Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    Doesn't have to be the O, SanDog!  I'd be happy with the W or even (depending heavily on the player) the Q!  Even, though less so, the SEL....

    But why quibble now that I've got you on the program.

    roler - Marchand was an 80 point guy in 2006-07 with 40 points in 20 playoff games.  Sounds "gifted" for a 57 game season - but it didn't even put him in the top 10 with guys like Frankie Bouchard scoring 125.  Bouchard, a Caps pick, hasn't had a sniff of the NHL, though, and last year didn't score as may points in Hershey as Marchand did in Boston.

    Marchand's real "gift" is the ability to go on crazy hot streaks.  We saw two last year - maybe even three if you split the playoffs into pre-Tampa and post-Tampa.  They can be spectacular.  The increase in scoring pace is significant.  If being more consistent means playing closer to that level on a regular basis, it would certainly give him a shot at 70 points.  At this stage, I don't know if it's realistic to expect that - I've said repeatedly that Marchand's risk is his ability to harness his emotions, and it's much harder to harness them at high rpm than a lower, but less productive level.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]Doesn't have to be the O, SanDog!  I'd be happy with the W or even (depending heavily on the player) the Q!  Even, though less so, the SEL.... But why quibble now that I've got you on the program. roler - Marchand was an 80 point guy in 2006-07 with 40 points in 20 playoff games.  Sounds "gifted" for a 57 game season - but it didn't even put him in the top 10 with guys like Frankie Bouchard scoring 125.  Bouchard, a Caps pick, hasn't had a sniff of the NHL, though, and last year didn't score as may points in Hershey as Marchand did in Boston. Marchand's real "gift" is the ability to go on crazy hot streaks.  We saw two last year - maybe even three if you split the playoffs into pre-Tampa and post-Tampa.  They can be spectacular.  The increase in scoring pace is significant.  If being more consistent means playing closer to that level on a regular basis, it would certainly give him a shot at 70 points.  At this stage, I don't know if it's realistic to expect that - I've said repeatedly that Marchand's risk is his ability to harness his emotions, and it's much harder to harness them at high rpm than a lower, but less productive level.
    Posted by Bookboy007[/QUOTE]
     
    I wouldnt call 80 points in 57 games in juniors as a gifted scorer.. I think yes its solid, its draft worthy, and the book on marchand has always been he can score at all levels, but its not 100 points in 60 games, i expect him to be a donminant player on the next level.. That said I didn't watch him as a junior, but nothing I have seen suggest to me that he's got first class hands, an amazing stick etc.. The kid detriot drafted, unreal stick, may or may not translate down the road, but theres potential there..

    Cunningham has had good numbers in juniors, I don't expect him to dominate the NHL either..
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    Before you get all smug about "potential," Chowdah, Couture had better scoring numbers in the playoffs than Marchand through 18 games.  Marchand disappeared - and was a liability given Tampa's PP success - against the Bolts.  Couture scored 3 fewer points than Thornton playing 3 fewer minutes per game, seeing less time on the PP, and he finished +2 to Thornton's -5.  It's not "potential" that saw him hit 32 goals - more than any Bruins player this year.  And it's only situation that has him on what is technically the second line.  He's a first-line quality player playing behind a nominal superstar.  That isn't about "potential" either.  He also plays the PK.

    You want Marchand, fine - but that choice is no more or less about Marchand's potential than Couture's.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheGuyWithDaThing. Show TheGuyWithDaThing's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    For the Bruins style - I take Marchand.
    If I'm trying to start a team based on how I would build a team - I take Couture.

    "I would hate to have Gretzky on my team; he plays like a sissy in the corners" - Not-A-Shot

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    Two sides of the same argument, right roler?  We all know that the Yannick Riendeaux and Frankie Bouchards who put up crazy Jr. numbers only occasionally become NHL superstars, but it's very rare to have a guy like Bergeron who puts up his best point total ever once he hits the NHL.  He had better points/game numbers in the Q one year, but he never came close to looking like a guy who'd score 30 goals. 

    Anyway, I don't think we disagree on the interpretation of 80 in 57 in the Q.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]Two sides of the same argument, right roler?  We all know that the Yannick Riendeaux and Frankie Bouchards who put up crazy Jr. numbers only occasionally become NHL superstars, but it's very rare to have a guy like Bergeron who puts up his best point total ever once he hits the NHL.  He had better points/game numbers in the Q one year, but he never came close to looking like a guy who'd score 30 goals.  Anyway, I don't think we disagree on the interpretation of 80 in 57 in the Q.
    Posted by Bookboy007[/QUOTE]

    I was going to mention Yannick, but pulled it back since he did it as an overage player..

    Bergeron played PPG in his only year of major juniors though, so there wasn't a lot to actually see.. I am glad marchand is getting it done, I just don't see where he grows from a 40point player to an 80..
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    So maybe the only time you really do see a guy score more effectively in the pros than in Jr. is when there's an extenuating circumstance, like Bergeron's limited time in the Q or Brett Connoly getting injured in his second year after a respectable debut. If he'd made the jump to the T-bags last year, there wouldn't be a 46 goal season on his resume to set expectations.

    There are bound to be exceptions - there must be a few players who didn't get a sniff of scoring responsibility in Jr. who got a shot at the NHL level (some sort of Axelsson like situation where the coach put him on a scoring line as the conscience and Booom!).  Anyone come to mind?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    No idea, I think there are better examples perhaps coming out of europe.. but again, I think its cause they are so young.. Ovechkin's best season in russia was 27 points in 37games..

    No ideas about any guys coming out of juniors as mediocre producers who put up big numbers.. But even then I'd want an example of a guy who wasnt younger with a great skill set, who hadn't matured yet, as opposed to a guy putting up mediocre numbers and then excelling later on at the games highest level.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    The kind of example I'm thinking of, the player would probably play out his whole Jr. eligibility, so he wouldn't be a young draft pick who jumps up immediately. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension : Not sure what side of the fence you mean, but my take on lucic has kind of been that I would expect a todd bertuzzi /thornton development curve. but i think he can be a 30-40 goal 70 point scorer as he refines his game, I don't expect anything prolific.. He won't hit his peak till he's 25 His contract though, highly criticized i always supported.. Hes a unique player, I think chiralleli looked at his development, his track in juniors Posted by rolerhoky19[/QUOTE]

    There were/are some on this board that don't think Milan can get to 40. I have always disagreed with them you seem to agree he can. Chiarelli is going to have some tough decisions in 2013/2014 if the new cap flattens like it did in 09/10.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension :   I wouldnt call 80 points in 57 games in juniors as a gifted scorer.. I think yes its solid, its draft worthy, and the book on marchand has always been he can score at all levels, but its not 100 points in 60 games, i expect him to be a donminant player on the next level.. That said I didn't watch him as a junior, but nothing I have seen suggest to me that he's got first class hands, an amazing stick etc.. The kid detriot drafted, unreal stick, may or may not translate down the road, but theres potential there.. Cunningham has had good numbers in juniors, I don't expect him to dominate the NHL either..
    Posted by rolerhoky19[/QUOTE]
    How many guys get 100 points in 60 games in junior(and not as an over ager). Claiming 120 points in 77 junior games doesn't make him a gifted scorer is just foolish but nobody's surprised.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:[QUOTE]Doesn't have to be the O, SanDog!  I'd be happy with the W or even (depending heavily on the player) the Q!  Even, though less so, the SEL.... But why quibble now that I've got you on the program. Posted by Bookboy007[/QUOTE]

    Just seeing if your paying "A" ttention. Time will tell if Cross, Bartkowski and/or Kampfer will make PC change his "D" philosophies.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension : How many guys get 100 points in 60 games in junior(and not as an over ager). Claiming 120 points in 77 junior games doesn't make him a gifted scorer is just foolish but nobody's surprised.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    I think there are lots of players who put up 150 points in 120 games.. I don't think thats gifted no.. My definition of being a gifted scorer is clearly a higher bar then yours.. 10 players scored 99 points or more that season, claude giroux 125 points in 64 games.. thats more along the lines of what I would call a gifted scorer..
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension : I think there are lots of players who put up 150 points in 120 games.. I don't think thats gifted no.. My definition of being a gifted scorer is clearly a higher bar then yours.. 10 players scored 99 points or more that season, claude giroux 125 points in 64 games.. thats more along the lines of what I would call a gifted scorer..
    Posted by rolerhoky19[/QUOTE]
    So Marchand wasn't a gifted scorer because someone outscored him? This is getting funnier by the minute. What do the numbers you bring uop have to do with Marchand getting 120 points in 77  games? Oh yeah, absolutely nothing. Are you a magician because you constantly try to win debates with misdirection. Try to stay on topic. Marchand and DK were the same age as rookies. Case closed! Move on.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension : So Marchand wasn't a gifted scorer because someone outscored him? This is getting funnier by the minute. What do the numbers you bring uop have to do with Marchand getting 120 points in 77  games? Oh yeah, absolutely nothing. Are you a magician because you constantly try to win debates with misdirection. Try to stay on topic. Marchand and DK were the same age as rookies. Case closed! Move on.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    Those are marchands numbers over his last 2 seasons.. And I would say the fact that no less then 15 players out scored him in that season would make the point that no, its not "gifted" scoring.. Its not elite level scoring if your not one of the top players in the league.. how do you not get that?  Lucic potted 30 goals this year, I wouldnt call him a gifted goal scorer at this point either.. Clearly we have a different standard of gifted.. Marchands a work horse talent, not a gifted talent..
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension : Those are marchands numbers over his last 2 seasons.. And I would say the fact that no less then 15 players out scored him in that season would make the point that no, its not "gifted" scoring.. Its not elite level scoring if your not one of the top players in the league.. how do you not get that?  Lucic potted 30 goals this year, I wouldnt call him a gifted goal scorer at this point either.. Clearly we have a different standard of gifted.. Marchands a work horse talent, not a gifted talent..
    Posted by rolerhoky19[/QUOTE]
    How many besides Giroux that outscored him were also in their draft year? Typical you'd change the argument again. The question was whether he was a gifted junior scorer. No surprises here I suppose. Oh well, I'm gonna go watch the lawn grow. It's more gratifying than matching wits with you(since you expect me to number and colour code them for you)..
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]Before you get all smug about "potential," Chowdah, Couture had better scoring numbers in the playoffs than Marchand through 18 games.  Marchand disappeared - and was a liability given Tampa's PP success - against the Bolts.  Couture scored 3 fewer points than Thornton playing 3 fewer minutes per game, seeing less time on the PP, and he finished +2 to Thornton's -5.  It's not "potential" that saw him hit 32 goals - more than any Bruins player this year.  And it's only situation that has him on what is technically the second line.  He's a first-line quality player playing behind a nominal superstar.  That isn't about "potential" either.  He also plays the PK. You want Marchand, fine - but that choice is no more or less about Marchand's potential than Couture's.
    Posted by Bookboy007[/QUOTE]

    Nope ! It's what I liked better in the style of play of the two from watching Marchand and Couture this year and years past . Nothing to do with potential. Nothing to do with stats . Sometimes a person doesn't need to look up statistics to like a player better . You should try it .

    btw smug ? Ouch ! Cry

     
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension : How many besides Giroux that outscored him were also in their draft year? Typical you'd change the argument again. The question was whether he was a gifted junior scorer. No surprises here I suppose. Oh well, I'm gonna go watch the lawn grow. It's more gratifying than matching wits with you(since you expect me to number and colour code them for you)..
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    Actually it wasnt an arguement, and it wasnt about whether he was a gifted scorer or not.. I don't consider his junior numbers to be gifted, and you werent even in the conversation..  if you think 80 points in 57 games is a gifted scorer thats fine. I certainly dont.. I wouldnt unless 80 points becomes the high water mark for scoring..  
    you pick these fights and your so dreadfully bad at it.. Way to many players score more then 80 points a season.. thus while its a great accomplishment, its solid numbers its good scoring, its not gifted..
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension : Actually it wasnt an arguement, and it wasnt about whether he was a gifted scorer or not.. I don't consider his junior numbers to be gifted, and you werent even in the conversation..  if you think 80 points in 57 games is a gifted scorer thats fine. I certainly dont.. I wouldnt unless 80 points becomes the high water mark for scoring..   you pick these fights and your so dreadfully bad at it.. Way to many players score more then 80 points a season.. thus while its a great accomplishment, its solid numbers its good scoring, its not gifted..
    Posted by rolerhoky19[/QUOTE]
    Name some of the 17 year old Q players that scored 80 in under  60 games last year..........oh wait, there's "way too many".  You do know that when you post, you're inviting others into the conversation. Why don't you send BB a text or an E-mail if it hurts so much when others comment. Christ you're a baby!
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension : Nope ! It's what I liked better in the style of play of the two from watching Marchand and Couture this year and years past . Nothing to do with potential. Nothing to do with stats . Sometimes a person doesn't need to look up statistics to like a player better . You should try it . btw smug ? Ouch !  
    Posted by Chowdahkid-[/QUOTE]

    Sometimes a person needs to support an opinion about player performance with more than a gut feeling.  A case in point: saying a player may be better down the road if he reaches his potential when said player has alread tied for 14th in the league in goal scoring.  Like I said, it's fine to like Marchand better for whatever reason you choose, but, taking potential entirely out of the equation, Couture outperformed Marchand in the regular season and outscored him through three rounds of the playoffs.  He's a first line player on no fewer than a dozen teams in the league.

    You made your choice based on Couture "maybe" being the better player if he reaches his potential. You said nothing about style of play.  Don't get all double-stuff smug while changing your tune.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension : Name some of the 17 year old Q players that scored 80 in under  60 games last year..........oh wait, there's "way too many".  You do know that when you post, you're inviting others into the conversation. Why don't you send BB a text or an E-mail if it hurts so much when others comment. Christ you're a baby!
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    Marchand put that season up as a 19 year old, not a 17 year old by my math, either way, your idea of gifted scorer and mine arent the same, doesn't make you correct in any way.. I have a higher standard then you do.. sorry..
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension : OK now your throwing leadership in ? I thought you didn't make predictions. Marchand could be wearing an "A" in two years but you would answer Couture will be wearing the "C" in San Jose in two years. So my answer is your usual attempt at ending a debate... "You don't know that, there is no way of knowing that"
    Posted by SanDogBrewin[/QUOTE]

    What did I predict?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension : So scoring more goals makes one player better then the next ? All facets of the game should be included when comparing players . When GM's make trades do you think they look at only the goals scored column when trying to get the best player for their team ? This year when watching Marchand take your 'Hate hat' off and watch all the positive things that he does that makes the rest of us think he's a good, young exciting player to watch rather then pointing out the negatives which you are known for doing.
    Posted by Chowdahkid-[/QUOTE]

    I included more than their total goals to avoid this angle.  Read it again.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]For the Bruins style - I take Marchand. If I'm trying to start a team based on how I would build a team - I take Couture. "I would hate to have Gretzky on my team; he plays like a sissy in the corners" - Not-A-Shot
    Posted by TheGuyWithDaThing[/QUOTE]

    How about you refrain from posting false quotes?   I never said that.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension

    In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Logan Couture signs 2 year/$5.75 mil extension : Sometimes a person needs to support an opinion about player performance with more than a gut feeling.  A case in point: saying a player may be better down the road if he reaches his potential when said player has alread tied for 14th in the league in goal scoring.  Like I said, it's fine to like Marchand better for whatever reason you choose, but, taking potential entirely out of the equation, Couture outperformed Marchand in the regular season and outscored him through three rounds of the playoffs.  He's a first line player on no fewer than a dozen teams in the league. You made your choice based on Couture "maybe" being the better player if he reaches his potential. You said nothing about style of play.  Don't get all double-stuff smug while changing your tune.
    Posted by Bookboy007[/QUOTE]

    Got no idea what changing my tune you are referring to.  Read my first post on this thread regarding what Craig Button said in which I agreed . Wouldn't this be classified as his ....style of play ? 

    I thought you mentioned you were a former professor. How'd you give grades on exams when you didn't read them properly. I guess it's former for a reason.

    If it's okay with you I'll stick to my original thought of why I likedMarchand more despite all of your stats ( and claims of outperforming Marchand throughout the playoffs ). And no a person doesn't have to support why they like a player more with numbers . Beauty is in the eye of the beholder doesn't mean you have to look up stats to explain why.Button referred to Marchand as being a special talent. Do you think that all of these special talents show up in boxscores ?

    btw to heck with the double , make my smug a triple.

     
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share