Confirmed with Link: LA Kings @LAKings Welcome to Los Angeles, Phillip Danault!

[Steve Zissou]

Is Frk still in the picture somewhere?

 

[BigBrown]

Since Jarret Stoll is often thought of as a comparable in terms of what role he played on the Kings, here's a simple comparison. Age 24-28 of both players are at the top of the table, side by side.

Stoll played for 6 more seasons which, coincidentally, matches the contract given to Danault. Let's hope Danault has a bit more staying power as a point producer than Stoll had because the numbers don't look very good.

That being said, Stoll was an important cog during the cup years despite being past his prime in terms of being a scorer and I'm optimistic that Danault also can be a valuable contributor when that time comes.

 

[DoktorJeep]

The arguments in favor for Danault don’t add up in a way that correlates to an improved Kings team that gets to the playoffs or within 5 points of the last wild card team.

His .5 ppg average is said to improve the Kings. But he’s worse than the previous player if he slots in at #2C. The Kings last full time #2C, Jeff Carter, put up .59 ppg over the same stretch another poster put down above.

No one needs to be reminded about the age difference. At 28, Danault has likely peaked when it comes to production, if you just look at aging curves and ignore things like linemates, deployment, utilization, quality of competition and overall team quality.

When you look at recent playoffs, the story is worse. Carter scored one more point than Danault in 18 less games. So expecting better results as a King from a peak Danault that is worse than an out to pasture worthy Carter is curious. And no one should need reminding that the Kings are eating half of Carter’s cap hit this year. So they’ve decided to put $8M into the 2C next year and put Danault in that spot. Just baffling when it comes to any kind of vision beyond one year.

Which brings me to the next argument that I am the most skeptical about, which is Danault’s past defensive play will translate to the Kings. His linemates in Montreal were two vets in Gallagher and Tatar. LA doesn’t have comparable players. Gallagher is a 25’ish goal right winger who is a pest. Tatar is a 20’ish goal left wing who is a play maker.

For the Kings, the closest fits if you were to retry that formula would be Arvidsson and ???? And Arvidsson is known as a shooting winger, not someone hard to play against. I will concede he is a net front player like Gallagher. But even there is a difference in styles, with Arvidsson known for his hands and Gallagher known for his willingness to crash the crease. With no play making winger on the team, the Kings might look to Vilardi to fulfill that role next to Danault. Or if growth from within isn’t feasible, maybe just sign Tatar on a 1 year deal if they can afford him.

And the final argument I think is faulty is that Danault’s intangibles will improve the team significant amount. Expecting Danault to rub off on his linemates is counting on something impossible to measure. It’s easy to keep track of how often your team gives up the first goal. But there isn’t a way to say a team “started on time” beyond the eye test. Over an 82 game season, you can’t expect one guy to teach 20 other guys how to improve their team games. Especially a guy coming into a new team who is going to have to figure out where he fits in. Danault is no Mike Richards who had a rockstar aura around him. Even Stoll seemed like he had more jam than Danault. Danault is truly closest to Handsuz when is comes to lead by example types of intangibles. It’s too bad Kopitar can’t pick that task up for his $10M paycheck.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

The Kings spent too much time in their own end of the ice, and Danault is going to immensely help the team in cutting down the time spent chasing the puck in the defensive zone.

Or do you guys prefer to watch the team skate aimlessly without the puck? I don't know about some of you, but I didn't find that style of hockey to be very fun to watch.

 

[brakeyawself]

If any of Byfield, Turcotte, or Vilardi leave it’ll be for a comparable young LHD defenseman. It’d have to be either for a comparable prospect (like Byram or one of the top 4 D from this past draft) or as part of package for an established U25 player like Werenski. The fact that Edler was signed to only a 1 year deal is inline with what we’ve been hearing from insiders which is that they will actively target this player in the next 12-18 months.

It’s also likely that 1-2 of those players will become wingers (my money is on Vilardi or Turcotte).

As for defense, our pool has great depth (Faber, Bjornfot, Anderson, Spence, etc.) and Clarke is the crown jewel. I think we’d all obviously still prefer to grab another player of his pedigree, but we’ll see.

Makes sense. The rest of the C prospect I guess would come a bit cheaper at least? I really thought JAD was going to be a top 6 player. Now I see that Madden and everyone else are ahead of him in a lot of rankings. And curious how Akil Thomas is coming along too. Haven't heard much about him last year or more. Out of the non Byfield, Vilardi and Turcotte young centers, which one's do you think will become the best players?

 

[brakeyawself]

The arguments in favor for Danault don’t add up in a way that correlates to an improved Kings team that gets to the playoffs or within 5 points of the last wild card team.

His .5 ppg average is said to improve the Kings. But he’s worse than the previous player if he slots in at #2C. The Kings last full time #2C, Jeff Carter, put up .59 ppg over the same stretch another poster put down above.

View attachment 457856

No one needs to be reminded about the age difference. At 28, Danault has likely peaked when it comes to production, if you just look at aging curves and ignore things like linemates, deployment, utilization, quality of competition and overall team quality.

When you look at recent playoffs, the story is worse. Carter scored one more point than Danault in 18 less games. So expecting better results as a King from a peak Danault that is worse than an out to pasture worthy Carter is curious. And no one should need reminding that the Kings are eating half of Carter’s cap hit this year. So they’ve decided to put $8M into the 2C next year and put Danault in that spot. Just baffling when it comes to any kind of vision beyond one year.

Which brings me to the next argument that I am the most skeptical about, which is Danault’s past defensive play will translate to the Kings. His linemates in Montreal were two vets in Gallagher and Tatar. LA doesn’t have comparable players. Gallagher is a 25’ish goal right winger who is a pest. Tatar is a 20’ish goal left wing who is a play maker.

For the Kings, the closest fits if you were to retry that formula would be Arvidsson and ???? And Arvidsson is known as a shooting winger, not someone hard to play against. I will concede he is a net front player like Gallagher. But even there is a difference in styles, with Arvidsson known for his hands and Gallagher known for his willingness to crash the crease. With no play making winger on the team, the Kings might look to Vilardi to fulfill that role next to Danault. Or if growth from within isn’t feasible, maybe just sign Tatar on a 1 year deal if they can afford him.

And the final argument I think is faulty is that Danault’s intangibles will improve the team significant amount. Expecting Danault to rub off on his linemates is counting on something impossible to measure. It’s easy to keep track of how often your team gives up the first goal. But there isn’t a way to say a team “started on time” beyond the eye test. Over an 82 game season, you can’t expect one guy to teach 20 other guys how to improve their team games. Especially a guy coming into a new team who is going to have to figure out where he fits in. Danault is no Mike Richards who had a rockstar aura around him. Even Stoll seemed like he had more jam than Danault. Danault is truly closest to Handsuz when is comes to lead by example types of intangibles. It’s too bad Kopitar can’t pick that task up for his $10M paycheck.

I kind of took the Danault signing, along with the Pinelli pick, to some extent, to be a minor hint that perhaps the Kings are not as certain or privately as comfortable about SOME of Turcotte, Vilardi, Byefield, Kupari, Madden etc... and the way they are progressing. All though no clue which ones are which.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

The arguments in favor for Danault don’t add up in a way that correlates to an improved Kings team that gets to the playoffs or within 5 points of the last wild card team.

His .5 ppg average is said to improve the Kings. But he’s worse than the previous player if he slots in at #2C. The Kings last full time #2C, Jeff Carter, put up .59 ppg over the same stretch another poster put down above.

View attachment 457856

No one needs to be reminded about the age difference. At 28, Danault has likely peaked when it comes to production, if you just look at aging curves and ignore things like linemates, deployment, utilization, quality of competition and overall team quality.

When you look at recent playoffs, the story is worse. Carter scored one more point than Danault in 18 less games. So expecting better results as a King from a peak Danault that is worse than an out to pasture worthy Carter is curious. And no one should need reminding that the Kings are eating half of Carter’s cap hit this year. So they’ve decided to put $8M into the 2C next year and put Danault in that spot. Just baffling when it comes to any kind of vision beyond one year.

Which brings me to the next argument that I am the most skeptical about, which is Danault’s past defensive play will translate to the Kings. His linemates in Montreal were two vets in Gallagher and Tatar. LA doesn’t have comparable players. Gallagher is a 25’ish goal right winger who is a pest. Tatar is a 20’ish goal left wing who is a play maker.

For the Kings, the closest fits if you were to retry that formula would be Arvidsson and ???? And Arvidsson is known as a shooting winger, not someone hard to play against. I will concede he is a net front player like Gallagher. But even there is a difference in styles, with Arvidsson known for his hands and Gallagher known for his willingness to crash the crease. With no play making winger on the team, the Kings might look to Vilardi to fulfill that role next to Danault. Or if growth from within isn’t feasible, maybe just sign Tatar on a 1 year deal if they can afford him.

And the final argument I think is faulty is that Danault’s intangibles will improve the team significant amount. Expecting Danault to rub off on his linemates is counting on something impossible to measure. It’s easy to keep track of how often your team gives up the first goal. But there isn’t a way to say a team “started on time” beyond the eye test. Over an 82 game season, you can’t expect one guy to teach 20 other guys how to improve their team games. Especially a guy coming into a new team who is going to have to figure out where he fits in. Danault is no Mike Richards who had a rockstar aura around him. Even Stoll seemed like he had more jam than Danault. Danault is truly closest to Handsuz when is comes to lead by example types of intangibles. It’s too bad Kopitar can’t pick that task up for his $10M paycheck.

So you're going to take past production as the reason he was brought in, but literally completely discount anything else he brings.

You can choose misery if you like, it's gonna be a long few months though.

 

[Ray Martyniuk]

1-2 years too long, but lets figure that out in 3 years from now.

He needs a shooter on his wing, is this the future center for a rookie Kaliyev?

No! Kaliyev needs time in the AHL like another 1-2 years! Want to see him become a 40-50 goal scorer in Ontario rather than a 4th liner he's not ready to take on duties as a top 6 player and I can say that about a lot of our prospects in Ontario they need time...

 

[Ray Martyniuk]

I kind of took the Danault signing, along with the Pinelli pick, to some extent, to be a minor hint that perhaps the Kings are not as certain or privately as comfortable about SOME of Turcotte, Vilardi, Byefield, Kupari, Madden etc... and the way they are progressing. All though no clue which ones are which.

They all need time a career is not made in a year...they need to develop but mostly they need to play a tonne and that will be in Onatrio until they prove they can do it at the NHL level on a consistent basis. Kopi and Danault will show the kids how to do and are the best examples of pros the Kings will have on offense

 

[KingsFan7824]

The arguments in favor for Danault don’t add up in a way that correlates to an improved Kings team that gets to the playoffs or within 5 points of the last wild card team.

His .5 ppg average is said to improve the Kings. But he’s worse than the previous player if he slots in at #2C. The Kings last full time #2C, Jeff Carter, put up .59 ppg over the same stretch another poster put down above.

View attachment 457856

No one needs to be reminded about the age difference. At 28, Danault has likely peaked when it comes to production, if you just look at aging curves and ignore things like linemates, deployment, utilization, quality of competition and overall team quality.

When you look at recent playoffs, the story is worse. Carter scored one more point than Danault in 18 less games. So expecting better results as a King from a peak Danault that is worse than an out to pasture worthy Carter is curious. And no one should need reminding that the Kings are eating half of Carter’s cap hit this year. So they’ve decided to put $8M into the 2C next year and put Danault in that spot. Just baffling when it comes to any kind of vision beyond one year.

Which brings me to the next argument that I am the most skeptical about, which is Danault’s past defensive play will translate to the Kings. His linemates in Montreal were two vets in Gallagher and Tatar. LA doesn’t have comparable players. Gallagher is a 25’ish goal right winger who is a pest. Tatar is a 20’ish goal left wing who is a play maker.

For the Kings, the closest fits if you were to retry that formula would be Arvidsson and ???? And Arvidsson is known as a shooting winger, not someone hard to play against. I will concede he is a net front player like Gallagher. But even there is a difference in styles, with Arvidsson known for his hands and Gallagher known for his willingness to crash the crease. With no play making winger on the team, the Kings might look to Vilardi to fulfill that role next to Danault. Or if growth from within isn’t feasible, maybe just sign Tatar on a 1 year deal if they can afford him.

And the final argument I think is faulty is that Danault’s intangibles will improve the team significant amount. Expecting Danault to rub off on his linemates is counting on something impossible to measure. It’s easy to keep track of how often your team gives up the first goal. But there isn’t a way to say a team “started on time” beyond the eye test. Over an 82 game season, you can’t expect one guy to teach 20 other guys how to improve their team games. Especially a guy coming into a new team who is going to have to figure out where he fits in. Danault is no Mike Richards who had a rockstar aura around him. Even Stoll seemed like he had more jam than Danault. Danault is truly closest to Handsuz when is comes to lead by example types of intangibles. It’s too bad Kopitar can’t pick that task up for his $10M paycheck.

How about just maybe wait a minute to see how the situation plays out?

Nah.

 

[Mats26]

Like to hear what Yannetti thinks about Danault. He said on a call after the draft that Kopitar Byfield Helenius would be a handful up the middle. Now we sign a center vet for 6 years just a few days later.

 

[Schrute farms]

I kind of took the Danault signing, along with the Pinelli pick, to some extent, to be a minor hint that perhaps the Kings are not as certain or privately as comfortable about SOME of Turcotte, Vilardi, Byefield, Kupari, Madden etc... and the way they are progressing. All though no clue which ones are which.

Pinelli wasn't even on the Kings draft radar until the end of Day 1. Even on Day 1, they were actually trying to move those picks to get Wall. It wasn't until Day 2 started and Pinelli was still around that they pivot and went up to get him. So I believe you are reading into that pick something that isn't there.
Now Danault, maybe your point is somewhat valid there -- At least these guys being ready to make meaningful top line impact in 0-2 years (IDK possibly).

 

[brakeyawself]

They all need time a career is not made in a year...they need to develop but mostly they need to play a tonne and that will be in Onatrio until they prove they can do it at the NHL level on a consistent basis. Kopi and Danault will show the kids how to do and are the best examples of pros the Kings will have on offense

Yes, understood. But that still clashes with certain time frames of the prospects. Some are definitely closer to others. And as they get closer to being ready they will need NHL experience, not just juniors or AHL experience. The Danault contract is fairly long term. So in that period, many of these prospects are going to become ready.

Plus, the Kings have wayyyy more top end center prospects than I think any other team, or even, more than any other team has any positional prospects. It's actually a bit crazy how deep they go. Which eventually means some will have to be traded, I don't think they will have a choice. And I don't think it would make sense not to trade some of them, when you have such excess and needs elsewhere. Just in general it's how teams in professional sports operate.

 

[brakeyawself]

Pinelli wasn't even on the Kings draft radar until the end of Day 1. Even on Day 1, they were actually trying to move those picks to get Wall. It wasn't until Day 2 started and Pinelli was still around that they pivot and went up to get him. So I believe you are reading into that pick something that isn't there.
Now Danault, maybe your point is somewhat valid there -- At least these guys being ready to make meaningful top line impact in 0-2 years (IDK possibly).

That's fair. But unexpected variables create unexpected results. So they might not have planned on Pinelli, I wouldn't either in their position as I wouldn't still expect him to be there when they got him. I was hoping hard that my Rangers actually traded into the 2nd to grab him before someone took him. But Kings ended up taking him probably because they thought he was too good to pass up, the BPA at that point in the draft. And that in itself changes things. And could also lead them to moving one of their other young centers who they weren't necessarily looking to move prior.

But I do see what you are saying.

 

[brakeyawself]

No! Kaliyev needs time in the AHL like another 1-2 years! Want to see him become a 40-50 goal scorer in Ontario rather than a 4th liner he's not ready to take on duties as a top 6 player and I can say that about a lot of our prospects in Ontario they need time...

I think Fagemo is a lot closer. Kaliyev gets a lot more of the spotlight and talked about way more, but I really think Fagemo can be a star. Or at least a top 6 forward. I am not sure what they are planning, but I suspect Fagemo will get a chance to prove himself in pre-season and depending on how that goes, could even get a few games with the Kings. If he shows well in his chances, who knows? Could even keep him on the roster.

I do think Kaliyev probably has a higher ceiling, but Fagemo has the higher floor and a pretty high ceiling to boot. For those that follow the team closely. There any real chance Fagemo ends up as like a 3rd liner for the Kings this year? Outside of perhaps getting a few games and then being sent down.

 

[dman3474]

No! Kaliyev needs time in the AHL like another 1-2 years! Want to see him become a 40-50 goal scorer in Ontario rather than a 4th liner he's not ready to take on duties as a top 6 player and I can say that about a lot of our prospects in Ontario they need time...

Danault isn't going anywhere for a few years. I said future, no room for Kaliyev on the roster and I agree that he isn't ready for prime time yet

 

[Steve Zissou]

There any real chance Fagemo ends up as like a 3rd liner for the Kings this year? Outside of perhaps getting a few games and then being sent down.

More than likely no. He did get into 32 games last season (out of 40) with The Reign, but he'll need to ripen on the vine for at least another season. Unless, that is, he is absolutely tearing it up and we have an injury or two.

 

[regulate]

More than likely no. He did get into 32 games last season (out of 40) with The Reign, but he'll need to ripen on the vine for at least another season. Unless, that is, he is absolutely tearing it up and we have an injury or two.

I have a feeling Fagemo may end up on a line with AHL MVP TJ Tynan. Fagemo, Kaliyev and Frk are the best shooters on the Reign. If Fagemo is fortunate enough to play with him, he'll rack up some goals for sure.

 

[Steve Zissou]

I have a feeling Fagemo may end up on a line with AHL MVP TJ Tynan. Fagemo, Kaliyev and Frk are the best shooters on the Reign. If Fagemo is fortunate enough to play with him, he'll rack up some goals for sure.

 

[AKAY47]

I kind of took the Danault signing, along with the Pinelli pick, to some extent, to be a minor hint that perhaps the Kings are not as certain or privately as comfortable about SOME of Turcotte, Vilardi, Byefield, Kupari, Madden etc... and the way they are progressing. All though no clue which ones are which.

this x100. Reading Mayor’s projected lines and “Be patient with byfield, he’s only 18” worries me. Stutzle had a great rookie year and Byfield wasn’t able to make an impact in the AHL. I know about the age gap and one played versus men while the other came from the OHL. Regardless, I’m worried. Not to mention the Danault signing signifies that Vilardi, Turcotte and Byfield aren’t ready for the added responsibility. Turcotte and Vilardi will most likely need to shift roles and positions, which they’ve done to Kempe too. Can’t be good for the development of these kids.

I’m just not a fan of the signing because I thought Blake would use the plethora of prospects and flip it into a 2nd line all star centre. Looks like the aim is to get a LHD now. Wonder who they’ll target with Werenski gone.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Like to hear what Yannetti thinks about Danault. He said on a call after the draft that Kopitar Byfield Helenius would be a handful up the middle. Now we sign a center vet for 6 years just a few days later.

Some here take every syllable these guys say as gospel. You've got a 34 year old, a soon to be 19 year old, and a guy that was just drafted late in the 2nd rd. That's a decent gap in age. Can we wait at all? I believe DL had Purcell in one of his boxes as a top scoring threat for the Kings when they were going to contend. Things change. Yannetti doesn't even know for sure that the guys he's picking will be NHLers, let alone be a handful when they get there.

Also, the NHL team is not Yannetti's job. Who cares what he thinks about the roster. Just keep drafting quality.

 

[Bandit]

Since Jarret Stoll is often thought of as a comparable in terms of what role he played on the Kings, here's a simple comparison. Age 24-28 of both players are at the top of the table, side by side.

View attachment 457863

Stoll played for 6 more seasons which, coincidentally, matches the contract given to Danault. Let's hope Danault has a bit more staying power as a point producer than Stoll had because the numbers don't look very good.

That being said, Stoll was an important cog during the cup years despite being past his prime in terms of being a scorer and I'm optimistic that Danault also can be a valuable contributor when that time comes.

Pretty crazy that Stoll didn't even crack 30 points in either of the cup years.

 

[bland]

Yanetti wasn't projecting a lineup with that comment, he was just discussing the value of large centermen and how difficult they are to play against.

 

[KINGS17]

this x100. Reading Mayor’s projected lines and “Be patient with byfield, he’s only 18” worries me. Stutzle had a great rookie year and Byfield wasn’t able to make an impact in the AHL. I know about the age gap and one played versus men while the other came from the OHL. Regardless, I’m worried. Not to mention the Danault signing signifies that Vilardi, Turcotte and Byfield aren’t ready for the added responsibility. Turcotte and Vilardi will most likely need to shift roles and positions, which they’ve done to Kempe too. Can’t be good for the development of these kids.

I’m just not a fan of the signing because I thought Blake would use the plethora of prospects and flip it into a 2nd line all star centre. Looks like the aim is to get a LHD now. Wonder who they’ll target with Werenski gone.

McKinnon didn't have a good first two or three seasons and look at him now.

 

[Lt Dan]

Is Frk still in the picture somewhere?

Yes, but he is hard to find