Speculation: LA Kings News, Rumors, Roster Thread part VII

[Herby]

Naw...your wrong....D+XXXXXXXX he should be first and 2nd line Center....3rd line D......multiple MVP shots.....and be on the cover of SI......otherwise, his development was completely f***ed.

Haha, the guy who accuses others of dishonesty makes a post like this. Yup, wanting a player to keep pace with his peers, to expect him to not be multiple levels below a college teammate taken 10 picks later is apparently wanting him to be an MVP or first liner in the GBH’s straw man fantasy world.

Also, are you still clinging to the ridiculous notion that Draisaitl was awful in his 2nd year pro? You conveniently never responded (a common thing for you I see). You defend Kings prospects than say a player who has 50 points in his 2nd year was awful.

Man, I just cleared the only name I ever had on an ignore list in 23 years here and now I guess I’ll have to join everyone else here in adding you. The stuff you post is just so insane I almost feel like I’m being trolled.

 

[Fishhead]

Yep, which is why this whole line of failed development is such horseshit.

Well, I wouldn't say it has zero merit. The Kings do have development problems, like all teams. It's just strange to see the vitriol towards how the Kings develop talent when every other team in the league has the same issues. If anything, the Kings have been above average overall for the last 15 years or so at developing guys, they've just struggled a bit lately. You can always find exceptions where some teams just nail the development on a guy, but for every one of those, there are 10 that they don't.

I have no problems holding the Kings to a high standard - as long as that standard is realistic. For example, the Canadiens have done well with Caufield, I think. Overall their development of prospects is subpar. The Ducks have been doing well with Zegras so far, yet their development as a whole in the last 10 years has been shit. It's hard to differentiate because we always want our team to be the best in all aspects, but just because another team does well with a young player doesn't mean we want our development to be similar to theirs.

 

[FSL KINGS]

I hated that the options pitted Vilardi vs Byfield based on both Kopitar and Carter being assumed locks. Carter was in the east 3 months later for spare parts futures. And he’s goes on to resurrect his career and earn an extension after two post season tourneys. The JAD vs Lizotte competition was just extra sprinkles on the shit sandwich.

It’s typical Blake Kings. Take a leap forward while also tearing a bigger hole in the seat of your pants that you never bother to notice.

Don't get the Lizotte vs JAD thing. If you can't beat Lizotte out of a job then what's the issue.

Side note, Lizotte should be replaced with an actual 3C that can defend. Got to have more than 2 lines you can ice on the road.

 

[King'sPawn]

Well, I wouldn't say it has zero merit. The Kings do have development problems, like all teams. It's just strange to see the vitriol towards how the Kings develop talent when every other team in the league has the same issues. If anything, the Kings have been above average overall for the last 15 years or so at developing guys, they've just struggled a bit lately. You can always find exceptions where some teams just nail the development on a guy, but for every one of those, there are 10 that they don't.

I have no problems holding the Kings to a high standard - as long as that standard is realistic. For example, the Canadiens have done well with Caufield, I think. Overall their development of prospects is subpar. The Ducks have been doing well with Zegras so far, yet their development as a whole in the last 10 years has been shit. It's hard to differentiate because we always want our team to be the best in all aspects, but just because another team does well with a young player doesn't mean we want our development to be similar to theirs.

The Kings do a great job at churning out NHLers, particularly on defense. Goaltending has taken a dip, but largely I think they're better than average. And they make very good bottom-six players. But they are well below average in developing top-six talent. I'd settle with them being average.

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

I’m defending your boy TMac here, he did the best he could but it wasn’t an easy situation. Had they played QB as much as people like RJ and KP wanted I don’t know if they make the playoffs.

Any coach that has us playing at 95 points or higher would be ‘my boy’…I have no shame.

 

[Herby]

Any coach that has us playing at 95 points or higher would be ‘my boy’…I have no shame.

Ok well, a lot of people here hated TMac and I don’t think that’s fair. When he was told to develop young talent they heavily played Vilardi and Bjornfot. When he was instructed to try and make the playoffs and was provided NHL proven veterans he did exactly that. I think the expectations for development at the same time trying to make the playoffs was unfair and unrealistic. This apparently means having a “hard on for Blake” and being “overly critical”. I am not anti-TMac, I think he should have been a coach of the year finalist. I think the inability to develop players at a pace similar to other teams is not because of the HC but because of the GM.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

The Kings do a great job at churning out NHLers, particularly on defense. Goaltending has taken a dip, but largely I think they're better than average. And they make very good bottom-six players. But they are well below average in developing top-six talent. I'd settle with them being average.

Maybe.....but then you get into the chicken or the egg, how do you consistenly develop top 10 talent, if say the past decade, you've had 3 top 10 picks,

Starting in 2012, this was where there 1st pick in the draft was, 30th, 37th, 29th*,43,51,11,20,5,2 and 8....so until recently.....past 3 drafts, they've had meh to work with, the 29th* is the one in the 1st round they developed, Kempe, if you look past that into later rounds, Kubalik? Kaliyev?

In that decade they've had 69 total draft picks, out of those they've selected 36 forwards, and out of those 36, 18 are in the top 3 rounds, and out of those 18, 10 have played in some form in the NHL....and in the last 4 years, 11 of those top 3 out of the 18....are forwards, I think it's simply not enough to just say, they are below average....they've never been in the spot to draft QUALITY....forwards...until the past 3 years...so now we are making judgements on 18, 19, 20 year olds.....in terms of development......and with the exception of a select few......players aren't breaking out at 18,19,20.,

 

[JeanBlanc]

Just thought I'd post this YouTube video covering the NYR Twitter discussion about how terrible they are at developing star forwards. All the same notes that this forum membership makes, just about Kaako and Lafreniere instead of Turcotte, Byfield, et al.

 

[Herby]

Just thought I'd post this YouTube video covering the NYR Twitter discussion about how terrible they are at developing star forwards. All the same notes that this forum membership makes, just about Kaako and Lafreniere instead of Turcotte, Byfield, et al.

Kakko just isn’t that good. He has shown nothing in 3 years that warrants the draft pick used on him. Another player who probably peaked at a young age and never really took steps you expect in age 18-19-20 seasons from a player you expect to be a star.

Laf we are on wait and see like with Byfield, but for a guy who was supposed to be at a level above anyone else in his draft it’s been pretty meh.

I’d take Stutzle over him without hesitation.

 

[Fishhead]

Kakko just isn’t that good. He has shown nothing in 3 years that warrants the draft pick used on him. Another player who probably peaked at a young age and never really took steps you expect in age 18-19-20 seasons from a player you expect to be a star.

Laf we are on wait and see like with Byfield, but for a guy who was supposed to be at a level above anyone else in his draft it’s been pretty meh.

I’d take Stutzle over him without hesitation.

I just never got the Laf hype. With Stutzle, you could see that he was the most NHL ready. With Byfield, you had crazy size and speed and potential for a really high season. Laf was just kind of "there" for me. I've always been skeptical of Q players, which is probably why I felt that way. That league doesn't exactly pump out stars.

 

[johnjm22]

delete

 

[Faterson]

What about Sekera at the NHL's minimal salary? In an interview in a Slovak newspaper a couple of days ago, he said he is definitely leaving Dallas and wants to see whether there still are any takers for his services, despite him being 36. And he is a left-handed defenseman... Perhaps on the bottom pairing?

no thank you

What about Chára, then? Left-handed as well... Again, as a temporary fix on the bottom pairing? Also likely willing to play for the NHL's minimum salary for a year. This season's numbers ain't so bad: +8 over 72 games on a non-playoff team...

 

[johnjm22]

I’d take Stutzle over him without hesitation.

I would take Laf for sure.

Points per 60:
Lafreniere: 1.66
Stutzle: 1.36


Lafreniere had 19 even strength goals this year as a 20 year old while playing 13:59 per night. That's pretty damn good.

Stutzle had 14 even strength goals while playing 18:25 per night.

The Senators agave Stutzle more PP TOI than any other player on the team. Laf was barely on the Rangers 2nd PP unit. That's the difference.

 

[Fishhead]

I would take Laf for sure.

Points per 60:
Lafreniere: 1.66
Stutzle: 1.36


Lafreniere had 19 even strength goals this year as a 20 year old while playing 13:59 per night. That's pretty damn good.

Stutzle had 14 even strength goals while playing 18:25 per night.

The Senators agave Stutzle more PP TOI than any other player on the team. Laf was barely on the Rangers 2nd PP unit. That's the difference.

It's not that I think Lafreniere isn't good, I just don't really get the hype he was getting anointed with. He's a really good player, just not a truly great one.

It's nothing against Laf though, I didn't think anyone in the 2020 class was top-notch. Part of that was because COVID screwed a lot of things up, and part of that is I just don't think it was a great draft class. It's one reason I was totally fine taking Byfield, even if the Kings had won the lottery. No one really stood out to me, so might as well take the guy with the unique physical tools to be dominant if he puts it all together.

 

[Fishhead]

What about Chára, then? Left-handed as well... Again, as a temporary fix on the bottom pairing? Also likely willing to play for the NHL's minimum salary for a year. This season's numbers ain't so bad: +8 over 72 games on a non-playoff team...

My main concern with a pickup like Chara is if a young guy looks great, how do you scratch a vet like him? With how he's respected around the league that would be difficult for any coach/organization. He'd rightfully want some guarantee of ice time, too. If this team was in a different spot, yeah I'd take a look at him.

 

[Faterson]

My main concern with a pickup like Chara is if a young guy looks great, how do you scratch a vet like him? With how he's respected around the league that would be difficult for any coach/organization.

Yeah, there seemed to be a bit of a problem with that on the Isles this season. However, he seems like a humble guy despite all the accomplishments, and with every passing year, he might be more and more OK with accepting the role of a healthy scratch if that's what's best for the team. I mean, any season could be his last.

 

[unicornpig]

f*** no to chara

 

[Kudelski37]

What about Chára, then? Left-handed as well... Again, as a temporary fix on the bottom pairing? Also likely willing to play for the NHL's minimum salary for a year. This season's numbers ain't so bad: +8 over 72 games on a non-playoff team...

Edler was much better than Chara this year and is 9 years younger than Chara so I don't think Chara is a good option.

 

[Faterson]

Edler was much better than Chara this year and is 9 years younger than Chara so I don't think Chara is a good option.

But also a lot more expensive, no?

I don't really care... just as a Slovak Kings fan, I'd like to have a Slovak player to cheer on in this team once again, that's all. Hrenák is making progress, but he's not quite up there yet, and who knows if he'll ever make it past the Reign. The upcoming draft doesn't look too promising, either – Slafkovský and Nemec are too high, and while Mešár and Sýkora are both, I believe, great players and will likely be available for the Kings, you all are likely sick of all these "undersized forwards".

 

[verbalkint47]

Of all the rumored forwards available I think Forsberg, Fiala, and DeBrincat are the best but will also cost a lot. I think Garland is actually the best value. He's signed for 4 more years at 4.9mil. I know some will say he's undersized but he plays with an edge and I think he'd be perfect next to Byfield.

Kempe - Kopitar - Kaliyev
Moore - Danault - Arvidsson
Iafallo - Byfield - Garland
Lemieux - Lizotte - Grundstrom

That's a good forward group imo

 

[Peter James Bond II]

Of all the rumored forwards available I think Forsberg, Fiala, and DeBrincat are the best but will also cost a lot. I think Garland is actually the best value. He's signed for 4 more years at 4.9mil. I know some will say he's undersized but he plays with an edge and I think he'd be perfect next to Byfield.

Kempe - Kopitar - Kaliyev
Moore - Danault - Arvidsson
Iafallo - Byfield - Garland
Lemieux - Lizotte - Grundstrom

That's a good forward group imo

Garland is signed 4 more years, at that 4.9.
I'd much much much rather sign Nichushkin or Burakovsky....Burakovsky has been injured and playing with an injury, so hard to judge his play this offseason, but he's been good...diving to block shots, etc.

Garland, you have to trade for and pay 4.9 for 4 more years...and if you can get size, with skill, offecnsive play, like 6'4" 210 Nichushkin, or 6'3" 210 Burakovsky and just sign them, I'd prefer that..and YES, the going rate....Nichushkin is about to cash in and will be worth it. He's been a force...and makes smart, quick, skilled plays, more than I knew.

The Kings lack size up front. Byfield may never use his size for power, but that may come, when he's filled out....Kaliyev may have power to hius game as well. But watch the finals and see how the players with size, strength, make an impact - MacKinnon, Landeskog, Rantanen, Burakovsky, Killorn, etc...even Palat, to a degree.

Consider the difference of adding Garland, compared to Nuichuskin with Byfield. Not the same, Garland may be quick and has some skill, but give me Nichuskin, to create more space for QB. He can make any play Garland can. Would be a lot for defenses to handle, 2 big players. Watch the finals and see how size makes an impact: That's what made MacKinnon, Rantanen and Landeskog so good, when they all played together. All power and skill.

 

[AbsentMojo]

Of all the rumored forwards available I think Forsberg, Fiala, and DeBrincat are the best but will also cost a lot. I think Garland is actually the best value. He's signed for 4 more years at 4.9mil. I know some will say he's undersized but he plays with an edge and I think he'd be perfect next to Byfield.

Kempe - Kopitar - Kaliyev
Moore - Danault - Arvidsson
Iafallo - Byfield - Garland
Lemieux - Lizotte - Grundstrom

That's a good forward group imo

are you assuming Vilardi gets traded in this deal? if not he needs a contract and be somewhere in your lineup

 

[tbrown33]

Garland is signed 4 more years, at that 4.9.
I'd much much much rather sign Nichushkin or Burakovsky....Burakovsky has been injured and playing with an injury, so hard to judge his play this offseason, but he's been good...diving to block shots, etc.

Garland, you have to trade for and pay 4.9 for 4 more years...and if you can get size, with skill, offecnsive play, like 6'4" 210 Nichushkin, or 6'3" 210 Burakovsky and just sign them, I'd prefer that..and YES, the going rate....Nichushkin is about to cash in and will be worth it. He's been a force...and makes smart, quick, skilled plays, more than I knew.

I'd toss Marchment into that group as well. Smaller body of work but I think he's legit.

 

[Herby]

are you assuming Vilardi gets traded in this deal? if not he needs a contract and be somewhere in your lineup

Why?

Who is he better than in that lineup besides Lemieux, who would presumably be the teams “tough” player?

Grundstrom was significantly better last year.

The Kings will be trying to ice the best team possible in 2023 and picks made in 2017 don’t matter. We saw that last year when QB (a much more recent and higher pick was scratched frequently)

 

[YP44]

What about Chára, then? Left-handed as well... Again, as a temporary fix on the bottom pairing? Also likely willing to play for the NHL's minimum salary for a year. This season's numbers ain't so bad: +8 over 72 games on a non-playoff team...

He would provide the physical presence but I would rather look for a long term solution