What’s up with Byfield?

[Raccoon Jesus]

That reinforces my point that what you're claiming happened while Byfield was his winger, since they played together every night until Jan 18th. More importantly, because of that, the ice time that they spent apart during that stretch was situational and temporary. The fact that chances were up suggests they were separated when the team was being outplayed or protecting a lead, with Kopitar obviously getting the harder minutes. I think that you're making a mistake by assuming that the chances went up because Kopitar didn't have Byfield, when it likely had nothing to do with that.

The same thing is likely going here, but making it even worse is the fact that, when it wasn't Byfield on Kopitar's wing, it was mostly Lafferiere and Turcotte, two rookies who were not up to the challenge. Lafferiere, in particular, had some of the worst metrics on the team even before the promotion. While they were on his wing, Kopitar's goals against soared and his GF% plummeted, as you just showed. Those kids were much worse in that role than Byfield, who deserves a lot of credit for his importance to the line and complementing Kopitar so well, but I think that it's a mistake to jump all of the way to the conclusion that Byfield was, therefore, carrying Kopitar.

In general, I think that you're misinterpreting the stats to support this notion that Kopitar hit a wall and needed Byfield to carry him. It seems like a colossal stretch to believe that a future HOFer who is leading the team in scoring for the 18th season needed to be carried last year by a 21-year-old who was struggling the year before and back to struggling away from him. I'm not one of those saying that Kopitar carried Byfield, but it seems pretty clear by now who benefited a little more from the arrangement last year. Honestly, I wish that it were the other way around, too, since the team would be better off long-term being led by the 22-year-old, not the 37-year-old.

It has to be reinforced by the eye test.

No one really watching last year or this year will say Kopitar is 'carrying' anyone. He's not the player he was at all. He's much slower, not doing much in the corners, and definitely not covering 200 feet. There's a reason they have had Kempe stapled to him. And that line exploded with Byfield on it and Kopitar fell apart with him off it. Anything else is noise, particularly a 9 game sample.

If you want to split the difference and just say it was symbiotic I can live with that, but it's a long way from the initial argument, which was Byfield was/is carried by Kopitar.

 

[nbwingsfan]

It's the fact that you blatantly rounded down and added a year that everyone finds amusing. I could say he had a 60 pt season at age 20 and been just as close to the truth as your statement was (both are wrong).

55 pts is definitely impressive for a 21 year old, especially one who is 6'5 and always projected to take some time. Let's wait till he's 25 before we close the book on his high end potential at least

How many 2nd overall picks have taken 7- 8 years to break out?

 

[DuklaNation]

His puck handling and hockey sense just isn't there consistently.

 

[Nfumass]

He sucks

 

[Osprey]

It has to be reinforced by the eye test.

No one really watching last year or this year will say Kopitar is 'carrying' anyone. He's not the player he was at all. He's much slower, not doing much in the corners, and definitely not covering 200 feet. There's a reason they have had Kempe stapled to him. And that line exploded with Byfield on it and Kopitar fell apart with him off it. Anything else is noise, particularly a 9 game sample.

The problem with the "eye test" is that you tend to see what you want to see and it can be a mistake to try to use the stats to support that.

Would you agree that 2017-18, his career year, was when Kopitar was still that player that he once was?

That looks very similar to last year's stats without Byfield that you cited as evidence of him falling apart. Surely, it isn't proof that he fell apart at only age 30 in his 92-point season.

Going back even further, here's 2014-15...

Surely, he wasn't already falling apart way back in 2014-15, when he was only 27 and had just won a Cup.

What you're presenting as evidence of his aging isn't that at all, because it's happened throughout his career, including in his prime. As I said, it's probably due to game management (and the number of games supports that). It's true that he isn't quite the same player that he once was, but that doesn't make the argument valid.

 

[Leafshater67]

How many 2nd overall picks have taken 7- 8 years to break out?

No clue but if you said 3, I’d say 1 - Dylan Strome.

It was strange they took a project as a 2OA. There was questions of his ceiling back then and it was assumed he’d be a long project. Seemed like a bit of a reach at the time and looking more like that now.

 

[FiveTacos]

It was strange they took a project as a 2OA. There was questions of his ceiling back then and it was assumed he’d be a long project. Seemed like a bit of a reach at the time and looking more like that now.

Perhaps the better question is who were the most successful highly drafted toolsy projects? And what the hit rate is compared to more conventional top prospects, and if it's riskier then is the payoff any higher?

 

[Herby]

The "Big Guys take longer" thing may or may not be true, I think there is some validity to it, but think it's less a thing the higher you move up a draft board.

But if you are taking a player with the #2 overall pick and your organizational belief is that player may not pay significant dividends until he is 24 or 25 years old, well then you probably shouldn't be using a #2 pick on that player, because you are just missing out on to many years where players you passed on are major contributors, this is especially true for a Kings team that was going to try and win in a 3/4 year window with Kopitar and Doughty as the main pieces. And also the days of having a guy under team control until he is 31 are long over, so drafting projects is less valuable than it was 20 years ago. But much like how they construct their roster and playing style, the Kings management team still believes its the late 90's era they all played in.

The Kings unqualified lackey AGM Nelson Emerson claimed in an interview that Byfield may not be what people expect until he is 25, and then 9 months later the Kings sign Byfield to a contract that will cause the Kings to lose team control after his age 26 season, you know that just makes a ton of sense, draft a 7 year project with the #2 overall pick and then let him hit UFA at 26.

Now, I don't believe for a second Emerson is telling the truth, I think the Kings expected much much more by now, but are just covering their asses with the laughable "Could be 7 years until he looks like a #2 pick" , even if it makes them look incompetent with the contract situation.

 

[Coach Reggie Dunlop]

He’s just not that great and never has been. He’s a good player. A solid player. But not someone worth 2 overall and even in his draft year I just never saw it. In a redraft stutzle and Raymond would be the obvious 1-2 draft spots.