Sending the Wrong Message?
- October 26th, 2011
- Write comment

The NJ Devils Celebrate a 2nd Period goal. (Photo:AP)
The Kings had won 4 straight games. Their solid play in all 3 zones had been punctuated by Jonathan Quick’s record setting 3 straight shutout games, 188:10 seconds without allowing a goal. Quick, much like the start of last season, has been the Kings’ best player through the first 8 games and has been in goal for each of the Kings 5 wins, with a shootout loss in New Jersey the lone blemish on his record. With a .81 goals against average and a .972 save %, it would be more than fair to say that Quick has been the NHL’s top netminder through his first six starts.
Enter Kings’ Head Coach Terry Murray, who said prior to the start of the season he would ride the hot hand in goal rather then penciling in a rotation for his two goaltenders. In fairness when the other half of your tandem is 2006 first round pick Jonathan Bernier, a guy who could probably start for 2/3 of the teams in the NHL; this is a pretty smart philosophy to keep as it creates an optimal, competitive environment in which the guy playing has to earn his games. Ideally this pushes both guys to be at their best, and so far this seems to have helped to elevate Quick’s game to a level among the NHL’s elite. Why then, did Terry Murray stray from his “ride the hot hand” philosophy by starting Bernier at home against the Devils on Tuesday? Bernier was average at best in his lone start of the season, a 4-2 loss against the Buffalo Sabres in Berlin; and there’s no hand in the league, much less in the Kings’ organization hotter than Quick. Murray’s reasoning for the change was well documented by Rich Hammond. His thought process was, with 3 games in 4 nights starting Thursday, and 15 of 17 games against the Western Conference, he wanted to make sure to get Bernier some playing time, as he will most certainly be needed during that stretch. Murray eludes to the fact that if not Tuesday, Bernier perhaps doesn’t play until December. So, it’s Bernier vs. the Devils on Tuesday, that’s that.
What happens next? The Kings absolutely stunk up the joint. Uncharacteristically bad turnovers that led to goals-against, and an inability to mount much offensive zone pressure. While Devils’ goalie Johan Hedberg was indeed very good, the number of high-octane scoring chances the Kings had against him was minimal. It might be worth noting that the breaks did not go the Kings’ way most of the game either: The Devils had a first period goal disallowed because Devils’ defender Henrik Tallinder was in the crease behind Bernier, and Dainus Zubrus’ first goal in the second period should have been disallowed: Bernier had possession of the puck and Zubrus ran him over like a Mack truck jarring the puck loose and into the net. If the first one was interference (and I’ll say for the record it was perhaps marginal but was the correct call as Tallinder did make incidental contact with Bernier), the second one DEFINITELY was. In a one goal game, I’d have been absolutely livid about that call. Once that goal was on the board it was all Devils. A rare but costly turnover by Anze Kopitar led to a one-timer by Patrik Elias that made it 2-0. Minutes later another turnover led to Zubrus’ 2nd goal of the night, a slapper from the right circle that was definitely stoppable to make it 3-0 New Jersey. The rest of the game the Kings made Hedberg look like the second coming of Patrick Roy. Game, set, match.
Let me make clear one point: The play of Jonathan Bernier wasn’t the reason the Kings’ lost this game. The first NJ goal shouldn’t have counted in the first place, the second one would’ve been tough for anybody to stop. The third goal was the only one of the bunch I’d call soft: Zubrus takes a slapshot with a long windup and shoots from the circle, giving Bernier time to come out and challenge (he didn’t). Any shot from that range without a screen or a deflection, save the absolutely perfect off the bar and in type shot, should not go in. Zubrus’ shot fell within none of the above parameters.
The team in front of Bernier played their worst game of the young season thus far on Tuesday, and while Bernier himself isn’t directly responsible for that, let me provide some food for thought.
What kind of message is Terry Murray sending to his team by sitting the man who has been it’s best player all season? What are you telling the guys in the room by saying you’re giving Quick the night off because 15 of 17 upcoming games are in-conference? Would you sit your best player in an important game? Me neither.
Quick’s streak is as important to the other guys in the room, if not more important than it is to Quick himself. It’s a testament not only to outstanding goaltending but excellent team defense – something Terry Murray’s system prides itself on. The longer that streak continues, the more it says not only about Quick, but about the team in front of him. Sitting Quick Tuesday night might have left enough wiggle room in players’ minds (we’re not defending Quicker’s streak tonight, so…) to allow the type of lackadaisical effort we saw from the Kings in this loss. You end up feeling bad for Bernier because, while he wasn’t outstanding by any means, he also wasn’t playing behind an inspired team, not his fault.
I’m not attempting to strike up the “Fire Terry Murray!” crowd yet, but I do question his decision to sit Jonathan Quick Tuesday night. While I think Murray is a fine coach, certainly capable of helping the Kings win the Cup, for one night at least he seemed to be out of touch with the psychological effects that a seemingly harmless personnel decision can have on the entire team.
Of course, nobody will ever know if the result would’ve been any different had Quick led the team onto the ice Tuesday night, but it’s something to think about.
Kings will be in Dallas Thursday night, with Quick in net.
GO KINGS!
-JS