RLR: Couturier not quite living up to our expectations

[Dread Clawz]

Not good enough. So have a lot of other players who haven't dropped in the ratings as a result.

As arsmaster said, yes they have. A respected Isles blogger who used to be a beat writer for the team had the Isles taking Duchene right before the draft in 09, and we all know Tampa would have picked Hedman, so that would have made Tavares #3. The wide open nature of this draft just makes it easier for a top tier player to fall. You know there is always going to be one or two surprise guys at the top of lists, and usually they don't go as high as they are ranked.

If that was the problem, that should have hurt him just as much a year ago, and it didn't.

Then why is it perceived as weak

That's because he's has another year of scrutiny and so people have looked for something to question. Prospects are never picked apart in year 1 or 2. When they have been big names for a few years, however, they start to get picked apart. Example, like I just said...Couturier's skating is identical to Landeskog's and Huberdeau's. Huberdeau is maybe a little more agile, but that's it. Why is nobody getting on their case? Landeskog also plays a somewhat dull style, yet you never hear about it.

Also, care to explain how Couturier's team is 4th in the Q when it has no NHL prospects on it and no projected draft picks for this year? How is that possible while Couturier is also at the top of Q stat sheets, if he's so bad?

Sorry, but that's a circular argument. If there is more opportunity for 2nd tier players to move up, that's because the 1st tier isn't convincing - and the question here is why a particular 1st tier player is currently not convincing the scouts.

Thanks for weighing in, but these are mainly the sort of speculative and unconvincing generalisations that I made this thread in an attempt to get beyond.

There is simply more opportunity for players to move up this year because unlike most drafts, there is no clearly defined #1 or top 2, and even the first tier of the draft is in question according to most people. The first tier is also larger than in most years, which means the 2nd tier players lower in the top 10 will be closer rated to the top prospects.

You asked for answers, i gave them. Sorry if it was too unconvincing for you.

 

[Breakfast of Champs]

I dont know what he hasnt done, his pts/game are up quite a bit from last year, his team is doing well, he cracked the wjc roster, hes big and smart and has one of the best plus minus ratings in the league. If people were expecting him to put up crosby like numbers this season just because he was the 1st player to lead a chl league in scoring before their draft year since crsoby than they were mistaken. He is not a sidney crosby nor is he an electrifying scoring machine. He will be a pt/game player in the nhl and a solid 2 way 1st line centre. IMO i would still take him 1st but it seems I am one of few that still have that opinion and havent jumped on every single flaw he has.

 

[J17 Vs Proclamation]

That's because he's has another year of scrutiny and so people have looked for something to question. Prospects are never picked apart in year 1 or 2. When they have been big names for a few years, however, they start to get picked apart. Example, like I just said...Couturier's skating is identical to Landeskog's and Huberdeau's. Huberdeau is maybe a little more agile, but that's it. Why is nobody getting on their case? Landeskog also plays a somewhat dull style, yet you never hear about it.

This doesn't explain anything though. His stock isn't judged through what fans think, and this is the type of thinking an armchair scout would have. We are seeing an obvious fall of his stock within the scouting world and i find it very hard to believe that he is legitimately falling because he has simply been around for long enough where he becomes over-scrutinized. It simply makes no logical sense if you tackle the assessment from a professional scouts position. Larsson and RNH are not seeing such a fall despite being in the limelight for a similar period of time. Why is this?

SC is falling for a reason that relates directly to his game and his projections. Im not quite sure what these issues are and am a little suprised at the decline of his stock. But what is clear is that numerous credible scouting sources have some concerns and these concerns are not going to derive simply from being over scrutinized.

 

[boredmale]

He will be a pt/game player in the nhl and a solid 2 way 1st line centre.

He seems more a 60-70 point 2 way second line center. Basically Jordan Staal with more offensive ability but not as good defensively or physically. Kesler might be another decent comparison.

I think the problem with alot of fans is they want that top line/pairing player(not a solid top 6 forward/top 4 defenseman) so somebody who most likely won't reach that seems to get undervalued. From an Islanders POV I would much rather take my chances with the safer Couturier then the upside of RNH(but a large part of that is because we already have Tavares for #1 center).

 

[Dread Clawz]

This doesn't explain anything though. His stock isn't judged through what fans think, and this is the type of thinking an armchair scout would have. We are seeing an obvious fall of his stock within the scouting world and i find it very hard to believe that he is legitimately falling because he has simply been around for long enough where he becomes over-scrutinized. It simply makes no logical sense if you tackle the assessment from a professional scouts position. Larsson and RNH are not seeing such a fall despite being in the limelight for a similar period of time. Why is this?

SC is falling for a reason that relates directly to his game and his projections. Im not quite sure what these issues are and am a little suprised at the decline of his stock. But what is clear is that numerous credible scouting sources have some concerns and these concerns are not going to derive simply from being over scrutinized.

My point is that scouts over-scrutinize too.

Larsson and RNH have not been in the spotlight for as long as Couturier has. Couturier was being hyped up before he even entered the Q at 15. That pre-dates the other two by far.

 

[J17 Vs Proclamation]

My point is that scouts over-scrutinize too.

Larsson and RNH have not been in the spotlight for as long as Couturier has. Couturier was being hyped up before he even entered the Q at 15. That pre-dates the other two by far.

Larsson and RNH absolutely have been. Perhaps we knew about SC in HFboards before the others, but in the scouting world, all three have been known for some time.

Your basically saying that SC is being over-scutinized because he has been known for so long. Clearly this is a ridiculous idea. If Scouts have concerns, it's because they believe real concerns are there. These concerns haven't manifested themselves just because SC has been known for so long.

We've had various top end players such as Tavares, Hedman etc over-scrutinized by us as fans on HFboards during their draft year ; but never did they realistically slide within the scouting world. SC apparently may well be and im sorry, but this isn't just because SC has been around longer.

 

[arsmaster*]

Lets wait until the draft for this "slide" to come to fruition.

I bet theres some teams that have him @ 8th and others probably have him #1.

Until the draft it is ALL speculation.

He isnt living up to expectations, is the biggest knock on him.

 

[TheStranger]

It always seems that the most hyped players end up falling in people's minds as soon as other players start showing any start of flash to their game. Happened with tavares, who was hyped for like 5 years, Duchene shows up for a few months and people start talking about him unseating Tavares.

Seems like the longer someone is hyped, the more volatile their position is and the longer people have to invent problems with their game. Or something like that.

 

[Qubax]

Yah I remember the same thing happening with Spezza....he was over analyzed and fell...I also think that since this draft has no sure fire top player every publication is looking for the risers/fallers, dark horses etc. Couturier has been a victim of this in a negative manner. I don't think that SC is anything like Angelo Esposito

 

[boredmale]

Yah I remember the same thing happening with Spezza....he was over analyzed and fell

There was also that Kovalchuk guy in Spezza's case. lol

 

[Qvist]

As arsmaster said, yes they have. A respected Isles blogger who used to be a beat writer for the team had the Isles taking Duchene right before the draft in 09, and we all know Tampa would have picked Hedman, so that would have made Tavares #3. The wide open nature of this draft just makes it easier for a top tier player to fall. You know there is always going to be one or two surprise guys at the top of lists, and usually they don't go as high as they are ranked.

I think that's a really, really bad argument. You could find people who thought someone else than Hall or Tavares would or should go first, but they both remained clear odds-on favorites to do so, and it would have been a major suprise if they didn't. That's not remotely comparable to Couturier's situation, which is not that of a projected 1st overall pick who's drawing some doubt, but that of a former first-ranked prospect who's heading full steam out of the top 5.

The notion that it is somehow plausible for a legitimate 1st overall to drop in the rankings because of overexposure simply has no support in experience. The last draft I can think of where somebody else than the long-time favorite to go first actually went first is 2003. The theory might account for why top prospects have extra question marks applied to them, it does not account for why a top prospect drops in the rankings. Especially when other prospects who have been hyped for just as long don't.

That's because he's has another year of scrutiny and so people have looked for something to question. Prospects are never picked apart in year 1 or 2. When they have been big names for a few years, however, they start to get picked apart. Example, like I just said...Couturier's skating is identical to Landeskog's and Huberdeau's. Huberdeau is maybe a little more agile, but that's it. Why is nobody getting on their case? Landeskog also plays a somewhat dull style, yet you never hear about it.

That's my question too, but the above answer just doesn't cut it.

Also, care to explain how Couturier's team is 4th in the Q when it has no NHL prospects on it and no projected draft picks for this year? How is that possible while Couturier is also at the top of Q stat sheets, if he's so bad?

I'm not arguing that he's bad. I'm asking why he's dropping in the ratings.

There is simply more opportunity for players to move up this year because unlike most drafts, there is no clearly defined #1 or top 2, and even the first tier of the draft is in question according to most people. The first tier is also larger than in most years, which means the 2nd tier players lower in the top 10 will be closer rated to the top prospects.

That doesn't make the slightest sense, unless what you actually mean when you say that the first tier is larger is that it's not as good. Even then, it wouldn't explain why Couturier is dropping and the other big 3 aren't.

You asked for answers, i gave them. Sorry if it was too unconvincing for you.

I'm sorry too, but they were.

 

[boredmale]

I think that's a really, really bad argument. You could find people who thought someone else than Hall or Tavares would or should go first, but they both remained clear odds-on favorites to do so, and it would have been a major suprise if they didn't. That's not remotely comparable to Couturier's situation, which is not that of a projected 1st overall pick who's drawing some doubt, but that of a former first-ranked prospect who's heading full steam out of the top 5.

Sort of reminds me of Phil Kessel in his draft year. We heard ton of hype about him for a couple years(saying how he the favorite for #1), then his his draft year he started slipping but still was considered a good prospect. That year there was Eric Johnson and 4 Centers where Kessel by the end of the year seemed to be the consensus #4 center of the group. You would even see a few places say Kessel might fall out of that group of 5 but when the draft happened he still got picked 5th.

 

[J17 Vs Proclamation]

It always seems that the most hyped players end up falling in people's minds as soon as other players start showing any start of flash to their game. Happened with tavares, who was hyped for like 5 years, Duchene shows up for a few months and people start talking about him unseating Tavares.

Seems like the longer someone is hyped, the more volatile their position is and the longer people have to invent problems with their game. Or something like that.

The Tavares situation doesn't correlate with this situation. Tavares was #1 in most circles for the majority of the season. Duchene may have closed the gap, but the majority still would have taken Tavares. As it turns out, the two are close.

In this situation, we've had a Top 4 for nearly all the year. SC was never ahead significantly of the other 3. Unlike Tavares, we have had several agencies actually state SC concerns and have had him dropped from his original #1 spot. Tavares never had such a fall. The longer someone is hyped, the more volative their position is with fans. Scouts largely won't make that mistake.

Remember when CSS said a couple of months ago as many as 8 guys could go #1? At the time i find it rather unlikely and crazy. Well here we are now, where the #1 guy at that point isn't really all that far ahead of guys like Strome. I don't see SC falling to #8 and i cannot speculate where SC will be drafted, but it doesn't seem too crazy to suggest SC may fall to 4, 5 or 6 spot.

 

[Qvist]

Yah I remember the same thing happening with Spezza....he was over analyzed and fell...I also think that since this draft has no sure fire top player every publication is looking for the risers/fallers, dark horses etc. Couturier has been a victim of this in a negative manner. I don't think that SC is anything like Angelo Esposito

Again, I simply don't agree that drafting history supports that theory. There are very rarely surprises in the top 3 on draft day, and most players who get selected that high have been highly scrutinised for a long time. Spezza went 2nd because Kovalchuk was a better prospect, which was not much of a surprise - and also well supported by subsequent events.

 

[Dread Clawz]

Larsson and RNH absolutely have been. Perhaps we knew about SC in HFboards before the others, but in the scouting world, all three have been known for some time.

I seriously doubt that many scouts had a good read on Larsson before his 15-16 year old season, a 15 year old junior d-man in Sweden. The same goes for RNH to some extent. Couturier was already playing in the Q at 15, but RNH was still playing in midget when he was 15. He was definitely scouted there, but I'm sure Couturier got a lot more viewings playing in the Q.

Your basically saying that SC is being over-scutinized because he has been known for so long. Clearly this is a ridiculous idea. If Scouts have concerns, it's because they believe real concerns are there. These concerns haven't manifested themselves just because SC has been known for so long.

We've had various top end players such as Tavares, Hedman etc over-scrutinized by us as fans on HFboards during their draft year ; but never did they realistically slide within the scouting world. SC apparently may well be and im sorry, but this isn't just because SC has been around longer.

It's happened before and it will happen again. Of course real concerns are there....like Tavares' skating. It's so horrible, isn't it? When I say kids are over-scrutinized, it's not like I'm implying scouts are making stuff up. Of course their concerns are real. When a kid is in the spotlight for 3+ years, scouts have a ton more viewings on them than other kids. Their weaknesses are going to be magnified. There are some things that scouts might not even know about a player that just comes out of nowhere.

Tavares wasn't just picked apart by fans on HFBoards. Nice try though.

 

[Qvist]

Sort of reminds me of Phil Kessel in his draft year. We heard ton of hype about him for a couple years, then his his draft year he started slipping but still was considered a good prospect.

Yes, but he was not dropping because of being over-scrutinized. He was dropping because he was not a better prospect than the four guys chosen ahead of him. He also dropped if anything further than most pre-draft rankings suggested he would.

 

[Qvist]

It's happened before and it will happen again. Of course real concerns are there....like Tavares' skating. It's so horrible, isn't it? When I say kids are over-scrutinized, it's not like I'm implying scouts are making stuff up. Of course their concerns are real. When a kid is in the spotlight for 3+ years, scouts have a ton more viewings on them than other kids. Their weaknesses are going to be magnified. There are some things that scouts might not even know about a player that just comes out of nowhere.

Tavares wasn't just picked apart by fans on HFBoards. Nice try though.

Like he said, Tavares remained the clear odds-on favorite to go 1st, and did. There's not any comparability with Couturier's situation.

 

[J17 Vs Proclamation]

I seriously doubt that many scouts had a good read on Larsson before his 15-16 year old season, a 15 year old junior d-man in Sweden. The same goes for RNH to some extent. Couturier was already playing in the Q at 15, but RNH was still playing in midget when he was 15. He was definitely scouted there, but I'm sure Couturier got a lot more viewings playing in the Q.

Scouts (Not NHL scouts) would have seen all 3 play long before their CHL debute/SEL Debute. Information travels fast. SC played in the CHL before Nugent-Hopkins, but NHL scouts wouldn't have followed him seriously that year because he was 3 years from being draft eligible. NHL scouts are not going to take that year seriously in regards to his NHL potential. The most important year in someones draft status (unless they are injured for it) is their draft year. NHL teams will assess their draft year performances and abilities. It's ludicrious to think that a few more viewings of SC at 15 will impact on what scouts think now. I know you aren't an idiot MR, but shake your head.

It's happened before and it will happen again. Of course real concerns are there....like Tavares' skating. It's so horrible, isn't it? When I say kids are over-scrutinized, it's not like I'm implying scouts are making stuff up. Of course their concerns are real. When a kid is in the spotlight for 3+ years, scouts have a ton more viewings on them than other kids. Their weaknesses are going to be magnified. There are some things that scouts might not even know about a player that just comes out of nowhere.

Tavares wasn't just picked apart by fans on HFBoards. Nice try though.

Tavares never fell in the rankings. Tavares did have a somewhat odd draft year (but his WJ was sick) but he never really fell in the rankings despite some concerns. This as of now, cannot be said about SC. Sure their weaknesses may be artificially magnified abit, but they aren't really going to get in the way of where they peg a player incomparison to another player.

All the top ranked players have been known for some time. All have been playing in well known leagues for 2+ years. All will have been seen alot. The most important year is this year ; where teams will concentrate on them ALOT more. Whatever these potential concerns are about SC and whether they are right or not, they don't exist because we about him at 15. They aren't being exaggerated because we knew him at 15. He isn't potentially falling in the rankings because we knew about him at 15.

 

[DuklaNation]

Like others have said, its a case of:

1) lack of wow factor due to average speed
2) others have improved while he seems to have plateaued.

 

[Qvist]

Like others have said, its a case of:

1) lack of wow factor due to average speed
2) others have improved while he seems to have plateaued.

And as has been pointed out, how come that supposed lack of a wow factor wasn't hurting his standing 6 months ago?

What does 2) actually mean, really? That there are now many players who projects as better than Couturier projected as 6 months ago? That seems to me somewhat unlikely.

Or that his performance since christmas has been less than projected, to such an extent his long-term projection has suffered from it? If the latter, then the answer just restates the question.....what exactly in his performance has not met what expectations?

I'm not trying to give everybody a hard time here, I just get the sense from what I've been reading that there are too many readily adopted explanations that lack basic plausibility and cannot really be supported.

 

[SympathyForTheDevils]

Like others have said, its a case of:

1) lack of wow factor due to average speed
2) others have improved while he seems to have plateaued.

Couturier hasn't really plateaued. He's actually improved this year. The problem is, it's hard to improve on leading the league in scoring. There was no way to go but down for Couturier this year.

IMO the reason he is dropping is his skillset is harder to project. When you're drafting a forward top-3, you're expecting a top-flight offensive player. It's easy to imagine RNH as being that player, even if he might not reach that level. For Couturier, the picture is murkier. He doesn't have the aggressiveness of a power forward, or the shot of an NHL sniper, or the speed and stickhandling we're used to seeing from those top picks. He's a very smart, talented center with great size. But will he be a Ryan Getzlaf, or a Mike Knuble, or a Jordan Staal? Hard to tell at this point.

And as has been pointed out, how come that supposed lack of a wow factor wasn't hurting his standing 6 months ago?

What does 2) actually mean, really? That there are now many players who projects as better than Couturier projected as 6 months ago? That seems to me somewhat unlikely.

Or that his performance since christmas has been less than projected, to such an extent his long-term projection has suffered from it? If the latter, then the answer just restates the question.....what exactly in his performance has not met what expectations?

I'm not trying to give everybody a hard time here, I just get the sense from what I've been reading that there are too many readily adopted explanations that lack basic plausibility and cannot really be supported.

First, there's the simple fact that Couturier had his coming-out earlier than anyone else, save maybe Larsson. 6 months ago, Couturier had led the Q in scoring, while most other top prospects in his draft class had a 30-40 points season on their resume.

Second, as we draw closer to the draft, and as prospects are starting to dominate their respective league, I think people look less at junior accomplishments and more at individual skillsets, which puts Couturier at a disadvantage compared to, say, RNH.

 

[Qvist]

Couturier hasn't really plateaued. He's actually improved this year. The problem is, it's hard to improve on leading the league in scoring. There was no way to go but down for Couturier this year.

IMO the reason he is dropping is his skillset is harder to project. When you're drafting a forward top-3, you're expecting a top-flight offensive player. It's easy to imagine RNH as being that player, even if he might not reach that level. For Couturier, the picture is murkier. He doesn't have the aggressiveness of a power forward, or the shot of an NHL sniper, or the speed and stickhandling we're used to seeing from those top picks. He's a very smart, talented center with great size. But will he be a Ryan Getzlaf, or a Mike Knuble, or a Jordan Staal? Hard to tell at this point.



First, there's the simple fact that Couturier had his coming-out earlier than anyone else, save maybe Larsson. 6 months ago, Couturier had led the Q in scoring, while most other top prospects in his draft class had a 30-40 points season on their resume.

Second, as we draw closer to the draft, and as prospects are starting to dominate their respective league, I think people look less at junior accomplishments and more at individual skillsets, which puts Couturier at a disadvantage compared to, say, RNH.

Thank you - now we're talking. In essence, your point is that Couturier was ahead due to having been the only prospect to put up a dominant performance in his league, and that this initially overrode projection based more around evaluating skillsets? That actually makes some good sense.

 

[DuklaNation]

Perception is reality. Ever heard of that phrase. That doesnt mean I agree with the perception. Thats how it goes. Is this the 1st draft you've ever followed? Bottom line, other players have improved enough to challenge him. Deal with it. Is everyone so confident on the outcome? No one knows. Not wise to bet on kids.

 

[dm1371]

That's completely stupid to Rank Couturier at 8th.. come on man he's still a great player and i think that he'll still go top 5 at least. If not, some1 will get a huge steal.

 

[Qvist]

Perception is reality. Ever heard of that phrase. That doesnt mean I agree with the perception. Thats how it goes. Is this the 1st draft you've ever followed? Bottom line, other players have improved enough to challenge him. Deal with it. Is everyone so confident on the outcome? No one knows. Not wise to bet on kids.

No, this is I believe the 19th draft I'm following. Which is why I'm not satisfied with glib and unconvincing generalisations, and try to elicit whatever anyone may have to offer in the way of more plausible explanations as to why this particular player seems to be sliding quickly down the rankings. Deal with it.

Sure I've heard the phrase "perception is reality". It's generally used by two kinds of people - those who don't understand the difference between the two, and those who don't care. I've no time for either of them, and even less for a cliche that basically amounts to an intellectual shrug.