HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Brian Boyle

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-20-2005, 09:08 AM
  #151
Legionnaire
Kill! Jeff, Kill!!!
 
Legionnaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA-LA Land
Country: United States
Posts: 35,486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingPurpleDinosaur
improvement is always good. next year should be big for him.

Is that your version of eating crow?

__________________
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Legionnaire is offline  
Old
03-20-2005, 09:18 AM
  #152
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,888
vCash: 500
haha, not really. all i said was "should we begin to worry" when he wasn't doin so hot when you guys all jumped on my case. apparently it's not cool to examine kings prospects here if u'r not pumping them up for some reason. case and point, u guys didn't seem to like me being critical of boyle's development earlier this year becuase he's a "long term project", but then now that he's doing better u guys are all for examing how well he's improved. u guys sure do care about hte present now

and im still not so convinced i'd pick him with the #26 spot. when it comes down to who was the better pick, irrespective of draft positions, i'd stillt ake pushkarev any day of the week. i like boyle's improvement and i really am a fan of his, but push IMO is far more potent. if i were to have done the draft on draft day, i prob would have taken push w/ the #26 (as i see him as the better player available) and pick up sullivan or someone else on the 2nd rounder. as of now, i think i still stick by those people as being the best picks.

but hey, if boyle does well then that is awesome. i have alwyas acknowledged that he had some skill, but he just played like a pansy. i just hope that he starts playing more physical and keeps up the good work. any improvement on kings prospect is a pat ont he back for the scouts and great for us fans.


Last edited by KingPurpleDinosaur: 03-20-2005 at 09:28 AM.
KingPurpleDinosaur is offline  
Old
03-20-2005, 11:23 AM
  #153
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingPurpleDinosaur
haha, not really. all i said was "should we begin to worry" when he wasn't doin so hot when you guys all jumped on my case. apparently it's not cool to examine kings prospects here if u'r not pumping them up for some reason. case and point, u guys didn't seem to like me being critical of boyle's development earlier this year becuase he's a "long term project", but then now that he's doing better u guys are all for examing how well he's improved. u guys sure do care about hte present now
I'm with you. There's nothing wrong with examining prospects and wondering if there is cause for worry. I sure did that with Lehoux and before him with Storr and Berg. But with a project who is EXPECTED to take AT LEAST a couple years to bloom into anything productive, worrying after just one year is premature. But even at that, I don't personally care if people worried...it's the ones who outright called him a bust (not here but at LGK) that I disagree with.

Quote:
and im still not so convinced i'd pick him with the #26 spot. when it comes down to who was the better pick, irrespective of draft positions, i'd stillt ake pushkarev any day of the week. i like boyle's improvement and i really am a fan of his, but push IMO is far more potent. if i were to have done the draft on draft day, i prob would have taken push w/ the #26 (as i see him as the better player available) and pick up sullivan or someone else on the 2nd rounder. as of now, i think i still stick by those people as being the best picks.
And while that's a fair criticism, it is inapplicable. The fact that the Kings GOT Pushkarev at #44 is clear proof that they DIDN'T need to take him at #26. You don't draft a guy higher merely because he has more talent. As a GM, you MUST factor in availability and all the talk I've heard is that Ottawa was going to take him at #29 and if they didn't Dallas was at #33. So if they'd done what you suggest, they couldn't have taken Boyle at all and the Ottawa and Dallas fans would be the ones happy today. But it sounds like you think they simply shouldn't have drafted Boyle at all and that's something we disagree about...I think he was a very good risk to take, considering they had three 1st rounders. Besides taking O'Sullivan (Sullivan?) would have been adding yet another smalling forward to Brown and Tambellini....how many do the Kings need before they take a chance on a guy like Boyle? Or are you simply opposed to taking projects?

Quote:
but hey, if boyle does well then that is awesome. i have alwyas acknowledged that he had some skill, but he just played like a pansy. i just hope that he starts playing more physical and keeps up the good work. any improvement on kings prospect is a pat ont he back for the scouts and great for us fans.
Played like a pansy? A pansy? 58 PIM in college and he's a pansy? He came in pretty damn skinny so it's not like he could have his way with the bulkier guys. But he is filling out his frame and looking at those pics I am VERY satisfied that he is on track.

Does all this mean he'll pan out? Hell no. But IMO he was a VERY solid pick at #26 and is progressing just fine.

jt is offline  
Old
03-20-2005, 11:54 AM
  #154
King'sPawn
Enjoy the chaos
 
King'sPawn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 8,240
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingPurpleDinosaur
haha, not really. all i said was "should we begin to worry" when he wasn't doin so hot when you guys all jumped on my case. apparently it's not cool to examine kings prospects here if u'r not pumping them up for some reason. case and point, u guys didn't seem to like me being critical of boyle's development earlier this year becuase he's a "long term project", but then now that he's doing better u guys are all for examing how well he's improved. u guys sure do care about hte present now
I just wanted to chime in on this point. For what it's worth, I think Kings fans are pretty even handed when it comes to evaluating their own prospects. I don't think people were jumping on you when you noticed he wasn't playing very well. I certainly wasn't.

What people were commenting about, were your expectations of Boyle when we know he's a long term project. Then we got into the discussion of why would the Kings take a long term project.

And of course we care about the present; like I said before, it's an indication of how much Boyle has progressed. He went from fourth liner last year to tournament MVP this year. If he jumped from fourth liner last year to healthy scratch this year, we'd be concerned about how dedicated he is to hockey, but many sensible fans would at least try not to panic, recognizing that we weren't expecting him to be a high impact player anytime soon.

The fact he IS becoming an impact player, as a sophomore in one of the best college programs, speaks volumes about how far he has come.

It was your expectations on Boyle we were discussing... not your evaluation.

King'sPawn is offline  
Old
03-20-2005, 12:05 PM
  #155
jfont
Registered User
 
jfont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 15,390
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by King'sPawn
I just wanted to chime in on this point. For what it's worth, I think Kings fans are pretty even handed when it comes to evaluating their own prospects.
except at the trade board where a couple of years ago they were suggesting federov from the wings for garbage...

__________________
Due to budget cuts, the light at the end of the tunnel will be turned off
jfont is offline  
Old
03-20-2005, 12:50 PM
  #156
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 30,789
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfont
except at the trade board where a couple of years ago they were suggesting federov from the wings for garbage...
That was bad...

Reaper45 is offline  
Old
03-20-2005, 02:01 PM
  #157
Old Hickory
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Good article on Boyle (make sure you read the second page)

http://sports.bostonherald.com/colle...rticleid=74252

 
Old
03-20-2005, 02:24 PM
  #158
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsjohn
Good article on Boyle (make sure you read the second page)

http://sports.bostonherald.com/colle...rticleid=74252
This part jumped out at me.

Quote:
``I don't even think I should have been the MVP - the guy sitting next to me should have been,'' said Boyle, referring to Eagles freshman goalie Cory Schneider at the postgame press conference.
Quote:
``Brian is a good athlete, a pitcher in high school and of course a very good hockey player,'' BC coach Jerry York said. ``But the adjustment for any player from the prep school level to Hockey East is huge. For big kids like Brian, it takes them longer, so you have to be a little patient with them. But at some point, you've got to challenge the player. You know, it's, `C'mon, you're just kind of treading water here, we want you to be much, much better in specific areas.'

``We thought his intensity level, his competitive level on the ice, had to improve. His skills have always been good. But I think he's playing much more the style I would like. He's a much more powerful player. He's using his 6-foot-7, 235 pounds - where sometimes during his freshman year I thought he was 5-foot-7 and 135 pounds. He was playing a cute little game. He's becoming a man now.''

Boyle has become a physical force, a guy cut from the Keith Primeau mold, who has learned to compete hard and use his size to great advantage.

``I just look at myself in the mirror and said, `This isn't the player that I am, I need to do better,' '' Boyle said. ``I had a lot of people telling me I had to do better for the good of the team. It had gotten to the point where I was a little nervous with the puck. I wasn't as confident as I could have been.''

But those days are gone. Also gone is that label of ``project'' Boyle had stuck to him.

After this weekend, you can bet the Kings know they made one heck of a great pick.

jt is offline  
Old
03-20-2005, 02:46 PM
  #159
David A. Rainer
Registered User
 
David A. Rainer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Huntington Beach
Country: Italy
Posts: 7,293
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to David A. Rainer
Quote:
"We thought his intensity level, his competitive level on the ice, had to improve. His skills have always been good. But I think he's playing much more the style I would like. He's a much more powerful player. He's using his 6-foot-7, 235 pounds - where sometimes during his freshman year I thought he was 5-foot-7 and 135 pounds. He was playing a cute little game. He's becoming a man now." - Coach York
Great! If this holds up, as far as I'm concerned, he's turned the corner. Talking with some people from BC and with the Kings, they all said that he was still playing like he's in high school which is a little tough to shake when you've never really been challenged at younger ages. This was the very critique many of us had of him - trying to do the cutsie play instead of just using his body to lean on people and with no discrenible intensity. (John can vouch for me with all the "stop playing like a midget" I was yelling at Boyle during the prospect camp) Heard from some at BC that he was starting to spend more time at the net and behind this season. So I started watching some BC games again and wouldn't you know it, there he was playing more of a power game. Great to hear he has turned the corner and really started to improve. He still has a long way to go, but atleast now he's on the right path.

__________________
Saxon Sports Information and Research
David A. Rainer is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 01:07 PM
  #160
Game Misconduct
Registered User
 
Game Misconduct's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 1,862
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David A. Rainer
Great! If this holds up, as far as I'm concerned, he's turned the corner. Talking with some people from BC and with the Kings, they all said that he was still playing like he's in high school which is a little tough to shake when you've never really been challenged at younger ages. This was the very critique many of us had of him - trying to do the cutsie play instead of just using his body to lean on people and with no discrenible intensity. (John can vouch for me with all the "stop playing like a midget" I was yelling at Boyle during the prospect camp) Heard from some at BC that he was starting to spend more time at the net and behind this season. So I started watching some BC games again and wouldn't you know it, there he was playing more of a power game. Great to hear he has turned the corner and really started to improve. He still has a long way to go, but atleast now he's on the right path.
He still has a long way to go.

But when he gets there, I'm going to tell everyone that I told you so! :lol

Game Misconduct is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 01:57 PM
  #161
Chartrand
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Bahrain
Posts: 2,209
vCash: 500
The thing is, look at Boyle's numbers, and look at Steckel's numbers.

I know they're in different situations, but Steckel...who looks like he'll probably be a bust, put up better numbers than Boyle has at the same stage in their respective collegiate careers.

Mind you, I'm not comparing Boyle to guys like Cammalleri and Clarke...you know, the small, agile forwards. I'm comparing one giant power forward to another. I know there's the issue of ice time, but has Steckel really fallen off, or were Boyle's freshmen numbers so dissapointing that we're making too much of his improvement?

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...php3?pid=54471

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...id%5B%5D=72656

EDIT: I know hockeydb doesn't display Boyle's current numbers, and for further comparison, you should see George Parros' stats too...

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...TRUE&pid=45094

Chartrand is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 02:04 PM
  #162
Matt13
Registered User
 
Matt13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: I'm on a boat MF!
Country: United States
Posts: 4,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHL MV
The thing is, look at Boyle's numbers, and look at Steckel's numbers.

I know they're in different situations, but Steckel...who looks like he'll probably be a bust, put up better numbers than Boyle has at the same stage in their respective collegiate careers.

Mind you, I'm not comparing Boyle to guys like Cammalleri and Clarke...you know, the small, agile forwards. I'm comparing one giant power forward to another. I know there's the issue of ice time, but has Steckel really fallen off, or were Boyle's freshmen numbers so dissapointing that we're making too much of his improvement?

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...php3?pid=54471

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/p...id%5B%5D=72656


Its just not the numbers. You cant argue that his freshman year was horrible, but with 14 of his 18 goals coming since Christmas and being a sophmore being named MVP of the tourney goes a long way IMO. While this pace must continue I think it goes to show what he can do.

I also believe with some maturity that Steckel still has a lot more to offer.

Matt13 is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 02:32 PM
  #163
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Game Misconduct
He still has a long way to go.
And a short time to get there, but we're gonna do what they say can't be done...


jt is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 02:41 PM
  #164
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,927
vCash: 500
Video clips of Boyle's goals from his big weekend against Maine & UNH...

http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/video/0405/0318boy.mov
http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/video/0405/0319bo1.mov
http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/video/0405/0319bo2.mov

Ziggy Stardust is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 02:45 PM
  #165
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jt
I'm with you. There's nothing wrong with examining prospects and wondering if there is cause for worry. I sure did that with Lehoux and before him with Storr and Berg. But with a project who is EXPECTED to take AT LEAST a couple years to bloom into anything productive, worrying after just one year is premature. But even at that, I don't personally care if people worried...it's the ones who outright called him a bust (not here but at LGK) that I disagree with.
just to keep things clear (and i kno u aren't implying so) i NEVER called him a bust. i did say "should we start worrying" when his second year wasn't goin that hot and that i still am not convinced we should have picked him up in the #26 spot. always held he had potential, but i still think we coulda got more value for those picks.



Quote:
And while that's a fair criticism, it is inapplicable. The fact that the Kings GOT Pushkarev at #44 is clear proof that they DIDN'T need to take him at #26. You don't draft a guy higher merely because he has more talent. As a GM, you MUST factor in availability and all the talk I've heard is that Ottawa was going to take him at #29 and if they didn't Dallas was at #33. So if they'd done what you suggest, they couldn't have taken Boyle at all and the Ottawa and Dallas fans would be the ones happy today. But it sounds like you think they simply shouldn't have drafted Boyle at all and that's something we disagree about...I think he was a very good risk to take, considering they had three 1st rounders. Besides taking O'Sullivan (Sullivan?) would have been adding yet another smalling forward to Brown and Tambellini....how many do the Kings need before they take a chance on a guy like Boyle? Or are you simply opposed to taking projects?
the mroe i talked about it, the more i felt i am just against taking projects in the first round. i think time to develop should be factored into the worth of a project. for example, do i like joki? of coruse i do and i would love to have him right now. but seeing as how long it took for him to come around, i would not draft him in the frist round, just not worth the wait and too much risk in waiting for a long term project to come around. the longer it takes for a project to develop the more risk as u constantly ahve to hope that he is just one day goin to pick it up. i mean two years earlier and joki would have been considered a bust, not worth it IMO

but when i say that i would draft push in the #26 spot, i am discounting what I kno now and drafting based on what I knew on draft day. i had no idea push would be availabe at the #44 spot (as it seems that detroit and phoenix were really gunnin for him), but i do feel that he was the best player avialable. bringing in hindsight into drafting just takes away any value of talking about where u would draft a player at all. pushkarev is wowrth a #26 spot, i dont think boyle was. with that said, sullivan was ALSO avialbe at the #44 spot, so if boyle was available and it came down to boyle vs sullivan, i say take sullivan. i wouldn't mind drafting boyle (again, contrary to popular opinion, i actually kidna liked him), i just don't see him being the best player avialable at any spots we drafted int he first two rounds.

and even though these are all "smallish" forwards, i dont' think size is too big an issue if they show the skillsets to overcome size. i mean if we drafted parise instead of boyle, would any of u guys be complaining? i don't think so, he'd be a helluva pick.

KingPurpleDinosaur is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 02:52 PM
  #166
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King'sPawn
I just wanted to chime in on this point. For what it's worth, I think Kings fans are pretty even handed when it comes to evaluating their own prospects. I don't think people were jumping on you when you noticed he wasn't playing very well. I certainly wasn't.

What people were commenting about, were your expectations of Boyle when we know he's a long term project. Then we got into the discussion of why would the Kings take a long term project.

And of course we care about the present; like I said before, it's an indication of how much Boyle has progressed. He went from fourth liner last year to tournament MVP this year. If he jumped from fourth liner last year to healthy scratch this year, we'd be concerned about how dedicated he is to hockey, but many sensible fans would at least try not to panic, recognizing that we weren't expecting him to be a high impact player anytime soon.

The fact he IS becoming an impact player, as a sophomore in one of the best college programs, speaks volumes about how far he has come.

It was your expectations on Boyle we were discussing... not your evaluation.
i dont reemmber if this is correct or not, but i believe my expectations of boyle were to hit about .75 ppg while being close to a first liner by the end of the year (i think i posted this earlier). he had reached my expectations and so i have to say i am not as worried about this pick as earlier in the year. in the first half of the season, he was doing NO WHERE near as good as he was in the second half of the season. i think my expectaitons were very reasonable for him as he was able to reach my expectations and exceed them w/ his tournament mvp.

i wasn't asking for the world of him, but when he didn't improve too much from last year to this year, i began to think we should worry about his development. he picked it up though, so i got no complaints. my expectations of him next year are to be either first or second leading scorer with first line playing time. doesn't have to dominate the nation, but i do believe he should be the best on his team by next year.

KingPurpleDinosaur is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 03:10 PM
  #167
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingPurpleDinosaur
just to keep things clear (and i kno u aren't implying so) i NEVER called him a bust. i did say "should we start worrying" when his second year wasn't goin that hot and that i still am not convinced we should have picked him up in the #26 spot. always held he had potential, but i still think we coulda got more value for those picks.
...those who called him a bust know (or should know) who they are. I wasn't posting at HF for what you did say, so I can take your word for it, no problem. On the one hand, I have no issues "worrying" about prospects. But on the other hand, I think worrying about "project" prospects until about their 3rd year is premature.


Quote:
the mroe i talked about it, the more i felt i am just against taking projects in the first round.
So no Joe Thornton? No Pat Marleau? No Keith Tkachuk? No Jarome Iginla? No Todd Bertuzzi? No Peter Forsberg? No Brendan Morrow? Some of the best power forwards in hockey and you wouldn't have drafted those guys in the 1st round?

Quote:
i think time to develop should be factored into the worth of a project.
I totally agree...but "factoring in" doesn't mean "I won't take him". Upside is a factor too so if the upside and likelihood of success factors outweigh the time to develop factor, you take him.

Quote:
for example, do i like joki? of coruse i do and i would love to have him right now. but seeing as how long it took for him to come around, i would not draft him in the frist round, just not worth the wait and too much risk in waiting for a long term project to come around.
But he wasn't thought of as a project at the time. He was actually thought to be the most NHL-ready of the three (him, Thornton and Marleau) because he had been playing in a men's league already and many people thought he would be able to step right in on the 2nd line.

Quote:
the longer it takes for a project to develop the more risk as u constantly ahve to hope that he is just one day goin to pick it up. i mean two years earlier and joki would have been considered a bust, not worth it IMO
But that's true of almost EVERY player picked after the top 10 (maybe even the top 5). Look at the previous drafts and you'll see.

Quote:
but when i say that i would draft push in the #26 spot, i am discounting what I kno now and drafting based on what I knew on draft day. i had no idea push would be availabe at the #44 spot (as it seems that detroit and phoenix were really gunnin for him), but i do feel that he was the best player avialable. bringing in hindsight into drafting just takes away any value of talking about where u would draft a player at all. pushkarev is wowrth a #26 spot, i dont think boyle was.
But DT obviously DID know that he'd be there at #44...and everything I've heard is that either Ottawa or Dallas was going to take him just a few picks later. So if DT did what you suggested, he'd have gotten Pushkarev at #26 and not gotten Boyle at #44...so he'd have taken Pushkarev too high and ended up with a lesser prospect than Boyle (IMO).

Quote:
with that said, sullivan was ALSO avialbe at the #44 spot, so if boyle was available and it came down to boyle vs sullivan, i say take sullivan. i wouldn't mind drafting boyle (again, contrary to popular opinion, i actually kidna liked him), i just don't see him being the best player avialable at any spots we drafted int he first two rounds.
O'Sullivan, right?

Why is taking Boyle, the project any more risky than taking O'Sullivan, who had a piss-poor attitude and would have been yet another smallish forward like Brown and Tambellini? How many 6' forwards do you draft until you decide you need some size?

Quote:
and even though these are all "smallish" forwards, i dont' think size is too big an issue if they show the skillsets to overcome size. i mean if we drafted parise instead of boyle, would any of u guys be complaining? i don't think so, he'd be a helluva pick.
The girls don't really mean it when they say size doesn't matter. It does.

Yes, teams can win with smaller players but when you have a shot at a mamoth kid who has good skills you take it. Talk is that Ottawa was going to take him in the first round and they've had an awful lot of draft success.........

jt is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 03:19 PM
  #168
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingPurpleDinosaur
my expectations of him next year are to be either first or second leading scorer with first line playing time. doesn't have to dominate the nation, but i do believe he should be the best on his team by next year.
If Eaves comes back, there is NO WAY he'll be #1 in points. They're the only two non-seniors in BC's top 5 scorers. If Gionta comes back, it'll be close but I'd expect Boyle to score more goals. Bertram will get significantly more ice time too so it will be close.

I would expect him to be top 4 in points and top 2 in goals. If he finishes #2 in points and #1 in goals, I would be VERY happy.

jt is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 03:36 PM
  #169
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,888
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jt
So no Joe Thornton? No Pat Marleau? No Keith Tkachuk? No Jarome Iginla? No Todd Bertuzzi? No Peter Forsberg? No Brendan Morrow? Some of the best power forwards in hockey and you wouldn't have drafted those guys in the 1st round?
its pretty obvious ur definition of a project is far different from me. my idea of a project is someone who hasn't really shown he is capable of producing just yet but has shown the occasional flashes or something else that scouts believe can be later developed into something great. it is also expected that this prospect probably won't develop until their late 20's. all the names u listed have already proven themselves by the time they were drafted, where boyle, on the other hand, barely played high school league and by his first year only pumped out a meager 8 pionts.

that and they all played in the NHL by the time they were 20, most at 18. hardly "long term" projects.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jt
I totally agree...but "factoring in" doesn't mean "I won't take him". Upside is a factor too so if the upside and likelihood of success factors outweigh the time to develop factor, you take him.
of course, this isn't a hard brick rule, it's just adjusts the scale of a prospect's worth, that's all. if i am completley convinced a guy is goin to be hella good and is considered a "project", of course i wouldn't mind takin him int he 1st. but he better have that good a potential.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jt
But DT obviously DID know that he'd be there at #44...and everything I've heard is that either Ottawa or Dallas was going to take him just a few picks later. So if DT did what you suggested, he'd have gotten Pushkarev at #26 and not gotten Boyle at #44...so he'd have taken Pushkarev too high and ended up with a lesser prospect than Boyle (IMO).
how does DT kno who is goin to be left? what are you talking about? he picks on who is left on his list, it's not about some grand scheme he developed prior to the draft. and as i said before, i dont think pushkarev at #26 is too high, i was fairly convinced back then that he woudl be good from scouting reports and was surprised he even droped to our 2nd rounder, as was most people. he was considered a very good pick when we got him for a 2nd.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jt
O'Sullivan, right?

Why is taking Boyle, the project any more risky than taking O'Sullivan, who had a piss-poor attitude and would have been yet another smallish forward like Brown and Tambellini? How many 6' forwards do you draft until you decide you need some size?
i dont kno where u get o' sullivan's atittude cuase i've never read his attitude has never been a problem. but i think the players like sullivan and push are good regardless of size. im not too concerned about size, i remember goin through the top scorers int he league and seeing that those who are over 6'5" aren't exactly those who are dominating the league. there was a couple, but not enough to convince me that size is essential to the success of a team.

KingPurpleDinosaur is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 03:46 PM
  #170
tomd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,707
vCash: 500
just curious...does HF have enough server capacity to handle the sheer volume of jt's posts?

tomd is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 04:02 PM
  #171
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingPurpleDinosaur
its pretty obvious ur definition of a project is far different from me. my idea of a project is someone who hasn't really shown he is capable of producing just yet but has shown the occasional flashes or something else that scouts believe can be later developed into something great. it is also expected that this prospect probably won't develop until their late 20's. all the names u listed have already proven themselves by the time they were drafted, where boyle, on the other hand, barely played high school league and by his first year only pumped out a meager 8 pionts.
If Brian Boyle doesn't develop until he's 27 or older, I will consider the pick a waste. I don't know of ANY players who have EVER been drafted in the 1st round who were expected to develop that late so I don't know any players who fit your definition of "prospect". I would say Boyle should be "developed" by 23 or so. Oh, and Keith Tkachuk was drafted out of high school unproven. I know his high school center and believe me...he was unproven.

Quote:
of course, this isn't a hard brick rule, it's just adjusts the scale of a prospect's worth, that's all. if i am completley convinced a guy is goin to be hella good and is considered a "project", of course i wouldn't mind takin him int he 1st. but he better have that good a potential.
But those players don't exist in the top 10, much less in the 20's. There isn't one single player taken in the 20's who wasn't a pretty big risk for one reason or another.

Quote:
how does DT kno who is goin to be left? what are you talking about? he picks on who is left on his list, it's not about some grand scheme he developed prior to the draft. and as i said before, i dont think pushkarev at #26 is too high, i was fairly convinced back then that he woudl be good from scouting reports and was surprised he even droped to our 2nd rounder, as was most people. he was considered a very good pick when we got him for a 2nd.
You really don't think people don't talk? That DT doesn't know anyone outside the Kings organization who might know who other GM's are looking at? What I heard/read was that at the draft (and the week before) Boyle was moving up, up and up...and he would likely go very high in the 2nd round, if not the 1st. Pushkarev is a talent but there are enough guys similar to him that he's not a unique commodity...so it was more likely he would be available at #44 than Boyle. And it was right. As I've read too many times to remember, if Pushkarev had been taken at #26 and Boyle at #44, it seems like you (and others) would be very happy. Y'all are just quibbling about draft positions.

i dont kno where u get o' sullivan's atittude cuase i've never read his attitude has never been a problem. but i think the players like sullivan and push are good regardless of size. im not too concerned about size, i remember goin through the top scorers int he league and seeing that those who are over 6'5" aren't exactly those who are dominating the league. there was a couple, but not enough to convince me that size is essential to the success of a team.

Well, I'll start with right here at hf: http://www.hockeysfuture.com/prospect.php?pid=3580. There is much more to be read about him but I'll let you find more reading material.

Size isn't everything, no doubt about that. And I'm not one to advocate drafting BECAUSE of size. But I see absolutely nothing wrong with taking a risk on a mamoth kid with VERY good skills at #26 when your other two picks were Brown and Tambellini. And from what I've heard Ottawa and Dallas felt the same.

jt is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 06:28 PM
  #172
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,888
vCash: 500
i never heard ottawa and dallas feeling that strongly about boyle. can u provide links? it'd be interesting to read how much they wanted him and what they were willing to offer. in fact, i havent' read anybody really interested in boyle, to tellu the truth. he's always been thoguht of as a high 2nd rounder, we picked him in the 1st round, if anyone was picked early, it was him. actually take that back, hockey news projected him as a #26 spot, but most other projections saw him goin 2nd round.

from all that i read, the wings and few other teams were really goin for pushakrev, offering 1st rounders 2004 for a 2nd round 2003 position, which is pretty damn good if it didn't come from the wings if u really think about it. out of all out picks, everythign i read says that the one that seemed to garner the most interest was pushakrev.

and no, i do not htink the organizations talk. if they give away who they are goign to draft, they are essentially showing their trump cards. why would teams trade up if they could figure out who they coudl draft, it's ridiculous to even think that. when florida traded up to get the #1 from the penguins, it was later found out that florida had been goin for horton all along and basically just pickedup a free samuelsson for nothing. it makes no sense to have other organizations kno who ur goin to pick or what your list is like.


Last edited by KingPurpleDinosaur: 03-21-2005 at 06:37 PM.
KingPurpleDinosaur is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 06:48 PM
  #173
Old Hickory
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
There were a couple of blurps here and there about Ottawa and Dallas having interest. If jt can't find anything, I will see if I can

 
Old
03-21-2005, 07:39 PM
  #174
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingPurpleDinosaur
i never heard ottawa and dallas feeling that strongly about boyle. can u provide links?
Man, that's tough to do. I read so much about it back then but it's hard enough to find "legit" rumors AT ALL, much less almost two years later. I googled for a little while but I couldn't find anything. All I can tell you is that they scouted the hell out of him and from what I heard they were after him.

Quote:
it'd be interesting to read how much they wanted him and what they were willing to offer. in fact, i havent' read anybody really interested in boyle, to tellu the truth.
Interesting question. I wonder what DT could have gotten in trade. But since Eaves fell to them, they might not have given up that much...and in retrospect I'm glad DT didn't make any moves at all.

Quote:
he's always been thoguht of as a high 2nd rounder, we picked him in the 1st round, if anyone was picked early, it was him. actually take that back, hockey news projected him as a #26 spot, but most other projections saw him goin 2nd round.
And USA Today (Kevin Allen/Ted Montgomery) had him at #30. Red Line had him at #48 based on his lack of intensity (I talked to a little Kyle Woodlief about him).

Quote:
from all that i read, the wings and few other teams were really goin for pushakrev, offering 1st rounders 2004 for a 2nd round 2003 position, which is pretty damn good if it didn't come from the wings if u really think about it. out of all out picks, everythign i read says that the one that seemed to garner the most interest was pushakrev.
And yet he lasted to #44...and teams like NJ, Montreal, Calgary and Dallas (twice) passed on him in the 2nd round. I'm not bagging on the guy and he may turn out to be a star but he's really just another flashy offensive prospect...and they come along every year.

Quote:
and no, i do not htink the organizations talk. if they give away who they are goign to draft, they are essentially showing their trump cards.
No, the organizations don't talk to each other. But it's naive to think various people don't talk and see each other scouting certain players. Teams certainly don't know exactly what the others are doing, but they often have some kind of idea. Why else would Lamoriello trade up to take Parise unless he had some reason to fear the kid wouldn't drop to him just a few picks later?

Quote:
why would teams trade up if they could figure out who they coudl draft, it's ridiculous to even think that. when florida traded up to get the #1 from the penguins, it was later found out that florida had been goin for horton all along and basically just pickedup a free samuelsson for nothing. it makes no sense to have other organizations kno who ur goin to pick or what your list is like.
Actually, most folks knew that from the get-go. Pittsburgh traded up so that CAROLINA wouldn't get Fleury, not so Florida wouldn't. Or do you seriously think Florida would have drafted Fleury when they already had Luongo?

Thanks kj, I don't think I'm going to be able to find anything by googling...and I don't read enough around here to find any HF blurps about it...so anything you can find would be great. I just know I read several articles/blurps from credible sources about it.

jt is offline  
Old
03-21-2005, 09:32 PM
  #175
Capn Brown
Registered User
 
Capn Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,493
vCash: 500
Am I the only one who thinks that:



1) Taking Boyle wasn't the wasted opportunity.

and

2) The Kings should have taken O'Sullivan over Tambellini. I.e., Tambs was the mis-used pick.



Am I alone in this?

Capn Brown is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:32 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.