Golden Knights Warning Signs, and Why They Can’t Beat the Kings

On Sunday, the Vegas Golden Knights laid a stinker against the Los Angeles Kings. Despite several valiant comeback attempts, they failed to overcome a slow start and fell 6-5 in regulation. There are two ways to view this loss.

On one hand, no team can win all 82 games in a season. The Golden Knights entered Sunday’s tilt against the Kings on a four-game heater and had won seven of their last eight games. The team will brush aside the loss, study the game tape, and move forward with the season. 

But there’s a concerning trend: the Golden Knights struggle against the Kings. 

The Golden Knights won the first matchup this season in dominant fashion. Tomáš Hertl enjoyed a four-point game, and Ilya Samsonov made 34 saves in a 6-1 win.

Yet, the Kings took the season series 3-1. I’m not sure you could call all three losses blowouts— the Golden Knights almost came back in the final game of the series, but they were down 6-3 at 10:57 in the third period— but the games weren’t exactly tight.

So, was that 6-1 win back in October a blip? You can’t ignore the facts– the Golden Knights lost the next three games to the Kings and allowed at least five goals in each outing. 

What is it about the Kings that gives the Golden Knights fits? On paper, the Kings are the weaker team. Neither team dominates the special teams battle, and goaltending is about even. The Kings are a fast team, but so are the Golden Knights. The Kings no longer clog the neutral zone with the 1-3-1; this season, they implemented the same 1-2-2 system that the Golden Knights use.

It’s not a coincidence, and it’s not just a string of bad nights; the Kings are an unfavorable matchup for the Golden Knights. The Kings outplayed them in all four meetings this season, and it goes far beyond the box score.

Scoring Chances Mismatch

The Golden Knights are a good team; thus, they possess the metrics of a good team. This season, they’ve outshot opponents 1,926-1,669. They’ve outscored opponents 212-172. They have out-chanced their opponents 1,858-1,712; in the high-danger chances metric, they lead 786-701.

And yet, they can’t generate that same success against the Kings.

Over the course of the season, the Kings outshot them 102-93 and outscored them 15-11. The Kings out-chanced them 104-76; high-danger chances were 46-31 in favor of the Kings. 

The Kings controlled these metrics even in the first meeting that the Golden Knights won. Despite losing 6-1, the Kings outshot them 35-30. Scoring chances were 33-23 in favor of the Kings; high-danger scoring chances were 17-11.

The Kings won the third matchup 5-2. Shots were 23-19 in favor of Vegas, but scoring chances were 21-17 in favor of LA. The Golden Knights led high-danger scoring chances 9-8.

On Sunday, the Kings outshot the Golden Knights 35-32. They out-chanced them 33-17 and dominated the high-danger scoring chances 14-4. It was like the previous three matchups were dress rehearsals; this was the final show, and the Kings knew all their lines.

The lone outlier is that in the second meeting, the Kings took 6-3 but lost these metric matchups. Shots were 27-26 in favor of LA, but the Golden Knights out-chanced the Kings 19-17. High-danger scoring chances were tied 7-7, but goaltending let them down.

The Kings are a good defensive team, but it goes deeper than that; they do things that prevent the Golden Knights from getting to their game.

Gather ‘round, children, and I’ll tell you why.

Goaltending Letdowns

Goaltending is rarely a strength in these games, but it seems that the Kings always have a slight edge. When the Golden Knights beat the Kings 6-1 in their first matchup, it was due to a stellar goaltending performance by Ilya Samsonov. He made 34 saves and saved 3.35 goals above expected. On the other end of the rink, David Rittich posted a .800 save percentage and saved -2.3 goals above expected. 

When the two teams met for a rematch eight days later, head coach Bruce Cassidy returned to Ilya Samsonov. However, he posted a .778 save percentage this time and saved -3.67 goals above expected. The Kings started Darcy Kuemper, who was slightly better with a .885 save percentage and -0.15 goals saved above expected and won 6-3.

On February 24th, the teams met for a third time. Cassidy went back to Samsonov, who ended the game with a .737 save percentage and -2.89 goals saved above expected. Darcy Kuemper posted a .913 save percentage and saved 0.04 goals above expected, and the Kings won 5-2.

On Sunday, David Rittich started for the Kings. Rittich ended the game with a .844 save percentage and -2.86 goals saved above expected. The Golden Knights started Adin Hill against the Kings for the first time this season; he posted a .829 save percentage and -2.52 goals saved above expected. The Kings won 6-5.

You can’t place all the blame on goaltending– not when the Golden Knights were so ineffective at stopping the rush– but in hockey, a save is the difference between a win and a loss. That was certainly the case in the three Golden Knights’ losses to the Kings this season.

Golden Knights Neutral Zone Woes

Structurally, these two teams are very similar. They’re both defensively sound and make life easy on their goaltenders. They generate much of their offense from either the counterattack or in transition. You’d think they would stack up evenly against each other.

Not so much.

Nine times out of ten, the Golden Knights are the team controlling the neutral zone. They defend well, force turnovers, and generate chances off the rush. The problem is, so do the Kings. 

The Kings have scored at least five goals in all three wins over the Golden Knights this season. Now, the Kings don’t struggle to score, but they’re nowhere near a high-flying offense. So why are the Kings so effective against Vegas?

Everything ties back to the neutral zone. When the integral part of a team’s offense is limited or neutralized entirely, it’s only logical that they’d struggle. And that’s exactly how it’s gone.

The Golden Knights are good at keeping the puck out of their net– they’re 24th in the league with 2.73 goals allowed per game played– but this season, they’ve struggled with neutral zone defense. When they lose, it’s generally because they can’t prevent teams from entering the zone with puck possession. 

Take this goal for example:

It’s a perfect storm. Vladislav Gavrikov picks off Noah Hanifin’s cross-ice pass, then impedes Jack Eichel from getting to the puck. Twice, Tanner Pearson fails to break up a pass; the result is that the Kings enter the zone, and Kevin Fiala’s shot bounces off Quinton Byfield’s skate and past Adin Hill.

The Kings have the 28th-ranked power play in the league at 15.4%, but they went 3/9 against the Golden Knights this season on the man advantage. All three goals came because they could enter the offensive zone with the puck.

The Kings are never in any hurry to score; they’re perfectly happy just preventing their opponent from scoring. They double down on their neutral zone defense when they take the lead. Yes, they moved away from the 1-3-1, but the 1-2-2 is just as frustrating. 

It’s a bad matchup. The Golden Knights are primarily a rush team, so a team like the Kings that limits their transition offense will always be their worst enemy.

Speed Mismatch

This problem also relates back to the neutral zone, but it’s more specific and goes much deeper than that. There’s a genuine issue with roster construction. 

In these four regular-season meetings, it’s no coincidence that the same repeat offenders kept appearing on the scoresheet: Warren Foegele, Kevin Fiala, and Adrian Kempe. And Brandt Clarke, but he’s not a forward.

The Kings have a lot of speed up front, and the Golden Knights have a speed problem on their blueline.

The Golden Knights like to score off the rush, while the Kings prefer to generate most of their offense from the forecheck. When the Kings forecheck hard, it prevents the Golden Knights’ defensemen from creating breakouts.

In turn, the Kings are so effective at scoring off the rush because their forwards have a step on the Golden Knights blueliners. LA’s heavy forecheck forces turnovers, and they have the speed needed to capitalize on them. 

The disadvantage grows because the Golden Knights’ game relies on building speed through the neutral zone. They can score off the forecheck but prefer to score off the rush and the counterattack. The Kings don’t often give up that kind of speed in the neutral zone– when they do, like in the third period on Sunday, the Golden Knights can finally get to their game and make them pay.

The Golden Knights like to pass through the neutral zone and break in; the Kings carry the puck through the neutral zone and dump it in to let their forecheck get to work. Bruce Cassidy’s system doesn’t work without creating turnovers in the neutral zone. When the Kings turn the puck over, it’s typically along the boards. When that happens, they collapse on the puck and get to their forechecking game.

The Golden Knights like to stretch the ice, which works because all of their defensemen are good puck movers. They like to have their forwards up and have the defensemen get the puck up to them. But this is unsuccessful against a team like the Kings, where their speedy forwards are aggressively in on the forecheck all game. 

The Kings are, somehow, the anti-Golden Knights. It’s like this Kings’ roster was built with these four regular-season games in mind. I’m not confident in the Golden Knights’ chances should they meet in the playoffs.