Briere was a great clutch scorer, but he was also a threat to be scored upon. I want all 4 center to be solid two way players. Just as you pointed out that when Handzus played it was a clutch and grab era, today's game is a 200 foot game. Need every line to be able to play both sides of the puck, and pressure the puck in all 3 zones. I don't want a one dimensional offensive center for the 2nd line. A good defensive center who can put up 50 points is a better player than a poor defensive center who can score 70 points.
- MJL

And yet the team was much more successful in the years where Briere was the 2C than the last 2 years of a lack of a bonafide option. Yes, Pronger was a big part of 2010. But they did well in 2007-2008 pre-Pronger.

The bottom line is, you make a fair point on the 200 foot game. I'd like a guy that can play a little more D too.

And I'm not in the camp that says Couturier has reached his potential and will not further improve offensively either. But 50 points from Couts and 30 or 35 points from Laughton won't get it done either, in my mind.

He did, but I have no idea how he was used in St Louis.

The bigger point is that we are in a new dead puck era with very limited PP opportunities compared to the seasons just after the 04-05 lockout because the league stopped calling interference.

http://www.quanthockey.com/TS/TS_GoalsPerGame.php

2002-03 average goals per game = 5.309
2014-14 average goals per game = 5.324
- Feanor

It's definitely dead again. That's a whole nother issue

Wait, people are NOT saying he's going to score 35 goals and 80 points while winning the Selke, Hart, and Vezina!?!? Then why the hell would we sign him to such an absurd contract?
- jmatchett383

Well, it's only money

Out of curiosity, do we know who the 3C is going to be?

Also, do you guys think if Couturier has a rough October/November, does he drop down to the 3rd line? Or do you think Hakstol let's him play his way through it?

I'm not suggesting Couturier is on a short leash. Just want to heat your take on the possibility of Couturier struggling to find his offensive game.
- MatveiDmitrii

The 3C could be any one of Couturier, Schenn, Bellemare, Raffl, Umberger, Lecavalier, or White. I'm sure there's a few other options. Aside from Giroux as the #1C, no one seems to be able to say anything for sure (and I'm sure someone would ever argue Giroux's spot somehow).

Well, it's only money

- BiggE

Well, maybe if he fought more and played Flyers' hockey I'd like him.

Did we find a legit goalie yet?

The combination of a lack of offensive talent on the wings, the most starts in the D zone of any center on the team, playing the most minutes on the PK and spending most of each and every game matched up against the opponents top line is really not the best method for developing a young players offensive game.

No one is saying that Sean Couturier is going to go out and score 35 goals and 80 points, but is it really so far fetched to think that giving him a bit more talent on the wings, a few less D zone starts and finding another line that can match up against the opponents top line now and then won't allow him to score 6-8 more goals and 15-18 more points per season?
- BiggE

All of this is true. But again I'll make the point, everyone is perfectly fine stating all of the reasons for Couturier's lack of success, and advocating the team putting him in a better position to succeed. But then half of this group doesn't give Schenn the same benefit of the doubt.

If they roll out

LW TBD - Schenn - Gagner
Read - Couts - Simmonds

and give them equal number of ozone starts, I'm quite curious to see how the two young centers progress. The biggest problem is that Schenn and Gagner really need a speedy winger on the other side, and the team just doesn't have a good candidate on the roster.

no it isn't as 15 points could be accomplished. we shall see. as bill said at some point he has to look in the mirror. tired of the wingers excuse. maybe read would produce more with a better center.
- rinaldo

Read did produce with Couturier in 13-14 - he had 40 points (34 at ES) in only 75 games. But his 14-15 season was consistently awful no matter who he played with. Remember when Berube tried him on the 1st line? It was a disaster.

Read did produce with Couturier in 13-14 - he had 40 points (34 at ES) in only 75 games. But his 14-15 season was consistently awful no matter who he played with. Remember when Berube tried him on the 1st line? It was a disaster.
- Feanor

But there is some validity to ask the question. Read had 47 points in his rookie year, and was on a 47-48 point pace in the lockout year. After being paired full time with Couturier he declined by 15% give or take. Some of that is usage, but it's fair to question whether the lack of an offensively-driven center affected him.

All of this is true. But again I'll make the point, everyone is perfectly fine stating all of the reasons for Couturier's lack of success, and advocating the team putting him in a better position to succeed. But then half of this group doesn't give Schenn the same benefit of the doubt.
- TheGreat28

Because BSchenn scored fewer ES points than Couturier despite getting 58% OZ starts compared to 40%, and mainly playing with Giroux and Voracek rather than Umberger and Read.

All of this is true. But again I'll make the point, everyone is perfectly fine stating all of the reasons for Couturier's lack of success, and advocating the team putting him in a better position to succeed. But then half of this group doesn't give Schenn the same benefit of the doubt.

If they roll out

LW TBD - Schenn - Gagner
Read - Couts - Simmonds

and give them equal number of ozone starts, I'm quite curious to see how the two young centers progress. The biggest problem is that Schenn and Gagner really need a speedy winger on the other side, and the team just doesn't have a good candidate on the roster.
- TheGreat28

For sure, there is a lack of quality, speedy wingers on the left side.

But there is some validity to ask the question. Read had 47 points in his rookie year, and was on a 47-48 point pace in the lockout year. After being paired full time with Couturier he declined by 15% give or take. Some of that is usage, but it's fair to question whether the lack of an offensively-driven center affected him.
- TheGreat28

I think a lot of it usage. Not just where the shifts start but the mindset of being matched up against and asked to shut down the opponents top line cannot help but take away from the lines offensive output.

Not sure if it was pointed out, but Handzus's early St. Louis seasons were on the Slovak/pak line with Demitra, & Bartecko.
Playing on a line with Pavel Demitra, (like he did), will boost anyones production.
And the Blues were a very defensive oriented team during his first few seasons.
I just hope the contract doesn't make Couturier "squeeze the stick too hard", & weigh on him to where he has to produce too much to earn the money he's given.
Getting him more time on the power play will only benefit his offensive game, and maybe pull him out of the defensive role he's accustomed to playing in.

Thanks Bill. It will be interesting to see how the team performs this season. With a new coach, can some players take it to the next level, or have a rebound season?
With Read, as mentioned, can he remain healthy, and provide consistent play? With Baby Schenn, can he show signs of progression, or is he going to end up like Zubrus at the end of his career; as a grinder who chips in a goal here, and there? With Gagner, can he bring some scoring punch or is he a bust? Can McD provide some more consistent D play? Can Schenn prove that he can be in the line-up on a regular basis, and will he gain some confidence in his play? Where will Gudas fit in?
Hopefully, Hakstol can bring some line stability, and install a strong work ethic with this group. If the forwards can start playing more in their own zone, it would go a long way with making the defensive problems less visible; my opinion. In addition, it should cut down on the forwards dumping the puck in the zone, and going for a line change; getting out of the D zone, and providing more pressure in the O zone.
High hopes, however realistic views when going into this season. First things, first, and making the playoffs would go a long way in my book.

And yet the team was much more successful in the years where Briere was the 2C than the last 2 years of a lack of a bonafide option. Yes, Pronger was a big part of 2010. But they did well in 2007-2008 pre-Pronger.

The bottom line is, you make a fair point on the 200 foot game. I'd like a guy that can play a little more D too.

And I'm not in the camp that says Couturier has reached his potential and will not further improve offensively either. But 50 points from Couts and 30 or 35 points from Laughton won't get it done either, in my mind.
- TheGreat28

The team was much better top to bottom. They had guys like Richards, Carter, Hartnell, Giroux, JvR, Leino (when he was good), and even Lupul and Umberger..

Defensively having a younger and healthy Timonen with Coburn, Carle, Pronger, Meszy.. it helps the whole team.

But there is some validity to ask the question. Read had 47 points in his rookie year, and was on a 47-48 point pace in the lockout year.
- TheGreat28

The Flyers were also an offensive powerhouse with a very good defense in his rookie year, and Read was still on pace for 44 points in 13-14. That's barely any drop off from 12-13.

It's pretty simplistic and frankly dishonest to blame Couturier for Read's struggles in 14-15 when his injury problems and inaccurate shooting were so obvious and unrelated to anything Couturier was doing.

All of this is true. But again I'll make the point, everyone is perfectly fine stating all of the reasons for Couturier's lack of success, and advocating the team putting him in a better position to succeed. But then half of this group doesn't give Schenn the same benefit of the doubt.

If they roll out

LW TBD - Schenn - Gagner
Read - Couts - Simmonds

and give them equal number of ozone starts, I'm quite curious to see how the two young centers progress. The biggest problem is that Schenn and Gagner really need a speedy winger on the other side, and the team just doesn't have a good candidate on the roster.
- TheGreat28

Raffl-Giroux-Gagner
Schenn-Couturier-Voracek
Read-Laughton-Simmonds
Umberger-Bellemare-White

(frank) Vinny

Raffl-Giroux-Gagner
Schenn-Couturier-Voracek
Read-Laughton-Simmonds
Umberger-Bellemare-White

(frank) Vinny


- mochoson

Not on the 3rd line, that would be wasting the production he can supply.

And then there's Umberger. A respectable 10 points in 424 minutes with Coots; a disastrous 3 points in 340 minutes without him.

http://stats.hockeyanalys...ue&season=2014-15&sit=5v5

DP

Because BSchenn scored fewer ES points than Couturier despite getting 58% OZ starts compared to 40%, and mainly playing with Giroux and Voracek rather than Umberger and Read.
- Feanor

Schenn was not placed in the role to which he is most suited. I'm not going to punish him for being uncomfortable playing on the wrong side of the ice and not having the puck on his stick enough to get him in the game.

This team has never committed to given him a legit shot at Center. He was given a chance in his first year, maybe year and half with inadequate wingers. Actually, a good chunk of that was with Vinnie and Schenn switching back and forth on the same line.

If everyone is so keen to point out that Couturier's production should be viewed with a grain of salt because of his age, Schenn should be given the same leeway.

Schenn was not placed in the role to which he is most suited.
- TheGreat28

Poor Brayden having to play with two of the best passers in the entire league.

The Flyers were also an offensive powerhouse with a very good defense in his rookie year, and Read was still on pace for 44 points in 13-14. That's barely any drop off from 12-13.

It's pretty simplistic and frankly dishonest to blame Couturier for Read's struggles in 14-15 when his injury problems and inaccurate shooting were so obvious and unrelated to anything Couturier was doing.
- Feanor

I didn't blame Couturier; I questioned his role in Read's production more so the year before than last year. I think that is entirely fair. For example, maybe with a better center in a more offensive role Read progresses from 48 points to 55 points, instead of dropping to 40 in that first year with Couts.

If you are not even going to entertain the question, then you are really a little too biased regarding Couturier.

I didn't blame Couturier; I questioned his role in Read's production more so the year before than last year. I think that is entirely fair. For example, maybe with a better center in a more offensive role Read progresses from 48 points to 55 points, instead of dropping to 40 in that first year with Couts.

- TheGreat28

Why didn't he progress from 11-12 to 12-13? Would you blame that on his most common center that season, Claude Giroux?

Not on the 3rd line, that would be wasting the production he can supply.
- puckhead17

He's still going to do plenty of damage on the PP. Get use to something similar to that, because Hakstol religiously roles 4 lines. Bellemare, White, VandeVelde and whoever else might be regularly on the 4th line (be it Umberger, Laughton, or someone else) should all average 11-12 minutes a game.

If you're dressed and on the bench, you're gonna play. Hakstol doesn't dress anyone he doesn't think he can use consistently, which is exactly why I think Lecavalier finds himself in the Cote suite fairly quickly.

And yet the team was much more successful in the years where Briere was the 2C than the last 2 years of a lack of a bonafide option. Yes, Pronger was a big part of 2010. But they did well in 2007-2008 pre-Pronger.

The bottom line is, you make a fair point on the 200 foot game. I'd like a guy that can play a little more D too.

And I'm not in the camp that says Couturier has reached his potential and will not further improve offensively either. But 50 points from Couts and 30 or 35 points from Laughton won't get it done either, in my mind.
- TheGreat28

There's a lot of reasons why that team was better than the current team is.

How can you say that 50 points from Couturier, and 30-35 points from Laughton won't get it done. Look at every other team and the scoring totals they got from the center position last season, or the season before that.

Last season, Chicago, who won the Cup, their top 3 center scored 66, 37, 17 points respectively.