Low IQ isnt the best description for his lack of consistency. He actually has good sense. Hes really good defensively (outside the first couple weeks of this season) and has made some really heady passes especially to Kopitar and Kempe last year. He sees the ice well. I think youd have a better argument questioning his desire to be the best and his desire to win at all cost.
He has a high ceiling because of his size, speed, and finesse that he actually has shown. You know he is not low ceiling as you became a believer in him at points last season.
Whether he becomes the best player he can be is up in the air but you are constantly dishonest about this player for what reason? You do not gain anything from it even if he busts out of the league in 2 years.
I find this to be extremely problematic. I am going to set the ground for my argument as I have seen this said so many times that I think it's bordering on disingenuous. I am not accusing you of being disingenuous but this topic has some people arguing out of bad faith.
1) Most NHL players in the modern era are capable of making nice plays.
2) What separates these players is their ability to do it frequently and to be a factor frequently.
3) PLD is an example of a player who showed no desire at all on the Kings to play which is why I disagree with your logic. I think Byfield shows desire to play, I see him struggling to implement that very heavily and he has had this problem for a very long time. Hence to me it's clearly a lack of hockey IQ that is prohibiting from being a factor. I think the desire has been OK with Byfield, he could be showing more tenacity, but a clear example of a player with desire issues is PLD.
And yes, at a point during last season I was convinced he was turning the corner and that the tool box was finally set. Posters here had also convinced me that he himself was "driving the line statistically". I have heard how statistics are glimpse into the sport but not objective truth. I believe the stats showing Byfield being the line driver were just inaccurate and lacking depth. While being alone without Kopitar and Kempe he is back to his usual self. Struggling and inept at being a factor.
My reasoning? Well, the fancy stats suggested that Byfield was driving the line so logic suggests you'd expect to see some correlation in performance with the top line with him missing.
That is far from the case. Kopitar and Kempe are producing extremely well without him and have not skipped a beat with him gone. On the contrary without Kopitar and Kempe, he is struggling significantly.
Reasoning suggests that it was Byfield who was being driven and not the driver. That much is clear to me. Look at Laferriere. He's producing very well with Kopitar and Kempe, and most people thought he sucked last year until this year.
All evidence suggests players play significantly better with Kopitar and Kempe carry the water for whoever gets strapped along them.
