Los Angeles Kings: What Needs to Change After Fourth Straight First-Round Playoff Loss to the Oilers

This season initially offered hope for the Los Angeles Kings. They performed better than the Edmonton Oilers during the regular season, and this trend seemed to continue through the first two games and initial periods of their playoff series.

The Kings aimed to break their three-year playoff losing streak against the Oilers, a prospect that looked promising after securing wins in Games 1 and 2 on home ice. However, Los Angeles then faltered, suffering four consecutive losses. Two of these defeats occurred after surrendering third-period leads, resulting in the same outcome they`ve experienced every year since 2022.

This most recent playoff elimination at the hands of the Oilers might be the most disappointing. The situation appeared favorable for the Kings. They were demonstrating elite defense against an offense primarily reliant on a few key stars. Los Angeles`s offense, which had shown improvement late in the season, was set to face an Edmonton defense without shutdown defenseman Mattias Ekholm.

In net, the Kings held a perceived advantage. Darcy Kuemper is a Vezina Trophy finalist, while Stuart Skinner had displayed significant inconsistency throughout the season.

Despite these advantages, Los Angeles couldn`t overcome the hurdle posed by the Oilers. Connor McDavid, Leon Draisaitl, and their teammates again proved too formidable for the Kings.

While avoiding the cliché about the definition of insanity, it`s clear that something fundamental must change for Los Angeles moving forward. Whether it involves personnel adjustments, coaching philosophy, or player deployment, let`s analyze the Kings` shortcomings and what needs addressing.

Personnel

This series essentially boiled down to the Kings` depth versus the Oilers` offensive firepower. The depth initially looked like the more reliable factor through two games, but Edmonton`s scoring power ultimately erupted. McDavid, Draisaitl, and Evan Bouchard took control of the series late in Game 3 and maintained their dominance.

The Kings` problem isn`t merely the absence of a player like McDavid – that`s a challenge shared by 30 other NHL teams.

Los Angeles simply lacks sufficient dynamic offensive talent – players capable of consistently generating scoring chances on their own. Adrian Kempe is a strong shooter, as demonstrated multiple times in the series. Kevin Fiala is a skilled playmaker in the offensive zone. Anze Kopitar remains one of the best two-way forwards in history, and Quinton Byfield is developing in that direction. However, none of these players approach the offensive generation capability of McDavid or Draisaitl.

In the final four games of the series, McDavid and Draisaitl collectively amassed 14 points. Bouchard contributed a combined four goals in crucial wins in Games 3 and 4.

If the Kings intend to capitalize on their current championship window, general manager Rob Blake needs to aggressively pursue genuinely elite playmakers. Such players are rare, but recent Stanley Cup champions, like the Florida Panthers and Vegas Golden Knights, have successfully made significant personnel acquisitions.

With another substantial increase expected in the NHL salary cap this offseason, opportunities for significant moves in free agency and the trade market may arise. The Kings must be active participants as they aim to strengthen their roster for the likely possibility of facing the Oilers again in future playoffs.

Philosophy

Another obvious issue for the Kings in this series was their management of third-period leads, particularly in Games 3 and 4. While understanding a team playing to its strengths – Los Angeles was highly effective at shutting down opponents with late leads in the regular season – this strategy is considerably riskier against an Oilers team that can score instantaneously.

After nearly being caught out by attempting to defend a lead passively in Game 1, the Kings somewhat replicated this approach to varying degrees in Games 3 and 4 when entering the third period with an advantage. Following competitive first 40 minutes where the Kings were often defending but capitalized on Edmonton`s short-handed defense, they attempted to rely on their two-way forwards and veteran defensemen to protect the lead.

This strategy proved ineffective. McDavid and the Oilers` top offensive weapons exploited any space given as Los Angeles unsuccessfully tried to defend the area in front of Kuemper.

Statistics from Natural Stat Trick highlight the Kings` third-period struggles in Games 3 and 4:

This conservative approach to protecting late leads has been a characteristic of the Kings, dating back to Todd McLellan`s tenure as coach from 2019 to 2024. When Jim Hiller took over, the team largely maintained this identity. While effective for winning many regular-season games, this strategy clearly has limitations when attempting to close out playoff contests against one of the Western Conference`s most potent offenses.

It is understandable that a team like the Kings would want to minimize risks late in games against a dangerous opponent like the Oilers. However, Los Angeles likely needed to maintain a more aggressive offensive posture in high-leverage situations to keep Edmonton on the defensive.

Player Usage

Credit is due to Coach Hiller for attempting to leverage his team`s depth advantage in the series. Nine different Kings players averaged over 20 minutes of ice time per game, compared to only six for the Oilers. The challenge for Los Angeles was that many of these players, particularly veteran defensemen, were not sufficiently effective during their ice time.

For example, Drew Doughty and Mikey Anderson were tasked with the difficult assignment of handling McDavid`s line. Despite being a strong duo in the regular season, they struggled in this specific matchup. The Oilers controlled over 75% of expected goals with McDavid on the ice against Doughty and Anderson at five-on-five, according to Natural Stat Trick.

Doughty and Anderson were not alone in facing difficulties. The other veteran defensive pairing of Joel Edmundson and Vladislav Gavrikov also performed below even in expected goals at five-on-five.

These results raise questions about why the highly skilled and mobile, albeit young, defensive pair of Jordan Spence and Brandt Clarke was not utilized more frequently. These two averaged only 7:31 and 12:47 minutes per game, respectively. While coaches often hesitate to rely heavily on young defensemen in critical playoff moments, this pairing could have provided a much-needed offensive spark from the backend. They combined for 61 points during the regular season.

At a minimum, Spence and Clarke could have absorbed more minutes earlier in games, potentially leaving players like Doughty and Anderson with more energy for crucial late-game situations. While the younger defensemen might also have struggled, they arguably deserved a longer leash than they received in the series.