You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on LA Kings Talk within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. Haven't heard much on Ellen D. It seems like it's been enough time for her supposed "Development". Can we offically say it's yet another Kings
Haven't heard much on Ellen D. It seems like it's been enough time for her supposed "Development". Can we offically say it's yet another Kings busted draft pick? Man, no wonder why we suck!!
I would say that he is. When he was drafted he was supposed to have an pretty high offensive ceiling. He hasn't shown that scoring touch yet, so the most we could likely hope for from him at this point is a strong defensive game. I don't know if he has shown that yet either, but I would be willing to bet Dano could add alot more insight. The games I have attended he looked okay as far as puck pursuit and energy (he seemed to give a good effort), but I didn't see many flashes of brilliance beyond that.
Can we offically say it's yet another Kings busted draft pick? Man, no wonder why we suck!!
Not to threadjack, but does HF or any other site maintain a draft success rate? I'm thinking of something similar to charts that show mutual fund performance over 3 years, 5 years, 10 years, etc. In this case, they'd track the percentage of drafted players who played more than 50 (or whatever) NHL games (not necessarily with the team that drafted them).
I'd *guess* that Colorado and Detroit would have the best percentages over the last 10 years, but it'd be interesting to see. Does such a thing exist anywhere?
Not to threadjack, but does HF or any other site maintain a draft success rate? I'm thinking of something similar to charts that show mutual fund performance over 3 years, 5 years, 10 years, etc. In this case, they'd track the percentage of drafted players who played more than 50 (or whatever) NHL games (not necessarily with the team that drafted them).
I'd *guess* that Colorado and Detroit would have the best percentages over the last 10 years, but it'd be interesting to see. Does such a thing exist anywhere?
FYI, 200 or more NHL games (with any team) is the "industry standard" metric for a successful draft pick.
Why not bring up L.T. for the remainder of the year, and put him on the 2nd or 3rd line to see what he's got? I don't think the Kings have ever given him a fair shot. Give him 10-12 minutes per game and lets see if he's truly a bust. Maybe he's the type of player that needs to play alongside NHL caliber talent to raise his game.
Who knows, but I'd rather watch him the next 3 months, then Willsie.
Why not bring up L.T. for the remainder of the year, and put him on the 2nd or 3rd line to see what he's got? I don't think the Kings have ever given him a fair shot. Give him 10-12 minutes per game and lets see if he's truly a bust. Maybe he's the type of player that needs to play alongside NHL caliber talent to raise his game.
Who knows, but I'd rather watch him the next 3 months, then Willsie.
One could argue that if all he could muster at the AHL level is 3 goals and 7 assists in 25 games, what would you expect to see him do at the NHL level that Willsie or any of the other hacks on the Kings aren't doing?
That said...I agree with you. I would rather see Purcell, Boyle, Lewis, Tukonen, or even Moulsen over Any of Willsie, Armstrong,and most nights Ivanans.
All I can say is that Tukonen is not a bust. He's got size, skills, intensity and is still very young. It seems like he's been around a long time since he was an '04 draft pick but he was a September '86 so it's mostly an illusion. Keep in mind that Lewis was an '06 draft and he's only 4 months younger than Tukonen.
The Monarchs seem to be dividing up ice time based on seniority. For all of Tukonen's time spent with the Monarchs he' still younger than all of the other top scorers, so I wouldn't panic about the points until he gets a legit shot with top linemates.
So is Tukonen a bust?! 
Hatter
