To all of the Couturier believers

[jammer2]

I can't believe nobody's done this on this thread already, so here it is.

2011 Draft

(pick-name-2012 pts- 2013 pts)

1. Nugent Hopkins 52 23

2. Landeskog 52 15

3. Huberdeau QMJHL 27

4. Larsson 18 5

5. Strome OHL OHL

6. Zibanejad 1 20

7. Scheifle 1 0

8. Couturier 27 14

9. Hamilton OHL 15

10. Brodin SWE 10

11. Siemens WHL WHL

12. Murphy OHL 0

13. Baertschi 3 5

14. Oleksiak OHL 2

15. Miller OHL 4

Anyone see a pattern here? Every player in the top 15 who played a significant amount of games (Hopkins, Landeskog, Coots) has seen their production go way down this year. The others didn't even (or hardly) get their feet wet in the NHL in year 1. The sophomore slump is real - as previously pointed out. If Couturier's ceiling is what we saw against Pittsburgh in the playoffs last year, I'd take that any day of the week. Sure, he has to get up to that level, but he's already proven he can at least be that good and he doesn't even turn 21 until this December.

Give the kid a break. There is nothing wrong with his trajectory at this point.

While I agree in prinicpal with your post, you are failing to mention that Landeskog and Nugent Hopkins had significant injuries which caused them to miss 10+ games, and in the case of Nugent Hopkins an extended AHL conditioning stint. You get a little different view of things when you break it down to points per game.....

1)Nugent Hopkins = 0.58 ppg or 47 pts over 82 games

2)Landeskog = 0.48 ppg or 39 pts over 82

3)Huberdeau = 0.64 ppg or 52 pts over 82

4)Zibaejad = 0.55 ppg or 45 pts over 82

5)Couturier = 0.34 ppg or 27 pts over 82 games

I left out Dmen, cause it's not fair to compare them to forwards, but overall....Couts has not played as well as his counterparts offensively....but in fairness to Couts, most of those guys are getting better linemates and play on the top 2 lines. This just gives a more accurate comparision. I've seen a lot of Nugent Hopkins this year and he looks kinda frail and not nearly the player he was last year. The 2nd year thing is proven over time, hit's more than it does not, totally agree with that. I'd be worried about Couts if he does not put up 45-50 pts next year, that a pretty fair output line for him.

[ruxpin]

I've said all along Couturier had a good series, just that I wouldn't over-credit him. People are dogging him this year and some of it is comparing to last year's playoff performance. If I were a Flyers fan if either trade him for defensive promise, or hold him and let him develop. Either way the team benefits, but I certainly wouldn't let him go cheap.

Okay. THAT English was clear enough even for me. I agree.

[B21]

_@aziz

“Defensive paranoia?” That’s a new one but not at all applicable here. This is a forum where people debate. Especially fans of opposing teams. You, like myself, will often point out something that was said which is incorrect. Not someone’s opinion, mind you. But facts. So when someone says…

<< The point isn't only that Couturier kept Malkin to 3 points in 6 games while getting 2 himself while Malkin was on the ice. He did it at 19. As good as Malkin is he wasn't in the NHL until he was 20. >>

…I don’t see how that can be taken as any thing other than Couturier was good enough to play in the NHL at 18 and Malkin wasn’t. As I pointed out to flyercanuck and to you once before, Malkin did not play at age 18 due to the lockout and his KHL “obligations”. Yet again though you have said…

“it was simply pointed out that not even Malkin put himself on display at that point in his career. for whatever reason.”

Of course, I gave you the reason which for the sake of this argument…matters. No lockout and no KHL issues and Malkin makes his Penguin debut at age 18 and joins the ranks of those special 18 year olds.

Next comment I replied to…

<< I'm not trying to say Couturier is anywhere near the player Malkin is. I'm saying he had a pretty good year as a true rookie right out of junior, that not many, including Malkin, do. >>

Sorry but yes – when you add the “…including Malkin” it implies once again Couturier did something that Malkin could not. Now we are on to opinion. Mine of course is that had Malkin played in the NHL as an 18 year old, he would have had what would have been judged to be a better season than Couturier (while giving all due respect to Couturier). Pretty simple stuff. No ruffled feathers. No panties in bunches. Just two fans of rival teams debating something that at the end of the day has no real significance whatsoever. He was making his case. I was making mine. Lots of tongue and cheek jabs. He didn’t seem to take offense and to your dismay I guess…neither did I. Kinda because that’s what people do in these forums. If that kind of back and forth banter bunches your own panties then I really don’t know what to tell you.

[B21]

I thought we weren't considering the apples and oranges....

Still fruit...

[LegionOfDoom]

fRUit Sa-laD yuu-mmmy yummy!

fRUit Sa-laD yuu-mmmy yummy!

[Polaris922]

@B21

Have you read the story of Malkin being forced to stay in Russia by some mobster? I can try to find the story when I get to a laptop.

[Clarke2Leach]

While I agree in prinicpal with your post, you are failing to mention that Landeskog and Nugent Hopkins had significant injuries which caused them to miss 10+ games, and in the case of Nugent Hopkins an extended AHL conditioning stint. You get a little different view of things when you break it down to points per game.....

1)Nugent Hopkins = 0.58 ppg or 47 pts over 82 games

2)Landeskog = 0.48 ppg or 39 pts over 82

3)Huberdeau = 0.64 ppg or 52 pts over 82

4)Zibaejad = 0.55 ppg or 45 pts over 82

5)Couturier = 0.34 ppg or 27 pts over 82 games

I left out Dmen, cause it's not fair to compare them to forwards, but overall....Couts has not played as well as his counterparts offensively....but in fairness to Couts, most of those guys are getting better linemates and play on the top 2 lines. This just gives a more accurate comparision. I've seen a lot of Nugent Hopkins this year and he looks kinda frail and not nearly the player he was last year. The 2nd year thing is proven over time, hit's more than it does not, totally agree with that. I'd be worried about Couts if he does not put up 45-50 pts next year, that a pretty fair output line for him.

I get what you're saying, but you may also want to do the ppg for last season as well if you're going to do it for this year - I'm not at work, so I can't commit to that kind of effort right now.. As you noted, the roles, linemates and draft position kind of make RNH and Landeskog unfair comparisons anyway. Regardless, production is down across the board among players who played both years, true?

[terp]

To be honest, I should have realized it was humor because I don't think I've ever read a dumb post from you. Not that we've always agreed, but I don't think I've ever read a post from you and had to double check who wrote it. Sorry again for the response.

You apparently missed my dumb posts but thanks. An avatar would help maybe.

[flyercanuck]

@B21

OK we'll do this one more time. IF Malkin had joined the NHL at 18 would he have had better production than Couturier? Probably. Did he? No, he didn't.

The End.

[brelic]

At the end of the day, can't we just agree that Couturier is a very precocious player who came in the league at 18 years old - which few players do - and performed at a level much higher than can reasonably be expected for an 18 year old? No, he didn't light the world on fire with points like some other 18 year old rookies who are offensive-minded.

But he did come in here and show that his defensive game was mature and ready for prime time.

He's not a super star, he's not even a star. He's a kid who came in and showed that he can play with men.

That last sentence sounds funny.

[flyercanuck]

@brelic

Exactly. Plus with Couturier we haven't been subjected to this..

[flyer4ever]

There is no reason he is not lighting it up, not with hall of fame sniper Craig Berube mentoring him! If you are a team commited to youth you need technical coaches, not cheer leaders from the alumni club. As far as the first ten minutes, the entire freaking team was asleep for the first 60 minutes. Once again Lavy showed his savvy preparing his team.

[ruxpin]

He's a kid who came in and showed that he can play with men.

REPORTED!

[B21]

@flyercanuck

OK we'll do this one more time. IF Malkin had joined the NHL at 18 would he have had better production than Couturier? Probably. Did he? No, he didn't because his 18 year old season was canceled by the lockout and he was unable to get released from his KHL contract thus costing him his 19 year old season.

The End.

Fixed.

[B21]

@B21

Have you read the story of Malkin being forced to stay in Russia by some mobster? I can try to find the story when I get to a laptop.

I missed that. I just remember some shady things going on while he was in Finland (KHL training camp) and him being smuggled out Argo-style (exaggerating of course but something along those lines).

[Polaris922]

I missed that. I just remember some shady things going on while he was in Finland (KHL training camp) and him being smuggled out Argo-style (exaggerating of course but something along those lines).

I'll try to remember to search it out and post it for you when I get home.

[radoran]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evgeni_Malkin

Transfer dispute

After his first professional season in Russia, Malkin was drafted 2nd overall (behind national teammate Alexander Ovechkin) in the 2004 NHL Entry Draft by the Pittsburgh Penguins. However, a transfer dispute between the National Hockey League (NHL) and the International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF) delayed his Pittsburgh debut. On August 7, 2006, it appeared that the 20-year-old Malkin had come to a compromise with Metallurg and signed a deal that would have kept him in Russia until May 2007. However, Malkin stated that he signed the one-year contract not as a compromise but because of the immense "psychological pressure" his former club exerted on him.^{[citation needed]} Desiring to play in the NHL, he left Metallurg Magnitogorsk's training camp in Helsinki, Finland, before it had started on August 12. It would later appear that the team had taken Malkin's passport away to prevent him from leaving, but it was eventually given back to him and Malkin was allowed to pass through Finnish customs. Meeting with his agent, J. P. Barry, the two quickly departed and waited for Malkin's visa clearance from the US Embassy.

In order to legally leave the team, on August 15, Malkin invoked, by fax, a provision of Russian labor law that allowed him to cancel his one-year contract by giving his employer two weeks notice.^[6] Having untied himself of obligations in Russia, he was able to sign an entry-level contract with the Penguins on September 5, 2006.^[7]

[Polaris922]

@radoran

Thanks for that summary. The full story reads a lot seedier with mafia bosses and millionaires that owned either the team or something KHL but that's the gist of it.

[jammer2]

@Clarke2Leach Here is another one, Adam Henrique went from 0.689 pts per game (basically 0.7) to 0.4 pts per game this year. Averaged out to a full year that is going from 56 pts in his rookie year to 33 pts in his second year.....another pretty big swing there. I think Adam gets 65 pts next year barring injury.