View Single Post
Old
06-18-2009, 03:32 PM
  #84
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyHigh View Post
See, I don't think so. I don't remember being Carter a big problem defensively and his plus-minus bears that out. It's called evidence, if I said he was okay defensively and he was a -20, then the evidence wouldn't support me. I think he was obviously protected, but he wasn't a liability.
Evidence based in a statistic that is utterly devoid of context to the point of being useless with supplying that context. As a rookie, Carter was heavily protected in the lineup as far as who he was out on the ice against. If you go back and watch him actually play those years, he was not a good defensive player.

One of the most important aspects of his development over the last two years is that he's gone from being a bad defensive player to a good defensive player. He wasn't passable...he was bad. His poor defense directly contributed to us being the worst team in the league, just as Nitty's poor goaltending did.

Quote:
If you want to start handing out blame for that season, it goes much, much farther than Carter and Umberger, you could even criticize Richards for that year.
And I have. Richards, Carter, and, to a lesser extent, Umberger were not ready for the roles they were asked to play that season. Richards wasn't ready offensively, and Carter wasn't ready defensively or offensively to be a leading forward for a competitive NHL team.

However, that isn't their fault. They were young players having too much asked of them too early in their careers. Just as being disappointed in a rookie struggling defensively isn't all that fair. It isn't fair to set high expectations and then be upset when players don't meet them...perhaps one should re-evaluate their expectations.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote