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

[Herby]

You think Barkov wasn't NHL ready? 16 year old playing against MEN in the Swedish Elite league putting up nearly a PPG but he wasn't ready? Really?

Barkov struggled in the NHL as a rookie, he was not ready for the physicality of the league. The Kings would have had him in the AHL, no question about it. Not much different from Hughes.

Also, if we are basing this all on junior aged production in the case of Barkov. QB had a higher PPG in the CHL as a 17 year old (1.8 PPG) than Seguin, Landeskog, Nugent-Hopkins, Hall, Hischier, Patrick, Svechnikov. All of whom played in the NHL at 18.

But the Kings were going to send a player who averaged 1.8 PPG back to junior, for some reason.

Look, if you want to make the case that Jesse is making that the Kings are the smartest men in the room and their unorthodox development paths might actually optimal, that is fine. But this notion that the Kings are just doing what the majority of other teams are doing is just laughable with no basis in reality.

 

[KINGS17]

Is there an entity no longer supplying the Kings will the liquid or gas equivalent of time?

Yes, it's a direct effect of Luc's "just make the playoffs and anything can happen" policy.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I'm not gonna get into the details or evaluate them I'm just gonna say that generally speaking

"Cus that's how it's always been done" is one of my absolute most hated replies whenever I would ask someone why things were done a certain way.

But what if the results are there from doing things that way?

Jesse,

Look at the stuff I posted about how top picks are handled. Literally 95% of them over the last dozen years have made their NHL teams out of camp. 95%!!! And the vast majority turned out to be good. In fact one of the few busts of Top 2 picks was actually one of the very few who was not in the NHL at 18.

Same thing with college kids staying the 2nd year. Just look at the names, how can you look at those names and say that isn't a better way to develop a 19 year old player than the AHL is?

I obviously don't expect you to come on here and be critical of what your bosses are doing with the handling of prospects on a public internet forum but looking at that provided data and minimizing it or trying to say the Kings weren't going down significantly different paths from normal is IMO being to much of a company man.

Especially with the results so far on those 2 players.

Hey, I'm all for innovation, but Herby nails it. Yes, we have to give it some time to play out, but early returns are not positive.

And the problem isn't so much that they're thinking outside the box, it's that the box is "no PP time for a lottery pick" and "bench them and put in AA."

They're not doing creative, crazy things; they're square-peg-round-holing scorers into checking roles so they can 'earn it.' Basically treating all the skilled youth like Ilya Kovalchuk.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Durzi was what, 12th on the depth chart at that point?

Doughty
Roy
Walker
Anderson
Edler
Maatta
Bjornfot
Wolanin
Strand
Clague
Moverare
Durzi

If not for myriad injuries, Durzi most likely leaves the organization this summer without ever seeing a single game because his style of play was so far off from the safety-first approach of the kids breaking in ahead of him.

That's not really a win for the developmental team, its a happy accident.

Absolutely f***ing nailed it

Kings are getting praised for their handling of d-men this year

But their 'handling' of dmen was getting blessed with a near-record number of injuries, and they tried to backtrack on it as soon as they could by trading for Stetcher and throwing clearly-still-hurting guys like Edler back into the lineup.

Maybe this will become apparent when guys start timing out on waivers because the Kings waited too long to see what they had and the kids become free assets and contributing members of other organizations.

 

[KINGS17]

Hey, I'm all for innovation, but Herby nails it. Yes, we have to give it some time to play out, but early returns are not positive.

And the problem isn't so much that they're thinking outside the box, it's that the box is "no PP time for a lottery pick" and "bench them and put in AA."

They're not doing creative, crazy things; they're square-peg-round-holing scorers into checking roles so they can 'earn it.' Basically treating all the skilled youth like Ilya Kovalchuk.

Sometimes earning it doesn't work. I don't think Smith Barney has their name on the building or letterhead anymore.

 

[Herby]

It’s only Vilardi that I think had his ceiling impacted because it cost him some key time where they could make meaningful improvement in his skating. I assume they felt his skating could be improved to some degree as it is something they look at carefully (per something I read/heard from Yanett). As it’s still something he has to manage (based on a quote from Vilardi when he first came back) it may have some impact ongoing but that’s just idle speculation that occurred to me as I’m typing. It certainly affects his timeline to establish himself and meant he came back just as a log jam was forming.

Turcotte? It’ll soon will possibly start affecting his ceiling simply because it impacts key development time. However again it’s definitely affecting the timeline for progressing through the development curve. I never used it to justify his draft position, that’s a different discussion. However, given the stop start nature of his time since being drafted I honestly don’t know what to think on that subject at this point.

Ok, fair enough. We can agree to disagree on skating. I am more of the belief you either have it or you don't (they had this discussion on the Yannetti interview with Jesse). But this isn't a factually backed debate that can be proven or disproven by looking at historical data like the other debates, there is no way to prove either one of us is right.

I do believe injuries can effect a player from reaching his ceiling, but I don't think it completely changes the ceiling all-together. In the case of Turcotte, you could tell pretty quickly when he made the level jump from the USHL to the NCAA that there was a much more limited ceiling than you would expect from a player you used a #5 overall pick on a couple of months before. And that had nothing to do with injuries, and I think to many here miss that part of it or excuse that part of it when it comes to criticizing the evaluation.

- The injuries and poor developoment choices might effect Turcotte from reaching his Andrew Copp ceiling. (I think had he been developed right and stayed healthy he is starting the year in a 3rd/4th line role with the Kings)

- The injuries and poor development choices did not cause Turcotte to go from a Jonathan Toews or Mike Richards ceiling (like expected on draft day) to an Andrew Copp ceiling.

 

[BigKing]

Absolutely f***ing nailed it

Kings are getting praised for their handling of d-men this year

But their 'handling' of dmen was getting blessed with a near-record number of injuries, and they tried to backtrack on it as soon as they could by trading for Stetcher and throwing clearly-still-hurting guys like Edler back into the lineup.

Maybe this will become apparent when guys start timing out on waivers because the Kings waited too long to see what they had and the kids become free assets and contributing members of other organizations.

But would the forward prospects play as well as the defense prospects if given the time or are the Kings legit good at finding defensemen but garbage at drafting forwards?

I understand that the answer is "we'll never know since they don't shove 19 minutes a night on the forwards like they do on the defenseman" but part of it is also that they just aren't good at drafting forwards.

Seems like I'm getting better D+1 seasons out of Blake's defensive prospects (Anderson/Bjornfot/Spence/Faber/Clarke) v. the forwards (Kaliyev higher PPG and good WJC/JAD and Thomas had nice seasons/Vilardi good once healthy but so much missed time/Turcotte poor WJC and debatable frosh season/Byfield bad WJC and streaky AHL play).

The Kings development team didn't touch these guys for a week in the summer and turn them into freshman blueline studs a teen AHL blueliner or the QMJHL defenseman of the year just like their week of development didn't cause Turcotte to not score in conference games or have Vilardi miss an entire summer and half a season (prior to missing a full season) as he shook off the "fatigue" that forced him to pass on lower body testing at the combine.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

But would the forward prospects play as well as the defense prospects if given the time or are the Kings legit good at finding defensemen but garbage at drafting forwards?

I understand that the answer is "we'll never know since they don't shove 19 minutes a night on the forwards like they do on the defenseman" but part of it is also that they just aren't good at drafting forwards.

Seems like I'm getting better D+1 seasons out of Blake's defensive prospects (Anderson/Bjornfot/Spence/Faber/Clarke) v. the forwards (Kaliyev higher PPG and good WJC/JAD and Thomas had nice seasons/Vilardi good once healthy but so much missed time/Turcotte poor WJC and debatable frosh season/Byfield bad WJC and streaky AHL play).

The Kings development team didn't touch these guys for a week in the summer and turn them into freshman blueline studs a teen AHL blueliner or the QMJHL defenseman of the year just like their week of development didn't cause Turcotte to not score in conference games or have Vilardi miss an entire summer and half a season (prior to missing a full season) as he shook off the "fatigue" that forced him to pass on lower body testing at the combine.

It's hard to tell to what degree that's the case since none of them have the chance is part of the issue as I see it.

Who knows what happens if Kaliyev actually gets plugged into a top-six role or PP1? He was already our top PP goal scorer.

You could do that exercise for any of the above because despite non-NHL-performance as you mention we don't see Durzi in the NHL doing what he did without basically ripping through two whole lineups of d-men.

As much as @Herby and I disagree on Turcotte, I like his theory that ceiling is part drafting part development/handling--some of it he will develop on his own as a player, some of it can only be brought out with support. Some players are better than that intrinsically--Durzi was able to do it through brass balls, Kaliyev apparently has his own natural talent driving it up. And thus far, guys like Vilardi and Turcotte aren't approaching their potential for any number of reasons (but of course I'm bullish on both of them).

 

[Statto]

Ok, fair enough. We can agree to disagree on skating. I am more of the belief you either have it or you don't (they had this discussion on the Yannetti interview with Jesse). But this isn't a factually backed debate that can be proven or disproven by looking at historical data like the other debates, there is no way to prove either one of us is right.

I do believe injuries can effect a player from reaching his ceiling, but I don't think it completely changes the ceiling all-together. In the case of Turcotte, you could tell pretty quickly when he made the level jump from the USHL to the NCAA that there was a much more limited ceiling than you would expect from a player you used a #5 overall pick on a couple of months before. And that had nothing to do with injuries, and I think to many here miss that part of it or excuse that part of it when it comes to criticizing the evaluation.

- The injuries and poor developoment choices might effect Turcotte from reaching his Andrew Copp ceiling. (I think had he been developed right and stayed healthy he is starting the year in a 3rd/4th line role with the Kings)

- The injuries and poor development choices did not cause Turcotte to go from a Jonathan Toews or Mike Richards ceiling (like expected on draft day) to an Andrew Copp ceiling.

I don’t think either one of us can be proven right or wrong simply because each player is different and depending on the player either one of us could be right or both of us could be wrong.


I really wish I’d made my post on how this debate was going to go in the correct thread as it may have saved much of the last couple of pages . Let’s face it there was no chance of that… roll on rookie camp.

 

[Sol]

I agree with several of the criticisms regarding the half-in/half-out rebuild plan and with how certain prospects have been developed but, at the same time, I fully believe that sometimes you just pick the wrong dudes.

Vilardi - Maybe the skating was too much of an issue but the injuries obviously hurt a lot.
Kupari - Blake made a safe pick that didn't scream huge upside. Injury doesn't help but not crazy significant. Somewhat playing out as expected. Big year coming up.
Turcotte - Fragile. Worst fears of scouting report ringing true so far. Bound to have busts from that USNTDP class. Still time but looks rough right now.
Byfield - They went for what looked like the grand slam over the safer play in Stutzle. More of a project and lack of development time due to COVID doesn't help. You'd like to see a lot more flashes of being special then we have seen so far but again, this off-season is huge for him. Could come in and look completely different.

Development gets knocked but they seem to do well with defenseman. I'd like to say it is because they take safe, lower offensive upside guys (Faber, Anderson, Bjornfot) but then you have a guy like Durzi step in. Is it development or is Durzi just that type of dude who seizes an opportunity while every forward prospect not named Kaliyev does the opposite? Is it development with Kaliyev or did they draft a f***ing guy that absolutely lit up the OHL, has good size and was regarded as having one of the best shots in the world? Last time they did something similar, they took an OHL guy with a world class shot but some skating issues: that guy helped the Kings win a title in 2014 and has a career average of 24 goals a year in the regular season.

It's all so frustrating because they've bombed so far on the 1st round picks excluding Clarke because we haven't seen any dip in his game from his draft year. I'm not saying Byfield is garbage or anything but, again, if these prospects were stocks then the Kings would be holding a bag on him right now. If Byfield hits and Clarke is good, none of the other stuff will matter. Lombardi hit on Doughty and mostly whiffed on his other 1st rounders. Byfield is the most important piece to the Kings future and Clarke is probably second: if they hit their potential then whiffing on Vilardi and Turotte will be fine.

It's really all on Byfield.

I dont think people realize how much the entire rebuild is riding on Byfield being a real good top 1C. Everything else at forward is likely a failure. If Byfield fails this year then its going to be much more evident where this team is heading with Kopitar pretty much continuing to decline.

People don't realize that the Kings are plugging in top 6 spots externally and ask themselves why they'd be doing that without logically coming to the conclusion that our forward drafts first round have been a failure it seems.

A Stutzle and a Zegras on the Kings, I guarantee you the Kings wouldn't trade for Fiala.

Absolutely drafting players you see what their ceiling is, and the other half or maybe even less than that is helping them get there.

I not only think the Kings drafted the wrong players, but I think the development of these players conceptually is broken

 

[Mattias]

Maybe it's just me but the people trying to have intelligent discussions about something they are passionate about seem a whole lot less "miserable" than someone who makes a dozen one sentence hit and run posts on here insulting people and telling those people how miserable they are.

And why would someone spend so much time on a place that they believe is so full of "miserable" people? That seems a bit strange to me.

I might be able too comment a little on this.

You can thank Tiktok, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube; or social media for the superficial posts and quick hot takes. It takes effort and discipline for meaningful posts. Coming up with a hypothesis and backing that with data can take a lot of work. Imagine trying to make up a thoughtful comment about Kings development when distractions are coming all over the place. Currently as I type this up, my partner is watching Ru Pual, a text message about fantasy football news, an Instagram notification, and a cat in my lap demanding pets. It's hard!

Being miserable with low attention span is less resistance than intellectual and taking time to articulate. I like to compare it to cooking. You can either A.) Go to McDonalds for a big mac meal. B.) Buy some fresh ingredients and cook a satiating meal (but you have to prepare and clean up after!). McDonalds will probably give diarrhea, but who likes to spend 45 minutes cooking and 15 minutes cleaning?

Finally, some greatly struggle coming up with material go over in depth. Just who they are and have little desire to change the formula. Just enjoy reading the thoughtful contributions and keep posting what you do best.

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

I dont think people realize how much the entire rebuild is riding on Byfield being a real good top 1C. Everything else at forward is likely a failure. If Byfield fails this year then its going to be much more evident where this team is heading with Kopitar pretty much continuing to decline.

People don't realize that the Kings are plugging in top 6 spots externally and ask themselves why they'd be doing that without logically coming to the conclusion that our forward drafts first round have been a failure it seems.

A Stutzle and a Zegras on the Kings, I guarantee you the Kings wouldn't trade for Fiala.

Absolutely drafting players you see what their ceiling is, and the other half or maybe even less than that is helping them get there.

I not only think the Kings drafted the wrong players, but I think the development of these players conceptually is broken

What I've learned from Sol today:

1) the entire future success of the Kings franchise lies solely on the shoulders of Quinton Byfield
2) Byfield is a bust at the age of 20 and 46 NHL games played

Maybe I should bail on this place, I swear I'm getting dumber the more I read.

Sorry if this post isn't long enough to quality for meaningful discussion -- it must be the Tik Tok influence on me. That or I have better things to do.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I think everyone is......overestimating.......which I never thought was possible.....but overestimating the prospect/development aspect....

And if there was no free agency, no trading, I think they would be right......

But one of our best forwards last year, Free Agent.....a D that turned out to be pretty damned solid.....and stepped up...Trade.....

Yes, you have to draft well, yes you have to develop well......but they aren't the only blueprint to build a team....if we can churn out 10 young Dman that people want.....we can turn them into top 6....wait...we did that with Fiala......Fiala is going to be a top six player for the next 3-4 years, same with Danault, same with Kempe, unless we are talking about a higher turnover than any other team....etc....

I get it, doldrums of summer, hockey shortage....nothing else to talk about...but holy f*** some of you guys on here....an outsider reading this would think LA Kings kicked your damn dog every day during the off-season...

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I think everyone is......overestimating.......which I never thought was possible.....but overestimating the prospect/development aspect....

And if there was no free agency, no trading, I think they would be right......

But one of our best forwards last year, Free Agent.....a D that turned out to be pretty damned solid.....and stepped up...Trade.....

Yes, you have to draft well, yes you have to develop well......but they aren't the only blueprint to build a team....if we can churn out 10 young Dman that people want.....we can turn them into top 6....wait...we did that with Fiala......Fiala is going to be a top six player for the next 3-4 years, same with Danault, same with Kempe, unless we are talking about a higher turnover than any other team....etc....

I get it, doldrums of summer, hockey shortage....nothing else to talk about...but holy f*** some of you guys on here....an outsider reading this would think LA Kings kicked your damn dog every day during the off-season...

It's almost like everyone here can walk and chew gum at the same time and hold multiple opinions, including those that Blake's trades and signings are f***ing fantastic but that the prospect development is thus far wanting.

Well, almost everyone, apparently. Some people are at least pretending they can't for sake of argument and argument alone.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Interesting line

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

It's almost like everyone here can walk and chew gum at the same time and hold multiple opinions, including those that Blake's trades and signings are f***ing fantastic but that the prospect development is thus far wanting.

Well, almost everyone, apparently. Some people are at least pretending they can't for sake of argument and argument alone.

Interesting angle...many on this board (we'll just label them the 'negative camp') are not labeling any of Blake's trades and signings as 'f***ing fantastic' until they have proven to be. For example, there was a ton of negative criticism over the Danault signing (shocking), but then everyone changed their tune once it was established what the guy could bring to the table.

These are the same people that have given up on our top prospects, despite the fact that nobody has seen what they really can do -- and yes, we won't know that until the org gives them the opportunity to do that. I mean just think how stupid a lot of posters here will look if these guys turn out to be studs, lol.

They might not, I get it....but I'm comfortable in saying I DON'T KNOW. it's perplexing to me that so many others here can't do the same.

 

[Sol]

What I've learned from Sol today:

1) the entire future success of the Kings franchise lies solely on the shoulders of Quinton Byfield
2) Byfield is a bust at the age of 20 and 46 NHL games played

Maybe I should bail on this place, I swear I'm getting dumber the more I read.

Sorry if this post isn't long enough to quality for meaningful discussion -- it must be the Tik Tok influence on me. That or I have better things to do.

BECAUSE IT DOES. If Byfield doesn't pan out and he hasn't YET and it is very POSSIBLE he DOES NOT.

And if he DOESN'T then the Kings will HAVE to REBUILD.

Here I even bolded it out for you so even you can understand it.

I have no idea if you are actually this dim or if you're just trolling. But the Kings success (Like All Teams) has to come through drafting and development. The players that are going to be the cornerstone of the team always comes from within. Danault is a good second line center. Kings need a Kopitar replacement or someone to fill his shoes even a bit. No one has shown that yet.

Thats the problem. No one has shown to be able to fill Kopitars shoes even a little. You dont understand the importance of knocking out the first round picks. Trades fix issues but it doesn't fix a broken system that the Kings are suffering from. Do you get it? Or are you going to pretend that its not true?

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

BECAUSE IT DOES. If Byfield doesn't pan out and he hasn't YET and it is very POSSIBLE he DOES NOT.

And if he DOESN'T then the Kings will HAVE to REBUILD.

Here I even bolded it out for you so even you can understand it.

Thank you, now I understand....

 

[Sol]

Thank you, now I understand....

View attachment 580366

You do realize the near future success of the Kings is solely on Byfield, right?

If not on Byfield then which prospect is going to fill Kopitar's shoes?

Please for once in your life make a case rather than being a clown whether intentional or not lol.

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

You do realize the near future success of the Kings is solely on Byfield, right?

If not on Byfield then which prospect is going to fill Kopitar's shoes?

Please for once in your life make a case rather than being a clown whether intentional or not lol.

Auston Matthews?

 

[Sol]

Auston Matthews?

Clown it is.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Interesting angle...many on this board (we'll just label them the 'negative camp') are not labeling any of Blake's trades and signings as 'f***ing fantastic' until they have proven to be. For example, there was a ton of negative criticism over the Danault signing (shocking), but then everyone changed their tune once it was established what the guy could bring to the table.

These are the same people that have given up on our top prospects, despite the fact that nobody has seen what they really can do -- and yes, we won't know that until the org gives them the opportunity to do that. I mean just think how stupid a lot of posters here will look if these guys turn out to be studs, lol.

They might not, I get it....but I'm comfortable in saying I DON'T KNOW. it's perplexing to me that so many others here can't do the same.

I actually mean this nicely not snidely--I think you're misreading a lot of us.

I'm VERY comfortable in saying I'm not sure and this has yet to play out. I don't think very many are speaking in absolutes, they're just voicing concerns about the kings' processes.

My angle is historically this isn't working and I'm concerned. And I get progressively more concerned. I'm high on Blake's moves, I'm higher than most are on our current prospects particularly Turcotte--but the more I see the Kings doing things unconventionally with little reward on the risk, the more worried I get that they're doubling down on ego and doing things their way whether it works or not.

 

[BigKing]

Auston Matthews?

The inference that none of know the future is true but in the Matthews scenario, we are talking some serious cap.

You want to have difference makers on ELCs or great cap hits that are usually the result of a 2nd contract and not the UFA cash-in. You could argue that his next deal could replace Kopitar's and you find a way to make the difference work (Quick's hit would be gone/minimized) but the point is that you control who you draft and you want that to work out: especially at #2OA.

You don't want to be the Knicks and base your hopes on landing a prize UFA that never comes.

 

[YP44]

The inference that none of know the future is true but in the Matthews scenario, we are talking some serious cap.

You want to have difference makers on ELCs or great cap hits that are usually the result of a 2nd contract and not the UFA cash-in. You could argue that his next deal could replace Kopitar's and you find a way to make the difference work (Quick's hit would be gone/minimized) but the point is that you control who you draft and you want that to work out: especially at #2OA.

You don't want to be the Knicks and base your hopes on landing a prize UFA that never comes.

Mathews to LA as a UFA makes a ton of sense as that is the same year Kopitar's contract runs out.

It's fun to fantasize both landing Matthews and the prospects developing!! God would that be sweet. It is frustrating seeing prospects picked after LA's draft picks seemingly hit their stride earlier then the kings prospects. But hopefully the kings picks hit a higher ceiling.

 

[KINGS17]

Deleted, somehow I quoted myself. I was winning that argument too!

Mathews to LA as a UFA makes a ton of sense as that is the same year Kopitar's contract runs out.

It's fun to fantasize both landing Matthews and the prospects developing!! God would that be sweet. It is frustrating seeing prospects picked after LA's draft picks seemingly hit their stride earlier then the kings prospects. But hopefully the kings picks hit a higher ceiling.

Matthews to TB makes a ton of sense too. My point is there will be multiple suitors for Matthews, and there are many drawbacks to signing in LA, and signing in TB has many advantages to offer in a couple of seasons.