Post-Game Talk: #66| FLYERS 2 at Leafs 4 | Thursday, March 9, 2017

[Beef Invictus]

I won't edit this in, but I forgot to add:

RF, you are correct when you point out that there are valid reasons to criticize Couturier. He is timid at times, still, with shows of confidence attacking the net absent for too long, even though he's had success doing that. He also isn't very good at getting shots on net unless he's point blank, if he has to outsmart a defender to get a shot on it's probably not happening, and that's a pretty big hindrance and becomes more glaring on a team where we don't have a standout shooter. And while he's shown some great accuracy in the past, his release must be easy to read because he rarely beats them cleanly.


What frustrates me is that many of his most feverish detractors ignore the valid criticisms and instead fabricate nonsense. Or they work their hardest do minimize any points he does produce, or erroneously attack what he actually does well instead of focusing on what he doesn't, or they engage in the worst vice of our media, reading deeply into a quote to assign whatever meaning is convenient to them.

 

[Curufinwe]

I think it's fair to see we don't have a really good ES center right now. Just because Couturier has been better than Giroux doesn't mean he's been great. At ES both are producing at 3C level.

If Giroux was producing 5 on 5 points at the same rate as Couturier he'd have 22 points at 5 on 5 instead of 13.

That's nine extra ES goals for the Flyers.

 

[Random Forest]

Couturier's usage is a bit harder than those two. Additionally, wingers and dmen have greatly benefited from the way Hakstol has had the team playing. Emphasis has been on getting the puck in their hands to generate offense; centers have fetched pucks and filled in at both positions. That didn't noticeably begin changing until after the Calgary loss; since then our centers are playing similarly to last year. His production has actually gone up a bit since then, even predating Flip's arrival. And finally, the people I'm addressing are the ones who have little more to contribute than "Couturier is awful and I don't believe your stats that prove my extreme stance wrong."

There is definitely some merit here, but this is also a bit of hand waving as well. Yes, Couturier plays tough minutes, but he also plays a lot of minutes and should be expected to perform better offensively simply on sheer volume.

I know you weren't directly referring to me with your criticism, but at the same time, a guy like Voracek, for example, gets excoriated around here when he slumps. But people don't respond to those critics with the same vitriol that people get when criticizing Couturier. There's a very peculiar defensiveness surrounding Couturier. I get that it's because some of his critics simply don't appreciate him at all, but at the same time, his defenders need to be honest when he's playing below expectations.

Anyone who says "Sean Couturier has performed adequately this season" is facing some serious cognitive dissonance. It's true that very few players on this team have performed adequately, but, again, that's not a defense of Couturier. As a player who many expect to be our second or third most valuable contributor, he's failed to have the kind of impact we should expect of him, and it's worth pointing out.

Giroux is more concerning to me now, and I've been playing a "hold on a minute" game with criticizing him and giving him the benefit of the doubt. His production is still low, and with centers no longer de-emphasized for going on 9 games now that factor isn't nearly as in-play as it was. He has 1 ES point going back to 1/25, none in the last 9 games. Couturier has 5 in those same last 9 games.

There's no doubt about this. I'm with you. But when we're searching for reasons why this team has failed this season, perhaps the single biggest reason is that we have no centers producing at true top-six quality. That's a reflection of our two centers who are expected to perform at top-six levels, so they both deserve criticism. Giroux just happens to mitigate this underachievement with strong PP performance.

 

[Beef Invictus]

There is definitely some merit here, but this is also a bit of hand waving as well. Yes, Couturier plays tough minutes, but he also plays a lot of minutes and should be expected to perform better offensively simply on sheer volume.

I know you weren't directly referring to me with your criticism, but at the same time, a guy like Voracek, for example, gets excoriated around here when he slumps. But people don't respond to those critics with the same vitriol that people get when criticizing Couturier. There's a very peculiar defensiveness surrounding Couturier. I get that it's because some of his critics simply don't appreciate him at all, but at the same time, his defenders need to be honest when he's playing below expectations.

Anyone who says "Sean Couturier has performed adequately this season" is facing some serious cognitive dissonance. It's true that very few players on this team have performed adequately, but, again, that's not a defense of Couturier. As a player who many expect to be our second or third most valuable contributor, he's failed to have the kind of impact we should expect of him, and it's worth pointing out.


There's no doubt about this. I'm with you. But when we're searching for reasons why this team has failed this season, perhaps the single biggest reason is that we have no centers producing at true top-six quality. That's a reflection of our two centers who are expected to perform at top-six levels, so they both deserve criticism. Giroux just happens to mitigate this underachievement with strong PP performance.

I don't believe I've proclaimed Couturier adequate; none of our centers have been. If I've made such a proclamation I was either drunk or hopped up on incredibly amounts of caffeine. My mission has been to determine why our center position has taken such a sharp dip. On an individual level Couturier has generally played well enough to keep me from being concerned. With system now accounted for and adjusted to my eye, it's clear to me that Giroux simply isn't. My two concerns with Giroux are his skating and shot. His speed and acceleration are down, and he's not doing well to get space and be open, which certainly impacts my impending Voracek paragraph. But without consulting stats, to me he looks to be shooting significantly less. He's passing up shots on the PP he normally takes, and he's been doing it all year...it's not the usual 1-3 week annual stretch. That does have me panicky, because my mind goes back to his wrist issues.

Speaking of Voracek, many of his slump periods have been baffling. He'll start a play looking great. He'll work his ass off to get the puck in and maintain possession. He'll keep working his ass off, make some nifty moves....and then make a low percentage pass or shot.

It's confusing to me. He'll look like Good Voracek for 80% of a play and then fall apart at the end, often.

 

[Curufinwe]

Couturier's current 5 on 5 points/60 of 1.39 isn't top 6 quality on a good team.

If our other two main centers, Giroux and Schenn, were also scoring at that rate, we'd be in a comfortable playoff position. Giroux is closer to Bellemare and Weise, than he is to Couturier.

 

[Striiker]

I won't edit this in, but I forgot to add:

RF, you are correct when you point out that there are valid reasons to criticize Couturier. He is timid at times, still, with shows of confidence attacking the net absent for too long, even though he's had success doing that. He also isn't very good at getting shots on net unless he's point blank, if he has to outsmart a defender to get a shot on it's probably not happening, and that's a pretty big hindrance and becomes more glaring on a team where we don't have a standout shooter. And while he's shown some great accuracy in the past, his release must be easy to read because he rarely beats them cleanly.


What frustrates me is that many of his most feverish detractors ignore the valid criticisms and instead fabricate nonsense. Or they work their hardest do minimize any points he does produce, or erroneously attack what he actually does well instead of focusing on what he doesn't, or they engage in the worst vice of our media, reading deeply into a quote to assign whatever meaning is convenient to them.

This is true.

My opinion of Couturier is somewhere in between the two groups that argue about him often, but even I get annoyed at how badly some of his hardcore haters exaggerate his flaws and minimize his accompaniments when he does have good offensive performances.

Saying you're disappointed with his level of scoring is fair, I think. Saying that he has zero offensive skill and is a black hole that kills any line he's on, is not. But unfortunately, often the people who criticize him can't control themselves and stop at fair criticism... they have to exaggerate and make things up.

It's as if both sides just want to get even every time something happens. When he has a good game his defenders act like that proves their point. When he has a bad game his haters act like that proves their point. That's why there's arguments about him so often, both sides like taking jabs so there's always people waiting for "payback".

As with most things, the grey area in between is probably most fair and realistic.

 

[Curufinwe]

There is definitely some merit here, but this is also a bit of hand waving as well. Yes, Couturier plays tough minutes, but he also plays a lot of minutes and should be expected to perform better offensively simply on sheer volume.

I know you weren't directly referring to me with your criticism, but at the same time, a guy like Voracek, for example, gets excoriated around here when he slumps. But people don't respond to those critics with the same vitriol that people get when criticizing Couturier. There's a very peculiar defensiveness surrounding Couturier. I get that it's because some of his critics simply don't appreciate him at all, but at the same time, his defenders need to be honest when he's playing below expectations.

Anyone who says "Sean Couturier has performed adequately this season" is facing some serious cognitive dissonance. It's true that very few players on this team have performed adequately, but, again, that's not a defense of Couturier. As a player who many expect to be our second or third most valuable contributor, he's failed to have the kind of impact we should expect of him, and it's worth pointing out.

He is our third most valuable 5 on 5 contributor. If you expected him to also be our third best PP contributor you had unrealistic expectations.

It's true that he is playing below reasonable expectations on the powerplay and he needs to get back to producing PP points at the rate he did in 15-16 or face the possibility of being taken off the PP entirely. But we already got a glimpse of that this season, and it didn't make PP2 any less dysfunctional.

 

[BernieParent]

As with most issues, I am pretty middle-of-the-road with Couturier. With the acquisition of Filppula, I don't see a reason to keep him on PP2, and it would be a merciful end to the ridiculousness of Bellemare and VandeVelde on PK1 to at the very least reduce them to PK2 duties and have Couturier - Simmonds / Read as the PK1 forward pairing.

We know Couturier's stellar ability to shut down opposing top lines and to generate positive Corsi in doing so, but the actual on-the-scoreboard offense his lines create is pedestrian, to say the least. Having a more offensively minded C like Filppula should do wonders to have an undisputed 1C (Giroux) 2A/2B (Couturier/Filppula) and a sparingly-used 4C (Bellemare or better).

 

[Random Forest]

He is our third most valuable 5 on 5 contributor. If you expected him to also be our third best PP contributor you had unrealistic expectations.

I bolded the operative word. Again, your constant comparisons to his counterparts on our team are not going to cut it as a defense. Our team is objectively terrible at 5v5 scoring. Relativism is a subtle deflection from deserved criticism.

It's true that he is playing below reasonable expectations on the powerplay and he needs to get back to producing PP points at the rate he did in 15-16 or face the possibility of being taken off the PP entirely. But we already got a glimpse of that this season, and it didn't make PP2 any less dysfunctional.

I don't blame Couturier personally for the struggles of PP2. At the same time, just because no one competent took his place in his absence does not excuse his own performance.

I just don't think his skill set is cut out for a role that requires him to directly create plays from the half wall. Retrieving pucks, maintaining possession, and subtly attracting the attention of PKers so other guys can work the puck? Yeah, those are all things Couturier is good at. Those things take place in front of the net and in the corners. I'm not necessarily an advocate of taking him off the PP, but I would hope he's in a role that better emphasizes his skills.

Regardless, his role on the PP is moot until we find the personnel and setup that's able to generate consistent offense. He's not the guy that will be generating that consistent offense though, and I think we can agree on that.

 

[hatcher]

The Islanders were making Andrew Ladd a healthy scratch earlier in the season, he now has 7 goals more than Giroux.

On December 15 the Islanders were 14 points behind the Flyers, they are now 5 points ahead.

 

[MacDonald4MVP]

The Islanders were making Andrew Ladd a healthy scratch earlier in the season, he now has 7 goals more than Giroux.

On December 15 the Islanders were 14 points behind the Flyers, they are now 5 points ahead.

We were all laughing at them. Who's laughing now?

 

[Beef Invictus]

I want a good sample size of Couturier playing near the net on the PP2. It could be neat to see him playing where he's typically best. As Neck gets a better grasp on NHL PPs, and with Filppula around, I don't see why we can't make that the go-to from here out. Provorov on D and I'd go with another D...probably Gudas, actually. He's great at keeping the puck in and he's shown more trickeration and subtlety with the puck than MDZ ever has, and I value that in dmen on the PP; MDZ is really easily read by PKers. In his brief stints on the point it's always brutally obvious if he's going to pass and where, if he's going to shoot, etc; compared to Streit and Ghost who mask their intentions really well with their skating and stickhandling.

 

[Beef Invictus]

We were all laughing at them. Who's laughing now?

They play in a car dealership, so still me.

 

[Rebels57]

I want a good sample size of Couturier playing near the net on the PP2. It could be neat to see him playing where he's typically best. As Neck gets a better grasp on NHL PPs, and with Filppula around, I don't see why we can't make that the go-to from here out. Provorov on D and I'd go with another D...probably Gudas, actually. He's great at keeping the puck in and he's shown more trickeration and subtlety with the puck than MDZ ever has, and I value that in dmen on the PP; MDZ is really easily read by PKers. In his brief stints on the point it's always brutally obvious if he's going to pass and where, if he's going to shoot, etc; compared to Streit and Ghost who mask their intentions really well with their skating and stickhandling.

I would definitely do Provorov-Gudas on PP2.

Sick of watching lefties retrieve pucks on their backhand and not have time to shift to the forehand. Gudas is good at keeping it in and getting it quickly to the net.

Eventually Myers will have that role but until then, give Gudas a chance.

 

[Flyerfan4life]

They play in a car dealership, so still me.

LOL.... best burn EVER !!!




if i knew how to make a signature on HFb, i'd totaly steal that line from you beef.. hahah

 

[Stizzle]

Couturier's current 5 on 5 points/60 of 1.39 isn't top 6 quality on a good team.

If our other two main centers, Giroux and Schenn, were also scoring at that rate, we'd be in a comfortable playoff position. Giroux is closer to Bellemare and Weise, than he is to Couturier.

It's funny you mention Bellemare and Weise. Because those 2 and Giroux were listed as bottom 20 NHL forwards in 5 on 5 efficiency according to a table I linked to a few days ago. Don't ask me what the formula is for 5 on 5 efficiency. I don't know, but it's pretty brutal to see Giroux listed there.

 

[BernieParent]

Hopefully this season is Giroux saying, "I'm saving myself for when this line-up is good."

 

[Striiker]

It's funny you mention Bellemare and Weise. Because those 2 and Giroux were listed as bottom 20 NHL forwards in 5 on 5 efficiency according to a table I linked to a few days ago. Don't ask me what the formula is for 5 on 5 efficiency. I don't know, but it's pretty brutal to see Giroux listed there.

If that's what it's saying than it doesn't seem to be worth anything.

He may not be producing much at 5v5, but anything that places him anywhere near those two is obviously deeply flawed.

 

[Random Forest]

It's funny you mention Bellemare and Weise. Because those 2 and Giroux were listed as bottom 20 NHL forwards in 5 on 5 efficiency according to a table I linked to a few days ago. Don't ask me what the formula is for 5 on 5 efficiency. I don't know, but it's pretty brutal to see Giroux listed there.

See, this is another thing I take issue with. You saw something in a table without understanding the statistic or methodology behind it, but you're willing to cite it because it confirms your preconceptions. It could be the best, most powerfully descriptive statistic in the world, but the blind trust of things because they 1) seem sophisticated/believable and 2) confirm what we already believe (or are primed to believe) is what makes misuse of analytics one of the more frustrating trends in the game amongst fans. If you admittedly don't understand what you're citing, it's probably not something you should be citing without more familiarity.

Analytics are super powerful tools for better understanding the game, but they often get seriously misused by fans.

 

[gto64dr]

I'm a Mason hater, have been for a while, but he has been on one of his rolls lately. In a game this important you don't start your designated backup who has been sitting cold for a while. Neuvy wasn't sharp but I blame the coach on that decision.
But the real problem on this team is still scoring, scoring can cover for a lot of shortcomings.
Why do we set up all our opportunities from the points or half walls? We constantly try to score from bad angles instead of the slot. The goalies have an easy time covering sharp angles and must love to play us.

 

[Flyerfan4life]

Why do we set up all our opportunities from the points or half walls? We constantly try to score from bad angles instead of the slot. The goalies have an easy time covering sharp angles and must love to play us.

ummm thats Haks "system"...

 

[deadhead]

Or maybe they just need to finish.
They had plenty of opportunities to score against Toronto, MDZ shot it into the stomach of Anderson, etc.
I don't think the problem is the scheme - its' the players - too many passers and not enough players who are goal hungry.

Schenn and Konency might be the only two who are snipers, and Neck is still learning. Simmonds is great on the PP, but 5x5 he disappears in the O-zone when he can't just hang in the crease.

They need guys like Lindblom, Rubtsov and Allison to join this team.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Or maybe they just need to finish.
They had plenty of opportunities to score against Toronto, MDZ shot it into the stomach of Anderson, etc.
I don't think the problem is the scheme - its' the players - too many passers and not enough players who are goal hungry.

Schenn and Konency might be the only two who are snipers, and Neck is still learning. Simmonds is great on the PP, but 5x5 he disappears in the O-zone when he can't just hang in the crease.

They need guys like Lindblom, Rubtsov and Allison to join this team.

"Maybe they need to finish" is a cop-out response though, that ignores the opposing goalie and whether they're playing a style that will generate real chances that can realistically be finished. They have improved on that front, luckily.

But yes the lack of good shooters is an issue. Schenn, like Couturier, isn't very good at producing successful shots.

Simmonds has 14 goals on the PP and 14 at ES so he hardly disappears.

 

[Delete99991]

I take back my comments about Couturier's passing.

Great assist he had on TO's second goal.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Why do we set up all our opportunities from the points or half walls? We constantly try to score from bad angles instead of the slot. The goalies have an easy time covering sharp angles and must love to play us.

That would be sort of like asking why a short, slow, all-white basketball team takes the vast majority of its scoring attempts from long outside jump shots: Because they don't have a choice. They don't have the ability to create offense through driving & dunking.