Kings coach Jim Hiller's ill-advised challenge of an Edmonton goal backfired and changed the course of the game. They can't let it change the course of their series against Edmonton.
I was screaming at the TV the whole latter part of the third period -- get the puck OUT! What I really meant was, stop playing defense and start being aggressive the way you have the whole game. Much of the third period was spent in Edmonton's end. That strategy was a major error by Hiller -- all of the post-game analysts said as much. My fear is the momentum has swung.
The worst part for me was in the post game presser when Hiller said (paraphrasing) it was an emotional game and then called the reporter asking the question emotional, too. To assume the position of the empirical expert at that time was ludicrous, especially when his decision defied any logic.
He's trying to climb Mount Everest without oxygen, hauling a piano with no sherpas. He's running three lines, double shifting Byfield and Danault while doing so.
He's playing Doughty like a kid eating too much sugar.
He's confessing his mistrust in key players by benching them, as if it weren't he that was supposed to have gotten them ready to contribute all season. Low ice time is one thing; 3 minutes total is an insult. It contradicts his stated "reasoning" given for the 11/7 which is he wants to keep guys warm despite special teams when he favors the 1st unit to almost exclusive use.
He's dressing 12/6 but playing 9/5. He's ceding a fatigue advantage that the Oilers give him. Instead of pounding McDavid and Draisaitl during their usual 21-plus minutes, he's icing Kopitar for 22 plus. Games previous one could point to 5 minutes on the Power Play to inflate the top 6 ice times, but not this game. Does he not understand that humans get tired, that Kopi is 37, that Byfield is only 22?
It's not a new idea to "play the top guys more" and other coaches have iced a 4th line with limited minutes, but keeping 22% of your lineup in purgatory is no way to get to heaven.
Hiller is short-sighted as he himself states. He abandons anything about tomorrow in wild pursuit of today.
Consider the circumstances of the challenge call; he is late-game, having over-used his top players, having blown a lead and needing to regroup, having a series lead and not wanting to lose series momentum, having seen his guys answer an earlier tying goal 9 seconds later to get the lead back, and then he decides to challenge on something so "iffy" that he needed to burn his time out just to look at it long enough to try to find something.
If they had just accepted the goal, and lost the game later, I could live with it. But to give them back the fatigue advantage, to ignore Turcotte and then sit Lewis, to burn guys out early and often in games and in the series, and then to inject himself into the outcome like the mad tinkerer I've called him in the past... these are unacceptable. These are unforced errors based on illogic. He just couldn't let it be, he had to "try something."
I had the same thoughts as you did, immediately, and so did the reporters and even the clown show broadcast crew of Liam, Ace etc. "Inexplicable", "...can't wrap my head around it", "...and he burned his time out, too, what a blunder".
McSorely's stick, a potential series changer, taking the game out of the competent hands of a hot team of players, forcing himself into the game... it was a fumb duck move and always will be.
I was at the Dodger game watching this game on my phone. It was simple to me. They sat back, looked like they thought they could hold on.
In game two when the Oilers got to 3-2, the Kings kept attacking. That looks like the way to go. As for the comparison to 1993, the Oilers don’t have Patrick Roy.
Marty McSorley's stick popped into my head too. Sad to say after the King's Game 5 home loss that series-changing call in Game 3 is one step closer to fruition
Great analysis of Game 3 and where the Kings are at this juncture. Bottom line: 2-1 lead is not a bad place to be and this is a team that is more likely than not to stay on an even keel and move forward. My guess is that Coach Hiller gets wiser with this experience (even if he does not admit so publicly). Thank you Helene!
The passive, bend but don’t break King’s defense in the third period is the reason the team lost. Instead of playing the style of hockey that won two consecutive games, Hiller opted to go into a defensive shell… And it was a total disaster.
Ill-fated challenge aside, I hope Hiller does not rely on Doughty as much and learns to trust Spence more. At some point, he has to realize that by trying to play it safe with his personnel, he is actually increasing risk.
Hiller should have been fired before he got back to the hotel. Yes this will be a McSorley moment. Kings about to get swept. I’m more than pissed off at the idiocy of passive play in the 3d and the bigger idiocy of the challenge.
I agree about the passive play. That was terrible. But I don't think the Kings will get swept: remember, the Oilers' goaltending and defense are weak. The Kings can easily force them into mistakes. For every goal Bouchard sets up or scores, he's responsible for giving one away with a defensive blunder. It's far from over. How the Kings respond on Sunday will reveal a lot about their character and their real capabilities.
I was screaming at the TV the whole latter part of the third period -- get the puck OUT! What I really meant was, stop playing defense and start being aggressive the way you have the whole game. Much of the third period was spent in Edmonton's end. That strategy was a major error by Hiller -- all of the post-game analysts said as much. My fear is the momentum has swung.
The worst part for me was in the post game presser when Hiller said (paraphrasing) it was an emotional game and then called the reporter asking the question emotional, too. To assume the position of the empirical expert at that time was ludicrous, especially when his decision defied any logic.
He's trying to climb Mount Everest without oxygen, hauling a piano with no sherpas. He's running three lines, double shifting Byfield and Danault while doing so.
He's playing Doughty like a kid eating too much sugar.
He's confessing his mistrust in key players by benching them, as if it weren't he that was supposed to have gotten them ready to contribute all season. Low ice time is one thing; 3 minutes total is an insult. It contradicts his stated "reasoning" given for the 11/7 which is he wants to keep guys warm despite special teams when he favors the 1st unit to almost exclusive use.
He's dressing 12/6 but playing 9/5. He's ceding a fatigue advantage that the Oilers give him. Instead of pounding McDavid and Draisaitl during their usual 21-plus minutes, he's icing Kopitar for 22 plus. Games previous one could point to 5 minutes on the Power Play to inflate the top 6 ice times, but not this game. Does he not understand that humans get tired, that Kopi is 37, that Byfield is only 22?
It's not a new idea to "play the top guys more" and other coaches have iced a 4th line with limited minutes, but keeping 22% of your lineup in purgatory is no way to get to heaven.
Hiller is short-sighted as he himself states. He abandons anything about tomorrow in wild pursuit of today.
Consider the circumstances of the challenge call; he is late-game, having over-used his top players, having blown a lead and needing to regroup, having a series lead and not wanting to lose series momentum, having seen his guys answer an earlier tying goal 9 seconds later to get the lead back, and then he decides to challenge on something so "iffy" that he needed to burn his time out just to look at it long enough to try to find something.
If they had just accepted the goal, and lost the game later, I could live with it. But to give them back the fatigue advantage, to ignore Turcotte and then sit Lewis, to burn guys out early and often in games and in the series, and then to inject himself into the outcome like the mad tinkerer I've called him in the past... these are unacceptable. These are unforced errors based on illogic. He just couldn't let it be, he had to "try something."
I had the same thoughts as you did, immediately, and so did the reporters and even the clown show broadcast crew of Liam, Ace etc. "Inexplicable", "...can't wrap my head around it", "...and he burned his time out, too, what a blunder".
McSorely's stick, a potential series changer, taking the game out of the competent hands of a hot team of players, forcing himself into the game... it was a fumb duck move and always will be.
I was at the Dodger game watching this game on my phone. It was simple to me. They sat back, looked like they thought they could hold on.
In game two when the Oilers got to 3-2, the Kings kept attacking. That looks like the way to go. As for the comparison to 1993, the Oilers don’t have Patrick Roy.
Marty McSorley's stick popped into my head too. Sad to say after the King's Game 5 home loss that series-changing call in Game 3 is one step closer to fruition
Great analysis of Game 3 and where the Kings are at this juncture. Bottom line: 2-1 lead is not a bad place to be and this is a team that is more likely than not to stay on an even keel and move forward. My guess is that Coach Hiller gets wiser with this experience (even if he does not admit so publicly). Thank you Helene!
The passive, bend but don’t break King’s defense in the third period is the reason the team lost. Instead of playing the style of hockey that won two consecutive games, Hiller opted to go into a defensive shell… And it was a total disaster.
Ill-fated challenge aside, I hope Hiller does not rely on Doughty as much and learns to trust Spence more. At some point, he has to realize that by trying to play it safe with his personnel, he is actually increasing risk.
Hiller should have been fired before he got back to the hotel. Yes this will be a McSorley moment. Kings about to get swept. I’m more than pissed off at the idiocy of passive play in the 3d and the bigger idiocy of the challenge.
I agree about the passive play. That was terrible. But I don't think the Kings will get swept: remember, the Oilers' goaltending and defense are weak. The Kings can easily force them into mistakes. For every goal Bouchard sets up or scores, he's responsible for giving one away with a defensive blunder. It's far from over. How the Kings respond on Sunday will reveal a lot about their character and their real capabilities.
I, and MANY Times' readers, miss your hockey insight and coverage Helene. Well done and thanks.
We can hope. But I believe the players are beyond pissed at Hiller. I sure am.