Two forwards off to a hot start on their team's top lines are featured in this week's Cage Match

Every season around this time poolies must decide whether somewhat established players who are far surpassing expectations are truly breaking out, or just providing a temporary mirage of elite production. Cases in point are this week’s combatants – Sean Couturier and Vladislav Namestnikov. The way things have been going, both could beat their scoring totals from all last season before the calendar flips to 2018! But can they sustain any semblance of their current pace, or will they disappoint poolies who don’t cash in and trade them? Cage Match is here to find out.

Career Path and Contract Status

Couturier, 24, was selected 8th overall in 2011 after his second consecutive 96-point QMJHL campaign. He made the leap directly into the NHL, posting 27 points. After honing his game in the AHL during the lockout, Couturier posted 15 points in 46 contests with the Flyers. Since then it’s been four straight seasons of 34-39 point output, although the latter two are somewhat disguised by him having played only 129 combined games in 2015-16 and 2016-17. Thus, the good news is his 73 total points over those two seasons is equivalent to a 46-point combined full season scoring pace, but the bad news is he might be at risk of becoming a mid-career band-aid boy.

Namestnikov, who turns 25 in two weeks, was drafted 19 spots after Couturier in 2011, then returned to the OHL (71 points in 63 games). From there, Namestnikov went to the AHL, where he dominated to the tune of 83 points in 90 total games. But he didn’t turn heads in his first full NHL season, with 35 points in 2015-16. Last season he fared slightly worse (28 points in 74 contests), leaving poolies to wonder if he might not ultimately fit into Tampa’s top six picture.

Couturier is inked through 2021-22 at a $4.33M annual cap hit, while Namestnikov’s cap hit this season is $1.937M before becoming an arbitration-eligible RFA this summer.

Ice Time

I’m surprised both averaged roughly two minutes of PP Time per game each of the last two seasons. To have received that much PP Time despite where they ranked among team forwards means their squads didn’t use a “true” PP1 unit over the past two seasons. Instead, they ran PP lines much like regular lines, where many forwards got a taste of the action rather than a select few. If this remains the case, both aren’t at risk of being shut out of PP Time; however, a downside is they might not be able to count on a lot of PP production, especially if not deployed with the best players on their squads.

Also, although Couturier’s Total Ice Time had dropped from 2013-14, his productive Ice Time rose due to his PK workload being halved, helping justify his uptick in production over the last two campaigns. Moreover, the repackaging of Couturier’s role from that of a shutdown center to more of an offensive contributor and him responding with higher scoring, not to mention other factors (e.g., him not turning 25 until December and having an elite offensive pedigree in juniors), make it easier to envision him being able to maintain the top-line center role he’s occupied thus far this season.

As for Namestnikov, astute poolies might have foreseen his “dream” deployment before 2017-18 began. That’s because he enjoyed well-disguised success last fall playing with Steven Stamkos before Stamkos was lost for the season. Tampa averaged 3.84 goals per 60 minutes with Stamkos on the ice in 2016-17; but when Stamkos skated with Namestnikov, that rate shot up by 50% to 5.71. Thus, it’s no wonder they were reunited this season, and are enjoying continued success. Moreover, this makes it less likely Namestnikov’s plum “spot” will be at risk. And given how much ice time Stamkos and Nikita Kucherov command, this could make Namestnikov’s prior season ice times relics of the past.

Secondary Categories

Both offer decent PIM and are safe bets for 1-1.5 Hits+Blocks per game, which is slightly better than average for “scoring” forwards. Neither has been even decent in PPPts, save for Couturier two seasons ago. In part that’s due to them not previously being used much – if at all – on PP1; yet as we saw above, they were getting regular PP shifts during each of the last two seasons, so their outputs – particularly Couturier’s last season and Namestnikov’s in 2015-16 – are bad enough to worry they simply aren’t adept on the PP and won’t be able to obtain (or, if obtained, be able to keep) a regular shift on PP1.

Couturier’s best SOG output came before he was repackaged as a scoring center. His rate of 1.8-1.9 over the past three seasons is seemingly high enough to suggest he can keep pace on an up-tempo top line; however, it’s also enough of a track record to question whether he could be counted on to see it stay above two per game as it is now. Namestnikov’s SOG rate has been poor; however, it had been slowly creeping upward; that, plus a consistent shift on a top line, might be enough to believe he too could sustain a higher SOG rate.

Luck-Based Metrics

For Couturier, it’s a mixed bag. In his last two seasons – when he became more of a top-six fixture and was looked upon for offense – his secondary assists percentage went up. It’s not risen above 50% as yet, and part of it being so low in previous seasons was being in the bottom six at even strength, which with his talent meant goals either were being scored by him or were a direct result of him setting up the goal. His ASD also dropped considerably once he became more of a top six player; and although that’s a good sign, we shouldn’t make too much out of it since it could also just be in response to him skating with better talent who help create better shot opportunities. As for IPP, after Couturier first passed the key 70% threshold in 2015-16, he dropped to his lowest rate not just of these four years but of his entire career. That raises our radar as to whether he might turn out to be a center who, despite being on a top line, sees the actual points mostly scored by his wingers.

Namestnikov’s ASD is low, which, in combination with his low SOG rate, might suggest he’s too selective about shooting. Also, his shrinking IPP and increasing secondary assists, both alone but especially when looked at together, are concerning. They paint the picture of a player who’s not dialed into scoring that occurs when he’s on the ice. Before we justify these numbers by noting they occurred when he was outside of the top six picture, let’s not forget that other Tampa players (including recent Cage Match combatant Brayden Point) have managed to fare well despite not being a top-six mainstay. The question is whether we decide to basically throw out these numbers in view of his new role, or give them at least some weight, either in terms of how likely it might be that he slumps enough to be taken off the top line or that he won’t produce well despite staying on it.

Early Results for 2017-18

Unless you’ve been living under a fantasy rock, you know that Couturier has been centering Philly’s top line, while Namestnikov has been a fixture alongside Stamkos and Kucherov. Understandably, both have been racking up points; however, there are areas of concern lurking beneath the surface. Both have a team shooting percentages over 12%, which is wholly unsustainable. Also, Couturier has one PPPt despite skating for over 45% of Philly’s PP time, while Namestnikov’s IPP is barely above 50%, suggesting on one hand he could get more points but also that he might be outclassed on this line.

Who Wins?

These are two players who could be at a crossroads in their respective careers, possibly morphing into mid-20s first liners. The question, of course, is who has the better odds of seeing his new role becoming the norm, as opposed to a short-term exception, since that will essentially determine our winner.

Couturier has a scoring pedigree, yet he also has talent at both ends of the end which could either tempt his team to push him back into that type of a role or could solidify his presence on the first line due to him providing useful defensive awareness. With Namestinikov, there’s clearly chemistry with Steven Stamkos; yet this is a team with one of the deepest and most widely talented forward ranks, so who’s to say Namestnikov can maintain his spot, especially when his metrics from past seasons suggest he could eventually be a drag on production, and he doesn’t provide the defensive-mindedness of Couturier?

I’m giving the win to Couturier mainly because he’s less feast or famine. Between his pedigree and his prior elevation to the top six, his spot not only might be safer but also if he loses it his scoring shouldn’t fall off a cliff. Namestnikov, on the other hand, could be all risk/reward. Excellent chemistry with a player is all great, until it isn’t. Just ask Jonathan Cheechoo and countless others. Also, Namestnikov’s pedigree doesn’t make me certain he’ll have what it takes to keep his spot, as he’s not a big shooter but also not a good set up guy, nor does he bring defensive-mindedness to the line. I think he’s having a nice run and it could last not only this season but beyond; however, it also could end in a flash.

If I own either one, but in particular Namestnikov, I’m entertaining all offers to lock in an upgrade. Yes, in doing so you risk that their current production might become the new normal; however, I think if you can turn either one into a 65+ point guy or fill a key need elsewhere on your team then you should trade them and not look back.