Prospect Info: Samuel Fagemo, RW, 50th Overall

[Rick Knickleback]

If only we didn't have so many right handed shots too!

Less than zero confidence in this regime's ability to develop scorers.

 

[De Montreal]

So 34 goals in 37 games.

I remember Toffoli had 15 goals in 18 AHL games. Alexandre Giroux had 60 in 69 games. That's the closest I can remember to this pace. Frk had 40 in 58 games. Pulkkinen 34 in 46 games.

I'm sure there's others.

Giroux seems to be the closest. Frk and Pulkkinen are impressive but not the same pace.

Goal per game or close to seems unheard of in the AHL. I don’t think he will maintain this rythm but he could very well win the scoring title even by playing only 2/3 of the season.

That said thanks for the research and I agree with everyone saying he has his warts.

 

[KopitarGOAT420]

Oh come on. The kings have given him several chances to show what he can do playing 6 minutes with 4th line plugs!

This is the biggest difference between the Kongs and a legitimately good team/organization like the Dallas Stars. And its why young players flourish in Dallas and struggle in LA.

The Fagemo / Stankoven situation is such a perfect example.

Both players drafted in a nearly identical position (Fagemo taken 50th overall, Stankoven taken 47th overall), both players absolutely torching the AHL this year, both organizations with strong NHL teams in playoff spots (granted, Dallas a stronger team).... Yet we get two wildly different outcomes.

The Stars recall Stankoven and instantly put him on the 3rd line with talented players (Currently playing with Johnston and Benn) and give him 14-18 minutes of ice time every night. Powerplay time too. They set him up for success and what do you know??? He's successful.

Meanwhile the Kings recall Fagemo and give him 6-8 minutes on the 4th line with players like JAD and Lizotte and then bench him when he doesn't immediately make an impact. Then after a couple weeks they send him back down to the AHL.

It's insane. Like you can even throw drafting and development aside... THIS is why young players struggle in LA - Deployment / Asset Management. Byfield is essentially the only exception to this issue and that's solely because he was such a high pick management couldn't afford for him to fail - So they continually set him up for success and yep, you guessed it - It's working.

Edit: I realize Stankoven is a bit younger and Fagemo may not be a perfect hockey player but the point still stands. You need to set these young players up for success and the Kings don't do that. We're even seeing them jerk Clarke around and he is an ultra-talented blue chip prospect. It's infuriating.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

This is the biggest difference between the Kongs and a legitimately good team/organization like the Dallas Stars. And its why young players flourish in Dallas and struggle in LA.

The Fagemo / Stankoven situation is such a perfect example.

Both players drafted in a nearly identical position (Fagemo taken 50th overall, Stankoven taken 47th overall), both players absolutely torching the AHL this year, both organizations with strong NHL teams in playoff spots (granted, Dallas a stronger team).... Yet we get two wildly different outcomes.

The Stars recall Stankoven and instantly put him on the 3rd line with talented players (Currently playing with Johnston and Benn) and give him 14-18 minutes of ice time every night. Powerplay time too. They set him up for success and what do you know??? He's successful.

Meanwhile the Kings recall Fagemo and give him 6-8 minutes on the 4th line with players like JAD and Lizotte and then bench him when he doesn't immediately make an impact. Then after a couple weeks they send him back down to the AHL.

It's insane. Like you can even throw drafting and development aside... THIS is why young players struggle in LA - Deployment / Asset Management. Byfield is essentially the only exception to this issue and that's solely because he was such a high pick management couldn't afford for him to fail - So they continually set him up for success and yep, you guessed it - It's working.

Good post....one problem,

Why are we assuming Fagemo and Stankoven are the same player? You are making the assumtion that Fagemo would be doing what Stankoven is doing if Fagemo was on Dallas, why?

EDIT: To expand on this, Stankoven, great story no doubt, good player, no doubt, but you are attributing his success because Dallas is playing him, saying, see if Team ABC played XXX then XXX would succeed as well, using that logic explain the following DALLAS players and why they aren't succeeding: Mavrik Bourque, Albin Eriksson, Brett Pollok,

 

[KopitarGOAT420]

Good post....one problem,

Why are we assuming Fagemo and Stankoven are the same player? You are making the assumtion that Fagemo would be doing what Stankoven is doing if Fagemo was on Dallas, why?

Not assuming they're the same player. Just pointing out the situations are very comparable and there's a key difference - Deployment at the NHL level.

If the Kings deployed Fagemo like the Stars deploy Stankoven, we'd likely see much better results (not saying he'd do exactly what Stankoven is doing right now... Just saying he'd be more successful than he's been).

On the flip side, if the Stars deployed Stankoven like the Kings deploy Fagemo, chances are, Stankoven would also struggle. Maybe I'm wrong on this point - Maybe Stankoven is just a stud and if you give him 6 minutes on the 4th line he'd still be producing. But I highly doubt it.

Edit: Addressing your edit.
Albin Eriksson - not signed so that's why.
Brett Pollok - not signed, 27, didn't exactly light up the AHL when he was younger.
Mavrik Bourque - slightly less productive when compared to Stankoven but this is a decent question. My guess would be the Stars realized they only had 1 spot open in the top 9 (due to Dadonov / Seguin injuries) and chose to give Stankoven a shot instead of Bourque.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Not assuming they're the same player. Just pointing out the situations are very comparable and there's a key difference - Deployment at the NHL level.

If the Kings deployed Fagemo like the Stars deploy Stankoven, we'd likely see much better results (not saying he'd do exactly what Stankoven is doing right now... Just saying he'd be more successful than he's been).

On the flip side, if the Stars deployed Stankoven like the Kings deploy Fagemo, chances are, Stankoven would also struggle. Maybe I'm wrong on this point - Maybe Stankoven is just a stud and if you give him 6 minutes on the 4th line he'd still be producing. But I highly doubt it.

100%, but then you have to break down the argument further, yes deployment is crucial, but does Stankoven get that deployment because he's ready, and does ALL thing things right?

Watch Stankoven play, he's not just offensive, from what I remember in the last game, he was defensively sound as well....Fagemo and Kaliyev ARE NOT, and are not going to be given the same deployment BECAUSE of that. Stankoven might have been born with that defensive acuity, or he might have worked to achieved it, either way, he has it.

So while yes, deployment is 100% crucial, players being ready and able and willing to do the work without the puck, plays 100% in the decision on how to deploy them.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

And that's the thing

We have so much more evidence that the Kings just suck at development and deployment post draft than we do 'player is flawed or a problem behind the scenes.'

It was simply a hypothesis a few of us had circa 2017-2018ish...now it's a full blown, battle-tested theory that just rings true every single time.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Not assuming they're the same player. Just pointing out the situations are very comparable and there's a key difference - Deployment at the NHL level.

If the Kings deployed Fagemo like the Stars deploy Stankoven, we'd likely see much better results (not saying he'd do exactly what Stankoven is doing right now... Just saying he'd be more successful than he's been).

On the flip side, if the Stars deployed Stankoven like the Kings deploy Fagemo, chances are, Stankoven would also struggle. Maybe I'm wrong on this point - Maybe Stankoven is just a stud and if you give him 6 minutes on the 4th line he'd still be producing. But I highly doubt it.

Edit: Addressing your edit.
Albin Eriksson - not signed so that's why.
Brett Pollok - not signed, 27, didn't exactly light up the AHL when he was younger.
Mavrik Bourque - slightly less productive when compared to Stankoven but this is a decent question. My guess would be the Stars realized they only had 1 spot open in the top 9 (due to Dadonov / Seguin injuries) and chose to give Stankoven a shot instead of Bourque.

Honestly it was kind of a rhetorical question designed to point out that just because players are drafted in the same postion draft wise, doesn't mean they are the same players with the same development path etc,

Like I had said, yes you are 100% correct in that deployment is vital to development, and Fagemo and Kaliyev both, have not had optimal deployment, at all. The question then becomes why, is it because they aren't the players that people think they are, and need a lot of work, which is what I think it is, or is it because the organization just has a complete blindspot to young players, despite playing the majority of young players.....that is the option that most are going with, and it just doesn't ring true when you look at the facts of the previous years.

 

[KopitarGOAT420]

Honestly it was kind of a rhetorical question designed to point out that just because players are drafted in the same postion draft wise, doesn't mean they are the same players with the same development path etc,

Like I had said, yes you are 100% correct in that deployment is vital to development, and Fagemo and Kaliyev both, have not had optimal deployment, at all. The question then becomes why, is it because they aren't the players that people think they are, and need a lot of work, which is what I think it is, or is it because the organization just has a complete blindspot to young players, despite playing the majority of young players.....that is the option that most are going with, and it just doesn't ring true when you look at the facts of the previous years.

I guess I just disagree with the 'why' and your assessment of Kaliyev and Fagemo (which seems to be that they have a lot they need to work on from a developmental perspective). Kaliyev's defensive game has significantly improved over the last few years - His motor looks much better this year (when he's given a chance to play). Fagemo's also improved over the years.

I realize neither player is particularly strong defensively but IMO - Not everyone has to be a fantastic 2 way forward to bring value to the lineup.

Now I'm not saying defense isn't important... But there's plenty of players around the league that aren't amazing defensively (some who are outright BAD defensively) who are still key players for their teams because of what they bring offensively.

The Kings take high skill, offensively gifted prospects and try to force them to fit a 'defensively responsible 200ft player' mold... And ruin players in the process. They deploy these prospects into a role they aren't suited for and then punish them when they fail - Which then destroys the confidence of these players.

You could also argue it's a drafting / development problem. Drafting because if that's your plan, why draft guys like Kaliyev and Fagemo in the first place?? They clearly don't fit your organization. Development because you take offensively gifted prospects and put them in front of a development staff that doesn't know the first thing about producing at a high level in the NHL.

Earlier this year the development staff basically said they don't give Clarke any direction when it comes to the offensive side of the game and just 'let him do his thing'. On one hand, that's terrible. On the other, thank god - Because none of these guys have any insight to offer Clarke from an offensive perspective so 'just stfu and don't ruin him' is probably our best possible approach at the moment.

At the end of the day, you might be right - Maybe Kaliyev and Fagemo just aren't that good. The problem is, the Kings don't deploy these players in a way that sets them up for success and allow us (and management) to appropriately evaluate them.

 

[lexlavender]

Good post....one problem,

Why are we assuming Fagemo and Stankoven are the same player? You are making the assumtion that Fagemo would be doing what Stankoven is doing if Fagemo was on Dallas, why?

EDIT: To expand on this, Stankoven, great story no doubt, good player, no doubt, but you are attributing his success because Dallas is playing him, saying, see if Team ABC played XXX then XXX would succeed as well, using that logic explain the following DALLAS players and why they aren't succeeding: Mavrik Bourque, Albin Eriksson, Brett Pollok,

*Pushes up glasses* Heh, good post kid, reminds me of myself back in the day.

One problem though...*unsheathes katana*...have you considered that we don't live in a universe where they are the same person?

*teleports behind you*

Face it kid, my debate powers are too great. You never had a chance.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I guess I just disagree with the 'why' and your assessment of Kaliyev and Fagemo (which seems to be that they have a lot they need to work on from a developmental perspective). Kaliyev's defensive game has significantly improved over the last few years - His motor looks much better this year (when he's given a chance to play). Fagemo's also improved over the years.

I realize neither player is particularly strong defensively but IMO - Not everyone has to be a fantastic 2 way forward to bring value to the lineup.

Now I'm not saying defense isn't important... But there's plenty of players around the league that aren't amazing defensively (some who are outright BAD defensively) who are still key players for their teams because of what they bring offensively.

The Kings take high skill, offensively gifted prospects and try to force them to fit a 'defensively responsible 200ft player' mold... And ruin players in the process. They deploy these prospects into a role they aren't suited for and then punish them when they fail - Which then destroys the confidence of these players.

You could also argue it's a drafting / development problem. Drafting because if that's your plan, why draft guys like Kaliyev and Fagemo in the first place?? They clearly don't fit your organization. Development because you take offensively gifted prospects and put them in front of a development staff that doesn't know the first thing about producing at a high level in the NHL.

Earlier this year the development staff basically said they don't give Clarke any direction when it comes to the offensive side of the game and just 'let him do his thing'. On one hand, that's terrible. On the other, thank god - Because none of these guys have any insight to offer Clarke from an offensive perspective so 'just stfu and don't ruin him' is probably our best possible approach at the moment.

At the end of the day, you might be right - Maybe Kaliyev and Fagemo just aren't that good. The problem is, the Kings don't deploy these players in a way that sets them up for success and allow us (and management) to appropriately evaluate them.

We are close to agreement than you think, here's the deal, you can be a Fiala....if you have Fiala like offensive talent, Kaliyev does not, 183 NHL games in, he's SHOWN he doesn't have that level, so, if he doesn't have that LEVEL of offense, where you can over look the flaws in his game, where can you play him that won't hurt the team, you can't play him as a top six, and he probably does't work as a bottom six,

Fagemo, is possibly the same thing, but I agree, he really hasn't had much of a chance to show that, so there is that. But when another organization pays money to acquire you, then uses you the same way, and keep in mind, these organizations, see and deal with these players on a DAILY basis, there is so much more to being an NHL player than just playing the game etc,

I think people are losing their shit over what easily can be Kale Clague and Paul Ladue

 

[King'sPawn]

We are close to agreement than you think, here's the deal, you can be a Fiala....if you have Fiala like offensive talent, Kaliyev does not, 183 NHL games in, he's SHOWN he doesn't have that level, so, if he doesn't have that LEVEL of offense, where you can over look the flaws in his game, where can you play him that won't hurt the team, you can't play him as a top six, and he probably does't work as a bottom six,

Fagemo, is possibly the same thing, but I agree, he really hasn't had much of a chance to show that, so there is that. But when another organization pays money to acquire you, then uses you the same way, and keep in mind, these organizations, see and deal with these players on a DAILY basis, there is so much more to being an NHL player than just playing the game etc,

I think people are losing their shit over what easily can be Kale Clague and Paul Ladue

The issue I have with the development is in multiple layers:
- why are forwards all expected to learn to grind? Even if it doesn't fit their style.
- if that's a requirement, why do they draft players who don't fit the Kings style? I understand organizations draft "assets", but if you don't know how to manage them, you operate at a loss. It's like buying a house and going back to asbestos, instead of renovating.
- why do veterans get more leash when they "aren't playing right"? Shouldn't they know better?
- why does Hiller talk about quality minutes and then bench highly skilled prospects for an extended period of time?
- Why did Blake and McLellan talk about needing Kaliyev to be a top-six forward then trade for PLD and Fiala, which shifts players around and gives them less room in the lineup... ESPECIALLY if it's the vets who do get more leash to make a mistake?
- How are players supposed to grow when they learn fear of making a mistake, because doing so will get them punished with benching? Fiala makes the same spin-around giveaways every game. And he was benched in the third period once?

Kaliyev and Fagemo need to do better. No doubt. But I don't think the Kings have created the best circumstances for them to grow. Byfield's become more of an exception, but he's a second overall pick. As pointed out by you, me, and several others, you can't depend on getting a top pick every year. Consequently, better needs to be done with the later picks. I think the Kings either need to:
- draft closer to the identity they want to keep (two-way puck hounds who can battle along the boards) or:
- accept that prospects that don't match their identity need more wiggle room to err and they're allowed to play their game.

Because single digit minutes for Clarke, Kaliyev, etc is just a waste of everyone's time.

 

[Chazz Reinhold]

I guess I just disagree with the 'why' and your assessment of Kaliyev and Fagemo (which seems to be that they have a lot they need to work on from a developmental perspective). Kaliyev's defensive game has significantly improved over the last few years - His motor looks much better this year (when he's given a chance to play). Fagemo's also improved over the years.

I realize neither player is particularly strong defensively but IMO - Not everyone has to be a fantastic 2 way forward to bring value to the lineup.

Now I'm not saying defense isn't important... But there's plenty of players around the league that aren't amazing defensively (some who are outright BAD defensively) who are still key players for their teams because of what they bring offensively.

The Kings take high skill, offensively gifted prospects and try to force them to fit a 'defensively responsible 200ft player' mold... And ruin players in the process. They deploy these prospects into a role they aren't suited for and then punish them when they fail - Which then destroys the confidence of these players.

You could also argue it's a drafting / development problem. Drafting because if that's your plan, why draft guys like Kaliyev and Fagemo in the first place?? They clearly don't fit your organization. Development because you take offensively gifted prospects and put them in front of a development staff that doesn't know the first thing about producing at a high level in the NHL.

Earlier this year the development staff basically said they don't give Clarke any direction when it comes to the offensive side of the game and just 'let him do his thing'. On one hand, that's terrible. On the other, thank god - Because none of these guys have any insight to offer Clarke from an offensive perspective so 'just stfu and don't ruin him' is probably our best possible approach at the moment.

At the end of the day, you might be right - Maybe Kaliyev and Fagemo just aren't that good. The problem is, the Kings don't deploy these players in a way that sets them up for success and allow us (and management) to appropriately evaluate them.

There's also just no evidence the Kaliyev is a problem defensively. You can look at it from a variety of angles, but the team does not bleed quality chances against when he's on the ice. In fact, the team is better in that department when he's on the ice.

E.g.,

Players who suck defensively don't have overwhelmingly positive expected and actual numbers when they're on the ice.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

The issue I have with the development is in multiple layers:
- why are forwards all expected to learn to grind? Even if it doesn't fit their style.
- if that's a requirement, why do they draft players who don't fit the Kings style? I understand organizations draft "assets", but if you don't know how to manage them, you operate at a loss. It's like buying a house and going back to asbestos, instead of renovating.
- why do veterans get more leash when they "aren't playing right"? Shouldn't they know better?
- why does Hiller talk about quality minutes and then bench highly skilled prospects for an extended period of time?
- Why did Blake and McLellan talk about needing Kaliyev to be a top-six forward then trade for PLD and Fiala, which shifts players around and gives them less room in the lineup... ESPECIALLY if it's the vets who do get more leash to make a mistake?
- How are players supposed to grow when they learn fear of making a mistake, because doing so will get them punished with benching? Fiala makes the same spin-around giveaways every game. And he was benched in the third period once?

Kaliyev and Fagemo need to do better. No doubt. But I don't think the Kings have created the best circumstances for them to grow. Byfield's become more of an exception, but he's a second overall pick. As pointed out by you, me, and several others, you can't depend on getting a top pick every year. Consequently, better needs to be done with the later picks. I think the Kings either need to:
- draft closer to the identity they want to keep (two-way puck hounds who can battle along the boards) or:
- accept that prospects that don't match their identity need more wiggle room to err and they're allowed to play their game.

Because single digit minutes for Clarke, Kaliyev, etc is just a waste of everyone's time.

Will respond later, running to an appointment in about 10, but just quick shots,

All forwards have to play defense, part of playing NHL defense is grinding and winning board battles. That is NHL hockey, that's not just LA Kings hockey, that's a staple of defense at the NHL level.

As far as requirement, you are drafting players at 17,18,19 year old, its easier to mold them to a style, again, this is something that happens to every team, at some degree, as players age, mature, get more experience, trends grow in their game, there are a shit ton of scoring machines in Juniors, that eaked out NHL careers playing bottom six minutes,

Veterans get more leash, because they've earned more leash, plain and simple.

You;d have to ask Hiller that, there's very very clearly something about Kaliyevs game that neither coach likes, a lot, and it's enough to alter his deployment significantly.

You'd have to ask Blake, but I think he traded for Fiala BEFORE mentioning Kaliyev, and I think everyone is looking at the PLD trade for now...instead of 3 years from now when Kopitar is gone etc.

You mention fear of getting benched, but Kaliyev was right back out there, Laferriere, right back out there, Spence, right back out there, I think that's a trope where if people repeat it enough it becomes "fact" when in fact, it's not what has happened.

 

[All The Kings Men]

You'd have to ask Blake, but I think he traded for Fiala BEFORE mentioning Kaliyev

I don't have a horse in this race but in the interest accuracy I don't think this is true.

My recollection is that Blake mentioned Kaliyev needing to be a "Top 6 player" in the exit media avails at the end of 2021-22 and they acquired Fiala after that.

I could be wrong and please nobody view this is as me taking a side on this particular topic.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I don't have a horse in this race but in the interest accuracy I don't think this is true.

My recollection is that Blake mentioned Kaliyev needing to be a "Top 6 player" in the exit media avails at the end of 2021-22 and they acquired Fiala after that.

I could be wrong and please nobody view this is as me taking a side on this particular topic.

Fair enough, I'm not sure of the timeline either, I thought it was before the Fiala deal, I thought it was beginning of this year or end of last year he had said it?

 

[All The Kings Men]

Fair enough, I'm not sure of the timeline either, I thought it was before the Fiala deal, I thought it was beginning of this year or end of last year he had said it?

I believe it's been said multiple times by multiple people over the years?

EDIT: I went back and listened to the exit avail with Blake and he didn't mention Kaliyev needing to be a top 6 forward. It's possible that he did it after the Fiala acquisition.

 

[KopitarGOAT420]

*Pushes up glasses* Heh, good post kid, reminds me of myself back in the day.

One problem though...*unsheathes katana*...have you considered that we don't live in a universe where they are the same person?

*teleports behind you*

Face it kid, my debate powers are too great. You never has a chance.

Lmfaoooooo damn this is hilarious. I've read it like 10 times and laughed out loud every time

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

There's also just no evidence the Kaliyev is a problem defensively. You can look at it from a variety of angles, but the team does not bleed quality chances against when he's on the ice. In fact, the team is better in that department when he's on the ice.

E.g.,

View attachment 834126

View attachment 834127

View attachment 834128

View attachment 834129

Players who suck defensively don't have overwhelmingly positive expected and actual numbers when they're on the ice.

Serious question, do these numbers quantify who he is on the ice against, case in point, I don't expect to see those numbers if he's on against a McDavid, or McKinnon etc, while I fully expect those numbers if he's on the ice vs a Matt Martin type....

 

[King'sPawn]

All forwards have to play defense, part of playing NHL defense is grinding and winning board battles. That is NHL hockey, that's not just LA Kings hockey, that's a staple of defense at the NHL level.

To varying degrees, sure. But I think we can all agree that Kaliyev isn't the worst either in board battles or defensive play, compared to the rest of the players in the league. So, why is there a higher threshold for Kings prospects?

As far as requirement, you are drafting players at 17,18,19 year old, its easier to mold them to a style, again, this is something that happens to every team, at some degree, as players age, mature, get more experience, trends grow in their game, there are a shit ton of scoring machines in Juniors, that eaked out NHL careers playing bottom six minutes,

Sure, you draft players and want them to grow their game. But why expect a player who almost never checked in junior to play in a grinder's role before he plays his scorer's role? That's not maturing them. It's telling a first baseman he needs to learn to pitch before he can play first base.

Veterans get more leash, because they've earned more leash, plain and simple.

Why have they earned it? Why does PLD get more leash for more egregious issues? This spans both McLellan and Hiller.

You;d have to ask Hiller that, there's very very clearly something about Kaliyevs game that neither coach likes, a lot, and it's enough to alter his deployment significantly.

Isn't that the point? Every player needs touches on the puck and skates on the ice on a regular basis. It's why backup goalies flex and warm-up before taking over. How can Kaliyev improve his game if he often gets put out there cold, then gets punished for not playing quality hockey?

You'd have to ask Blake, but I think he traded for Fiala BEFORE mentioning Kaliyev, and I think everyone is looking at the PLD trade for now...instead of 3 years from now when Kopitar is gone etc.

As Jesse mentioned, the whole statement of needing Kaliyev to be a top-six winger was the end of the season press conference of the 2021-22 season. Fiala was acquired two months later at the draft. Maybe it was McLellan who said it. Going back a few years and finding the exact quote is giving me a hard time at the moment.

You mention fear of getting benched, but Kaliyev was right back out there, Laferriere, right back out there, Spence, right back out there, I think that's a trope where if people repeat it enough it becomes "fact" when in fact, it's not what has happened.

I don't think referencing him getting two quality shifts counters the argument that he's getting quality ice time. Not when he had 8 minutes TOI one game and 5 minutes prior. I'm curious how you space that TOI out to make sure it's quality. Every 7ish minutes at best is going to have you cold. Then if you add he "went right back out there' means there was even MORE time between shifts in there.

Clearly we'll just see things differently. I think Laferriere fits their identity. Good for him. He earned the minutes with his hard work. Kaliyev and Fagemo don't fit their style. Which, you know, I can't blame the Kings for that.

BUT

When they trade a player like Faber, who would fit in the Kings system, for Fiala, who's also incredibly skilled, but he's one dimensional and weak on the boards, benching Kaliyev for not playing "their way", then there's an issue.

This isn't even a dump on Fiala. Just pointing out that the Kings are willing to let vets not play to the team's identity when it suits them. Why should the prospects and journeymen be held accountable for things the vets aren't doing? Because they're vets? So does Kaliyev automatically get a leash when he reaches x number of games or minutes played?

There's inconsistency in the org. And prospects can't be expected to develop well like that. But maybe that's just me.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I believe it's been said multiple times by multiple people over the years?

Forgot the at multiple times

But if you can find a better article, seems like this was said after last year, after the Fiala deal

Kings Internal Options to Replace Vilardi, Iafallo & Kupari

In his exit interview, Rob Blake said that the Los Angeles Kings were banking on internal improvements this summer. To not expect any big moves that drastically change the team. That turned out to not be true. Almost two months after making that claim, Blake pulled off a blockbuster trade that...

lahockeynow.com

 

[All The Kings Men]

Forgot the at multiple times

But if you can find a better article, seems like this was said after last year, after the Fiala deal

Kings Internal Options to Replace Vilardi, Iafallo & Kupari

In his exit interview, Rob Blake said that the Los Angeles Kings were banking on internal improvements this summer. To not expect any big moves that drastically change the team. That turned out to not be true. Almost two months after making that claim, Blake pulled off a blockbuster trade that...

lahockeynow.com

I'm just listening back to my own recordings... I didn't hear him say it at the 2022 Exit interviews but I was listening at double speed while doing other things.

I am less certain of my own recollection than I was when I first posted it.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

I'm just listening back to my own recordings... I didn't hear him say it at the 2022 Exit interviews but I was listening at double speed while doing other things.

I am less certain of my own recollection than I was when I first posted it.

No worries, I know he said it....everyone knows he said it, it was just when....I think it was after they traded for Fiala, before they traded for PLD....

 

[Lt Dan]

I am less certain of my own recollection than I was when I first posted it.

Not directed at you, because I am just as guilty and I am pretty I'm sure older, but..

getting old sucks, doesn't it

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

To varying degrees, sure. But I think we can all agree that Kaliyev isn't the worst either in board battles or defensive play, compared to the rest of the players in the league. So, why is there a higher threshold for Kings prospects?

Sure, you draft players and want them to grow their game. But why expect a player who almost never checked in junior to play in a grinder's role before he plays his scorer's role? That's not maturing them. It's telling a first baseman he needs to learn to pitch before he can play first base.

Why have they earned it? Why does PLD get more leash for more egregious issues? This spans both McLellan and Hiller.

Isn't that the point? Every player needs touches on the puck and skates on the ice on a regular basis. It's why backup goalies flex and warm-up before taking over. How can Kaliyev improve his game if he often gets put out there cold, then gets punished for not playing quality hockey?

As Jesse mentioned, the whole statement of needing Kaliyev to be a top-six winger was the end of the season press conference of the 2021-22 season. Fiala was acquired two months later at the draft. Maybe it was McLellan who said it. Going back a few years and finding the exact quote is giving me a hard time at the moment.

I don't think referencing him getting two quality shifts counters the argument that he's getting quality ice time. Not when he had 8 minutes TOI one game and 5 minutes prior. I'm curious how you space that TOI out to make sure it's quality. Every 7ish minutes at best is going to have you cold. Then if you add he "went right back out there' means there was even MORE time between shifts in there.

Clearly we'll just see things differently. I think Laferriere fits their identity. Good for him. He earned the minutes with his hard work. Kaliyev and Fagemo don't fit their style. Which, you know, I can't blame the Kings for that.

BUT

When they trade a player like Faber, who would fit in the Kings system, for Fiala, who's also incredibly skilled, but he's one dimensional and weak on the boards, benching Kaliyev for not playing "their way", then there's an issue.

This isn't even a dump on Fiala. Just pointing out that the Kings are willing to let vets not play to the team's identity when it suits them. Why should the prospects and journeymen be held accountable for things the vets aren't doing? Because they're vets? So does Kaliyev automatically get a leash when he reaches x number of games or minutes played?

There's inconsistency in the org. And prospects can't be expected to develop well like that. But maybe that's just me.

Not sure I am going to hit every point you made, and I know you know this, but there's shit ton we don't get to see sitting on this side of the ice, in GENERAL, you are correct when it comes to ice time, quality time, development ice time, itc, but you are just looking at the literal GAME time ice time, I know...Captain Obvious here, and part of this is me speculating, so take that, but I've got to think that SPECIFCALLY with Kaliyev and Fagemo, there is shit they are either doing or not doing on practice time, that is rubbing coaches the wrong way, whether it be right....or be wrong, that's another question, but can you name another player on another team, whose SOLE contribution is their shot, that doesn't have elite numbers, and is getting 15-16-17 minutes a game? I can't, every player who has a cannon like Kaliyev's is ALSO contrinbuting to other aspects of the game, Kaliyev doesn't. His board play has impoved, but his defensive coverage is so bad even the Lakers don't want anything to do with it.

As far as Fagemo goes, again, another organization, paid to get him, had him for nearly a month, that's games and practices, and then said, naw, not for us, to me, that's on the player, missing holes in his game or whatever the reason.

As far as drafing a scorer in juniors and then putting them in scorer's spots, here's the 2017 leading OHL scorers, top 25 some damn good players in there, but out of that 25, there are 17 that did not translate their scoring, into the NHL, I mean Nic Hague was top 20 in scoring and not a single person in here would tag him as an offensive D. Listis below cuz I suck at formatting

So you draft the players you think will, and you try and round that game out, but they absolutely HAVE to learn to do other things, Kaliyev and Fagemo have not yet done that to date.

As far as mistakes/leash etc, Fiala has earned that because what he does offensively, PLD has earned that because of what he has done offensively, again AS A CAREER....Kopitar f***s up game to game, as does Doughty, they don't get benched because they have earned the right to correct it and play through it and 9 out of 10 times they do, no one is judged at the professional level by one and only one mistake, shit happens, but when it' s the same mistake after same mistake after same mistake, after same mistake after......you get the idea, then it shows the inability to learn, or inability to adjust, and you don't earn the right to play through that, as far as examples, the other night was perfect, Kaliyev f***ed the dog on that 1st goal, showed less effort than me on most nights, and was back out there for his next shift...and the shift after, which frankly, I was surprised, that lack of effort I thought he would have been done for.


As far as improving their game, that's why they practice, again, we aren't seeing that time on the ice, we aren't seeing anything that revolves around that, which is why I think there is more to this, than just....coaches don't like young players, that's a fallacy in and of itself.

Appoarently I couldn't cut and paste the list, so here is the link

OHL Scoring Leaders 2017-2018

OHL scoring leaders and demographics breakdown in the 2017-2018 season. Player stats, nationality and age distributions, draft rounds of players in the 2017-2018 OHL season.

www.quanthockey.com