GDT: GM #5 LA Kings vs Ottawa Senators @11:00AM 10/13/18

[King'sPawn]

Claims I have failed to back up?

I literally just showed you the ice time from Amadio and JAD, how it went up each game...

The ice time for them was mathematically improbable to go down any further. But fair enough. The point is that you didn't back up your claim the ONLY reason Stevens has minimized ice time is he doesn't trust the players. You are assuming facts and expect us to believe and agree with you.

Coaches lie to the media all the time....ok, I mean, I didn't really think I had to back that up, common sense would dictate that the coach, even if he feels that a player downright ****ed it all up, isn't going to the media and telling him, that player just done ****ed it all up....that's just common sense...

Coaches don't lie all the time. There are plenty of times coaches, especially Sutter, will call a player's performance out. Again, you have nothing to reinforce the claims of Stevens trusting Amadio defensively was a lie. You just said he was lying, which conveniently backs up YOUR claim he doesn't trust him.

How is anyone supposed to discuss anything with you if every time they bring up quotes, facts, or figures, you invoke "that's a lie, I can't believe you call that evidence. Use common sense!"

Claims they haven't had enough practice, only place I can find that he said that, is someone on here said he said that, but EVEN if he did say that, not having a practice the day after a tough night game, and before a day game start....really, that's what you are going to pin on bad coaching?

He supposedly said it after the Winnipeg loss. then after the Montreal win, he doesn't have the team practice on the ice at all? How can you complain about not getting enough practice and then pass up practice... especially since the team is yet to score a powerplay goal... that practice time would be helpful.

Keeping a pairing together that has produced worst metrics...ok, sure, if hockey was played by a computer, you might be right, be in the real world, those metrics don't mean much...case in point, on the 4th goal, Muzzin-Martinez on the ice, you want to argue that the PAIRING ITSELF, is responsible for Martinez making a boneheaded decision to step up to a player standing still and ignore the puck coming down? That's your argument, that if it was Martinez and LaDue, it wouldn't be the pairing, but just Martinez? That's asinine.

We're arguing there's something wrong with the pairing. We don't know if it's lack of chemistry or communication, but they are both looking very bad when they are on the ice together.

It's like why some forwards don't play well together. It's not because the line exists, but there's a dynamic between those two players where they don't work.

Both Martinez and Muzzin made individually bad plays yesterday. Will they have played better if they were with someone else? I don't know for certain, but what we DO know is the numbers are not looking good when they are together. If Kopitar gets 10 points in 50 games with a certain two wingers, and 40 points in 30 games with two other wingers, would you argue that Kopitar individually chose to play better? Or would you say there's a dynamic between Kopitar and two other wingers where it just works?

The whole team has looked out of sync for various reasons, coaches trying to implement a system they aren't familiar with, or not buying into is one of them, them playing through hesitation and fear of making a mistake, another....

Again, if the whole team is out of sync, that's on the coach. At least in my opinion. If individual players are playing poorly, you can point out the players, but if we're in agreement the entire team has confidence or lack of direction issues, it's the coach's responsibility to bring them together.

As far as the team playing flat footed and blaming that on not having a practice...that's again, asinine. It's hindsight at it's best, and if they had come out strong, it would have been a "good" move etc, it's nonsense.

They came out with energy. But they lacked cohesion, again. And you are assuming I would have said it's a good move. I could have said I disagree with the decision but it turns out they played better as a result, had they actually won or played well. You don't know. What we DO know is a team that is out of sync with their on ice play didn't practice any on-ice activities between games, and in turn looked bad against an expected lottery team.

A team that has been out shot every game, had struggles breaking out every game, gone 0-for in the powerplay every game, and NOT PRACTICE in between games won't provide further direction.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

The ice time for them was mathematically improbable to go down any further. But fair enough. The point is that you didn't back up your claim the ONLY reason Stevens has minimized ice time is he doesn't trust the players. You are assuming facts and expect us to believe and agree with you.



Coaches don't lie all the time. There are plenty of times coaches, especially Sutter, will call a player's performance out. Again, you have nothing to reinforce the claims of Stevens trusting Amadio defensively was a lie. You just said he was lying, which conveniently backs up YOUR claim he doesn't trust him.

How is anyone supposed to discuss anything with you if every time they bring up quotes, facts, or figures, you invoke "that's a lie, I can't believe you call that evidence. Use common sense!"



He supposedly said it after the Winnipeg loss. then after the Montreal win, he doesn't have the team practice on the ice at all? How can you complain about not getting enough practice and then pass up practice... especially since the team is yet to score a powerplay goal... that practice time would be helpful.



We're arguing there's something wrong with the pairing. We don't know if it's lack of chemistry or communication, but they are both looking very bad when they are on the ice together.

It's like why some forwards don't play well together. It's not because the line exists, but there's a dynamic between those two players where they don't work.

Both Martinez and Muzzin made individually bad plays yesterday. Will they have played better if they were with someone else? I don't know for certain, but what we DO know is the numbers are not looking good when they are together. If Kopitar gets 10 points in 50 games with a certain two wingers, and 40 points in 30 games with two other wingers, would you argue that Kopitar individually chose to play better? Or would you say there's a dynamic between Kopitar and two other wingers where it just works?



Again, if the whole team is out of sync, that's on the coach. At least in my opinion. If individual players are playing poorly, you can point out the players, but if we're in agreement the entire team has confidence or lack of direction issues, it's the coach's responsibility to bring them together.



They came out with energy. But they lacked cohesion, again. And you are assuming I would have said it's a good move. I could have said I disagree with the decision but it turns out they played better as a result, had they actually won or played well. You don't know. What we DO know is a team that is out of sync with their on ice play didn't practice any on-ice activities between games, and in turn looked bad against an expected lottery team.

A team that has been out shot every game, had struggles breaking out every game, gone 0-for in the powerplay every game, and NOT PRACTICE in between games won't provide further direction.

No way I can respond as clean as you did, but,

The ice time issue, are you saying that Stevens did trust the players, but just decided to gradually increase the ice time, just because, because that's backwards thinking, there's only really two reasons why a coach doesn't play a player, he doesn't trust them, or the player screwed up big time, neither Amadio nor JAD had any major f***-ups, so I will go with the first option.

As far as me claiming Stevens didn't trust Amadio etc, first of all I said that was more than likely the reason, I also said again, that ice time increases when trust increases, and ice time increased, kind of amazing how that happens. Wagner, he doesn't trust, Wagner...isn't playing...this isn't multi dimensional chess we are talking about here.

Coaches lie to the media, ALL THE TIME...Sutter and Tortorella, are probably the two outliers in that, and even then, they rarely called a player out, they always used the superlative we, or they, as a group....etc.

How can you complain about not practing enough, then not run a practice, simple...its a LONG GRINDING season, if that OTT game was a 7pm start, you would probably have a valid point, but it was a 2pm start, 4 games in 7 days, and you want to run them into the ground with a practice....ok...I guess.

I don't think Muzzin or Martinez, indiviually CHOOSE to play bad, I think they make bone headed decisions that are independent of who they play with, everyone wants to link them as a pairing, and that's nonsense, from what Ive seen, there has been no blown coverages, miscommunications, that are indications of a bad pairing, what has happened is that they make boneheaded decisions that lead to goals, ala Martinez stepping up etc.

If the entire team is lacking confidence, it's gonna take a helluva lot longer than a day or two or an extra practice to bring them together, Stevens is going to have to show confidence in the players by NOT benching them after they screw up, by letting them try things and fail and not bringing the hammer down etc, that takes a while to get to the players etc.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Keeping a pairing together that has produced worst metrics...ok, sure, if hockey was played by a computer, you might be right, be in the real world, those metrics don't mean much...case in point, on the 4th goal, Muzzin-Martinez on the ice, you want to argue that the PAIRING ITSELF, is responsible for Martinez making a boneheaded decision to step up to a player standing still and ignore the puck coming down? That's your argument, that if it was Martinez and LaDue, it wouldn't be the pairing, but just Martinez? That's asinine.

That's not the argument.

The argument is that the season they were on the ice for an extended time together--2016-2017--they were a 38.57% GF% pairing when the team was 54.39% without them. Does those metrics resonate with you at all? It's not a fancy stat, and we are seeing a similar phenomenon play out again this season.

Yes, it's always on the individual players to perform, but you're completely removing agency from the coach for putting them in that position in the first place. Why keep going back to the pairing that makes you the worst team in the league when they're on, and the best team in the league when they're off?

For an 'old school' guy who believes so much in individual accountability and intangibles, you're proving immensely dense to the concept of 'chemistry' and the lack of it M+M have together, and instead going play by play to try to attribute fault to anyone on the ice but them.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

That's not the argument.

The argument is that the season they were on the ice for an extended time together--2016-2017--they were a 38.57% GF% pairing when the team was 54.39% without them. Does those metrics resonate with you at all? It's not a fancy stat, and we are seeing a similar phenomenon play out again this season.

Yes, it's always on the individual players to perform, but you're completely removing agency from the coach for putting them in that position in the first place. Why keep going back to the pairing that makes you the worst team in the league when they're on, and the best team in the league when they're off?

For an 'old school' guy who believes so much in individual accountability and intangibles, you're proving immensely dense to the concept of 'chemistry' and the lack of it M+M have together, and instead going play by play to try to attribute fault to anyone on the ice but them.

You are using one stat that proves that they don't have chemistry....unless there's another one you want to point out,

And no, I specifically said Martinez made a bonehead move on the 4th goal, but you want to put that on the pairing and the coach, instead of the player himself, that makes no sense. Martinez doesn't step up to a player who isn't moving, that goal more than likely does not happen, hence, a higher GF% funny how that works.

 

[Winger23]

You are using one stat that proves that they don't have chemistry....unless there's another one you want to point out,

And no, I specifically said Martinez made a bonehead move on the 4th goal, but you want to put that on the pairing and the coach, instead of the player himself, that makes no sense. Martinez doesn't step up to a player who isn't moving, that goal more than likely does not happen, hence, a higher GF% funny how that works.

Funny how you are quick to dismiss a very telling stat over a much longer sample size instead you prefer to chalk it up to a new system blah blah blah when they sucked together prior to the new system, whatever this new system is, if there even is one. I've spent way too much time trying to figure out how you and Steven's seem blind to not see how these 2 guys just dont work well with each other. I guess stevens doesnt use metrics either.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

You are using one stat that proves that they don't have chemistry....unless there's another one you want to point out,

And no, I specifically said Martinez made a bonehead move on the 4th goal, but you want to put that on the pairing and the coach, instead of the player himself, that makes no sense. Martinez doesn't step up to a player who isn't moving, that goal more than likely does not happen, hence, a higher GF% funny how that works.

You literally said "Keeping a pairing together that has produced worst metrics...ok, sure, if hockey was played by a computer, you might be right, be in the real world, those metrics don't mean much" to de-emphasize stats, so I cited the simplest, cleanest metric to show their lack of effectiveness. They spent close to 800 minutes together, and were on the ice for 27 goals for and 43 goals against while starting nearly 70% of their shifts outside the defensive zone without hard competition. There were in the best spot to succeed on the Kings...yet they were a miserable failure. What accounts for that? Wanna go thru and audit those 43 5v5 goals and tell me what someone else did wrong?

Your hyper-focus on one play where the player made a mistake is a forest-trees issue that you're putting there on purpose. Look at the bigger picture, that being of no chemistry between two players in over a thousand minutes of playing time together, and think aloud who can solve that problem. Hint: he's not on the ice. Unless you just believe that chemistry isn't actually a thing, which I would find hard to believe from a high-level coach.

If you want to be really pedantic yes, every player mistake is a player's fault, not a coaches fault. And there's not a stat to 'prove' chemistry, only performance, and I've seen more than enough of those two together to want them to continue to be together. They're absolutely terrible at reading each other in all zones and as such their turnovers are catastrophic, and it sure doesn't help that Martinez is permanently on his backhand.

 

[Fishhead]

Cmon. Martinez and Muzzin have had maybe 10 good games together in the last 3 years that they've played together. One was a couple games ago and they looked good, but that doesn't mean they don't suck together. They just happened to be playing against a really small team who didn't pressure them. For whatever reason, it hasn't worked back to when Sutter was coaching and it doesn't work now. Yet they keep trying to shove that square peg through that round hole.

There isn't any reasonable explanation to do so either. The eye test, Corsi, Fenwick, GF%, etc. - every single stat, metric, and viewing opportunity has shown they don't play well together. I want it to work, I really do, but it's not going to. It's like that smokin' hot girl that likes you, but completely hates hockey and asks you to stop watching it. It's not worth it, just please let that pairing go. Hell, even the girl that hates hockey could sit down by you on the couch, watch 5 minutes, and she would say "those guys suck together".

 

[Bandit]

Martinez/Muzzin is garbage. Arguing with anyone who wants to claim otherwise is a waste of electrons.

I would honestly trade Muzzin before every GM in the league figures out he’s awful. Dude is Charlie Huddy bad at this point.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

You literally said "Keeping a pairing together that has produced worst metrics...ok, sure, if hockey was played by a computer, you might be right, be in the real world, those metrics don't mean much" to de-emphasize stats, so I cited the simplest, cleanest metric to show their lack of effectiveness. They spent close to 800 minutes together, and were on the ice for 27 goals for and 43 goals against while starting nearly 70% of their shifts outside the defensive zone without hard competition. There were in the best spot to succeed on the Kings...yet they were a miserable failure. What accounts for that? Wanna go thru and audit those 43 5v5 goals and tell me what someone else did wrong?

Your hyper-focus on one play where the player made a mistake is a forest-trees issue that you're putting there on purpose. Look at the bigger picture, that being of no chemistry between two players in over a thousand minutes of playing time together, and think aloud who can solve that problem. Hint: he's not on the ice. Unless you just believe that chemistry isn't actually a thing, which I would find hard to believe from a high-level coach.

If you want to be really pedantic yes, every player mistake is a player's fault, not a coaches fault. And there's not a stat to 'prove' chemistry, only performance, and I've seen more than enough of those two together to want them to continue to be together. They're absolutely terrible at reading each other in all zones and as such their turnovers are catastrophic, and it sure doesn't help that Martinez is permanently on his backhand.

Sure, link the 43 goals, and let's see how many of them are due to bad chemistry.....

The issue is that you think they are terrible together, and won't or can't, think that they might be just as terrible, with other D. Let's list those 43 goals, and let's see if there was a blown coverage due to them not communicating a switch off, let's see if there was an errant pass due to again, miscommunication, THOSE are the cues to look for, for a bad pairing, or lack of chemistry, not individual mistakes that lead to goals.

Chemistry absolutely is a thing, mainly with forwards, but with D as well, when to switch, when to drop back in position etc, and those two, do not have a chemistry problem at all.

 

[funky]

Blake just has to take the Billy’s Beane route and trade one of Muzz or Martinez so Stevens can’t play them together

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Blake just has to take the Billy’s Beane route and trade one of Muzz or Martinez so Stevens can’t play them together

LOL, I think one of them is traded by the deadline, but it will be up to Clague or Brickley to determine when, when one of those is ready, I think you have to move one of them....

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Sure, link the 43 goals, and let's see how many of them are due to bad chemistry.....

The issue is that you think they are terrible together, and won't or can't, think that they might be just as terrible, with other D. Let's list those 43 goals, and let's see if there was a blown coverage due to them not communicating a switch off, let's see if there was an errant pass due to again, miscommunication, THOSE are the cues to look for, for a bad pairing, or lack of chemistry, not individual mistakes that lead to goals.

Chemistry absolutely is a thing, mainly with forwards, but with D as well, when to switch, when to drop back in position etc, and those two, do not have a chemistry problem at all.

That would actually be incredibly easy to prove with WOWY stats and the eye test but I get the feeling you'll just move the goalposts yet again. You wanting to suggest that simply everyone else is being closed-minded here is a laugher. Edit: here I'll do it right now.

Remember, together they were 38.57% GF. 27 GF, 43 GA. 769 minutes.
Martinez without Muzzin was 51.43%--18 GF, 17 GA. 572 minutes.
Muzzin w/o Marty 48.78%--20 GF, 21 GA. 627 minutes.

So their goals for per 60 sees a miniscule bump--from 1.89 and 1.91 to 2.10--but their goals against per 60 SPIKES from 1.78 and 2.01 to friggin 3.35. It's probably just everyone else's fault though right?

Taking two top 4 d-man and putting them with the likes of Matt Greene and Tom Gilbert instead of each other results in that.

With Muzzin-Martinez there are tons of missed passes and blown coverages and most visible of all bad support positioning for one another but if you truly believe that's not the case you're just flat-out not open to neither facts NOR opinions so I think we're done here.

 

[kingsfan28]

Claims I have failed to back up?

I literally just showed you the ice time from Amadio and JAD, how it went up each game...

Coaches lie to the media all the time....ok, I mean, I didn't really think I had to back that up, common sense would dictate that the coach, even if he feels that a player downright ****ed it all up, isn't going to the media and telling him, that player just done ****ed it all up....that's just common sense...

I have coached at a higher level than most here, and I never said they they would have a job, I was surprised that with all the insight, no one has applied, big difference, probably a bit facetious, but it drove home the point.

But hey, let's take a look at yours...

Claims they haven't had enough practice, only place I can find that he said that, is someone on here said he said that, but EVEN if he did say that, not having a practice the day after a tough night game, and before a day game start....really, that's what you are going to pin on bad coaching?

Keeping a pairing together that has produced worst metrics...ok, sure, if hockey was played by a computer, you might be right, be in the real world, those metrics don't mean much...case in point, on the 4th goal, Muzzin-Martinez on the ice, you want to argue that the PAIRING ITSELF, is responsible for Martinez making a boneheaded decision to step up to a player standing still and ignore the puck coming down? That's your argument, that if it was Martinez and LaDue, it wouldn't be the pairing, but just Martinez? That's asinine.

The whole team has looked out of sync for various reasons, coaches trying to implement a system they aren't familiar with, or not buying into is one of them, them playing through hesitation and fear of making a mistake, another....

As far as the team playing flat footed and blaming that on not having a practice...that's again, asinine. It's hindsight at it's best, and if they had come out strong, it would have been a "good" move etc, it's nonsense.

It's a long season, for them not to have a practice after a hard night game, and an early day game the following day, oh boy, the horror.

EDIT: At least you had the balls to put down what you thought was wrong, other than STEVENS SUCKS and leave it at that....

They weren't the only ones. The entire broadcast crew as well as others questioned the move, considering the amounts of shots and pp issues the previous games. 5 games in you don't need a day off.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

They weren't the only ones. The entire broadcast crew as well as others questioned the move, considering the amounts of shots and pp issues the previous games. 5 games in you don't need a day off.

No, the entire broadcast crew said it would be criticized if they came out flat, and it would be praised if they came out strong....they said it was hindsight judgement.

EDIT: Unless you are talking about something after the game, but between periods, Fox was talking about it while showing pictures and saying it was hindsight etc.

 

[Winger23]

That would actually be incredibly easy to prove with WOWY stats and the eye test but I get the feeling you'll just move the goalposts yet again. You wanting to suggest that simply everyone else is being closed-minded here is a laugher. Edit: here I'll do it right now.

Remember, together they were 38.57% GF. 27 GF, 43 GA. 769 minutes.
Martinez without Muzzin was 51.43%--18 GF, 17 GA. 572 minutes.
Muzzin w/o Marty 48.78%--20 GF, 21 GA. 627 minutes.

So their goals for per 60 sees a miniscule bump--from 1.89 and 1.91 to 2.10--but their goals against per 60 SPIKES from 1.78 and 2.01 to friggin 3.35. It's probably just everyone else's fault though right?

Taking two top 4 d-man and putting them with the likes of Matt Greene and Tom Gilbert instead of each other results in that.

With Muzzin-Martinez there are tons of missed passes and blown coverages and most visible of all bad support positioning for one another but if you truly believe that's not the case you're just flat-out not open to neither facts NOR opinions so I think we're done here.

Game, set, match.

 

[KingPuckChoo]

No, it's history and my word against yours, take a look at how many times in the NHL a coach is fired 10 games into the season.

so it wasn't exactly 10 games, but pretty damn close eh? 13 games

can you be man enough and say you were right KingPuckChoo?

also, next time you want to argue with me, appreciate that i also come with a wealth of knowledge maybe?

 

[tny760]

so it wasn't exactly 10 games, but pretty damn close eh? 13 games

can you be man enough and say you were right KingPuckChoo?

also, next time you want to argue with me, appreciate that i also come with a wealth of knowledge maybe?

^ $$$

serving up a stone cold dish of crow

 

[riznat]

^ $$$

serving up a stone cold dish of crow

hard to serve something to someone who won't show up.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

so it wasn't exactly 10 games, but pretty damn close eh? 13 games

can you be man enough and say you were right KingPuckChoo?

also, next time you want to argue with me, appreciate that i also come with a wealth of knowledge maybe?

You were close, I will give you that....I was right lol but you were close,

In all seriousness, if he truly lost the players after the BUF game, you had to make that move, and you probably would have been dead on the money, if they had someone lined up right away, but that takes time...