HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Los Angeles Kings (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=42)
-   -   Kings #11 in new HF Organizational Rankings (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=106180)

David A. Rainer 09-29-2004 01:35 AM

Kings #11 in new HF Organizational Rankings
 
Article

I thought for sure the Kings would crack the top 10 this year. I was thinking #8 or #9. But I guess #11 is not far off.

With as many as 5 of the Kings top 20 set to graduate this season, some the Kings projects (Boyle, Karlsson, even Pushkarev to some degree) better step up this season or the Kings won't be this high in the rankings again for awhile.

KingPurpleDinosaur 09-29-2004 02:52 AM

i think the fact that we have virtually no goalie prospects drags us down a lot. had we had a decent goaltender in our farm, i bet we'd jump a few positions based purely on having a more balanced farm.

T2M 09-29-2004 06:43 AM

If this were done 1 month later, we'd be in the top 10. Once Pushkaryev (who wasn't mentioned at all in the article) starts lighting up the WHL, then everybody'll take notice of another top flight younger. Finally, what's the big deal about having a bunch of "projects". Every player's a project until he has 3 or 4 consistent years in the NHL.

David A. Rainer 09-29-2004 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T2M
If this were done 1 month later, we'd be in the top 10. Once Pushkaryev (who wasn't mentioned at all in the article) starts lighting up the WHL, then everybody'll take notice of another top flight younger. Finally, what's the big deal about having a bunch of "projects". Every player's a project until he has 3 or 4 consistent years in the NHL.

If you want to look at it that way, not every player is the same level of a project. It's a relative term and if every player is a "project" to some degree, then the Kings have more high-risk projects than the rest of the league.

If you want to define "project" the way you have and call both Zach Parise and Brian Boyle "projects" because neither has played 3 or 4 years in the NHL, then you are not telling the whole story between the two prospects. You are making the term "project" superfluous.

So, when someone uses the term "project", they mean that although every prospect is nothing but a "prospective player" (and not a sure thing), a "project" of a prospective player is someone who is going to take a lot more time (and therefore some more risk) to develop than others.

KingPurpleDinosaur 09-29-2004 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T2M
If this were done 1 month later, we'd be in the top 10. Once Pushkaryev (who wasn't mentioned at all in the article) starts lighting up the WHL, then everybody'll take notice of another top flight younger. Finally, what's the big deal about having a bunch of "projects". Every player's a project until he has 3 or 4 consistent years in the NHL.

ur a bit optimistic on push's development. don't expect too much from him just yet, he hasn't done anything to prove himself worthy of this hype. the more important prospects that MUST show up this year are the boyles, steckles, lehoux, and karlsson if they want to even have a crack shot at making the NHL.

also, i too am not big on projects. i don't really know if boyle was worth that first round pick we made, but we'll see. skeptical, but i see the raw material there at the same time.

T2M 10-04-2004 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathFromAbove
If you want to look at it that way, not every player is the same level of a project. It's a relative term and if every player is a "project" to some degree, then the Kings have more high-risk projects than the rest of the league.

If you want to define "project" the way you have and call both Zach Parise and Brian Boyle "projects" because neither has played 3 or 4 years in the NHL, then you are not telling the whole story between the two prospects. You are making the term "project" superfluous.

So, when someone uses the term "project", they mean that although every prospect is nothing but a "prospective player" (and not a sure thing), a "project" of a prospective player is someone who is going to take a lot more time (and therefore some more risk) to develop than others.

The point I was trying to make (and didn't make it all that well) is that most teams aren't filled with sure fire things. If you look at our guys in development (and I'm including Brown here) I'd say we have four or five guys who will be solid NHLers. Grebs, Gleason, Brown, Cammy and Tukkonen. That the rest are "projects" just plain doesn't surprise me. You can be a big guy who needs to pull things together, a little guy who needs to step it up and prove he can play in traffic, I guess my problem is that one homer's "sure thing" is another guy's "boom or bust project". I think the best you can do is select raw talent, what appears to be a good head on the kid's shoulders and hope things fall into place before he's 23 and washed up. That's what I was implying with the project assessment.

T2M

P.S. I'm also just plain not sold on Parise. Sorry to all the supporters and I've eaten crow before, but I think he's further along than Boyle, and at the same time could have a much shorter career. Got all the fundamentals, I just worry about an injury filled future.

Game Misconduct 10-07-2004 02:59 PM

1 Attachment(s)
I find your lack of faith in Boyle disturbing.

Legionnaire 10-07-2004 11:30 PM

I still say the Kings prospects are better than the Oilers and a few other teams. But hey, what are you going to do?

jfont 10-07-2004 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Game Misconduct
I find your lack of faith in Boyle disturbing.

come to the dark side, luc...


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:07 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.