It has been nearly two months since the LA Kings fired head coach Todd McLellan and promoted Jim Hiller to the interim position.
This came after the team won only three games in January, a month they came into with a 20-8-5 record.
Obviously, there needed to be a change. Stars were not playing up to their potential, and the season was at stake. Letting McLellan go wasn’t an easy decision for GM Rob Blake, yet one he ultimately felt he had to make.
In this week’s Analytics Perspective, we’ll will take a look at some of the Kings numbers both pre and post the coaching change. Have they been performing better, worse, or about the same?
All data used comes via NaturalStatTrick and Hockey-Ref.
Basic Stats
Under McLellan, the Kings went 23-15-10 this season, giving them a .583 points percentage (the percent of possible points earned). In Hiller’s 22 games — including Monday’s victory in Vancouver — the team is 15-7-1 with a .674 points percentage (9th in the league since he took over). This 9% increase may seem small; however, at this point in the season every point matters.
The Kings are currently third in the Pacific Division with 87 points. They’re just above the Wild Card spot, and Vegas is only two points back (both teams with 71 games played). Meanwhile, looking at things from a full Western Conference perspective, Nashville is holding strong in the first Wild Card spot and they have one more point than LA. Thus, if the Kings fell out of third in the Division and slipped into a Wild Card spot, they could end up playing one of the top two seeds in the West (i.e. most likely Vancouver, Colorado, or Dallas) in Round One of the playoffs. Again, every point matters, and the Kings are earning points and a higher percentage under Hiller than they were with McLellan behind the bench.
When it comes to Goals for Percentage, or GF% (note: an explanation can be found here), the Kings are also slightly better off under Hiller.
With McLellan, the team had a 54% GF%, meaning they were scoring slightly more than they were getting scored on (remember from last week’s article, a GF% above 50% indicates a team is scoring more goals than they are allowing). Under Hiller, they have a nearly 57% GF%. Another marginal, yet meaningful difference. Late in the season, every shift, every shot, and every goal matters. This increase in GF% means that under Hiller, the Kings have done a slightly better job scoring goals vs. what they allow.
Advanced Stats
We just broke down GF%, so now let’s look at Expected Goals for Percentage, or xGF%. This is extremely similar to GF%, but instead of using Actual Goals For and Goals Against, we’re going to use Expected Goals For and Against. This provides a better understanding of the shot quality — both in terms of for and against — rather than simply the result of shots.
Under McLellan, the team’s xGF% was 54%, while it has been slightly under 50% during Hiller’s tenure. This suggests that under McLellan, the Kings were expected to score more goals than they were expected to give up (keep in mind that expected goals is really a measure of shot quality, based on variables like position on the ice, type of shot, etc). McLellan’s Kings team was generating better quality shots than they were giving up. Meanwhile, Hiller’s Kings have an xGF% of about 50%, meaning they are giving up shots that are just as dangerous as the shots they are taking. This is rather interesting, considering they’re earning points at a better rate.
When it comes to shot attempts, or Corsi (find more on Corsi here), McLellan’s team also comes out ahead. On both sides of the coin, they generated more shot attempts per 60 minutes than Hiller’s Kings (66 CF/60 versus 57) and allowed less shot attempts against per 60 (56 CA/60 versus 60).
This would suggest that McLellan’s Kings were playing a more aggressive game, generating more shot attempts, and not sacrificing defense to do so, allowing less shot attempts. Under Hiller, they have regressed (analytically speaking) at both ends of the ice, taking less shot attempts and allowing more.
Why Have the Kings Had Success?
As we’ve addressed in previous articles, goaltending is key. And that is a large reason the Kings have had success over the past couple of months. In the first article of this series, we suggested that Hiller start David Rittich more often, as his numbers looked better than Cam Talbot’s did. There has definitely been more of an even split since then, as Rittich has started 10 games, while Talbot has started 13 since the coaching change.
This tandem has led the Kings to a lot of success since Hiller stepped in. They have combined for a .919 SV%, fifth in the league over that span. Talbot has been elite, dropping from a 2.59 GAA with McLellan to a 2.04, and Rittich has transitioned from a 2.09 to a 2.26, still very good (i.e. the league average is 2.9 among goalies with at least 600 minutes).
All things considered; Hiller has done an excellent job at turning the Kings around. He’s improved the club in several areas, especially squeezing every point possible out of games. Consider this – the Kings have only lost once in overtime since he’s taken the reigns, something that seemed impossible in January.
When all is said and done, like the rest of management and LA’s players, Hiller will be judged by his team’s performance in the playoffs.
RELATED CONTENT:
Follow @mayorNHL
Note to webmasters/reporters: When recapping news or interviews from this site please remember to include a link to www.MayorsManor.com
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-522840723937225840-1’); });
Continue reading...
