HFBoards

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

Should Flyers have kept Carle?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-08-2012, 12:14 AM
  #26
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,518
vCash: 5500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Invictus View Post
Over the course of 82 games, the Flyers' offense was demonstrably more effective whenever Carle wasn't on the ice. Goals were scored at a higher rate when he was on the bench. It's not luck when it occurs over the course of an entire season...that's a trend.

I've got a post spelling it out in the other Carle offseason thread. I'm going to bed but I'll dig it up tomorrow if I remember/feel like it.
Carle moves the puck up more effectively than Coburn. We see the scoring chances while Player X is on the ice. It's not Carle's fault if someone else blows the scoring chance, the fact is that he's on the ice for them, and if the team is constantly producing scoring chances while you're on the ice, which with Carle they did.

Coburn had a better QOT and PDO than Carle, which could easily account for the difference. Carle and Timonen were the only defensemen (40 games played) who had a positive Corsi Rel, while everyone else (including Coburn) was a negative, though the difference is close, but regardless other people would use to demonstrate that the Flyers were better with Carle on the ice, and not better with Coburn on the ice in terms of controlling the play.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 12:21 AM
  #27
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,905
vCash: 156
If the Flyers were worse offensively when Coburn was on the ice compared to Carle, why did Coburn out-produce Carle at even strength? (I think. I'm going off memory and I haven't looked in like two months, so I might be wrong, apologies.)

Don't forget, Carle's shot is essentially not a threat unless he pinches in close or gets lucky bounces. That makes him a one dimensional player...he has to rely on passing. One dimensional players are easier to defend against. The team's actual production while he's on the ice reflects that...they didn't perform as well. You can choose to ignore the actual results in favor of chances, but chances don't win. Goals scored do, and the team scored less goals with Carle playing.

Chalking it up to "lack of luck despite more ice time in 82 games" isn't a satisfying answer for me. Bad luck happens, but it averages out (at least partially) over time...it doesn't last for 82 games.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 01:21 AM
  #28
GoneFullHextall
adios Holmgren
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 30,710
vCash: 50
5.5 is too much money for me per season. Even if some feel he "deserved" that raise.
I am sure he will pile up the assists if he gets out there with Stamkos and Vinny but its the other side of the puck is where I would be concerned.
5.5 at 6 years isnt a good contract for Carle at all.

GoneFullHextall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 03:15 AM
  #29
BillDineen
Registered User
 
BillDineen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,657
vCash: 500
Flyers needed a No. 1 and still do. Now they need a stop gap until Mesz returns. Carle is neither of those things. He is a overpayed 2-4 defenseman.

BillDineen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 04:17 AM
  #30
TheDrizzle81
Registered User
 
TheDrizzle81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Marlton NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,357
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to TheDrizzle81
Not wit that deal. No. Way.

TheDrizzle81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 04:32 AM
  #31
dats81
Registered User
 
dats81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Carinthia
Country: Austria
Posts: 2,050
vCash: 500
Same as with Jagr:

A very servicable player in the right role. Homer decided to go for a real upgrade und refused to sign him right at the begin of the offseason. Player - or his management - does not want to wait, wants to test the waters and signs somewhere else.

Can't blame Homer for how this all evolved.

dats81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 08:44 AM
  #32
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,518
vCash: 5500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Invictus View Post
If the Flyers were worse offensively when Coburn was on the ice compared to Carle, why did Coburn out-produce Carle at even strength? (I think. I'm going off memory and I haven't looked in like two months, so I might be wrong, apologies.)

Don't forget, Carle's shot is essentially not a threat unless he pinches in close or gets lucky bounces. That makes him a one dimensional player...he has to rely on passing. One dimensional players are easier to defend against. The team's actual production while he's on the ice reflects that...they didn't perform as well. You can choose to ignore the actual results in favor of chances, but chances don't win. Goals scored do, and the team scored less goals with Carle playing.

Chalking it up to "lack of luck despite more ice time in 82 games" isn't a satisfying answer for me. Bad luck happens, but it averages out (at least partially) over time...it doesn't last for 82 games.

We can start here:

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_time_...4+25+26+27+28#

Most common teammate:
Braydon Coburn -- Kimmo Timonen (NHL All-Star)
Matt Carle -- Marc-Andre Bourdon (not guaranteed a spot on the NHL roster)

Significant difference.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 08:46 AM
  #33
thelos
Bunk
 
thelos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,610
vCash: 500
Carle is a soft offensive defenseman with mediocre speed and a horrible shot that can't run a PP. Not a combo that helps us in any way at all

thelos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 09:20 AM
  #34
Protest
C`est La Vie
 
Protest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Deptford, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BernieParent View Post
As long as he's a 3.

I don't miss Carle under the circumstances, and I fully approve what Holmgren tried this off-season. They just need to call the Vatican and get in an exorcist for this franchise.
The Vatican can't help them... Only Keanu Reeves can help them.

Protest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 10:16 AM
  #35
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,905
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
We can start here:

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_time_...4+25+26+27+28#

Most common teammate:
Braydon Coburn -- Kimmo Timonen (NHL All-Star)
Matt Carle -- Marc-Andre Bourdon (not guaranteed a spot on the NHL roster)

Significant difference.
MAB played 45 games to Carle's 82. MAB averaged 16 minutes a night to Carle's 23. One would expect Carle to raise his GFON/60 during his time without MAB, if MAB was hampering him...but he doesn't. MAB's GFON/60 is slightly higher than Carle's.

At the absolute most, Carle spent less than half (46%) of his season with MAB. MAB doesn't completely account for the drop in offensive numbers while Carle was playing, and if somehow he does it only serves to back up my claim that Carle isn't fit to anchor a pairing because he's a secondary-role player.

Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 10:26 AM
  #36
goodrev
Registered User
 
goodrev's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 367
vCash: 500
no, Especially for what he got paid.

goodrev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 11:38 AM
  #37
Spongolium*
Potato Magician
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bridgend,UK
Country: Wales
Posts: 8,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
We can start here:

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_time_...4+25+26+27+28#

Most common teammate:
Braydon Coburn -- Kimmo Timonen (NHL All-Star)
Matt Carle -- Marc-Andre Bourdon (not guaranteed a spot on the NHL roster)

Significant difference.
Oh look, the stat skewer.

Go look up Carles zone starts, and how he was used. Corsi is your favourite one right? Go look at his quality of competition.

Spongolium* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 01:11 PM
  #38
Flyerfan4life
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Richmond BC, Canada
Country: England
Posts: 12,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongolium View Post
Oh look, the stat skewer.

Go look up Carles zone starts, and how he was used. Corsi is your favourite one right? Go look at his quality of competition.
better yet just go watch some game footage of his actual on ice playing..

make mental notes on how often he screws up or refuses to go near the opposition with anything other then the end of his sticks blade..

enjoy Tampa Carle, no one here miss' you..

Flyerfan4life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 02:20 PM
  #39
Erza Scarlet
following the mantle
 
Erza Scarlet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Requiem
Posts: 8,289
vCash: 500
We really need to start drafting good defencemen. And no Carle won't be a big loss.

Erza Scarlet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 02:37 PM
  #40
KimiFerrari
Messi Is God
 
KimiFerrari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Argentina
Posts: 3,817
vCash: 500
I have been a long time defender of Carle, because I believed he got too much hate on these boards. Carle did eat up a lot of minutes, infact the most minutes on the team last year, blocked the most shots and would stay out of the box.

With that said. I was happy we didn't resign Carle. His skill set is not that hard to replace at a cheaper cost. But don't be surprised to see our other Dmen pick up that mantle now that their work load will be increased.

KimiFerrari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 03:12 PM
  #41
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,269
vCash: 500
The truth comes out ..dude even try's to cover up his Tom foolery and ballyhoo with an assumed name and front operation

http://www.delawareonline.com/articl...rl-s-keg-party

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 05:16 PM
  #42
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,518
vCash: 5500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Invictus View Post
MAB played 45 games to Carle's 82. MAB averaged 16 minutes a night to Carle's 23. One would expect Carle to raise his GFON/60 during his time without MAB, if MAB was hampering him...but he doesn't. MAB's GFON/60 is slightly higher than Carle's.

At the absolute most, Carle spent less than half (46%) of his season with MAB. MAB doesn't completely account for the drop in offensive numbers while Carle was playing, and if somehow he does it only serves to back up my claim that Carle isn't fit to anchor a pairing because he's a secondary-role player.
He spent half the season constantly changing partners, eventually ending up with Timonen once Coburn switched to Grossmann, but the switch does not register among Carle or Coburn's 10 most common teammates.

There's going to be variance because no one plays every single shift with the same player. Carle after all did lead the defensemen in 5v5 TOI/60.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongolium View Post
Oh look, the stat skewer.

Go look up Carles zone starts, and how he was used. Corsi is your favourite one right? Go look at his quality of competition.
Corsi Rel is actually what I focus on more than Corsi. Most advanced numbers experts caution using raw Corsi.

But you brought up zone starts and finishes. So, let's satisfy your curiosity.

Each of Coburn, Timonen, Carle, and Meszaros (those we would consider the Top 4 defensemen, Grossmann did not play enough games), all went backward. You're adamant something major is there, so let's assume that it's not basically even, although, the differences themselves in comparison I would consider negligible for the most part. Yet, of those 4, Carle went backward the least. Oh, and Bourdon went forward, despite the worst QOT among our defensemen (40 game minimum).

Maybe I'm not the one who should have been looking harder. I see Carle (again, by what I consider negligible difference, but I'm not the one who brought it up zone starts/finishes), had worse offensive zone start percentage than ALL of Timonen/Coburn/Meszaros, and was the only one who was under 50%.

Keep in mind that Coburn had a higher QOT, highlighted with the fact he had the all-star defenseman for a longer amount of time than Carle's minor league call-up partner.

So, unless you just want to call everything even when comparing those 4, you'd have to give the nod to Carle in raw zone starts/finishes across the board. He had the best difference between starts and finishes, while getting worse zone starts.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 05:55 PM
  #43
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,905
vCash: 156
Carle also spent 13 games with Pronger, who was producing at a very high level before his season/career were torpedoed; this would have boosted his numbers initially, before coming back down to normal. Overall, Carle's production is lower than should be expected from someone who is supposedly very good at offfense, considering his time on ice with a top 3 offense and time with the top forward line.

My theory is that other teams know how to defend Carle now. He gets neutralized because they can single him out, because he is one dimensional offensively. A one dimensional player like that can't drag along a teammate who isn't all that gifted offensively; MAB wasn't an offensive dynamo, and that surely didn't help. Despite that, with time spent with Pronger and Timonen, and loads of time with our top forward lines, his offensive output is disappointing compared to other Dmen, and spending half his time with MAB doesn't adequately explain it...especially since the team's production with MAB on the ice is slightly better.

Carle should be a strictly secondary player, and it was detrimental for the team to use him so much in a primary role. However, we didn't really have much choice. This year, someone else will likely be that offensive detriment, possibly even two whole pairings. At the end of the day, it was wise to not give Carle the contract he got with the team in its current situation. That's the sort of contract you give to someone who helps fix/does fix the problem, and I don't think that would have been Carle.

I wrote this while doing several other things, so sorry if it isn't strung together/communicated adequately/makes no logical sense. Don't really have the time to polish it.

Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 06:12 PM
  #44
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Invictus View Post
If the Flyers were worse offensively when Coburn was on the ice compared to Carle, why did Coburn out-produce Carle at even strength? (I think. I'm going off memory and I haven't looked in like two months, so I might be wrong, apologies.)

Don't forget, Carle's shot is essentially not a threat unless he pinches in close or gets lucky bounces. That makes him a one dimensional player...he has to rely on passing. One dimensional players are easier to defend against. The team's actual production while he's on the ice reflects that...they didn't perform as well. You can choose to ignore the actual results in favor of chances, but chances don't win. Goals scored do, and the team scored less goals with Carle playing.

Chalking it up to "lack of luck despite more ice time in 82 games" isn't a satisfying answer for me. Bad luck happens, but it averages out (at least partially) over time...it doesn't last for 82 games.
Yes it does. That is why they track PDO. It is similar to BABIP in baseball. Carle had the worst PDO of Flyers defenders that played at least 30 games. He was the unluckiest of the bunch along with Meszaros. Carle's goals for suffered because the team's shooting percentage was down when he was on ice. That's luck. Similar to a pitcher not getting any run support.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 06:18 PM
  #45
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,905
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haute Couturier View Post
Yes it does. That is why they track PDO. It is similar to BABIP in baseball. Carle had the worst PDO of Flyers defenders that played at least 30 games. He was the unluckiest of the bunch along with Meszaros. Carle's goals for suffered because the team's shooting percentage was down when he was on ice. That's luck. Similar to a pitcher not getting any run support.
Carle's goals for suffered because he has a very bad shot. It doesn't strike me as bad luck that team goalscoring and shooting percentage dropped when a player with a notoriously weak shot was on the ice.

Edit: Not sure I see the comparison with pitchers lacking run support. A player on a premier offense producing at a lower overall rate than his peers is a totally different scenario. Having that offense produce more points when he's off the ice is a different scenario.


Last edited by Beef Invictus: 08-08-2012 at 06:25 PM.
Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 06:25 PM
  #46
96
Esq.
 
96's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,700
vCash: 500
Yes, I think that we should have held onto Carle. He's prone to giveaways and blown coverage here and there, but he's reliable health-wise and can eat up minutes while providing good even-strength production and block shots. He's being paid a lot, but that is the case with most defensemen who reach UFA. If we could have signed him at a slight discount, I think it would have been great, especially considering Meszaros's injury, Pronger's injury, and the failure to bring in Suter or Weber.

96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 06:26 PM
  #47
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Invictus View Post
Carle's goals for suffered because he has a very bad shot. It doesn't strike me as bad luck that team goalscoring and shooting percentage dropped when a player with a notoriously weak shot was on the ice.
It was his lowest on ice shooting percentage in years and lowest goals for per 60 in years. That suggests bad luck.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 06:28 PM
  #48
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,905
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haute Couturier View Post
It was his lowest on ice shooting percentage in years and lowest goals for per 60 in years. That suggests bad luck.
If he was playing great all 82 games and snakebit, sure. But he wasn't. There was a definite trend where his blocked/easily saved shots hampered offensive opportunities, and the fact that his best option was to always pass made him predictable.

It could also be that he was just in over his head, and a detriment to the team overall as a result. This is also the first year where he was used in a prominent role...his past years, he was playing second fiddle. I doubt it's a coincidence or "luck" that a guy who's always been a secondary player can't make the cut as a primary defenseman playing big minutes.

Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 06:36 PM
  #49
Haute Couturier
Registered User
 
Haute Couturier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish Invictus View Post
If he was playing great all 82 games, sure. But he wasn't. There was a definite trend where his blocked/easily saved shots hampered offensive opportunities, and the fact that his best option was to always pass made him predictable.

It could also be that he was just in over his head, and a detriment to the team overall as a result.
Is there any evidence of such trend or is this a perception bias? It also has nothing to do with his teammates shooting percentage. If a goalie makes a great save on a shot that's luck. Carle wasn't any less productive last year.

Haute Couturier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 06:47 PM
  #50
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Wing or Retire!
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 36,905
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haute Couturier View Post
Is there any evidence of such trend or is this a perception bias? It also has nothing to do with his teammates shooting percentage. If a goalie makes a great save on a shot that's luck. Carle wasn't any less productive last year.
That was something I noticed while watching him. You didn't notice all the blocked shots, or how often his shots were gloved by goalies without much challenge? That usually led to a faceoff, which the Flyers lost more often than not. That's what happens when all you do is gently wrist it in from the blue line.

Carle himself wasn't less productive, yet the team overall was while he was on the ice.

Beef Invictus is online now   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 10:11 PM.

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.