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

[bland]

View attachment 669516

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

Zoinks!

 

[Sol]

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.

That’s why I never liked the Byfield pick. So much of his offense was never something that would translate well into the NHL. How many players like that exist in the NHL? Zero. All those Tage Thompson hope fanfics are based upon the fact that he becomes an insanely strong player that’s immovable and can cycle into any spot on the ice by sheer power and will. Byfield has shown zero ability to do that.

I think what really bothers me most is that people think I hate Byfield when I just hated the pick and it’s hard to see people exaggerate every little good thing he does like he was some college player on a try out. He was a second overall pick who has shown very little. He has 8 NHL goals, 2 of which came off empty net goals and another the puck hit off his leg.

That’s not anything to be hyping up. I’m going to use Kopitar as a comparable because he was drafted higher and had size.. Kopitar was carving through defenseman in his rookie year. Byfield can’t do any of that.

As long as we can all agree that he was the wrong pick it will become easier to overlook his draft status. I see way too many pump his tires for doing something good like that somehow justifies where he was drafted. People accuse me from hating byfield when I just hated the pick from the get go.

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.

That’s another thing too, no one has anything good to say about Stutzle on here as if Stutzle decided not to join the Kings himself. What’s so difficult admitting that Stutzle is easily a far greater player than Byfield? Byfield isn’t going to reach him. That much is obvious.

So many people fell in love with the idea of Byfield on here but no one could tell me who is comparable was because players like that don’t exist in the NHL. Which was my rationale when drafting him, why would you draft a player like that so high when a player like Stutzle whose playstyle is relatively common and effective was available? A Patrick Kane, Kucherov type playstyle. No shit? Draft that guy because there isn’t a Byfield comparable in thE NHL. There’s no tall ass players who’s game is run and gun style.

 

[Fishhead]

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.

There is such a thing as BPA. It's the player you think that is the best overall and most valuable, a fairly straight-forward concept. It's not best fit, that's something else. Like Hickey - he was the best fit as we needed a defenseman. That gets you into trouble unless it's used as a tiebreaker between equivalent prospects. It doesn't mean that BPA and best fit can't be the same player - such a Doughty.

 

[Herby]

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.

I agree, it's a canned cliche.

It's more to do with organizational philosophy, and with the Kings it's been the shortstop strategy, except with centers (credit @Raccoon Jesus ). The Kings place less value on using 1st and 2nd rounders on wingers and d-man than other teams do, and the drafting has shown as much. The Kings have drafted nine centers in the first two rounds under Blake. three defenseman, two wingers and zero goalies.. I think the deciding factor in QB over TS was that QB was seen as more of a sure thing center, which is kind of ironic that TS is excelling as a C and QB is playing the best hockey of his pro career at wing.

 

[Sol]

I agree, it's a canned cliche.

It's more to do with organizational philosophy, and with the Kings it's been the shortstop strategy, except with centers (credit @Raccoon Jesus ). The Kings place less value on using 1st and 2nd rounders on wingers and d-man than other teams do, and the drafting has shown as much. The Kings have drafted nine centers in the first two rounds under Blake. three defenseman, two wingers and zero goalies.. I think the deciding factor in QB over TS was that QB was seen as more of a sure thing center, which is kind of ironic that TS is excelling as a C and QB is playing the best hockey of his pro career at wing.

Which is funny because Byfield didn’t play like a center. When you watched his offense generation it was him always high up on the ice taking long passes to use his speed to burn Dmen on the rush.

And all the footage I was seeing of Stutzle was him creating his own space to create open ice while Byfield was using his speed to rush the open ice. One ability is far more impressive than the other.

 

[kilowatt]

I agree, it's a canned cliche.

It's more to do with organizational philosophy, and with the Kings it's been the shortstop strategy, except with centers (credit @Raccoon Jesus ). The Kings place less value on using 1st and 2nd rounders on wingers and d-man than other teams do, and the drafting has shown as much. The Kings have drafted nine centers in the first two rounds under Blake. three defenseman, two wingers and zero goalies.. I think the deciding factor in QB over TS was that QB was seen as more of a sure thing center, which is kind of ironic that TS is excelling as a C and QB is playing the best hockey of his pro career at wing.

That's what hurts the most, Stutzle is looking to be a pretty good center. I know, no one wants to see my 10,000th line combination, but we would be a really deep team with Stutzle at center.

Kempe - Kopitar - Kaliyev
Fiala - Stutzle - Vilardi
Moore - Danault - Arvidsson
Iafallo - Lizotte - Kupari

 

[bland]

There is such a thing as BPA. It's the player you think that is the best overall and most valuable, a fairly straight-forward concept. It's not best fit, that's something else. Like Hickey - he was the best fit as we needed a defenseman. That gets you into trouble unless it's used as a tiebreaker between equivalent prospects. It doesn't mean that BPA and best fit can't be the same player - such a Doughty.

Sorry, but that is Axl-level over simplification, as though its a universally accepted moniker that leaves out the goals of each organization.

There is never a "best player" when choosing between kids from different nations, positions, physical development, family situations, etc. Every year, every team enters a draft with an agenda based on a variety of reasons that don't fit that description. Some years there is a dearth of a particular position in specific sections of the draft - if you want to come out with a defenseman but there don't project to be the right FITS in rounds 3-5, you may elect to take one earlier than projected with your 2nd rounder. If you don't need a goalie and don't project to have the space to develop him properly, you go a different route even if he is the highest rated player available at the time.

Its so much more nuanced than that. You choose the kid who best fits what you are looking for out of that pick, and even a cursory look at any stinking draft will show just how different teams view these players from other organizations. Draft lists aren't vertical, numbered from top to bottom, they are horizontal with a variety of options at every spot based on what you value at that moment, hopefully fully considered by your scouts.

 

[Herby]

That’s another thing too, no one has anything good to say about Stutzle on here as if Stutzle decided not to join the Kings himself. What’s so difficult admitting that Stutzle is easily a far greater player than Byfield? Byfield isn’t going to reach him. That much is obvious.

So many people fell in love with the idea of Byfield on here but no one could tell me who is comparable was because players like that don’t exist in the NHL. Which was my rationale when drafting him, why would you draft a player like that so high when a player like Stutzle whose playstyle is relatively common and effective was available? A Patrick Kane, Kucherov type playstyle. No shit? Draft that guy because there isn’t a Byfield comparable in thE NHL. There’s no tall ass players who’s game is run and gun style.

It's a combination of minimizing that player to prop up your guy, and also because he went to a Canadian team with an extremely annoying fanbase that continually throws it in our faces. Kings fans on this forum never entered Brian Lee discussions back in the day to make fun of Ottawa for passing on Kopitar for him, yet that happens here with Sens fans frequenting the Byfield threads. I think it's stupid how much hate TS gets around here, but if he is in Carolina or Nashville its probably not the same, people sometimes react stupid to stupidity from others.

The big superstar #1 center if it hits is going to be the most valuable of all assets in the NHL, but yes, many times teams make poor choices in trying to search for that unicorn when its just not there. I think more highly of QB than you do and was happy with the pick at the time, but it became apparent pretty quickly there wasn't going to be a Malkin or Kopitar there, and to take him over someone who more easily projected as a Patrick Kane type (and showed it from the get go) that is probably what you realistically needed to get. Getting a PLD type is not a terrible consolation prize, but you are obviously taking Kane or Kucherov if you had a do-over, even after a half seasons of games (which is what I said on this forum). The Kings probably knew pretty quickly they made the wrong choice and people like you were right and people like me were wrong.

 

[King'sPawn]

Sorry, but that is Axl-level over simplification, as though its a universally accepted moniker that leaves out the goals of each organization.

There is never a "best player" when choosing between kids from different nations, positions, physical development, family situations, etc. Every year, every team enters a draft with an agenda based on a variety of reasons that don't fit that description. Some years there is a dearth of a particular position in specific sections of the draft - if you want to come out with a defenseman but there don't project to be the right FITS in rounds 3-5, you may elect to take one earlier than projected with your 2nd rounder. If you don't need a goalie and don't project to have the space to develop him properly, you go a different route even if he is the highest rated player available at the time.

Its so much more nuanced than that. You choose the kid who best fits what you are looking for out of that pick, and even a cursory look at any stinking draft will show just how different teams view these players from other organizations. Draft lists aren't vertical, numbered from top to bottom, they are horizontal with a variety of options at every spot based on what you value at that moment, hopefully fully considered by your scouts.

Isn't this all pedantry, though?

An org who says the player is the "best player available" is speaking within their own context, anyway. Meaning a player who provides the most value to the org itself.

Like, a GM won't (and actually can't because of risk of tampering) say "well, we think player X is the most skilled player we've seen in the past 5 drafts, but player Y, albeit slightly less skilled, fits into our long-term vision better". They can, of course, discuss how a player they drafted fits into their own team's paradigm, but what's the difference if the verbiage they use is "best player available" versus "best fit available"?

 

[Herby]

That's what hurts the most, Stutzle is looking to be a pretty good center. I know, no one wants to see my 10,000th line combination, but we would be a really deep team with Stutzle at center.

Kempe - Kopitar - Kaliyev
Fiala - Stutzle - Vilardi
Moore - Danault - Arvidsson
Iafallo - Lizotte - Kupari

The Kings are the favorites in the West right now with Stutzle.

Although to be fair, in your alternate universe I would argue that had the Kings drafted Stutzle, and knowing he was the answer at C it's very unlikely that they still sign Danault as a FA in the summer of 21, knowing that they'd be having to pay Stutzle big when his ELC ended. Danault was the result of them realizing QB was a ways away, that Vilardi had no future at C and that Turcotte was trending significantly downward.

There is no way the Kings could have been able to commit almost $24m to three centers next season.

 

[Sol]

It's a combination of minimizing that player to prop up your guy, and also because he went to a Canadian team with an extremely annoying fanbase that continually throws it in our faces. Kings fans on this forum never entered Brian Lee discussions back in the day to make fun of Ottawa for passing on Kopitar for him, yet that happens here with Sens fans frequenting the Byfield threads. I think it's stupid how much hate TS gets around here, but if he is in Carolina or Nashville its probably not the same, people sometimes react stupid to stupidity from others.

The big superstar #1 center if it hits is going to be the most valuable of all assets in the NHL, but yes, many times teams make poor choices in trying to search for that unicorn when its just not there. I think more highly of QB than you do and was happy with the pick at the time, but it became apparent pretty quickly there wasn't going to be a Malkin or Kopitar there, and to take him over someone who more easily projected as a Patrick Kane type (and showed it from the get go) that is probably what you realistically needed to get. Getting a PLD type is not a terrible consolation prize, but you are obviously taking Kane or Kucherov if you had a do-over, even after a half seasons of games (which is what I said on this forum). The Kings probably knew pretty quickly they made the wrong choice and people like you were right and people like me were wrong.

I get that. I understand WHY they chose Byfield and what they were looking for when they got him. However that player just never existed within him. It’s not a good sign when you see most of Byfields goals were never based on his size but more so his speed and his playstyle. He was a run and gun forward who was usually pretty up to ice looking for the long pass to reach him. I just have a hard time understanding why that was attractive to them. Just because he’s tall? He never
Really used his size for scoring and you can see it now where Byfield is a very physically weak player now and his size means nothing in the NHL because he never used it. I don’t hate Byfield, I just hate that they took him. He’s not a top 6 player. And if by some miracle he becomes one he’s going to be average. Kings bet the house on something that didn’t exist at the time when they could have bet the house on something tangible. That’s what’s infuriating.

The thing is too with Stutzle it was very clear to me that a player who creates their chances when it’s not available is far more valuable than a player who’s playstyle depends on getting to the open ice. Stutzle comments are not going anywhere unfortunately. While I hate sens fan there’s no doubt he is far better. Vancouver fans bitched about skipping Kopitar for an eternity. I’m allowed to be angry with Byfield.

 

[Fishhead]

Sorry, but that is Axl-level over simplification, as though its a universally accepted moniker that leaves out the goals of each organization.

There is never a "best player" when choosing between kids from different nations, positions, physical development, family situations, etc. Every year, every team enters a draft with an agenda based on a variety of reasons that don't fit that description. Some years there is a dearth of a particular position in specific sections of the draft - if you want to come out with a defenseman but there don't project to be the right FITS in rounds 3-5, you may elect to take one earlier than projected with your 2nd rounder. If you don't need a goalie and don't project to have the space to develop him properly, you go a different route even if he is the highest rated player available at the time.

Its so much more nuanced than that. You choose the kid who best fits what you are looking for out of that pick, and even a cursory look at any stinking draft will show just how different teams view these players from other organizations. Draft lists aren't vertical, numbered from top to bottom, they are horizontal with a variety of options at every spot based on what you value at that moment, hopefully fully considered by your scouts.

I think this is an over-complication, but to each his own.

 

[bmr]

I still like the Byfield pick, even with Stutzle getting more playing time on a worse team. Byfield's game is growing by leaps and bounds and it's just a confidence issue to me before he starts potting a lot more goals. The bottom line for me, he makes Kopitar and Kempe even better! I'm not worried about all that other stuff, it will come. He's playing on the 1st line right now and doesn't look out of place. He's hounding the puck and playing a tenacious game. Love what I see.

 

[Sol]

I still like the Byfield pick, even with Stutzle getting more playing time on a worse team. Byfield's game is growing by leaps and bounds and it's just a confidence issue to me before he starts potting a lot more goals. The bottom line for me, he makes Kopitar and Kempe even better! I'm not worried about all that other stuff, it will come. He's playing on the 1st line right now and doesn't look out of place. He's hounding the puck and playing a tenacious game. Love what I see.

Leaps and bounds? Really? He has three goals on the season. 1 empty net goal, 1 that hit him and one regular goal. I don’t think he’s doing bad since Kopitar is on his line but I really don’t see how he’s improved so much over last season. Last season he was terrible and he’s a bit better than last season now. Byfield would have improved leaps and bound for me when he actually looks like a threat in the offensive zone. His advanced stats mean nothing to me if he can’t produce to save his life.

I don’t see how you can say that about the pick and downplay Stutzle like that when it’s not debatable that Stutzle is a lot better. But shit if he looks that much better to you from last season I’m not gonna deflate your balloon. Have hope brudda even if I don’t.

 

[bland]

Isn't this all pedantry, though?

An org who says the player is the "best player available" is speaking within their own context, anyway. Meaning a player who provides the most value to the org itself.

Like, a GM won't (and actually can't because of risk of tampering) say "well, we think player X is the most skilled player we've seen in the past 5 drafts, but player Y, albeit slightly less skilled, fits into our long-term vision better". They can, of course, discuss how a player they drafted fits into their own team's paradigm, but what's the difference if the verbiage they use is "best player available" versus "best fit available"?

Its pedantic for the organization, but not for the fans or pundits who use the term to criticize the organizations for making the "wrong" choice because the "better" player wasn't picked.

And since that is all we are doing here on a message board, it is an important distinction in conversations like these because as is the case with all things, the process is even more important than the results.

 

[bmr]

Leaps and bounds? Really? He has three goals on the season. 1 empty net goal, 1 that hit him and one regular goal. I don’t think he’s doing bad since Kopitar is on his line but I really don’t see how he’s improved so much over last season. Last season he was terrible and he’s a bit better than last season now. Byfield would have improved leaps and bound for me when he actually looks like a threat in the offensive zone. His advanced stats mean nothing to me if he can’t produce to save his life.

I don’t see how you can say that about the pick and downplay Stutzle like that when it’s not debatable that Stutzle is a lot better. But shit if he looks that much better to you from last season I’m not gonna deflate your balloon. Have hope brudda even if I don’t.

Honestly, it's not about the goals to me. They will come. It's how effective he has been and how much it has elevated the 1st line. He has 3 times more assists than last year and has also corrected many of his defensive deficiencies that were plaguing him. He's a 6'5" 20 year old who will continue to gain confidence and improve his game. How can you not like the upside here? I think we are all expecting too much too soon. We were all ready to put Vilardi out to pasture. Remember Kempe? Look at his stat lines since 2016-17 (where he was 20 years old):

2016-17: 26GP 2G 4A
2017-18: 81GP 16G 21A
2018-19: 81GP 12G 16A
2019-20: 69GP 11G 21A
2020-21: 56GP 14G 15A
2021-22: 78GP 35G 19A
2022-23: 68GP 32G 20A

I think you can make the argument that Kempe had a mediocre first 4 years in this league. I'm personally glad that Blake is patient with these prospects. There isn't a single team in this league that wouldn't jump on the opportunity to land Byfield with his skillset. It's obvious to me that he has all the tools/skills to be an extremely effective player in the league and he is carving out his niche on this team much like Vilardi and Kempe did.

 

[Sol]

Honestly, it's not about the goals to me. They will come. It's how effective he has been and how much it has elevated the 1st line. He has 3 times more assists than last year and has also corrected many of his defensive deficiencies that were plaguing him. He's a 6'5" 20 year old who will continue to gain confidence and improve his game. How can you not like the upside here? I think we are all expecting too much too soon. We were all ready to put Vilardi out to pasture. Remember Kempe? Look at his stat lines since 2016-17 (where he was 20 years old):

2016-17: 26GP 2G 4A
2017-18: 81GP 16G 21A
2018-19: 81GP 12G 16A
2019-20: 69GP 11G 21A
2020-21: 56GP 14G 15A
2021-22: 78GP 35G 19A
2022-23: 68GP 32G 20A

I think you can make the argument that Kempe had a mediocre first 4 years in this league. I'm personally glad that Blake is patient with these prospects. There isn't a single team in this league that wouldn't jump on the opportunity to land Byfield with his skillset. It's obvious to me that he has all the tools/skills to be an extremely effective player in the league and he is carving out his niche on this team much like Vilardi and Kempe did.

Do you seriously think what’s happened Kempe is normal? There’s no other Kings prospect who’s done that in recent history. Why do you use Kempe as an example rather than the exception that he is? Would you invest money in a pattern or a volatile stock? Kempes like GameStop it soared for the lulz.

Regardless I’m not gonna argue at this point because I think we’re fundamentally so far apart that it’s pointless.

 

[bmr]

Do you seriously think what’s happened Kempe is normal? There’s no other Kings prospect who’s done that in recent history. Why do you use Kempe as an example rather than the exception that he is? Would you invest money in a pattern or a volatile stock? Kempes like GameStop it soared for the lulz.

Regardless I’m not gonna argue at this point because I think we’re fundamentally so far apart that it’s pointless.

It's a discussion, not an argument...and i'm cool tabling this. But I do reserve the right to save this and give you a big I told you so in a couple years.

 

[Herby]

Honestly, it's not about the goals to me. It's how effective he has been and how much it has elevated the 1st line. He has 3 times more assists than last year and has also corrected many of his defensive deficiencies that were plaguing him. He's a 6'5" 20 year old who will continue to gain confidence and improve his game. How can you not like the upside here? I think we are all expecting too much too soon. We were all ready to put Vilardi out to pasture. Remember Kempe? Look at his stat lines since 2016-17 (where he was 20 years old):

2016-17: 26GP 2G 4A
2017-18: 81GP 16G 21A
2018-19: 81GP 12G 16A
2019-20: 69GP 11G 21A
2020-21: 56GP 14G 15A
2021-22: 78GP 35G 19A
2022-23: 68GP 32G 20A

I think you can make the argument that Kempe had a mediocre first 4 years in this league. I'm personally glad that Blake is patient with these prospects. There isn't a single team in this league that wouldn't jump on the opportunity to land Byfield with his skillset. It's obvious to me that he has all the tools/skills to be an extremely effective player in the league and he is carving out his niche on this team much like Vilardi and Kempe did.

It's not so much about Byfield, it's more about just how good Stutzle is. Since the lockout, players who are this good at his age almost always go on to be Hall of Fame players. That is why it's a bit crazy to me that people can still say they would take QB. There can still be optimism about QB continuing to figure it out and progress, while acknowledging that the Kings could have drafted a likely HOF player and made the wrong choice. It's not one or the other, acknowledging how great TS is doesn't mean QB is a bust or a bad player.

 

[SmytheKing]

Honestly, it's not about the goals to me. They will come. It's how effective he has been and how much it has elevated the 1st line. He has 3 times more assists than last year and has also corrected many of his defensive deficiencies that were plaguing him. He's a 6'5" 20 year old who will continue to gain confidence and improve his game. How can you not like the upside here? I think we are all expecting too much too soon. We were all ready to put Vilardi out to pasture. Remember Kempe? Look at his stat lines since 2016-17 (where he was 20 years old):

2016-17: 26GP 2G 4A
2017-18: 81GP 16G 21A
2018-19: 81GP 12G 16A
2019-20: 69GP 11G 21A
2020-21: 56GP 14G 15A
2021-22: 78GP 35G 19A
2022-23: 68GP 32G 20A

I think you can make the argument that Kempe had a mediocre first 4 years in this league. I'm personally glad that Blake is patient with these prospects. There isn't a single team in this league that wouldn't jump on the opportunity to land Byfield with his skillset. It's obvious to me that he has all the tools/skills to be an extremely effective player in the league and he is carving out his niche on this team much like Vilardi and Kempe did.

It's no coincidence that Kempe doubled his scoring once he started playing with Kopitar. He was playing with him about 20% of the time prior to 2021-2022. That year and this year he's playing with him over 80% of the time.

You're starting to see similar outcomes with Byfield.

For another example of this phenomenon see the following: Brown, Dustin

Until QB is the one driving the play and the one mostly responsible for the results of that 1st line, I'd be cautious about heaping the results on his shoulders. His play has improved, but he still has a long ways to go.

 

[BigKing]

He can still have a bad game that looks as bad as a bad game from last year (last night was a doozy) but he generally has much. much better game tape this season.

There are more concerns than just goal scoring but it is a worry at this point. I've been banging the drum since his WJC performance that he defers too much v. imposing his will: he definitely looks like a pass first, second and third type guy while playing with 11 and 9.

 

[King'sPawn]

Its pedantic for the organization, but not for the fans or pundits who use the term to criticize the organizations for making the "wrong" choice because the "better" player wasn't picked.

And since that is all we are doing here on a message board, it is an important distinction in conversations like these because as is the case with all things, the process is even more important than the results.

Again, isn't this all the same? Sure, you'll see some pundits and laymen criticize a pick because there was a "better" player, but that's, again, speaking from their own context of understanding. It's like when pundits criticized the Price pick in 2005, because they already had two solid goaltenders and needed a center.

Who do you think the BPA for Montreal was? At the time, many were saying Brule or Kopitar. Would you say the Best Fit Available would be different?

What about Blake Wheeler in 2004 with Phoenix? Who is the BPA they should have taken? Who is the BFA (Best Fit Available) they should have taken?

I REALLY need to see a good example of BPA vs BFA to see this discussion as anything beyond pedantic, and with those highly controversial picks at the time (and how their careers played out), I figure these would be the best opportunities for you to help lay out the distinction, unless there's an easier frame of reference.

 

[Byfield]

Expecting a 20 year old to be a generational talent with koala as his coach smh

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

As long as we can all agree that he was the wrong pick it will become easier to overlook his draft status.

See, this is the reason why you are constantly clowning yourself -- you are willing to base a decision on limited scope of work.

 

[Herby]

Expecting a 20 year old to be a generational talent with koala as his coach smh

I don't think anyone is expecting QB to be a generational talent. Expecting more from a player taken that high does not equal expectation of a generational player.

See, this is the reason why you are constantly clowning yourself -- you are willing to base a decision on limited scope of work.

Stutzle just turned 21 years old, is in his 3rd season and is on a 44 goal, 95 point scoring pace. Do you realize how rare that is? Almost all modern players who have done what he has done at his age have gone on to be superstar HOF players, why will this be any different?

Do you believe QB's career projection is that of a Hall of Fame caliber player?
Do you believe Tim Stutzle is going to pull a Jimmy Carson?

If Stutzle had been the consensus #1 pick that year (which he clearly should have been in hindsight) and there was no chance he could have been a King do you still hold these views that QB could be as good or do you just acknowledge "well he's a generational talent" no reason to compare them? Which would be a logical view.

It's not even a knock on QB to say that. Do you think its a knock on Nico Hischier and Miro Heiskanen to say their teams made the wrong picks and should have taken Makar? No, its not a knock on them, its just acknowledging how great Makar is. It's the same situation with Stutzle.

Amazing how opinions on players can change for you and some of your clique with how it relates to the Kings. A year ago it was awesome to have a prospect as good as Faber, he gets traded and now people like you and TKF make mocking posts about people who still hold him in high regard, whether he is a Kings prospect or not (aka having an honest opinion regardless of team). Now praise of him is a mocking suggestion that "Faber is a generational defenseman" by your Weekly World News buddy.