Prospect Info: 2014-2015-2016 Kings Prospects in the CHL/College

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ir is very very common for a highly talented offencive player to get drafted by a team and then sent back to his team with instructions on what they would like to see him work on. This is exactly what has happened with Zykov this year. He had a very good camp and went back to his team with the instruction to work on his defence and to become more aware in every zone.

He definitely has done exactly this. What I have seen from Z this past season and I have seen allot of him is a player who knows how to back check effectively and how to be a team player where before he was only a one dimensional sniper (though a very good one) now he is starting to play the kind of game that will take him to the NHL.

He is an exceptional prospect who still has a very high ceiling. Anything can happen but the same can be said for every prospect. But I there isn't any indication that Z has done anything except take another step forward as a highly touted prospect.

Of course the rest of the hockey world could be wrong but I very much doubt it.
 
Ir is very very common for a highly talented offencive player to get drafted by a team and then sent back to his team with instructions on what they would like to see him work on. This is exactly what has happened with Zykov this year. He had a very good camp and went back to his team with the instruction to work on his defence and to become more aware in every zone.

He definitely has done exactly this.
Lets be honest here, this is what you think. You makes it sound like this has happened. That coach does not care one bit what the Kings want. The "I have an average offensive season because I focus more on defense'' argument is getting lame as well.
 
Lets be honest here, this is what you think. You makes it sound like this has happened. That coach does not care one bit what the Kings want. The "I have an average offensive season because I focus more on defense'' argument is getting lame as well.

Your third sentence incriminates you of the first two as well. Idle speculation. Though I'd argue it makes plenty of sense for junior coaches to care about player development and even if you want to disagree it's pretty well documented that draftees have 'homework,' if you will, to grow as players. I don't think TG or anyone else is making excuses for Zykov's lowered production, I too think it's worth wondering, but you can't dismiss him as a bust yet. I get that you think he has been over-hyped, but it's odd how much that's put you off to him.
 
Your third sentence incriminates you of the first two as well. Idle speculation.
I see quite a difference.

If I say the world will come to an end tomorrow and you say, no way. Than we both speculate. Which opinion is worse ?


I didnt call him a bust either. Im just fed up with the hype for this guy.
 
I see quite a difference.

If I say the world will come to an end tomorrow and you say, I doubt it. Than we both speculate. Which opinion is worse ?


I didnt call him a bust either. Im just fed up with the hype for this guy.

Just out of curiosity, how many times have you seen him play live?

Or are you basing your rigorous analysis on solely his stat line?
 
Just out of curiosity, how many times have you seen him play live?

Or are you basing your rigorous analysis on solely his stat line?
I have seen a few moments via streams and the WJC.

Just out of curiosity too, are you one of those who cant absorb any negativity regarding the team you are rooting for ? We have plenty of those on the main board.
 
I have seen a few moments via streams and the WJC.

Just out of curiosity too, are you one of those who cant absorb any negativity regarding the team you are rooting for ? We have plenty of those on the main board.

Nope. I listen to everyone's opinion and adjust my thinking to who has been right/wrong in the past. I have no view on Zykov - I've seen a few streams and the couple of mins at the WJC like you, but haven't formed an opinion of his "eliteness" or lack thereof.

You would be more persuasive if you had viewed multiple games live though.

For example, if TG says he's seen him live multiple times last year and this year, then I would defer to him when analyzing Zykov's defense. TG saying that Zykov's defense and positioning has improved is a data point. Rather than making a statement on whether you think Zykov's defense has improved, regressed, or stagnated, you pretty much make a comment that Zykov's coach is indifferent to his development. That's not what I would consider a persuasive argument.

There's nothing wrong with what you're asking - is Zykov overrated based on stats? That's a valid question. I'm simply looking at the depth with which you are evaluating prospects.
 
I see quite a difference.

If I say the world will come to an end tomorrow and you say, no way. Than we both speculate. Which opinion is worse ?


I didnt call him a bust either. Im just fed up with the hype for this guy.

I don't think the difference in opinion between "the Kings sent him back to work on defense/all-around game" and "the coach doesn't care what the Kings want" is significant enough that one deserves to be ridiculed, hence my comment. They both have the same amount of proof and likelyhood. We can pointlessly debate all day the rhetorics of those two statements but the overall point is a disagreement about Zykov's handling/development doesn't warrant personal aggressiveness.

It's not at all about having a dissenting opinion because you're more than welcome to that and we learn a lot more about our own players based on your criticisms but you can't shut down those who present another view but just plugging your ears and making noise.
 
For example, if TG says he's seen him live multiple times last year and this year, then I would defer to him when analyzing Zykov's defense. TG saying that Zykov's defense and positioning has improved is a data point. Rather than making a statement on whether you think Zykov's defense has improved, regressed, or stagnated, you pretty much make a comment that Zykov's coach is indifferent to his development. That's not what I would consider a persuasive argument.
I certainly admit TG's opinion about prospects is 200% more educated than mine but problem with TG is, he's positive about pretty much any prospect.

If we believe TG, than Dean has drafted 19,5 potential NHL players in the last three years.

I don't think the difference in opinion between "the Kings sent him back to work on defense/all-around game" and "the coach doesn't care what the Kings want" is significant enough that one deserves to be ridiculed hence my comment. They both have the same amount of proof and likelyhood. We can pointlessly debate all day the rhetorics of those two statements but the overall point is a disagreement about Zykov's handling/development doesn't warrant personal aggressiveness.

It's not at all about having a dissenting opinion because you're more than welcome to that and we learn a lot more about our own players based on your criticisms but you can't shut down those who present another view but just plugging your ears and making noise.
I just cant agree with this. He came up with a complete theory like that has actually happened. He even confirmed it. Yes that needs to be ridiculed if you want to call it like that. People with common sense would understand that mine was at least an opinion + one that is more than logical.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the difference in opinion between "the Kings sent him back to work on defense/all-around game" and "the coach doesn't care what the Kings want" is significant enough that one deserves to be ridiculed, hence my comment. They both have the same amount of proof and likelyhood. We can pointlessly debate all day the rhetorics of those two statements but the overall point is a disagreement about Zykov's handling/development doesn't warrant personal aggressiveness.

It's not at all about having a dissenting opinion because you're more than welcome to that and we learn a lot more about our own players based on your criticisms but you can't shut down those who present another view but just plugging your ears and making noise.

While TG certainly knows more about this than me, but I tend to see where Frolov is coming from in terms of the junior coaches "not caring" what pro teams want.

The professional teams have their own, but sometimes conflicting agendas with prospects. If the Kings want Zykov to focus on defense but another pro team wants their prospect to thrive in an uptempo game, what's the Drakkar coach supposed to do? He's just trying to coach his team to win, and while he may get input from the pros, he can't run a team based off the needs of several.

As with Zykov, with the games I've seen, he hasn't done much to impress upon me "working on his defense." I usually see him standing in the high slot while the opposition is moving the puck around. That's just what I've seen.
 
I certainly admit TG's opinion about prospects is 200% more educated than mine but problem with TG is, he's positive about pretty much any prospect.

If we believe TG, than Dean has drafted 21,5 potential NHL players in the last three years.

I just cant agree with this. He came up with a complete theory like that has actually happened. He even confirmed it. Yes that needs to be ridiculed. People with common sense would understand that mine was at least an opinion.

I feel fortunate to have read enough of TG's analysis to pick up on his nuances. While he is too polite to come out and say a prospect sucks, he will provide different levels of enthusiasm for different prospects. Reading between the lines is just as important as reading what he explicitly states. I think I've gotten to a point to where I can identify the prospects that he's banging the table on, the prospects he things are decent, and the prospects he thinks are meh.

I can see how someone can mistake his "meh" prospects for surefire NHL bets since he usually includes something positive in each writeup, but I think he will even acknowledge that there are plenty of kids in the org that will never see a NHL ice surface.
 
I certainly admit TG's opinion about prospects is 200% more educated than mine but problem with TG is, he's positive about pretty much any prospect.

If we believe TG, than Dean has drafted 19,5 potential NHL players in the last three years.


I just cant agree with this. He came up with a complete theory like that has actually happened. He even confirmed it. Yes that needs to be ridiculed if you want to call it like that. People with common sense would understand that mine was at least an opinion.

I am going to address this because it is entirely untrue and a completely false statement. I only spend time writing about the prospects that I know to be of a caliber to have the potential to make the NHL and don't waste my time writing about the Campbells Tueberts etc etc for the most part. If I believe in a prospect and continue to do so as they develop in our system then there is a reason for it.

When I don't see the potential in their development I don't spend too much time writing about them. It is as simple as that.

You will not find me writing about prospects that don't make the NHL or don't at least have the potential to do so and saying otherwise just isn't true. Give me an example of a prospect that I have written positively (and continued to do so) about that either hasn't made the NHL, is developing with the potential to make the NHL or has had their situation change (dealt to a different team, system etc or had injuries that have effected their ability to make it etc) to where I no longer follow their development.

You have gone out of your way to try and ridicule what I post both here and at other times and that is no biggie to me, these are boards and you can write what you want to, it doesn't bug me with the exception of when you flat out say something that is definitely untrue. I am going to respond to this type of garbage every time.

The rest of what you have written must be a language barrier thing because I can't make heads or tails of what you are trying to say.

Zykov came to camp and was sent back to his team with a list of things to work on and that is what he has done and will hopefully continue to do until he makes the Kings. Every player wether it is a developing player or a member of our current roster has an end of the season interview.

With the Kings it is usually with DL and DS and with prospects it can be a number of others. This isn't speculation, it is a fact. During that interview they discuss the season and if there are things that they want the player to address during the offseason or in their development/game then they talk about it. If not they talk about the coming season.

What happened with Zykov is what happens with most of our prospects. It is the reason we have a rookie/prospect camp. Again, this is common knowledge and not a theory of mine. Some prospects do better than other at working on their games and have a faster trajectory to making the Kings and some never put it all together but all of them are given instruction on what they need to work on to make the team. Again, just a simple fact.

DL and co haven't had all of their picks work out and I don't write too often about most of them. I do champion and sometimes I am alone in doing so the prospects I believe will work out and like I said, I typically don't waste my time writing about the kids that I don't think have a shot at making the NHL all too often.

Maybe that is where part of your confusion comes from.

Also, when we tell a prospect what they need to work on and then send them back to their respective teams we aren't telling the coach of that prospects team what they need to help our kids learn (with the exception of Morris and co along with the rest of our systems coaching staff etc). That is left up to the player to work out for themselves.

A good example would be TT and his skating. He went to back to Ottawa and hired a power skating coach and then continued working on his skating with the 67's coaching staff whenever possible. Nobody has said anywhere here that DL called up and demanded that anyone help Tyler make himself ready for the Kings.

TT was sent back to his jr squad with the knowledge that he needed to work on his skating if he wanted to make the next level of his development and he did. He is on the Kings today as a result of overcoming an area of his development that needed to be addressed.

The same thing happened with Z. He was told what he needed to work on and that is what he is trying to do. I saw some very good improvements in his game from the start of the season to the last game I saw him play live which was recently. He still needs work but if he can address this part of his game I stand by what I said when we drafted him. He has all of the skills to become a very good sniper at the NHL level and would be a perfect fit on our second line at LW.

If that is overhyping him then time will tell I guess.
 
Last edited:
While TG certainly knows more about this than me, but I tend to see where Frolov is coming from in terms of the junior coaches "not caring" what pro teams want.

The professional teams have their own, but sometimes conflicting agendas with prospects. If the Kings want Zykov to focus on defense but another pro team wants their prospect to thrive in an uptempo game, what's the Drakkar coach supposed to do? He's just trying to coach his team to win, and while he may get input from the pros, he can't run a team based off the needs of several.

As with Zykov, with the games I've seen, he hasn't done much to impress upon me "working on his defense." I usually see him standing in the high slot while the opposition is moving the puck around. That's just what I've seen.

I get that and I don't disagree with it. That's not my point or problem. Junior coaches may very well have conflicting agendas with the big club's goals for their prospects. My problem is when one poster presents a theory that the coach doesn't care about specific development (because it is a theory--unless you can find me that somewhere in writing) but ridicules another poster for presenting another theory, that a player's production is down because he's been asked to do something. Presenting my opinion as fact and then blasting your equally valid thought is unnecessary and to a certain degree it is flaming.

I guess I should have just handled this via PMs but it's about creating a culture of respect for differing opinions that this board needs more emphasis on.

I just cant agree with this. He came up with a complete theory like that has actually happened. He even confirmed it. Yes that needs to be ridiculed if you want to call it like that. People with common sense would understand that mine was at least an opinion + one that is more than logical.

They were both opinions. Yours is not "better" than his to any degree that would warrant the "you're crazy for thinking that" response.

FWIW, a poster on the Prospects board had this to say about Zykov's season when I asked specifically about the lack of production Frolov mentioned:

"Main break on his production has been him playing much better competition. Last year he kinda came out of nowhere, so at first teams weren't preparing for him. BC eased him into the lineup.

This year has been a different story. For a good part of the season, he's been paired with Félix Girard. They typically play to opposing team's top line. I think they've done a fantastic job pinning the other teams down in their own end. They make offensive players work along the boards in their own end, so that's one of the things that struck me this year watching those 2 play. Also, although Girard might be the hardest working player in the league, kid isn't particularly gifted offensively. That has an effect on Zykov's point totals."

So I agree with Frolov that the concern is very valid--being faced with stiffer competition dropping one's production is troublesome. However, I think he's young enough that this is part of the development cycle--learning to work with different linemates through tougher assignments and such. If his production stays down moving forward next year, then we may have to be a little bit more worried. I just think it's premature to write him off. But I guess I haven't been exposed to the same hype that others have, either.
 
I get that and I don't disagree with it. That's not my point or problem. Junior coaches may very well have conflicting agendas with the big club's goals for their prospects. My problem is when one poster presents a theory that the coach doesn't care about specific development (because it is a theory--unless you can find me that somewhere in writing) but ridicules another poster for presenting another theory, that a player's production is down because he's been asked to do something. Presenting my opinion as fact and then blasting your equally valid thought is unnecessary and to a certain degree it is flaming.

I guess I should have just handled this via PMs but it's about creating a culture of respect for differing opinions that this board needs more emphasis on.



They were both opinions. Yours is not "better" than his to any degree that would warrant the "you're crazy for thinking that" response.

FWIW, a poster on the Prospects board had this to say about Zykov's season when I asked specifically about the lack of production Frolov mentioned:

"Main break on his production has been him playing much better competition. Last year he kinda came out of nowhere, so at first teams weren't preparing for him. BC eased him into the lineup.

This year has been a different story. For a good part of the season, he's been paired with Félix Girard. They typically play to opposing team's top line. I think they've done a fantastic job pinning the other teams down in their own end. They make offensive players work along the boards in their own end, so that's one of the things that struck me this year watching those 2 play. Also, although Girard might be the hardest working player in the league, kid isn't particularly gifted offensively. That has an effect on Zykov's point totals."

So I agree with Frolov that the concern is very valid--being faced with stiffer competition dropping one's production is troublesome. However, I think he's young enough that this is part of the development cycle--learning to work with different linemates through tougher assignments and such. If his production stays down moving forward next year, then we may have to be a little bit more worried. I just think it's premature to write him off. But I guess I haven't been exposed to the same hype that others have, either.


Zykov went from a pretty free wheeling sniper to working harder at being a better more responsible player in every zone. The statement I bolded here is in line with what I have been saying about the continuing development of Z's all around game.

To me he hasn't lost a single step of O production himself but instead has elevated the rest of his game at the expense of some of his point production. That and he plays a much better game in the neutral zone then he did last year. Prior to this season he was constantly looking to break into the zone with the puck at the expense of his teams attack more often than not. In that area he was either out of position or would turn the puck over pretty often though when it would work his superior O skills would lead to him scoring a goal it was more of a me first style of play.

He looks to have fixed that part of his game this season or at least has taken a big step in being more responsible then he was last season. I don't see it as a regression of his O skills but more of a maturing of other aspects of his game.
 
I don't understand what the big deal is with Zykov. He's fine, I'm sure. So what if he's regressed offensively, he's not the first prospect to have done that. I don't care how he did in juniors, I care about how he would develop and how he plays with the big club.
 
I feel fortunate to have read enough of TG's analysis to pick up on his nuances. While he is too polite to come out and say a prospect sucks, he will provide different levels of enthusiasm for different prospects. Reading between the lines is just as important as reading what he explicitly states. I think I've gotten to a point to where I can identify the prospects that he's banging the table on, the prospects he things are decent, and the prospects he thinks are meh.

I can see how someone can mistake his "meh" prospects for surefire NHL bets since he usually includes something positive in each writeup, but I think he will even acknowledge that there are plenty of kids in the org that will never see a NHL ice surface.

Ya know, I think that is a very fair assessment of my writing "style". Though I really try not to wright much if anything at all about the kids I don't see making it. Mostly because of time constraints.
 
Ya know, I think that is a very fair assessment of my writing "style". Though I really try not to wright much if anything at all about the kids I don't see making it. Mostly because of time constraints.

can't please everyone, it's that easy.

i enjoy TG's analysis and am thankful for the input. dude sees way more live than the rest of us, which is invaluable. trust me when i say you can watch an entire season on TV and you only get a fraction of what is happening. to truly judge-grade a player you have to see them live. there is too much happening in game, the cameras will never show that are vital to truly analyzing any player.

keep up the good work TG
 
I remember years ago when tennis player Pete Sampras was ruling juniors, he decided to re-tool his game, causing his his game to "suffer" while he learned better techniques that would serve him better once he got to the professional circuit. He sacrificed in the short term, but it paid off in the long term. He became the #1 player in the world years later. It takes self-control to learn to play defense better and open oneself up to criticism for not producing as expected in the short term. If Zykov ends up becoming a strong two-way player, he will be more of a contributor to his NHL team. Looking at Kopi, I think that if Kopitar wanted to, he could score more goals and get more attention, but he refuses to if it will expose his team defensively. I also think that Mark Morris has praised Jordan Weal for becoming less of a one-dimensional me-first offense-only player to more of an unselfish, team-first, two-way player.

I love TonelliGhost's insights, but I also like reading alternative opinions that make a good discussion.
 
TG, just out of curiosity (as I said you know this stuff a lot better than me), but how does a player improve his defense without the coaches getting involved?

I understand when organizations want players to improve on upper body strength, leg strength, skating, shooting habits, etc. But if the Kings want Zykov to improve on his defense, how does he accomplish that on his own? I guess that's where I'm lost from a development understanding.
 
TG, just out of curiosity (as I said you know this stuff a lot better than me), but how does a player improve his defense without the coaches getting involved?

I understand when organizations want players to improve on upper body strength, leg strength, skating, shooting habits, etc. But if the Kings want Zykov to improve on his defense, how does he accomplish that on his own? I guess that's where I'm lost from a development understanding.


Your a pretty dialed in poster and we have several of them around here.

If a player is looking to improve an aspect of their game in jr's (before pro play because then they would be coached by Kings staff so it is a different thing) if it is a personal aspect (shot strength, skating etc) then they can work on it before the season starts and through working with various training partners/consultants. But the most effective tool that is most often used is the content room (game tapes etc). When a prospect is sent back to their am team with instruction their parent franchise will often send them back with video (dedicated media is what it is called today but it used to simply be called game tapes) of their respective games, practices workouts etc. They will see tape of what they are doing and then tape of a pro player who plays their position with their parent team that uses proper execution with instructions on what the coaching staff thinks the player needs to do to improve their game.

It is up to them on how they work on the area of need away from their am team. Where the am team is concerned parent teams typically try to at least have a working relationship with the coaching staffs of their prospects teams. In Zykov's case we have a scout that works that region most often and follows the Q closely who knows the mgt systems of each team and especially those who we have prospects playing for.

While the coaching staff may or may not agree entirely with the parent team of a prospect usually the two systems want the same thing. In Z's case I know this to be true but that isn't always the case. Say that Z's team wanted him to be a pure sniper and that they weren't looking for him to play a two way game. Then they would simply instruct the player to play the way they want them to and that would be what happens.

So it isn't so much that the team automatically works with the parent team of each prospect in so much as it usually falls under everyone wanting each prospect to work on the same aspects of their game(s).

The coaching staff usually will work with each prospect and their parent team so long as it meets their own needs which is most often the case. When it isn't then you will see the parent team work hard depending on the prospect to move them along to a team that they have a better working relationship with or to a team within their system. Sometimes they just have to wait for their chance to give the player the instructions that they (the parent team) believe that the player needs like in the case of Kitsyn and Porkins.

Sorry for rambling a bit and I hope I answered your question.

It's late and I am tired, I will give it a look tomorrow and see if I have missed anything.
 
Last edited:
Great and informative answer, TG, thank you! I look forward to more insights and to pick your brain more :)
 
Zykov only played 52 games this year after playing 67 last year. If you go per game he looks like this:

Zykov last year: .6 Goals/Game, .52 Assists/Game, 1.12 Pts/Game, 3.75 Shots/Game (16% Shooting Percentage)

Zykov this year: .42 Goals/Game, .75 Assists/Game, 1.19 Pts/Game, 3.3 Shots/Game (13% Shooting Percentage)

If he's playing tougher competition like TG says he is, it sounds like he's progressing just fine.
 
Mersch vs. LaDue
March 28, 8 p.m. ET, ESPNU/WatchESPN
No. 1 Wisconsin (24-10-2) vs. No. 4 North Dakota (23-13-3)

North Dakota wins 5-2 and Wisconsin's season ended. Is there any kind of time limit when Kings can sign Michael Mersch or can they sign him immediately and send to Manchester?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad