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

[KopitarFAN]

When making the Thompson comp, I don't think it's fair to look at years, but rather games played. Thompson played 70 NCAA games (over 2 seasons), 70 AHL games (over 4 seasons) and 145 NHL games before the 2021-22 season.

To date, Byfield has played 59 AHL games and 85 NHL games (including tonight).

 

[All The Kings Men]

You can be grumpy about it if you want, but...

Dude.

dude

ᵈᵘᵈᵉ

lulz

 

[Kudelski37]

And that is fine, I am just confused by the continued notion that Byfield was viewed as a long term project that wouldn’t pay dividends for years down the road. I think some fans think that, but I have a hard time thinking the organization felt the same way.

Why would you choose a long-term play over a shorter one in 2020, and then in 2021 decide to try and contend by trading a bunch of 1st rounders/elite prospects for older veteran players? It just seems to me that if they viewed QB the way some fans here do, it would have made sense to either draft Stutzle in 2020 or trade QB for the best 24-26 year old they could get in 21/22.


And yet, the general consensus here is to break up that line next season, rather than to let it grow into an even more dominant line.

And again, with the Thompson stuff. Doesn’t explain why if QB was 5-7 years away why did the Kings take him over Stutzle, if the plan was to contend in the Kopitar/Doughty window.

When you start with bad data, your conclusion will be incorrect. The Kings didn't trade first round picks and/or top prospects in 2021. Heck, Faber is the only decent prospect they have traded in years. For discussion, Hults is not considered a decent prospect.

Second, when people say he was a long term project, that does not mean Byfield would not be productive for 5-7 years. Thompson is brought up when people start the bust talk. Byfield has been well ahead of Thompson at every age and level so it isn't a literal comparison as to Byfield's development. Byfield has 29 points in 85 NHL games at age 20. Thompson didn't reach that many career NHL points until he was 23 years old and had played over 130 NHL games. It is used to show an extreme example of how long it can take a large player to develop. Stutzle took roughly 100 NHL games to start approaching a pt/game for a month. Byfield is there right now in March after roughly 85 NHL games.

The team saw after last season that players like Kempe, Anderson, Moore, etc have taken a big step while prospects were also playing a role so the team was closer to contending than expected and added players. it doesn't seem confusing to me.

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

Agreed. Either management didn’t think QB would be a long term project, or they did, and they knowingly made an illogical pick.

Or maybe they were looking for a #1 center to eventually replace Kopitar. I don't think it's that complicated, boys. In addition, I highly doubt that three years ago Kings management would have predicted the team would be competing for the conference in '23.

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

When you start with bad data, your conclusion will be incorrect. The Kings didn't trade first round picks and/or top prospects in 2021. Heck, Faber is the only decent prospect they have traded in years. For discussion, Hults is not considered a decent prospect.

Sounds like Herby is arguing in bad faith...say it ain't so.

 

[Herby]

Sounds like Herby is arguing in bad faith...say it ain't so.

It was a simple mistake. To compare it to the pathetic made up BS that TruKingFan says in almost all of his posts (and you sadly have decided to co-sign recently, for whatever reason) is ridiculous. But whatever year doesn’t matter, the point remains they took what people are saying was considered to be a longer term project and then proceeded to trade a top prospect from 2020, and 1st rounders in 2022 and 2023 for prime pieces to help try and win in the final years of Kopitar. I’m just curious they of that is indeed the case (and I don’t really think it is) why would you make the moves they have made in the years since?

Oh and as far as “bad data” and dishonest takes. So because QB has 1 ENG and 6 assists in a whopping 8 game sample size he is now ahead of schedule on Stutzle? So by that logic can we expect QB to take the same step that Stutzle took in games 100-180 next season? Even if he is returned to the position that he has struggled at as an NHL’er instead of the one where he has thrived? Which is the rumor if you listen to those connected.

QB is progressing slowly but the position change helped him become a better and more comfortable player and there are clear signs of light at the end of the tunnel, even if it’s unlikely to be a truly game-changing player you might hope for that high, he still will be a quality 1st liner (I still don’t understand where the bust stuff comes from, who’s saying it?). I also don’t understand the constant need to try to downplay what Stutzle has done, which has been one of the better young players in the last 20 years. The latest now being to blame him for the teams struggles, something that was never done when the Kings had a similar young player who lost a lot of games when he was the same age. Trashing Stutzle or blaming him when his 2 goals weren’t 5 so the team lost doesn’t make Byfield a better prospect.

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

It was a simple mistake. To compare it to the pathetic made up BS that TruKingFan says in almost all of his posts (and you sadly have decided to co-sign recently, for whatever reason) is ridiculous. But whatever year doesn’t matter, the point remains they took what people are saying was considered to be a longer term project and then proceeded to trade a top prospect from 2020, and 1st rounders in 2022 and 2023 for prime pieces to help try and win in the final years of Kopitar. I’m just curious they of that is indeed the case (and I don’t really think it is) why would you make the moves they have made in the years since?

Oh and as far as “bad data” and dishonest takes. So because QB has 1 ENG and 6 assists in a whopping 8 game sample size he is now ahead of schedule on Stutzle? So by that logic can we expect QB to take the same step that Stutzle took in games 100-180 next season? Even if he is returned to the position that he has struggled at as an NHL’er instead of the one where he has thrived? Which is the rumor if you listen to those connected.

QB is progressing slowly but the position change helped him become a better and more comfortable player and there are clear signs of light at the end of the tunnel, even if it’s unlikely to be a truly game-changing player you might hope for that high, he still will be a quality 1st liner (I still don’t understand where the bust stuff comes from, who’s saying it?). I also don’t understand the constant need to try to downplay what Stutzle has done, which has been one of the better young players in the last 20 years. The latest now being to blame him for the teams struggles, something that was never done when the Kings had a similar young player who lost a lot of games when he was the same age. Trashing Stutzle or blaming him when his 2 goals weren’t 5 so the team lost doesn’t make Byfield a better prospect.

I'd like to know why the Stutzle/QB argument only revolves around the Kings decision of who they picked at #2....why does nobody bring up the fact that Stutzle should have been picked by NYR at #1??

 

[Schmooley]

Even if he is returned to the position that he has struggled at as an NHL’er instead of the one where he has thrived?

Byfield looked great at the beginning of the year centering Vilardi and Iafallo. They showed another teams locker room pregame and they were circled as the line to worry about. Then he got sick and that line never reunited.
There is still plenty of time for him to become a good center.

 

[Herby]

I'd like to know why the Stutzle/QB argument only revolves around the Kings decision of who they picked at #2....why does nobody bring up the fact that Stutzle should have been picked by NYR at #1??

Because this is the Kings board?

Obviously NYR misjudged what type of player TS was going to be as well., or else they would have taken him. And to be honest, I’d rather have QB than Laf. I think Laf might be another one of those prospects (like with Kings ones Bjornfot, Tuebert and Turcotte) where his development peaked as a teenager instead of at 22/23 like most players do. Now that peak at 18/19 is still good enough to potentially be a 2nd liner in the NHL, just as Toby’s good enough to be a #6 d-man, but there should be progression and there just has been very little with Laf from where he was at 18 to where he is today (which isn’t the case with QB)

And yes, I was on the QB train. I also said pretty quickly that I was probably wrong in that assessment. I got push back from saying early on that the Kings (and Rangers) would have changed their pick, people thought I was crazy, but I don't see what the big deal is. I remember having this debate with KP, I think people on all these forums get so locked in to analyzing players at lower levels when they are 17, that there is way to much of a reluctance to re-evaluate when presented with more relevant data and viewings vs higher end competition. Stutzle stepped right into the NHL and was a star, why would we not use that new information to determine whether the Kings made the right move or not? And again it wasn't a debate about the pick on draft night, it was a hypothetical "with new information", but people still refused to budge off, that just confuses me. It would be like saying you preferred the 5 star QB because he was judged to be better at 17 even though the 4 star QB was looking like a much better player and likely superstar vs more relevant competition (and this does happen on NCAA forums). Another for the Kings, two huge examples of this on opposite ends of the spectrum were Faber and Turcotte. Turcotte was taken inside the Top 5, Faber was taken outside the Top 40. Yet when they made the big move from the USHL to the NCAA one really struggled and one thrived. Why shouldn't we judge how they looked in the NCAA but instead defer back to how they looked as younger players vs weaker competition, again it just doesn't seem to make sense with how stubborn people are to hold to views they had of players and not use new information to maybe change those.

 

[Schrute farms]

It's almost like NHL scouting and drafting of 17-18 year olds is an inexact science and risky, roll-of-the-dice type activity. Who knew?!?!?

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

Because this is the Kings board?

Obviously NYR misjudged what type of player TS was going to be as well., or else they would have taken him.

What my client is trying to say is...'none of these organizations have a bonafide psychic on their payroll to make these decisions.'

 

[Herby]

It's almost like NHL scouting and drafting of 17-18 year olds is an inexact science and risky, roll-of-the-dice type activity. Who knew?!?!?

What my client is trying to say is...'none of these organizations have a bonafide psychic on their payroll to make these decisions.'

Hey, I have never said drafting isn't largely about luck. Ottawa got lucky they had the #3 instead of the #1. The Kings got unlucky in 2019 that they took the guy who's game didn't translate to the next levels, it evened out the next year when the Kings had what is going to end up being one of the best picks in the draft that they used to get a 1st line player.

People like Axl though, want to give the management and scouting staff credit for the right decisions but then excuse the wrong ones and blame it on luck.

 

[LAKings88]

Stutzle and Byfied were a debate for me down to the day of the draft.

I'm an armchair gm and highlight film watcher. The only time I got to watch either play was the wjc. Stutzle looked damn good.

I still said I'd be happy with Byfield but I tend to not like going for physically more mature junior players.

In hindsight now there were a lot of other choices that could have been made. I do think the Kings overthought a bit on Byfield and the size/center factor. It's not like Stutzle is petite or anything.

All that said, it doesn't matter anymore. LA needs to put their efforts into helping him become the best he can be. I have little hope for Turcotte.

Turcotte
Bjornfot
Byfield

Time will tell but these were three building block picks that haven't shown all that much truth be told.

 

[Telos]

I mean, it is now water under the bridge and they might have made a different choice if they had to do a re-draft, though they wouldn't have acquired Fiala if they had to be paying Stutzle $8M+/season. I bet there are Kings execs that would still roll the dice on Byfield + Fiala over Stutzle + Faber. Faber fans would certainly be happy if he were still here, though it still sounds like he may have been out the door either way. However, I think they always knew Byfield was a long-term project.

He was nearly the youngest player in the draft by a mile and it was literally the first thing out of Yanetti's mouth during his draft interview. They said they could go either way but getting a center like Byfield with his intangibles could be a grand slam if they let him slow-cook, fill out his frame, and hopefully develop into a Kopitar replacement.

Byfield doesn't look very close right now, but also he doesn't look like he can never get there either. There's going to be bickering back and forth until time unfolds the results, but I still think Byfield was a good dice roll. I don't think any of us expected the Kings brass to stomp on the gas this year as they did. In the end, I would rather have Fiala in his prime at $7M+ long-term + Byfield than just Stutzle at $8M+.

 

[Kudelski37]

It was a simple mistake. To compare it to the pathetic made up BS that TruKingFan says in almost all of his posts (and you sadly have decided to co-sign recently, for whatever reason) is ridiculous. But whatever year doesn’t matter, the point remains they took what people are saying was considered to be a longer term project and then proceeded to trade a top prospect from 2020, and 1st rounders in 2022 and 2023 for prime pieces to help try and win in the final years of Kopitar. I’m just curious they of that is indeed the case (and I don’t really think it is) why would you make the moves they have made in the years since?

Oh and as far as “bad data” and dishonest takes. So because QB has 1 ENG and 6 assists in a whopping 8 game sample size he is now ahead of schedule on Stutzle? So by that logic can we expect QB to take the same step that Stutzle took in games 100-180 next season? Even if he is returned to the position that he has struggled at as an NHL’er instead of the one where he has thrived? Which is the rumor if you listen to those connected.

QB is progressing slowly but the position change helped him become a better and more comfortable player and there are clear signs of light at the end of the tunnel, even if it’s unlikely to be a truly game-changing player you might hope for that high, he still will be a quality 1st liner (I still don’t understand where the bust stuff comes from, who’s saying it?). I also don’t understand the constant need to try to downplay what Stutzle has done, which has been one of the better young players in the last 20 years. The latest now being to blame him for the teams struggles, something that was never done when the Kings had a similar young player who lost a lot of games when he was the same age. Trashing Stutzle or blaming him when his 2 goals weren’t 5 so the team lost doesn’t make Byfield a better prospect.

In summary you don't like when people point out the flaws of other teams players yet you don't think the Kings players will ever be as good since the Kings players have flaws too and will never meet the expectations of their draft slot. The expectations are the vague and undefined term truly game changer. Yet, truly game changing players can't be expected to actually change the game by you know winning because it is a team sport. That is an unrealistic expectation for truly game changers, like back checking, blocking shots, and everything else besides scoring that people point to to explain why team A beat team B in a playoff series. This is all a function of King fan jealousy and not decades of watching sports and reading/listening to interviews of guys like Gretzky and Lemieux explaining they had to learn what it took to win for the team to be successful.

I made the mistake of replying to you even though I know better. I'm out.

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

People like Axl though, want to give the management and scouting staff credit for the right decisions but then excuse the wrong ones and blame it on luck.

NOPE...but nice try. I think they are all basically a crap shoot -- you win some, you lose some.

 

[Fishhead]

Agreed. Either management didn’t think QB would be a long term project, or they did, and they knowingly made an illogical pick.

I think so much more is being written into the Byfield pick than is actually there. If you start picking to fit into a timeframe or to replace certain positions that's a path that usually doesn't work out as we've seen many times before. You take what you think is the BPA and that's it.

Occam's razor, and all that.

 

[Herby]

In summary you don't like when people point out the flaws of other teams players yet you don't think the Kings players will ever be as good since the Kings players have flaws too and will never meet the expectations of their draft slot. The expectations are the vague and undefined term truly game changer. Yet, truly game changing players can't be expected to actually change the game by you know winning because it is a team sport. That is an unrealistic expectation for truly game changers, like back checking, blocking shots, and everything else besides scoring that people point to to explain why team A beat team B in a playoff series. This is all a function of King fan jealousy and not decades of watching sports and reading/listening to interviews of guys like Gretzky and Lemieux explaining they had to learn what it took to win for the team to be successful.

I made the mistake of replying to you even though I know better. I'm out.

No. I don't care when people point out flaws, every player in the league has flaws. I just don't understand how people can blame individual players in the NHL for a team not doing well. This is the NHL, he's not in the NBA or a QB in the NFL. I just simply asked if the same evaluations "What's it matter, his team sucks" were used about Anze Kopitar early in his career? If they were, I certainly don't remember it. Pointing out flaws is not the same thing as blaming the player for the teams struggles or saying his own performance means nothing because the team has struggled. You are smart enough to know that, and if you were a long enough term fan you certainly saw Marcel Dionne and Ziggy Palffy shine on bad teams, are you going to crap on them too?

And ofcourse you will leave rather than have a discussion, every time. Last time it was right as an excuse was being exposed as a myth in another discussion (mono that came and went based on the level of competition). But yes, I hate all the Kings prospects. I clearly hate Clarke, Kaliyev, Spence, Durzi. Hated Faber. Apparently I hate Byfield because I don't think he will be as good as TS. Said I think he can be a point-per-game 1st line LW as soon as next season, apparently that is hating him. Kopitar wasn't as good as Crosby in 2005, guess I hated him too.

 

[King'sPawn]

No. I don't care when people point out flaws, every player in the league has flaws. I just don't understand how people can blame individual players in the NHL for a team not doing well. This is the NHL, he's not in the NBA or a QB in the NFL. I just simply asked if the same evaluations "What's it matter, his team sucks" were used about Anze Kopitar early in his career? If they were, I certainly don't remember it. Pointing out flaws is not the same thing as blaming the player for the teams struggles or saying his own performance means nothing because the team has struggled. You are smart enough to know that, and if you were a long enough term fan you certainly saw Marcel Dionne and Ziggy Palffy shine on bad teams, are you going to crap on them too?

And ofcourse you will leave rather than have a discussion, every time. Last time it was right as an excuse was being exposed as a myth in another discussion (mono that came and went based on the level of competition). But yes, I hate all the Kings prospects. I clearly hate Clarke, Kaliyev, Spence, Durzi. Hated Faber. Apparently I hate Byfield because I don't think he will be as good as TS. Said I think he can be a point-per-game 1st line LW as soon as next season, apparently that is hating him. Kopitar wasn't as good as Crosby in 2005, guess I hated him too.

Just go be a Ducks fan if you hate the Kings prospects so much you have to criticize them.

 

[Sol]

I think it was pretty clear that Byfield wasn’t the right choice from the beginning. He played a run and gun style of hockey. Most of his scoring came from off the rush. There wasn’t much about his game that was going to translate well into the NHL. The main reason I didn’t want him was because his playstyle was far from an NHL style.

I said before the draft and I still say it now. Stutzle was easily the better option because he had a playstyle that was NHL tried and tested. Really good skating, very good hands, very good at creating chances in all types of situations. Anyone who watched Byfield would see that he doesn’t have the agility in his skating, his hands are average, and most of what he his scoring was contingent on someone finding him off the rush and he’d use his speed to score. You’re not going to be scoring goals like that in the NHL.

It was obvious then and it is obvious now that Byfield was the wrong pick and the Kings wouldn’t redraft him if there was the option.

You don’t ever take projects this high. When you invest a big portion of your money, you don’t go a in on a volatile asset.

I hated the Byfield pick then and I still do. He’s far from being a top 6 player. His progress is extremely SLOW. And the fact that his progress is so slow indicates to me that there isn’t a special player there at all.



Byfield was never a good pick. It wasn’t a logical pick. It was a hope pick. You have the Patrick Kane archetype in Stutzle which is a very NHL safe playstyle because players who can skate like that and move like that always carve good careers. And they got Byfield who’s comparable doesn’t exist because players like him never happen. Who does Byfield play like? No one.


We talk about his age and shit but Kopitar was finessing players like Pronger as a rookie and was using his strength. Byfield is extremely weak physically and no one knows how he will look if he actually becomes a strong player but again that’s a big IF.

anyone saying Byfield is a good pick just doesn’t want to admit that he was the wrong pick.

 

[Herby]

Just go be a Ducks fan if you hate the Kings prospects so much you have to criticize them.

TKF has finally been unmasked, it was KP the whole time!

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Those things aren't mutually exclusive

TS can be an amazing player and so can QB

Little early to be closing the entire book even if the first chapter isn't as good as one would hope

 

[Rick Knickleback]

Byfield doesn't look very close right now, but also he doesn't look like he can never get there either.

There are games when he looks damn close. Like an elite playmaker with size and speed and the only thing missing is a consistent shot.

Then there are games like last night...

 

[bland]

I think so much more is being written into the Byfield pick than is actually there. If you start picking to fit into a timeframe or to replace certain positions that's a path that usually doesn't work out as we've seen many times before. You take what you think is the BPA and that's it.

Occam's razor, and all that.

There is no such thing as "best player available", its a generally accepted platitude/sound bite used to avoid having a lengthy nuanced conversation behind the reasoning for a choice. Its actually best FIT available, based on loooooooong debated decisions that do involve projections, needs and surpluses both on the current roster and asset list.

Byfield was a gamble from the start. Whether he turns into a 1c or just a reliable mid-roster player, the Kings had the right mix of previous picks AND tenured roster players to take the chance of Byfield hitting his potential.

Its natural to look at a kid and exaggerate strengths and excuse his weaknesses as something that can be ironed out. Byfield DID generate most of his chances by using his physical advantages on the rush against subpar kids. That was downplayed a LOT around here, but it was spot on. Its why he was never considered as an option at first overall, just a bit too much risk there.

His biggest issue was going to be translating those physical gifts into producing in a more professional environment. That was the gamble, if he figured it out his skating and size would be the rarest commodity available. If he didn't, well, they had just drafted several other offensive centers and undoubtedly Byfield would contribute down the lineup.

It was always going to take time, but yeah, the risk is still readily apparent and I don't blame those who are concerned because the best case scenario hasn't appeared yet. Lots of positive signs, but that's it so far. I always said that Stützle was likely going to be the better player, most definitely would produce sooner, but that the Kings were in the perfect spot to gamble in the unicorn. Don't see any reason to think differently - yet.

 

[Herby]

Those things aren't mutually exclusive

TS can be an amazing player and so can QB

Little early to be closing the entire book even if the first chapter isn't as good as one would hope

Unfortunately people are always going to link them, and the hype TS is getting is going to anger people to say unfortunate things. If QB were taken 3 there is no discussion and probably no dislike of TS. A lot of it is built on the great debate leading up to the draft. It's extremely unlikely that QB is ever as good, but that doesn't mean QB won't be a good player for the Kings. He has a lot of talent and physical attributes that will make him a force on the ice.

It's not going to be Peyton Manning and Ryan Leaf
It's not going to be Jared Goff and Carson Wentz (Thank God)
It's not going to be Michael Jordan and Hakeem Olajuwon

Maybe something like Zion Williamson over Ja Morant. Except QB isn't made of glass and TS has a brain in his head.