Am I the only one who thinks Carle's contract is actually an asset? If he has truly plateaued and stays at this level, he's probably a bit overpaid, but $3.5M for a second pairing puckmover isn't terrible. However, the kid's 23 or so. What if he becomes a true top pairing guy by the time he's 26 and is still playing for $3.5M? The reward outweighs the risk to me.
Jones, on the other hand, is on a deal that won't allow for such changes. I think he's still progressing and I certainly don't have the hate for him that others do (despite the fact that he'll occasionally make me pull my hair out. That's just a trait of most defensemen and he's not alone in that regard). $2.5M this year and next isn't a terrible overpayment for what he brings to the table (I think I'd prefer something like $2M, but the amount he and Carle are slightly overpaid is a wash), but one of them is clearly too expensive for the third pairing. I'd prefer to stick with the guy who has a deal we could really reap the benefits of down the line.
Uhhh, yeah. Look at the stats instead of basing your opinions on what others say on here.
Jones 180 gp - 62 points
Carle 187 gp - 74 points
Very similar.
Only one player is 3-4 years older than the other. Jones is what he is. Carle is still developing. When Jones was Carle's age he was a Phantom.
You want to know why Carle? Because he has a skill that 99% of the rest of the league doesn't have, Jones being one of the 99%. Carle knows where he's passing the puck mid-play before he even gets control of the puck. His touch passes are just off the damn charts. Sometimes his teammates aren't ready for them because they simply can't read the play half as fast as Carle does. Carle is to the touch pass as Carter is to the wrist shot.
Jones is a 4/5. Carle could be a legit 3 in a few years. They aren't the same player.
Only one player is 3-4 years older than the other. Jones is what he is. Carle is still developing. When Jones was Carle's age he was a Phantom.
You want to know why Carle? Because he has a skill that 99% of the rest of the league doesn't have, Jones being one of the 99%. Carle knows where he's passing the puck mid-play before he even gets control of the puck. His touch passes are just off the damn charts. Sometimes his teammates aren't ready for them because they simply can't read the play half as fast as Carle does. Carle is to the touch pass as Carter is to the wrist shot.
Jones is a 4/5. Carle could be a legit 3 in a few years. They aren't the same player.
Yup, and I alluded to this in my post. A lot of his passes aren't turnovers - they're plays that our own teammates didn't pick up on because he's ahead of them.
He's the only one on our team that has that ability.
I'll also add that Carle's ceiling is much higher than a #3. Whether or not he reaches it is a mystery, but he's already a second pair d-man on 90% of the teams in the league.
Our defense for the future is well set, I might add, even when Timonen is winding down. In 4 years:
Yup, and I alluded to this in my post. A lot of his passes aren't turnovers - they're plays that our own teammates didn't pick up on because he's ahead of them.
He's the only one on our team that has that ability.
Not only is he the only one on our team that has that ability, there are plenty of teams all around the league that don't have a guy with this skill.
When a guy has a skill that 99% of the rest of the league doesn't have, you don't move him, at least not until you allow him to pan out or plateau. You have to bet on him developing and using that skill to help you win LOTS of games.
All 3 (Coburn, Carle and Jones) playing below potential, make mistakes and been very average this season.
Outside of Timonen and Vaananen our 1st paring, we do not have a very solid 2nd paring. On paper we should.
Alberts deserves some credit imo. 2nd on our D with hits behind Vaananen, good on PK, scores some points. I would keep Alberts over Jones right now I also would love to see Coburn and Carle playing better. They are capable.
Am I the only one who thinks Carle's contract is actually an asset? If he has truly plateaued and stays at this level, he's probably a bit overpaid, but $3.5M for a second pairing puckmover isn't terrible. However, the kid's 23 or so. What if he becomes a true top pairing guy by the time he's 26 and is still playing for $3.5M? The reward outweighs the risk to me.
He's significantly overpaid if he doesn't start to produce some more points. His pace as a Flyer is for a 30 point season, given his age and that contract I'd rather see a 40 point season out of him with that price tag. You add in the fact that he's also shown why he got himself in trouble with Wilson with some consistency (letting men slip behind him, and some reckless plays at the line with no one behind him) and that contract isn't much of an asset.
He's a ways away from being a top-pairing guy defensively, the real question is whether he can find the consistent offensive game he showed in SJ that earned him that contract in the first place. Is he better than Jones? Absolutely, Carle actually creates plays moving forward and helps sustain the offense moving out of the zone, which Jones has never been all that great at. Defensively they have more in common than different. Carle is just a better think with the puck and more skilled at where he's going to put it.
Jones...that contract was stupid at the time it was offered, and it's even dumber to keep him around after adding 3.5M in salary with Carle.
One could certainly draw some errant conclusion from the +/- data.
I'm just saying he wasn't a disaster last year.
that's fine. i have a knack for exaggeration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by opus
It's all relative.
If Richards were making 2 million a year he'd be the best player in the league.
I have no problems with Carle or Briere. I just find it funny (Actually, I don't) that Carle has had one good season and he's the messiah. Jones coming off a very good year...and he's muck. I just don't get it. I know everybody will jump on me here and say it's his contract...but the fact of the matter is this...he didn't have this contract last season.
Also, why is it that Carle is guarenteed to improve...and Jones isn't?
I really don't get it.
first off, who said carle was the messiah? last i checked, he wasn't bringing about any apocalypse of eschatological proportions. carle is simply a more talented jones.
and secondly, i'll never say that carle is guaranteed to improve (or the opposite for jones). this kind of sport is too chaotic to make absolute statements like that. however, based on what i've seen from both players this season, carle has been the better player. pretty much my biggest reason for keeping matt and trading jones.
Only one player is 3-4 years older than the other. Jones is what he is. Carle is still developing. When Jones was Carle's age he was a Phantom.
You want to know why Carle? Because he has a skill that 99% of the rest of the league doesn't have, Jones being one of the 99%. Carle knows where he's passing the puck mid-play before he even gets control of the puck. His touch passes are just off the damn charts. Sometimes his teammates aren't ready for them because they simply can't read the play half as fast as Carle does. Carle is to the touch pass as Carter is to the wrist shot.
Jones is a 4/5. Carle could be a legit 3 in a few years. They aren't the same player.
i kinda of agree w/ you...this is like the carter/umberger debate that went on last year...many people said umberger was just as good and would be better because he could be signed for less.
they neglected the fact that carter was 22 y/o and umberger 26 y/o...i am not saying carle willl make the same leap carter did but when you watch them play you see carle does more things naturally then jones...i give jones credit for making himself a good pro but i see carle being a better finisher as he gets more experience.
i like jones the same as i liked umberger but i think carle will be a better player and his contract will be an asset down the line.
He's significantly overpaid if he doesn't start to produce some more points. His pace as a Flyer is for a 30 point season, given his age and that contract I'd rather see a 40 point season out of him with that price tag. You add in the fact that he's also shown why he got himself in trouble with Wilson with some consistency (letting men slip behind him, and some reckless plays at the line with no one behind him) and that contract isn't much of an asset.
He's a ways away from being a top-pairing guy defensively, the real question is whether he can find the consistent offensive game he showed in SJ that earned him that contract in the first place. Is he better than Jones? Absolutely, Carle actually creates plays moving forward and helps sustain the offense moving out of the zone, which Jones has never been all that great at. Defensively they have more in common than different. Carle is just a better think with the puck and more skilled at where he's going to put it.
Jones...that contract was stupid at the time it was offered, and it's even dumber to keep him around after adding 3.5M in salary with Carle.
This argument is fairly simplistic (no offense).
Carle is going to put up most of his points on the PP. In his best season in SJ, he put up 26 of his 42 points on the PP, that's 62%.
Last year, Kimmo put up 29 of his 44 points on the PP, that's 66%.
Last year, Lidstrom put up 34 of 70 points on the PP, around 50%.
Last year, Rafalski put up 31 of his 55 points on the PP, 56%.
Also, keep in mind that the Flyers are not a great ES team, in fact, they're pretty darn poor, so a lot of their scoring gets done on the PP.
Now, in Carle's best year, he spent an average of 4:36 per game on the first PP unit. That's not too much out of normal, Kimmo spends 4:26 per game on our PP unit.
By contrast, Carle spends 2:17 per game on the PP. That is a fairly significant drop.
So hypothetically, let's double Carle's time on the unit. He has an admittedly unimpressive 3 A on the PP so far. However, if we double his PP time, that becomes 6 A.
That would give him 12 points in 24 games, a 41 point pace although that's an admittedly small sample size.
Personally, I am more worried about his defensive play and positioning than his point production. Carle is a PP defenseman, most offensive d-men are. If he's not getting PP time, he's not going to produce as much, that's exacerbated by the fact that we are a poor ES team. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out.
Carle is going to put up most of his points on the PP. In his best season in SJ, he put up 26 of his 42 points on the PP, that's 62%.
Last year, Kimmo put up 29 of his 44 points on the PP, that's 66%.
Last year, Lidstrom put up 34 of 70 points on the PP, around 50%.
Last year, Rafalski put up 31 of his 55 points on the PP, 56%.
Also, keep in mind that the Flyers are not a great ES team, in fact, they're pretty darn poor, so a lot of their scoring gets done on the PP.
Now, in Carle's best year, he spent an average of 4:36 per game on the first PP unit. That's not too much out of normal, Kimmo spends 4:26 per game on our PP unit.
By contrast, Carle spends 2:17 per game on the PP. That is a fairly significant drop.
So hypothetically, let's double Carle's time on the unit. He has an admittedly unimpressive 3 A on the PP so far. However, if we double his PP time, that becomes 6 A.
That would give him 12 points in 24 games, a 41 point pace although that's an admittedly small sample size.
Personally, I am more worried about his defensive play and positioning than his point production. Carle is a PP defenseman, most offensive d-men are. If he's not getting PP time, he's not going to produce as much, that's exacerbated by the fact that we are a poor ES team. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out.
Carle is going to put up most of his points on the PP. In his best season in SJ, he put up 26 of his 42 points on the PP, that's 62%.
Last year, Kimmo put up 29 of his 44 points on the PP, that's 66%.
Last year, Lidstrom put up 34 of 70 points on the PP, around 50%.
Last year, Rafalski put up 31 of his 55 points on the PP, 56%.
Also, keep in mind that the Flyers are not a great ES team, in fact, they're pretty darn poor, so a lot of their scoring gets done on the PP.
Now, in Carle's best year, he spent an average of 4:36 per game on the first PP unit. That's not too much out of normal, Kimmo spends 4:26 per game on our PP unit.
By contrast, Carle spends 2:17 per game on the PP. That is a fairly significant drop.
So hypothetically, let's double Carle's time on the unit. He has an admittedly unimpressive 3 A on the PP so far. However, if we double his PP time, that becomes 6 A.
That would give him 12 points in 24 games, a 41 point pace although that's an admittedly small sample size.
This is a terribly simplistic argument...guys who are really good offensively earn PP time and produce on it? Shocking.
Fact of the matter is that Carle hasn't earned those minutes, even without Briere here. And the point of having an offensive defenseman is that they create and produce offense. The coulda, shoulda, and woulda argument is great and all, but ultimately the Flyers are paying 3.5M for something we haven't really gotten out of him yet. Now, he's certainly showed offensive flair, but not with the consistency that I would like to see.
However...if we double his time, and assume he'd score some more assists, then he'd be right on that pace...seriously?
Quote:
Personally, I am more worried about his defensive play and positioning than his point production. Carle is a PP defenseman, most offensive d-men are. If he's not getting PP time, he's not going to produce as much, that's exacerbated by the fact that we are a poor ES team. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out.
His defensive positioning is a grave concern. The way he plays right now is terrifying for a potential playoff series. If I were coaching against the Flyers and watching tape of Carle I'd be setting up some breakouts just looking to get breakaways on his side of the ice.
However, defending his production simply along the lines of team play is ridiculous. The reason you're an offensive defenseman is that you produce offense...the reason you get those guys is to help your team produce offense at even strength. If you're saying Carle isn't good enough to help us get offense at even strength...then that's a problem. He's getting 20+ minutes a night, and it isn't like with Timonen where he's getting tossed out there against the stiffest competition each night with the goal of keeping the puck out of our net.
Dude, the numbers are literally staring you in the face.
I mean, all offensive d-men produce at least 50% of their points on the PP, Kimmo Timonen, everyone's hero (as he should be), produces 2/3 of his points on the PP.
If Carle doesn't get PP time, then he's not going to produce as many points. Why is this hard to understand?
I mean, usually, your arguments are decent at least. But this is so utterly stupid. The numbers are staring you straight in the face.
And Carle is not the problem at ES, he's a +6 which is the best rating among d-men on the team besides Alberts.
Dude, the numbers are literally staring you in the face.
I mean, all offensive d-men produce at least 50% of their points on the PP, Kimmo Timonen, everyone's hero (as he should be), produces 2/3 of his points on the PP.
If Carle doesn't get PP time, then he's not going to produce as many points. Why is this hard to understand?
I mean, usually, your arguments are decent at least. But this is so utterly stupid. The numbers are staring you straight in the face.
And Carle is not the problem at ES, he's a +6 which is the best rating among d-men on the team besides Alberts.
None of which speaks to why Carle hasn't produced more points. He was getting time with the first unit when he first got here. He's in the same spot that Randy Jones was in last year on the depth chart...and producing at the same exact rate (despite more overall TOI).
The central issue in my argument is that 3.5M should be buying a bit more than Carle is producing. If you want to use his lack of PP time as the justifcation for the lack of production...my response would be that you pay a premium for PP defenseman...if Carle isn't fulfilling that role here, then that is inefficient use of cap space on our part, as we're paying for something that we don't need.
For 3.5M, we should be getting more out of Carle than we are. He's overpaid for what he's doing for the team right now...all your doing is citing reasons for why his production is what it is, and they can all be perfectly valuable. However, for 3.5M you should be getting a bit more than a cog who isn't hurting you. Is he horribly overpaid? No. If he was on Jones' contract I'd be perfectly fine with his contract...but 3.5M for someone his age, he's not worth that contract right now. The numbers are staring you in the face.
Produce or don't produce. If you're not getting PP minutes...you're not worth as much to your team.
carles positioning isnt great, ive watched him on a couple odd man rushes and wanted to cry....but i still hate jones more.
He's terrifying to watch defensively fairly frequently. My biggest gripe is the fact that he seems to so frequently let men get behind him in the neutral zone. On the upside, unlike Jones he doesn't seem to be big on retarded turnovers with the puck.
He makes up for it with some nice outlet passes that setup the rush going the other way. Unlike last year, he does give us another guy capable of playing at speed with the puck--something guys like Hatcher and Smith were woefully ill-prepared for.
Timonen - No brainer. He's a stud, there's no argument here. I'll also add that the following is all under the assumption that Timonen is the best at it unless otherwise noted.
Vaananen - defensively more positionally sound and more physical, but I think Carle is a better 1 on 1 defender, and brings a much better breakout pass (best on the team, in fact - his passes are so adept sometimes that his teammates don't see them and people think these are his turnovers - once the team starts realizing he's back there those magical "turnovers" will go down). He brings a better offesnive game, as well as slightly better footspeed (but minor in the overall). Carle also has a higher hockey IQ, IMO, but he does make mistakes from time to time. People think Vaananen is less prone to mistakes - which is only somewhat true - he's less prone to them because he has to be. He doesn't have the skill to try and make plays - that's not his game, so he's great at playing within himself, but it also affects his breakout and transition games and such. Easily our #3 though, IMO.
Coburn - Our best skating defenseman, and the one with the most potential - but struggles whenever he's not with Timonen. Shows me he's not capable to anchor a pair yet - in fact, Carle is the anchor on the Coburn/Carle pairing, which has to do with Carle's mental game a bit more. Coburn has the most tools to be the best - but his decision making leaves a lot to be desired. I think this will improve over time and he'll be our future #1.
Jones - Not as bad as some people make him out to be, but probably our worst turnover machine. He has the skill to be a second pair, no problem, but Carle's turnovers seem to be because he's trying to make something happen - when Jones turns it over, I'm wondering where he was trying to go with that. If he can work it out, he's fine. But, he's also overkill compared to the rest of the defense. He doesn't do anything that stands out when compared to them, which is why he's the most tradeable. Timonen is our best at most things. Vaananen is our most physical. Carle is our best transition guy. Coburn is our best skater. Jones doesn't do anything better than anybody else, and is still prone to mistakes. Everybody makes mistakes on the team - nobody is perfect. But Jones doesn't have a skill that isn't already covered by somebody better, and has the same issues.
The rest of the D have no argument so no point in discussing them.
These are my thoughts, anyway.
Well put, especially regarding Coburn and Vaananen.
None of which speaks to why Carle hasn't produced more points. He was getting time with the first unit when he first got here. He's in the same spot that Randy Jones was in last year on the depth chart...and producing at the same exact rate (despite more overall TOI).
The central issue in my argument is that 3.5M should be buying a bit more than Carle is producing. If you want to use his lack of PP time as the justifcation for the lack of production...my response would be that you pay a premium for PP defenseman...if Carle isn't fulfilling that role here, then that is inefficient use of cap space on our part, as we're paying for something that we don't need.
For 3.5M, we should be getting more out of Carle than we are. He's overpaid for what he's doing for the team right now...all your doing is citing reasons for why his production is what it is, and they can all be perfectly valuable. However, for 3.5M you should be getting a bit more than a cog who isn't hurting you. Is he horribly overpaid? No. If he was on Jones' contract I'd be perfectly fine with his contract...but 3.5M for someone his age, he's not worth that contract right now. The numbers are staring you in the face.
Produce or don't produce. If you're not getting PP minutes...you're not worth as much to your team.
I really, really doubt any 23 year old defenseman is going to uproot Kimmo Timonen on the point. I think you're being way, way to critical.
There's absolutely no way. Timonen doesn't produce much at even strength either, just like the rest of the defense.
On the PP point, Carle and Timonen are similar in style - they QB it. They shouldn't both be on it to gether, because that's redundant. The reason Coburn is on it is because of his shot, not his ability as a QB or some magical untapped offensive ability.
I really think you have an extremely warped expectation for defensemen - Timonen is awesome but is also double the cost of Carle, or close to it. If he's not better at it, then we'd all be *****ing about Timonen. He better be our best defenseman - expecting the rest of the defense to play mistake-free, perfect hockey would require us to be paying them like such. It doesn't happen. We can't have 6 Timonens back there.
If you're not paying a guy all-star money, he's probably not going to be at an all-star level at everything like you seem to expect.
shoudl have kept eminger, they judged him to early. cant tell me that carle has been head and shoulders better than eminger. cold have used that 3.5mm this summer on somethng much better than carle
shoudl have kept eminger, they judged him to early. cant tell me that carle has been head and shoulders better than eminger. cold have used that 3.5mm this summer on somethng much better than carle
