Toggle sidebar

Around the League Thread part V

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fishhead said:
Caufield gets preferential deployments and lots of PP time, he always has. No reason to make excuses for him. He will get better, but I'll take Kaliyev over him easily right now and he was a second-rounder.
Click to expand...

I'd take Kaliyev over Caufield, too.

However, the point is that people are defending not putting Kaliyev on the top six because:
- he hasn't played well enough in the bottom-six to earn it
- it will kill his confidence if he doesn't score right away
- he needs to learn to play "the right way" first
 
  • Like
Reactions: bland
King'sPawn said:
I'd take Kaliyev over Caufield, too.

However, the point is that people are defending not putting Kaliyev on the top six because:
- he hasn't played well enough in the bottom-six to earn it
- it will kill his confidence if he doesn't score right away
- he needs to learn to play "the right way" first
Click to expand...

And the problem to a degree with learning to play 'the right way'--how much offense do we trade off for that?

If Kaliyev becomes a run of a mill 20 goal scorer but a responsible checker....well, then the Dwight King comp becomes true.

Why do they all have to be 'good little checkers?' why can't we have a 40 goal liability being deployed as such when we have two selke guys on the roster?

Rhetorical question, not trying to restart the fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bland, Ollie Weeks, Schmooley and 2 others
Raccoon Jesus said:
And the problem to a degree with learning to play 'the right way'--how much offense do we trade off for that?

If Kaliyev becomes a run of a mill 20 goal scorer but a responsible checker....well, then the Dwight King comp becomes true.

Why do they all have to be 'good little checkers?' why can't we have a 40 goal liability being deployed as such when we have two selke guys on the roster?

Rhetorical question, not trying to restart the fire.
Click to expand...

I've already put the ones incapable of having an honest discussion on ignore, so I won't fan the flames anymore, either.

But I agree - what is the point of learning to play "the right way" by learning how to check and grind, but we also have conversations about getting Eichel? Why do the homegrown players HAVE to learn to check, only to have hired guns like AA, or other high octane players, run-and-gun?

LAKings88 said:
I keep seeing the narrative that Kaliyev is being taught to be a grinder. I still think it’s more a matter that the fourth line clicked than keeping him on a grinder line.
Click to expand...

If that's the case of being a happy accident, then why was he put on the Lizotte line to begin with? Or are you saying the Lizotte line was good to begin with, and so they put him on a line that was already clicking?
 
  • Like
Reactions: funky and Raccoon Jesus
Raccoon Jesus said:
And the problem to a degree with learning to play 'the right way'--how much offense do we trade off for that?

If Kaliyev becomes a run of a mill 20 goal scorer but a responsible checker....well, then the Dwight King comp becomes true.

Why do they all have to be 'good little checkers?' why can't we have a 40 goal liability being deployed as such when we have two selke guys on the roster?

Rhetorical question, not trying to restart the fire.
Click to expand...

Besides to an extent Kessel....how many 40 goal scorers are there that ARE a defensive nightmare? Seems to me, your top echelon of players, even goal scorers, are also defensively adept at worst.....
 
GoldenBearHockey said:
Besides to an extent Kessel....how many 40 goal scorers are there that ARE a defensive nightmare? Seems to me, your top echelon of players, even goal scorers, are also defensively adept at worst.....
Click to expand...

There aren't a ton that's for sure because usually guys with that kind of skillset are better all around players, especially these days. But Kessel is one. One of Kaliyev's comps pre-draft--Vanek--is another. I wouldn't call Ovy a defensive savant. Kane and Skinner--wouldn't call them liabilities but they'll give you next to nothing in the dzone. Laine.

I think Kaliyev fits in that group just fine already and I'd say he's defensively ahead of Kessel, Vanek, Laine with certainty. And their teams deploy them as such.
 
Im fine with Kaliyev development and deployment so far - because his line gets 3rd line minutes and he does get time on PP2 where he gets some time and space to use his shot. 5x5 I would prefer to swap him and Brown at this point to give Byfield someone to work with and Kaliyev some more skill to get his shot off but thats a nit. Re Byfield - im not happy with his deployment - not just for his sake but for the teams. He needs to be given some PP time to let him build confidence with the puck to make some things happen since he never gets that chance on the reject line. This would benefit him and the team. There are two obvious players on the PP in 22 and 23 that could easily be replaced with only upside to be had.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raccoon Jesus
Raccoon Jesus said:
There aren't a ton that's for sure because usually guys with that kind of skillset are better all around players, especially these days. But Kessel is one. One of Kaliyev's comps pre-draft--Vanek--is another. I wouldn't call Ovy a defensive savant. Kane and Skinner--wouldn't call them liabilities but they'll give you next to nothing in the dzone. Laine.

I think Kaliyev fits in that group just fine already and I'd say he's defensively ahead of Kessel, Vanek, Laine with certainty. And their teams deploy them as such.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I don't think any of those, maybe Vanek.....are defensive liabilties.....

I have zero concerns over Kaliyev, because you can be taught defense (hence what he's doing now) offensive touch and skill, you either have it or you don't, and if you have it, you don't lose it.
 
kingsfan28 said:
you've been here as long as I have, I think you know the answer. You'd have been ok with Blake paying 8/80 mil for 30 total goals? :laugh:
Click to expand...

You didn't mention anything about his contract in your original post, so why are you mentioning it now? His contract has nothing to do with his development. He is making 925k this year and is a point-per-game player. He will be making $8m for the next 8 years (not $10, you should not trust the person you apparently trusted) with that likely as his baseline production. That contract takes him through almost his entire 20's (his prime), and doesn't look bad at all for a player of his talent.
'
Getting back to development, they had him up in the NHL his entire 18 year old season, despite being the first player to ever make the jump from the NTDP to the NHL. Was he completely ready for the NHL? No he wasn't, but neither have a lot of top picks who played in the NHL at 18 and the vast majority of them turned out great. I guess I would fall in as one of the usual suspects you mentioned. I said when QB was drafted and the rumors were he was going back to the OHL that I wanted him up in the NHL because it's a successfully proven path for players of his caliber. I can't speak for anyone else but I would have been totally fine with QB having a similar D+1 type season that Hughes had.

Fishhead said:
Yeah, he's doing fine now, but it took him a few years which is the point. There is no real set path for any player. Someone better tell the Oilers about that path because they sent Draisaitl down and he ended up twice the player Hughes is. If Hughes would have had those first two years around here the narrative would be the Kings were terrible at drafting/development, etc. because they couldn't even get a dominant player with the 1OA.

It's difficult to compare the paths that players take because no two players are the same and they all take different times to succeed. It's like the Draisaitl comparison, he's just one player - what worked for him will not work for someone else. For every higher pick that is thrown on a top-line right away and succeeds, there is one who doesn't. It's also impossible to really analyze the development of a draft pick for 3 or 4 years. Was Wheeler developed incorrectly? He started incredibly slow then became a very dominant player. So many variables on and off the ice.
Click to expand...

I just feel like if there are successful models for development with players the Kings took #5 in 2019 and #2 in 2020 why not just go that same route that has been so successful for other teams? If the fastest way to get from one side of town to the other is taking the highway and everyone else takes the highway and it works why would you take the side streets?

Most of the Top scorers in the NHL developed in the NHL, not the AHL.
 
King'sPawn said:
I'd take Kaliyev over Caufield, too.

However, the point is that people are defending not putting Kaliyev on the top six because:
- he hasn't played well enough in the bottom-six to earn it
- it will kill his confidence if he doesn't score right away
- he needs to learn to play "the right way" first
Click to expand...

I'm not on board with those first two, but that third one is helpful. I'd argue that it's showed him part of the game he's never had to do before, and it will make him a better overall player in the long run.
 
Raccoon Jesus said:
And the problem to a degree with learning to play 'the right way'--how much offense do we trade off for that?

If Kaliyev becomes a run of a mill 20 goal scorer but a responsible checker....well, then the Dwight King comp becomes true.

Why do they all have to be 'good little checkers?' why can't we have a 40 goal liability being deployed as such when we have two selke guys on the roster?

Rhetorical question, not trying to restart the fire.
Click to expand...

Or what if learning to round his game out makes him a 30 goal scorer you can put out there in any situation? I think the 4th line has been great for Arty, but it shouldn't be an extended thing.

I think the answer to that last one is by the time the Kings are contending, they are going to have only one Selke guy at top level. And when the Kings were winning cups, the closest thing to a high scoring liability would be Gaborik, and they were already a dominant team when they added him. Everyone on those teams could play defense. Toffoli didn't play in pure scoring roles right away either and it did wonders for him, and I think he is as close to Kaliyev as a recent Kings player gets.

There are good arguments for both sides of that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raccoon Jesus
GoldenBearHockey said:
Fair enough, I don't think any of those, maybe Vanek.....are defensive liabilties.....

I have zero concerns over Kaliyev, because you can be taught defense (hence what he's doing now) offensive touch and skill, you either have it or you don't, and if you have it, you don't lose it.
Click to expand...

Yeah maybe liability isn't the right word--I guess my point is those teams sure aren't trying to deploy them defensively. Hell even Torts didn't try to fourth-line Laine.

I don't think you 'lose' offensive ability but you don't get to refine it at a pro level in low-minute, low-touch roles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AbsentMojo and kingsholygrail
Herby said:
I just feel like if there are successful models for development with players the Kings took #5 in 2019 and #2 in 2020 why not just go that same route that has been so successful for other teams? If the fastest way to get from one side of town to the other is taking the highway and everyone else takes the highway and it works why would you take the side streets?

Most of the Top scorers in the NHL developed in the NHL, not the AHL.
Click to expand...

There definitely are successful models that are very contrary to what the Kings are doing. There are arguments to go either way, just as some guys have taken off, others have been screwed up. There are great arguments for both sides.

That second part is actually why I lean towards the slower route unless guys are obviously ready when they first show up, and it is 100% linked to their drafting strategy. The Kings don't draft those top scorer types, they always go for the more rounded players and we've seen that for quite a while now. I think their plan for the last 15 years or so has been to develop well-rounded guys who can play up and down the lineup, relying on 4 strong lines rather than two higher octane ones to win series, once they start making the playoffs. You can see it when they draft guys like Turcotte, I fully expected him to need time in the minors. Even Byfield to a lesser extent.

I think it comes down to who you think is more likely to win you cups. A more dynamic Stutzle or a more rounded Byfield? A bigger, flashier Dach or a smaller, tenacious Turcotte? If history is any indication deeper teams are the ones who win more in general. Even Crosby/Malkin/Letang had a huge gap between wins, and in those years their supporting players were fantastic. I think that's what the Kings are ultimately shooting for.
 
Kaliyev is never going to be a plus defensive player , even in his current role he cheats a decent amount, but that is ok, the Kings didn't draft him to be that player. He really isn't in a 4th line role right now anyways, due to the rotating black hole that the Kings "3rd line" has been all year the Lemieux-Lizotte-AK line has been more like a 3rd line.

I wish that the Kings had given him more NHL games last year, and I wish they'd see if Lemieux-Lizotte-Brown could be a functioning 4th line to try and get the 1st and "3rd" lines going more offensively but my guess is TM still feels he is going to get more offense from Iafallo and Kempe than AK.

Atleast the Kings have an apparent plan for AK, they expect him to be a scoring line winger next season. It seems like they don't really have a plan for any of the other young players as most of them are blocked by veterans.
 
Raccoon Jesus said:
Yeah maybe liability isn't the right word--I guess my point is those teams sure aren't trying to deploy them defensively. Hell even Torts didn't try to fourth-line Laine.

I don't think you 'lose' offensive ability but you don't get to refine it at a pro level in low-minute, low-touch roles.
Click to expand...

You refine it in practice.....no they didn't try and deploy them defensively.....is Kaliyev AT the point in his career, where he can be in the same group as those players? be honest with yourself....you are talking about top top top picks.....not 2nd rounders
 
Raccoon Jesus said:
Yeah maybe liability isn't the right word--I guess my point is those teams sure aren't trying to deploy them defensively. Hell even Torts didn't try to fourth-line Laine.

I don't think you 'lose' offensive ability but you don't get to refine it at a pro level in low-minute, low-touch roles.
Click to expand...

That is key. If a team is using the pathway the Kings do, creating more well-rounded players, it's essential that you move them up at the correct time and don't let them stagnate. I'm fine with Kaliyev starting on the fourth line, but I'll start getting concerned if he doesn't start seeing PP time and moving up the lineup occasionally as the season progresses. How they handle these guys they are breaking in is essential to their future production.
 
Herby said:
Kaliyev is never going to be a plus defensive player , even in his current role he cheats a decent amount, but that is ok, the Kings didn't draft him to be that player. He really isn't in a 4th line role right now anyways, due to the rotating black hole that the Kings "3rd line" has been all year the Lemieux-Lizotte-AK line has been more like a 3rd line.

I wish that the Kings had given him more NHL games last year, and I wish they'd see if Lemieux-Lizotte-Brown could be a functioning 4th line to try and get the 1st and "3rd" lines going more offensively but my guess is TM still feels he is going to get more offense from Iafallo and Kempe than AK.

Atleast the Kings have an apparent plan for AK, they expect him to be a scoring line winger next season. It seems like they don't really have a plan for any of the other young players as most of them are blocked by veterans.
Click to expand...

You are gonna see that unfold in the off-season I think AA gone, Brown, gone, that's two spots right there.....the question is, do they fill them with Turcotte, Fagemo, switch the lines around, or do they get another Danault/Arvidsson.....I think that is gonna be the telling point going forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schmooley and Raccoon Jesus
King'sPawn said:
I've already put the ones incapable of having an honest discussion on ignore, so I won't fan the flames anymore, either.

But I agree - what is the point of learning to play "the right way" by learning how to check and grind, but we also have conversations about getting Eichel? Why do the homegrown players HAVE to learn to check, only to have hired guns like AA, or other high octane players, run-and-gun?



If that's the case of being a happy accident, then why was he put on the Lizotte line to begin with? Or are you saying the Lizotte line was good to begin with, and so they put him on a line that was already clicking?
Click to expand...
I don’t know if they intended it to be permanent. Just seeing what sticks. Maybe had they not clicked, he would have been shuffled again. I do think he is being sheltered there tho per Blake. He also likely would have been in the AHL if Byfield didn’t get hurt.
 
LAKings88 said:
I don’t know if they intended it to be permanent. Just seeing what sticks. Maybe had they not clicked, he would have been shuffled again. I do think he is being sheltered there tho per Blake. He also likely would have been in the AHL if Byfield didn’t get hurt.
Click to expand...

Or Kupari....I think Kupari made more sense both being Centers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom