C Quinton Byfield (2020, 2nd, LAK) part III

[Coaches Coroner]

I'm not sure he's NHL ready tody from what I've seen dating back to Sudbury, but his package of size, skillset and position combination isn't very common and has very high potential.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Okay, so you're at the point of calling people "major homers" after ignoring the points presented that a) he got better b) he has done well in higher competition (OHL playoffs) and c) he was the second best forward on the team in the gold medal game, not as an aggregate.

So you have shown you are not here to discuss. Just antagonize and argue. So have fun trolling everyone else. I'm done with you.

I dont think anyone is going to agree he was the second best forward in the Gold Medal game either. Cozens wasnt even really the best.

The playoffs is not "better competition"... Its the same competition he was playing against all season. When he plays against the best on best, he simply isnt anywhere close to the best when he should be with how he is rated in the OHL.

Hes a great prospect and none of this means he's a bust but these tournaments are really exposing his lack of decision making or ability to up his game in tougher situations and that's definitely a big concern.

 

[bsu]

My best friend just got hired by Byfield for his daily meals. Know he is eating very healthy and good. @RightMealz on instagram

 

[ponder]

Anyone know when his AHL debut will be? The OHL shutdown could be a really blessing for Byfield - he’s too good for the OHL, but not good enough for the NHL, the AHL is the perfect spot for him, but he’s only allowed to play there due to COVID (and the resulting relaxing of the CHL transfer agreement). I expect him and Kaliyev will both be quality AHLers from day 1.

 

[93LEAFS]

Anyone know when his AHL debut will be? The OHL shutdown could be a really blessing for Byfield - he’s too good for the OHL, but not good enough for the NHL, the AHL is the perfect spot for him, but he’s only allowed to play there due to COVID (and the resulting relaxing of the CHL transfer agreement). I expect him and Kaliyev will both be quality AHLers from day 1.

To good for the OHL is a bit of a myth. Tavares and Marner both repeated at 18 after better seasons as 17 year-olds (and in Tavares case a 16 year old season too). Lower levels allow you to focus more on holes in your game, which you can't at higher levels while trying to stay above water. The only guys who are too good for the OHL at 18, are good enough to walk into an NHL team's top 6 right off the bat.

 

[ponder]

To good for the OHL is a bit of a myth. Tavares and Marner both repeated at 18 after better seasons as 17 year-olds (and in Tavares case a 16 year old season too). Lower levels allow you to focus more on holes in your game, which you can't at higher levels while trying to stay above water. The only guys who are too good for the OHL at 18, are good enough to walk into an NHL team's top 6 right off the bat.

Tavares played in the NHL in his D+1 season, and Marner was a twig who needed to get stronger.

My concern with Byfield is that he’s just SOOOOO physically dominant against OHL kids, he can lean on that while not really needing to sharpen his skill and hustle/aggression/consistency. We see in higher level international hockey that he can keep up, but not dominate. I think against men in the AHL he’s more likely to pick up good habits, he’ll have to get more consistently aggressive and develop his skillset to dominate, while in the OHL he can (and should) just overpower dudes.

I mean, I could easily be wrong, prospect development is complex and hard to predict. But my personal feeling is that he’ll develop better in the AHL than he would in the OHL.

 

[King'sPawn]

Anyone know when his AHL debut will be? The OHL shutdown could be a really blessing for Byfield - he’s too good for the OHL, but not good enough for the NHL, the AHL is the perfect spot for him, but he’s only allowed to play there due to COVID (and the resulting relaxing of the CHL transfer agreement). I expect him and Kaliyev will both be quality AHLers from day 1.

There's an exhibition game tomorrow versus San Diego, so I expect him to play then.

 

[93LEAFS]

Tavares played in the NHL in his D+1 season, and Marner was a twig who needed to get stronger.

My concern with Byfield is that he’s just SOOOOO physically dominant against OHL kids, he can lean on that while not really needing to sharpen his skill and hustle/aggression/consistency. We see in higher level international hockey that he can keep up, but not dominate. I think against men in the AHL he’s more likely to pick up good habits, he’ll have to get more consistently aggressive and develop his skillset to dominate, while in the OHL he can (and should) just overpower dudes.

I mean, I could easily be wrong, prospect development is complex and hard to predict. But my personal feeling is that he’ll develop better in the AHL than he would in the OHL.

My point is Tavares repeated at the same age and was better while improving as a player due to being able to round out his defensive game and work on skating. You have way more downtime in the OHL during the week as a high-school graduate to focus on skill development, compared to the grind of pro-hockey, at-least in all years prior to this one. You have way more room to experiment with things that can develop into good habits at lower-levels, even if they start off as a weakness. In the AHL that is difficult to do as an 18-year-old.

To be honest, Marner didn't get much bigger or stronger in his one extra year.

 

[Frolov 6'3]

My point is Tavares repeated at the same age and was better while improving as a player due to being able to round out his defensive game and work on skating. You have way more downtime in the OHL during the week as a high-school graduate to focus on skill development, compared to the grind of pro-hockey, at-least in all years prior to this one. You have way more room to experiment with things that can develop into good habits at lower-levels, even if they start off as a weakness. In the AHL that is difficult to do as an 18-year-old.

To be honest, Marner didn't get much bigger or stronger in his one extra year.

Ponder said he was too good for the OHL and the AHL was a good next step.

You disagreed by saying both Tavares and Marner returned to Juniors too despite their numbers.

Marner was explained already and for Tavares there was no other option than returning. If he could play in the AHL or NHL at 17, he would have been there. He did not return to the OHL to work on his game.

Sorry, but you made no sense.

 

[93LEAFS]

Ponder said he was too good for the OHL and the AHL was a good next step.

You disagreed by saying both Tavares and Marner returned to Juniors too despite being very good.

Marner was explained already and for Tavares there was no other option than returning. If he could play in the AHL or NHL at 17, he would have been there. He did not return to the OHL to work in his game.

Sorry, but you made no sense.

My point is Tavares clearly improved his game down there despite being better and the same age. This myth guys stagnate in the CHL is a bit ridiculous. If a guy like Tavares who dominated at 16 and 17, can improve as an 18-year-old down there, so can Byfield. Its easier to work on clear weaknesses in a lower-paced environment if you buy-in, combined with the more forgiving schedule of the CHL.

To be honest, if we look at the track-record of CHL players who used loopholes to jump to the AHL at 18 it isn't that impressive. See Alex Nylander or Julius Honka.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

Ponder said he was too good for the OHL and the AHL was a good next step.

You disagreed by saying both Tavares and Marner returned to Juniors too despite their numbers.

Marner was explained already and for Tavares there was no other option than returning. If he could play in the AHL or NHL at 17, he would have been there. He did not return to the OHL to work on his game.

Sorry, but you made no sense.

Tavares was able to work on his skating which wasnt very good back then. so I guess your wrong

 

[Frolov 6'3]

My point is Tavares clearly improved his game down there despite being better and the same age. This myth guys stagnate in the CHL is a bit ridiculous. If a guy like Tavares who dominated at 16 and 17, can improve as an 18-year-old down there, so can Byfield. Its easier to work on clear weaknesses in a lower-paced environment if you buy-in, combined with the more forgiving schedule of the CHL.

I disagree, that CHL rule is ridicule. I understand it but do not like it. Most of all that second year.

The AHL is a better place for plenty of players than another season and possibly second season in juniors. Not just for extremely skilled players. The majority of Kings fans think a player like Kyle Clifford would have been a different player if he wasnt rushed in the NHL. Unfortunately it was junior hockey or NHL.

Tavares in the AHL at age 17 would not have been a problem either (hypothetically of course). He could have worked on his skating there too.

 

[93LEAFS]

I disagree, that OHL rule is ridicule. I understand it but do not like it. Most of all that second year.

The AHL is a better place for plenty of players than another season and possibly second season in juniors. Not just for extremely skilled players. The majority of Kings fans think a player like Kyle Clifford would have been a different player if he wasnt rushed in the NHL. Unfortunately it was junior hockey or NHL.

Tavares in the AHL at age 17 would not have been a problem either (hypothetically of course) he could have worked on his skating there too.

The thing that misses is that lower-players also develop due to playing against stronger opposition, and I don't think its shown guys stagnate down there. Byfield benefits by being able to play against drafted players at 16 and 17. If those guys are taken out, you likely get players even less prepared for the AHL at 18.

Rushing guys to the NHL is absolutely a thing, but, I don't believe in guys being too good for juniors. If they are too good for juniors they would be clear top 9 guys on almost all NHL teams.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

My point is Tavares repeated at the same age and was better while improving as a player due to being able to round out his defensive game and work on skating. You have way more downtime in the OHL during the week as a high-school graduate to focus on skill development, compared to the grind of pro-hockey, at-least in all years prior to this one. You have way more room to experiment with things that can develop into good habits at lower-levels, even if they start off as a weakness. In the AHL that is difficult to do as an 18-year-old.

To be honest, Marner didn't get much bigger or stronger in his one extra year.

Comparisons aside, it's hard to really disagree with @ponder 's reasoning, imo.

I feel like he'd be much better served learning to use his body vs. men with the skill and ability to absolutely slaughter him physically while getting used to the pace of the game. That addresses most of his question marks, no? More than running the OHL again would, imo. Plus, he'd be with the Kings' vaunted development team constantly instead of just as a check in.

I do really like the point about being a graduate and having downtime though, I've honestly never thought of that part of it. Didn't realize that was a thing at all. I'm not 100% sure if that's better though. But if he'd have consistent access to the Kings while playing in the O, maybe it's not such a bad deal.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

The thing that misses is that lower-players also develop due to playing against stronger opposition, and I don't think its shown guys stagnate down there. Byfield benefits by being able to play against drafted players at 16 and 17. If those guys are taken out, you likely get players even less prepared for the AHL at 18.

Rushing guys to the NHL is absolutely a thing, but, I don't believe in guys being too good for juniors. If they are too good for juniors they would be clear top 9 guys on almost all NHL teams.

Sorry to respond again, don't mean to over-chat, haha. But I think in Byfield's case it's not so much being too good for juniors as it is his improvement opportunities don't seem to be as great there.

 

[93LEAFS]

Comparisons aside, it's hard to really disagree with @ponder 's reasoning, imo.

I feel like he'd be much better served learning to use his body vs. men with the skill and ability to absolutely slaughter him physically while getting used to the pace of the game. That addresses most of his question marks, no? More than running the OHL again would, imo. Plus, he'd be with the Kings' vaunted development team constantly instead of just as a check in.

I do really like the point about being a graduate and having downtime though, I've honestly never thought of that part of it. Didn't realize that was a thing at all. I'm not 100% sure if that's better though. But if he'd have consistent access to the Kings while playing in the O, maybe it's not such a bad deal.

Sorry to respond again, don't mean to over-chat, haha. But I think in Byfield's case it's not so much being too good for juniors as it is his improvement opportunities don't seem to be as great there.

Sudbury is a bit in the sticks, but if you are located where like 80% of the OHL is, you have access to skill development guys pretty easily. I mean, quite a few of the top skill-development coaches in the world are within a 3 to 4 hour drive of most OHL teams (pretty sure both Oates and Belfry for example, plus Gary Roberts and Biosteel guys for workouts). Plus, most teams top development guys are flying around all the time. Obviously, I'm talking as if this was a normal year. This year it is clear he has to go to the AHL as the OHL is still in flux and there are quite strict lockdown rules here.

I just remember Leafs posters complaining for ages that Marner was too good for the CHL in his d+1, he improved and within 3 years out of junior was a 90 point player. I'd find it hard to believe going to the AHL would have dramatically sped up that time-line or made it better. Same with someone like Matt Barzal in the WHL.

 

[nbwingsfan]

I disagree, that CHL rule is ridicule. I understand it but do not like it. Most of all that second year.

The AHL is a better place for plenty of players than another season and possibly second season in juniors. Not just for extremely skilled players. The majority of Kings fans think a player like Kyle Clifford would have been a different player if he wasnt rushed in the NHL. Unfortunately it was junior hockey or NHL.

Tavares in the AHL at age 17 would not have been a problem either (hypothetically of course). He could have worked on his skating there too.

It's much harder to work on holes in your game at the AHL/NHL level.

I cant really think of any prospects who had their development ruined by staying in Junior too long. As already pointed out, many players who went to even the AHL early did not turn out as good as expected. I wish the Wings had kept Rasmussen/Zadina in the CHL instead of rushing them.

The only players who IMO are "too good" for Junior are players who dont look out of place in a top 9 role in the NHL as well.

 

[Frolov 6'3]

It's much harder to work on holes in your game at the AHL/NHL level.

I cant really think of any prospects who had their development ruined by staying in Junior too long. As already pointed out, many players who went to even the AHL early did not turn out as good as expected. I wish the Wings had kept Rasmussen/Zadina in the CHL instead of rushing them.

The only players who IMO are "too good" for Junior are players who dont look out of place in a top 9 role in the NHL as well.

Of course you cant because the agreement in place between the National Hockey League and the CHL is there for years already. Besides not everything needs to be ruined, things can stagnate too.

Dont always speak in absolutes.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Of course you cant because the agreement in place between the National Hockey League and the CHL is there for years already.

But there are many examples of high end prospects leaving the CHL early to join the NHL/AHL and stalling. I cant think of many top prospects who stayed longer in the CHL and ended up poor players.

 

[Frolov 6'3]

But there are many examples of high end prospects leaving the CHL early to join the NHL/AHL and stalling. I cant think of many top prospects who stayed longer in the CHL and ended up poor players.

Please tell me those many examples of high end prospects leaving the CHL and who joined the AHL too soon ?

Really curious.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Please tell me those many examples of high end prospects leaving the CHL and who joined the AHL too soon ?

Really curious.

The AHL/NHL? There's so many examples of rushed prospects...

Nylander, Zadina, Honka just recently for the AHL.

Countless examples of top ~5 picks being rushed to the NHL at 18/19 who ended up busts.

Meanwhile I'm having a hard time for top 5 picks who were considered "too good" for the CHL at 18/19 but were sent back regardless and ended up being busts. Strome I guess kind of did but he also showed he wasnt good at the professional level either.

 

[Frolov 6'3]

The AHL/NHL? There's so many examples of rushed prospects...

Nylander, Zadina, Honka just recently for the AHL.

Countless examples of top ~5 picks being rushed to the NHL at 18/19 who ended up busts.

Meanwhile I'm having a hard time for top 5 picks who were considered "too good" for the CHL at 18/19 but were sent back regardless and ended up being busts. Strome I guess kind of did but he also showed he wasnt good at the professional level either.

We are not talking about straight to the NHL but the AHL.

Zadina has played a full year in the AHL and a good portion of last year too. Why was he rushed, why would he have been better if he had played junior hockey for another 1,5 season ? If anything, that was the right decision.

Both Nylander and Honka are europeans and could be busts too, whatever league they have been playing in.

I understand it will always be difficult to draw any conclusions but there are certainly not many examples like you implied due to the fact there cant be many examples.

 

[nbwingsfan]

We are not talking about straight to the NHL but the AHL.

Zadina have played a full year in the AHL and a good portion of last year too. Why was he rushed, why would he have been better if he had played junior hockey for 1,5 season. If anything, that was the right decision.

Both Nylander and Honka are europeans and could be busts too, whatever league they have been playing in.

I understand it will always be difficult to draw any conclusions but there are certainly not many examples like you implied.

Im saying there arent really example of top 10 players who looked "too good" for the CHL at 18/19 but went back anyways and ended up as busts. There are however plenty of examples of top 10 picks being rushed to professional hockey and ending up busting. There really is no harm in sending a player back to Junior to work on holes in his game if he's not ready for the NHL.

Honka and Nylander played junior when they were drafted and used a loophole to play AHL instead of going back and it hurt their development. Zadina is also well behind where he was projected to be at this point and he used that same loophole. It's not a guarantee they'd be better players if they stayed in Junior, but they certainly aren't ahead in their development because they went to the AHL instead of staying in Junior.

 

[Frolov 6'3]

Im saying there arent really example of top 10 players who looked "too good" for the CHL at 18/19 but went back anyways and ended up as busts. There are however plenty of examples of top 10 picks being rushed to professional hockey and ending up busting. There really is no harm in sending a player back to Junior to work on holes in his game if he's not ready for the NHL.

Honka and Nylander played junior when they were drafted and used a loophole to play AHL instead of going back and it hurt their development. Zadina is also wel behind where he was projected to be at this point and he used that same loophole. It's not a guarantee they'd be better players if they stayed in Junior, but they certainly aren't ahead in their development because they went to the AHL instead of staying in Junior.

No idea why you come up with the NHL..

I dont give up.

The discussion was if some North-American players would not benefit greatly if they went to the AHL in either their first or at least their D2 season. The AHL, that league similar to the better European pro leagues where so many Europeans prospects are playing in too, and where nobody has a problem with.

That is not possible now, with exception of European players, due to the agreement, so no, there are not many examples of high end prospects leaving the CHL for the AHL like you were saying.

 

[nbwingsfan]

No idea why you come up with the NHL..

I dont give up.

The discussion was if some North-American players would not benefit greatly if they went to the AHL in either their first or at least their D2 season. The AHL, that league similar to the better European pro leagues were so many Europeans prospects are playing in too and nobody has a problem with.

That is not possible now, with exception of European players, due to the agreement, so no, there are not many examples of high end prospects leaving the CHL for the AHL like you were saying.

The few examples we do have, haven't been good.

The point is that there are almost no examples of keeping high end prospects in a league they are "too good for" and it ruining their development. There are many examples of players falling in development because they were rushed into a league they weren't ready for. Why take that risk that Byfield isnt ready for even the AHL then yet instead of letting him work on his flaws in Junior like everyone else has done and ended up fine?