GDT: 2022-23 season game 79 LA Kings vs Vegas Golden Knights @7:00pm 4/6/23

[Nasti]

I don’t think that’s exactly true. I remember seeing many people cast doubt about Byfield for the same reason we are now. There’s no doubt that most of Byfields hype was based upon the speculation that he was the unicorn type player that everyone would want, but it’s a fight against a high probability that he won’t achieve it.

Stutzle was always the safer bet because he was known what he was going to be. Byfield was always based on hope. People saw 6’5 with speed and got chills.

I would bet that most people would have picked Stutzle because everyone knew he was going to be a really good player.


And I think the impatience is true to a very small extent. Byfield has shown nothing to be excited about yet and it’s been a couple years in.

Whenever you have a project you keep people confident in you by updating them on the process.

Byfield is showing very little improvement. If any. And many can argue that stagnation is regression. All the reasons I didn’t like Byfield have come true. The only thing I didn’t expect from Byfield is to have an abysmal shot which RJ was knocking on Stutzle for nonstop.

Byfield was supposed to have a great shot but he looks like shit out there.

It was just two weeks ago when everyone was saying Byfield was showing progress. Now he’s in a slump when the games got tighter (typical this time of year) and people are saying he’s shown no progress. It’s hyperbole. He HAS shown progress this year.

As for who would have been taken by most GMs, it was a coin flip. Those who needed immediate help would likely have taken Stutzle. The Kings had the luxury of patience and took a chance on Byfield since his ceiling was always higher. I just did a quick check to make sure I wasn’t misremembering things but two out of three NHL.com analysts predicted Byfield to the Kings while also stating Stutzle would make the jump to the NHL faster.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Growth happens in fits and starts and isn't linear. If you're not willing to believe a positive trajectory will continue indefinitely, then it's not right to consider a negative trajectory as the 'true' one. It's part of the process.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

I still can’t wrap my head around the idea of Blake trying to retool and contend as soon as possible and consciously taking the project player at #2 rather than the NHL ready player.

Either Blake really is that aimless or he thought Byfield would just be that much better than Stutzle in the long run (highly doubtful at this point).

 

[Surf Nutz]

I still can’t wrap my head around the idea of Blake trying to retool and contend as soon as possible and consciously taking the project player at #2 rather than the NHL ready player.

Either Blake really is that aimless or he thought Byfield would just be that much better than Stutzle in the long run (highly doubtful at this point).

The Kings were only considered a borderline playoff team last year and 7 games against Edmo, upped timelines and expectations.
Their play this year, made Blake go all in for playoff again accelerated timelines and expectations.
Their play and acquisitions after the trade deadline , once again accelerated the timelines and expectations.
Recent injuries to key players and losses to to division rivals had severely tempered expectations to those not targeting Blake as scapegoat.
Byfield, the project pick was picked before the Kings timelines and expectations doubled to three times shorter.

 

[Sol]

It was just two weeks ago when everyone was saying Byfield was showing progress. Now he’s in a slump when the games got tighter (typical this time of year) and people are saying he’s shown no progress. It’s hyperbole. He HAS shown progress this year.

As for who would have been taken by most GMs, it was a coin flip. Those who needed immediate help would likely have taken Stutzle. The Kings had the luxury of patience and took a chance on Byfield since his ceiling was always higher. I just did a quick check to make sure I wasn’t misremembering things but two out of three NHL.com analysts predicted Byfield to the Kings while also stating Stutzle would make the jump to the NHL faster.

Yeah he has made a little bit of progress sure but that’s honestly not good enough for someone drafted second overall.

I still can’t wrap my head around the idea of Blake trying to retool and contend as soon as possible and consciously taking the project player at #2 rather than the NHL ready player.

Either Blake really is that aimless or he thought Byfield would just be that much better than Stutzle in the long run (highly doubtful at this point).

They fantasized about Byfields size and avoided all the red flags about his game.

In a redraft the Kings would absolutely go Stutzle

 

[Herby]

Look at all the recent injuries to the Kings as soon as playoff position hockey started.
You gotta get these guys ready to play PLAYOFF hockey against the biggest, strongest, fastest, most skilled players in the world.
The path ther runs through the AHL and its desperados, not pushing them onto a NHL team trying to get into the playoffs, and potentially a run at the cup..
Or coddling them in college hockey.
THe AHL needs to bolster its rules, refereeing, player safety and the Kings need to structure players to keep their heads up, on a swivel and back down if in a dangerous position as they adjust to the AHL and the PRO game.

Making players solid team members able to play on both sides of the puck and to the little things right is a good thing.
It frustrates the posters here to no end.

I don't know what to say other than your opinions have no basis in reality.

If the AHL is a requirement for all players, why do so many teams continue to bypass the AHL for top prospects?

You claimed that Covid changed everything, but here we are another run of top prospects bypassing the AHL in a post Covid world. Today it was Luke Hughes, after the final on Saturday it will be Cooley, Knies and Faber all jumping to the NHL. Next year it will be Bedard, Fantilli. This year it was Power, Beniers, Johnson. I could also list the countless number of star players in the league who never stepped foot on AHL ice, but you have called that "ancient history" , so out of respect I will just keep it with the current.

And LOL at the coddling them in college hockey is worse than putting them in the AHL, just another comment that has no reality other than between your ears.

The AHL is what it is, its a good development league for upper middle to lower end prospects to play. For high end kids its not a good environment, the league is not going to change the way you want it to, it's going to be filled with lesser guys who aren't going to make it on their skill level and have to show their managers in other ways, which almost always involves wreckless, physical plays. Teams have for the most part decided they don't want their elite prospects down there, and would prefer to have them be "coddled" in college or learning on the fly in the NHL.

 

[bland]

You don't think, "he only scores in rushes" and "there has been zero growth to his game" are criticisms?

He doesn't even score on rushes, so no, that isn't a valid criticism.

I'd show myself out, but...

 

[Surf Nutz]

I don't know what to say other than your opinions have no basis in reality.

If the AHL is a requirement for all players, why do so many teams continue to bypass the AHL for top prospects?

You claimed that Covid changed everything, but here we are another run of top prospects bypassing the AHL in a post Covid world. Today it was Luke Hughes, after the final on Saturday it will be Cooley, Knies and Faber all jumping to the NHL. Next year it will be Bedard, Fantilli. This year it was Power, Beniers, Johnson. I could also list the countless number of star players in the league who never stepped foot on AHL ice, but you have called that "ancient history" , so out of respect I will just keep it with the current.

And LOL at the coddling them in college hockey is worse than putting them in the AHL, just another comment that has no reality other than between your ears.

The AHL is what it is, its a good development league for upper middle-middle to lower end prospects to play. For high end kids its not a good environment, the league is not going to change the way you want it to, it's going to be filled with lesser guys who aren't going to make it on their skill level and have to show their managers in other ways, which almost always involves wreckless, physical plays. Teams have for the most part decided they don't want their elite prospects down there, and would prefer to have them be "coddled" in college or learning on the fly in the NHL.

I never said all players and I just meant most.
I don't write my posts like they are a legal briefing.
What is jumping to the NHL?
Or is it hopping back and forth between the NHL and the AHL or occasionally another league?
Like 90% of players, especially on teams like the Kings do?
So reality is based on 10% Herby?
I stand by my assessment of your list.
Times they are a changing Herr Bee.
The AHL is partly what you say because it acts as a supplemental league for player of all ages to be called up to the NHL as team needs dictate.
Again most playoff bound teams put their top prospects in the AHL.
Non playoff teams have less quality pieces and room for top prospects.
In addition it works in their favor to diminish their records and gain better lottery odds.
We have certainly seen plenty of reckless play in the NHL as the playoff position battling began.
It even hits veteran players like Fiala and Edler , mid experience players like Vilardia and Anderson.
Young players in the NHL would be in even more danger.
Once the playoff style of play commences they are in just as much danger in the NHL as the AHL.
Completely obliterating your theories...

 

[bland]

This is why I kept harping that trading away Kopitar, Doughty, etc doesn't make a difference if you aren't making sure your development decisions adequately prepare prospects going forward.

I'm still holding out hope that Byfield, Vilardi, Turcotte, Clarke, etc all work out. But waiting until your second overall pick's D+3 season to TRY him on the top line regularly is something I've never agreed with.

The most likely reason for these awful developmental decisions is because they DIDN'T trade Anze when they should have done so.

The team has won 4 playoff games and malnurtured multiple top prospects in a vain effort to catch the uncatchable during the first 6 years of his deal, and appears to be poised for another rapid exit.

It was always bad business. No doubt at all that they would have made better decisions without the ghosts of the Cup era unduly influencing their choices.

 

[Herby]

I never said all players and I just meant most.
I don't write my posts like they are a legal briefing.
What is jumping to the NHL?
Or is it hopping back and forth between the NHL and the AHL or occasionally another league?
Like 90% of players, especially on teams like the Kings do?
So reality is based on 10% Herby?
I stand by my assessment of your list.
Times they are a changing Herr Bee.
THe AHL is partly what you say because it acts as a supplemental league for player of all ages to be called up to the NHL as team needs dictated.
Again most playoff bound teams put their top prospects in the AHL.
Non playoff teams have less quality pieces and room for top prospects.
In addition it works in their favor to diminish their records and gain better lottery odds.
We have certainly seen plenty of reckless play in the NHL as the playoff position battling began.
It even hits veteran players like Fiala and Edler , mid experience players like Vilardia and Anderson.
Young players in the NHL would be in even more danger.
Once the playoff style of play commences they are in just as much danger in the NHL as the AHL.
Completely obliterating your theories...

We are talking about high end players, players teams use high picks on. That is why I said the AHL is for upper middle down to lower level prospects.

Most teams would not have done what the Kings did with Byfield and Turcotte, we know this because we have significant historical evidence to show they haven't. Most teams would not decide in the Spring before camp that Brandt Clarke was going to go to the AHL, no matter what.

You can say you think everyone else is wrong and the Kings are right, that is your opinion and you are entitled to it, but no, everyone else is not doing what the Kings are doing.

Use Luke Hughes as an example, the Devils are better than the Kings, yet they are bringing him up to the NHL. What would the Kings be doing, honestly, answer truthfully? You know he'd be getting ready to play for the Reign.

You can use the same examples for Turcotte and Byfield, the Kings are just different. And the results thus far with the heavy AHL usage doesn't seem to show that different is better.

 

[johnjm22]

We need a deterrent many nights and he is what we got right now.

He hasn't deterred anything.

 

[Surf Nutz]

He hasn't deterred anything.

Debatable but not impossible.
Teams may have taken more liberties without him/\.
Lemieux had to be cast out he was a penalty liability due to biased officiating.
Blake made the right move for now and he can address a solution in the off season.
There is less of that type of play in the playoffs.

 

[Surf Nutz]

T

We are talking about high end players, players teams use high picks on. That is why I said the AHL is for upper middle down to lower level prospects.

Most teams would not have done what the Kings did with Byfield and Turcotte, we know this because we have significant historical evidence to show they haven't. Most teams would not decide in the Spring before camp that Brandt Clarke was going to go to the AHL, no matter what.

You can say you think everyone else is wrong and the Kings are right, that is your opinion and you are entitled to it, but no, everyone else is not doing what the Kings are doing.

Use Luke Hughes as an example, the Devils are better than the Kings, yet they are bringing him up to the NHL. What would the Kings be doing, honestly, answer truthfully? You know he'd be getting ready to play for the Reign.

You can use the same examples for Turcotte and Byfield, the Kings are just different. And the results thus far with the heavy AHL usage doesn't seem to show that different is better.

Teams often try to have top prospects join their team this time of year in order to encourage them to sign their ELC's so they don't have to risk losing their rights.
Blake tried it with Faber last year.
It is not surprising.
We will see how many playoff games Hughes and the others get to see if they are jumping into the NHL or just hopping back and forth between the developmental leagues and the NHL.

 

[King'sPawn]

The most likely reason for these awful developmental decisions is because they DIDN'T trade Anze when they should have done so.

There's no evidence to suggest one way or the other. We just know how they're handling prospects now.

And even right after they said that Kaliyev needs to play in the top-6, they acquired Fiala.

They signed Danault and traded for Arvidsson. They're still not playing Spence and Bjornfot, instead of Walker and Edler.

You can speculate that they wouldn't have done so, but with how the Kings seem very vet-centric, it's much more arguable they would have just tried chasing the playoffs without addressing their rigid approach to bringing players along.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I don't know what to say other than your opinions have no basis in reality.

If the AHL is a requirement for all players, why do so many teams continue to bypass the AHL for top prospects?

You claimed that Covid changed everything, but here we are another run of top prospects bypassing the AHL in a post Covid world. Today it was Luke Hughes, after the final on Saturday it will be Cooley, Knies and Faber all jumping to the NHL. Next year it will be Bedard, Fantilli. This year it was Power, Beniers, Johnson. I could also list the countless number of star players in the league who never stepped foot on AHL ice, but you have called that "ancient history" , so out of respect I will just keep it with the current.

And LOL at the coddling them in college hockey is worse than putting them in the AHL, just another comment that has no reality other than between your ears.

The AHL is what it is, its a good development league for upper middle to lower end prospects to play. For high end kids its not a good environment, the league is not going to change the way you want it to, it's going to be filled with lesser guys who aren't going to make it on their skill level and have to show their managers in other ways, which almost always involves wreckless, physical plays. Teams have for the most part decided they don't want their elite prospects down there, and would prefer to have them be "coddled" in college or learning on the fly in the NHL.

@Herby You have made countless topics on this, so you know this as well as anyone, but you say that For high end kids its not a good environment, and that teams don't do that...anymore....but wouldn't that also be because the luxury of not having too, they are drafting 1-2-3-4-5 for a reason (probably 99%) of the time, so for instance, Ottawa - Stutlze, because that's so...popular.....who was he going to supplant? Raymond in Detroit, same question, Caufield in MTL, Boldy in MIN, Jack Huges in NJ, Power in Buffalo, Dahlin in Buffalo etc......would it not be fair to say that teams don't do that anymore with high end prospects, because they don't care about winning the first 2-3 years when drafting 1-2-3-4-5 etc....

But when you have teams like TB, PIT, NYR, TOR, etc, they are drafting, and putting their kids in the AHL after juniors, for the most part, but also they are later picks, due to success etc.....right?

 

[Surf Nutz]

There's no evidence to suggest one way or the other. We just know how they're handling prospects now.

And even right after they said that Kaliyev needs to play in the top-6, they acquired Fiala.

They signed Danault and traded for Arvidsson. They're still not playing Spence and Bjornfot, instead of Walker and Edler.

You can speculate that they wouldn't have done so, but with how the Kings seem very vet-centric, it's much more arguable they would have just tried chasing the playoffs without addressing their rigid approach to bringing players along.

Fiala and Kaliyev are quite different, almost potentially complimentary players.
The same with P. Danny and Arvi, who also play center and wing respictively.
You want to bring young players into a winning playoff bound team and make them earn it by being able to do all the little things right and not being a liability.

@Herby You have made countless topics on this, so you know this as well as anyone, but you say that For high end kids its not a good environment, and that teams don't do that...anymore....but wouldn't that also be because the luxury of not having too, they are drafting 1-2-3-4-5 for a reason (probably 99%) of the time, so for instance, Ottawa - Stutlze, because that's so...popular.....who was he going to supplant? Raymond in Detroit, same question, Caufield in MTL, Boldy in MIN, Jack Huges in NJ, Power in Buffalo, Dahlin in Buffalo etc......would it not be fair to say that teams don't do that anymore with high end prospects, because they don't care about winning the first 2-3 years when drafting 1-2-3-4-5 etc....

But when you have teams like TB, PIT, NYR, TOR, etc, they are drafting, and putting their kids in the AHL after juniors, for the most part, but also they are later picks, due to success etc.....right?

Also 7 examples and only two players on two currently playoff bound teams.

 

[Sol]

There's no evidence to suggest one way or the other. We just know how they're handling prospects now.

And even right after they said that Kaliyev needs to play in the top-6, they acquired Fiala.

They signed Danault and traded for Arvidsson. They're still not playing Spence and Bjornfot, instead of Walker and Edler.

You can speculate that they wouldn't have done so, but with how the Kings seem very vet-centric, it's much more arguable they would have just tried chasing the playoffs without addressing their rigid approach to bringing players along.

This is my biggest fear. None of the prospects really hit it big so they will have to rebuild once Kopitar is gone and then they will be waiting for the new player to take number one.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

The reality is that players like Iafallo, Walker, Durzi, etc. would’ve never been extended under a properly constructed team. These are prototypical bridge players like Modry, Ponikarovsky, etc. were back in the day.

It just is what it is at this point. Blake isn’t going to change. Neither will McLellan. And as long as they continue to make the playoffs and get bounced in the first or second round, half of the fanbase will think they’re doing a great job. We’ve re-entered the early 2000s Kings era again, and aren’t escaping anytime soon.

I never thought I’d say this, but I miss Lieweke. He meddled and caused issues, but at least he cared enough to keep his GMs on the hot seat. I doubt Beckerman even knows who Brandt Clarke is.

 

[Mattias]

I don't know what to say other than your opinions have no basis in reality.

If the AHL is a requirement for all players, why do so many teams continue to bypass the AHL for top prospects?

You claimed that Covid changed everything, but here we are another run of top prospects bypassing the AHL in a post Covid world. Today it was Luke Hughes, after the final on Saturday it will be Cooley, Knies and Faber all jumping to the NHL. Next year it will be Bedard, Fantilli. This year it was Power, Beniers, Johnson. I could also list the countless number of star players in the league who never stepped foot on AHL ice, but you have called that "ancient history" , so out of respect I will just keep it with the current.

And LOL at the coddling them in college hockey is worse than putting them in the AHL, just another comment that has no reality other than between your ears.

The AHL is what it is, its a good development league for upper middle to lower end prospects to play. For high end kids its not a good environment, the league is not going to change the way you want it to, it's going to be filled with lesser guys who aren't going to make it on their skill level and have to show their managers in other ways, which almost always involves wreckless, physical plays. Teams have for the most part decided they don't want their elite prospects down there, and would prefer to have them be "coddled" in college or learning on the fly in the NHL.

Hot damn. Hockey PDO cast talked about this a tad and the conclusion was "AHL is good for grinders and mid-bottom forwards. For high end talent it is best to 'stay in school' with NCAA if they are currently playing there.

Surprise! Blake has some strange obsession with taking higher end talent and thrusting into the NHL to change a square peg into a round one. Low results.



Worth a listen to for everyone to take a victory lap. Stay in school everyone.

 

[Herby]

@Herby You have made countless topics on this, so you know this as well as anyone, but you say that For high end kids its not a good environment, and that teams don't do that...anymore....but wouldn't that also be because the luxury of not having too, they are drafting 1-2-3-4-5 for a reason (probably 99%) of the time, so for instance, Ottawa - Stutlze, because that's so...popular.....who was he going to supplant? Raymond in Detroit, same question, Caufield in MTL, Boldy in MIN, Jack Huges in NJ, Power in Buffalo, Dahlin in Buffalo etc......would it not be fair to say that teams don't do that anymore with high end prospects, because they don't care about winning the first 2-3 years when drafting 1-2-3-4-5 etc....

But when you have teams like TB, PIT, NYR, TOR, etc, they are drafting, and putting their kids in the AHL after juniors, for the most part, but also they are later picks, due to success etc.....right?

Not all of the players bypassing the AHL are on bad teams.

Caufield played what one weekend in the AHL(?) before jumping to the Habs and being one of the best players on a team that went to the final. Does this happen if he spends the season learning to be a system player and paying his dues in the AHL instead of having an all-time great season in the NCAA?

Makar jumped right from the Frozen Four into the Avs playoff lineup and was one of their best defenseman.

McAvoy did the same thing, played a weekend or two in the AHL and was put into the playoffs with Boston.

Beniers on this years Seattle team.

And when the Kings made the unorthodox decision to not have QB in the NHL they were not a team that was attempting to contend, the Kings were a bottom 5-8 team in the league and had a clear opening for a 2nd line C spot next to a solid veteran in a low pressure situation and chose to once again lean heavily on their AHL affiliate to the detriment of the player. We debated this before, but I still stand by my feelings that QB would have been in the NHL with a management team with a more traditional philosophy, the numbers are cut and dry, CHL forwards taken in the Top 2 picks play in the NHL at over a 90% rate since the turn of the century. And it's not about being ready or not, Jack Hughes, Joe Thornton, Sasha Barkov are examples of high pick forwards who played in the NHL at 18 without necessarily being NHL ready. Thornton did not have an AHL option but Barkov and Hughes did. If the Kings had won the 2019 lottery and drafted Jack Hughes the likelihood is he is in the AHL that year, does he end up the same player? I don't know, but we do know that the Devils having him in the NHL despite not being ready to be a contributing player ended up working out just fine. The Kings decision to have QB in the AHL for almost a full seasons worth of games has not yielded anything close to those results.

The Turcotte thing was another wildly unorthodox development decision, how else do you explain every other team choosing college over the AHL for their players taken in that same draft (and most drafts before and after)? Why was 2 years of college ok for Cale Makar, Quinn Hughes, Cole Caufield, Matty Beniers, Owen Power, Matt Boldy, Zach Werenski but the Kings felt the need to get their guy signed and into the AHL, despite having zero chance of playing in the NHL?

On Clarke. Why is it pre-determined (if you trust Hoven) that Clarke is going to the AHL at 20? Even for this season, is it realistic to say that most teams would have traded someone like Walker or Durzi to free up a spot for Clark rather than sending him back to the OHL where he hasn't been challenged at all. Getting back to Clarke for next season, why is it that Quinn Hughes, Cale Makar, Jake Sanderson, Miro Heiskanen, Noah Dobson, Bowen Byram (3 games), Drew Doughty, Erik Karlsson, Kris Letang (9 games), Noah Hanifin and guys like this are able to begin their NHL careers without spending so much time in the AHL?

Come on man, surely you can't keep trying to say that the Kings are not way different than most teams when it comes to AHL usage for top draft picks.

 

[Nasti]

Not all of the players bypassing the AHL are on bad teams.

Caufield played what one weekend in the AHL(?) before jumping to the Habs and being one of the best players on a team that went to the final. Does this happen if he spends the season learning to be a system player and paying his dues in the AHL instead of having an all-time great season in the NCAA?

Makar jumped right from the Frozen Four into the Avs playoff lineup and was one of their best defenseman.

McAvoy did the same thing, played a weekend or two in the AHL and was put into the playoffs with Boston.

Beniers on this years Seattle team.

And when the Kings made the unorthodox decision to not have QB in the NHL they were not a team that was attempting to contend, the Kings were a bottom 5-8 team in the league and had a clear opening for a 2nd line C spot next to a solid veteran in a low pressure situation and chose to once again lean heavily on their AHL affiliate to the detriment of the player. We debated this before, but I still stand by my feelings that QB would have been in the NHL with a management team with a more traditional philosophy, the numbers are cut and dry, CHL forwards taken in the Top 2 picks play in the NHL at over a 90% rate since the turn of the century. And it's not about being ready or not, Jack Hughes, Joe Thornton, Sasha Barkov are examples of high pick forwards who played in the NHL at 18 without necessarily being NHL ready. Thornton did not have an AHL option but Barkov and Hughes did. If the Kings had won the 2019 lottery and drafted Jack Hughes the likelihood is he is in the AHL that year, does he end up the same player? I don't know, but we do know that the Devils having him in the NHL despite not being ready to be a contributing player ended up working out just fine. The Kings decision to have QB in the AHL for almost a full seasons worth of games has not yielded anything close to those results.

The Turcotte thing was another wildly unorthodox development decision, how else do you explain every other team choosing college over the AHL for their players taken in that same draft (and most drafts before and after)? Why was 2 years of college ok for Cale Makar, Quinn Hughes, Cole Caufield, Matty Beniers, Owen Power, Matt Boldy, Zach Werenski but the Kings felt the need to get their guy signed and into the AHL, despite having zero chance of playing in the NHL?

On Clarke. Why is it pre-determined (if you trust Hoven) that Clarke is going to the AHL at 20? Even for this season, is it realistic to say that most teams would have traded someone like Walker or Durzi to free up a spot for Clark rather than sending him back to the OHL where he hasn't been challenged at all. Getting back to Clarke for next season, why is it that Quinn Hughes, Cale Makar, Jake Sanderson, Miro Heiskanen, Noah Dobson, Bowen Byram (3 games), Drew Doughty, Erik Karlsson, Kris Letang (9 games), Noah Hanifin and guys like this are able to begin their NHL careers without spending so much time in the AHL?

Come on man, surely you can't keep trying to say that the Kings are not way different than most teams when it comes to AHL usage for top draft picks.

I’m convinced it’s an over correction for how the team dealt with prospects in the past. Like Jamie Storr and Aki Berg being fed to the wolves at 18. Both Luc and Blake saw it first hand.

 

[Sol]

My boy Pushkarev was never given a fair chance in this god forsaken franchise

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Not all of the players bypassing the AHL are on bad teams.

Caufield played what one weekend in the AHL(?) before jumping to the Habs and being one of the best players on a team that went to the final. Does this happen if he spends the season learning to be a system player and paying his dues in the AHL instead of having an all-time great season in the NCAA?

Makar jumped right from the Frozen Four into the Avs playoff lineup and was one of their best defenseman.

McAvoy did the same thing, played a weekend or two in the AHL and was put into the playoffs with Boston.

Beniers on this years Seattle team.

And when the Kings made the unorthodox decision to not have QB in the NHL they were not a team that was attempting to contend, the Kings were a bottom 5-8 team in the league and had a clear opening for a 2nd line C spot next to a solid veteran in a low pressure situation and chose to once again lean heavily on their AHL affiliate to the detriment of the player. We debated this before, but I still stand by my feelings that QB would have been in the NHL with a management team with a more traditional philosophy, the numbers are cut and dry, CHL forwards taken in the Top 2 picks play in the NHL at over a 90% rate since the turn of the century. And it's not about being ready or not, Jack Hughes, Joe Thornton, Sasha Barkov are examples of high pick forwards who played in the NHL at 18 without necessarily being NHL ready. Thornton did not have an AHL option but Barkov and Hughes did. If the Kings had won the 2019 lottery and drafted Jack Hughes the likelihood is he is in the AHL that year, does he end up the same player? I don't know, but we do know that the Devils having him in the NHL despite not being ready to be a contributing player ended up working out just fine. The Kings decision to have QB in the AHL for almost a full seasons worth of games has not yielded anything close to those results.

The Turcotte thing was another wildly unorthodox development decision, how else do you explain every other team choosing college over the AHL for their players taken in that same draft (and most drafts before and after)? Why was 2 years of college ok for Cale Makar, Quinn Hughes, Cole Caufield, Matty Beniers, Owen Power, Matt Boldy, Zach Werenski but the Kings felt the need to get their guy signed and into the AHL, despite having zero chance of playing in the NHL?

On Clarke. Why is it pre-determined (if you trust Hoven) that Clarke is going to the AHL at 20? Even for this season, is it realistic to say that most teams would have traded someone like Walker or Durzi to free up a spot for Clark rather than sending him back to the OHL where he hasn't been challenged at all. Getting back to Clarke for next season, why is it that Quinn Hughes, Cale Makar, Jake Sanderson, Miro Heiskanen, Noah Dobson, Bowen Byram (3 games), Drew Doughty, Erik Karlsson, Kris Letang (9 games), Noah Hanifin and guys like this are able to begin their NHL careers without spending so much time in the AHL?

Come on man, surely you can't keep trying to say that the Kings are not way different than most teams when it comes to AHL usage for top draft picks.

Great post and it's too early for me to completely dig in, but....you are right not ALL players go on to bad teams, but....having said that, your examples, WHO did they supplant?

Makar - the year before the D core was - Barrie, Girard, Zadarov, E. Johnson, Nemeth, Barberio, there was no talent there that he had to compete with, they did make room so to speak by trading Barrie for Kadri etc, but do we really think that was going to be a competition?

Caufield - Montreal top six the year before his full season - Toffoli, Suzuki, Tatar, Anderson, Danault, Gallagher, Drouin, - again, who was he competing with, Tatar? Drouin? Gallagher?

McAvoy - Boston D corp before - Krug, Chara, Carlo, Miller, Miller McQuaid - Who was he competing with a 39 year old Chara? Sure....he was still good at that age,

Byfield - LA Top 6 before - Kopitar, Iafallo, Brown, Kempe, Carter, Toffoli, We know he wasn't supplanting Kopitar, one can argue Carter, but the put Vilardi in there, etc...

I'm not saying they made the right move, but I'm not willing to say they made the WRONG move either, I'm saying its extremely early still to make that call, Jack Hughes, Thornton and Barkov, and then Stutzle, Raymond, Zegras, etc, were all given spots on bad teams.....and the only one to have any success (team wise) is NJ.

As far as D, look at that list, Hughes - Vancouver, awful, Makar, not good, not where they are now, his 1st full year, they drafted 4th OA, Sanderson, awful team, Heiskanen 1st year after, drafted 13th OA, so not where they were in his 2nd year, but that's probably the closest example of the bunch, Dobson, horrible, Byram has shown that's a bad decision, Doughyt, bad team, Karlsson, bad team Hanifin, bad team, Letang with Heiskanen probably the two closest examples....

Someone posted above that this is an over correction for how they used to bring players in and I think thats 100% dead on.....

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

To take a step further, look at the top 5 from 2021 - 2016....in general drafting top 5, means...you are a bad team, there are FEW exceptions to this,

2016
Matthews - TOR - Previous season 29-42-11
Laine - WPG - Previous season 35-39-8
Dubois - CBJ - Previous season 34-40-8
Pulijarvi - EDM - Previous Season 31-43-8
Juolevi - VAN - Previous Season 31-38-13

2017
Hischier - NJ - 28-40-14
Patrick - PHI - 39-33-10
Heiskanen - DAL - 34-37-11
Makar - COL - 22-56-4
Petersson - VAN - 30-43-9

2018

I can actually keep doing this, but just the 1st two drafts, ONE team over .500......picked in the top 5.....not sure how you can say that top picks dont go on bad teams....

Unless you are just saying anyone in the 1st round etc.

 

[Schrute farms]

Wasting your time Herby. It's a valiant effort on your behalf. But any questioning of Blake (let alone criticism) is simply not allowed by that one. Pure dogma.