Confirmed with Link: Pierre-Edouard Bellemare 2-Year Ext. ($1.45M AAV), Selected by VGK in Expansion 6/21

[kudymen]

We can get a specialist in VdV for free though!

 

[deadhead]

Well, given your third pair options are Hagg, MacDonald or Folin, Folin playing won't be the worst thing in the world, and since Ghost and Sanheim are unlikely to get much PK time, you want your third pair guys to at least be decent on the PK.

 

[Tripod]

In the thread on the Trade board, I said as much in more words, but:

Yes, Lappy sucks. The bolded, however, are guys you don't want to be piling SH TOI on, let alone have blocking point shots on a regular basis. They've done it capably, out of necessity, at different points in their careers, it's just not a good strategy if it can be avoided. Only one of the remainder is a center, and while decent, you'd like to have a better first option.

Don't let our mutual hatred of members of the coaching staff absolve other problems. It's a theme here.

Bergeron and Marchand do it for the Bruins. Why can't Couts and Giroux?

I REALLY miss when our PK was a threat to score as well. It kept opponents a bit more passive.

 

[deadhead]

Couts has an injury history and Giroux will be 31, I'd rather ration their minutes for situations where they can be more productive.
Couts played 21:36 and Giroux 20:22 last year.

 

[Magua]

In the thread on the Trade board, I said as much in more words, but:

Yes, Lappy sucks. The bolded, however, are guys you don't want to be piling SH TOI on, let alone have blocking point shots on a regular basis. They've done it capably, out of necessity, at different points in their careers, it's just not a good strategy if it can be avoided. Only one of the remainder is a center, and while decent, you'd like to have a better first option.

Don't let our mutual hatred of members of the coaching staff absolve other problems. It's a theme here.

Well, I’d like to see the data that says a player is more likely to get injured on the PK than at any other point in practice or game. All these players played PK at lower levels. All the injuries that have piled up......how many came from PKing? I struggle to think of one. You’re more likely to get injured with physical contact, of which there is none on the PK. Seems rather facile to boil it down to blocking shots as well. Most of it is skating and lane filling, not forming a wall in your own crease.

There’s not a team in the league who wouldn’t use Couturier as a mainstay PKer. You absolutely lost me on that. Every other top defensive center sees that usage for a reason. The Flyers, who desperately need their best PKers to fix a diseased unit, don’t have the luxury to bench their best PKers. Should Bergeron and Kopitar not PK too and cost their team value in one of the highest leverage situations in the game? I think Patrick can excel there; I think he is an all-situations player and eventually not using him as such is a waste. I don’t want Giroux as anything more than a 3rd unit PKer, to take face-offs, but he can do that. Simmonds broke a bone in his ankle last year on a shot by Ghost.....should he be kept off the PP too? I can at least understand not overtaxing him coming off an injury riddled season and as a potential trade chip, etc. But his litany of injuries were totally isolated from his PK duties.

Having depth players of equal merit to be used on the PK and free up scorers elsewhere is a reason to make personnel decisions on the PK. I think they have a few. Being afraid of injuries is not to me. Wrap everyone in bubble wrap in the press box then.

 

[Rich Nixon]

Bergeron and Marchand do it for the Bruins. Why can't Couts and Giroux?

I REALLY miss when our PK was a threat to score as well. It kept opponents a bit more passive.

I mean, they can, you just don't really want them to. Bergeron and Marchand are both very good at it...but funny you bring up Bergeron, who missed an entire month last season after blocking a shot against the Leafs (on the PK, I believe, as well). Which is why I say the guys are capable, but it's not necessarily the situation you want.

It's just a misuse of players, at a certain point. A WRX has AWD, but I'd prefer to drive a crappy old Jeep in the snow and save the fast toy for a summer highway run. Just because the thing is capable of handling certain situations doesn't mean you shouldn't find a way to preserve it for what it does best. There aren't many PKers better than Bergeron out there, so you end up using him. But for all the time he gets out there, the "scoring threat" argument is kinda bunk to me, since he produced all of 3 points shorthanded, which would have been eclipsed pretty easily by the points he'd have put up in the 13 games he missed in March. That is, however, a complicated equation given that he's one of the best PKers in the league. Giroux isn't quite as good, Simmonds isn't close, and Couturier might be...but he just followed his offensive breakout season with 2 knee injuries in 4 months.

Of course guys are going to get hurt and worn down in any and all situations. Which, to me, is why you look for ways to let a 30+ year-old Giroux or a recovering Couturier risk injury and fatigue in the offensive zone and at even strength if you can find a decent PK center.

 

[Flyerfan4life]

We can get a specialist in VdV for free though!

do not even joke about that...

 

[Rebels57]

We can get a specialist in VdV for free though!

I will fight your f***ing face.

 

[deadhead]

Having depth players of equal merit to be used on the PK and free up scorers elsewhere is a reason to make personnel decisions on the PK. I think they have a few. Being afraid of injuries is not to me. Wrap everyone in bubble wrap in the press box then.

Yeah, that's my approach as well.
The injury consideration with Couts is more a matter of overuse, I think tired players are more likely to get injured. 20+ minutes is a lot for a forward, Couts was 2nd, Giroux 9th, Voracek 21st in total minutes for forwards (Kopitar #1).

As they develop a stronger 3rd line (and more confidence in the 2nd line) then you can reduce Couts and Giroux's ES minutes from 16+ to say 15, sorta like Toronto.

 

[Rebels57]

It honestly really concerns me that Hextall thinks the personnel is still the issue and not the guy who coached his PK unit to a near league worst efficiency percentage over his 4 year tenure.

Hextalls biggest blindspot continues to be his coaching staff.

 

[Magua]

“I don’t think Provorov should be used on the PK as a first option. Last year he suffered a shoulder injury (200ft from his own net by crashing into the boards). His PK1 minutes should be given to Hagg or Folin, since Provorov is too important to give PK minutes to and risk injury blocking shots.”

How many would agree with that? It’s identical logic.

 

[BernieParent]

“I don’t think Provorov should be used on the PK as a first option. Last year he suffered a shoulder injury (200ft from his own net by crashing into the boards). His PK1 minutes should be given to Hagg or Folin, since Provorov is too important to give PK minutes to and risk injury blocking shots.”

How many would agree with that? It’s identical logic.

And Couturier shouldn't practice.

 

[Magua]

And Couturier shouldn't practice.

Couturier shouldn’t do charitable work either.

 

[Rich Nixon]

“I don’t think Provorov should be used on the PK as a first option. Last year he suffered a shoulder injury (200ft from his own net by crashing into the boards). His PK1 minutes should be given to Hagg or Folin, since Provorov is too important to give PK minutes to and risk injury blocking shots.”

How many would agree with that? It’s identical logic.

...no, it isn't. You're being pretty glib here. As Couturier becomes increasingly-relied upon as an offensive threat, and Giroux continues to be one, his usage should change. It isn't that hard to comprehend and it doesn't mean they should never be used on the PK, it just means that the team should look to find alternatives in order to maintain balance in their lineup and not overuse certain players as their roles evolve. Pretty non-controversial concept here.

 

[FLYguy3911]

Special Teams situations are high leverage situations. Your best players should be playing in those situations.

 

[deadhead]

It's a dynamic optimization problem, your constraint is minutes for your top players, who you would like to last past February, and to give them enough rest between shifts so they don't have dead legs during games.

So if you have depth players who can PK as well as your top offensive players, you'd rather have them eat PK minutes and have more offensively talented players on the ice at ES and on the PP.

You don't need to be an offensively skilled player to excel on the PK, Raffl for example, is as suited to the PK as most forwards.

Now if you're bottom six are just limited period, well, you try to limit their minutes as best you can, but you still face constraints because you not only want to limit total minutes for players like Giroux and Couts, you also have to give them shifts off, so SOMEONE has to go onto the ice in their place.

 

[Magua]

...no, it isn't. You're being pretty glib here. As Couturier becomes increasingly-relied upon as an offensive threat, and Giroux continues to be one, his usage should change. It isn't that hard to comprehend and it doesn't mean they should never be used on the PK, it just means that the team should look to find alternatives in order to maintain balance in their lineup and not overuse certain players as their roles evolve. Pretty non-controversial concept here.

Well, you didn't explain why my glib comparison of Couturier to Provorov was inaccurate. Provorov led the NHL in goals for defensemen; he was the best 5v5 scoring defenseman on a team that relies a lot on defense generating offense at 5v5. I think many people believe he has more offense to unearth, hence his usage role should change too, no? If Morin and Myers come up, we can lower Provorov's penalty kill minutes to, say, 2nd unit.

These aren't my beliefs -- my belief, as echoed above, is you ideally use your best players in the highest leverage situations, especially considering the lack of PK success for this team -- but why is Provorov immune from this logic? Because he's a defenseman? A team that finishes 2nd worst or thereabouts every year shouldn't be looking for alternatives to using their best PKers. And even if we work with the hypothetical that the team can be strong on the PK without Couturier, whose offense has become more important (though they're not mutually exclusive), you scoffed at the idea of using someone like Patrick there too. What I'm intuiting is you think they should just use bottom 6 players on the PK. Yes, if 4th liners can anchor a top ranked PK that's wonderful, but it's not revelatory stuff that your best players are your best players at ALL strengths, and the Flyers are not in a position of luxury.

 

[kudymen]

I will fight your ****ing face.

oooh big stroong online man.. or something like that.. I dont even know what thread that was

 

[Rebels57]

oooh big stroong online man.. or something like that.. I dont even know what thread that was

 

[kudymen]

It is ON

 

[deadhead]

Provorov, like many top defensemen, can play 25 minutes a night, so he has those extra 5 minutes to play with, top forwards play 20-21 minutes at most and ideally you'd like to keep them down to 18-19 minutes (fresher legs since they skate more than defensemen).

 

[Rich Nixon]

Well, you didn't explain why my glib comparison of Couturier to Provorov was inaccurate.

It's pretty self-explanatory...

Because he's a defenseman?

You got it. Yes, and a very good one.

A team that finishes 2nd worst or thereabouts every year shouldn't be looking for alternatives to using their best PKers.

This is kind of inane. A team that's terrible at the PK should be looking at all options to improve it.

What I'm intuiting is you think they should just use bottom 6 players on the PK.

I'm not arguing that at all, I'm arguing that they should try to find alternatives who can handle a bulk of those duties to limit the exposure of the better players. My problem isn't with the idea of Couturier and Giroux ever killing penalties, it's that they're the lone guys who are quite good at it and that's not a good thing. Also the fact that it seems that no problem around here can ever be more complicated than the damn punching bags: The PK is poorly coached, but the personnel are also inadequate and create excessive wear-and-tear on the top end of the lineup. Yes, Lappy sucks, but you yourself said it: They're not in a position of luxury. I don't get what the argument is, or if there even is one. There's holes in the lineup. We can rage about crappy coaches all we want and still admit that the team lacks a true 3rd line center, right?

 

[Striiker]

Why would we take our best defensive forward off the PK... the place where you're most likely to get scored on?

That'd be like taking Giroux off the PP...

 

[Ruck Over]

Wrap everyone in bubble wrap in the press box then.

Wouldn't that cause them to suffocate? What good are their non-bruised/broken bodies if they die from asphyxiation?

 

[deadhead]

Cut air holes.