Thread: Scott Laughton
View Single Post
Old
07-09-2013, 09:30 PM
  #68
hockeyfreak7
Registered User
 
hockeyfreak7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYguy3911 View Post
Couldn't disagree more. By saying Laughton isn't a skill player (which is bogus) you are basically conceding any offensive upside. He's the kind of guy that needs that seasoning, unless you are content with him being just a #3 center. He has #2 upside. Wouldn't you like to maximize your return on your investment? I would.
You have misunderstood what I've said.

I say Laughton isn't a skill player in the same way that I say Mike Richards is not a 'skill' player or Ryan Callahan or David Backes or whoever. These are simple players as opposed to skill players. They don't rely on natural offensive skills (ie, hands, vision, etc.) to produce. Instead, they simplify the game always making smart decisions with the puck and never trying to do too much.

I am not limiting Laughton's offensive upside by saying this. In fact, I've been stating that I think he has higher offensive upside than Brayden Schenn. It's just a different skill set, and I think Laughton's skill set is better honed through NHL experience. Other players benefit from being handled differently.

Quote:
As for Couturier, he had nothing left to prove in the Q. He had a track record (unlike Laughton). He dominated his league for two consecutive seasons. There was very little to gain by him going back. He had a miserable year last year, but to suggest it was because he didn't play his 4th season in juniors is nuts. He was very good his rookie year considering the circumstances. He just took a step back last year.
Again, Couturier has a much different skill set than Laughton. I'm not even saying he should have been sent back to the Q. I'm just saying that I think his offensive game would have been much more refined with an extra year of juniors.

I'm not at all trying to minimize Couturier's performance in the NHL. I'm just hypothesizing that another year may have been beneficial for his offensive development. Agree or disagree, doesn't really matter, but Couturier still has a very raw offensive game, and yet we still know he has untapped offensive potential. My point was merely that it may not be hidden had he had the extra year of dominating his peers another time in the Q.

hockeyfreak7 is offline   Reply With Quote