All I know about Bourqe is what I can read from his stat lines. I sort of remember seeing him play last year and think his quick stride struck me, but can't really be certain.
First, a brief history for those unaware:
Rene was a St. Alberta Saint in the Alberta Hockey League before going on to play 4 years at the University of Wisconsin in the NCAA. He scored 19 goals and 16 goals in his final two years of College hockey but was never drafted. In 04/05, he was picked up by the Norfolk Admirals of the AHL where he scored 33 goals and 60 points in 78 games as a rookie. He was selected for the AHL all-star game that year and he his 99.8MPH slahshot won him the hardest shot competition. He also won the Dudley Garrett award as the AHL's top rookie.
His impressive pro debut got him noticed by the Chicago Blackhawks who signed him in July, 2005. He made the big club the following season and managed 16 goals and 34 points (similar to Matthew Lombardi's rookie campaign). The bad news is, Bourque has yet to replicate that level of success. In the two seasons since, he's spent a generous amount of time in the infirmary. He played in just 44 games in 06/07 and 62 games last season. The big gap two years ago was due to an incident that occurred against the Blue Jackets where Bourque's neck was accidentally cut by Nikolai Zherdev's skate. The injury required surgery and could have been fatal.
Last season, Bourque spent a lot of time on PK before getting injured. His nightly average of 2:26 was the second highest of any Blackhawk forward. Half of his 10 goals came SH, thanks in part to whatever weird SH mojo Chicago had going last year.
That provides a nice segue into Bourques advanced stats:
QUAL COMP - 0.03 - third highest amongst regular Hawks forwards behind Sharp and Wiliiams.
QUAL TEAM - (-0.02) - Apparently didn't play with the difference makers.
ESP/60 - 1.20 - The worst production rate of the Hawks forwards.
GFON/60 - 2.40/60 - Middling.
GAON/60 - 2.32/60 - Only regular forwards that were better were Dustin Byfuglien and Robert Lang.
Bourque saw a decent level of competition with bad linemates at ES last year and wasn't underwater. That's good, and can't be said about the other guys I've talked about in this series so far. His production rate was ghastly, but may have something to do with the circumstances in which he was in employed.
5on4 stats:
His 2.01 G/60 rate is absurdly good and, I think, not repeatable. The real number to look at here is his GA/60 rate of 5.63, which was one of the best rates amongst the regular penalty killers. To put that in perspective, the only Flames in that range were Craig Conroy (5.43) and Alex Tanguay (5.55). Stephane Yelle (7.46), Matthew Lombardi (7.10) and Owen Nolan (7.76) all got scored on at significantly higher rates than Bourque.
I think the picture that is being painted here is a clear one: Bourque looks like an obvious candidate for shut-down duties. He's fast, good on the penalty kill and can keep his head above water against tough competition. With the Flames current roster, I can see two options for Bourque:
1.) He could land on Conroy's line if Keenan decides to use the affable one against the other guy's top guns again. Bourque-Conroy-Moss perhaps?
2.) If Iginla proves to be the only Flame that can consistently take on the big boys regularly, Bourque might well skate with the top unit -
Bourque-Lankgow-Iginla
What that configuration potentially creates is a secondary trio that might could beat up on the softer assignments -
Cammalleri - Lombardi - Bertuzzi
Personally, I dont see Keenan going with option #2. he proved last year that he likes to give Iginla productive linemates and then try to increase his scoring chances by feeding someone else to the wolves as much as possible.
The problem being that Tanguay was what made the checking unit tick last year and Bourque < Tanguay in the scheme of things. Assuming this all goes according to my fanciful imaginings, The Flames hopes will therefore lie in the Conroy unit not getting beat up too badly and the top 2 scoring trios making up the difference.
