2019-20 Kings News/Rumors

[Fat Elvis]

My prediction for the season is that they are not bottom 5 bad, but somewhere in the bottom 6-10 range bad. An improvement

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Why do you forget to add that you thought Bjornfot would turn into a bottom pairing defenseman like Hickey ?

That we had to worry about any defenseman who can skate as well as Bjornfot but not create a ton of offense ?

That Bjornfot was not worth to be picked 1st round.

Just a small summery because it is even worse.

Why do I need to **** myself. You were wrong back than and possibly even more wrong now. I dont need to let this go, this is a message board.

I never said Bjornfot would turn into a bottom pairing defenseman.

The PROFESSIONAL SCOUTING REPORTS questioned Bjornfot's offensive game. I simply echoed that.

I never said Bjornfot wasn't worth a 1st Round pick. I said Kaliyev was a better pick, which the Kings' own damn scouting staff agreed with by admitting it was a draft-by-need gamble to pick Bjornfot at #22.

You need to go **** yourself because you're continuing to misunderstand literally everything I said those months ago, and now claiming I said things I never did.

All I did was compare Bjornfot and Hickey's scouting reports. FULL STOP.

You took that as some kind of attack on Bjornfot, which it wasn't. And now you're in full white knight mode for your pet prospect when I haven't even attacked him.

 

[crassbonanza]

I never said Bjornfot wasn't worth a 1st Round pick. I said Kaliyev was a better pick, which the Kings' own damn scouting staff agreed with by admitting it was a draft-by-need gamble to pick Bjornfot at #22.

This isn't true. The statement made was that they believed that a defenseman of Bjornfot's caliber would not be available for their pick at 33, while they believed that there would be high end forwards available at that pick. Basically their scouting was on top of things, they correctly identified the way that the draft was going to fall in the second half of the 1st round.. They did not at any time ever say that they believed that Kaliyev was a better pick.

 

[Frolov 6'3]

I never said Bjornfot would turn into a bottom pairing defenseman.

What ?

You have to worry about any defenseman who can skate as well as Bjornfot but not create a ton of offense.

At 6’0, Bjornfot absolutely must improve his production to become a top four defenseman in the NHL.

I never said Bjornfot wasn't worth a 1st Round pick.

You did.

And that’s exactly where I think a player like Bjornfot is worth picking: the 2nd round.
My contention is whether he is worth drafting at 22nd overall. It’s the mere principle of drafting a player like Bjornfot that high, when he would have likely been available well into the 2nd round. That’s really all I’m saying.

I’m happy we drafted Bjornfot. But do I think he’s worth picking at 22nd overall? No, I do not

There are only a couple of picks left after the 22nd overall, so you just whined about basically nothing. Now if he was picked 10th overall (if we had that pick), than I could understand you.

Its fully allowed to prefer Kaliyev over Bjornfot as well but you totally downgraded the kid with some wrong arguments. You say just just echoed the scouting reports. For instance when I and other explained that his offense wasnt really that bad at all and came up with examples, you just ignored it and kept running your agenda.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

What ?

You did.

Its fully allowed to prefer Kaliyev over Bjornfot but you totally downgraded the kid with wrong arguments. You say just just echoed the scouting reports. For instance when I and other explained that his offense wasnt really bad at all, you just ignored it.

Again, you just can't seem to grasp the nuance of anything I'm saying. Preferring another player at #22 in this specific draft is entirely different than believing a player is not "first round caliber" in a vacuum, which in itself is a nebulous value judgment. Mock drafts wildly differed on Bjornfot's placement: some had him as low as 45th, some as high as 18th.

Once more, all I ever did was echo his scouting reports and compare said scouting reports to Hickey's, which are undeniably similar. As much as you say I "ignored" your counter argument about his offensive game, you've continued to ignore mine about Bjornfot and Hickey's similarities. We're not speaking the same language here. We're talking past one another and clearly feel ignored and/or misunderstood, which is why the original argument went nowhere. Moreover, you're outright disputing Bjornfot's scouting reports. I can't debate someone who claims to have special knowledge that goes against all the available conventional thinking. And the craziest thing is I LIKE Bjornfot, as I said months ago. He's a good prospect, and I hope he exceeds all expectations and becomes a fixture in our top four.

End of story. Argument finished.

My big beef with you now is the fact you held onto all this and tried to throw me under the bus for simply asking a question about the opening night roster. If you're that petty and childish, it's probably best we just put one another on ignore and move on with our lives.

 

[BigKing]

If Bjornfot's name was Jones, is there such a rush to bring this all back up to run a victory lap before the kid has even played a regular season NHL game?

 

[SettlementRichie10]

This isn't true. The statement made was that they believed that a defenseman of Bjornfot's caliber would not be available for their pick at 33, while they believed that there would be high end forwards available at that pick. Basically their scouting was on top of things, they correctly identified the way that the draft was going to fall in the second half of the 1st round.. They did not at any time ever say that they believed that Kaliyev was a better pick.

No, but they sure as hell implied it. Why would they outright say they were nervous picking Bjornfot at #22 if he was the clear BPA?

Because he wasn't the clear BPA.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

If Bjornfot's name was Jones, is there such a rush to bring this all back up to run a victory lap before the kid has even played a regular season NHL game?

And all over a simple yes or no question about the opening night roster.

The manner in which some posters marry their entire self worth to certain players/prospects is psychotic.

 

[Frolov 6'3]

If Bjornfot's name was Jones, is there such a rush to bring this all back up to run a victory lap before the kid has even played a regular season NHL game?

Than I take the full responsibillity and say I was totally wrong.

Thats the difference.

Right now he most likely will play on the 1st pairing. Not too shabby for a player we had to worry about with a lack of offense....all this just three months later after getting drafted. Hickey never played for LA.

 

[crassbonanza]

No, but they sure as hell implied it. Why would they outright say they were nervous picking Bjornfot at #22 if he was the clear BPA?

Because he wasn't the clear BPA.

They never said they were nervous picking him at #22 unless there was an interview I missed. The only one I saw was the Yanetti interview where he discussed selecting Bjornfot at #22, he mentioned that they looked at couple of forwards at that spot, but believed they would be available at #33 while they didn't believe Bjornfot would. This isn't the case of Lombardi drafting Hickey/Teubert to fill in boxes, this is correctly predicting the direction the draft is going and maximizing your draft capital.

 

[crassbonanza]

If Bjornfot's name was Jones, is there such a rush to bring this all back up to run a victory lap before the kid has even played a regular season NHL game?

I feel like the answer would be yes? I don't think his nationality is why people are excited about him as a prospect. He has shown the potential to be Doughty's long term partner, earned healthy praise and made the opening night roster as an 18 year old. There are not a lot of players that do that, even fewer as non lottery picks(though there is another this year which is pretty coincidental).

 

[cyclones22]

They never said they were nervous picking him at #22 unless there was an interview I missed. The only one I saw was the Yanetti interview where he discussed selecting Bjornfot at #22, he mentioned that they looked at couple of forwards at that spot, but believed they would be available at #33 while they didn't believe Bjornfot would. This isn't the case of Lombardi drafting Hickey/Teubert to fill in boxes, this is correctly predicting the direction the draft is going and maximizing your draft capital.

You're certainly much closer to the truth than the other poster. Here's how it went down, they picked TB at 22 and not Kaliyev (or another forward) because they felt that taking a defender at 22 COMBINED with whatever was left at forward at 33 was a higher value of total prospects than had they picked a forward at 22 and a defender 33. Now, if anyone wants to say, well saying that you want one of each in those 2 picks is drafting for need and not BPA on a purely black and white level, then that's fine. But let's be real, drafting is more nuanced than that. Context that the Kings were going to be drafting again in 11 picks has to be taken into account. I've seen the Kings "filling the boxes" chart for not just the big club, but for the pipeline. They identified which prospect pools they were deficient in and I'm sure that had some influence. It absolutely should but it depends on how much you weigh one factor or another. When some of you folks are playing Fantasy Football, you're gonna draft 5 running backs in your first 5 picks because BPA? Hell no. You're going to consider it, but you weigh the value of adding that running back depth over grabbing a higher level receiver or QB.

 

[BigKing]

Than I take the full responsibillity and say I was totally wrong.

Thats the difference.

Right now he most likely will play on the 1st pairing. Not too shabby for a player we had to worry about with a lack of offense....all this just three months later after getting drafted. Hickey never played for LA.

But you probably wouldn't have been in such an argument with SR10 if his last name was Jones v. Bjornfot. That's the point. Much like you were carrying the torch for Phantomberg, a guy who is a nothing player.

As for saying you would admit that you were wrong, there are a couple of items here.

1 - Are you even right? He hasn't played a single regular season NHL game. Lack of offense can still be an issue and doesn't preclude a player from being "Top Pairing" (see Forbort, Derek).

2 - When would you get to admit you were wrong? Four years after his draft year? But you can roll in here based off of a training camp and run a victory lap? Again, I think you would show more restraint if this was some guy named Jones that you liked more than SR10 did v. a European prospect.

I think the point of the Hickey comparison is that Hickey was a reach and SR10 felt the same about Bjornfot. Definitely not as much of a reach but a reach nonetheless. It is a message board so hyperbole reigns supreme and, as you've shown, taking shots at prior arguments does as well. That's all well and good but it is understandable for someone to get riled up when you take a shot like that: especially out of nowhere and much too early. I mean, Hickey has played 450 NHL games and Bjornfot has yet to play one.

I'd say Bjornfot is already a better prospect than Hickey ever was simply based on already playing with men and this training camp since Hickey didn't really impress post-draft, but it is still way too early to be anointing him.

 

[BigKing]

They never said they were nervous picking him at #22 unless there was an interview I missed. The only one I saw was the Yanetti interview where he discussed selecting Bjornfot at #22, he mentioned that they looked at couple of forwards at that spot, but believed they would be available at #33 while they didn't believe Bjornfot would. This isn't the case of Lombardi drafting Hickey/Teubert to fill in boxes, this is correctly predicting the direction the draft is going and maximizing your draft capital.

They were nervous they would miss out on Kaliyev. They were set on drafting a defenseman at #22 because they didn't like the drop off in talent on D from 22-33 since they felt there would be more of a run on D and that there was a better chance of getting a forward they liked.

But make no mistake: they wanted Kaliyev and sweated out the Ottawa pick hard. I think their might be a blurb that they even talked to Ottawa about moving up the one spot. The Athletic, maybe? Regardless of that, there is an interview where they said they were sweating it.

Now, if they had Kaliyev ranked at 10OA, would they have risked it? No, but it is entirely plausible that they had him ranked at the same level or even a couple of spots higher than Bjornfot but went D since they had been using all of their top picks on forwards since Blake took over.

For the thousandth time, major kudos to them for reading the draft correctly and winding up with both of their guys. Major hat tip to Blake and Co. That being said, it doesn't mean one can't still like Kaliyev more as a prospect than Bjornfot but all of us are pleased to have both.

 

[The Tikkanen]

After reading the bickering going back and forth I have firmly come to the conclusion NONE of us are scouts!

 

[bland]

No, but they sure as hell implied it. Why would they outright say they were nervous picking Bjornfot at #22 if he was the clear BPA?

Because he wasn't the clear BPA.

There is no such thing, not now or ever, as "best player available". Its a complete misnomer and used only to avoid discussing draft strategy. It is a term that cannot be defined because every single pick is chosen via a variety of variable information.

 

[Frolov 6'3]

But you probably wouldn't have been in such an argument with SR10 if his last name was Jones v. Bjornfot. That's the point. Much like you were carrying the torch for Phantomberg, a guy who is a nothing player.

As for saying you would admit that you were wrong, there are a couple of items here.

1 - Are you even right? He hasn't played a single regular season NHL game. Lack of offense can still be an issue and doesn't preclude a player from being "Top Pairing" (see Forbort, Derek).

2 - When would you get to admit you were wrong? Four years after his draft year? But you can roll in here based off of a training camp and run a victory lap? Again, I think you would show more restraint if this was some guy named Jones that you liked more than SR10 did v. a European prospect.

I think the point of the Hickey comparison is that Hickey was a reach and SR10 felt the same about Bjornfot. Definitely not as much of a reach but a reach nonetheless. It is a message board so hyperbole reigns supreme and, as you've shown, taking shots at prior arguments does as well. That's all well and good but it is understandable for someone to get riled up when you take a shot like that: especially out of nowhere and much too early. I mean, Hickey has played 450 NHL games and Bjornfot has yet to play one.

I'd say Bjornfot is already a better prospect than Hickey ever was simply based on already playing with men and this training camp since Hickey didn't really impress post-draft, but it is still way too early to be anointing him.

Oh I see, this is still about Fantenberg and me being an European than the actual discussion about Bearfoot. For Fantenberg we got a pick and he was picked over MacDermid to play for LA. Exactly what I said back than.

I am surprised you bring this up again while everything turned out like that.

It obvious you are still pissed off about that. Could it be, I see more of European leagues than OHL/WHL ? Have you thought about that ?

Just stop with your Jones/Bjornfot theory. That is something you made up, now. Just admit, you are still annoyed and use this discussion to “make a point”.

If my name wasnt Frolov 6’3, you wouldnt care at all.

 

[KINGS17]

But you probably wouldn't have been in such an argument with SR10 if his last name was Jones v. Bjornfot. That's the point. Much like you were carrying the torch for Phantomberg, a guy who is a nothing player.

As for saying you would admit that you were wrong, there are a couple of items here.

1 - Are you even right? He hasn't played a single regular season NHL game. Lack of offense can still be an issue and doesn't preclude a player from being "Top Pairing" (see Forbort, Derek).

2 - When would you get to admit you were wrong? Four years after his draft year? But you can roll in here based off of a training camp and run a victory lap? Again, I think you would show more restraint if this was some guy named Jones that you liked more than SR10 did v. a European prospect.

I think the point of the Hickey comparison is that Hickey was a reach and SR10 felt the same about Bjornfot. Definitely not as much of a reach but a reach nonetheless. It is a message board so hyperbole reigns supreme and, as you've shown, taking shots at prior arguments does as well. That's all well and good but it is understandable for someone to get riled up when you take a shot like that: especially out of nowhere and much too early. I mean, Hickey has played 450 NHL games and Bjornfot has yet to play one.

I'd say Bjornfot is already a better prospect than Hickey ever was simply based on already playing with men and this training camp since Hickey didn't really impress post-draft, but it is still way too early to be anointing him.

I think Bjornfot might have been a reach at number 22 overall, but there had been a run on defensemen, and I think he was the highest rated defenseman by the Kings still on the board. If they felt like many of the remaining forwards were relatively equal, and there was a big drop off in the talent level of defensmen after Bjornfot, I understand the pick at that spot.

EDIT: As I was posting this response BK was pretty much writing the same thing.

 

[Choralone]

Just to add some shade, I read somewhere that the forward the Kings were really eyeing was Tomasino, who went shortly after Bjornfot at 24 - though Kaliyev (obviously) and others were in the mix.

 

[crassbonanza]

They were nervous they would miss out on Kaliyev. They were set on drafting a defenseman at #22 because they didn't like the drop off in talent on D from 22-33 since they felt there would be more of a run on D and that there was a better chance of getting a forward they liked.

But make no mistake: they wanted Kaliyev and sweated out the Ottawa pick hard. I think their might be a blurb that they even talked to Ottawa about moving up the one spot. The Athletic, maybe? Regardless of that, there is an interview where they said they were sweating it.

Now, if they had Kaliyev ranked at 10OA, would they have risked it? No, but it is entirely plausible that they had him ranked at the same level or even a couple of spots higher than Bjornfot but went D since they had been using all of their top picks on forwards since Blake took over.

For the thousandth time, major kudos to them for reading the draft correctly and winding up with both of their guys. Major hat tip to Blake and Co. That being said, it doesn't mean one can't still like Kaliyev more as a prospect than Bjornfot but all of us are pleased to have both.

I don't think that the Kings did not want Kaliyev, I don't think I ever said that. I just don't believe that the Kings thought he was a better pick at 22 than Bjornfot was. They mentioned that they had Bjornfot in a similar tier as a number of other forwards(Kaliyev, Tomasino, Brink, etc.) and they believed that one of those players was likely to make it to them at 33, while they didn't believe that Bjornfot would.

Again, my point is that the Bjornfot pick was not simply reaching to fill a spot. Hickey and Teubert are examples of that, while I do not believe that in this occasion it was.

I also think that the fans who mercilessly shit all over the pick should be eating some crow right now because it was kind of ridiculous the way some were acting. Damn few of us spent any significant time scouting Bjornfot and were basing our opinions off of people like f***ing Craig Button. Ruutu has done an exceptional job scouting in Europe, so maybe we should believe him over the mock drafters who obviously don't have the ability to devote as much time to every prospect. It may be too early for fans of the pick to take a victory lap, but it is a lot more reasonable than the fans shitting on the pick on draft night.

 

[Zero Pucks Given]

Come on, y'all...

 

[Brodeur]

Definitely would have been interesting to listen in on the conversation at the draft table. Reminds me of 2007 when the team pulled an audible in the 2nd round. They were going to take Wayne Simmonds with pick #52 but Oscar Moller was unexpectedly dropping (I think most had him in the 25-40 range). Some at the table (Jack Ferreira I think in particular) wanted to stick with the list which had Simmonds ranked over Moller. But others thought that Simmonds wasn't really on anybody's radar so that they could wait until #61 whereas Moller probably wouldn't last an additional 8 picks. In the end they rolled the dice and it worked out aside from Moller not panning out.

 

[kings11]

I think Bjornfot might have been a reach at number 22 overall, but there had been a run on defensemen, and I think he was the highest rated defenseman by the Kings still on the board. If they felt like many of the remaining forwards were relatively equal, and there was a big drop off in the talent level of defensmen after Bjornfot, I understand the pick at that spot.

EDIT: As I was posting this response BK was pretty much writing the same thing.

That was never the case, right after the '18 draft plenty of scouting sites and scouting reports had Tobias Bjornfot as a top 10 talent. He only dropped because scouts felt he stalled offensively, although his overall game took 2-3 steps forward. You can clearly see that with his defensive play and ability to move the offense.
In regards to Arthur Kaliyev, well we did get lucky with him in the 2nd round because the kid can snipe. But lets not for a second think that he was ever rated above TB by the Kings FO, hell the main reason people were angry about the pick was because everyone wanted offense. We literally took the BPA, which is what everyone was clamouring for the past 10 years....
BTW this is all a general comment for everyone, I just dont understand how people cannot see that we took the BPA and are now reaping the benefits of it..

 

[BigKing]

Oh I see, this is still about Fantenberg and me being an European than the actual discussion about Bearfoot. For Fantenberg we got a pick and he was picked over MacDermid to play for LA. Exactly what I said back than.

I am surprised you bring this up again while everything turned out like that.

It obvious you are still pissed off about that. Could it be, I see more of European leagues than OHL/WHL ? Have you thought about that ?

Just stop with your Jones/Bjornfot theory. That is something you made up, now. Just admit, you are still annoyed and use this discussion to “make a point”.

If my name wasnt Frolov 6’3, you wouldnt care at all.

I have no problem with you being European or calling out your bias towards European players. I'm an American meathead that likes North American meatheads and I have a known bias towards said meatheads.

I'm just calling a spade a spade. I don't dislike European players, Europeans in general or even you in particular.

I'm not hung up on the Fantenberg thing one bit. I simply reached in to the way back machine to an argument we had in the past like you did with this Hickey thing. It was just some supporting evidence that you will go to bat for a guy based on his background, unless you thought Fantenberg was actually good which then calls other things in to question. In the end, Blake stole a pick by trading Fantenberg and then both players barely made an NHL roster this season while the one I prefer is still with the team I cheer for so everything worked out great.

 

[Master Yoda]

Definitely would have been interesting to listen in on the conversation at the draft table. Reminds me of 2007 when the team pulled an audible in the 2nd round. They were going to take Wayne Simmonds with pick #52 but Oscar Moller was unexpectedly dropping (I think most had him in the 25-40 range). Some at the table (Jack Ferreira I think in particular) wanted to stick with the list which had Simmonds ranked over Moller. But others thought that Simmonds wasn't really on anybody's radar so that they could wait until #61 whereas Moller probably wouldn't last an additional 8 picks. In the end they rolled the dice and it worked out aside from Moller not panning out.

Ferreira was right. Should've stuck with their list.