Thread: Speculation: Would you take Carle back?
View Single Post
Old
05-15-2012, 05:45 PM
  #141
usahockey22flyers
Classic Coburn...
 
usahockey22flyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Jersey, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,339
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bort Sampson View Post
It's pretty obvious to anyone who's read these forums that there are a few vehement defenders of Carle:

VanSciver
DenverBoone
usahockey22flyers
Larry44

There's honestly something fishy about two of them, because they constantly quote each other as factual evidence for their arguments, but I digress. Just a head's up for others, as these people don't really listen to valid arguments, refer to Corsi as "fact", and generally love Matt Carle regardless of poor play. Hopefully when the Flyers let him walk, they walk too.

I don't think Carle is an awful player, but he can't play in the top-4, and he's pretty easy to coach against. He's a great, fast skater. That's a blessing and a curse for defensemen. It gives them the ability correct positioning errors and catch other players on the ice. It also gives them the curse of being able to move completely out of position with just a few steps. Carle's positioning in the defensive zone is awful to anyone who has actually played the game. He constantly wanders from the net, allowing opposing players to slip in behind him. He gets caught above the circles while the puck is still in the zone. He essentially moves out of position with the play, oftentimes following the puck (or the wrong player) up the boards.

His lack of physicality is alarming for a defenseman who has seen so much playoff action in his career. Opposing teams bring the puck down his side because he gives up the blue line. When they end up on Carle's partner's side of the ice, the puck is dumped into Carle's corner, because he's easily knocked off the puck. Carle also doesn't use his body in the corner and along the boards, allowing the cycle to work with little resistance. This was the Devils' tactic and it worked perfectly for them.

Of the Flyers, Carle remains their least physical defenseman and most prone to turnovers.

This is essentially what killed the Flyers against the Devils. They were able to play within the Flyers zone regardless of whether they had the puck or not.

The Flyers have offensive players; It's time to shore up the defense. Matt Carle's probably a perfect fit for some other teams, but not this one, and not at the money he will command. He's a one-dimensional defenseman, and can be replaced.

Basically, if we like seeing goals and shallow playoff runs, we should keep Carle. If we want to win a Cup sometime soon, we need to get better on the blue line, and signing a 5-million dollar offensive-defenseman to a team loaded with offense is redundant and completely illogical.
First off, I never really come on the computer, I usually check HF on my phone or what not. I don't appreciate having my name mentioned in any type, theres no need for it, just because I defended Carle a few times, it doesn't mean I'm a die-hard fan of him. I've actually been very critical of him in the 2nd half of the season. Jim and the rest of the defense absolutely hung Bryzgalov out to dry in the NJD series. I never cared for the criticism for Carle because there were times when other defenseman we're playing subpar (Cough, Timonen, cough Pronger, yes there were a few injuries for both) but at 100% they committed turnovers, took stupid penalties and they received no criticism.

That being said, here's a question, who was the best defenseman in the NJD series?

In the Pitt series I think it was Coburn, but I'm just curious what people think of the question above.....

I hope Matt Carle walks, I don't want Homer to overpay for him at all. We all know what he brings to the table, both positive and negative.

usahockey22flyers is offline   Reply With Quote