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
05-17-2004, 04:10 PM
  #1
OC Kings Fan 24
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Westminster
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
Brian Boyle

Anybody else thing we could of done something else with our pick. I've read alot of articles and they all pretty much have him as a "Project". Which I guess all draftees are at one point or another. I've talked to a few people that said we were better of picking somebody else or trading the pick.. whats your thoughts on Brian Boyle

OC Kings Fan 24 is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 04:42 PM
  #2
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
High risk high reward. He is huge with great hands and can skate. Big men take longer to turn solid most of the time in the NHL but, most *all* prospects are projects mate. I say, Boyle is a grand pick and since we took him out of highschool and that he is big and playing for one of the best programs in the country that it will just take a little longer than it will for some of our other lads.

IF Boyle pans out, we will have our GIANT to go to war with, if he doesn't, chances are we will know it before the rest and might get some value out of him in a trade. The thing is that since nobody really knows what will happen with any picks, he were as good as anyone else at that selection.

Now, if you want to talk about our trading his pick to get better faster, that is another story.

punchy1 is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 04:49 PM
  #3
Old Hickory
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
If he pans out you will be very happy we made the pick. Like punchy said , high risk. He is in very capable hands at BC though, I am glad he is there.


Last edited by Old Hickory: 05-17-2004 at 05:53 PM.
 
Old
05-17-2004, 05:10 PM
  #4
tomd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,701
vCash: 500
my $0.02...

considering the players still left on the board, it was a very, very poor pick...the ultimate reach. if he had been taken as a second or third round pick, no problem. my gut feel is that he'll never play in the NHL.

tomd is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 05:12 PM
  #5
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,879
vCash: 500
the ONE thing that made me feel a bit better about the pick, irregardless of his somewhat disappointing freshman year, was the fact that i heard montreal was trying to trade up to nab this guy. i dont know what it is, but anytime a team tries to trade up to get anyone, it kind of makes me happier that we got him before they did.

from these boards, i heard that montreal was packaging up Brisebois and a pick to get boyle. who knows how he'll turn out, but at least he's better then steckel.

KingPurpleDinosaur is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 05:17 PM
  #6
tomd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,701
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingPurpleDinosaur
the ONE thing that made me feel a bit better about the pick, irregardless of his somewhat disappointing freshman year, was the fact that i heard montreal was trying to trade up to nab this guy. i dont know what it is, but anytime a team tries to trade up to get anyone, it kind of makes me happier that we got him before they did.

from these boards, i heard that montreal was packaging up Brisebois and a pick to get boyle. who knows how he'll turn out, but at least he's better then steckel.
I think that was the ultimate in conjecture and speculation. the only thing ANYONE knows for sure is that Gainey and Taylor chatted before the Boyle pick. I don't suspect that anyone on this website has any idea what they were actually talking about.

tomd is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 05:34 PM
  #7
Hockey Moose
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Langley, B.C. Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 528
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomd
I think that was the ultimate in conjecture and speculation. the only thing ANYONE knows for sure is that Gainey and Taylor chatted before the Boyle pick. I don't suspect that anyone on this website has any idea what they were actually talking about.
i'd say there were making a side bet on whos team would get more unjuries. As Always, Taylor came through in a flash.

Hockey Moose is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 05:44 PM
  #8
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomd
I think that was the ultimate in conjecture and speculation. the only thing ANYONE knows for sure is that Gainey and Taylor chatted before the Boyle pick. I don't suspect that anyone on this website has any idea what they were actually talking about.
that's true. but then even still, i think the fact that they named boyle out should specify that there was at least some interest in him. i still don't know yet if i am hapy or not that he was used on the 26. he didn't seem to be that highly touted coming into the draft since his competition was weak and was kind of risky gambling on him as a high pick. unfortunatley, it looks like that may be somewhat right as his production dropped dramatically once going to BC. what hurts more is that there were still very good players like bergeon and howard left that we could have taken instead.

at the same time, at the prospect scrimmage i have to say i was impressed by him. although his size is his best asset, he did seem to move fast and could guard the puck fairly well. he was definately as impressive as Brown was during the camp. i just don't understand why his production was so little in his freshman year. and i don't buy the "he's on the 4th line" junk, lots of freshman have worked their way up to a higher line and it's disappointing boyle wasn't able to. also, wasn't he a healthy scratch on some games too?

oh well, we'll see how this all turns out...

KingPurpleDinosaur is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 06:51 PM
  #9
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
I don't know mate. He were ranked exactly about the 24th through 26th spot in the first round by a couple of sources. TSN had him that high. I reckon he went where he were ranked, is that ranking deserved? I think so but who knows.

What I do know is that after picking up Brownie and Tambs, two very highly regarded prospects that since we had decided to keep the pick that using it to gamble a bit on a Sydney or the bush player like Boyle were a right smart idea.

punchy1 is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 07:02 PM
  #10
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,879
vCash: 500
i really believed that boyle could have dropped to the second round. except for montreal, i dont remember hearing too much interest in him. if there were to be some team that was offering 2 second rounders for a first, i think we should have taken that, used the 26 to pick up tambellini, then use the second rounder picks to get anyone who's good and still left. o' sullivan, pushkarev, bergeron, i mean the list just goes on and on. there was so much talent still left int he 2nd round, i'm not sure boyle was worth keeping that 1st pick.

KingPurpleDinosaur is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 07:13 PM
  #11
tomd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,701
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by punchy1
I don't know mate. He were ranked exactly about the 24th through 26th spot in the first round by a couple of sources. TSN had him that high. I reckon he went where he were ranked, is that ranking deserved? I think so but who knows.
not to get into a pissing match but virtually every scouting service had him as a mid 2nd rounder. CSB had him in the 30s for North American players, RLR had him in the 40s overall, and McKeens had him similarly ranked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by punchy1
What I do know is that after picking up Brownie and Tambs, two very highly regarded prospects that since we had decided to keep the pick that using it to gamble a bit on a Sydney or the bush player like Boyle were a right smart idea.
with all due respect, the kings do not have enough depth at any level in the organization to be gambling on high risk prospects. look at their first round selections since '98:
'98 Mathieu Biron (big project)
'99 none
'00 Frolov
'01 Karlsson (big project)
'01 Steckel (big project)
'02 Grebeshkov
'03 Brown
'03 Boyle (big project)
'03 Tambellini

4 major projects out of 8 selections...that's waaaay too high for 1st round picks. you've got to make your first round picks count...swing for the fence once in a while but not regularly unless you have so much depth throughout the organization that you don't need to worry about striking out once in a while. the kings, however, don't have anywhere near the depth to justify that mindset...

tomd is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 07:20 PM
  #12
Kingz4life
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Armenia
Posts: 2,105
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kingz4life
Well we cant forget even though he MIGHT have been takin to high, we got him out of highschool. I liked the pick. If we didn't have 3 picks who knows but we did and we took a chance on a guy who can be a huge force.

Kingz4life is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 07:30 PM
  #13
agentfouser
Playoffs?!?!
 
agentfouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Ireland
Posts: 2,361
vCash: 500
i wouldn't worry about boyle not putting up numbers this year for BC. i know that you don't want to hear the usual cliches about him taking longer to develop and playing on the fourth line (believe me, i don't like using them), but i think in this case, it is entirely appropriate. he didn't just play fourth line on any old team - boston college was an outstanding team that made the frozen four, and we knew from the outset that he was going to be at the end of a long and talented line of players there. furthermore, this really is a case of a guy who is used to playing against high school KIDS having to adjust to playing adults - its going to take him a long time to learn to really use his size and strength effectively against manwich-sized competition.

overall i'm pretty happy with him. long term, yeah yeah, that's okay. he seems to have the speed (and he certainly has the size) to be a decent checker, even if his offensive skills don't pan out. one thing that he did do this year for bc, in the frozen four game that i saw anyway, was kill penalties. that's got to a great sign.

agentfouser is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 07:30 PM
  #14
tomd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,701
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingz4life
Well we cant forget even though he MIGHT have been takin to high, we got him out of highschool. I liked the pick. If we didn't have 3 picks who knows but we did and we took a chance on a guy who can be a huge force.
well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I think the kings are going to regret this pick in a major way down the road ESPECIALLY given that there were so many incredibly talented players available at that spot who WILL play in the NHL in the next 2-3 years. Boyle is light years away from even a sniff at the NHL. it's a shame really...

tomd is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 07:34 PM
  #15
agentfouser
Playoffs?!?!
 
agentfouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Ireland
Posts: 2,361
vCash: 500
i wonder (perhaps a college hockey fan could answer this) if it would be appropriate to compare the way dustin brown was used by the kings to the way that brian boyle was used by bc - that is, in very limited fourth-line action, more to get a feel for the game at a higher level and to acclimatize(sp?) them to their new team and its demands.

agentfouser is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 07:58 PM
  #16
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,879
vCash: 500
i hear the word "project" a lot, but i dont really understand the term. i konw it has to deal with getting a guy w/ high upside that will take a long time to devleop, but what are the chances of developing a successful project? also, can someone explain to me who is/was a project that is currently int he NHL right now? also, it seems our batting average on drafting projects is ridiculously low, can someone then explain to me why we keep drafting these projects???

and PLEASE do not go off on the "well, all prospects are projects" becuase this is a term that is distinctly labelled on boyle.

KingPurpleDinosaur is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 07:59 PM
  #17
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomd
not to get into a pissing match but virtually every scouting service had him as a mid 2nd rounder. CSB had him in the 30s for North American players, RLR had him in the 40s overall, and McKeens had him similarly ranked.

with all due respect, the kings do not have enough depth at any level in the organization to be gambling on high risk prospects. look at their first round selections since '98:
'98 Mathieu Biron (big project)
'99 none
'00 Frolov
'01 Karlsson (big project)
'01 Steckel (big project)
'02 Grebeshkov
'03 Brown
'03 Boyle (big project)
'03 Tambellini

4 major projects out of 8 selections...that's waaaay too high for 1st round picks. you've got to make your first round picks count...swing for the fence once in a while but not regularly unless you have so much depth throughout the organization that you don't need to worry about striking out once in a while. the kings, however, don't have anywhere near the depth to justify that mindset...



Well mate, that is your opinion. I see it differently.


I can give you a link to two sights that had boyle ranked at 26th and one for 24th (can't post the linkies for some reason, just pm me and I will post them up). All in though, we took him at 22nd so it could be argued as too high though not by me.

I thought we took him at 26th and Tambs at 22nd. Maybe my memory is off and TSN is right and it were the other way around.


Still as to your list, lets talk about it.


You listed from 98 on. I can give on each.


Firstly, Biron. Big tough strong defencemen who is still playing in the NHL. He has his ups, and his downs, but, he is big and young enough to where he can still pan out. Not going to be the star we hoped but, that happens sometimes with all picks.


Second, skip a year.


Thirdly, Frolov. Enough said. (2000 pick)

Fourth in line, Karlson. You would be right in saying he were a "big project" a year ago but not so today. He is very highly thought of in his bit of the globe and it is believed that we might see him at a Kings camp (you might) soon enough. He has improved every year and like many of his countrymen, they put up short numbers there only to become bang solid in the NHL. I wouldn't call him anything other than a promising prospect with some nice upside. Likely not a future star but maybe.

Fifth we have Steckel. I must also be readin the wrong reports here as well. He had a grand enough senior year in college and went back after being drafted by us to work on his two way game as instructed. Third line center monster potential in my books and a few others as well. We will see. (he is big though)

Sixth, Grebseshkov, one of the most touted defencive prospects outside the NHL.

Seventh through Ninth, Brownie, Tambellini, Boyle. Lord knows mate. They are one season out of there draft years so if you have the skills to call them then you know more and are simply better at this than I am and many others.

I say that Boyle is a project but a good one. I say that Tambellini will get the final pieces next season and that his Da will steer him into the NHL. I say that Brownie needs to get more ice time to develope ALL of his game instead of just his brilliant defencive play.

Still, if we go by your reckoning, we have a likelyhood of a %50 return on our first rounders. Have a look about mate, that isn't any worse than many of the NHL franchises and better than some when it comes to first round selections *and* we will have to revisit this after we find out what is what with Brownie/Boyle and Tambellini.

God forbid that two of them turn into NHLers, we would be amoung the elite at picking NHL caliber players. (wink)


The one area we are having (to this point) not grand success with is picking the homerun types. Frolov certainly is in my books but after him, what other *elite* lads besides Grebs (potentially) do we have? I say all of them but I am optomistic and believe that Al Murray and co have done a brilliant job so there you are.

A matter of opinion is all.

punchy1 is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 09:00 PM
  #18
KINGLEWOOD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: INGLEWOOD, CA
Posts: 382
vCash: 500
I was as surprised as anyone when the Kings took him, in fact it's funny Eaves was taken after Boyle by the Senators and man did he have a great year. I'm not saying I'm dissapointed I saw him at prospect camp and on TV. He's a good skater for a big man and had good offensive abilities, he will only get better and hopefully in a year or two he'll be in Manchester.

KINGLEWOOD is offline  
Old
05-17-2004, 09:05 PM
  #19
Old Hickory
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGLEWOOD
I was as surprised as anyone when the Kings took him, in fact it's funny Eaves was taken after Boyle by the Senators and man did he have a great year. I'm not saying I'm dissapointed I saw him at prospect camp and on TV. He's a good skater for a big man and had good offensive abilities, he will only get better and hopefully in a year or two he'll be in Manchester.
Boyle was a freshman last season, He won't be in Manchester till after his senior year

 
Old
05-18-2004, 01:06 AM
  #20
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
I also did not like the pick*. I think this organization did not need to take a project, nor should it have. The draft was too deep to risk on a project. Projects are taken in weak drafts, like the one where the Kings took 2 in Karlsson and Steckel. But not in the deepest draft possibly in the last 10 years.

I don't know what this organization's fascination with huge, plodding forwards is all about. An NHL roster full of them sunk this franchise in the mid 90s as speedier teams just skated right past them. Yet, they seem content to be constantly looking for the Keith Primeau amongst the hundreds of centers with size who never even come close to the NHL.

It just doesn't make sense to me.

* Don't get me wrong. I want Boyle to become an allstar as much as the next guy because the Kings did in fact take him, but I'm not holding my breath.

__________________
Saxon Sports Information and Research
David A. Rainer is offline  
Old
05-18-2004, 01:56 AM
  #21
maximil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 281
vCash: 500
I wouldn't worry too much about his lack of production this last season. He didn't get a lot of ice time because so many players had seniority over him at Boston College. That will probably change next season.

His situation is probably comparable to that of Pineault (also played for BC but is leaving) who is entered in the 2004 draft. He put up similar numbers and is still considered a late first round - early second round pick.

While I must confess I haven't seen him play more than a game or two I have read a lof of good things about his skills and overall athletic ability. I've heard he is a good skater, and has decent hands for a big man. This will help in his development. You need to have the skills before you can really develop a mind for the game. So at least he has that going for him.

The jury is still out. To say this is a bad pick is just as ridiculous as saying it is an excellent pick. Nobody will know for a couple of seasons what this guy is capable of.

maximil is offline  
Old
05-18-2004, 02:11 AM
  #22
KingPurpleDinosaur
Bandwagon Kings Fan
 
KingPurpleDinosaur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: irvine, ca
Posts: 2,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by maximil
The jury is still out. To say this is a bad pick is just as ridiculous as saying it is an excellent pick. Nobody will know for a couple of seasons what this guy is capable of.
i disagree. i think people can make a somewhat valid prediction of his skill level, potential, and time of development to get a good enough understanding of whether or not boyle was a good pick. although i see his skill level ok and potential to be possibly good, i think his time of development is too long for him to be considered a "good pick". not to mention, the fact that hte draft was so deep that it gave us plenty of other options that we could have acted on with that pick that would have been as good or better decisions then boyle. I think boyle is one pick i wouldn't have minded doing something else with.

KingPurpleDinosaur is offline  
Old
05-18-2004, 10:25 AM
  #23
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:
Originally Posted by maximil
The jury is still out. To say this is a bad pick is just as ridiculous as saying it is an excellent pick. Nobody will know for a couple of seasons what this guy is capable of.
That is only if you are basing your judgement on production. I'm not. I'm basing it on draft philosophy. It is absolutely unnecessary to spend a high pick on a project (which it is almost unanamously agreed upon that he is a project) when the draft is so deep and strong. That is just something you don't do and that is why I am critical of the pick.

But the damage is done. It's time to make due on the pick that was made or there will be even more people critical of some of Dave Taylor's drafting philosophy.

David A. Rainer is offline  
Old
05-18-2004, 01:47 PM
  #24
Kingz4life
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Armenia
Posts: 2,105
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kingz4life
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathFromAbove
That is only if you are basing your judgement on production. I'm not. I'm basing it on draft philosophy. It is absolutely unnecessary to spend a high pick on a project (which it is almost unanamously agreed upon that he is a project) when the draft is so deep and strong. That is just something you don't do and that is why I am critical of the pick.

But the damage is done. It's time to make due on the pick that was made or there will be even more people critical of some of Dave Taylor's drafting philosophy.
I think he is a ptoject but although it was a deep draft you have to look at this guys abilities. He's a project in a deep draft but he can become a dominant player. I just think the KINGS felt like they couldnt pass by him.

Kingz4life is offline  
Old
05-18-2004, 01:55 PM
  #25
punchy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Kiwiville.
Posts: 2,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingz4life
I think he is a ptoject but although it was a deep draft you have to look at this guys abilities. He's a project in a deep draft but he can become a dominant player. I just think the KINGS felt like they couldnt pass by him.

I kind of agree with this line of thinking too.

The thing is this, he were thought of highly enough to have been ranked by at least three of the professional pundits to be a late first round pick so, while there were other grand lads to be had, since we kept the pick I reckon he were as good of a shot at being a special player at best and an NHL caliber player at worst as anyone around him (maybe Osullivan but the jury is still out on him as well).

The other thing is this, I reckon that we have done a brilliant job with our picks over the past five years so I think it is also improtant to note that Al Murray and Dave Taylor also found him to be a late first rounder.

He could bomb, so could Grebs though, I just fancy that he is as worthy of a shot as anyone else at his bit of the draft.



Now, should we have dealt the two picks (Tambs and Boyle) to move into the top 8 of that draft? I would have but thats me.

punchy1 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 10:08 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.