Much of the postgame discussion centered around a play that led up to Minnesota’s third goal, an important power-play goal that made the score 3-1 early in the third period. On the play, Alexander Frolov lost his stick and had it broken. In that situation, a player has three options: attempt to play without a stick until the puck is cleared, go to the bench for a new stick or make a line change. In Frolov’s case, he chose the second option, giving the Wild a temporary 5-on-3 advantage on which they scored.
After the game, Terry Murray referred to the play as bad luck. Today, I asked Murray what the proper play should have been in that particular situation…
MURRAY: “As you saw, as it happened, Simmer was on top of the boards, ready to go. We were saying on the bench, `Change. Make a change. Simmer, go.’ If the trainers are at the other end (of the bench), then it’s fine, then he stays. He’s got to get a stick. That’s fine. But when it’s at the other end like that, the fastest play probably would have been to switch.”
Question: Either way, there’s no guarantee that the guy, whether it’s Frolov or Simmonds, gets back in time to prevent the goal though, right?
MURRAY: “No guarantee, but you have to give yourself that opportunity to at least get back and be constructive in your play, with a stick in your hand. There’s no hard, set rule on that, but when you can recover your stick at the bench, you want to do it.”
someone needs to make a ‘leave frolov alone’ youtube video in the like of that brittanny spears kid.
[Reply]
Should Frolov have changed? Probably. He had to skate the entire extra length of the bench to get his stick. But was it the right play to go back? I think it was. Quick kind of screwed up the pass from behind the net, it was a weak attempted dump that didn’t really go anywhere. Jim Fox said it best… he made a choice and it didnt work out.
[Reply]
I do not fault Frolov for the goal. It was a bad break and it didn’t go the KINGS way. It’s a long season, there still is no reason to panic. But, IMHO, I do think Dean needs to work the phones for some help up front.
[Reply]
From the start of the game everyone saw the step in Fro’s speed. Maybe he stayed because he wanted to show that extra effort on the D and it backfired.
[Reply]
Johnson should go.
Oh, are we talking about something else?
[Reply]
“In that situation, a player has three options: attempt to play without a stick until the puck is cleared, go to the bench for a new stick or make a line change.”
Whats the third option?
I need to know…
I also agree that we fans need to get off of Fro’s case. He chose wrong last night and it cost the Kings a goal. Move on.
[Reply]
Ok… I’m dumb…
I read it for or five times and didn’t see it until I posted it.
Sorry.
[Reply]
If Fro is still on our team after March 3 I will be surprised. I doubt we are going to resign him after all the issues this season and we better get something from him and not just let him go and get nothing.
[Reply]
Fro made a choice. Good for him. He took control. If the Wild did not score there, it would not have even been noticed. I support Fro’s decision.
[Reply]
As for the Frolov thing, look either way it goes, they scored. Was it the right move, well i am sure no expert, but i thought if you have no stick you could get a penalty for delay of game. Not sure on that.
As for you Kris i agree. Frolov most likely will be traded sooner rather than later maybe. I would hate to see him go, there has been one bright spot in his game, puck control down low.
[Reply]
1. Play without stick
2. Go get new stick
3. Make a change
[Reply]
Non issue. Simmonds wouldn’t have crossed the blue line before that puck went in. It didn’t matter. In hindsight he might have been better to stay there but the pass still gets across…it’s just a matter of if he can body the guy up or not.
[Reply]
Frobot’s best game so far IMO. But Purcell… that experiment needs to be over and done with. I think Moulson has actually hurt the kings by doing good b/c now DL probably wants to give TP an even longer time and more chances to perform than ne normally would’ve.
We have a serial killer on our top line. You’ve heard of BTK, we have TPK – Teddy “Play Killer”. He played the body effectively a few times last night, but he killed every play that was in the making. If it was passed to him, he lost it in his skates, if it was a shot he took, he fanned or shanked it wide. He couldn’t even put the puck deep with no one around him. On the break-outs he was making figure-8s on the low boards, refusing to give our Dmen any options when the pressure was on them. He stinks. I’d rather play anyone else on that top line!
I’m out. Happy New Years all.
[Reply]
And not delay of game playing with out a stick. It’s unsportsmanlike to play with a broken stick resulting in 2 minutes.
[Reply]
It’s really pointless imo. Hindsight being 20/20 applies here.
[Reply]
Howe 9: Even if the puck hadn’t gone in on that PK, everyone at the game noticed Fro going his normal slow pace back to the bench.
Stuart: I don’t know how you could think this was Fro’s best game. Sure, he had some good shifts, but his terrible decision on the PK and his pass on the odd-man break instead of shooting negates anything positive he did.
Overall, Fro made a decision when his stick broke, and I think it was the wrong one. He took himself completely out of the play on the PK, someone else had to cover up for the his vacated position, and that left the Wild wide open to score. At least a body in position would have helped potentially block the shot.
[Reply]
Trade Fro, Teddy and a first round pick for Kovalchuk.
[Reply]
im with everyone else wanting to end the Purcell experiment.
as with frolov he played a great consistent game all 3 periods.
that change was not his fault it happened tough luck.
[Reply]
frolov is not going to be traded
we just lost a good winger in williams/ we need the team to gel together and become a unit.
they will find away to win. But last night’s game was the Wild scoring timely goals and QUICK not being his stellar self
the Havlat goal and that goal with 2min left where saveable shots.
[Reply]
Frobot was solid all night. His pass/no shot is typical so I can’t say his game went south because of it. He was physical and he played strong with the puck. He looked passionate out there.
The Havlat and Belangers second were sniper shots that picked top corner. good shots always go in.
Do the Kings practive with regualtion nets? If so, how is it that they cannot put a fricken shot ON NET??? This has been going on for years now! Someone call El Segundo and have them take the tape measure to the pipes!
[Reply]
And just to ride on that last bit about practice, I really think that if the Kings practiced in their own building (ie-Staples) their home play would improve tremendously. Thanks Anshutz, I hate you even more than I used too, if that were possible.
[Reply]
badGoltending…I don’t know what game you were watching but Quick kept us in early and all 4 goals beat him cleanly with 2 of them going off posts.
Frolov made the right play. Had he been down low he doesn’t go to the bench. He was as close to the bench as anyone could be and no way he or Simmer make it back before the goal goes in.
[Reply]
Stewie: that was funny!! well put. made me laugh.
my comments on Ted; last year i though Wayne the 1st 50 games needed to be in the minors to develop. but the last 30, he was a different player! and it is because they consistantly played WS, and it paid off in confidence and finding a comfort zone within himself. that could be what Ted Purcell needs; especially since he cannot be sent down. i see what everyone else sees. but playing him at 1 position and leaving him play, is the only way for him to show if he’s got what it takes. i was pals with Doug Smith, a #1 pick, and he was frustrated with the way the KINGS handled him; in and out of the line-up consistantly. i remember he mentioned to me how Winnipeg was starting and staying with Dale Hawerchuck, picked ahead of Doug, but he was handled differently; allowed to play and make mistakes. Maybe TP is not a major league player, but we’ve all seen players let go by a team and they become solid contributors somewhere else and all they needed was consistant playing time in order for the game to slow down in their mind.
[Reply]
Frolov is a dumb player period.
[Reply]
Frolov’s decision to go to the bench is a bad decision, because it happened during the second period. Second period, your bench and sticks are on the far end of the bench. That extra 30 feet, 60 if you count the returning trip, cost time. Had Fro made the same decision during the first or third period, it would have been a non factor.
Defensemen are reminded that during the second period, you have to hustle to the bench to change, To make better line changes, because of the extra distance.
I even remember when teams take advantage of the 5 feet rule around the bench to gain the extra 30 feet on out numbered chances.
[Reply]
Man, I must have watched a different game last night. I thought Quick played awesome and none of the goals were his fault. As John Vanbiesbrouck stated, if the shooter is going to beat you, it has to be a perfect shot, upper corners and they were. I also thought Fro played very well. We only lost by 1 goal and did a good job in coming back with 2:37 left to play. Our defense breakdown caused the game winner for the Wilds but all in all, I think we played pretty good. Let’s go on to Calgary and show the Canadian fans what we are made of.
[Reply]
Hey guys, cut Fro some slack. He (and for that matter the rest of the Kings) didn’t know that a team could actually score on a 5 on 3…
[Reply]
As Ed correctly stated, Fro’s decision was not a good one. The length to get to the bench in the 2nd period dictates you stay in the zone and try to get your body in front of a shot or pass and wait for the puck to clear the zone.
His 2nd mistake was going to the end of the bench to get a stick instead of getting off the ice. there was a player alreeady over the boards ready to go. He took a circular turn and just missed getting back in the play.
As for his great play during the game. Any explanation as to why he passed up a golden scoring opportunity in the slot? We did lose by 1 goal..that could have been the difference. He had nobody on him and a clear shot at the net. Instead he passed it up and the Kings ended up with no shot on goal. Inexcusable in my opinion. especially from a guy who’s supposed to be a goal scorer.
[Reply]
we brought the D-men into the attack in the 3rd and dominated instead of using them like gargoyles at the blueline.
Why don’t they do this on a more consistent basis throughout the game? It would take pressure off the forwards down low and get some big front of net presence…
Are we this afraid of the odd man rush???
[Reply]
Well Johnjuan, as you stated, that is the big risk taken with that play. I think however, that Quick is above average with odd man rushes and it would be a nice surprise to throw that play out there more often.
[Reply]
It was a selfish play. He should have changed.
[Reply]
Fro should have changed, but the bottom line is there were 3 other Kings on the ice. They were all bunched along the boards, leaving 75% of their own zone wide open. You can’t lay all the blame at Frolov’s feet.
[Reply]
Khanon
Fro is not dumb. If you will recall, it was TM last year who wanted Fro and others (Kopi, Simmer and even look what he said about Parse this year) to focus on their “dot to board play” more than their scoring. He was even put on the third “stopper” line. It seems to me that he is doing exactly what he is being told to do.
This raises another issue that many of you are not thinking about but you should. Bringing in a high quality scorer on a trade right now might not work given how this team is structured. They would need to play a type of game like Smitty; it is no coincidence that he has fit so well on this team.
[Reply]
Stuart,I was at the game and watched the line with Teddy on it,and felt that line really carried the play to Minnasota.1 game experiments aren’t productive.As to getting the shots on net I think we had more than they did.
[Reply]
Shorthanded in the 2nd period, with the long change, I say you stay in the zone and try to play the body.
And yes, I agree Stuart. TP just kills any offensive flow. I don’t know how many times I have seen him flub a pass or lose a puck in his skates at this point, but it seems more often than not. Maybe if he started skating around in the scoring areas, with his stick on the ice, then he would be be more apt to complete some plays. For whatever reason, he doesn’t do this one thing that you are taught from day one in Hockey 101.
[Reply]
I agree with the people who like Purcell on the first line for the near future. He did play better yesterday. The whole line had some good pressure. Now they just have to translate it into goals. This line should be producing, so let’s give it a chance. They can all be goal-scorers. If it doesn’t, part of the blame should go to Kopitar.
Parce and Simmonds fit well together on the 3rd line and produce secondary scoring. They seem to do well regardless of the center. But usually it’s been:
Parce—Handzus—Simmonds
I hope we get Stoll back soon; that should make for a better 2nd line center. Handzus is good as a 3rd line center.
However, if Brownie and Frolov don’t produce, maybe they should go to the 3rd line too… And Parce and Simmonds could be part of the top six forwards.
In that case (with Stoll back):
Smyth—Kopitar—Purcell
Parce—Stoll—Simmonds
Frolov—Handzus—Brown
Ivanans—Richardson—Segal/Moller
Or since Richardson plays well with Brown:
Smyth—Kopitar—Purcell
Parce—Stoll—Simmonds
Richardson—Handzus—Brown
Frolov/Ivanans—Moller—Segal
Oh-oh, Frolov on the 4th line?!
[Reply]
Stuart, actually kinda funny with moulson, he had a great start but now has dissapeared the last 10 games so thats why he’s not a king we already have horribly streaky players
[Reply]
Somehow kopi needs to get his swaggar back, even with smitty back he’s still way to slack and tentative out there, he needs someone or something to piss him off, get angry and go out there and do some damage
[Reply]
I am Kopitar’s biggest supporter, but something is wrong with him right now.
It’s either –
A — He’s hurt.
B — He’s being told to put skill in the back seat, shoot all the time, dump it in all the time, and cycle only.
C — He’s lost his confidence.
D — He’s not game for the physicality of an NHL season.
I’ve seen too much from him to think it can be anything he cannot overcome, but if the answer is (D) we’ve got a huge problem.
I don’t want to blame TM, but there is a ton of talent in Brown, Frolov, Kopitar, and Johnson; why do they seem to be regressing?
I feel Smyth and Zues MUST help these guys get back to playing like they are capable of playing.
And, Kompon must go.
[Reply]
People, look at the replay. At the moment Fro decided to go to the bench, the puck was moving slowly toward an open corner where (1) there were no Wild Players waiting, (2) No Wild Players had inside position, or were closer to the puck, (3) Scuderi had position on Koivu, and was skating to get the puck and (4) Jonathan Quick had left the net and was on his way to to the puck.
Fro sees that and has to think “we are gonna get a clear.”
Instead, Quick got to the puck first, and instead of simply teeing it up for a d-man to ring it around the boards or wheel and fire airborne through a gap, he “slapped” at the puck and it partially climbed his stick, went past Scuderi right to Koivu on the half boards.
That goal was a combination of errors, but this blog and many of it’s readers seem myopic on Frolov. Sometimes it feels like the villagers with the torches are running up the hillside for Frolov no matter what he does.
The replay clearly shows Qucik with time at the puck, and Scudri has 2 steps inside position on Koivu, and as a matter of fact Doughty also had 2 steps of inside position on Brunette. Quick could have just stopped the puck, successfully slapped the puck much ahrder off the boards, left the puck alone entirely, or passed it slowly to either Scuderi or Doughty for them to clear.
I got news for many of you; Frolov did not kill Kennedy, either, and had nothing to do with Jimmy Hoffa or the Chicago Fire.
Yes, he could have stayed in the play, yes he could have let Simmonds come on for him, but also hell yes that puck was supposed to leave the zone any number of more likely ways than not.
[Reply]
It never ceases to amaze me how much Frolov gets picked apart here. He made a decision which didn’t work out. Happens every game, and it happens to every player over time. Why is no one roasting Kopitar for the turnover that led to one of the Wild goals? (I cannot remember which one – but I KNOW it happened….). I do agree with others that the atmosphere being created around Frolov is going to make it very difficult to bring him back here next year – which IMO is a shame because he is one of the very few provem commodities at forward that we have. He is not my favorite player by a long shot, but he deserves far better than what he gets here.
[Reply]
I wonder about that too Cristobal.
It seems like our offense is being held back. Everything is about minimizing risk. When do our forwards ever peel off the boards after crossing the blue line and head between the circles? It always seems to be boards, cycle, kick it out to the point for a long one.
What we do we do well but it seems sort of one dimensional.
[Reply]
yes, frolov made a decision that didn’t work out.
because it was a dumb decision. even without a stick he could have been a defensive factor, and he also could have gotten off the ice and let the other player hop on.
but the more serious bad decision was his refusal to take the shot in the slot. what’s the excuse on that one, could this be why he’s got 9 goals in a contract year halfway through the season? is it any wonder the russian team wouldn’t trade him to poland for a tractor factory and three villages to be named later at this point.
[Reply]
Those who are overly concerned with Kopitar…I just spoke with his mother and she said thanks for all your concerns but Kopi’s just in a slump so therefore, just chill out!
[Reply]
Nice to hear from Kopi’s mom.Can you talk to JJ’s.
[Reply]
Player-x very good observation.Richad(I think) also brught up a very good point on an earlier post that no one was waiting to change when Fro went to the bench which negates another option.IMHO he really didn’t have too many choices.He made one and just missed.It shouldn’t negate everything else he did well.
[Reply]
As I was going through all of the posts and opinions, I kept thinking that everyone should read Player-X’s post on the previous thread. And then I finally got to his post in this thread. He has explained the situation perfectly.
[Reply]
thanks Hawk!!
[Reply]
Agree with comments above about our conservative offense. We seem to play around the edges more than most teams, with little real action in the slot. We can cycle with the best of them, but with that many stick to stick exchanges something is bound to go wrong – which it often does. I am no expert, but when you see watch a team like San Jose or Calgary there is just something more dynamic about their offensive zone play than what we seem to get with the Kings. As we all know, our power play often appears to be on life support. I realize a lot of that is personnel-related, but I have gotta believe that the style of play is dictated as much by coaching as by personnel.
[Reply]
People are pissed that Frolov disappears for great stretches, uses only 70 percent of his talent, has not scored much and seems confused/lost/passionless.
We need goals from him — first and foremost. Heck, Cammeleri has 19 goals! How many has Frolov got?
[Reply]
Player X
I agree with you about players not getting the job done to clear the zone, but the 1st rule of PK..especially in a close game..never assume the puck is leaving the zone. That’s how 5 on 3′s occur down low. That’s also how guys are able to slide down the slot untouched for wide open shots. Heck, a good high school player could have buried that shot. The only one who wouldn’t score would be Fro. He’d pass it up.
Sorry, that bonehead play pissed me off. He’s too talented a player to do stupid shit like he did.
[Reply]
NYK, I can see your pissed, it is just that Fro was not the only one, nor the last one, to do somthing leading to that goal. Quick is young, he will learn, it was just a misplay on the puck. Fro is undeniably playing great lately, don’t let one error blind you to the many great plays the guy makes. To condemn Frolov for the stick decision is to disagree not just with me, but with Jim Fox and Terry Murray, among others. I was only trying to fully analyze the play, not just superficially blame the guy that seems obvious as the only scapegoat. Anyway, on to Calgary and who knows what…GO KINGS
[Reply]
Jerry Mitchell,
I don’t think Atlanta would go for that trade,
but then again there have been some weird trades
in sports history. The Boston Celtics got Garnett &
Ray Allen for far less than any NBA Expert would have
guessed.
[Reply]
We need to keep Frolov if we can sign him for the
4 mil/year or less, but if we do trade him we should trade for a player that can play LW and C that is very strong in faceoffs. Our best faceoff player Stoll has been out for 4 games and we have given up 3 goals straight off the faceoff that is probably more than the other 30 or so games this season.
[Reply]
Player X
You’re right…I’m singling out Fro..probably a little unfairly, but he was the point man per se, on that play.
He had to make a quick decision. I’m sitting here second guessing all the different scenarios with plenty of time to go through them. He had no time to think about it.
I wish he would have stayed on the ice, but he and the coaches know a hell of a lot more than me.
BUT even a pee wee knew to shoot the puck wide open in the slot.
You get the feeling I’m still pissed over that play? LOL
Oh well. GO get em tonight boys…I hope Fro scores a hat trick and we win.
[Reply]
Yeah, that non-shot was disappointing, to put it mildly…
[Reply]
At several points during the game, I yelled, “No wonder Russia doesn’t want you!” I think that sums it up.
[Reply]
I think it was a good decision to get a stick. I always wondered why teams do not go to the 5 on 3 for the 10-15 seconds instead of trying to play without a stick. You are useless out there. Did anyone communicate that they were down an extra man? It seemed like they didn’t know he left to get his stick. The non-shot? It’s hard to criticize when our angle is not the same as Fro’s. Perhaps the goalie had the angles covered up and the better option was a pass? If it connected, it was a goal. Frobot? That not fair either. To get to this level you have to be extremely competitive. I think it’s more a cultural thing. Russians are pretty stoic and to air your dirty laundry in the media is a no win situation. I’m referring to the Olympics. Ovechkin is the only truly outgoing Russian I can remember. Lastly, does anyone know what Fro is asking for? I remember his last contract he took less money for a longer term. Perhaps he’ll do the same.
[Reply]
Excellent point about giving up goals off the faceoff. It’s one of the most underrated stats and why Handz is so valuable. Russia not wanting a “try when I feel like it” Frolov is of no surprise.
Frolov and AHL Allstar Bernier and our number one next year for Kovalchuk, PLEASE DEAN!
[Reply]
Judging from the posts, maybe the Kings need to either send Purcell to the minors or trade Frolov. When I read the posts, I’m beginning to think that Frolov’s play blown the entire game on Monday and perhaps the entire season, and it may have stolen the Kings morale.
[Reply]