Stanley Cup Playoffs 2025: What the Kings must address after fourth consecutive first-round loss to the Oilers

This year, there was a sense that things might be different for the Los Angeles Kings. They had a stronger regular-season performance than the Edmonton Oilers, a trend that seemed to continue through the first two games and two periods of the playoffs.

The Kings aimed to break a three-year streak of playoff exits against the Oilers. This goal appeared achievable after securing wins in Games 1 and 2 at home. However, Los Angeles then faltered, suffering four consecutive losses, including two where they surrendered third-period leads. The ultimate outcome mirrored their playoff fate every year since 2022.

This most recent playoff defeat by the Oilers was arguably the most painful. The situation seemed ideal for the Kings: they were excelling defensively against an Oilers offense largely reliant on a few key players. Furthermore, the improved Los Angeles offense faced an Edmonton defense missing key shutdown defenseman Mattias Ekholm.

In the goaltending department, the Kings held a clear advantage. Darcy Kuemper is a Vezina Trophy finalist, while Stuart Skinner had shown considerable inconsistency throughout the season.

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

Without resorting to the `definition of insanity` cliché, it`s clear that the Kings must make changes moving forward. Whether the focus is on personnel, coaching strategy, or player deployment, let`s examine what contributed to the Kings` struggles and what adjustments are necessary.

Personnel

The series was fundamentally a contest between the Kings` depth and the Oilers` offensive firepower. While depth seemed advantageous through two games, Edmonton`s offense eventually ignited. McDavid, Draisaitl, and Evan Bouchard took control of the series late in Game 3 and maintained their dominance.

The Kings` challenge isn`t simply the absence of a generational talent like McDavid – that`s a problem shared by most NHL teams.

Los Angeles lacks sufficient dynamic offensive stars – players capable of consistently creating their own scoring opportunities. Adrian Kempe is a good shooter, as demonstrated in the series. Kevin Fiala is a skilled offensive playmaker. Anze Kopitar remains one of the league`s premier two-way forwards, with Quinton Byfield showing similar potential. However, none of these players possess the unique ability of McDavid or Draisaitl to generate instant offense.

In the final four games of the series, McDavid and Draisaitl combined for 14 points. Bouchard was also pivotal, contributing four goals in crucial wins in Games 3 and 4.

For the Kings to maximize their current championship window, general manager Rob Blake must actively pursue truly elite playmakers. Such players are rare, but recent Stanley Cup winners like the Florida Panthers and Vegas Golden Knights have successfully acquired impact talent through significant personnel moves. With the NHL salary cap projected to increase significantly this offseason, facilitating potential free agency and trade activity, the Kings need to be active participants as they prepare for a potential rematch with the Oilers in future playoffs.

Philosophy

Another significant issue for the Kings in this series was their approach to protecting third-period leads, particularly in Games 3 and 4. While it`s understandable for a team to stick to its identity, and Los Angeles was effective at shutting down opponents with late leads in the regular season, this strategy is considerably harder to execute against an Oilers team that can score instantly.

After almost being caught attempting to `park the bus` in Game 1, the Kings somewhat revived this strategy to varying degrees in Games 3 and 4 when holding a third-period lead. After 40 competitive minutes where the Kings often played on their heels but capitalized on an injured Edmonton defense, they attempted to rely on their two-way forwards and experienced defensemen.

This approach proved ineffective. McDavid and the Oilers` top offensive weapons thrived, taking full advantage of any space the Kings yielded while attempting unsuccessfully to defend the area in front of Kuemper.

Data from Natural Stat Trick clearly illustrates the Kings` third-period struggles in Games 3 and 4.

This kind of shutdown approach with 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, he maintained this strategy. While this identity has secured many regular-season wins for the Kings, its limitations are evident when attempting to close out games against one of the top teams in the Western Conference.

It`s understandable that a team like the Kings would want to avoid taking excessive risks late in games against a lethal opponent like the Oilers. However, Los Angeles might have benefited from maintaining more offensive pressure to keep Edmonton on the defensive in critical moments.

Player usage

To his credit, coach Hiller did attempt 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 time on the ice.

For example, Drew Doughty and Mikey Anderson were assigned the difficult task of defending Connor McDavid`s line. Despite their strong regular-season performance as a pairing, they struggled in this matchup. According to Natural Stat Trick, the Oilers controlled over 75% of the expected goals at five-on-five when McDavid was on the ice against Doughty and Anderson.

Doughty and Anderson were not the only pairing to face difficulties. The other veteran defensive duo of Joel Edmundson and Vladislav Gavrikov also performed below even at five-on-five.

These outcomes raise questions about why the highly skilled and mobile (though young) pairing of Jordan Spence and Brandt Clarke wasn`t utilized more frequently. Spence averaged 7:31 minutes per game, and Clarke averaged 12:47. Coaches are typically hesitant to rely on young defensemen in crucial playoff situations, but this pairing could have provided valuable offensive contributions from the blue line, having combined for 61 points in the regular season.

At a minimum, Spence and Clarke could have played more minutes earlier in games, potentially allowing players like Doughty and Anderson to have more energy when attempting to close out wins. While the younger defensemen might also have struggled, they likely deserved more playing time than they received.