Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Where Do The Lakers Go From Here?

What's Broken (part 3): Mixed Messages

Part One is here.

Part Two is here.

Lombardi, Murray discuss impending free agents " LA Kings Insider

MURRAY: "Alexei Ponikarovsky is a] big body. A 6-(foot-)5 guy. I need him to score more, though. I relayed that to him, in the last talk I had with him on the morning of Game 6 here, in the morning skate, that this is the reason why (he wasn’t playing). It wasn’t because of poor play. I mean, he’s trying, he cares. He’s going to the net. He’s using his size most of the time. I just need more of what you’ve shown for seven years in your resume, a 20-goal scorer. What happened?"

Here's what happened:

Ponikarovsky played against the third toughest competition (per QUALCOMP) of any Kings forward, behind only Smyth and Stoll, and only behind them by a hair. Tougher than Handzus. Tougher than Brown or Simmonds. And much tougher than he played against last year in Toronto and Pittsburgh. And he did this while playing with the weakest teammates (per QUALTEAM) of any non-rookie except Peter Harrold. (The players who drew weaker teammates than Poni were Harrold, Schenn, Lewis, Clifford, Westgarth and Zeiler.) 

In other words, he had just about the toughest job on the team. 

And how did that effect his play? Well, let's see...

Star-divide

He had the lowest GA/60 of any forward on the Kings who played more than a handful of games (Parse and Loktionov both had lower/better numbers in their few games). Only Alec Martinez was better on the entire squad. So that's pretty good for Poni. And offense? Well, not very good. His P/60 dropped from 2.64 (2008), and 2.27 (2009) to 1.11 (2010). But his QUALCOMP was -.007 and -.023 in 2008 and 2009; .042 this year. QUALTEAM was .048 and .015; -.026 this year. 

The guy played with much worse players against much better players and his production was cut in half. Shocking. But his defensive play was great and that's what the Kings are all about. 

Aren't they?

I believe Murray's comments about Ponikarovsky are representative of his general attitude, and it embodies a degree of schizophrenia in its conflicting messages. Yes, I understand that Poni (like Kopitar and whoever else) is a grown-up and is expected both to be defensively-responsible and to score goals. But the problem comes right back to our old friend, the "step up" message.

How is a player supposed to react to the "constructive" criticism Murray articulates above? We all know that the defensive system takes precedence over everything. Lombardi's words bear this out. What happened to the system, etc.? And it would seem that Poni (like Alex Frolov before him -- or for that matter Teddy Purcell*, who, let's remember, had good defensive numbers but couldn't get his production going...) did job #1 very well, which is to keep the puck out of his own net. 

*Teddy Purcell, who didn't produce in Terry Murray's system, is currently 3rd in playoff scoring, two points behind the leader, and 2nd in playoff assists, one point behind the leader. Teddy Purcell, as I said many many times, has soft hands and skill; I said I thought he would come around, and look, he's come around. Tampa has a pretty suffocating defense, too. Another guy who "couldn't get it together" under Murray's system is another one of my favorite (now ex-King) prospects, Matt Moulson. That would be Matt two-time-30-goal-scorer Moulson, who I F-ING TOLD YOU WAS ONE OF THOSE DORKY GUYS WHO LOOKS LIKE HE CAN'T SKATE BUT HAS THAT UNCANNY KNACK FOR GETTING THE PUCK TO THE BACK OF THE NET. That would be Matt Moulson, who has scored more goals over the last two seasons than (1) everyone on the Kings, and (2) everyone on Detroit, and (3) Marian Hossa, Patrick Kane, Jonathan Toews, Brad Richards...a long list, let's just say.

But I digress. Back to Poni. Poni did what was asked of him, except the part that was asked of him that was not reasonable to ask of him. The part where he's supposed to play against tougher opponents, with weaker teammates, and be more defensively responsible, while also scoring like you have done on bad teams, with better players, playing easy minutes. 

How hard is that?

I don't even know what he was supposed to do, in response to such comments (the comments that obviously occurred during the season; the post-season comments are just retroactive justification). Should he try harder? "Keep your feet moving?" Underline: what he's doing on the defensive side of the puck IS WORKING. And he's being asked to change that. In order to score. I assume that Poni (or anyone else) is doing the exact thing he thinks in that moment is required by the defensive system. If there's a fork in the road, and he can choose (1) slightly more risky defense but more offense, or (2) sound defense...

It's a trade-off. Everyone knows it's a trade-off. And Murray's system requires everyone choose (2). Then why the message that everyone should be choosing (1), which is impossible? 

I think it's because the team's offense is suffering and Murray is feeding us the reason for the suffering. The reason is not that his defensive system prevents the Kings from having a more potent offense. The reason is that the players haven't "learned" or aren't "committed" to a "full effort," "every shift." That's very convenient. 

And I am a big believer in defensive systems. I am, for all the cliched reasons. Defense wins championships. But I am not a big believer in "you can have your cake and eat it too." If you're going to win every game 1-0 and 2-1, then do that. But don't send the message that the guys who are making those 1-0 games possible actually need to be scoring more as if that won't affect defense at all. Because it will, and, as we've seen, it does.

Look at Drew Doughty's and Jack Johnson's numbers 

and you will see the same effect. Both players (1) played against tougher competition (2) with weaker teammates and (3) with more defensive zone starts, yet (4) had virtually identical +-/60 as the previous year despite (5) taking a hit in offensive production. Got that? Both players were given a much tougher job this year, with an emphasis on defensive responsibility, and as a result offense suffered. And what was the message we got from Terry Murray?

Lombardi, Murray discuss Drew Doughty " LA Kings Insider

MURRAY: "[...] as coaches we have very high expectations when you come out of the previous year and you won a gold medal with Team Canada and he was one of the premier players on that (team). He’s being mentioned as a Norris Trophy candidate, finalist, and to end up playing well in the playoffs, you want that right away, right now. In my opinion, it wasn’t there, but he certainly came to being that kind of player as we got to the middle of the season. His contribution was tremendous, and we saw it in Game 2. He stepped up. He showed the kind of leadership and the kind of player he is, and that’s what we need all the time."

Be a dominant player on the ice, while playing with weaker teammates against tougher opponents in more defensive situations. Right. Look, Kopitar and Brown both got stronger teammates and weaker opponents this season compared to last season. Is that an accident? I doubt it. 

Here's Murray on Wayne Simmonds' season:

Murray discusses Wayne Simmonds " LA Kings Insider

Question: When you look at Wayne Simmonds’ year, was it a step backward?

MURRAY: "He had a bit of a lull. I don’t know if he took a step backwards. Maybe half a step. 

Simmonds' drop-off in QUALTEAM was highest among forwards by a mile, and was 1/1000th of a QUALTEAM point away from Rob Scuderi's, which was the biggest drop-off on the team. As a reminder, a low QUALTEAM means you're playing with weaker teammates. Nobody had a bigger change for the worse than Simmonds and Scuderi. And, yes, Simmonds' QUALCOMP went up, reflecting tougher defensive assignments, tougher opponents. He already drew a lot of defensive zone starts, and that didn't change.

Among top-nine forwards, Simmonds' QUALTEAM number was nearly as bad as Ponikarovsky's. 

Of course, he lost a fraction of a point in P/60, as did Poni, Doughty and Johnson. But, hey, the numbers (P/60) of Brown and Kopitar, who had better teammates and weaker opponents, went up, way up in Kopitar's case. Funny out that happens. 

I just caught the following

post-mortem on the Washington Capitals.

The Caps, you will remember, had "changed" their ways, and were to have a much more successful post-season because they had seen the light and come over to a defensive system similar to the Kings'. 

On Frozen Blog › Reconstruction Time

As implosions go, by a perennially imploding franchise in spring, this may have been an all-timer. And you know where we stand: there should be serious repercussions. [...] Earlier this season I wrote about a [...] premature, illusory achievement settling in. [...] In the absence of coherent and sustained game plans we saw the Capitals often pursue a highly individualized style of play, with the captain especially susceptible to it. By the bitter end, we saw a band of misled brothers wholly uncertain of what to do against Tampa Bay [...] By the bitter end, you didn’t sense [...] there was great resolve and great buy-in by these Caps for what their coach was preaching. 

Sound familiar? 

When looking at all these several incidents in which the Kings crapped out in the face of greatness it strikes me that there may be, "in the culture", a pressure applied to the players in the form of the unexamined cliche, "we need our great players to be great." This is, of course, "step up" in sheep's clothing. And the message is the same: it's time for you to do more, take over, be the "history will be made" version of yourself. Whatever. You might score the Bobby Orr OT highlight goal. Or you might pinch when you're not supposed to and give the other team an outnumbered attack.

Don't forget

No one had blown a 4 goal lead in a playoff game in 26 years. The record is the comeback from 5-0 known as the Miracle on Manchester. It's only happened two other times (both from 4 goals down), the last being in 1985. That's a level of historic collapse that you simply can't brush off as a "youthful mistake." And the entire season came down to that second period. I don't know who was supposed to take the reigns there, calm everyone down, slow down the pace, whatever. Should a time-out have been called? I have no idea (but, yes, it should have). Truly, I don't know who was supposed to take over there, but I sure as hell know who did.

Nobody.

Don't forget

this, from back in January...

I looked to the history books to find a worse run of Kings' games - Jewels From The Crown

12-19-1, our current run, is the record to beat. As far as I can tell, and I am pretty bleary-eyed from fatigue and anger, the Kings have not put together 32 games this crappy in eight years. Not during the rebuild, not during Crawford, not during the Andy Murray flame-out of 2006. [...] In 2002-03, they also had a 12-19-1 stretch, in the middle of which they traded Brian Smolinski (for Tim Gleason, good trade) and Mathieu Schneider (for Sean Avery, bad trade). In both 1995-96 and 1996-97, the Kings did worse.1996 was the year of the Gretzky fire-sale, so that's expected. It's also one of the darkest periods of crappiness in Kings history.  Then you would have to go back before 1988, at least, to find another one. 

What's mind-boggling to me about that particular streak is, the other streaks I mentioned all had obvious causes:

  • In 2003, the Kings were trading away important assets. 
  • In 1996, the (Burger) Kings traded away that Gretzky guy.
  • 1997, if I recall correctly, there were major ownership issues and was just generally a lousy team in all ways, with no expectations whatsoever, and no prospects (literally and figuratively - Roman Vopat?) for the future. 
But this year's team was distracted by ... nothing? No trades. No distracting contract negotiations. No ownership issues. No injuries even. Everything was just hunky-dory. How can that be?

A historic melt-down with no cause. 

It occurs to me, there is another sense in which "step up" isn't total hogwash, and that's when it refers to stepping up as a team. Gelling as a team. Uniting against all outside forces, acting as one. As a team, not as an individual stepping outside of the team. 

But then, you can't act on that instruction either, except through a redoubled emphasis on focus. 

And if the Kings had been able to maintain that focus, they wouldn't have followed up goals-for with immediate goals-against about a thousand times this season, nor would they have followed historic winning streaks with historic slumps, nor would they have lost either of their last two playoff series.

And we wouldn't be having this conversation. 

[next up: screw that, it's not the coach or the captains...the Kings just need better players, that's all...]

Comment 33 comments  |  1 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

TM is on the hot seat...

another epic slide….bye bye….

"It's not illegal. It's frowned upon, like masturbating on an airplane."-Alan Garner

by card_base on May 5, 2011 2:28 PM PDT reply actions  

The comparison with WAS is probably useful

It seems like just a year ago Bruce Boudreau was widely respected, even admired, for having whipped the Caps into shape, and now it seems to be conventional wisdom that he may be fired this summer. It seems like just yesterday that some folks where bemused at how the Kings let him get away. And yet he’s a bum now, apparently.

I find it hard to believe that Boudreau became a markedly worse coach in the last 12 months. I also think that Terry Murray is basically the same coach who was widely respected, if not praised, last season for whipping the young Kings into shape and turning them into a playoff team. IIRC, less than 18 months ago Quisp posed him as an Adams candidate.

Looking for sports franchises who have had success over extended periods of time as comparables, I keep coming back to the Dodgers under Walter O’Malley. Walter Alston managed the Dodgers for over 20 years, winning 4 World Series and 7 NL Championships, all the while working on a series of 1-year contracts. After a really bad 1958 campaign, O’Malley and Fresco Thompson decided to renew him anyway, figuring that he was entitled to an off year. In other words, the Dodgers didn’t become successful by getting too caught up in the roller coaster ride when assessing their personnel.

That being said, my own view of Murray hasn’t changed. I still think that Lombardi hired him to guide the Kings through a very specific stage in their development — to teach a young team how to play defense — and that further judgment would be reserved until he had gotten them through that stage. And I don’t see how even TM’s detractors can reasonably deny that he has accomplished that.

The thing is, the Kings may be at the point where Dean has to decide whether or not Murray is the right coach to take them beyond that learning stage, to the next level. He may be; he may not be. I think that TM will have another year — until the end of his current contract, IIRC. If the Kings don’t make it out of the first round again, then I think Murray gets a farewell handshake, with hearty (and sincere) thanks for having done what he was hired to do.

"Prepare your bladder for imminent release!" — Invader Zim

by DougX on May 5, 2011 3:03 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

i agree...

thats what i was trying to say….he taught them how to play defense…but does not appear to be capable of the next step or level….
he isnt clear in what he asks of the players….last season it was play defense….again this year it was play defense, oh a nd score more too….do more more more!!!
when in reality what we were doing was ok…most of the time anyway….

"It's not illegal. It's frowned upon, like masturbating on an airplane."-Alan Garner

by card_base on May 6, 2011 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions  

Nice post. Way to step up.

Quite possibly the only LA Kings fan living in Brooklyn, New York.

by Robert_P. on May 5, 2011 3:55 PM PDT reply actions  

you really kept your skates moving, way to get it in deep

by hughestom1 on May 5, 2011 5:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

I feel like it can be hard to interpret some of the Qualteam numbers when you are talking about Poni and Simmonds. Those two guys started the season on a line together with Handzus which I don’t think anyone would say is playing with very poor or bad linemates. Poni got hurt which led to Clifford playing more on the third line with Zues and Simmonds(if I remember right). Poni upon his return struggled a bit (understandably coming off an injury) and was relegated to mostly 4th line duty for the rest of the season once Clifford grabbed hold of the third line spot. The struggles of individual players can then cause them to be played with worse players because they aren’t producing so I just consider it a chicken and egg kinda thing of what comes first- the struggles that lead to worse teammates or worse teammates that lead to struggling?

by GoKings09 on May 5, 2011 5:59 PM PDT reply actions  

or they're not even struggling

the nice thing about qualteam (or qualcomp) is it measures what it measures, literally: the ratings of the players you play with/against. it is of course possible that the rating system is flawed. but then we can look at other rating measures, which is why we have corsi-relative qualcomp/team, and so forth. the point of simmonds and poni’s numbers (and doughty’s, johnson’s) is that they ALL played tougher minutes. it’s uniform. it’s not an accident.

can you say it was a mistake? well, i think the decision was to give kopitar and brown and easier time of it…and for about half the season the second line was on fire…while also playing against tough competition…so it worked at that point…until it didn’t.

and we know that murray juggled his lines quite a bit. but the thing is, he juggled his lines but he still put simmonds and poni out against the other team’s best players, or consistently against better players…the numbers show this.

Wait till this year.

by Quisp on May 5, 2011 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m not an expert on qualteam or qualcomp but just from a general observation I would agree the numbers for qualcomp seem accurate because the Zeus line was normally the shutdown line. My point about the qualteam numbers is that part of Simmonds and Poni’s drops in the quality of teammate was due to playing with each other as they both had subpar seasons where going into the season you wouldn’t say that putting Poni on a line with Handzus and Simmonds was giving him crappy linemates. The other thing is that when they struggled they got moved down to the fourth line for stretches playing with Lewis, Westgarth, Clifford and Richardson which then further lowers their qualteam numbers. The issue I see is just bad play can lead to worse linemates or worse linemates can lead to bad play but you can’t always tell which came first.

by GoKings09 on May 5, 2011 6:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Qualcomp and Qualteam are based on plus/minus. Scuderi’s massive drop is tied directly to Johnson. In terms of Poni, you’re talking about putting a guy who does just fine as a second liner vs. easier competition on a team like Toronto into Frolov’s spot, and asking him to produce just as much. He didn’t. To me, what this says is that he’s not a bad player, he’s just not as good as Frolov.

I hope they look back and see that what Fro accomplished on the third line — in a ‘down’ year where he got less power play time and more of the shutdown role than ever — was not easy to do. I get the feeling they took what he did lightly. Even now Murray doesn’t seem to grasp the different variables that affect offensive production.

In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC

by Niesy on May 6, 2011 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

I find it hard to believe that Boudreau became a markedly worse coach in the last 12 months. I also think that Terry Murray is basically the same coach who was widely respected, if not praised, last season for whipping the young Kings into shape and turning them into a playoff team. IIRC, less than 18 months ago Quisp posed him as an Adams candidate.

all true. and, yes, i do think murray has done an amazing job with the kings, especially the last two seasons. there’s no question that 98 points and 101 points are excellent finishes.

the problem we’re addressing here is the collapses. and i think there is an argument to be made that the collapses are on Murray as much as anybody else.

i haven’t decided for myself exactly where the blame mostly lies, to say nothing of what should be done about it.

but i do know that the pattern that has emerged over the last two seasons must be corrected.

Wait till this year.

by Quisp on May 5, 2011 6:11 PM PDT reply actions  

ya think?

That’s what I Was gonna say, but then it sounded too ‘wise guy’ but I just said it to show you what I was gonna say. Really all to emphasize your last line about the issue must be corrected.
Quisp, you know what’s scary? I think that every single thread you’re writing has something in it.

I was just thinking these last two or three days, not ‘why did we let TP (not tom petty) go, we all know why we let him go, or matt moulson, or brian boyle or kimmo timmanen (sorry, that was just for joking). But seriously, rather than complain, I thought it interesting and worthwhile to pose it as a question… Why do so many of these guys find it so difficult to bring out the best of themselves in our organization? I do think that’s a very very valid question.

I mean if a guy goes elsewhere and does ‘ok’ well that’s one thing. But when you assist on the tying and winning goals in Game 3 (and the last assists as well…. that made the goals) of the 2nd round, and as you pointed out are doing exceptionally well in a top 6 role in the playoffs, then something is askew. That’s one example. I don’t want Brian Boyle back even if we could get him back for free. BUT He has played with a huge passion in NY. It was in there waiting to come out. Why couldn’t the Kings find a way to bring it out. It’s easy to say ‘well, he had his chance’. Now it’s Oscar Moller. It’s a 50-50 deal. Part of it is the player finding a way. But the other part is the organization pushing the right buttons.

I also watch Guy Boucher during his press conference, and I mean really… he has a ‘presence’ that …. I’ll let you fill it in as I’d rather not say anymore… so probably shouldn’t have even started that sentence.

by number 6 on May 5, 2011 8:24 PM PDT up reply actions  

the problem we’re addressing here is the collapses. and i think there is an argument to be made that the collapses are on Murray as much as anybody else.

i haven’t decided for myself exactly where the blame mostly lies, to say nothing of what should be done about it.

but i do know that the pattern that has emerged over the last two seasons must be corrected.

True, which is why I think that TM gets another year to show that he can get the team to the next level. If those kinks don’t get worked out, the argument that the Kings are young and callow falls away a bit more, and there is more evidence to suggest that new leadership at the top is needed.

"Prepare your bladder for imminent release!" — Invader Zim

by DougX on May 5, 2011 9:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

RE: Boudreau and the Caps comparison

"We played real well in the first round, and we stuck to our game plan, and we strayed away from it and it was definitely not on his shoulders," center Jason Arnott(notes) said. "It’s the guys in the dressing that have to go out and play and execute the plan. The only thing he can do is put the plan together and keep us on track. It’s up to us to go out and do it."

"Their role players outplayed our highest paid players," Leonsis wrote. He said the Lightning "adhered to their coaches’ system better than we adhered to our coaches’ system. The wheels fell off for us. No doubt about that."

Interesting comments from the owner and one of the Caps players both putting the blame for the loss on the players not playing the system well enough rather than the coaching. Not saying this is exactly the same as the Kings, just thought it was interesting.

by GoKings09 on May 5, 2011 6:23 PM PDT reply actions  

it is interesting but the dynamics of the Caps is so different to the Kings. The Caps have like 4 superstar caliber players on their team. We have sort of one and a half…. and not sure if the half is DD or Kopi. Just the feel of the two teams is so different.

by number 6 on May 5, 2011 8:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree the teams are very different especially without Kopitar in this year’s playoffs the Kings were basically a team full of role players at least amongst the forwards.

The similarity is that both teams struggled when they got away from playing the defensively responsible system that had worked for them before. Arnott puts the blame on the players to execute the gameplan of the coach rather than the coach needing to motivate better or do a better job scheme-wise or whatever. And that really is part of the debate that has been going on the past few weeks on this blog is where does the blame lie for getting away from the system and more specifically does it fall on the coaches not motivating (or whatever other adjective you want to use) the players properly to execute the system or on the players for not following the coaches’ game plan well enough or playing hard enough?

by GoKings09 on May 5, 2011 8:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

I would like to see what Dave Tippett could do with this kings roster as head coach. He seems to have a lot of talent for coaching, imo the Coyotes had no business being anywhere near the playoffs the last 2 years. He just seems like a good fit to me to try and reach that next level. I like what TM has done. He has made the Kings much tougher and are definately no longer a joke around the league. I just feel that this may be as far as he will be able to take this team.

by lowrydin on May 6, 2011 2:24 AM PDT reply actions  

Yeah, I still miss Tippett. Kings’ special teams was never the same after he left.

"Prepare your bladder for imminent release!" — Invader Zim

by DougX on May 6, 2011 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not the Same Organization
Why do so many of these guys find it so difficult to bring out the best of themselves in our organization?

This is not the old Kings famous for ruining players.

Compare Cammalleri, Boyle and Purcell (0 playoff goals) to Martinez, Clifford, Simmonds, Drewiski and Lewis.

Was Purcell given a fair shot? How about Davis Drewiski? Was Cammalleri a good fit and would he fit even now?

If every team had hung on to players who moved and found success…well they’d be Detroit.

Are Teemu Selanne and Melanie Griffith Twins?

by USHA#17 on May 6, 2011 8:53 AM PDT reply actions  

Above was intended as response to "number 6"

Are Teemu Selanne and Melanie Griffith Twins?

by USHA#17 on May 6, 2011 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

If every team had hung on to players who moved and found success…well they’d be Detroit.

They’ve lost Kyle Quincey, Ville Leino and Jiri Hudler (though he came back) in the last few years.

The West Coast is the Best Coast.

by RudyKelly on May 6, 2011 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions  

Well, OK but you get my point.

Are Teemu Selanne and Melanie Griffith Twins?

by USHA#17 on May 6, 2011 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

All this is interesting but I still believe TM needs one more shot. The core of the team is still young and I attribute the colapses and streakiness to youth and inexperience.

With a stronger power play + increased consistency as players age, I believe the team will take a step forward next year.

by Sev The Montreal Kings Fan on May 6, 2011 9:24 AM PDT reply actions  

i agree....but...

if we start to implode….time to make a change….

"It's not illegal. It's frowned upon, like masturbating on an airplane."-Alan Garner

by card_base on May 6, 2011 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

He gets 40 games. No slump or else…

by Passemoilapuck on May 6, 2011 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions  

The guy played with much worse players against much better players and his production was cut in half. Shocking. But his defensive play was great and that’s what the Kings are all about.

Poor Poni. Welcome to the LA Kings, where your offensive career comes to die, but we will stick you in the doghouse for it.

I get a little tired of TM picking on certain players (even Sturm — STURM?!) and not others. I also wish he’d pick apart his own decisions every once in a while.

In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC

by Niesy on May 6, 2011 11:50 AM PDT reply actions  

Murray hates all left wingers except Clifford. Think about it.

The West Coast is the Best Coast.

by RudyKelly on May 6, 2011 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

No kidding.

Clifford scoring one goal against Chicago got him Poni’s spot for how many games?

In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC

by Niesy on May 6, 2011 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

"I also wish he’d pick apart his own decisions every once in a while."

preferably before he actually runs his goaltending into the ground instead of much long after (reference to 09-10).

by uvgt2bkdnme on May 7, 2011 7:30 AM PDT up reply actions  

If we end up with a similar season next year. TM will be fired for sure. We need to take a step forward as the team needs to start showing a consistent level of elite play like they did during some runs…

by Sev The Montreal Kings Fan on May 6, 2011 12:40 PM PDT reply actions  

I believe that next year is the last of his contract, so there won’t even be any need to fire him. You just look for a new coach over the summer. And you give TM a handshake and ‘thanks for everything.’ Just like you get new teachers when you move from one grade to another in school.

That’s why I think he gets until the end of next season. It will still be a young team (phase out old guy Handzus, phase in young guy Schenn/Loktionov/Moller) so next year will hardly be their last chance at glory; TM gets a fair chance to prove that he can move the team forward; and if he can’t, everyone gets to save as much face as possible under the circumstances.

"Prepare your bladder for imminent release!" — Invader Zim

by DougX on May 6, 2011 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

This pretty much sums up my problem with Murray this season – he expects the players to be perfect defensively – and if they’re not, they either get demoted down a line or two, benched completely or in the case of Lotki, sent to Manchester. Then, he turns around and asks them to score more.

Ultimately, it was these mixed messages that I think were part of the reason why Poni and Penner didn’t produce as much as was expected offensively (ultimately, both of these guys are pros and have to take responsibility for their poor offensive production, but Murray didn’t help either). Watching Poni this year, it seemed to me that most of the time he made the “safe” play – getting it out of the zone, getting it in deep, etc – which is what Murray wants him to do, but doesn’t lead to many scoring chances. For Penner’s part, sorry, but at times he simply looked confused out there and not sure what to do because on one hand if he screws up defensively, he’ll be called out by Murray and on the other, if he doesn’t score, he’ll be called out by Murray.

When you look at the number of Kings who had “off” years offensively – Poni, Penner, Doughty, Johnson, Simmonds, Handzus, etc – its not ALL because of the players. It is at least in part due to the coach. I’m all for giving Murray another chance next season, but I also think its time for him to deliver some better results next season, or yes, it will be time for coaching change.

by Hoolie on May 6, 2011 12:42 PM PDT reply actions  

Terry Murray often reminds me of the basketball coach who doesn’t want his players creating individually and when seeing them do so says, “No don’t…” And if it goes, he says, “Good shot.” And it misses he gets benched/called out.

The problem with TM is that he’s a defensive-defenseman at heart who considers shots from the point prime scoring chances.

by soccersucks on May 6, 2011 6:06 PM PDT reply actions  

and Quisp...

Don’t let Lombardi and TM off so easily on another front. We’ve heard him repeat the story of the learning process and one problem this year was how when things went well (12-3 start of season, up 4-0 against SJ), the Kings got complacent/cocky. You addressed this from angle of the captain(s) being at fault, but I think this goes to the team as constructed by DL and coached by TM. When DL talks along this vein, he talks about the youth of the team. Well, on average we’re a young team but Smyth, Hanzus, Green, Scuderi, and Stoll have been around the block, and Williams was brought in, in part, because of his Cup-winning experience. These guys play a lot. Where’s their leadership? What has all the experience of TM being behind the bench for years, taking two teams to the finals (Philly for sure, I think Florida); how has he affected the maturation of the players in handling “success”? I think the real leaders of the team—those with cache—have done a poor job leading. We see it in the slumps, in the repeated slow starts, and the repeated giving up goals shortly after we score. I don’t see us learning. And DL is hiding from this, blaming the immature kids for being immature, instead of taking to task those responsible for teaching the younger players.

by soccersucks on May 6, 2011 9:12 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Is it time to stop lurking and jump into the conversation? YES!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Snpy_small
8-1 Playoff Starts

Recent FanPosts

Snpy_small
Stanley Cup Champions' Playoff Records
Small
The Piece from Pittsburgh
Male-lion_small
Pac West Eternal Thread #1 We are a go! Maybe?
Nike_o_small
Interesting existence of Kings fan in Portland
Shock5_small
Great Moments In Illegal Ryane Clowe Poke Checking History
Small
....and Toffoli
Small
Schenn & Simmonds....
Snpy_small
What does it mean for the Kings when the Coyotes move?
Small
Kings College Prospects

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Manager

Pumpernicholl_small Niesy

Editors

Icon_crop_3_small Quisp

Eazy-e-color_small Robert_P.

Uncle_nick_s_avatar_small defrim65

Authors

Cima-avatar_small John Carroll