GDT: Los Angeles Kings at Calgary Flames - December 29, 2014 - 6:00 p.m. (PST)

[Chain]

You guys are either being purposely obtuse or just not properly reading what I wrote. nowhere did I suggest we deserved to win because we corsi'ed them. Corsi is a big picture stat but if we're playing towards the league lead in it as per usual it's good for long term success. Tonight was a microcosm of the Kings in that we were massive corsi kings but let ourselves down on defense and didn't truly press the issue on offense. Regardless, we DID outplay Calgary tonight, to suggest that their rope-a-dope was an intentional strategy or that full-game PK defense is the way to go is insane.

And actually, you're just flat out demonstrating a complete misunderstanding, because those stats ARE broken down by game situation--when casually spit out here, it's usually measuring basic 5v5 play; you know, how you spend most of the game. It's just that not every post needs a disclaimer.

Unless you're just suggesting the way to be successful is to hope for two bounces then just sit on your hands the rest of the game and pray. Then I don't know what else to tell you. "Just take a lead and PK the rest of the game?" Really? That's not going to make you successful in today's NHL. Literally today it worked, but long term...you're dead in the water.

If it's just easier for you and Trolfoli, just ignore that I even used the word "corsi" and remember all the times we just waltzed around their zone with the puck for 70% of the game. We had the lead in shots on net and possession time for the last 2.5 periods, it was just a 58 minute game like last time we played the Flames. Play like that and sort out the defensive miscues and all is well, no?

The thing is...

Well, let me start by saying my two favorite sports are hockey and MMA. In both sports there is this philosophy that can be a big mistake. In MMA it's when a guy "outpoints" an opponent, whether via grappling or landing more strikes and is "winning" much of the fight, sometimes by a wide margin, and then the "losing" opponent cracks the guy with momentum with a hard strike or a slick submission and finishes his opponent, winning the fight. A good example would be Melendez vs Pettis a few weeks ago where Melendez was easily "winning" the fight, controlling the action, even doing well in the striking against Pettis who is considered the superior striker...but then Pettis caught Melendez with a hard hook, rocked him, and sunk in a submission. Some might say "well, Melendez was winning so he would win the rematch", but that's a mistake. MMA fans and fighters can't just ignore those finishing skills. Hockey is actually pretty similar in that idea.

Back to the thing. The idea that we outplayed them because of the recorded Corsi stats, puck control, hits, etc, is incorrect. Ya, we beat them in things like puck control, but puck control doesn't score goals. Puck control in hockey is a nice asset but in and of itself it does not win games anymore than ball control and first downs do in football. The team that's getting first downs and controlling the ball may seem like they're outplaying the opponent, but if they're not putting it in the end-zone but the opponent throws a couple long bombs and does, they didn't outplay them. Luck can factor in but the Flames didn't just beat us two games in a row because of puck luck. When those all-important chinks in the stat armor opened up, they used skill and effort to capitalize on them and scored all-important goals and we failed to do the same.

I'm actually a big believer in the ability of stats to provide useful info and tell an accurate story, but the problem is are they the right stats, and are we placing the right amount of emphasis on each stat? Due to the limits of human knowledge and limited ability to track every single aspect, that's virtually impossible for us to do. Corsi and Fenwick both fall short. I'm not saying they're not useful to look at. I think they're very useful...but they're obviously missing something. It is an illusion to say we "outplayed" the Flames because there is only one litmus test for that and that is the scoreboard. It's a bit too easy to claim a one-game sample size is too small. Unless Corsi, Fenwick, or whatever stats we want to use match up almost exactly with the team rankings over an 82 game season (or perhaps longer), then the stats are imperfectly tracking what it means to "outplay" the opponent.

So, in my view, we outcontrolled the Flames, outshot them, outhit them, but we didn't outplay them.

 

[Pucknut50]

Once again we talk about defense while The Kings didnt even manage to score more than one goal.

Happens too often.

Exactly - But we do need defense men that can defend and move the puck not one or the other. We miss Voynov who moves the puck up ice not sideways. I am confident the Kings will step it up a notch soon. They will make the playoffs but would not be surprised if they don't get out of the first round.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I'm not going to draw out the argument because it sounds like we actually mostly agree. I disagree that we got outplayed but that's subjective anyway. Just in reference to corsi the only reason I brought it up on the first place is that we are still on an encouraging trend. The issues we have are eminently fixable and to respond to a few folks yes, string corsi numbers match up favorably with the standings at the end of the year. Depending on which stat you look at, we are top 5 in corsi, fenwick, and so on. Results will follow when we want to get our noses dirty again. The encouraging thing and the main reason I was posting that is that it's a lot easier to fix the detail issues than big picture issues. I.e. It's easier to fix getting to the net than it is to fix possession. It's easier to say go cover your man than it is to Fix getting systematically outshot every night. And so on. We don't have systematic issues. We have detail issues. And those can be fixed in a number of ways just like they can be caused in a number of ways.

Believe me, I'm much more positive about this team than I sound.

Edit: add to the mix goal differential--which we're tied for the division lead with--and we have most of the positive indicators. Things to smile/be positive about.

 

[Reclamation Project]

We're the kid that fails his physics test, but when the teacher looks at his work, she notices all the work is correct until the final step. Get your **** together!

 

[bob77]

Oh yeah of course, I'm not gonna criticise management just for not bringing Forbort up yet, they know more about the situation than I do.

I understand wanting to stick to veteran guys when we already have one rookie on the blue line, I personally just thought this would be a perfect time for Forbort's first call up but maybe that's just me. I would just like to hear Lombardi and Blake's thoughts on it.

And who may I ask is our rookie on the blue line? I have said it before, and I'll say it again, this is McNabbs 3rd season in the NHL! He's on his 3rd cup of coffee!! Now DS says after last nights game that McNabb has been struggling, and that's why he didn't play. So now they're going to give Schultz more of a look? I wonder if Schultz is playing tonight? In fairness to McNabb, he's not the only D struggling! Forbort hasn't had a cup of coffee yet! I'm sure he'd struggle somewhat as well at the outset. They'd be his first games ever! McNabb has now played close to 75 NHL games! They don't like something about his game! It's certainly not his crushing hits along the boards?

 

[DonKingKong]

Mcnabb has played 25 then 12 and now 36 games for a total of 73 games in the NHL over the past 4 NHL seasons (11/12 25 games 13/14 12 games and now in 14/15 he has 36 games). 73 games over 4 seasons still has him in his first or rookie season to me. Especially so when you add in the fact that he has finally been taught to play in an actual system where D is first and foremost for all players.

 

[damacles1156]

There is nothing wrong with McNabb's development so far. He is doing exactly what you would expect of a first year NHL defender.

This is McNabb's first steady NHL shot, he looks ok so far.