Player Discussion John Carlson - Vol. 1

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bieronymus Trotz

Registered User
Sep 4, 2017
547
424
@Hivemind

Hard to take your contributions to any discussion seriously when you ignore half the boards commentary. Talk about trying to only play (and own) your own sandbox.
Quintuple posting so your posts take up half the page doesn't make you "half the board." ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ridley Simon

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
18,127
9,067
Marin County — SF Bay Area, CA
Quintuple posting so your posts take up half the page doesn't make you "half the board." ;)
Glad you are following along. Thanks. I responded to 5 separate messages, but I guess that’s too many?

I will try to follow your lead and do better. Appreciate you calling me out.

Second time you’ve backed up @Hivemind. Seems you have a liking to him/her, And perhaps a disliking to me. Good to know. ;)
 

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,625
14,444
What stat is more important than scoring points?

he had mostly bad G play behind him (save Samsonov’s first few months), a bad D partner, and now it looks like bad coaching to boot.

Put Carlson in Josi’s role in Nash. We all really think he’s do worse?

or flip side — our Josi in Carlsons role in DC. He’d do better?

I mean I’d pick something like WAR if I had to rely on one stat because it tries to take into account everything.

The problem with just relying on points is that it doesn’t take into account defensive contributions at all. By most metrics (xGA, defensive WAR, CA/FA, etc.) Carlson is not only below average but he’s near the bottom of the league defensively. Taken in totality he’s not a top 5 defenseman in the league according to most people who crunch the numbers. It’s not meant as some huge burn against him, it’s just what it is.

I’m open to saying Carlson will be better under a new coach but it’s not enough to make him a Norris contender this year. Indeed players like Jensen and Orlov were able to put together competent defensive play under the same poor coaching so it’s difficult for me to excuse all or even most of Carlson’s defensive faults as a coaching failure or a goaltending failure.

If you’re asking me who I’d take next year I’d take Josi in a heartbeat. It’s also why I’m advocating trading Carlson and signing Pietrangelo, not that it will ever happen.
 

Ridley Simon

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
18,127
9,067
Marin County — SF Bay Area, CA
I mean I’d pick something like WAR if I had to rely on one stat because it tries to take into account everything.

The problem with just relying on points is that it doesn’t take into account defensive contributions at all. By most metrics (xGA, defensive WAR, CA/FA, etc.) Carlson is not only below average but he’s near the bottom of the league defensively. Taken in totality he’s not a top 5 defenseman in the league according to most people who crunch the numbers. It’s not meant as some huge burn against him, it’s just what it is.

I’m open to saying Carlson will be better under a new coach but it’s not enough to make him a Norris contender this year. Indeed players like Jensen and Orlov were able to put together competent defensive play under the same poor coaching so it’s difficult for me to excuse all or even most of Carlson’s defensive faults as a coaching failure or a goaltending failure.

If you’re asking me who I’d take next year I’d take Josi in a heartbeat. It’s also why I’m advocating trading Carlson and signing Pietrangelo, not that it will ever happen.

Appreciate the response. I was open to dealing Carlson a few seasons ago. I was worried (and still am) about his “mental toolbox”. Same issue (but was worse) with Mike Green.

that said, he’s improved a lot, IMO, and last year he was always seemingly on the ice for almost all the important moments (O & D), and while metrics may not play that out, its what I witnessed in my time watching the team.

if we could sign Piets, and deal Carlson, that’s a huge win from the asset ROI point of view. Not sure what it would do the room, but that’s above my paygrade.

I see Piets and JC74 as being mostly equal. Big picture. One is better than the other at certain aspects of the game, and vice versa. If you can get one for “free” (= money) and recoup most of that plus a lot of other assets, it’s worth exploring.

I mean, I would.
 
  • Like
Reactions: twabby

CapitalsCupReality

It’s Go Time!!
Feb 27, 2002
64,388
19,089
Oh the hypocrisy....let’s see how our favorite Vrana does under a new coach before overreacting, yet Carlson isn’t a Norris contender out of the gate? If you’re simply crunching numbers and projecting Lavi suddenly putting the clamps on him, maybe, but Lavi will be cutting off his own nose if he saddles 74 to his own end.

IMO better to find the guy a legit damn D partner and turn him loose to realize his potential.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Calicaps

Calicaps

NFA
Aug 3, 2006
21,816
14,097
Almost Canada
I mean I’d pick something like WAR if I had to rely on one stat because it tries to take into account everything.
What kind of statistic "accounts for everything"? That doesn't even make sense.

Beyond that, your take on Carlson reminds me of your old anti-Orpik positions. When the stats don't align with what you see happening on the ice, you choose to not believe your eyes. I'm not saying JC74 is Brooks Orpik, far from it; they're totally different players. But they both are on-ice difference makers, no matter what the number-crunchers say, and for at least half of the RS, Carlson was absolutely top tier. Leaving him off the ballot entirely is preposterous.
 

Hivemind

We're Touched
Oct 8, 2010
37,009
13,425
Philadelphia
I'm not a big believer of any "all in one" stats for hockey. I do think there are stats that are better predictors than others, and stats that are more objectively defined than others.


What kind of statistic "accounts for everything"? That doesn't even make sense.

WAR - Wins Above Replacement - is a baseball metric that takes all sorts of different inputs and weights them by how much they contribute to wins (on average) to determine an "all in one" metric for a player's value.

There are attempts at making hockey equivalents - GVT - Goals Versus Threshold (etc). But the results haven't been overly impressive, in my opinion.
 

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
13,491
10,046
Carlson's play did decline over the course of the season. (13 goals in his first 41 games, 2 goals in his last 28 games). If he played the second half the way he played the first half, he'd have won the Norris.

I'm convinced that his injury in the playoffs was worse than we knew. He did not look like his normal self. What's odd about it is the points still came.
 

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,625
14,444
What kind of statistic "accounts for everything"? That doesn't even make sense.

Beyond that, your take on Carlson reminds me of your old anti-Orpik positions. When the stats don't align with what you see happening on the ice, you choose to not believe your eyes. I'm not saying JC74 is Brooks Orpik, far from it; they're totally different players. But they both are on-ice difference makers, no matter what the number-crunchers say, and for at least half of the RS, Carlson was absolutely top tier. Leaving him off the ballot entirely is preposterous.

Wins Above Replacement essentially takes everything about a player and their context and spits out a number that tells how many wins above a replacement level player a certain player is. It’s tough to explain but one such model is described here:

Wins Above Replacement: The Process (Part 2)

As @Hivemind mentioned these metrics are still in their infancy and leave much to be desired but I think they are still useful and much better than using points, for instance.

Also I imagine you and I see much different things on the ice, including and especially when it comes to players like Orpik, which is why I don’t really think it’s useful to compare eye tests if we’re really trying to evaluate a player.

Carlson probably was a top 5 defenseman during the first half of the season. But the second half counts just as much and in that half he was considerably worse. Again, in totality it wasn’t good enough to call him a top 5 defenseman IMO.
 

CapitalsCupReality

It’s Go Time!!
Feb 27, 2002
64,388
19,089
Carlson was “Probably” a top-5 Defender early? I’m pretty sure we can trace your Carlson criticism to his early days, so pardon my disgust in that opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Calicaps

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,625
14,444
Carlson was Probably a top-5 Defender early? I’m pretty sure we can trace your Carlson criticism to his early days, so pardon my disgust in that opinion.

I’m talking about 2019-20, not prior seasons. It’s a one season award and not a lifetime achievement award despite how some of the PHWA members cast their ballots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hivemind
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->