Around the league part 2

[tigermask48]

What we do know is that they churn out NHL players at a fairly high rate... a rate I have been told in multiple ways and by multiple metrics is higher than the rest of the NHL.

Are these the same metrics that had PLD as the Kings number 2 center and a great fit for the Kings for the next 8 years?

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

One player in 10 years? Pretty low bar there.

Sorry, forgot Anderson like the other poster said, Vilardi, Kempe.....

That's 4 right there....

 

[Schrute farms]

What we do know is that they churn out NHL players at a fairly high rate... a rate I have been told in multiple ways and by multiple metrics is higher than the rest of the NHL.

Yeah, 3rd liners and bottom pair defensemen. They do a great job finding late round picks & UDFA and turning them into viable NHL players. But it's depth players -- not difference makers. Same with goalies -- they are really good turning reclamation project type around and into a viable goalie. But name a goalie they have drafted the last 15-17 years who became a good NHL goalie. Same with forwards/centers -- it's an extremely small number and you have to qualify things. People make the argument, well they haven't drafted top 5 most years. Come on, that's just an excuse. The NHL is filled with skilled, star type players who were drafted mid/back of 1st round or even 2-3rd rounds.

The fact is the same story with the Kings -- great at finding and making something out of nothing and getting an AI, Roy, Dwight King, Nolan, Walker, Lizotte, Laf, etc. types. Those are very valuable players. The Kings are easily top 5 in league at that aspect. But those are depth guys...not difference making players that you truly need to WIN and win big in the NHL.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

If you move to the middle of nowhere maybe.

I too moved out of California a little over 2 years ago, and outside of real estate (which isn’t nothing, it was one of the main reasons we moved), it’s not much cheaper here.

As an example in California it cost about $600 to register mine and my wife’s car annually. Well here in CT there is property tax on cars so while registering your car is a nominal fee, I just paid a $1,500 tax bill to the city for the same two cars. Oh and that’s not annual, is bi-annual. So $600 a year to $3000.

Hating on LA/California because of taxes is nonsensical propaganda. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. State tax is a drop in the bucket compared to fed, and fed is inescapable unless you’re going off the grid. I don’t think any hockey players are giving up their careers to move to Montana and build a log cabin.

I’m in real estate so I always have a good laugh when people move from say CA to TX and then get their property tax bill and go WAITAMINUTE

Truth is line items mostly just get moved around especially if you’re in any sort of metropolitan center

I’m not poopooing what @Piston is saying necessarily but I do think taxes are a much smaller piece of the puzzle than is made out. These guys aren’t min-max investors.

 

[King'sPawn]

Are these the same metrics that had PLD as the Kings number 2 center and a great fit for the Kings for the next 8 years?

I dunno dude. I think the Kings have been pretty consistent in that. Yannetti talked about 200 games as the threshold. From 2007-2016, the Kings have had 23 players they've picked hit that mark. From 2017 to now, they have none, but there are a few who have a chance to do it it next season:
Vilardi (199 GP)
Kupari (158)
Kaliyev (188)
Byfield (179)

They've made 125 picks since 2007. With 27 players looking like they'll hit that mark by next year. If you remove the latest 4 drafts where it's impossible to have hit that mark (2024 hasn't played, 2022-2023 players could hit a max of 168 games, and 2021 only has 2 players who have hitthat mark, making it a very low probability), you have 27 players in 105 picks. That's a 25.7% rate.

I'll look at the same window for a couple other teams we are usually envious of:
Tampa Bay: 21 out of 107 (19.6%)
Dallas: 17 out of 91 you can to add a couple likely to make it, like Wyatt Johnson and Ty Dellandrea. That makes it 19. That's 20.9% if you want to be generous (as Wyatt Johnson is part of the 2021 draft, which I excluded from the other teams, but I didn't count all their other picks)

Check any team you want with players picked 2007-2020. Yes, scouting plays a part in that. But so does development.

Even if high-impact players are very low in LA, they're stupid good at churning out regulars. I didn't even include college/undrafted FA signings like Iafallo and Lizotte, as I wasn't going to pour over every undrafted free agent the other teams have made.

Use whatever criteria you'd like. It's only when you adjust criteria to include only superstars that you will see where the Kings start to dip relative to other teams.

Someone posted some additional stats confirming the same.

 

[DoktorJeep]

States have had varying tax burdens since forever. I think it’s more a facet of a hard cap league that teams in low/no income tax states have some marginal advantage. It allows a player to accept less money and gives the team more cap savings. If someone hates the tax advantages and loves the cap, there is some serious cognitive dissonance going on.

 

[BigKing]

When giving credit for developing Anderson and Roy, it can't be ignored that they were developed by being college players. Toss Laf, Lizzote and Iafallo on there too.

Faber while we're at it.

The Kings churn out NHL players under Blake at a good clip as long as they play in the NCAA for a couple years first.

 

[Schrute farms]

If you are taking less money on a contract for whatever reason (taxes, location, close to family, to win, etc.), you better be getting a full NTC.

 

[tigermask48]

I dunno dude. I think the Kings have been pretty consistent in that. Yannetti talked about 200 games as the threshold. From 2007-2016, the Kings have had 23 players they've picked hit that mark. From 2017 to now, they have none, but there are a few who have a chance to do it it next season:
Vilardi (199 GP)
Kupari (158)
Kaliyev (188)
Byfield (179)

It's pretty telling that 2 of those players aren't in LA anymore and a third is actively in the dog house and being shopped around by the team

It's also pretty damning of the Kings development style that in that 2007-2016 time frame the only player that is a key contributor to the Kings is Doughty, drafted in 2008.

The other 22 are either contributors for other teams or bottom of the lineup role players or out of the NHL.

I don't think the Kings outside of Yannetti who has been amazing, should be praised for making chicken shit out of chicken salad.

Edit to say: It's also hard to not look at that list of 200 games played and not go "there should be 3-5 MORE names on it" when you consider Clarke, Bjornfot, Spence, Fagemo, Moverare should all be close to that mark under ideal development conditions.

 

[tigermask48]

When giving credit for developing Anderson and Roy, it can't be ignored that they were developed by being college players. Toss Laf, Lizzote and Iafallo on there too.

Faber while we're at it.

The Kings churn out NHL players under Blake at a good clip as long as they play in the NCAA for a couple years first.

That's why I've said the best thing for Hampton Slukynsky is to stay in coll3ge a minimum of 3 years. He can come to LA largely a finished product and step right into a backup role.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Yeah, the franchise is so good at producing NHL players they’re still playing 36 year old Kopitar 25+ minutes a night.

What a ridiculous, irrelevant talking point.

 

[King'sPawn]

When giving credit for developing Anderson and Roy, it can't be ignored that they were developed by being college players. Toss Laf, Lizzote and Iafallo on there too.

Faber while we're at it.

The Kings churn out NHL players under Blake at a good clip as long as they play in the NCAA for a couple years first.

Of the 27 players I listed above, 6 went the NCAA route: Martinez, Dowd, Forbort, Anderson, Roy, Shore.

I agree the Kings prospects benefit from NCAA, but I submit the NCAA is an ideal league for producing bottom-six players. The schedule allows them to build up more strength, fewer games get played, the ages range from 17-23, so there's a lower-tier of talent and challenges as far as developing skillsets. I just think, by and large, the NCAA produces less top-tier talent compared to the CHL and overseas.

Yeah, the franchise is so good at producing NHL players they’re still playing 36 year old Kopitar 25+ minutes a night.

What a ridiculous, irrelevant talking point.

How is it irrelevant? It narrows down where the issue is.

If someone gets chest pain, their cholesterol looks fine, but the EKG shows an arrhythmia, a doctor would be remiss to say the cholesterol is irrelevant.

Kopitar takes up one spot. The organization's refusal to reduce his responsibility doesn't undo the other players who have and continue to play at the NHL level. It just highlights where the issue is.

 

[Omni Owl]

Trotz seems to think states with less taxes have an advantage. There's definitely something to it:

Trotz: 'No question' teams in tax-free states have advantage

Nashville Predators general manager Barry Trotz knows his team has an edge over the majority of NHL clubs.Being situated in Tennessee - one of the U.S.' nine states that doesn't levy a state income tax - Predators players are able to keep more of their money.In a league with a hard salary cap...

www.thescore.com

 

[Herby]

When giving credit for developing Anderson and Roy, it can't be ignored that they were developed by being college players. Toss Laf, Lizzote and Iafallo on there too.

Faber while we're at it.

The Kings churn out NHL players under Blake at a good clip as long as they play in the NCAA for a couple years first.

The NCAA is a better developmental atmosphere than the AHL. Players and many teams have finally realized this, and it's better for both the players and the NHL teams longterm outlook.

Trotz seems to think states with less taxes have an advantage. There's definitely something to it:

Trotz: 'No question' teams in tax-free states have advantage

Nashville Predators general manager Barry Trotz knows his team has an edge over the majority of NHL clubs.Being situated in Tennessee - one of the U.S.' nine states that doesn't levy a state income tax - Predators players are able to keep more of their money.In a league with a hard salary cap...

www.thescore.com

I understand the attitude many here might have that taxes for millionaires shouldn't matter, but the reality is that rich people do care a lot about taxes. There are a lot of snowbirds from California and Florida at my CC that spend a good chunk of year up here and they always talk about 183 days. What is interesting is the ones from CA need to make sure they spend 183 days here to avoid CA taxes, while the ones from Florida need to make sure they are in Florida 183 days. That is why the Florida people come later and leave earlier, while most of the CA people leave around Thanksgiving.

 

[bland]

Yeah, the franchise is so good at producing NHL players they’re still playing 36 year old Kopitar 25+ minutes a night.

What a ridiculous, irrelevant talking point.

I am curious if the ratio of home grown players is higher on teams that have spent to the cap on higher end players while chasing or coming down from contention. Is it a plan, or is it by necessity?

Very few teams kept the same #1c, #1d and #1g as long as the Kings did. Pittsburgh did as well, and Chicago to a lesser degree as they managed their roster a bit better during their prolonged run. When you pay at a premium for those spots for that long, you need first and second contracts to fill out your roster. Those players come from the draft and collegiate UFA signings.

Anyway, I put FAR more weight on their inability to develop impact players over what may very well be just the happenstance of churning out a larger number of low cost depth options that cannot supplement the declining results of players on retirement contracts.

 

[dabeechman]

If you move to the middle of nowhere maybe.

I too moved out of California a little over 2 years ago, and outside of real estate (which isn’t nothing, it was one of the main reasons we moved), it’s not much cheaper here.

As an example in California it cost about $600 to register mine and my wife’s car annually. Well here in CT there is property tax on cars so while registering your car is a nominal fee, I just paid a $1,500 tax bill to the city for the same two cars. Oh and that’s not annual, is bi-annual. So $600 a year to $3000.

Hating on LA/California because of taxes is nonsensical propaganda. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. State tax is a drop in the bucket compared to fed, and fed is inescapable unless you’re going off the grid. I don’t think any hockey players are giving up their careers to move to Montana and build a log cabin.

Caveat...my wife and I make a decent living so mileage may vary. We aren't in the middle of nowhere and live in a very upscale part of the state.

State tax for us is $6k less annually for dual earners. Our registrations are 1/3 what it was in CA. Our insurances are a little less than half of what they were. My utilities are about 5x less, and property taxes are less, but marginally. I see a very real 10-15k$ in annual savings just in the above.

Forbes has the cost of living in Utah @ 52% cheaper to live than in OC. Bankrate has it at 34% cheaper, CNN @ 36%, and Nerdwallet @ 33% cheaper. MIT estimates that you would need to earn an extra $40k annually to live in OC with 2 children as opposed to Utah.

It is absolutely anything but nonsensical propaganda to say that CA is bleeding their residents dry. Do these numbers affect multi-millionaire athletes? No, I can't see that playing a role in their decision, but it absolutely affects the rest of us.

 

[DoktorJeep]

Life long SoCal native here. I vote first with my feet, then wallet, then at the ballot most years. It’s great living in a diverse country. If the economics of SoCal don’t fit your budget, well good news, you’ve got a lot of options. Plenty of folks from around the country and the world are dying to pay the highest state income tax around.

Great weather, economy, and diversity is worth the price as long as you can afford. If not, vaya con dios.

 

[bland]

Caveat...my wife and I make a decent living so mileage may vary. We aren't in the middle of nowhere and live in a very upscale part of the state.

State tax for us is $6k less annually for dual earners. Our registrations are 1/3 what it was in CA. Our insurances are a little less than half of what they were. My utilities are about 5x less, and property taxes are less, but marginally. I see a very real 10-15k$ in annual savings just in the above.

Forbes has the cost of living in Utah @ 52% cheaper to live than in OC. Bankrate has it at 34% cheaper, CNN @ 36%, and Nerdwallet @ 33% cheaper. MIT estimates that you would need to earn an extra $40k annually to live in OC with 2 children as opposed to Utah.

It is absolutely anything but nonsensical propaganda to say that CA is bleeding their residents dry. Do these numbers affect multi-millionaire athletes? No, I can't see that playing a role in their decision, but it absolutely affects the rest of us.

I have lived in Southern California my entire life, and am comfortable but certainly not well-off.

I have never, not for one second, even considered taxes as a problem.

 

[All The Kings Men]

Are these the same metrics that had PLD as the Kings number 2 center and a great fit for the Kings for the next 8 years?

no

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Of the 27 players I listed above, 6 went the NCAA route: Martinez, Dowd, Forbort, Anderson, Roy, Shore.

I agree the Kings prospects benefit from NCAA, but I submit the NCAA is an ideal league for producing bottom-six players. The schedule allows them to build up more strength, fewer games get played, the ages range from 17-23, so there's a lower-tier of talent and challenges as far as developing skillsets. I just think, by and large, the NCAA produces less top-tier talent compared to the CHL and overseas.


How is it irrelevant? It narrows down where the issue is.

If someone gets chest pain, their cholesterol looks fine, but the EKG shows an arrhythmia, a doctor would be remiss to say the cholesterol is irrelevant.

Kopitar takes up one spot. The organization's refusal to reduce his responsibility doesn't undo the other players who have and continue to play at the NHL level. It just highlights where the issue is.

Because the rate at which a franchise produces 200 game NHL talent is such a broad and multifaceted dataset we can’t possibly glean anything particular from it. What kind of NHL talent? From what development path? Is the organization trying to contend? Is the organization tanking? Are they having more success with European prospects versus North American prospects?

There’s just so much that goes into these data, to make statements such as, “well, LA is producing NHL talent at a greater clip than Tampa Bay and Dallas” just doesn’t say anything at all, not without a great many qualifiers.

 

[Bandit]

I’m in real estate so I always have a good laugh when people move from say CA to TX and then get their property tax bill and go WAITAMINUTE

Truth is line items mostly just get moved around especially if you’re in any sort of metropolitan center

I’m not poopooing what @Piston is saying necessarily but I do think taxes are a much smaller piece of the puzzle than is made out. These guys aren’t min-max investors.

Yeah I don’t think tax is nothing but it’s a MUCH smaller issue than everyone makes it out to be. To keep in on hockey the bigger issue is travel. Playing 80% of your games in the eastern time zone would be a hell of lot more appealing to me than any tax advantage I’d get in Utah.

 

[dabeechman]

I have lived in Southern California my entire life, and am comfortable but certainly not well-off.

I have never, not for one second, even considered taxes as a problem.

Was in the same boat. We were fine, but I wouldn't say we were well off despite making very good money. I never thought taxes were an issue either.

But what is wild is our state taxes and registration is cheaper in UT, but road conditions, infrastructure, and transportation are all much higher rated.

For what it's worth, I am not bagging on CA, I lived there for 40 years and the weather is amazing and most of what the state offers is great. It just came at a far more substantial cost than I anticipated.

Hell, I can get aerial fireworks from Costco out here. That stuff cracks me up.

 

[johnjm22]

Hating on LA/California because of taxes is nonsensical propaganda. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. State tax is a drop in the bucket compared to fed, and fed is inescapable unless you’re going off the grid. I don’t think any hockey players are giving up their careers to move to Montana and build a log cabin.

It depends on your income level though.

For a middle income person it won't make a huge difference in nominal terms.

But CA rates a progressive. A high earner pays 12% and there's no SALT deduction anymore.

 

[Bandit]

It depends on your income level though.

For a middle income person it won't make a huge difference in nominal terms.

But CA rates a progressive. A high earner pays 12% and there's no SALT deduction anymore.

12%? My last full year in California my effective tax rate was 27% and my state tax was 20% of my fed tax.

And again, am I supposed to feel sorry for these poor millionaires? Have they worked so much harder at their jobs than I have in the f***ing entertainment business playing a game? Bullshit.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Yeah, 3rd liners and bottom pair defensemen. They do a great job finding late round picks & UDFA and turning them into viable NHL players. But it's depth players -- not difference makers. Same with goalies -- they are really good turning reclamation project type around and into a viable goalie. But name a goalie they have drafted the last 15-17 years who became a good NHL goalie. Same with forwards/centers -- it's an extremely small number and you have to qualify things. People make the argument, well they haven't drafted top 5 most years. Come on, that's just an excuse. The NHL is filled with skilled, star type players who were drafted mid/back of 1st round or even 2-3rd rounds.

The fact is the same story with the Kings -- great at finding and making something out of nothing and getting an AI, Roy, Dwight King, Nolan, Walker, Lizotte, Laf, etc. types. Those are very valuable players. The Kings are easily top 5 in league at that aspect. But those are depth guys...not difference making players that you truly need to WIN and win big in the NHL.

The vast majority of players aren't difference makers. You have the elite of the elite who are the definition of game changer, and then anyone else that is actually good, you're hoping for a career year. Get a couple secondary players that do better than they should, and you get a winner, if it all comes together at the same time.

How many true difference makers did the Kings have in that 3 year window? Maybe Doughty, and that's a pretty strong maybe. Other than that, Quick and Brown just had a great 2012 playoff. Gaborik had a great 2014 playoff. Richards was already kind of a shell of himself in 2012, and even more so in 2014. Williams was Mr.Game 7, but he wouldn't be in the difference maker category. Very good, clutch as hell, but he ain't taking a game over.

That's why that run only lasted 3 years. And only those 3 years. They weren't a top team in the standings before the 2012 playoffs. They haven't done anything after 2014. And rationally should've ended any number of times in the 2014 playoffs. Three Game 7's on the road, 3 OT wins at home in the Final, and an 0-3 comeback. Literally a ridiculous run. Logically should've been a 1 hit wonder.

If you get a real difference maker outside of the top 3-5 picks in any given draft(and obviously not all drafts are equal), that's not a real skill. That's taking a guy, and he happens to end up being good. The Sharks didn't know they were getting Joe Pavelski when they drafted Joe Pavelski at #205 in the 2003 draft. That's not, we'll develop him properly, because it doesn't happen every year with the same draft guy or team.

The next 1,000 pt player for the Kings: James Reeder. Why not?