive breakdowns which resulted in backbreaking goals than I can remember.
 
It's simple!! Hockey is a game of mistakes! And when you play a system that is geared for possession, but can't tolerate many mistakes, you're going to lose some games! I think DD said it best at the very start of the year that to him the Corsi was meaningless. And some thought he was only saying that because Muzzin's was so high, and higher than his. Also, its a weird stretch to call it the posession stat. It's not like they are timing all game long which team and/or players possess the puck. Look it up!
 
Like all stats, they can be misleading/eploited to suite ones argument.

But, stats like corsi, are still legitimate tools to measure success with the puck.
 
Chazz Reinhold said:
Corsi closely correlates to actual possession time in timed studies: http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2...nd-part-1?_ga=1.86096720.933672149.1428370765

http://www.jewelsfromthecrown.com/2013/11/8/5081592/corsi-explained
Click to expand...
Maybe! But it's just counting up all shot attempts for and against. Shots that miss, shots blocked, shot from the boards, you name it. So, if you're always shooting, your corsi is high. The stat assumes everyone shoots with the same efficiency. Trevor Lewis is just as efficient as Patrick Kane!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom