Year Player Team Pos GP Even: G A P Power Play: G A P Shorthanded: G A P GW OT PP TOI
06/07 Matt Carle SJS D 77 3 13 16 8 18 26 0 0 0 1 0 354:26
07/08 Matt Carle SJS D 62 0 7 7 2 6 8 0 0 0 1 0 194:07
08/09 Matt Carle TBL, PHI D 76 5 13 18 0 8 8 0 0 0 2 0 176:40
09/10 Matt Carle PHI D 80 4 17 21 2 12 14 0 0 0 1 0 201:32
10/11 Matt Carle PHI D 82 1 37 380 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 188:41
11/12 Matt Carle PHI D 82 1 25 26 3 9 12 0 0 0 0 0 216:23
Another "proving" thread with selected stats. I am not going to get into another marathon on the weakness of corsi, but I have an issue with the treating all shots the same.
Complaint about Carle 1: "Weak wristers into defenders shin pads"
Carle was a PP superstar his first year in San Jose. I tried to find all goals on youtube and could not, but I recall ones similar to the one he had in the playoffs when he pinched and roofed it. Where has that player gone?
Carle is supposed to be offensive. He led the league in ES points from D last season with 38. However, he had only 2 PP assists in 188:41 of ice time! This year, his PP numbers were better, but his ES points were 4 more than each of Timonen, Coburn and Meszaros.
So what are you going to get from Carle next season? Tons of ES points? Good PP numbers? For an "offensive" D man, he is inconsistent.
(Aside: selected stats are fun)
(Aside: weak wristers into shin pads lead to better Corsi numbers)
Complaint about Carle 2: "Inopportune Turnovers"
I don't see how you can "prove" this one without watching. Maybe Carle's gaffs are more visible to those that dislike him as compared to Meszaros and Coburn (new end of season Coburn seems to make less though). Total recorded giveaways do not tell the story here.
Complaint about Carle 3: "He is soft"
Watch.
-----
Carle is very good at the breakout and not as horrible as many fans think, but let's be a little realistic in these arguments. Some Carle supporters get a little overexcited when some Corsi numbers or BSH article are mentioned that their love of Carle has been "proven" correct and come out of the woodwork for some high fives.
Year Player Team Pos GP Even: G A P Power Play: G A P Shorthanded: G A P GW OT PP TOI
06/07 Matt Carle SJS D 77 3 13 16 8 18 26 0 0 0 1 0 354:26
07/08 Matt Carle SJS D 62 0 7 7 2 6 8 0 0 0 1 0 194:07
08/09 Matt Carle TBL, PHI D 76 5 13 18 0 8 8 0 0 0 2 0 176:40
09/10 Matt Carle PHI D 80 4 17 21 2 12 14 0 0 0 1 0 201:32
10/11 Matt Carle PHI D 82 1 37 380 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 188:41
11/12 Matt Carle PHI D 82 1 25 26 3 9 12 0 0 0 0 0 216:23
Another "proving" thread with selected stats. I am not going to get into another marathon on the weakness of corsi, but I have an issue with the treating all shots the same.
Complaint about Carle 1: "Weak wristers into defenders shin pads"
Carle was a PP superstar his first year in San Jose. I tried to find all goals on youtube and could not, but I recall ones similar to the one he had in the playoffs when he pinched and roofed it. Where has that player gone?
Carle is supposed to be offensive. He led the league in ES points from D last season with 38. However, he had only 2 PP assists in 188:41 of ice time! This year, his PP numbers were better, but his ES points were 4 more than each of Timonen, Coburn and Meszaros.
So what are you going to get from Carle next season? Tons of ES points? Good PP numbers? For an "offensive" D man, he is inconsistent.
(Aside: selected stats are fun)
(Aside: weak wristers into shin pads lead to better Corsi numbers)
Complaint about Carle 2: "Inopportune Turnovers"
I don't see how you can "prove" this one without watching. Maybe Carle's gaffs are more visible to those that dislike him as compared to Meszaros and Coburn (new end of season Coburn seems to make less though). Total recorded giveaways do not tell the story here.
Complaint about Carle 3: "He is soft"
Watch.
-----
Carle is very good at the breakout and not as horrible as many fans think, but let's be a little realistic in these arguments. Some Carle supporters get a little overexcited when some Corsi numbers or BSH article are mentioned that their love of Carle has been "proven" correct and come out of the woodwork for some high fives.
Excellent points. Other than an elite few no defenseman does all things well, and Carle does several things for the Flyers. Most offensive defenseman/defenseman tasked with starting the break out turn the puck over sometimes. Unless it's Lidstrom or someone like that they're going to turn the puck over. Not all defesemen need to be able to rip the puck from the point. This is where defensive partners can be key to making each other look good. Pair him with a guy who does have a good shot (such as when he was with Pronger) and suddenly people are not complaining so much about the quaility of Carle's point shot.
Excellent points. Other than an elite few no defenseman does all things well, and Carle does several things for the Flyers. Most offensive defenseman/defenseman tasked with starting the break out turn the puck over sometimes. Unless it's Lidstrom or someone like that they're going to turn the puck over.
Carle starts it at times, but how often does he really carry the puck up ice and hit a forward on the fly or deposit it into the attack zone? He usually starts behind the net...then passes to Timonen (or Pronger) who then carries, or he sits there and makes a relatively risky pass up ice...his turnovers seem a little frequent for someone who isn't actually carrying the puck up ice more than he does. He should skate more to start the breaks...push the other team back and open up passing lanes. He does it once in a great while. A guy like Suter does it every game. Carle is put in a good position, getting nice minutes surrounded by very talented players who produce. He can't help but put up some numbers that make him look good...a guy like Suter would make a lot more out of the minutes and opportunities that Carle currently gets, improving things at both ends. Letting Carle walk and getting Suter would be a nice move, obviously. If Suter can't happen, then signing Carle (hopefully to a modest deal) might just have to be done...but it would be settling in a sense.
As someone who once posted that "Andreas Nodl is an absolutely key player for the Flyers", it's funny to see you post about credibility.
Feel free to post a link to the comment. And then we'll discuss it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fauxflex
Carle starts it at times, but how often does he really carry the puck up ice and hit a forward on the fly or deposit it into the attack zone? He usually starts behind the net...then passes to Timonen (or Pronger) who then carries, or he sits there and makes a relatively risky pass up ice...his turnovers seem a little frequent for someone who isn't actually carrying the puck up ice more than he does. He should skate more to start the breaks...push the other team back and open up passing lanes. He does it once in a great while. A guy like Suter does it every game. Carle is put in a good position, getting nice minutes surrounded by very talented players who produce. He can't help but put up some numbers that make him look good...a guy like Suter would make a lot more out of the minutes and opportunities that Carle currently gets, improving things at both ends. Letting Carle walk and getting Suter would be a nice move, obviously. If Suter can't happen, then signing Carle (hopefully to a modest deal) might just have to be done...but it would be settling in a sense.
Timonen Suter
Grossman Coburn
Mez Bourdon/Gusty
.
You talk about credibility and then you make comments like these. So Carle puts up numbers by being sorounded by very talented players who produce. And he can't help but put up numbers that make him look good? Is that seriously what your offering? LOL. C'mon you have to at least offer something that can at least be thought about without laughing. Good let's put Gustafsson in that spot and see how he produces. And no Carle should not skate more to start the breaks. Passing the puck is far more efficient and quicker to start the breaks. You obviously have a lack of knowledge of breakout systems based on your comments. And you have a bias against Carle. This is the nonsense you get from most Carle detractors. Fantasy made up, not based on any facts. And can't be backed up by any reasonable thought.
Feel free to post a link to the comment. And then we'll discuss it.
Well, I can't find that particular quote at the moment, but I recall it pretty distinctly. In lieu of that, I'll post what I did find so far on the topic:
"I'm telling you that I think Nodl is going to be a solid NHL Winger with 20 goal potential at the high end, and is a much better player than Wellwood. "
You talk about credibility and then you make comments like these. So Carle puts up numbers by being sorounded by very talented players who produce. And he can't help but put up numbers that make him look good? Is that seriously what your offering? LOL. C'mon you have to at least offer something that can at least be thought about without laughing. Good let's put Gustafsson in that spot and see how he produces. And no Carle should not skate more to start the breaks. Passing the puck is far more efficient and quicker to start the breaks. You obviously have a lack of knowledge of breakout systems based on your comments. And you have a bias against Carle. This is the nonsense you get from most Carle detractors. Fantasy made up, not based on any facts. And can't be backed up by any reasonable thought.
Passing the puck would be a great option, if it wasn't passsed to the opposing team's player! He should move his feet more and come out more, like Timonen like Suter like a puck moving D man should be doing. We'll just agree to disagree.
Well, I can't find that particular quote at the moment, but I recall it pretty distinctly. In lieu of that, I'll post what I did find so far on the topic:
"I'm telling you that I think Nodl is going to be a solid NHL Winger with 20 goal potential at the high end, and is a much better player than Wellwood. "
Passing the puck would be a great option, if it wasn't passsed to the opposing team's player! He should move his feet more and come out more, like Timonen like Suter like a puck moving D man should be doing. We'll just agree to disagree.
So go talk to the guy who posted that on another website. LOL
Let's discuss giveaways. And bring some facts to the table. Again, another stupid comment which is again not backed up by any facts.
Well, I can't find that particular quote at the moment, but I recall it pretty distinctly. In lieu of that, I'll post what I did find so far on the topic:
"I'm telling you that I think Nodl is going to be a solid NHL Winger with 20 goal potential at the high end, and is a much better player than Wellwood. "
Passing the puck would be a great option, if it wasn't passsed to the opposing team's player! He should move his feet more and come out more, like Timonen like Suter like a puck moving D man should be doing. We'll just agree to disagree.
Another lazy and uninformed argument. It is convenient to ignore a complete body of work over an 82 game season, and, like the rest of the herd on here, focus on the giveaway rather than the mutlitude of other passes/breakouts that Matt successfully executes.
Another lazy and uninformed argument. It is convenient to ignore a complete body of work over an 82 game season, and, like the rest of the herd on here, focus on the giveaway rather than the mutlitude of other passes/breakouts that Matt successfully executes.
so the brain farts/stupid plays are offset by the positive plays he does ??
you mean the plays/pass' hes fricken EXPECTED to do !!!
hahah, saying that Carle is ok, because he sometimes doesnt pass directly to the opposing players is a laffable arguement..
It's pretty obvious to anyone who's read these forums that there are a few vehement defenders of Carle:
VanSciver
DenverBoone
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.
Last edited by Bort Sampson: 05-15-2012 at 05:58 PM.
Another lazy and uninformed argument. It is convenient to ignore a complete body of work over an 82 game season, and, like the rest of the herd on here, focus on the giveaway rather than the mutlitude of other passes/breakouts that Matt successfully executes.
It's par for the course on here. Ignore all the facts, and have your opinion regardless. Even when all the facts, all the metrics. All the articles written about Carle says otherwise. The Carle detractors still hold fast to their fantasy arguments. I've asked this many times of the Carle detractors. Find me one credible analyst or writer that agrees with them on Carle. They can't produce it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyerfan4life
so the brain farts/stupid plays are offset by the positive plays he does ??
you mean the plays/pass' hes fricken EXPECTED to do !!!
hahah, saying that Carle is ok, because he sometimes doesnt pass directly to the opposing players is a laffable arguement..
the dude flat out sucks..end of discussion..
I'll tell you what. Ignore completely the game of Hockey. And just use simple common sense. Something that you use every day to make simple decisions. Not this is something a 10 year old can figure out. If Carle flat out sucks. Why do the Flyers Coaches play him 23-25 minutes a game, every game? And why is Holmgren looking to resign him for somewhere in the neighborhood of 5M a year, in a multi year deal? Why don't they know that Carle flat out sucks?
So asking those simple questions. Which don't require, lucky for you. Any knowledge of the game of Hockey whatsoever. Why doesn't Flyers management and Coaching staff think the same thing about Carle as you do.
Using simple common sense, it's pretty easy to decipher who doesn't have the first clue!
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.
Well then it's pretty obvious you've never played the game. Because Carle is solid in his positioning defensively. And unlike what you didn't do, I'll provide the evidence. Carle is one of the top shot blockers in the League, and is the top shot blocker on his team. Which proves that he's solid in his positioning in his own end. If you need the exact figures, I'll gladly provide them for you. Because unlike you, I deal in the facts. How can someone who claims to have played the game, make the statement that Carle can't play in the top 4? When he obviously does and has, for a number of years now. You watch the games you can clearly see that Carle isn't easily knocked off the puck. And if you look at the advanced stats, the refute every statement you've made. And your other comments such as about Carle moving up the boards or following the wrong man, shows that you clearly don't understand basic defensive zone coverage. Nor do you understand the Flyers defensive zone system. Just like another poster who says that Carle just passes the puck to another defenseman, and is incapable of recognizing a basic D to D breakout that is by design. It's laughable what you read on here. It really is. So it's one of two things. Either you have an unreasonable bias against the player. Or you simply don't know what your talking about. So which is it?
If you want me to listen to a valid argument. Well then the first step is to make one. And you've failed to do so. I need some facts to back up these statements. You didn't offer a single one.
And I think your going to find in the very near future, that Paul Holmgren does not agree with you.
Well then it's pretty obvious you've never played the game. Because Carle is solid in his positioning defensively. And unlike what you didn't do, I'll provide the evidence. Carle is one of the top shot blockers in the League, and is the top shot blocker on his team. Which proves that he's solid in his positioning in his own end. If you need the exact figures, I'll gladly provide them for you. Because unlike you, I deal in the facts. How can someone who claims to have played the game, make the statement that Carle can't play in the top 4? When he obviously does and has, for a number of years now. You watch the games you can clearly see that Carle isn't easily knocked off the puck. And if you look at the advanced stats, the refute every statement you've made. So it's one of two things. Either you have an unreasonable bias against the player. Or you simply don't know what your talking about. So which is it?
If you want me to listen to a valid argument. Well then the first step is to make one. And you've failed to do so. I need some facts to back up these statements. You didn't offer a single one.
And I think your going to find in the very near future, that Paul Holmgren does not agree with you.
Just to show you something that's common knowledge, teams don't play man-to-man defense. Teams have tried and failed, because it doesn't work, at all. Here's an article about Byslma trying it out. It didn't work for them, the players didn't like it, and it only worked because they have good defensive forwards.
You really have no idea what you're talking about, WOW.
You keep saying you have facts to refute all of my statements, but all you offered up was Shots Blocked?
Also, the bold in your statement is the reason why we're talking about the Flyers right now, rather than watching them.
Also, I've played the game before. I have the PCS, broken teeth and scars to prove it.
You know nothing of the game itself, enjoy your statistics.
Your statements certainly don't back up that you've played the game.
Prove to me that the reason were talking about the Flyers right now, rather then watching them, is due to Carle?
If a player is not good positionally defensively, he couldn't possibly be that good of a shot blocker. But you've played the game. Well then why don't you know that? LOL
I'll put it on the line, quite simply. Back up your statements. Find me a credible NHL analyst or blogger that agrees with you. That offers a factual argument that echoes your opinion. And post it on here.
And I'll do the same. I'll post article after article, with factual evidence, that backs up my stance on Carle.
Are you game? Put your money where your mouth is.
And to respond to your edit. yes teams do play man to man in the defensive zone. Yuo might want to read your own article again.
By the way, when you respond with the "hahaha's". Well that's pretty much a dead giveway.
And here's a few quotes from the article you linked, copied and pasted. Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Your telling me that NHL teams don't play man to man defense, and post a link to an article about Bylsma installing a man to man defense. Well done!
"One reason why the man-to-man system works is because it prevents scrambling."
"Ultimately, the man-to-man system generates so much pressure that the offense cannot string passes together. This results in a turnover."
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.
I know a lot of the game itself. Your statements certainly don't back up that you've played the game.
Prove to me that the reason were talking about the Flyers right now, rather then watching them, is due to Carle?
If a player is not good positionally defensively, he couldn't possibly be that good of a shot blocker. But you've played the game. Well then why don't you know that? LOL
I'll put it on the line, quite simply. Back up your statements. Find me a credible NHL analyst or blogger that agrees with you. That offers a factual argument that echoes your opinion. And post it on here.
And I'll do the same. I'll post article after article, with factual evidence, that backs up my stance on Carle.
Are you game? Put your money where your mouth is.
And to respond to your edit. yes teams do play man to man in the defensive zone. Yuo might want to read your own article again.
By the way, when you respond with the "hahaha's". Well that's pretty much a dead giveway.
HAHAHAHAHA
The Flyers don't play man-to-man, barely any teams do, it's dependent on a number of different factors (chemistry, experience together, individual defensive skill, defensive forwards, etc.). The Flyers don't touch that system with a ten-foot pole.
Don't reply to me anymore, please, I'm here to talk about hockey with people that know hockey.
Quote:
Originally Posted by usahockey22flyers
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.
My bad, I took a hiatus from all media during the playoffs and haven't been around here lately, haven't noticed posting trends as a result.
I'll edit out your name.
As to your question, I think it has to be one of Coburn or Carle, but strictly by default. The other defensemen were too old/hurt/young to contribute and be relied upon. Carle and Coburn were the anchors of the top-4, which unfortunately, just wasn't very good.
Last edited by Bort Sampson: 05-15-2012 at 05:57 PM.
The Flyers don't play man-to-man, barely any teams do, it's dependent on a number of different factors (chemistry, experience together, individual defensive skill, defensive forwards, etc.). The Flyers don't touch that system with a ten-foot pole.
Don't reply to me anymore, please, I'm here to talk about hockey with people that know hockey.
Yes, the Flyers do play some man to man defensively. I offered you a direct challenge. To back up your statements and provide any article or blog of a credible analyst that agrees with you. Step to the plate.
Now that I've thrown it back in your face, you don't want me to reply to you anymore. Why is that? You replied to me. Prove me wrong! Here is your big chance. To show me how much you know about Hockey. I'll be waiting.
Yes, the Flyers do play some man to man defensively. I offered you a direct challenge. To back up your statements and provide any article or blog of a credible analyst that agrees with you. Step to the plate.
Now that I've thrown it back in your face, you don't want me to reply to you anymore. Why is that? You replied to me. Prove me wrong! Here is your big chance. To show me how much you know about Hockey. I'll be waiting.
Or you could just go with another hahahaha.
The Flyers don't play man-to-man, it's pretty obvious. Have you ever seen them play within their own zone? It's traditional zone coverage: 1 d-man in the corner with center support, 1 d-man in front of the net. That's how you play defense. Man-to-man didn't work that year for Bylsma, and the Pens don't do it anymore. It just doesn't make sense, as it's prone to...just about everything an opposing coach would do once he recognized it.
Bolded: Because you have no idea what you're talking about, and I'm not going to waste my time.
Asking for an article or blog to prove every single point is absurd.
Where is your wealth of articles and blogs that prove Carle's worth? Asking someone to show how much they know about hockey by blindly following what the media says doesn't make sense either. Anybody can parrot back quotes from writers. Analyzing them for their merit and thinking about them critically takes some understanding of the game though. Blindly accepting everything written at face value is useless.
__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Because you have no idea what you're talking about, and I'm not going to waste my time.
Also, lol
If I don't know what I'm talking about, then it shouldn't be too hard to prove me wrong. So what's the problem? Clearly you've played the game. LOL
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Invictus
Asking for an article or blog to prove every single point is absurd.
Where is your wealth of articles and blogs that prove Carle's worth?
I'm just looking for one article, or any kind of proof by any metric, any bit of factual evidence from any of the Carle detractors, that backs up their statements. Anything. If what they say is true, it has to be out there.
Wow, honestly, you might be watching the wrong team if you think the Flyers play a man to man defensive system. Also dont care about quoting online newspapers so dont ask for it.
I missed saying "NHL Analysis Bill Meltzer" and now that VanSciver is back I can say it wootttt.
Asking for an article or blog to prove every single point is absurd.
Where is your wealth of articles and blogs that prove Carle's worth? Asking someone to show how much they know about hockey by blindly following what the media says doesn't make sense either. Anybody can parrot back quotes from writers. Analyzing them for their merit and thinking about them critically takes some understanding of the game though. Blindly accepting everything written at face value is useless.
There are plenty of articles out there that offer statistical and factual data to support their conclusion. Where is the factual data to support your conclusions? Typical of this site. You ignore the facts.
Wow, honestly, you might be watching the wrong team if you think the Flyers play a man to man defensive system. Also dont care about quoting online newspapers so dont ask for it.
They absolutely do play man to man at times in the defensive zone. I love guys like you. Offer something like this and can't back it up. Want to review highlights of games, and see how they play man to man?
There are plenty of articles out there that offer statistical and factual data to support their conclusion. Where is the factual data to support your conclusions? Typical of this site. You ignore the facts.
