Logan Couture, Terry Murray, and 200

[agentfouser]

Hey fellas, I don't post on HF much anymore, but I do read frequently. I wrote this long post for another forum, so you might see it there, but I wanted to share it here as well.

I was thinking about the pivotal moments in last night's game, and it reminded me of the pivotal moments in last year's game 7. Here's a refresher: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzvuqj_DdUI.

The commentators don't do a good job of highlighting it, but the Sharks forwards really blew that game right there. They had a great chance to score, which they missed; but, really, that was a bit of luck to miss that. That's not the real issue. The real issue is that as soon as they turned the puck over and the Kings cleared the zone, the Sharks forwards all went right to the bench for a change. Patrick Marleau, Logan Couture, and Joe Pavelski are the three forwards. I'd actually put the greatest fault on Marleau, because he's the highest forward when the Kings get the puck and clear the zone. He goes for an ineffective check near the bench, and then seems to say, "Well, as long as I'm here, I might as well come off." Couture and Pavelski cruise over to the bench at their leisure. Meanwhile, the Kings break the other way for a four-on-two. I remember commenting at the time that it was staggeringly bad timing for a change, and it ultimately cost them the game and the series.

Now consider last night's winning goal. Here's the best clip, though I don't think it will embed: http://video.kings.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=612529.

The Sharks try to break the puck out, and the Kings' up-ice pressure forces a bad pass, and then a bit of broken play in the neutral zone; exactly what the Kings want to do to slow down the Sharks' attack. The critical moment is when Kopitar picks up the puck at center ice, and dishes it to Williams, who can attack down the right wing. At that point, the numbers for each side don't look terrible. The Kings are poised to break in and attack, and Kopitar clearly has position on the two nearby Sharks forwards. Still, it's an attack that could be defended with hustle. The problem for the Sharks is that they didn't hustle. Matthew Nieto and (again) Logan Couture, instead of backchecking with a purpose, each just sort of cruise into the defensive zone, going through the motions of defending but not picking up anyone. Kopitar is literally right between them when he picks up the puck and has the room to not only get a shot, but to make a move and score easily. If Couture and/or Nieto had hustled back on that, Kopitar would have had a much more difficult time.

These two moments are single events in two series that were as long as they could be (barring long overtimes). And, I'm a #fancystat guy at heart, so I try not to put too much importance into single events; really, when you break down most goals, there's a major element of luck for a puck to bounce the right way, the goalie to get his angle off slightly, and so on. Nevertheless, I think it's really important to highlight these two critical moments, because I think that they illustrate where the Kings and Sharks franchises have differed. The key to this difference, I think, is Terry Murray.

For reference, here is our HockeyDB page: http://www.hockeydb.com/stte/los-angeles-kings-6664.html.
And here is Kopitar's: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=83457

Recall that before Murray, we had Marc Crawford, truly a terrible coaching hire by Lombardi and one that still baffles me. In two seasons under him, we got 68 and 71 points, and were really bad. Part of that was personnel, no doubt, and those terrible years did have some benefits in decent draft positions. Still, things were bad, and I think it came down to the fact that Crawford really had no discernible system and certainly no sound defensive structure. His philosophy is best described by reference to Harry Redknapp, the English football coach, whose plan is to tell the players JFRAAB: "Jus' Fackin' Run Around A Bit." In those years, we conceded 283 and 266 goals, far more than we could hope to score with the talent at our disposal.

Crawford was, mercifully, replaced by Terry Murray, literally a human ambien pill, but a coach that did us a great deal of good. Murray taught the Kings players to play a structured defensive game. I remember news reports of his very first practice, in which he got out spray paint, put dots on the ice, and had players start sticking to a defensive plan that was based on defending "home plate," the area from the face-off dots back to the goal. He instilled defensive responsibility in everyone: Anze Kopitar went from 77 points in 2007-08 under Crawford to 66 points in 2008-09 under Murray. People moaned about Kopitar's lack of production, and accused him of being a lazy European, a guy who would never be "the guy," a player who would never be truly elite. But that year, Kopitar and the rest of the Kings core learned to play a 200-foot game. Over Murray's three years, our goals-against dropped from 266 under Crawford to 234, 219, and 198. We became a team built on a foundation of *excellent* defensive play and *enough* scoring to win. A team that scored 2.8 and allowed 3.5 in Crawford's first year, by Murray's final full year, we scored 2.7 and conceded just 2.4.

Now, obviously, we made major personnel changes in those years, and core players--like Kopitar, Doughty, and Quick--either joined the team or really matured into elite players. So it's not totally fair to compare Crawford to Murray. Nevertheless, I think it's hard to imagine us being the team we are today without Murray's defensive schooling. With Murray and now Sutter, we have players who are absolutely committed to playing 200-foot games, not to going for a change when they're tired of playing offense or cruising back and going through the motions.

I also think that Lombardi's focus on "character" in players has been a massive boon. Our players are clearly committed to winning and to doing everything it takes to win in a way that San Jose's top players just are not. And really, I don't mean to poke fun at them or insult them. The Sharks are family, and I genuinely feel bad that they haven't had the kind of success we have had. They are and have been a very good team, but ultimately they have not had a coach or a core of players with the necessary ethic to win these big games. And it's unfortunate for them, because I think Thornton, Marleau, and maybe Pavelski, as talented as they are, are simply not guys who can lead that team to a Cup. If I were the Sharks' management, I'd blow up the team--but they cannot, because those players are under contract with no-movement-clauses for several more years. They'll come back next year with basically the same team, and it's hard to see them doing a whole lot better. Maybe they will; I'm notoriously bad at picking winners, and if we're not going to win, the Sharks are my second choice and it's not even really close. Who knows.

Anyhow, just my thoughts on the past two playoff series against San Jose. The Kings still do have their problems, and as some will might know, I'm not a huge fan of Sutter or certain members of our defensive corps. Still, one cannot deny success, and here it is. I'm still grinning compulsively.

Click to read more...

 

[ukyo]

Excellent post.

I too have the sharks second on my list because my son is going to grow up a sharks fan (even though I have historically hated them). I really hope they start adding players that have that ethic and killer instinct that the Kings have by the time I have to explain to my son what it takes to be a champion.

But in the meantime, I'm absolutely ecstatic that it's my favorite team that has those players today.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Miss you buddy, great post!

It's very true, the evolution of this team had to happen the way it did and I feel for SJ's seeming inability to win in the clutch. It's sort of baffling even with your great explanation.

 

[TonySCV]

Pure gold.

 

[Nefarious]

Excellent post. Loved it.

 

[Quattro]

Great post. Terry Murray does deserve much credit for the defensive character of this team.

I especially enjoyed the Harry Redknapp reference. As a Southampton fan, I always like to hear him get bashed - lol

 

[BigBrown]

Happy to see someone else giving Terry Murray some credit and if general managers around the league had half a brain he'd be back as a bridge NHL coach already. It's easy to forget how long Kopitar had to come to have this good of an allround game. His defensive game during the Crawford era primarily consisted of him crouching while putting his stick flat on the ice to deny the cross ice pass, and look at him now.

 

[ibleedkings]

TM still received a Championship ring right? The front office had much respect for what he did for the Kings.

 

[agentfouser]

TM still received a Championship ring right? The front office had much respect for what he did for the Kings.

Did he really? I never heard that, pretty remarkable if it's true.

 

[ibleedkings]

Did he really? I never heard that, pretty remarkable if it's true.

Im almost positive he did.

 

[agentfouser]

Great post. Terry Murray does deserve much credit for the defensive character of this team.

I especially enjoyed the Harry Redknapp reference. As a Southampton fan, I always like to hear him get bashed - lol

I know him from his time at Spurs. Whenever a young player does well for us, I always hear 'Arry's voice saying "top lad."

 

[agentfouser]

Miss you buddy, great post!

It's very true, the evolution of this team had to happen the way it did and I feel for SJ's seeming inability to win in the clutch. It's sort of baffling even with your great explanation.

I'm always here, in your heart.

 

[TonySCV]

TM still received a Championship ring right? The front office had much respect for what he did for the Kings.

Yes he did.

 

[damacles1156]

Dean Lombardi made sure Terry Murray received a Stanley Cup Ring.

 

[Yammer]

With Murray and now Sutter, we have players who are absolutely committed to playing 200-foot games, not to going for a change when they're tired of playing offense or cruising back and going through the motions.

I also think that Lombardi's focus on "character" in players has been a massive boon. Our players are clearly committed to winning and to doing everything it takes to win in a way that San Jose's top players just are not.

This is a well written encomium on systems, structure and discipline; and the results are certainly there.

But while I think you're right, and also that the Kings are smart to have adopted this successful method, it also makes me kind of sad.

I don't watch hockey to observe science. I want to be amazed. I know just enough about playing the sport to be blown away at the abilities of NHL stars. Abilities that, under modern systems play, are constrained - all wild improvisational flights to be scorned, the gladatorial elan of one on one challenge replaced with soberly effective tactics.

But it must feel good to watch your team carry around the Cup, of course. Perhaps it is even amazing.

 

[Buddy The Elf]

I'm pretty sure they lobbied for Terry Murray's name on the Cup too but they got shot down by the NHL.