Matt Carle

[GKJ]

I think losing Pronger ruined this team and we are going to feel the ramifications for several seasons.

If Pronger were healthy, this is a completely different team. Without that #1, everything is off kilter.

Well, losing Pronger did ruin every other team he has played for

 

[LI Fly Guy]

Guess we all would rather spend $4.5 on Coburn to miss the net from the blue line.

That's a $1 million savings.

Nope we spend that for Coburn to actually play defense. Which is something Carle sucked at also. We don't need Coburn to score goals.

 

[Pantokrator]

Well, losing Pronger did ruin every other team he has played for

I never thought about that. Edmonton goes to the Cup, then he leaves and they stink. Anaheim won the Cup, then he left and they miss the playoffs. We went to the Cup, now he is gone and it looks like we'll miss the playoffs!

 

[Beef Invictus]

If we're using small sample sizes to judge how Carle has done in Tampa Bay, that same sample size fits in to the fact that the Flyers have not only yet to prove that they're better off without him, but it seems more like they desperately need him back. No one has proven they can move the puck forward quickly and spark a transition game, especially since Timonen has started slowly. It's not like the jury is out and we're a decent team fitting in new players. Since the second lockout, we've been a good team with Carle, and a bad one without him.

By the same token, Gervais has played well for his role, and the defensemen have been still done a good job defensively 5v5. Being that he was the one who replaced Carle's spot on the roster, he hasn't been an abject failure.

The larger sample size from last season indicates that Carle hurt offensive production. I fail to see how someone who hurt offensive production will help increase offensive production.

I guess if we let him pass the puck out of the zone and then immediately put him on the bench that would work, but that's hardly worth his cap hit.

 

[GKJ]

The larger sample size from last season indicates that Carle hurt offensive production. I fail to see how someone who hurt offensive production will help increase offensive production.

I guess if we let him pass the puck out of the zone and then immediately put him on the bench that would work, but that's hardly worth his cap hit.

We've been over this, man. He was the only defenseman in the league with 35 points and 100 blocked shots. If there was an over/under for number of teams who would take that, and it could be set it at 28, you'd take the over.

 

[Beef Invictus]

We've been over this, man. He was the only defenseman in the league with 35 points and 100 blocked shots. If there was an over/under for number of teams who would take that, and it could be set it at 28, you'd take the over.

35 points because of sheer ice time. If Coburn had the same ice time he would have had more points than Carle.

 

[GKJ]

35 points because of sheer ice time. If Coburn had the same ice time he would have had more points than Carle.

Of course. He got the ice time because he was good enough for it. Was Lilja or Bourdon going to play 22 minutes per game? He's never averaged less than 21 for us. As we saw this summer, there aren't a ton of those guys readily available on the open market, that's why we had to go into the RFA market.

 

[Dumpster Flyers]

Carle is better than Meszaros. I said it last season and was crucified. People underrated Carle's ability to transition the puck through the neutral zone, and defend 1 on 1. There was a reason Carle would get more ice time than Andrei, because Carle is a MUCH better even strength player.

You can point to his lack of a point shot all you want, but in the grand scheme of things, it's not a make-or-break skill for a defender to have. He may not be worth $5.5M, but to suggest that losing him does not make the team SIGNIFICANTLY worse is to misrepresent the team's previous recipe for success.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Of course. He got the ice time because he was good enough for it. Was Lilja or Bourdon going to play 22 minutes per game? He's never averaged less than 21 for us. As we saw this summer, there aren't a ton of those guys readily available on the open market, that's why we had to go into the RFA market.

Being better than those guys isn't exactly an accomplishment. Playing Carle as a major anchor of our defense came about as necessity, not choice, and it didn't make the team better. That the Flyers didn't wish to keep using him in that role and let him take his services elsewhere helps show that.

 

[GKJ]

Being better than those guys isn't exactly an accomplishment. Playing Carle as a major anchor of our defense came about as necessity, not choice, and it didn't make the team better. That the Flyers didn't wish to keep using him in that role and let him take his services elsewhere helps show that.

Well, it's working out great so far. The Flyers can't score, have no transition game to speak of, and got caught chasing ghosts in terms of finding a replacement.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Well, it's working out great so far. The Flyers can't score, have no transition game to speak of, and got caught chasing ghosts in terms of finding a replacement.

They were seeking to replace Pronger, not Carle.

If we had Carle, it wouldn't make our forwards play competently, become better at receiving and handling passes, develop some sort of chemistry, or make better decisions in general. Those problems would still exist.

 

[Dumpster Flyers]

If we had Carle, it wouldn't make our forwards play competently, become better at receiving and handling passes, develop some sort of chemistry, or make better decisions in general. Those problems would still exist.

So now that the absolutely useless Carle is gone, who is going to be your unwarranted scapegoat?

 

[Beef Invictus]

So now that the absolutely useless Carle is gone, who is going to be your unwarranted scapegoat?

The stats and on ice performance warranted my criticism of Carle. Whoever is detrimental to the team overall should be criticized.

 

[Dumpster Flyers]

The stats and on ice performance warranted my criticism of Carle. Whoever is detrimental to the team overall should be criticized.

Wait... I can see you rationalizing your hatred of Carle by inaccurately analyzing his on-ice play, but how can you criticize his stats? For years he was a leader in ice time and was among the point-producing leaders among defensemen.

 

[Beef Invictus]

Wait... I can see you rationalizing your hatred of Carle by inaccurately analyzing his on-ice play, but how can you criticize his stats? For years he was a leader in ice time and was among the point-producing leaders among defensemen.

The stats clearly show the team produced less offense when he was on the ice. He accumulated his points through bulk ice time.

www.behindthenet.ca

Edit: It makes a lot of sense, considering his shot is so bad it makes him very easy to defend against in the offensive zone.

 

[GKJ]

Beef, when you say "bulk ice time," you know that most of the stats at behindthenet are on a per-60 scale, right?

 

[Beef Invictus]

Beef, when you say "bulk ice time," you know that most of the stats at behindthenet are on a per-60 scale, right?

Yes. He accumulated his point totals through bulk ice time. Breaking it down into a per 60 scale shows that he actually wasn't producing at such a great rate.

 

[GKJ]

Yes. He accumulated his point totals through bulk ice time. Breaking it down into a per 60 scale shows that he actually wasn't producing at such a great rate.

Everyone else is judged the same way. That's why it's on a per-60 scale, so numbers wouldn't be skewed by the ice time.

 

[Dumpster Flyers]

The stats clearly show the team produced less offense when he was on the ice. He accumulated his points through bulk ice time.

www.behindthenet.ca

Edit: It makes a lot of sense, considering his shot is so bad it makes him very easy to defend against in the offensive zone.

Even as stupid as those stats are, Carle had a positive Corsi in all instances so I don't know what you're talking about. Of course he's no Brandon Manning

 

[Beef Invictus]

Everyone else is judged the same way. That's why it's on a per-60 scale, so numbers wouldn't be skewed by the ice time.

Yes, and the numbers indicate the team produced fewer goals while Carle was on the ice.

Even as stupid as those stats are, Carle had a positive Corsi in all instances so I don't know what you're talking about. Of course he's no Brandon Manning

Positive Corsi doesn't really mean much. Teammates added to that, and it also ignores the poor quality of the average Carle shot.

Interesting that you dismiss stats that run contrary to your belief as "stupid." And you insinuate I'm biased?

 

[Larry44]

Well, it's working out great so far. The Flyers can't score, have no transition game to speak of, and got caught chasing ghosts in terms of finding a replacement.

The Flyers miss Carle more than anyone right now. He was so steady, so competent and so skilled he could play in any situation, log huge ice time, play against the other teams' top lines. He's really missed right now.

Can Gus be a workhorse like that? Doubtful. Can Kimmo even keep it up? Questionable if not for how great Luke is playing beside him.

Sign Campoli? Trade for Visnovsky? I'm sure they are looking at a lot of options, but a puck moving Dman is #1 need, and we had one and let him walk.

This season's marketing motto should be photos of Jagr and Carle in Dallas and Tampa jerseys, with the simple tag line:

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, stupid.

 

[GKJ]

Yes, and the numbers indicate the team produced fewer goals while Carle was on the ice.

Ok, because Carle was 17th in the league last year in on-ice GF rate in 5v5 Close among defenseman with 750 minutes played, and 29th in GF%. You might note that no current Flyers defenseman appears among the Top 42 (don't know why it cuts off there, I'm relatively new to this site). And since it's 5v5 Close, these are tough minutes. None of these garbage time goals where someone scores in a 5-1 game.

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...e&minutes=750&type=goal&sort=F20&sortdir=DESC

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...e&minutes=750&type=goal&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

(They do use 20 minute intervals, but it's a per-rate so it's not skewed).

 

[Dumpster Flyers]

Yes, and the numbers indicate the team produced fewer goals while Carle was on the ice.

Positive Corsi doesn't really mean much. Teammates added to that, and it also ignores the poor quality of the average Carle shot.

Interesting that you dismiss stats that run contrary to your belief as "stupid." And you insinuate I'm biased?

Yes, you're biased. If you're pointing to small variations in an obscure stat as proof of a player is useless, it's clear that you're out to justify a preconceived opinion.

And yes, the stat is stupid. You can look at ice time and point production rather than a glorified +/- that doesn't account for tons of variables like everyone else does.

 

[ILoveStephanieBrown]

I'm sure as hell not missing this:

The scary thing is some people here do

 

[Beef Invictus]

Ok, because Carle was 17th in the league last year in on-ice GF rate in 5v5 Close among defenseman with 750 minutes played, and 29th in GF%. You might note that no current Flyers defenseman appears among the Top 42 (don't know why it cuts off there, I'm relatively new to this site). And since it's 5v5 Close, these are tough minutes. None of these garbage time goals where someone scores in a 5-1 game.

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...e&minutes=750&type=goal&sort=F20&sortdir=DESC


http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...e&minutes=750&type=goal&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

(They do use 20 minute intervals, but it's a per-rate so it's not skewed).

And now you've narrowed it down to a set, very slim parameter. That fails to explain why, in general, the team scored less goals with Carle on the ice. We know this offense was very good at scoring goals when tied or down. We were tied/down very often thanks to the suspect goaltending and defensive play. Yet despite that, our forwards had a very strong season. Therefore, with a lot of goals being scored against and a lot of goals being scored for, it makes sense that Carle gets a boost there. It's also pretty hard to believe that Timonen isn't on that list, since he was also out there a lot. His injuries must have sliced his ice time and dropped him below the 750 threshold. As we know, Carle was out there more than usual because injuries necessitated it. Add the fact that a lot of our games were close/involved comebacks because of goaltending, yet our forwards were great, and it takes some of the shine off of that stat. The fact remains that in overall play, the team scored less with Carle on the ice than it did with other defensemen...including his partners.

Edit: Also, I don't like using these sorts of stats to compare players across teams. I think they're fantastic for seeing how players stack up on their own teams, but comparing across the board doesn't work well because they fail to account for difference between teams. It's not like all these defenseman have the same coach, teammates, and goalie.

Edit: And now I know how that site works. Here it is for the Flyers: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...goals&teamid=22&pos=defense&minutes=50&disp=1

Coburn is close. Most Flyers surpass him, notably Mez and Timonen who had ice time cut thanks to injury.

Yes, you're biased. If you're pointing to small variations in an obscure stat as proof of a player is useless, it's clear that you're out to justify a preconceived opinion.

And yes, the stat is stupid. You can look at ice time and point production rather than a glorified +/- that doesn't account for tons of variables like everyone else does.

Wrong. I was once a Carle fan and supporter. As time went by though, his constant disappointing play, combined with the fact that all the stats indicated he actually wasn't as good as people claimed, changed my mind. I started out with the opposite mindset, actually.

If you bothered to read any of my posts, you'd find that I attempt to justify why the stats indicate that he's actually not all that great on offense by analyzing his actual play. I account for tons of variables.