Prospect Info: William Carrier (2014 via trade) ‎– '16-17: Buffalo #48 (NHL)

[Jame]

Is it true that Carrier needs 3 more Games Played to then be required to be protected in expansion? (paging dotcommunism)

If that's true, it would be idiotic to keep him up over Fasching for the final weeks of the season....

what am I missing?

 

[Reddawg]

Is it true that Carrier needs 3 more Games Played to then be required to be protected in expansion? (paging dotcommunism)

If that's true, it would be idiotic to keep him up over Fasching for the final weeks of the season....

what am I missing?

Every mock expansion list I've seen since last summer indicates that we have to protect Carrier or lose him to expansion, I don't know what would have changed recently on that front. I think it's the number of seasons you've played as a pro that matter, not the number of games in those seasons or where you played them.

 

[Husko]

Is it true that Carrier needs 3 more Games Played to then be required to be protected in expansion? (paging dotcommunism)

If that's true, it would be idiotic to keep him up over Fasching for the final weeks of the season....

what am I missing?

Pretty sure he needs to be protected either way. Measurement is seasons pro not games player. Regardless, protecting him shouldn't be difficult, we only have 7 forwards worth protecting.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Is the three games related to the requirement that each team exposes a certain number of players with at least X games in the league?

 

[Jame]

Sorry, maybe my confusion is coming from the discovery of the capfriendly.com expansion simulator.

 

[truthbluth]

Is it true that Carrier needs 3 more Games Played to then be required to be protected in expansion? (paging dotcommunism)

If that's true, it would be idiotic to keep him up over Fasching for the final weeks of the season....

what am I missing?

In 3 games Carrier will have played 40 games, making him eligible to meet the requirements for 1 of 2 forwards that must be exposed in the draft that are under contract and have either played 40 games in 2016-2017 or 70 games between 2015-2017.

Separate is the distinction of who is exempt from the expansion draft, which is any player currently playing in his 3rd or later professional season. Carrier is in season 3, so he is eligible for the expansion draft (Reinhart, Eichel, Bailey, Baptiste, Fasching...not)

The Sabres currently have 6 forwards that meet the forward requirements (O'Reilly, Okposo (NMC), Ennis, Kane, Moulson, Deslauriers) If the Sabres manage to trade Moulson and or Ennis, it would be good for Carrier to get his 3 games so that he could be exposed. That said, I fully expect Moulson, Ennis and Des to be exposed, so Carrier's games don't really matter. But they do give the Sabres flexibility.

 

[Jame]

In 3 games Carrier will have played 40 games, making him eligible to meet the requirements for 1 of 2 forwards that must be exposed in the draft that are under contract and have either played 40 games in 2016-2017 or 70 games between 2015-2017.

Separate is the distinction of who is exempt from the expansion draft, which is any player currently playing in his 3rd or later professional season. Carrier is in season 3, so he is eligible for the expansion draft (Reinhart, Eichel, Bailey, Baptiste, Fasching...not)

The Sabres currently have 6 forwards that meet the forward requirements (O'Reilly, Okposo (NMC), Ennis, Kane, Moulson, Deslauriers) If the Sabres manage to trade Moulson and or Ennis, it would be good for Carrier to get his 3 games so that he could be exposed. That said, I fully expect Moulson, Ennis and Des to be exposed, so Carrier's games don't really matter. But they do give the Sabres flexibility.

That makes more sense...

Do pending UFAs count in the 1 of 2 formula? So if for some reason they wanted to protect Ennis, Gionta and Moulson would count as the 2?

I guess it doesn't matter since Deslauriers counts under the 70 threshold.

 

[nickdawg95]

he's nothing more than a bottom 6 energy guy, don't really see the HYPE

 

[OkimLom]

he's nothing more than a bottom 6 energy guy, don't really see the HYPE

I'm sorry to hear that.

He's a responsible smart winger who you could put with Eichel or ROR and bring the same role and type of game that a Kunitz did for Crosby and is able to keep up. Pretty much, he's another Girgensons type of player (but doesn't have the flexibility to to play center) but is a smarter player.

 

[Chainshot]

he's nothing more than a bottom 6 energy guy, don't really see the HYPE

Effective, inexpensive wingers who bring certain elements to their line are always useful. Giving them away for free is just stupid.

 

[Husko]

That makes more sense...

Do pending UFAs count in the 1 of 2 formula? So if for some reason they wanted to protect Ennis, Gionta and Moulson would count as the 2?

I guess it doesn't matter since Deslauriers counts under the 70 threshold.

No, which is presumably the reason they re-signed Faulk, to give them the option of moving Georges.

 

[Jame]

he's nothing more than a bottom 6 energy guy, don't really see the HYPE

He's actually played about 40% of his ES Minutes with Oreilly...
And in those minutes with Carrier, ROR produces 2.49 GF and 2.49 GA per 60, with a Corsi % of 56.2%

In all of ROR's other minutes, he remains a net neutral GF/GA player, but his Corsi % drops to 48%

And that narrative continues regardless of what line he's on....

Girgensons w/ Carrier
GF 2.26
GA 0.00
58.4%

Girgensons w/o Carrier
GF 1.39
GA 2.21
45.4%

The often overused "Hecht-like glue guy" applies here. Carrier doesn't have the offensive skillset that Hecht had, but he's very much similar in the nature and subtle power in their game. Carrier is going to be a guy who can move up and down the lineup while being a big contributor in driving possession.

It's not surprising that people don't see the hype... and there's two obvious reason for that....
1. There isn't really any hype to begin with...
2. His game isn't flashy, his work is unseen.

 

[Revelate]

I love how as soon as he gets the pucks he's looking to get north south with zero hesitation. He does need to clean up his lapses in the defensive zone.

 

[nickdawg95]

He's actually played about 40% of his ES Minutes with Oreilly...
And in those minutes with Carrier, ROR produces 2.49 GF and 2.49 GA per 60, with a Corsi % of 56.2%

In all of ROR's other minutes, he remains a net neutral GF/GA player, but his Corsi % drops to 48%

And that narrative continues regardless of what line he's on....

Girgensons w/ Carrier
GF 2.26
GA 0.00
58.4%

Girgensons w/o Carrier
GF 1.39
GA 2.21
45.4%

The often overused "Hecht-like glue guy" applies here. Carrier doesn't have the offensive skillset that Hecht had, but he's very much similar in the nature and subtle power in their game. Carrier is going to be a guy who can move up and down the lineup while being a big contributor in driving possession.

It's not surprising that people don't see the hype... and there's two obvious reason for that....
1. There isn't really any hype to begin with...
2. His game isn't flashy, his work is unseen.

I mean cool, yeah, corsi numbers, sick man really informative stuff not SUBjective at all...

He's inexpensive, you can play him with anyone , defensively responsible. that's great I am not dissing him. BOTTOM LINE he's a dime a dozen player bottom 6, won't crack more than 30-40 points ever.

 

[Jame]

I love how as soon as he gets the pucks he's looking to get north south with zero hesitation. He does need to clean up his lapses in the defensive zone.

Agreed. I love how he plays through the opponent. Whether with the puck, or to get the puck. He's a straight line player, and has the power/balance to play that game.

 

[Jame]

I mean cool, yeah, corsi numbers, sick man really informative stuff not SUBjective at all...

He's inexpensive, you can play him with anyone , defensively responsible. that's great I am not dissing him. BOTTOM LINE he's a dime a dozen player bottom 6, won't crack more than 30-40 points ever.

Sounds like you've got a really good eye for the game, thanks for sharing bro dude awesome man dawg snoopy doopy cool for the win, bring your green hat

 

[nickdawg95]

Sounds like you've got a really informative eye for the game, thanks for sharing bro dude awesome man dawg cool for the win.

Yeah dawg forreal, catch me on That hawkey tonight dog. tsn sportscentre boy

 

[Jame]

Yeah dawg forreal, catch me on That hawkey tonight dog. tsn sportscentre boy

cash me ouside

 

[nickdawg95]

cash me ouside

Respeck to you Jame but watch how u speakz on my name you know ?

 

[ende]

u brahs crushing some hawt hawkey takes?

 

[Aladyyn]

I mean cool, yeah, corsi numbers, sick man really informative stuff not SUBjective at all...

He's inexpensive, you can play him with anyone , defensively responsible. that's great I am not dissing him. BOTTOM LINE he's a dime a dozen player bottom 6, won't crack more than 30-40 points ever.

30-40 points with no PP time is top 6 production. We had 0 players with 30 even strength points last season.

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

I like Carrier. He definitely should be protected. But I don't want him in the top 6 as Eichel or RoRs LW. I want him on my 4th line with ERod playing smart hockey drawing penalties and chipping in a goal here and there. Carrier is excellent at drawing penalties. He has some jam to his game too. I think he could eventually be a solid and consistent PKer, possibly taking over Giontas spot on the PK if he isn't re-signed. That being said he is still a bottom 6 player and we shouldn't become too attached. That's how players like Girgensons get mythical values placed on him. During Girgs second season I shudder to think what kind of trade value us Sabre fans placed on him or future tags like "Girgs is our future captain". I think it definitely plays a part in the city identity, Buffalo is a blue collar town and we love our lunch pail hard working type players. I just don't think they should be overvalued. Carrier in a bottom 6 role is excellent. Carrier playing in the top 6 is not.

And I don't think Carrier is going to be scoring 30-40 points next season. That would be a gigantic leap in production from his rookie season, and I just don't think he has the skill to do that. But I can definitely see him a 10-10-20 type player for sure. A lot of physicality and jam and energy. Very valuable player to have in the bottom 6, even on a cup contender.

 

[Butt Ox]

If you don't appreciate his game now, perhaps you will grow to if we're treated to another season of clutch-n-grab hawkey.

 

[DazedandConfused]

Kid is probably the least mentioned when Murray's moves and acquisitions are brought up.

Young winger whose shown the ability to play up and down the lineup without changing what it is that got him the opportunity in the first place. Knows his role and has executed flawlessly. Hate to see when a player looks awesome playing a heavy north-south game on a 3rd or 4th line and all of a sudden thinks he's Gretzky coming across the blue line when he's bumped up the lineup. Not too point fingers at any current players.

 

[dasaybz]

He's actually played about 40% of his ES Minutes with Oreilly...
And in those minutes with Carrier, ROR produces 2.49 GF and 2.49 GA per 60, with a Corsi % of 56.2%

In all of ROR's other minutes, he remains a net neutral GF/GA player, but his Corsi % drops to 48%

And that narrative continues regardless of what line he's on....

Girgensons w/ Carrier
GF 2.26
GA 0.00
58.4%

Girgensons w/o Carrier
GF 1.39
GA 2.21
45.4%

The often overused "Hecht-like glue guy" applies here. Carrier doesn't have the offensive skillset that Hecht had, but he's very much similar in the nature and subtle power in their game. Carrier is going to be a guy who can move up and down the lineup while being a big contributor in driving possession.

It's not surprising that people don't see the hype... and there's two obvious reason for that....
1. There isn't really any hype to begin with...
2. His game isn't flashy, his work is unseen.

So, in other words, a career 4th liner.