GDT: 2020-21 season game 24 LA Kings vs Anaheim Ducks @7:00pm 3/8/21

[Herby]

On if he feels he has to protect some players from getting frustrated by their lack of production
Nope. If you’re not playing well, you can still find a way to contribute. You can bring energy to the bench, especially in these empty buildings. You can’t sit on the bench like a house plant and not contribute. Whether you’re getting your minutes or not, there’s some guys that play a lot of minutes and they need a little uplift every now and then. Recognize a block shot, recognize a big hit, a face off, a good line change. If you’re not getting your minutes because it’s not going really well, you can still find ways to contribute. We’re learning that as we go, especially playing in front of empty buildings where there’s not a lot of energy. If it really affected our team dramatically and I have to protect them, even the good guys wouldn’t have played well tonight. I don’t think that’s an issue.


Who is Todd referring to as a house plant? Curious if there are issues behind the scenes to make such a comment.

Wagner or Amadio? Maybe Walker?

Carter hasn't exactly been lighting the world on fire, he has actually been pretty bad a lot of nights but I don't think that is who he is talking about, Carter seems like a good pro.

Lizotte, Moore and Grundstrom could never be accused of not providing energy, Lizotte hasn't played great a lot of nights but you can absolutely never question that kids energy on any shift he plays.

 

[tny760]

i think tmac just really likes the guys like doughty who are banging their stick on the boards and screaming for late game blocked shots

i think it's probably fair because as corny as it is, that means they're engaged even if they're not on the ice.. like, aware of the pulse of the game

 

[YP44]

Kings drafting philosophy is to draft players with character and leadership skills as primary attributes. They stick with it, right or wrong. They want to build a contender and feel those are the type of players that will help the team succeed to win a cup. As a fan that is what I want...this team needs to win, contend.

But... the question is, can we win with the players they passed up on while also providing a better product(entertainment value) on the ice? It is a business right? I mean we will pay for tickets to see Kings games live eventually, would u rather pay to see Stutzle\Zegras or Turcotte\Byfield?

At the end of the day if the prospects they drafted don't help us contend and win the cup, they failed. Jobs will be lost and our day goes on while a new rebuild will re-start.

I don't think it was character or leadership as to why they went with Turcotte over Zegras or QB over Stutzle. I think they had those players as the best ones available. The Zegras one I think may haunt LA, but Turcotte should still be a really good NHL'er. That draft still pisses me off as I wanted Dach. Stupid Chicago.

Too early to compare long term QB vs Stutzle.

 

[Herby]

I just think it's f***ing stupid that it's seen as a badge of honor to like another team's prospect but to shit on your own while it's seen as unrestrained homerism to like both and suggest patience. That's what it boils down to.
.

I don't base my evaluations of players on what team they are drafted by or play for. I will sing the praises of Kings prospects I think deserve it and will be critical of Kings prospects I think deserve criticism. I think Tobias Bjornfot, Artur Kaliyev and Samuel Fagemo are three of the best value picks of the 2019 draft and would think that with whoever drafted them. I think Turcotte is returning poor value and would think that with whoever drafted him. Just as I thought he was the 3rd best prospect in the draft even when most people thought Chicago (a team I probably hate like you guys hate the Ducks) was taking him at #3. I have been incredibly impressed with Tim Stutzle, and I would feel the same way if the Kings had taken him, even though I didn't want the Kings to. And I think if we had taken him most people here would be singing a different tune and wouldn't be comparing him to Nail Yakupov.

It's just hilarious that terms like "hater" and "irrational hatred" and "living rent free" are thrown around about a player I was desperately hoping the Kings to draft leading up to the draft. It's just funny to me because I get clowned by UW friends because I hyped him so much coming into last year to them and to them he was a pretty big disappointment. And then overly optimistic is thrown around about a player who I at the time wished they didn't take in Toby. But it is what it is I guess.

 

[cyclones22]

Kempe has taken his play to another level.


Nice to see, who knows he might score 30 goals once.

He's a prime example of why it doesn't hurt to be patient. Any time you've got a prospect with + physical tools, you hope that the brain eventually catches up. Sometimes it doesn't, but the tools don't go away - until he ages out that is. I credit TMc for recognizing Kempe's strengths and putting him in position to exploit them. Using him as a zone entry machine is genius. For one it puts the puck on Kempe's stick with decision making options. He either carries it in or he finds the best entry outlet after he's drawn the defense. That helps develop his on ice recognition and the repetition helps him and his confidence. He just looks like he knows where he's supposed to be now and he often makes good decisions to shoot or pass. I also like how TMc is doing the same thing with Vilardi as a designated zone entry machine. That is going to help his development as well.

Kupari is next. A season ago, his first NA pro year was viewed as disappointment leading up this injury. But he's another kid with + physical tools. He's very similar to Kempe in a lot of ways. Like early Kempe, we're not sure what kind of shot he has, but he's got + hands and skating for sure and his vision has really made progress. This season, he looks like the best player in Ontario. Turcotte, + skater + stick handler + vision ++ compete, but smaller than Kempe and Kupari. Byfield + skater + stick handler ++ size. These qualities aren't going away. It's up to our development staff (and hard work by the players) to get these kids to the next level and ight now, I feel REALLY good about the development staff. Kempe, Roy and Walker IMO are exceeding original expectations. A lot of the young defensemen look like legit NHL players. Vilardi is legit. It's one thing if our top prospects were drafted in large part because of intangibles, but each of them have + physical tool boxes. I expect they're all going to be fine. Be patient.

 

[King'sPawn]

You and I just have a completely different idea of what good production and good play for a freshman in the NCAA is. Especially for someone who was considered an elite prospect and was essentially the #1 recruit in the NCAA going into last year, which Turcotte was.

I expected to see similar play that I saw from Jonathan Toews, Clayton Keller, Kyle Connor, Quinn Hughes, Cale Makar. High NHL draft picks who were very good players as freshman.

Maybe my expectations were to high. I expected someone who was going to be the Kings #1 center one day.

Freshman scoring:
Toews had 39 points in 42 games
Clayton Keller: 45 points in 31 games
Kyle Connor: 71 points in 38 games

Turcotte had 26 points in 29 games

He's on par with Toews.

 

[Herby]

Freshman scoring:
Toews had 39 points in 42 games
Clayton Keller: 45 points in 31 games
Kyle Connor: 71 points in 38 games

Turcotte had 26 points in 29 games

He's on par with Toews.

Toews was 17 as a freshman, youngest player in the NCAA that year. When he was the age Turcotte is now he had 54 points in 65 games in the NHL. Turcotte has 1 in 7 in the AHL.


I don't think that is on par with Toews as a prospect. I'll be the first to admit if I am wrong and he turns out to be a Toews like player (quote me on it).

And that is also more of a praise of Toews than a criticism, not many play in the NCAA at 17, or make Team Canada's WJC team as an NCAA player, much less as a 17 year old. Toews is a first ballot Hall of Famer who dominated every level he played. I think a more fair comparison as a potential upside to Turcotte is Dylan Larkin, but even that is lagging behind right now.

And I like KC, he had an amazing freshman season for us, but he was 19, it's a world of difference vs someone who was 17 or even someone who was 18. Toews doing what he did at 17 in the NCAA was remarkable.

 

[Bandit]

wasn't our prospects that looks like shit last night. Sloppier than a drunk prom date.

I'm a big Petersen fan but he looked asleep through the first period and a half. Not blaming him for all the goals but when that dump in bounced off the boards and then went between his legs out to the slot, I thought "we're screwed tonight".

This team better show the f*** up on Wednesday.

I was referring to the ongoing pissing match about how everyone we’ve picked in the last 3 years was “wrong”

 

[kilowatt]

Freshman scoring:
Toews had 39 points in 42 games
Clayton Keller: 45 points in 31 games
Kyle Connor: 71 points in 38 games

Turcotte had 26 points in 29 games

He's on par with Toews.

How dare you respond with facts?

 

[Martyros]

Cant we all just be friends.

no, screw you buddy!

**** you too !

Hey! There's a whole lot of f***ing going on in here!

 

[Herby]

How dare you respond with facts?

I respect you greatly, it's why I am responding.

Can you tell me anything I said that wasn't a fact?

Thanks.

 

[King'sPawn]

Toews was 17 as a freshman, youngest player in the NCAA that year. When he was the age Turcotte is now he had 54 points in 65 games in the NHL. Turcotte has 1 in 7 in the AHL.

I don't think that is on par with Toews as a prospect. I'll be the first to admit if I am wrong and he turns out to be a Toews like player (quote me on it).

And that is also more of a praise of Toews than a criticism, not many play in the NCAA at 17, or make Team Canada's WJC team as an NCAA player, much less as a 17 year old. I'd be happy if Turcotte ends up being a Larkin type player. Toews is a first ballot Hall of Famer who dominated every level he played.

I just think context is key.

Toews was 17, yes, but he was third on team scoring with teammates who scored 57 points.

Turcotte was third on team scoring. Caufield was the leading scorer with 36 points in as many games.

I'm not absolving Turcotte of the lack of production. It's not ideal. I just don't think it's as bad as you think it is. Particularly since he was on the second line in the games I watched.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Where are you coming up with this information?

I just looked at his game logs, his first 19 games resulted in 16 points, not 25. He had 7 multi-point games, 6 of them came vs. non-conference opponents (Arizona St x2. Omaha x2, Merrimack, UMD and Notre Dame). 8 of his 9 goals and 16 of his 26 points on the season game vs. non-conf opponents.

He missed 2 games vs. Clarkson in November, then returned to have a 4 point weekend vs. Omaha (severe injury?). He was then injured again in South Bend and missed 5 games vs. ND, Michigan and Minnesota. Was this the injury you speak of? At this point he had already played 15 conference games and had a 0-5-5 -11 line before the injury.

I don't know man, just seems like it's quite a stretch to blame the massive egg laid in conference play on an injury that happened after most of the conference play had already happened.

Like I said, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. But here's the game log in reference:

Was sick in october, came back, struggled, picked up again. Hit a very obvious wall, got hurt. Came back and finished strong.

First 10 games: 15 points
Next 10 games: 1 point
Last 9 games: 10 points

The difference we have is you're ONLY counting those middle games and disregarding his productive games as well as the season as a whole. I see a guy who played through injury/banged up and sickness as the most important center on a shitty team and still finished second only to the guy who was deployed purely offensively in Caufield. His entire season production still on par with Freshman Toews. His healthy production is up there with the dominant picks you wanted to see.

And good to know the Mike Richards viral infection of 2014 has returned as an excuse, that one proved to be so valid the last time it was used. It was such a bad viral infection that 2 weeks after it he was able to have a big weekend vs. Omaha, how is that possible if he "couldn't breath for 2 months"

But I'll ask you the same thing I asked others, if 21 months is to soon to expect production and domination that warrants a Top 5 pick then when should it be expected? When does Turcotte show us something similar to Bjornfot has shown us since basically the moment he was drafted?

You're just getting an answer you don't like because it's horseshit reasoning.

He was productive in college. He was insanely productive before college. He was the top two-way USA C at the WJC and was insanely productive there too. You're somehow saying he sucks in the AHL and this entire year based on not even double-digit pro games. How about you let it play out?

I expect him to pick it up in the coming months and for you to stop playing stupid and extrapolating 7 games to an entire season.

Toews was 17 as a freshman, youngest player in the NCAA that year. When he was the age Turcotte is now he had 54 points in 65 games in the NHL. Turcotte has 1 in 7 in the AHL.

I don't think that is on par with Toews as a prospect. I'll be the first to admit if I am wrong and he turns out to be a Toews like player (quote me on it).

And that is also more of a praise of Toews than a criticism, not many play in the NCAA at 17, or make Team Canada's WJC team as an NCAA player, much less as a 17 year old. I'd be happy if Turcotte ends up being a Larkin type player. Toews is a first ballot Hall of Famer who dominated every level he played.

Oh, I thought we didn't make excuses for other players because we're tough critics?

This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say you're finding reasons to dislike him rather than reasons to be optimistic. You have to qualify his production with certain games, leave out context for this season, ignore other games where he's been productive.

 

[Herby]

I just think context is key.

Toews was 17, yes, but he was third on team scoring with teammates who scored 57 points.

Turcotte was third on team scoring. Caufield was the leading scorer with 36 points in as many games.

I'm not absolving Turcotte of the lack of production. It's not ideal. I just don't think it's as bad as you think it is. Particularly since he was on the second line in the games I watched.

Turcotte and Caufield started the year playing together, and were sometimes put together again in certain situations, they played together on special teams but 5 on 5 it was a disaster, both guys were lost in the defensive zone, and their awful goaltending last year compounded the problem. The puck was just ending up in their own net to much. Both Granato and whoever the USA WJC coach was last year just tried to force a square peg through a round hole. They thought because they came from the NDTP (where they weren't linemates), were arguably the 2 top recruits in the country and had styles that you'd think would compliment each other that they would be ideal linemates, and they weren't. Thankfully it wasn't tried again at the WJC this year.

 

[BigKing]

Back to the team at present and my constant reminder that a 2008-09 type of season is a real win for everyone involved:

2009 Kings record with 80% of the season played: 29-28-9

2021 Kings record with 43% of the season played: 10-8-6

I picked that spot for the '09 Kings as that was probably the last time they got us believing in the playoffs. That was the conclusion of a three game homestand which they swept. They then proceeded to string together three, three game losing streaks in the remaining 16 games as the grind of the season wore on and teams ramped up their intensity while making a playoff push.

While I don't think this year's squad would be in the thick of it under a normal 82 game schedule--at least as much as they are right now--I think we would all be very happy at the beginning of this season if they are within striking distance of a playoff spot with 80% of the season down all while getting more contributions from younger players. The shorter season might help save this year's squad from hitting a wall since all these young guys not used to playing 82 games still won't have to do so but, regardless, things are tracking nicely.

What we saw in 2008-09 though was the start of Doughty and the attitude of Simmonds. Never mind the actual talent those guys brought to the ice but they brought an attitude which we saw the next season in 2010. I'll never forget the 16th game of that season at home against the Penguins. 5-2 victory with guys playing with extreme confidence. Just took it to the Pens to move to 10-4-2 on the season. That's when I finally felt like they were a legit team. I don't know who is added to the roster for next season that helps provide that attitude or if it is already on the roster and that's my fear.

 

[Jason Squirties]

It's obvious that you're nothing more than an uninformed clown, look at my location buddy. I can guarantee you with 100% certainty that I watched more of their games last year than you did. Both on TV and in person. I play in 2 men's leagues where basically my entire team are alumni or followers of the team, with many being ST holders, hockey is huge here and they are most hockey peoples team of choice with the lack of an NHL team, you don't think I have an idea of what is going on with that program? You think I didn't go see the highest draft pick the team I religiously follow has had in a decade when he was playing an hour away?

And good to know the Mike Richards viral infection of 2014 has returned as an excuse, that one proved to be so valid the last time it was used. It was such a bad viral infection that 2 weeks after it he was able to have a big weekend vs. Omaha, how is that possible if he "couldn't breath for 2 months"

But I'll ask you the same thing I asked others, if 21 months is to soon to expect production and domination that warrants a Top 5 pick then when should it be expected? When does Turcotte show us something similar to Bjornfot has shown us since basically the moment he was drafted?

22 months imo

 

[Herby]

Like I said, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. But here's the game log in reference:

View attachment 405309

Was sick in october, came back, struggled, picked up again. Hit a very obvious wall, got hurt. Came back and finished strong.

First 10 games: 15 points
Next 10 games: 1 point
Last 9 games: 10 points

The difference we have is you're ONLY counting those middle games and disregarding his productive games as well as the season as a whole. I see a guy who played through injury/banged up and sickness as the most important center on a shitty team and still finished second only to the guy who was deployed purely offensively in Caufield. His entire season production still on par with Freshman Toews. His healthy production is up there with the dominant picks you wanted to see.

I never said otherwise, the beginning of the year and the end of the year saw matchups against weaker teams, where he did the majority of his damage. I have never said otherwise, I'm just curious why he didn't do better when he went into the tougher part of his schedule, and completely fell off the Earth. I'm actually happy you said he hit a wall, that is all I wanted to hear instead of the nonsense injury excuse stuff, he was hurt and missed some time, a lot of players get hurt and miss time. It's hockey.

Plus, it's not like my views are out of left field, look at Turcotte's own quotes in the State Journal, he himself said he struggled to find his game for large stretches of the season and it was the first time in his hockey life he really struggled on the ice. He himself doesn't make excuses, so why do people here?

I don't think I ever said he sucks in the AHL. I said he again has struggled to be productive playing against higher competition. I'm happy to let it play out. How about this, we both agree not to bring up Alex Turcotte again until he hits 20 games in the AHL. If he becomes productive in the next 13 games you can bring it up and call me a fool. If he doesn't you don't make the excuses anymore and admit there might be a problem? Fair?

I hope I am wrong, but I trust my evaluation and you trust yours.

Oh, I thought we didn't make excuses for other players because we're tough critics?

This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say you're finding reasons to dislike him rather than reasons to be optimistic. You have to qualify his production with certain games, leave out context for this season, ignore other games where he's been productive.

Wait a second, the guy who decided to take his most productive games vs sub-par talent and then say it's on par with Clayton Keller's entire season which included all his games (vs. good and bad teams) is talking about others qualifying stats?

And what excuse did I make, I know you understand hockey and the difference between a player who is 17 and a player who is 18. It's a massive world of difference, one of the most important years in a players development. I know you're not an idiot and I know that you understand that, so why bring it up? You know what Toews did playing for North Dakota at that age was remarkable, very few have done it, period. You know that is not an excuse but a fact, I know you do.

And as far as my unreal expectations, what are fair expectations for a player the Kings took with the #5 pick two years ago. Am I being unrealistic in expecting that if he was going pro this year that he should have been one of the best players on the team and knocking on the door to the NHL? Zegras is in the show, Keller was in the show, Larkin was in the show, Tkachuk was in the show. Am I being unreasonable in expecting our guy who was picked right around there to be at the level of those guys at the same age?

I mentioned Larkin in the other post, I'd take him being Larkin in the NHL. But Larkin was a star as a freshman and immediately jumped into the NHL and lead his somewhat decent (playoff) team in goal-scoring, was one of the best defensive forwards on the team, killed penalties, and he was younger than Turcotte. I don't consider Larkin to be a superstar by any stretch so I don't think this comparison is unfair for a guy taken #5 overall. It's not like I am asking for Jack Eichel here.

Am I being unrealistic in expecting a career path similar to Dylan Larkin from Alex Turcotte? Maybe I am, I don't know.

 

[SFKingshomer]

A short few months ago he was 1 of the best centers in a tournament of his peers and won gold.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I never said otherwise, the beginning of the year and the end of the year saw matchups against weaker teams, where he did the majority of his damage. I have never said otherwise, I'm just curious why he didn't do better when he went into the tougher part of his schedule, and completely fell off the Earth. I'm actually happy you said he hit a wall, that is all I wanted to hear instead of the nonsense injury excuse stuff, he was hurt and missed some time, a lot of players get hurt and miss time. It's hockey.

Plus, it's not like my views are out of left field, look at Turcotte's own quotes in the State Journal, he himself said he struggled to find his game for large stretches of the season.

I don't think I ever said he sucks in the AHL. I said he again has struggled to be productive playing against higher competition. I'm happy to let it play out. How about this, we both agree not to bring up Alex Turcotte again until he hits 20 games in the AHL. If he becomes productive in the next 13 games you can bring it up and call me a fool. If he doesn't you don't make the excuses anymore and admit there might be a problem? Fair?

I hope I am wrong, but I trust my evaluation and you trust yours.




Wait a second, the guy who decided to take his most productive games vs sub-par talent and then say it's on par with Clayton Keller's entire season which included all his games (vs. good and bad teams) is talking about others qualifying stats?

And what excuse did I make, I know you understand hockey and the difference between a player who is 17 and a player who is 18. It's a massive world of difference, one of the most important years in a players development. I know you're not an idiot and I know that you understand that, so why bring it up? You know what Toews did playing for North Dakota at that age was remarkable, very few have done it, period. You know that is not an excuse but a fact, I know you do.

And as far as my unreal expectations, what are fair expectations for a player the Kings took with the #5 pick two years ago. Am I being unrealistic in expecting that if he was going pro this year that he should have been one of the best players on the team and knocking on the door to the NHL? Zegras is in the show, Keller was in the show, Larkin was in the show, Tkachuk was in the show. Am I being unreasonable in expecting our guy who was picked right around there to be at the level of those guys at the same age?

I mentioned Larkin in the other post, I'd take him being Larkin in the NHL. But Larkin was a star as a freshman and immediately jumped into the NHL and lead his somewhat decent (playoff) team in goal-scoring, was one of the best defensive forwards on the team, killed penalties, and he was younger than Turcotte. I don't consider Larkin to be a superstar by any stretch so I don't think this comparison is unfair for a guy taken #5 overall. It's not like I am asking for Jack Eichel here.

Am I being unrealistic in expecting a career path similar to Dylan Larkin from Alex Turcotte? Maybe I am, I don't know.

Yes, absolutely. I nearly shared that article too. Turcotte is his own worst critic and admitted he struggled there. Im simply saying his production on the whole even despite all that isn't bad, it's actually very good. If you're willing to give it 20 AHL games then we're square.

If you're willing to acknowledge the differences in age/production curves then you would certainly acknowledge that we shouldn't even 'worry' about Turcotte until he's 21+ but that's another can of worms that maybe we shouldn't open yet haha.

Re: expectations--the 20 games above to evaluate is fair imo. If he is just raw stinking up the joint, I'm patient, but I'll be a little more worried too. But let's be real, Zegras is 'in the show' the same way Kupari is right now. If Turc came up and had 2 points in 7 games, he'd be getting blasted too. Simply 'being in' the NHL isn't impressive to me, especially when the roster is thirsty for it. I have no doubt Turcotte COULD play right now--but is it the best thing for him? Imo this is more of a development vs. roster thing than an inability thing.

 

[The Butcher]

I just can't take any argument seriously, no matter how valid it may be, if it's accompanied by childish name calling. Losing some respect for a few of you today.

 

[Herby]

A short few months ago he was 1 of the best centers in a tournament of his peers and won gold.

And Byfield is a huge bust because he had a disappointing tournament where he mostly looked awful? Nope, don't agree with that.

I place no importance on that tournament whether Kings players (or any players) kill it or they suck. Just been fooled to many times over the years by prospects either sucking and turning into stars (Nathan MacKinnon) or lighting it up and being jokes in the NHL (Jared Aulin).

I think it's perennially the most overrated event in the hockey world. The best part about it is watching the meltdown on here and in the Canadian media in the years they don't win.

 

[King'sPawn]

I just can't take any argument seriously, no matter how valid it may be, if it's accompanied by childish name calling. Losing some respect for a few of you today.

You tell them, weeniehead. <3

 

[tny760]

22 months imo

 

[SFKingshomer]

And Byfield is a huge bust because he had a disappointing tournament where he mostly looked awful? Nope, don't agree with that.

I place no importance on that tournament whether Kings players (or any players) kill it or they suck. Just been fooled to many times over the years by prospects either sucking and turning into stars (Nathan MacKinnon) or lighting it up and being jokes in the NHL (Jared Aulin).

I think it's perennially the most overrated event in the hockey world. The best part about it is watching the meltdown on here and in the Canadian media in the years they don't win.

And I place little importance over AHL numbers. There's usually a ton of guys there that produce and fail in the NHL. TJ Hensick, Brett Sterling, Gabe Gauthier, Simon Gamache. etc. With the hype surrounding Zegras, I'd think he would have more than a couple of assists in 7 games. He certainly passes the eye test...

 

[Herby]

And I place little importance over AHL numbers. There's usually a ton of guys there that produce and fail in the NHL. TJ Hensick, Brett Sterling, Gabe Gauthier, Simon Gamache. etc. With the hype surrounding Zegras, I'd think he would have more than a couple of assists in 7 games. He certainly passes the eye test...

All those players are under 5'10 and none of them were ever considered to be legit NHL prospects. They also lit up juniors or the NCAA (depending on where they played)

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. But it seems wrong to hype up WJC stats when they are positive and minimize them when they aren't. Unless you were critical of Byfield for his WJC play, in which case I apologize. Whatever ones views on the WJC, I think they should atleast be consistent.