Around the league part 2

[kingsfan28]

This is all on Quick. This one doesn’t fall on the organization. Quick sucked and if he wanted to stay in the league, he needed to change his style and that’s what he did. He wasn’t that great with Vegas either. He relaxed his playing style a bit and got behind a good defense like the Rangers and isn’t their starting goalie.

For sure. He finally put aside his pride and ego, and asked for help in order to continue his career. He was a longshot in NY to be the back up, and his pre-season was bad, until they made the proper adjustments. Once he accepted he was going to be a back up, things changed. 15-5 this season is outstanding for a back up, and carried NY while Igor tried to figure out his game.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

It's funny because it's the same adjustment Lundqvist made, playing extremely (relatively) deep in his own net

rely less on reflexes and more on smarts and position

 

[Kingfan1967]

LA development may indeed "suck" but some of it also falls on the player, look at Fagemo, couldn't put it together in LA's system , goes to Nashville and still fails, returns to LA and something clicks (AHL but still) , he may not have a place in LA next year, but hopefully LA can get something in an off season trade now.

 

[King'sPawn]

LA development may indeed "suck" but some of it also falls on the player, look at Fagemo, couldn't put it together in LA's system , goes to Nashville and still fails, returns to LA and something clicks (AHL but still) , he may not have a place in LA next year, but hopefully LA can get something in an off season trade now.

Absolutely. Nobody has said otherwise.

It's about the body of work from the org though. Aside from Byfield, Kempe is the only forward the Kings have developed through the AHL who have become top-six forwards on the Kings. That's 2 in 10 years.

Yet, the Kings have made virtually every forward they drafted to spend multiple seasons in the AHL. Except for Laferriere, who basically played there for a couple weeks. And he has had the "easiest" transition to the NHL, even if an imperfect season.

Iafallo was signed as a free agent. Vilardi apparently "needed" to be upgraded for PLD, and he was put on the bottom-6 in LA. In Winnipeg, he was put in the top-6, and did well aside from injury.

But if you want to credit LA with developing Vilardi, the issue remains that Vilardi, Byfield, and Kempe are all first round picks.

Edit: I forgot Pearson, who was also a first rounder. So that's 4 in 12 years.

The Kings haven't developed a top-six forward outside of the first since Tyler Toffoli. And when your team keeps trading first round picks, you need to do better than a second round pick that's good enough for the top six once every 14 years. And you need to do better than once every three years with first round picks.

This isn't about Fagemo. It's fair to say the players need to put in the work. But there comes a point where we need to look at the dataset and evaluating if the model they're operating under is a good idea or sustainable.

 

[Schmooley]

Absolutely. Nobody has said otherwise.

It's about the body of work from the org though. Aside from Byfield, Kempe is the only forward the Kings have developed through the AHL who have become top-six forwards on the Kings. That's 2 in 10 years.

Yet, the Kings have made virtually every forward they drafted to spend multiple seasons in the AHL. Except for Laferriere, who basically played there for a couple weeks. And he has had the "easiest" transition to the NHL, even if an imperfect season.

Iafallo was signed as a free agent. Vilardi apparently "needed" to be upgraded for PLD, and he was put on the bottom-6 in LA. In Winnipeg, he was put in the top-6, and did well aside from injury.

But if you want to credit LA with developing Vilardi, the issue remains that Vilardi, Byfield, and Kempe are all first round picks.

The Kings haven't developed a top-six forward outside of the first since Tyler Toffoli. And when your team keeps trading first round picks, you need to do better than a second round pick that's good enough for the top six once every 14 years. And you need to do better than once every three years with first round picks.

This isn't about Fagemo. It's fair to say the players need to put in the work. But there comes a point where we need to look at the dataset and evaluating if the model they're operating under is a good idea or sustainable.

Pearson also was a top six player I think he was a first rounder.
Fagemo played only what 3 games for Nashville and he scored in one of them.
Has JAD played any games yet?
Hope he can carve out a career. A team will probably want to give him a chance because hell be cheap and can be used on the pk.

 

[King'sPawn]

Pearson also was a top six player I think he was a first rounder.
Fagemo played only what 3 games for Nashville and he scored in one of them.
Has JAD played any games yet?
Hope he can carve out a career. A team will probably want to give him a chance because hell be cheap and can be used on the pk.

You're right. I forgot Pearson. But yes, he was also a first rounder. So, that makes 4 in 12 years.

 

[Schmooley]

You're right. I forgot Pearson. But yes, he was also a first rounder. So, that makes 4 in 12 years.

That doesnt seem like a good ratio but Im not sure what the average is league wide.
They have guys like Odonell who can churn out conservative dmen but they have a real problem handling guys with high end skill.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

You're right. I forgot Pearson. But yes, he was also a first rounder. So, that makes 4 in 12 years.

But you have to look at where they picked......it's very rare...that picks outside top 15 become top flight consistent top 6 players....it happens of course, LEAGUE wide....but how many teams have drafted in the bottom half of the 1st round and has churned out consistent top six talent?

 

[King'sPawn]

But you have to look at where they picked......it's very rare...that picks outside top 15 become top flight consistent top 6 players....it happens of course, LEAGUE wide....but how many teams have drafted in the bottom half of the 1st round and has churned out consistent top six talent?

That's all the more important to have a flexible development path, because teams don't consistently pick in the top 10.

Let's assume each team has 3 of the top 96 scoring forwards. This would give each team a first line. Here's the distribution:

Picked 1-5: 24
Picked 6-15: 23
Picked 16-32: 15
Picked after 32: 28
Undrafted: 6

I understand there's some overlap, as players picked 31 or 32 may not have been first round picks a decade ago, but the point is about hitting more than just a lottery pick.

But of the 96 TOP forwards as far as scoring, almost 30% are from outside the first round.

It's actually pretty important to be able to land scoring talent outside the first.

As far as how many consistently do it? I don't know. But I don't think 1 every 14 years (Toffoli) is sustainable. Not when a team trades their first round picks or players picked with their first.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

That's all the more important to have a flexible development path, because teams don't consistently pick in the top 10.

Let's assume each team has 3 of the top 96 scoring forwards. This would give each team a first line. Here's the distribution:

Picked 1-5: 24
Picked 6-15: 23
Picked 16-32: 15
Picked after 32: 28
Undrafted: 6

I understand there's some overlap, as players picked 31 or 32 may not have been first round picks a decade ago, but the point is about hitting more than just a lottery pick.

But of the 96 TOP forwards as far as scoring, almost 30% are from outside the first round.

It's actually pretty important to be able to land scoring talent outside the first.

As far as how many consistently do it? I don't know. But I don't think 1 every 14 years (Toffoli) is sustainable. Not when a team trades their first round picks or players picked with their first.

Honestly, f*** off with the math lmfao.....but I get what you are saying, I just have no desire to delve into it further, because you then have to look at how many picks were defense vs forward etc, and the ability to turn a D....(faber) into a F (fiala) no matter how much we hate it, or some hate it etc, I think it's a helluva lot more nuanced, than 1 every 14 years etc etc.

Also, I was of the understanding you were talking 1st round picks.....not outside of the 1st.

 

[King'sPawn]

Honestly, f*** off with the math lmfao.....but I get what you are saying, I just have no desire to delve into it further, because you then have to look at how many picks were defense vs forward etc, and the ability to turn a D....(faber) into a F (fiala) no matter how much we hate it, or some hate it etc, I think it's a helluva lot more nuanced, than 1 every 14 years etc etc.

Sure. Every org makes trades, too. I focused on picks though, because:
1. I believe it's important to develop internally (not ALL players, but you ultimately spend more to bring in outside talent via trades and UFA signings)
2. We can't assume a desired player is available to fill a need, so the team may have to make due with what they have

Also, I was of the understanding you were talking 1st round picks.....not outside of the 1st.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. Of course, first round picks do matter because they are inherently more valuable. But organizations also have to get quality scoring depth, including the top six, outside of the top 15 picks as well as outside the first.

While people preach rebuilds and picking high, that's more secondary to me. Yes, the higher picks are more tantalizing. But I've been saying for years: amassing picks, including high picks, don't mean anything if there's rigidity or lack of vision in a player and organization's development path.

It's why teams like Buffalo struggle to get out of the lottery range or miss the playoffs. Edmonton struggled with it too, until McDavid helped them succeed despite their issues.

We've discussed Boston and Tampa as teams that haven't had to "tank" to get a top pick to carry their team. How do they make it work? They've not only hit on their later picks, but they brought them along as well.

Tampa had Stamkos and Hedman during their cup run, but they also had Point (3rd rounder), Kucherov (2nd rounder), Killorn (3rd rounder), Cirelli (3rd rounder), and Palat (7th rounder) all rounding out what was effectively their top-6 (at least their top six scoring forwards). All drafted by the Lightning.

I know this is another dissertation, but I've been saying since 2016 that I'm concerned about the output of high scoring forwards on the Kings. I first wrote it off as "well, it's the Lombardi/Sutter era," but then it just feels like we're still not doing that? I love defensive forwards and depth to game, but as Blake wanted to have more scoring, because it's more fun, you'd think we would see more of that from our prospects aside from a second overall pick.

It's not ALL the org's fault. Players don't put in the work or pan out. But when you use the same pickup line on 20 women and only one sleeps with you, it might be time to start wearing deodorant and tossing away the "Elon is my homeboi" t-shirt and try something new.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Sure. Every org makes trades, too. I focused on picks though, because:
1. I believe it's important to develop internally (not ALL players, but you ultimately spend more to bring in outside talent via trades and UFA signings)
2. We can't assume a desired player is available to fill a need, so the team may have to make due with what they have

Sorry if I wasn't clear. Of course, first round picks do matter because they are inherently more valuable. But organizations also have to get quality scoring depth, including the top six, outside of the top 15 picks as well as outside the first.

While people preach rebuilds and picking high, that's more secondary to me. Yes, the higher picks are more tantalizing. But I've been saying for years: amassing picks, including high picks, don't mean anything if there's rigidity or lack of vision in a player and organization's development path.

It's why teams like Buffalo struggle to get out of the lottery range or miss the playoffs. Edmonton struggled with it too, until McDavid helped them succeed despite their issues.

We've discussed Boston and Tampa as teams that haven't had to "tank" to get a top pick to carry their team. How do they make it work? They've not only hit on their later picks, but they brought them along as well.

Tampa had Stamkos and Hedman during their cup run, but they also had Point (3rd rounder), Kucherov (2nd rounder), Killorn (3rd rounder), Cirelli (3rd rounder), and Palat (7th rounder) all rounding out what was effectively their top-6 (at least their top six scoring forwards). All drafted by the Lightning.

I know this is another dissertation, but I've been saying since 2016 that I'm concerned about the output of high scoring forwards on the Kings. I first wrote it off as "well, it's the Lombardi/Sutter era," but then it just feels like we're still not doing that? I love defensive forwards and depth to game, but as Blake wanted to have more scoring, because it's more fun, you'd think we would see more of that from our prospects aside from a second overall pick.

It's not ALL the org's fault. Players don't put in the work or pan out. But when you use the same pickup line on 20 women and only one sleeps with you, it might be time to start wearing deodorant and tossing away the "Elon is my homeboi" t-shirt and try something new.

And to add, as I always mention when we talk about this, I think we can say the drafting is fine to good becasue by any metric--points, games played, etc--our draft picks are wildly successful, they just continually do it elsewhere instead of here, due to development/deployment/confidence/putin a position to succeed etc.

Kings keep buying 200 dollar hammers when they need a nail, then trade the hammer for 5 nails, then act surprised pikachu when the nails don't build a house themselves

 

[johnjm22]

Nashville wins again.

17 straight without a regulation loss.

Preds have to be the biggest surprise of the season.

 

[ru4reals]

Nashville wins again.

17 straight without a regulation loss.

Preds have to be the biggest surprise of the season.

Brunette is a good coach was hoping we got a chance at him. But believe he wasn't available when we hired Todd.

 

[Little Psycho]

Heated discussion between the two asshats

 

[GameNight]

Heated discussion between the two asshats

If the Canadian hockey media starts to hone in on this and if it could please put it under the microscope over the next few weeks leading up to the playoffs, we do want the Oilers for round 1.

I'll say this much about the Oilers for round 1, it's likely the only potential match-up where the Kings have the edge in goaltending, OR should I say, have the edge in something

 

[Kingfan1967]

Leon has 1 year left then he's a UFA, ( and Edmonton may not have cap space to resign, rumor is he's looking at upwards of 15 million a year).

 

[Johnny Utah]

Kings should have not made the PLD deal and waited for Leon to become a UFA.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Anders Lee proving that he’s a dirty piece of shit.

 

[AbsentMojo]

Anders Lee proving that he’s a dirty piece of shit.

That face of his needs to meet a baseball bat

 

[tny760]

doesn't get much more blatant than that

those hammerfists through the linesmen were f***in pathetic too

 

[Bandit]

Anders Lee proving that he’s a dirty piece of shit.

Anders Knee at it again. And amazing that Meier got and instigator but the other day Mustachio didn’t for going after Englund for a clean hit.

 

[YAYSAY]

If the Canadian hockey media starts to hone in on this and if it could please put it under the microscope over the next few weeks leading up to the playoffs, we do want the Oilers for round 1.

I'll say this much about the Oilers for round 1, it's likely the only potential match-up where the Kings have the edge in goaltending, OR should I say, have the edge in something

Hasn't Skinner been solid for them after the first half of the season?

 

[johnjm22]

I wonder if Hertl will be back for the playoffs.

 

[BigKing]

I don't know...Brown made that same hit before. No priors as far as supplemental discipline.

I think the five and game is all that is needed here. Tossing another game or two in today's climate wouldn't bug me.