Prospect Info: Quinton Byfield (2nd Overall 2020 Draft) Discussion part II

[Herby]

In my opinion, the Kings have shown the ability to judge talent. They have struggled with developing it.

In my eyes - the Kings cannot be bad at BOTH drafting and developing. Either the draft has provided enough talent that the development team has failed to grow, or the development team has not had good enough talent provided from the draft.

For the most part I agree. I think it can be argued that the Kings made the wrong development decisions with every one of their 1st round centers between 2017-2020. In particular the decision to pull Turcotte out of school after his freshman year might have been the worst freshman pull that any NHL team has made in recent memory. I think putting QB in the AHL last year was right there with it, I think with how he has looked in the NHL this year it was essentially a wasted development at age 18, something that is obviously not optimal for a developing player.

As far as evaluation, it's tough to say, there to me have certainly been some questionable ones that no matter what development decisions had been made weren't going to ever work out for the Kings. For players I saw play very shortly after being drafted the first was Tuebert in the ECHL playoffs, just was painfully apparent that he was never going to play in the league, I don't know if we will ever see a worse pick for as long as we are all alive. The second was Forbort, a top 15 pick who never in 3 years in college looked anything like a 1st round pick, drafted for his measurables he has been able carve out a career as a 3rd pairing guy but that was an evaluation miss. The third was Turcotte, he is obviously not at the level of the previous two guys, but I've seen a lot of Top 10 picks come through the midwest the last 20 years since I've been following closely, he just wasn't at the level you would expect and it was pretty apparent quickly, and this is not a me being a "hater" take, ask any UW fan if he met expectation. When you look at the four top 5 picks Michigan had in last years draft and then look at Turcotte it's a very wide gap in talent for comparable picks from the same league.

But either way, whether you want to blame evaluation, development, deployment or a combination of all of them, there is clearly a broken link in the chain of draft night to the NHL with the Kings when it comes to these highly picked forwards that is really beginning to drain on the franchise in the current and obviously will hurt even more if things don't get better. I know people hate to hear about Suzuki, Norris, Thomas, Zegras, Caufield, Boldy, Stutzle, Raymond etc. but these are guys that are turning into bigtime contributors on their teams and we can't get anything from guys taken before them in the draft. Their were 5 forwards taken in the Top 15 from the NTDP, Hughes, Turcotte, Zegras, Boldy and Caufield. Are the Kings just the unluckiest or is there something we are doing wrong in evaluation or development compared to those teams? I think so.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

New draft strategy--

Draft ONLY defensemen
Let Dallas pick all our 5th rounders for us in exchange for all our #4s
Find another team excellent at developing scoring talent and set up a trade pipeline
profit

 

[Herby]

New draft strategy--

Draft ONLY defensemen
Let Dallas pick all our 5th rounders for us in exchange for all our #4s
Find another team excellent at developing scoring talent and set up a trade pipeline
profit

Ha.

Or Blake could just make the same development decisions with his high picks that every other team in the league would make if they had that player.

Byfield in the NHL right away
Turcotte at UW for his sophomore year
Kupari in Finland in his D+2
Vilardi all of last year in the AHL

At this rate the Kings are probably going to tell Brandt Clarke to go play for the Berlin Polar Bears next season.

 

[apocalypse]

Development takes time. I would argue that we're still rebuilding. With that said, Byfield played great tonight. The team played great. Losing just sucks. Brings the worst out of you.

 

[bland]

QB is just too adamant about using a short stick and also about wanting to be lean and not adding weight...to his detriment. He can easily add 10 pounds and will not lose quickness, or possibly a tiny fraction, but will be able to not only handle the physical rigors better, but be able to utilize his size as a strength. Not be pushed around and knocked down so easily.

He is literally just a kid, he has plenty of time to realize the error of his young thinking. This year is about learning what doesn't work, and unless you want to bury him in what would likely amount to be a bad habit factory in Ontario you just have to give him time to shake off the big fish/tiny pond thing. Maturity is built on learning what went wrong when you thought otherwise.

 

[bland]

New draft strategy--

Draft ONLY defensemen
Let Dallas pick all our 5th rounders for us in exchange for all our #4s
Find another team excellent at developing scoring talent and set up a trade pipeline
profit

Still think folks aren't looking at the real picture here. The Kings developmental team's goal is to push out players whose primary function is to first do no harm. Honest to goodness, they still think that the vets have another run in them.

Thats why defensemen come out as soon as they are proven competent, but offensive forwards who rely on riskier play MUST prove that they can play safe then hope their offense translates.

Durzi was what, 10th on the depth chart to start?

MacKinnon is the perfect example to follow here. Offensive players need to be able to play with swagger and prove what they can do. He was allowed time to break in, find his game, push it as far as his ability could go, then dial it back a notch for team success. Here, every forward comes in scared to lose their chance because they have to think about playing responsibly instead of pushing it, and every split second spent thinking results in lost plays.

Screw the results, let the kids find out who they are instead of who they are supposed to be, and earn on the longterm investment made in the rebuild.

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

Still think folks aren't looking at the real picture here. The Kings developmental team's goal is to push out players whose primary function is to first do no harm. Honest to goodness, they still think that the vets have another run in them.

Thats why defensemen come out as soon as they are proven competent, but offensive forwards who rely on riskier play MUST prove that they can play safe then hope their offense translates.

Durzi was what, 10th on the depth chart to start?

MacKinnon is the perfect example to follow here. Offensive players need to be able to play with swagger and prove what they can do. He was allowed time to break in, find his game, push it as far as his ability could go, then dial it back a notch for team success. Here, every forward comes in scared to lose their chance because they have to think about playing responsibly instead of pushing it, and every split second spent thinking results in lost plays.

Screw the results, let the kids find out who they are instead of who they are supposed to be, and earn on the longterm investment made in the rebuild.

Have you ever considered interviewing for the 'head of development' position?

 

[bland]

Have you ever considered interviewing for the 'head of development' position?

Its beneath my abilities.

 

[MBH]

For the most part I agree. I think it can be argued that the Kings made the wrong development decisions with every one of their 1st round centers between 2017-2020. In particular the decision to pull Turcotte out of school after his freshman year might have been the worst freshman pull that any NHL team has made in recent memory. I think putting QB in the AHL last year was right there with it, I think with how he has looked in the NHL this year it was essentially a wasted development at age 18, something that is obviously not optimal for a developing player.

As far as evaluation, it's tough to say, there to me have certainly been some questionable ones that no matter what development decisions had been made weren't going to ever work out for the Kings. For players I saw play very shortly after being drafted the first was Tuebert in the ECHL playoffs, just was painfully apparent that he was never going to play in the league, I don't know if we will ever see a worse pick for as long as we are all alive. The second was Forbort, a top 15 pick who never in 3 years in college looked anything like a 1st round pick, drafted for his measurables he has been able carve out a career as a 3rd pairing guy but that was an evaluation miss. The third was Turcotte, he is obviously not at the level of the previous two guys, but I've seen a lot of Top 10 picks come through the midwest the last 20 years since I've been following closely, he just wasn't at the level you would expect and it was pretty apparent quickly, and this is not a me being a "hater" take, ask any UW fan if he met expectation. When you look at the four top 5 picks Michigan had in last years draft and then look at Turcotte it's a very wide gap in talent for comparable picks from the same league.

But either way, whether you want to blame evaluation, development, deployment or a combination of all of them, there is clearly a broken link in the chain of draft night to the NHL with the Kings when it comes to these highly picked forwards that is really beginning to drain on the franchise in the current and obviously will hurt even more if things don't get better. I know people hate to hear about Suzuki, Norris, Thomas, Zegras, Caufield, Boldy, Stutzle, Raymond etc. but these are guys that are turning into bigtime contributors on their teams and we can't get anything from guys taken before them in the draft. Their were 5 forwards taken in the Top 15 from the NTDP, Hughes, Turcotte, Zegras, Boldy and Caufield. Are the Kings just the unluckiest or is there something we are doing wrong in evaluation or development compared to those teams? I think so.

I think the Kings' had their hand forced by the Ontario Hockey League. It wasn't clear if the OHL was going to have a season and the Kings couldn't afford to risk Byfield not playing. I think I would have liked the idea of sending Byfield to Sweden, like the Red Wings did with Seider. Or maybe Switzerland. But I'm not sure every kid is built for going to Europe at 18 years old.

I think the Kings may be a bit guilty of drafting the high-profile BPA. That will get you lots of love on HFboards on draft day. I know I've loved the Kings' draft in recent years. But who the f*** am I?
I didn't like the Moritz Seider pick by the Wings when Yzerman took over.
But compare that to the Ken Holland selection of Zadina the year before. Zadina was definitely the high-profile BPA at 6 overall. Seider was not.
If you have good scouting and a ballsy GM, who gives a f*** what a bunch of know-nothings like me have to say on draft day?

I remember everyone loving so hard on Lafreniere and watching his video and just not getting any excitement at all.
Guys like Sanderson, Byfield, Stuetzle and Drysdale were all moving the needle more.

 

[BigKing]

Development takes time. I would argue that we're still rebuilding. With that said, Byfield played great tonight. The team played great. Losing just sucks. Brings the worst out of you.

Byfield was great last night?

 

[Herby]

Have you ever considered interviewing for the 'head of development' position?

Oh God, more of this nonsense.

I guess we should all stop posting since none of us are coaches, players, scouts etc. The board can be the same 3-4 people saying how great everyone is doing.

This is the response people often get when they type out a decent post here, I don't agree with everything that @bland says, but he adds to this board, you don't with stuff like this.

 

[Herby]

I think the Kings' had their hand forced by the Ontario Hockey League. It wasn't clear if the OHL was going to have a season and the Kings couldn't afford to risk Byfield not playing. I think I would have liked the idea of sending Byfield to Sweden, like the Red Wings did with Seider. Or maybe Switzerland. But I'm not sure every kid is built for going to Europe at 18 years old.

I think the Kings may be a bit guilty of drafting the high-profile BPA. That will get you lots of love on HFboards on draft day. I know I've loved the Kings' draft in recent years. But who the f*** am I?
I didn't like the Moritz Seider pick by the Wings when Yzerman took over.
But compare that to the Ken Holland selection of Zadina the year before. Zadina was definitely the high-profile BPA at 6 overall. Seider was not.
If you have good scouting and a ballsy GM, who gives a f*** what a bunch of know-nothings like me have to say on draft day?

I remember everyone loving so hard on Lafreniere and watching his video and just not getting any excitement at all.
Guys like Sanderson, Byfield, Stuetzle and Drysdale were all moving the needle more.

The OHL had nothing to do with the Kings making the strange decision to have QB in the AHL instead of the NHL as a 2OA pick. This is like the people who use the uncertainty about Covid as an excuse for the Kings even worse decision to sign Turcotte after his freshman year at Wisconsin. I guess the Wild, Habs and Avs weren't effected by Covid since they chose not to sign their 1st round picks and all of them look like much better prospects because of it. But maybe overseas would have been a better option for QB, certainly nothing could have been more useless for him than playing in the AHL last year.

 

[MBH]

The OHL had nothing to do with the Kings making the strange decision to have QB in the AHL instead of the NHL as a 2OA pick. This is like the people who use the uncertainty about Covid as an excuse for the Kings even worse decision to sign Turcotte after his freshman year at Wisconsin. I guess the Wild, Habs and Avs weren't effected by Covid since they chose not to sign their 1st round picks and all of them look like much better prospects because of it. But maybe overseas would have been a better option for QB, certainly nothing could have been more useless for him than playing in the AHL last year.

Maybe you're right.
But I honestly can't say the OHL would have helped Byfield much last year, given the schedule and pisspoor overall quality.
Besides, if it wasn't for COVID, Byfield wouldn't have been able to play in the AHL. It was junior or NHL without COVID. I hope to God the Kings were smart enough to make that call right.

 

[Herby]

Maybe you're right.
But I honestly can't say the OHL would have helped Byfield much last year, given the schedule and pisspoor overall quality.
Besides, if it wasn't for COVID, Byfield wouldn't have been able to play in the AHL. It was junior or NHL without COVID. I hope to God the Kings were smart enough to make that call right.

I know you think junior hockey was the right path for him had it been available, but it's very likely that the majority of NHL teams in the same situation as the Kings last year would have opted to have him in the NHL rather than the OHL. You can't just ignore the historical data with similar players and where they play at that age. And that is to me what is the most frustrating with the Kings development path with these players, these struggles are very likely because the Kings went against proven trends in development with so many of their high picks. But since almost everyone involved in covering the Kings works for the Kings these type of questions are never asked of Blake. The closest we get is Dillman saying in one of her articles "In hindsight it's apparent that Turcotte should have spent a second season at the University of Wisconsin"

Maybe one day someone who covers the team will ask Blake why they went against the trends with his two highest picks, but I'm not holding my breath on that ever being explained. Blake has it made as GM of the Kings and not GM of a Canadian team.

 

[MBH]

I know you think junior hockey was the right path for him had it been available, but it's very likely that the majority of NHL teams in the same situation as the Kings last year would have opted to have him in the NHL rather than the OHL. You can't just ignore the historical data with similar players and where they play at that age. And that is to me what is the most frustrating with the Kings development path with these players, these struggles are very likely because the Kings went against proven trends in development with so many of their high picks. But since almost everyone involved in covering the Kings works for the Kings these type of questions are never asked of Blake. The closest we get is Dillman saying in one of her articles "In hindsight it's apparent that Turcotte should have spent a second season at the University of Wisconsin"

Maybe one day someone who covers the team will ask Blake why they went against the trends with his two highest picks, but I'm not holding my breath on that ever being explained. Blake has it made as GM of the Kings and not GM of a Canadian team.

Byfield can't hack the NHL this year.
Why do you think last year would have been better?
There are no "proven" paths. Every prospect has a different road.
Byfield was not only one of the most raw players in the draft, he was one of the youngest. He was almost a full year younger than Lafreniere, if I remember correct (perhaps I'm thinking of someone else).
He was just a kid. In the WJC, he stood out in no particular way. Because his skillset wasn't advanced. Only his raw physical ability was advanced.

The longer Byfield goes without playing in a league where he can develop his skills, the more challenging his development will be.

The Kings' development reminds me a bit of the Wings development with Michael Rasmussen. There are some similarities between players and skillset too.
Rasmussen was forced into the NHL for some f***ing reason. He was good but not dominant in the WHL (except for a six week stretch that included the playoffs). Despite the dominance, it was clear in training camp that Rasmussen had zero ability to skate the puck through neutral ice (or virtually anywhere else).
And yet, the Wings gave him a spot on the team. And he struggled all year. Then they put him in the AHL for his entire D+3 year. And he OK there. And now he;s back in the NHL, struggling again for the second straight year.
Rasmussen never learned key elements of the game. He never developed key parts of his game.

Byfield's upside is way higher than Rasmussen's ever was. But his NHL ability isn't far off from what Rasmussen showed in the NHL in his D+2 season.


Byfield will be a good player in the NHL one day. But I'd like to think he can be a great one.
The longer the Kings force this current role on him, the more likely it is that Byfield ends up as part of a trade and ends up finding his game in some other organization.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I know you think junior hockey was the right path for him had it been available, but it's very likely that the majority of NHL teams in the same situation as the Kings last year would have opted to have him in the NHL rather than the OHL. You can't just ignore the historical data with similar players and where they play at that age. And that is to me what is the most frustrating with the Kings development path with these players, these struggles are very likely because the Kings went against proven trends in development with so many of their high picks. But since almost everyone involved in covering the Kings works for the Kings these type of questions are never asked of Blake. The closest we get is Dillman saying in one of her articles "In hindsight it's apparent that Turcotte should have spent a second season at the University of Wisconsin"

Maybe one day someone who covers the team will ask Blake why they went against the trends with his two highest picks, but I'm not holding my breath on that ever being explained. Blake has it made as GM of the Kings and not GM of a Canadian team.

yeah for all the things you and I disagree on--even down to the nuance of where these guys should have been--we will always agree that Blake deciding to do everything differently for every one of these prospects will ALWAYS look suspect, like 'smartest man in the room' syndrome, ie what are the Kings doing so differently and so special that we need to buck the development trend for every one of these guys? Even if it ends up working, that will always rub me the wrong way

 

[Herby]

Byfield can't hack the NHL this year.
Why do you think last year would have been better?
There are no "proven" paths. Every prospect has a different road.
The longer Byfield goes without playing in a league where he can develop his skills, the more challenging his development will be.

Byfield will be a good player in the NHL one day. But I'd like to think he can be a great one.
The longer the Kings force this current role on him, the more likely it is that Byfield ends up as part of a trade and ends up finding his game in some other organization.

I'm not saying he would have been better last year. I'm saying we would have gotten through a lot the crap he is fighting through this year out of the way in a throw away year, and not in a season where the team is fighting for a playoff spot. Byfield being lost last year would have meant nothing to the Kings, where this year it's hurting the team on the ice in meaningful games.

And yes, there are proven paths to developing players taken that high, and it almost always involves playing in the NHL at 18. You think I am BS'ing go back and look for yourself at players taken as high as QB over the past decade, how many played in a league that wasn't the NHL in their D+1? Just like with the 2 years in college thing for good to great (but not elite) prospects, it's the most successful path. But Rob Blake didn't seem to care in either case. Again maybe one day we will find out why.

 

[Kudelski37]

I know you think junior hockey was the right path for him had it been available, but it's very likely that the majority of NHL teams in the same situation as the Kings last year would have opted to have him in the NHL rather than the OHL. You can't just ignore the historical data with similar players and where they play at that age. And that is to me what is the most frustrating with the Kings development path with these players, these struggles are very likely because the Kings went against proven trends in development with so many of their high picks. But since almost everyone involved in covering the Kings works for the Kings these type of questions are never asked of Blake. The closest we get is Dillman saying in one of her articles "In hindsight it's apparent that Turcotte should have spent a second season at the University of Wisconsin"

Maybe one day someone who covers the team will ask Blake why they went against the trends with his two highest picks, but I'm not holding my breath on that ever being explained. Blake has it made as GM of the Kings and not GM of a Canadian team.

What makes you think it was the Kings getting Turcotte to leave Wisconsin? I think Turcotte was set in his mind to leave after one year. He quit school when he signed even though he could have finished classes with hockey being cancelled. He might not have put in the classwork before signing to return. You see this all the time with college football and basketball players.

 

[lumbergh]

I think Blake made the conventional decision under extraordinary circumstances. With Turcotte, let’s not ignore his role in the decision. After a year in college he wanted to take the shortest route to the show. Blake and the Kings gave it to him. I can’t think of an instance where a prospect wanted out of college and a team said no, stay in college. With Byfield, you can argue he could have gone straight to the show, but the Kings appear to want players to develop in the AHL. I don’t think that’s a bad decision, again that’s actually the conventional decision given the circumstances.

 

[Kudelski37]

I'm not saying he would have been better last year. I'm saying we would have gotten through a lot the crap he is fighting through this year out of the way in a throw away year, and not in a season where the team is fighting for a playoff spot. Byfield being lost last year would have meant nothing to the Kings, where this year it's hurting the team on the ice in meaningful games.

And yes, there are proven paths to developing players taken that high, and it almost always involves playing in the NHL at 18. You think I am BS'ing go back and look for yourself at players taken as high as QB over the past decade, how many played in a league that wasn't the NHL in their D+1? Just like with the 2 years in college thing for good to great (but not elite) prospects, it's the most successful path. But Rob Blake didn't seem to care in either case. Again maybe one day we will find out why.

Is that a proven path or just a random fluke of great players at the top of the draft in recent drafts. If it is a proven path, why didn't work out for all the top prospects going back to the 80s?

 

[Herby]

What makes you think it was the Kings getting Turcotte to leave Wisconsin? I think Turcotte was set in his mind to leave after one year. He quit school when he signed even though he could have finished classes with hockey being cancelled. He might not have put in the classwork before signing to return. You see this all the time with college football and basketball players.

You see it with football players who are wishing to declare for the draft, there was no declaring for the draft as Turcotte was already drafted. Players who declare early for the NFL draft are almost 100% of the time playing in the NFL that next year. He certainly could have said he wanted to leave, that didn't mean the Kings had to offer him a contract, usually in these cases the players defer to the wishes of the team. The Kings controlled all the cards in this one, they were the only one capable of offering a contract. Caufield wanted to turn pro after his freshman year and Montreal told him no, that they wanted him to return to school. If it was Turcotte's call to leave, the Kings should have told him they wanted him to return and that if college wasn't for him to contact Saginaw. He was simply not ready hockey wise or strength wise to jump up levels. It was one of the worst freshman pulls ever, although I did forget Mittlestadt in my earlier post, that one was even worse.

The Kings should have been assertive that Turcotte return to school, work on his shot (1 goal in 21 conference games) and to take advantage of the lighter schedule and live in the world-class weight room to gain weight.

 

[Herby]

I think Blake made the conventional decision under extraordinary circumstances. With Turcotte, let’s not ignore his role in the decision. After a year in college he wanted to take the shortest route to the show. Blake and the Kings gave it to him. I can’t think of an instance where a prospect wanted out of college and a team said no, stay in college. With Byfield, you can argue he could have gone straight to the show, but the Kings appear to want players to develop in the AHL. I don’t think that’s a bad decision, again that’s actually the conventional decision given the circumstances.

Well, teams have told guys to return to school when they didn’t want to. Cole Caufield his own teammate at UW wanted to sign but ended up honoring the Habs request and returned to school. Which player got more out of their D+2 development season? It is not an unheard of thing, Nor is it unheard of for teams to send NCAA players to major junior should school not have worked out.

What is ironic/sad is the “quickest path to the NHL” argument, which you are correct was used by the Kings and Turcotte has proven to be a massive miscalculation. All his buddies at the NTDP who went back to school
As sophomores are in the NHL now. Unfortunately it’s consequences for poor decisions (whether initiated by Blake or his family advisor/agent) it was a poor decision to leave.

 

[Telos]

The problem definitely lies with our player development program, coaching, and player utilization. It is no coincidence that all of our top prospects and virtually every player taken in the first round has identical stats in the NHL. There's still time though for most of them, and hopefully, worse comes to worst, they at least develop on the Kempe track.

I've watched Turcotte, he has the speed and skill but is sort of going down the Byfield line of gaining his confidence and finding his niche and learning what works and what doesn't at the higher level. My hopes are still high for the kid and I would wager on him being a top 6 forward and even still a center in the NHL, but our systems definitely seem to stunt growth and development of high-end talent.

 

[apocalypse]

Byfield was great last night?

Better. Maybe great was an overstatement.

 

[apocalypse]

Byfield was great last night?

Better. Maybe great was an overstatement.