HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

Matt Carle Appreciation Thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-23-2011, 10:05 PM
  #26
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,252
vCash: 156
When he's not creating heinous turnovers that lead to goals...

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2011, 11:00 PM
  #27
WeekendAtBernies
Registered User
 
WeekendAtBernies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,716
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by usahockey22flyers View Post
+262102352936862342342

One of the best passers on the team for sure.
You neglected to insert the fact that lots of his passes end up on the sticks of the opposing team, who then deposit the puck into the back of our net.

WeekendAtBernies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 12:24 AM
  #28
fauxflex
Registered User
 
fauxflex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandlansd View Post
You neglected to insert the fact that lots of his passes end up on the sticks of the opposing team, who then deposit the puck into the back of our net.
Yes, I think this is the major issue with Carle; defensive zone turnovers, which are usually very noticeable and often impactful. If he can manage to minimize his D zone brain farts with the puck he'd go a long way in silencing his critics as the rest of his game is decent. Another thing he could do is be more physical in his own zone, standing some people up at the blueline and marking them harder in and around the net, but if he can just avoid the egregious turnover I'd take it!

fauxflex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 05:51 AM
  #29
usahockey22flyers
Classic Coburn...
 
usahockey22flyers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New Jersey, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandlansd View Post
You neglected to insert the fact that lots of his passes end up on the sticks of the opposing team, who then deposit the puck into the back of our net.
Do you have stats too back up your argument? Or are you going off of two bad games in a row last year or two years ago?

usahockey22flyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 07:03 AM
  #30
VanSciver
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,302
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=sandlansd;38362941]Honestly, I hope this is a joke...

He has still been terribly defensively, he has still had quite a few giveaways, a few lucky goals where he just happens to be in the right place and is the beneficiary of others' great plays (in the case of last night's goal, Voracek and Briere) doesn't make up for that.

But yes, Coburn has been worse. And unfortuantely, Lilja has been worse than both of them combined.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandlansd View Post
You neglected to insert the fact that lots of his passes end up on the sticks of the opposing team, who then deposit the puck into the back of our net.
You start off with this is a joke and then make these laughable posts? Which couldn't be further than the actual truth of Carle as a player.

Provide some proof, with any metric that you want to use, to substantiate these opinions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by usahockey22flyers View Post
Do you have stats too back up your argument? Or are you going off of two bad games in a row last year or two years ago?
No he doesn't have any. It's just an uninformed opinion.

VanSciver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 08:00 AM
  #31
VanSciver
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fauxflex View Post
Yes, I think this is the major issue with Carle; defensive zone turnovers, which are usually very noticeable and often impactful. If he can manage to minimize his D zone brain farts with the puck he'd go a long way in silencing his critics as the rest of his game is decent. Another thing he could do is be more physical in his own zone, standing some people up at the blueline and marking them harder in and around the net, but if he can just avoid the egregious turnover I'd take it!
Carle doesn't turn the puck over any more than any defenseman who handles the puck as much as he does. Carle is very good with the puck, and make the right play the overwhelming majority of the time. And all of the factual information and metrics backs that up.

VanSciver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 08:38 AM
  #32
dats81
Registered User
 
dats81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Carinthia
Country: Austria
Posts: 2,000
vCash: 500
Matt Carle is a decent puck mover that can be very effective when backed up by a solid partner.
He is not a franchise player like Pronger but that's not his projection. Based on his skillset he is doing well.

I understand that we all have high expectations and as long as this team does not win the cup, Matt Carle will remain the subject of speculation and trade talks...

dats81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 09:30 AM
  #33
phillyfanatic
Registered User
 
phillyfanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,631
vCash: 500
Matt Carle gets no love which is BS. Until last year it was "he is insulated by Pronger", but.....no Pronger last year......no problem, still led the team in +/- playing on the top unit against the other teams best. The pairing of Pronger/Carle is as solid a pairing as there is in the eastern conference. He is our top +/- guy this year, was last year, was #2 behind his partner Pronger the previous year.....see a trend?

This is just like the whole "Giroux is weak defensively" garbage. People talk about it as if it is fact, but the stats and the results do not support your argument. The one turnover every 3 or 4 games is all you focus on, but the 100-200 passes in between that land in a good position pushing the Flyers up ice quickly and out of trouble effectively? No mention. Curious.....Curious indeed.

Show me ANYTHING concrete to say Matt Carle is not a good D-man. Some feel the Flyers have the BEST D-core in the NHL, Matt Carle is on our top unit and deserves to be there. So, he is a legit #2 Defenseman on one of the best D-units in the NHL.

If you give me the choice of Carle versus Coburn, it is Carle all day long, twice on Sunday.

phillyfanatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 09:52 AM
  #34
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,252
vCash: 156
Actually, giroux has looked much worse on defense this year without carter around to shoulder the load. Not the best example

Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 09:55 AM
  #35
Larry44
FlyersTankNation
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,050
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillyfanatic View Post
Matt Carle gets no love which is BS. Until last year it was "he is insulated by Pronger", but.....no Pronger last year......no problem, still led the team in +/- playing on the top unit against the other teams best. The pairing of Pronger/Carle is as solid a pairing as there is in the eastern conference. He is our top +/- guy this year, was last year, was #2 behind his partner Pronger the previous year.....see a trend?

This is just like the whole "Giroux is weak defensively" garbage. People talk about it as if it is fact, but the stats and the results do not support your argument. The one turnover every 3 or 4 games is all you focus on, but the 100-200 passes in between that land in a good position pushing the Flyers up ice quickly and out of trouble effectively? No mention. Curious.....Curious indeed.

Show me ANYTHING concrete to say Matt Carle is not a good D-man. Some feel the Flyers have the BEST D-core in the NHL, Matt Carle is on our top unit and deserves to be there. So, he is a legit #2 Defenseman on one of the best D-units in the NHL.

If you give me the choice of Carle versus Coburn, it is Carle all day long, twice on Sunday.
I don't know if I'd choose Coburn over Carle, we need both. And it depends if you're replacing Timonen or Pronger..

People harp on his turnovers, but if you did a 'touches to turnovers' ratio, which would be much more useful a stat than give-takeaways, it would reflect well on Matt.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.h...ewName=summary

Carle is second to Pronger in points and TOI.

Leads the D at +5.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.h...tssPlayerStats

Carle is right in with the top 5 team on giveaways, takeaways, etc. He's low on blocked shots and hits, but that's his game. He's not as physical as some of the others, but he logs lots of ice.

Larry44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 09:57 AM
  #36
VanSciver
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillyfanatic View Post
Matt Carle gets no love which is BS. Until last year it was "he is insulated by Pronger", but.....no Pronger last year......no problem, still led the team in +/- playing on the top unit against the other teams best. The pairing of Pronger/Carle is as solid a pairing as there is in the eastern conference. He is our top +/- guy this year, was last year, was #2 behind his partner Pronger the previous year.....see a trend?

This is just like the whole "Giroux is weak defensively" garbage. People talk about it as if it is fact, but the stats and the results do not support your argument. The one turnover every 3 or 4 games is all you focus on, but the 100-200 passes in between that land in a good position pushing the Flyers up ice quickly and out of trouble effectively? No mention. Curious.....Curious indeed.

Show me ANYTHING concrete to say Matt Carle is not a good D-man. Some feel the Flyers have the BEST D-core in the NHL, Matt Carle is on our top unit and deserves to be there. So, he is a legit #2 Defenseman on one of the best D-units in the NHL.

If you give me the choice of Carle versus Coburn, it is Carle all day long, twice on Sunday.
Your description of Carle's play is 100% accurate. The only thing is , I don't know if I would label him a #2 defenseman. I would label him a top 4 puck moving defenseman who is a solid defender. So he's a quality all around top 4 D man. Many don't appreciate or recognize the value of moving the puck from defense to offense, and how critical that is in today's skating game. And Carle is very good in that area. And he's solid in his own end. And contributes at a high leve offensively.

I like all 3 of the Flyers younger D men. The each has key elements in their game.

VanSciver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 09:59 AM
  #37
VanSciver
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry44 View Post
I don't know if I'd choose Coburn over Carle, we need both. And it depends if you're replacing Timonen or Pronger..

People harp on his turnovers, but if you did a 'touches to turnovers' ratio, which would be much more useful a stat than give-takeaways, it would reflect well on Matt.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.h...ewName=summary

Carle is second to Pronger in points and TOI.

Leads the D at +5.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.h...tssPlayerStats

Carle is right in with the top 5 team on giveaways, takeaways, etc. He's low on blocked shots and hits, but that's his game. He's not as physical as some of the others, but he logs lots of ice.
Good post. I just want to mention that Carle is a very good shot blocker, which point s to how well he play positionally and reads plays in his own end.

VanSciver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 10:35 AM
  #38
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,217
vCash: 5775
+/- is the worst way to determine how someone has played defensively.

Carle has done well to start this season, which isn't unlike the past few seasons. He already has more than 1 goal, which he was bound to do given that his shooting percentage last year was under 1%.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 11:57 AM
  #39
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,281
vCash: 500
I think since we are throwing out stats, we might as well use them all.

All the stats you will find below are found on the website behind the net, which is very good in regards to individual stats from each player.

Now Im just going to focus on the defenders and how they rank among the team:

First is how they match against quality of components. Remember in this case, the higher the number = the better opponents they have faced so far in 7 games.

QUALCOMP Rankings
Quote:
Chris Pronger: .288
Kimmo Timonen: .207
Matt Carle: .060
Braydon Coburn: .042
Andre Meszaros:-.032
Adreas Lilja: -.122
As you can see, Timonen and Pronger face stronger opponents. Carle and Coburn face just about the same quality of opponents.

Quality Of Teammates (QUALTEAM):

Quote:
Pronger: .514
Carle: .271
Lilja: -.007
Meszaros: -.066
Timonen: -.118
Coburn: -.267
As we see here, Pronger and Carle are matched up with mostly high quality teammates while Lilja and Meszaros have been getting average quality of teammates and Timonen and Coburn poor quality.


Now where this information comes into play:

Corsi Rel QoC (Relative to Quality of Competition)


Quote:
Pronger: 1.761
Timonen: .743
Coburn:.658
Carle: .241
Meszaros: .144
Lilja: -1.053
Corsi Quality of Competition:

Quote:
Timonen: 5.717
Pronger: 5.513
Carle: 4.712
Coburn: 4.516
Meszaros: 4.193
Lilja: 2.234


Corsi Relative to Quality of Teammates:

Quote:
Pronger: 3.725
Timonen: 1.349
Carle: 1.210
Coburn: .225
Lilja: -.642
Meszaros: -1.236
Corsi Quality of Teammates:

Quote:
Pronger: 1.353
Timonen: -.178
Carle: -.190
Coburn: -1.401
Lilja: -1.443
Meszaros: -1.634

If you dont quite understand what Corsi is, go here: http://www.japersrink.com/2008/10/br...si-number.html . It is a very interesting concept that alot of people dont know about.

What is interesting from these numbers is that, so far this season Pronger has been flat out dominate. Next to him in most categories is Timonen. Next comes Carle and Coburn. They are alot closer then many think.

sa cyred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 12:23 PM
  #40
flyersfan018
Registered User
 
flyersfan018's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,030
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
+/- is the worst way to determine how someone has played defensively.

Carle has done well to start this season, which isn't unlike the past few seasons. He already has more than 1 goal, which he was bound to do given that his shooting percentage last year was under 1%.
It's definitely not the be all end all stat; like say you were comparing someone who is a +5 to a +4. But +/- does over time tend to show you something. You're saying someone like Kovalchuk being a -26 last year had nothing to do with his defensive play?

flyersfan018 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 12:28 PM
  #41
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyersfan018 View Post
It's definitely not the be all end all stat; like say you were comparing someone who is a +5 to a +4. But +/- does over time tend to show you something. You're saying someone like Kovalchuk being a -26 last year had nothing to do with his defensive play?
I dont think it shows nothing about his defensive play, but who were his defenders at the time of all -26? Was their it their top defensive line or ahl scrubs? Quality of teammates are extremely important.

sa cyred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 12:38 PM
  #42
flyersfan018
Registered User
 
flyersfan018's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,030
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
I dont think it shows nothing about his defensive play, but who were his defenders at the time of all -26? Was their it their top defensive line or ahl scrubs? Quality of teammates are extremely important.
My point was that +/- isn't as important as some people think but at the same time you can't just throw it out when you're comparing two people.

flyersfan018 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 12:43 PM
  #43
sa cyred
Yea....the Flyers...
 
sa cyred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Traveling...
Country: Cuba
Posts: 15,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyersfan018 View Post
My point was that +/- isn't as important as some people think but at the same time you can't just throw it out when you're comparing two people.
Eh, I think it should be used minimally. Just go to the stats page on nhl.com and look at the +/- leaders for the past few seasons. Take some of the defenders near the top of the list and compare them to other defenders. Im at work right now, built I remember a few years ago, some random defender lead the league in +/- just because his offense provided points while he was out on the ice. It doesnt prove he is good defensively...just the offense was good offensively.

sa cyred is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 12:49 PM
  #44
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillyfanatic View Post
Show me ANYTHING concrete to say Matt Carle is not a good D-man. Some feel the Flyers have the BEST D-core in the NHL, Matt Carle is on our top unit and deserves to be there. So, he is a legit #2 Defenseman on one of the best D-units in the NHL.
The leap of logic here is so astoundingly, stupendously, awesomely dumb that it deserves applause.



Matt Carle is an unreliable 2nd pairing D with some offensive chops... who is *ing terrible on the PP.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 12:49 PM
  #45
DumpyD
Registered User
 
DumpyD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibbs18 View Post
His first goal he almost failed completley....

Quick dove over to try to save the puck and he had a whole left side of the net to shoot at but he puts it right in the middle of the net. Luckily it squeeked under Quick's arm...
Gagne made a career out of ugly goals like that.

DumpyD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 12:52 PM
  #46
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
Eh, I think it should be used minimally. Just go to the stats page on nhl.com and look at the +/- leaders for the past few seasons. Take some of the defenders near the top of the list and compare them to other defenders. Im at work right now, built I remember a few years ago, some random defender lead the league in +/- just because his offense provided points while he was out on the ice. It doesnt prove he is good defensively...just the offense was good offensively.
+/- is generally effective within the confines of a team, but useless to expand beyond that. Simply put, it is HEAVILY influenced by being on good teams. That being said, a lot of defensive stats are difficult to quantify comparatively team-to-team without a great deal of work to pay attention to a variety of stats all at once.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 01:01 PM
  #47
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,252
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred View Post
Eh, I think it should be used minimally. Just go to the stats page on nhl.com and look at the +/- leaders for the past few seasons. Take some of the defenders near the top of the list and compare them to other defenders. Im at work right now, built I remember a few years ago, some random defender lead the league in +/- just because his offense provided points while he was out on the ice. It doesnt prove he is good defensively...just the offense was good offensively.
Lidstrom was a -2 last year...so, yeah.

Beef Invictus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 01:23 PM
  #48
VanSciver
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,302
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
The leap of logic here is so astoundingly, stupendously, awesomely dumb that it deserves applause.



Matt Carle is an unreliable 2nd pairing D with some offensive chops... who is *ing terrible on the PP.
Do you have anything logical to back up the opinion that Carle is unreliable?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
+/- is generally effective within the confines of a team, but useless to expand beyond that. Simply put, it is HEAVILY influenced by being on good teams. That being said, a lot of defensive stats are difficult to quantify comparatively team-to-team without a great deal of work to pay attention to a variety of stats all at once.
Well how does a team get to be a good team? By having good players who play well together. And players like Carle contribute to a team being a good team. That's not to say that good players can't be on bad teams and have their +/- altered by that. Plus/minus is just one tool. And it says what it says. That good things happen when a player who is consistently a + player, is on the ice.

There seems to be a consistent theme here. I guarantee you that all the Carle bashers would use +/- to criticize him if he was a minus player.

VanSciver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 01:59 PM
  #49
Spongolium*
Potato Magician
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bridgend,UK
Country: Wales
Posts: 8,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
The leap of logic here is so astoundingly, stupendously, awesomely dumb that it deserves applause.



Matt Carle is an unreliable 2nd pairing D with some offensive chops... who is *ing terrible on the PP.
This

Spongolium* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-24-2011, 02:45 PM
  #50
DenverBoone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
The leap of logic here is so astoundingly, stupendously, awesomely dumb that it deserves applause.



Matt Carle is an unreliable 2nd pairing D with some offensive chops... who is *ing terrible on the PP.
Cmon man! Accuse others of leaping logic, then make a statement such as above which is not based in any sort of logic or support? Step your game up.

DenverBoone is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:54 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.