I think we learned two things from Game 1. At least I did.
1. The LA Kings are more than capable of playing a style of hockey and executing a gameplan that will give them a chance to beat the Colorado Avalanche.
2. The Colorado Avalanche are a good enough team that they can win those games, even when the Kings do a good job of executing the way they want to play.
Think we saw that exact scenario in yesterday afternoon’s Game 1. The Kings hung right with Colorado. They threatened and they did what they’ve done all season long, which is keep games close, even when playing the best team in the NHL. Thought they had arguably the best two individual chances to open the scoring. It was a one-goal game entering the third period and a one-goal game inside the final minute of the third period. Thought that the Kings met the moment that Game 1 presented, bringing playoff-level intensity and compete. And yet, the Avalanche hold a 1-0 series lead.
Colorado ranked first in the NHL this season in percentage of scoring chances controlled at 5-on-5, per Natural Stat Trick. In Game 1, the Kings actually out-chanced the Avalanche 22-20 in that department. High-danger looks were 10-9 Kings. Colorado certainly had their spells and it certainly felt at times like the hosts had more of the dangerous looks throughout the afternoon, but the raw numbers tell the story of a game that was pretty tight in that area.
If you were to create a checklist entering the first game, I think you’d say the Kings checked several items off that list. The Kings won the special teams battle, scoring a 6-on-4 power-play goal while turning in a 4-of-4 showing on the penalty kill. They limited Nathan MacKinnon to one assist, no points for Cale Makar. The goaltending from Anton Forsberg was outstanding. The Kings handled Colorado’s swings and I thought their veteran group of defensemen displayed a lot of composure to help calm the game down when needed, largely limiting chances from the inside in the process.
In advance of the series, I laid out what I felt were the five biggest keys for the Kings to have success and compete. I think they got three of those five keys in Game 1, with the fourth taking care of itself in a different way, as the Kings rarely got the Byfield/MacKinnon matchup they were hoping for, but they were able to contain the top line regardless. That’s the thing with Colorado, though. They can beat you even when you knock off 80 percent of your checklist.
The one the Kings missed from that list was timely scoring. Wasn’t due to a lack of opportunities. Drew Doughty missed on an open net in the first period. Artemi Panarin missed on an open net in the second period. Both of those looks came in a 0-0 game. Adrian Kempe had a couple looks in tight spaces and Trevor Moore a couple off the rush. Quinton Byfield got the puck into dangerous areas twice on the power play. None were able to go, as the Kings were blanked at 5-on-5, scoring only on a late power play via Panarin to make the ending interesting.
I don’t think the Kings should be upset with the way they played in Game 1. But when you don’t complete the entire checklist, missing out on opportunities throughout the course of a game against the Avalanche, that’s a team that will make you pay. Colorado capitalized on two of their chances, both 5-on-5, and the Kings came up short on theirs. In a game in which the Kings largely skated with the NHL’s best team over 60 minutes, it’s those finer details, that level of execution that swung Game 1 to the hosts.
I think when you look at those factors, you walk away from yesterday’s game both with confidence and disappointment, a mixture of emotions that seemed to be felt in the locker room as well.
The disappointment stems from losing a playoff game. There are no moral victories in the postseason. There can’t be. A loss in Game 1 sent the Kings to within three defeats of their season ending. Anytime you compete as the Kings did and you come up short, it stings. As it should. Against Colorado, there might be a night where they just completely take over and there isn’t much you can do about it. Last night was not that night and it was because of how the Kings played. To lose that game, scoring just one goal, is an opportunity missed, especially when you look at some of the chances that could have been.
However, it’s a seven-game series and the Kings showed that they can more than compete if they play that way. If they can find a way to add a couple of timely goals onto the portions of the checklist that they completed, they’ve got a chance here. A few of chances they missed aren’t exactly hope and a prayer types of looks. They were Grade-A chances that were simply missed. One or two of those go in and it’s a different ballgame. You might feel that is simply Kings hockey and for a lot of this season, you’d be right. Hasn’t been D.J. Smith’s Kings, though. The Kings scored their goals down the stretch, an uptick of more than 0.5 goals-per-game, with pretty much everyone in the Top-6 producing. That should lend some optimism and confidence going into Tuesday, that the gameplan worked. With a better job of bearing down and similar execution in other areas, there’s a winning formula in there.
So where does that leave us?
Ultimately, it’s just 1-0 down.
Whether it was 2-1 or 8-1, a loss is a loss in the playoffs. However, there is enough optimism stemming from yesterday’s performance to take into Game 2, certainly. The Kings will be in the series if they deliver that same showing in each game but for a team that has not had consistency throughout the bulk of the 82 games during the regular season, there is an if there to be answered. The Kings have a chance to even the series tomorrow evening and they’ll need every ounce of what they gave on Sunday, plus another level. As Smith said before the series, the Kings need some players to “outperform what they are” while playing outside of their comfort zones. In that area, there is more to give. The Kings were pretty good in Game 1, but pretty good won’t be enough. They’ll need to be great in this series, beginning with Game 2.
