Sean Couturier Part III

[Rebels57]

I don't want to quote everyone who responded, all I know is when the chips were on the table Couturier put the team on his back and showed up. Look at the type of team the Sharks have become stripping Thornton from C and giving it to Pavelski it's not a negative thing, it's the correct thing. Couturier will lead the youth into the future, for me there no debate here.

And you learned all that from 1 game.

Impressive.

 

[deadhead]

It's not a matter of taking the C from Giroux and giving it to Couterier, a bit more subtle than that.
Giroux is making the transition, like it or not, from the key player to a solid veteran who provides veteran leadership.

The younger players didn't play with Giroux for six or seven seasons, but they've seen first hand Couts have a heroic attempt at keeping the Flyers in this series - and they'll naturally look to him for leadership.
Couts is the better player going forward, he's a top two way player, Giroux is more of a playmaker but not the guy who does everything anymore - and his minutes should be reduced a bit going forward so he can maintain his offensive production.

Couts, Provorov and Patrick will be the three core players that the young players will look to lead them on the ice.
Giroux will be the "older statesman" that they look to for advice, who'll continue to be the voice of the team.
Voracek, no one sees him as a leader.

 

[Striiker]

Making the transition into the background by having a 102 point season and carrying the team to the playoffs?

ok

I love all the conclusions being jumped to after one series... and some after one single game. Really exposes the short-term and reactionary thinkers.

 

[deadhead]

Giroux will be 31 next year, if you think he's going to continue to produce like last season, well, I've got a bridge . . .
It's not uncommon for veterans to have a bounce back season before regressing to their "decline curve."
The playoffs made it clear that he's not the same player he was at 24.
And he's unlikely to improve in his 30s.
The best we can hope for is a slow decline that can be mitigated by reducing his minutes and young players taking some of the pressure off of him.

 

[Rebels57]

Making the transition into the background by having a 102 point season and carrying the team to the playoffs?

ok

I love all the conclusions being jumped to after one series... and some after one single game. Really exposes the short-term and reactionary thinkers.

Giroux not only had a great season, he had one of the best individual seasons in Flyers history.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Giroux will be 31 next year, if you think he's going to continue to produce like last season, well, I've got a bridge . . .
It's not uncommon for veterans to have a bounce back season before regressing to their "decline curve."
The playoffs made it clear that he's not the same player he was at 24.
And he's unlikely to improve in his 30s.
The best we can hope for is a slow decline that can be mitigated by reducing his minutes and young players taking some of the pressure off of him.

A six game sample size managed by an incompetent coach is definitive proof?

 

[Striiker]

Giroux not only had a great season, he had one of the best individual seasons in Flyers history.

But but but but he had 4 bad games, against the back-to-back cup champs, matched against Crosby's line, and with at least one horrible linemate at all times...

Clearly that means he's a bad leader and we should exaggerate this to say he got completely dominated, was completely invisible, and is no longer the best player on the team!

 

[Adtar02]

It's not a matter of taking the C from Giroux and giving it to Couterier, a bit more subtle than that.
Giroux is making the transition, like it or not, from the key player to a solid veteran who provides veteran leadership.

The younger players didn't play with Giroux for six or seven seasons, but they've seen first hand Couts have a heroic attempt at keeping the Flyers in this series - and they'll naturally look to him for leadership.
Couts is the better player going forward, he's a top two way player, Giroux is more of a playmaker but not the guy who does everything anymore - and his minutes should be reduced a bit going forward so he can maintain his offensive production.

Couts, Provorov and Patrick will be the three core players that the young players will look to lead them on the ice.
Giroux will be the "older statesman" that they look to for advice, who'll continue to be the voice of the team.
Voracek, no one sees him as a leader.

Don’t think it’s time yet. G will be 5he briere of the team. Only more productive. I just think coots gets an A first before they give the C.

Edit: also think this transition happens slowly over the next 3 years

 

[Tripod]

Hey...at least Giroux's decline starts at 102 points compared to 60 points, right?

It is funny to see people talk in such definitive terms concerning Giroux, when EVERYONE was wrong at how good he would be this pas year. Even those expecting a bounce back, thought 70 points was doable. But not a PPG. Not 90. CERTAINLY NOT 100!!

I have no issue saying G will be the vet guys rely on as I said last off season he would be in a Hossa like role when we are contenders. But mark my words, he will be as important as some of the kids that are getting the hype. When they start getting the harder matchups, guess who gets easier ones?

To me, our top 6 is set for the next 4 years(Lindblom as the 6th guy) and it's up to a kid to try and supplant one of them. And if not, we could have a dynamite, young 3rd and 4th line.

 

[deadhead]

Hey...at least Giroux's decline starts at 102 points compared to 60 points, right?

It is funny to see people talk in such definitive terms concerning Giroux, when EVERYONE was wrong at how good he would be this pas year. Even those expecting a bounce back, thought 70 points was doable. But not a PPG. Not 90. CERTAINLY NOT 100!!

It's also why it's extremely unlikely he approaches this season again.
When a player suddenly has an extreme season later in his career, it is usually an anomaly.
At his peak, he was a consistent 50 ES point player, so 66 this year is probably not repeatable.
Some may be due to moving to LW with Couts as his center, but some is probably an outlier
But 40-45 with another 30 PP points is a reasonable expectation the next two years.

Couts is harder, making a jump at 25 is less unusual than at age 30, but it's probably not sustainable either.
The previous two years, he was a 40 ES scorer (82 games prorated), so 62 is probably an outlier.
But 50 points or so in his peak years isn't outrageous, and a full season on PP1 could be good for 15-10 25 or so.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Gotta admit, I have to eat some crow after the season Couturier had. Hopefully he keeps it up.

 

[Striiker]

Both Giroux and Couturier will almost definitely see hits in their points next year.

 

[Ruck Over]

I too want to learn to not self-immolate.

A lot of these fans complaining about Couts are just jerks.

Couts is a Joel Otto clone'ish (hey, they were both born in America even, I know Couts is a Canadian, just sayin). Calgary didn't need Otto to score to be effective, they needed him to handle Mark Messier.
Calgary likely doesn't have the success for that one season in 89, nor the boiling rivalry with Edmonton, if not for Otto. And as Otto was behind Nieuwendyk and Gilmour, hopefully Patrick lives up to hype and Couts slots behind him and Giroux.

Blah, my opinion - no messy facts, guys like Couts are important to winning teams. The depth and grit he adds allows the "pretty players" to play "pretty hockey". In the same way a lot of fans attempted to rationalize Boyd Gordon as relieving pressure from Giroux, Couts actually does that. If someone is looking to Couts as a detriment or shortfall on the team, they are mistaken and looking in the wrong places. (Unless that detriment is a lack of front teeth for formal headshot photographs for "Happy full smile of teeth" magazine.)

Am bored, gonna necro

Look at this dingus! Made some bold predictions before the season started, looked real foolish with how Coots played the year out. Flyers not needing him to score? Say what 76 points.

But, there was a lot of truth in this next misguided post-

Based upon my previous post, dated 8/9/17, which was commended as a great post, the best post. This is all the evidence needed that Couts is not a great player.

As the last sentence of that magnificent post, so many people loved that post, there was more than one positive response to that post. I did not see any negative replies to that post, it is such a great post. As the last words said, "(Unless that detriment is a lack of front teeth for formal headshot photographs for "Happy full smile of teeth" magazine.)"

This photo clearly shows Couts, this make-pretend savior does not even have his two front teeth. Isn't there a Christmas song about this? Because Couts is lacking at least his two front teeth (possibly three or four teeth), he will never appear on the cover of the make pretend "Happy Full Smile of Teeth" Magazine, a tragic, epic, horrible, frightening, pathetic loss. He is not the hero you deserve, he is not the hero you need. Wanton abandonment of common care and dental awareness have left him mangled, broken, and disgusting. Those missing two front teeth are easily good for 40 goals a season, and likely another 30 assists.

Again, everyone already knows this is true, my previous post was lauded as being solid, and great, it's just really fantastic. What kind of healthcare does Couts even have?

After a lot of fluff and noise, there was a comment about 40 goals and 30 assists. Well, we all know that didn't come to pass!

 

[Stizzle]

 

[baudib1]

Coots is going to average 70+ points over the next 4 years.

 

[Ruck Over]

Coots is going to average 70+ points over the next 4 years.

But will he ever reach 40 goals?

 

[deadhead]

Tough crowd!

Couts is the advanced metrics hero.
He actually had slightly better xGF the two years before last season with far worse linemates.
His "breakout season" was almost entirely offense, the rest of his game was the same as the previous two seasons.
People put too much emphasis on scoring, which is often context dependent (who are your linemates, do you get PP1 time?).
The one thing a player can control is playing the game right, which creates scoring chances while limiting opposing scoring chances.

One reason for advanced metrics is as a check on raw scoring, are you getting points because you neglect defense (low xGF) and increase your scoring chances by gambles that also lead to scoring chances for the other team.

 

[CS]

The better player is not always the captain....in fact it's more often not than it is....

Also the captain is more of a locker room thing so by implying that Giroux should be stripped implies you know something about the locker room that nobody else seems to know...

That or you just want to get some sick enjoyment out of it because your beliefs would be somehow vindicated if it were to happen...

The "C" stripping nonsense has got to stop.

 

[CS]

Also, these point totals could be closer to the new norm as opposed to away from it.

Take into account point inflation this past season and note percentage of players in the late 80s-100 as players in the late 60s-PPG from prior seasons. I'm on my phone, not at a comp, so actually looking at the data is rough, but I expect some obvious enough correlation should anyone look.

100-pt Giroux is probably 80-point Giroux before the scoring inflation this year.

Note: the implication is also that Coots' "breakout" year was far less impressive offensively when weighed against the background scoring. The higher your point totals, the more likely you were impacted more by inflation. I suspect the curve is logarithmic...so players who scored 30 are closer to the norm while 70 is further away and 100 is even further away from the norm.



In an attempt to weigh that metric though for Giroux, despite inflation he still finished 2nd in scoring which IS decisively more telling.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Take into account point inflation this past season and note percentage of players in the late 80s-100 as players in the late 60s-PPG from prior seasons. I'm on my phone, not at a comp, so actually looking at the data is rough, but I expect some obvious enough correlation should anyone look.

100-pt Giroux is probably 80-point Giroux before the scoring inflation this year.

Scoring was up a little over 7% leaguewide from 2016-17.

Interestingly enough, the PP numbers as a whole were up over a full percent and broke 20 for the first time since 1989-90. Anytime you have a PP spike, it’s logical to expect it to show in your top-end scorers. At the same time, we did see a half of a percent bump from 2015-16 to 2016-17, but didn’t see a similar top-end scoring spike. Meanwhile, Shots were at ~31.8 per game, the highest rate since 1970.

TLDR; The league is opening up AND Giroux was better.

 

[Ruck Over]

Scoring was up a little over 7% leaguewide from 2016-17.

Interestingly enough, the PP numbers as a whole were up over a full percent and broke 20 for the first time since 1989-90. Anytime you have a PP spike, it’s logical to expect it to show in your top-end scorers. At the same time, we did see a half of a percent bump from 2015-16 to 2016-17, but didn’t see a similar top-end scoring spike. Meanwhile, Shots were at ~31.8 per game, the highest rate since 1970.

TLDR; The league is opening up AND Giroux was better.

BUT... will Giroux ever be a 40 goal scorer?

 

[Appleyard]

Also, these point totals could be closer to the new norm as opposed to away from it.

Take into account point inflation this past season and note percentage of players in the late 80s-100 as players in the late 60s-PPG from prior seasons. I'm on my phone, not at a comp, so actually looking at the data is rough, but I expect some obvious enough correlation should anyone look.

100-pt Giroux is probably 80-point Giroux before the scoring inflation this year.

Note: the implication is also that Coots' "breakout" year was far less impressive offensively when weighed against the background scoring. The higher your point totals, the more likely you were impacted more by inflation. I suspect the curve is logarithmic...so players who scored 30 are closer to the norm while 70 is further away and 100 is even further away from the norm.



In an attempt to weigh that metric though for Giroux, despite inflation he still finished 2nd in scoring which IS decisively more telling.

The maths says that had the scoring climate been the same as last year:

Giroux: 102pts = 94-95pts

Couturier: 76pts = 70-71pts

 

[hatcher]

But but but but he had 4 bad games, against the back-to-back cup champs, matched against Crosby's line, and with at least one horrible linemate at all times...

Clearly that means he's a bad leader and we should exaggerate this to say he got completely dominated, was completely invisible, and is no longer the best player on the team!

He'll be matched up against the best no matter how good the team so if its the 4th line that has to win the series because our top cant compete in playoff hockey NOW then were f***ed.

 

[hatcher]

Playoffs is what matters. All top players have good years but the cup is what matters not f***in points.

 

[klutch]

Ugh... Hatcher