Toggle sidebar

Kings Article: Were the Kings out of Contention by February?

Jason Lewis

Registered User
Oct 4, 2011
5,476
1
The NHL Stanley Cup playoffs will commence tomorrow, and the LA Kings will not be taking part.

Should that be the case? Probably not.

But no excuses, it is, and it is partly by luck and partly by their own devices. As Ernest Hemingway once said to his son Gregory, "You make your own luck, Gig. You know what makes a good loser? Practice."

The Kings will have some things to practice this offseason, but some of it is simply was the situation. There are tons of practical reasons you can point to as to why the Kings missed the playoffs. We are going to hit you with at least one major one today.
Click to expand...

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Jason-Lewis/Were-the-Kings-out-of-Contention-by-February/179/67928
Click to read more...
 
Personally, I am downright fascinated with how this team works in January.

Like clockwork they are a poor midseason team and a great closeout team. Maybe it has to do with the players, the style, whatever...but they are like a good closer who was a terrible middle reliever.

I really want to look into other teams to see if there is any sort of pattern in down and up months like the Kings.
 
Kings win the games vs the Flames and they are in
Kings when three more OT games they are in.
Kings had a very good chance of being in despite Voynov, despite the slumps, the lack of scoring, the injuries.
Flames and Jets had to win a lot to keep them out.
 
onlyalad said:
Kings win the games vs the Flames and they are in
Kings when three more OT games they are in.
Kings had a very good chance of being in despite Voynov, despite the slumps, the lack of scoring, the injuries.
Flames and Jets had to win a lot to keep them out.
Click to expand...

Slow down. It's a long summer and I have to fill time somehow :laugh:
 
Guys... It's not hard to find 2 points. I mean, we can actually just point to any out of the ordinary result.Fact is, they failed to make it with the same record as 2012.

I think that says more about the conference this season than the Kings.
 
kingsholygrail said:
Guys... It's not hard to find 2 points. I mean, we can actually just point to any out of the ordinary result.Fact is, they failed to make it with the same record as 2012.

I think that says more about the conference this season than the Kings.
Click to expand...

The problem is that it was ;)
 
cruise-control-light.jpg
 


This was probably the most deflating game of the season, to the point that I figured the team was toast after this loss.

The manner in which they lost that game just gave me the impression that it may have been too late, especially when you accumulate all of the points they had given up thanks to their third period meltdowns.

Yes, I know they followed this loss up with an eight game win streak, but as we all saw, it was too little too late. They were playing catch up for months and never firmly held a playoff position from the mid-way point on.
 
kingsholygrail said:
Guys... It's not hard to find 2 points. I mean, we can actually just point to any out of the ordinary result.Fact is, they failed to make it with the same record as 2012.

I think that says more about the conference this season than the Kings.
Click to expand...

In 2011-12 the Kings made it with 95 points, and the next closest team was Calgary with 90.

I think you are totally right to say that the conference as a whole was more competitive this season.

One of the biggest problems for the Kings wasn't actually the Kings. It was the fact that Vancouver, Calgary, Minnesota, and Winnipeg all won quite a few games at the same time the Kings needed to make up ground AND overtake some of those teams. Personally, I kept waiting for Calgary to drop off, but it never happened.
 
Jason Lewis said:
Personally, I am downright fascinated with how this team works in January.

Like clockwork they are a poor midseason team and a great closeout team. Maybe it has to do with the players, the style, whatever...but they are like a good closer who was a terrible middle reliever.

I really want to look into other teams to see if there is any sort of pattern in down and up months like the Kings.
Click to expand...

3 wins (2 by 1 goal, and 1 shutout), 4 losses in OT/SO. 1 loss by 1 goal in regulation. 3 losses by 2 goals in regulation (2 of those had ENG's). 28 GF vs 36 GA.

Compared to the Flames that had 4 losses total, all but 1 was by 1 goal, the other was by 3. Interestingly, their losses were against current playoff teams, with the only bad loss being against Anaheim which was by 3 goals. And their wins against PacDiv playoff contenders was a 1-0 win against Vancouver with OT/SO wins against LA/SJ. 30 GF vs 26 GA.

Kings started at as no. 3 in team Corsi and finished no. 1 for January. But Quick slid from 6th to 9th in my goalie stats for that same month, sliding further to 11th at the beginning of February and team Corsi dropping to 3 again (I believe this was due to the loss in Washington and Florida).
 
Ziggy Stardust said:


This was probably the most deflating game of the season, to the point that I figured the team was toast after this loss.
Click to expand...


Yep. I said the same thing at that time. It felt like the Kings pushed their slump just a little too far to recover.

This team needs to be in the playoffs when the all-star break rolls around, or they're in trouble. No different than most teams really. Just too hard even with incredible stretch runs for teams to move up in the standings. It basically has to be Senators-like (and even with that crazy 20-2 run or whatever it was they STILL almost missed). Once teams are in a playoff spot solidly, it's almost impossible to displace them (unless they're the Sharks).
 
sdgulls said:
3 wins (2 by 1 goal, and 1 shutout), 4 losses in OT/SO. 1 loss by 1 goal in regulation. 3 losses by 2 goals in regulation (2 of those had ENG's). 28 GF vs 36 GA.

Compared to the Flames that had 4 losses total, all but 1 was by 1 goal, the other was by 3. Interestingly, their losses were against current playoff teams, with the only bad loss being against Anaheim which was by 3 goals. And their wins against PacDiv playoff contenders was a 1-0 win against Vancouver with OT/SO wins against LA/SJ. 30 GF vs 26 GA.

Kings started at as no. 3 in team Corsi and finished no. 1 for January. But Quick slid from 6th to 9th in my goalie stats for that same month, sliding further to 11th at the beginning of February and team Corsi dropping to 3 again (I believe this was due to the loss in Washington and Florida).
Click to expand...

Calgary was really really good against the division this year.
 
sdgulls said:
That'd be an interesting team stat, see what the points breakdown is for a team win.
Click to expand...


Hockey Prospectus has GVT, which was invented by Tom Awad. It's similar to WAR. It is goals versus threshold, so it kind of gives you a pinpoint value of how many goals their ice time is worth.

Unfortunately Voynov did not register. Here is that link nonetheless

http://www.hockeyprospectus.com/gvt-goals-versus-threshold/


War-on-ice.com and Stephen Burtch have been getting a WAR stat set up and they have actually run it back a couple of years. That one is also very fun to play around with. It shows goals and wins above replacement, so you can again get a feel for how many goals that player is worth above a replacement level player.

Here is the WAR Board

http://war-on-ice.com/WARboard.html

Basically, last year, Voynov was barely above a replacement level defenseman in GAR. He has had a significant drop off over the years.

He was 0.39 goals above replacement last year, versus 6.07 in 2012-13, and 4.55 in 2011-12.

Voynov in total, is only about 1 win above replacement. Compare that to someone like Drew, who is just over 9, or Kopitar who is almost 29.

To get the opposite side of it, Regehr is a -3.41 WAR, and fringe guys like Jordan Nolan and Kyle Clifford are a .05 and a -.3 respectively. That seems about right. Someone like Andrew Campbell, who was n't able to cut it here and went to Arizona for a better opportunity is JUST under replacement level. -0.3. So Again, seems pretty accurate for evaluative purposes.

For the most part this seems pretty accurate, as it takes into account penalties drawn/taken, various shot rates both for and against in any and all situations, as well as straight shooting stats/goal stats.
 
Last edited:
Still think it's a minor miracle that it took a slew of injuries, off-ice distractions like Voynov and EPIX, the sheer uncertainty of the Voynov situation, and honestly just crap coinflip luck to keep us out of the playoffs with the exact same record as 2012. I mean, don't get me wrong, the season is a failure; but it took complete nightmare after complete nightmare to hold this team down. And that's just the stuff we're certain about, who knows what happened behind the scenes with fatigue and such and on an individual level (like Kopitar's baby, etc.).

No excuses, as every team has issues, but in non-tank-battle years, this may be a playoff team by default.

Now if you want to break it down, I don't even look at particular losses because there are points here and there, but the road record, the OT/SO record, and third-period lead record were the most alarming trends to me, and personally, I attribute those to mental and physical fatigue.
 
Brad Doty said:
Still think it's a minor miracle that it took a slew of injuries, off-ice distractions like Voynov and EPIX, the sheer uncertainty of the Voynov situation, and honestly just crap coinflip luck to keep us out of the playoffs with the exact same record as 2012. I mean, don't get me wrong, the season is a failure; but it took complete nightmare after complete nightmare to hold this team down. And that's just the stuff we're certain about, who knows what happened behind the scenes with fatigue and such and on an individual level (like Kopitar's baby, etc.).

No excuses, as every team has issues, but in non-tank-battle years, this may be a playoff team by default.

Now if you want to break it down, I don't even look at particular losses because there are points here and there, but the road record, the OT/SO record, and third-period lead record were the most alarming trends to me, and personally, I attribute those to mental and physical fatigue.
Click to expand...

The OT Shootout record is kind of a coinflip also. There is so much variance in success and failure that it is hard to get a grasp on it. Like a few years ago the Kings were awesome in the shootout. Same shooters, same goalie, but way way better. It is dumb.

But the other thing you mentioned, that third period lead thing, yea that's something I really want to get into.

417th said:
Another really solid article. Good work. Asks some neat questions too.
Click to expand...



Thanks so much!
 
Jason Lewis said:
The OT Shootout record is kind of a coinflip also. There is so much variance in success and failure that it is hard to get a grasp on it. Like a few years ago the Kings were awesome in the shootout. Same shooters, same goalie, but way way better. It is dumb.

But the other thing you mentioned, that third period lead thing, yea that's something I really want to get into.
Click to expand...

The shootout for sure, and 4v4 OT is gimmick hockey imo as well, but the reason I lumped them together is they're sort of the "end of game fall apart" stats. Shootout is a complete coin toss, but I'm still shocked that a good team can be so very clueless at 4v4 hockey. Most nights we weren't even competitive at it.
 
Brad Doty said:
The shootout for sure, and 4v4 OT is gimmick hockey imo as well, but the reason I lumped them together is they're sort of the "end of game fall apart" stats. Shootout is a complete coin toss, but I'm still shocked that a good team can be so very clueless at 4v4 hockey. Most nights we weren't even competitive at it.
Click to expand...

Ah yea, I can see that. You are 100% correct there. It is kind of crazy. I have yet to get down into the nitty gritty of breaking down third period performances across the board and stuff. I'm hoping it's more or less an anomaly rather than a trend of some sort.
 
Jason Lewis said:
Ah yea, I can see that. You are 100% correct there. It is kind of crazy. I have yet to get down into the nitty gritty of breaking down third period performances across the board and stuff. I'm hoping it's more or less an anomaly rather than a trend of some sort.
Click to expand...

Don't forget "goals against in bunches," too :laugh: Plenty to keep Kings writers/analysts busy this offseason!

To me, like I said, feels like a fatigue thing, but hard to say. Seems like more of an anomaly and is in direct contrast to a number of things, the most prominent being, oh, the last four years of Kings hockey, but also things like the Ducks' one-goal game record, Flames' third periods, etc. (though I thought it was interesting when DL hinted they were going to look at the Flames' style of play, would have to look up that quote again).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom