For some reason when I jump on here, this darn laptop keeps defaulting me to Carlebuzz.

I am starting to fear that tomorrow we are going to end up with no one at all

Passing the puck to outlet the puck is absolutely the preferred method. It is the quickest and most efficient way to transition the puck and create offense. And Carle excels at it. And to say that passing the puck is not an effective strategy is very shortsighted. And you've made this comment before. And it lacks insight. And lack of recognizing a simple D to D breakout which is a standard breakout that a lot of teams use, and is by design. All of the Flyers defenseman do it, as it is part of the Flyers systems play.
- MJL

I never said that an outlet pass is not effective. It can be...but the better puck movers in the league can also skate up the ice and deliver it into the zone themselves when the opportunity presents itself. Carle rarely does this and it's a big differentiator between the very good players and those at are merely a bit above average, like Carle (according to Meltzer, with whom I agree).

As far as your stats, your talking about a couple of percentage points. The differences are miniscule. And it is but one metric, out of many.

Like you say, those are the FACTS, man...sorry, you cannot dispute them.

Well that would make perfect sense since Carle played the majority of his PP time on the 2nd unit. Which didn't include Giroux, who led the NHL in PP points, and Hartnell who led the Flyers in PP goals, and was 2nd overall in the League in PP goals. Your point lacks insight.
- MJL

Carle spent plenty of time on the first unit (especially after Pronger was out). He had the second-most TOI per game on the powerplay for the Flyers and almost a full minute and 30 seconds more than the guy with 3rd most minutes per game (Mez). The numbers don't support your claim. Talk about lack of insight!

Carle plays on the PP because of his confidence, quick thinking and movement, swift puck movement, vision and hockey sense.
- MJL

I love your method of just taking what negative people say and turning it around by restating it in the affirmative about the player, but it's gimmicky and shows you lack lack any real insight yourself. Try coming up with your own words.

And since you a big fan of Advanced Stats.

A1/60 in 5 on 4 Offensive play

Timonen 0.87
Carle 1.11

While playing with lesser PP talent. And Carle ranked 28th in the League in PP points among NHL defenseman. Compare the minutes played on the PP of Carle compared to those above him. Pretty good production.

- MJL

Carle may have been 28th in PP pts, but that stat lacks insight...remember the Flyers led the league in PP time, so you have to look at it deeper. Among D men getting at least 1 minute of (5v4) pp time per game , Carle was 64th D man in the league in PP scoring effectiveness (pts/60 mins of icetime). Mediocre. A more dynamic pointman with a better shot and better overall skillset would be able to better capitalize on the Flyers many pp opportunities.

I think you vastly underrate Carle as a player, and what he brings to the team.
- MJL

I don't think so. I think you overrate him. You think he's a "very good NHL defenseman", have mentiuoned the word elite many times in reference to his 5v5 play and often try and compare him favorably to much better D men like Suter and the like. Meanwhile, credible observers like Meltzer (with whom I agree) place Carle as a bit above average D man. Can you tell me what makes Carle special? Besides outlet passing, what does he really do that's critical to making the flyers offense click? Also, what does he do on defense that makes the team more effective/tough to play against defensively?

With that being said, there will be opportunity for other players. Or new players brought aboard. And the Flyers can still be a very good team if they lose Carle.
- MJL

Who knows, with other players getting his minutes, they might even be better.

You once told me if there was an area Carle needs to improve in was on the PP after I defended him as being a good Power Play Point man...
- Schenn2shine

I did. Why makes you think that has changed? There is always room for improvement.

- MJL

Um, maybe it's because you talk out of both sides of your mouth? I made an argument against Carle's pp play and you fluffed it up like it was very good...people aren't stupid. They remember when you talked about/admitted his pp deficiencies. You just switch up your arguments to suit whatever debate you may be in at the time, which does little more than undermine your overall credibility.

I never said that an outlet pass is not effective. It can be...but the better puck movers in the league can also skate up the ice and deliver it into the zone themselves when the opportunity presents itself. Carle rarely does this and it's a big differentiator between the very good players and those at are merely a bit above average, like Carle (according to Meltzer, with whom I agree).
- phantasm

Absolutely you did. You called Carle's puck movement as you described it as "not an overly effective strategy" And Bill hasn't said that Carle is merely a bit above average. In fact what Bill said is that Carle is closer to an All Star then he is to an average defenseman. And Bill has talked in a number of blogs of the skills that Carle brings. And one of the skills that he is very good at, is puck movement. The better puck movers in the NHL quickly pass and move the puck up to the forwards. That is the best way to create transition offense. I disagree that skating the puck up is a big differentiator between the very good player and the average. That may be your opinion, but it's hardly the case in the NHL

You tried to use the fact that the Flyers use a very common D to D set breakout as a criticism of Carle. How can you not recognize a simple set breakout that has been used in the game for years? That the majority of NHL teams at one time or another use. And if you can't recognize a fundamental Hockey strategy. How can you accurately asses a defenseman's puck moving ability.

Like you say, those are the FACTS, man...sorry, you cannot dispute them.


- phantasm

I have no reason to dispute it. It is one metric out of many. And a few percentage points really doesn't point to anything.

The bottom line is that I look at all the information available on a player, and I don't blindly look at one metric. And all the information available says that Carle is a pretty good 2/3 NHL defenseman. Who is in line for a nice new contract because of the player that he is.

Carle spent plenty of time on the first unit (especially after Pronger was out). He had the second-most TOI per game on the powerplay for the Flyers and almost a full minute and 30 seconds more than the guy with 3rd most minutes per game (Mez). The numbers don't support your claim. Talk about lack of insight!
- phantasm[]

Absolutely the numbers support my opinion. Carle played some on the first unit. But the majority of his PP time was on the 2nd unit.

Easily identified by the facts. And those facts are total PP TOI

1st unit for the majority of the Season was
Giroux 301:21
Simmonds 264:01
Hartnell 263:21
Voracek 262:28
Timonen 287:55

Players who for the majority of the Season were on the 2nd PP unit

Jagr 237:40
Briere 225:07
Carle 216:23
Read 199:58

Now the units were mixed and matched some over the course of the Season, as Jagr spent some time on the first unit. But there is an obvious disparity in PP icetime between the players who spent the the most time on the first unit versus the 2nd. So how do explain the discrepancy between Carle and Timonen's total PP icetime? It's easy to explain. Carle spent a lot of time on the 2nd unit. So my point is accurate. And is a factor that you obviously did not consider when looking at the metric you posted. You have to be able to figure out what it's telling you. Not just blindly look at it.

I love your method of just taking what negative people say and turning it around by restating it in the affirmative about the player, but it's gimmicky and shows you lack lack any real insight yourself. Try coming up with your own words.
- phantasm[]

I thought the words were perfect in describing Carle.

Carle may have been 28th in PP pts, but that stat lacks insight...remember the Flyers led the league in PP time, so you have to look at it deeper. Among D men getting at least 1 minute of (5v4) pp time per game , Carle was 64th D man in the league in PP scoring effectiveness (pts/60 mins of icetime). Mediocre. A more dynamic pointman with a better shot and better overall skillset would be able to better capitalize on the Flyers many pp opportunities.


- phantasm

Doesn't lack insight at all. To play on the 2nd unit PP the majority of the Season, and not with the Flyers top PP producers. And with the total icetime he got on the PP, Carle's point total was solid. There's 30 teams in the League. How many NHL defenseman play the point on the PP? 28th in the League is solid. As I've said before. Carle is not a player I would consider a PP QB. He doesn't have the shot for it. Nor will he ever be a "dynamic" PP defenseman along the lines of the top PP defenseman. But he does a nice job of handling and distributing the puck on the PP. Evidenced by the A1/60 Advanced stat that I provided. That you failed to address.

I don't think so. I think you overrate him. You think he's a "very good NHL defenseman", have mentiuoned the word elite many times in reference to his 5v5 play and often try and compare him favorably to much better D men like Suter and the like. Meanwhile, credible observers like Meltzer (with whom I agree) place Carle as a bit above average D man. Can you tell me what makes Carle special? Besides outlet passing, what does he really do that's critical to making the flyers offense click? Also, what does he do on defense that makes the team more effective/tough to play against defensively?


- phantasm

I don't overrate him. My opinion of Carle is in line with the NHL's view on the player. Carle is a very good NHL defenseman. He is not All Star caliber, but he is in the next level.
In terms of 5 on 5 play, Carle has been elite. Leading the NHL in Even strength scoring for Defenseman in 10/11. Leading the entire NHL in Plus games in 10/11 while racking up a +30 that put him 5th in the League. Those are certainly Elite numbers.
We'll see on Sunday if the NHL thinks Carle is a "bit above average" defenseman.

I don't think Carle is special. Players like Weber and Chara are special.

Who knows, with other players getting his minutes, they might even be better.
- phantasm[]

I agree who knows. If Carle leaves and the Flyers make other moves, the Flyers absolutely might even be better, Entirely possible.

Um, maybe it's because you talk out of both sides of your mouth? I made an argument against Carle's pp play and you fluffed it up like it was very good...people aren't stupid. They remember when you talked about/admitted his pp deficiencies. You just switch up your arguments to suit whatever debate you may be in at the time, which does little more than undermine your overall credibility.
- phantasm

So your saying that if a player is good at something, that means that there isn't room for improvement? Do you have any idea when the comment was made? You didn't consider that did you? Nothing was switched up, nor does it have anything to do with my credibility.

Here's is the simple reason why a statement that Carle needs to improve on his PP play, was made. And if you took into consideration the timeline of the comment, you would know why the statement was made.

Carle's PP points.

10/11 2 PP points, that is poor and hence why the comment was made

11/12 12 PP points. Much improved.

Absolutely you did. You called Carle's puck movement as you described it as "not an overly effective strategy"
- MJL

Right, I said it wasn't an "overly effective strategy" and provided factual basis showing so... in your response, you said "And to say that passing the puck is not an effective strategy is very shortsighted." Which is mischaracterizing/miscomprehending what I actually said. You do this all the time. Comprehension apparently isn't your strong suit (except the CBA).

And Bill hasn't said that Carle is merely a bit above average.
- MJL

Umm, did you read Bills blog from this thread?

Certainly, Carle has his flaws. He is not physical. He turns over his fair share of pucks. He is not a true shutdown defender. He doesn't shoot hard or with tremendous accuracy. Nevertheless when the total package is weighed, he is somewhere a bit north of the middle of the pack among NHL defensemen.
- Bill Meltzer

Middle of the pack is average...north is above...so according to Meltzer, Carle is a bit above of average. Comprehension'd again.

In fact what Bill said is that Carle is closer to an All Star then he is to an average defenseman.
- MJL

Wrong, that is not, in fact, what Bill said. Comprehension'd again. Bill said:

He's not an All-Star but he's closer to that than he is being a dime-a-dozen player who can be easily replaced in the lineup.
- Bill Meltzer

Nowhere in that comment does it mention or imply an average defenseman. A "dime a dozen player who can be easily replaced" doesn't mean average. Heritage defines the phrase "dime a dozen" as meaning "So plentiful as to be valueless." So in NHL parlance, this implies an easily obtainable, readily available, well below average player....#6/7 types that are relatively easy to come by. He's saying Carle is closer to an all star quality type than he is to being one of those.

And Bill has talked in a number of blogs of the skills that Carle brings. And one of the skills that he is very good at, is puck movement. The better puck movers in the NHL quickly pass and move the puck up to the forwards. That is the best way to create transition offense. I disagree that skating the puck up is a big differentiator between the very good player and the average. That may be your opinion, but it's hardly the case in the NHL
- MJL

Gee, we better inform guys like Doughty, Suter, Timonen, Yandle, Letang and Karlsson they need to cease skating the puck out of the zone to lead the attack and stick to strictly making outlet passes instead.

You tried to use the fact that the Flyers use a very common D to D set breakout as a criticism of Carle. How can you not recognize a simple set breakout that has been used in the game for years? That the majority of NHL teams at one time or another use. And if you can't recognize a fundamental Hockey strategy. How can you accurately asses a defenseman's puck moving ability.
- MJL

I am well aware of the d to d pass being a common and valid play, duh. My point was not to say that such passes or outlet passes are inherently bad. Certainly there's a time and a place for them in every game. Rather, my point was that Carle's "puck moving" seems limited mainly to making passes from the defensive zone, which can be risky, whereas the better/more skilled and confident puck movers in the league can do that but also readily skate the puck out to lead the rush, pressuring the opposing d, opening passing lanes and promoting a 5 man attack. So, I believe this is one of the differentiators that keep Carle from being one of the best puck moving D men.

I have no reason to dispute it. It is one metric out of many. And a few percentage points really doesn't point to anything.
- MJL

Oh, it doesn't mean anything because you don't think it means anything. Lolz...ok.

The bottom line is that I look at all the information available on a player, and I don't blindly look at one metric. And all the information available says that Carle is a pretty good 2/3 NHL defenseman. Who is in line for a nice new contract because of the player that he is.
- MJL

Apparently, it's you don't look at all the available info. You admit you aren't strong on advanced stats. I haven't blindly looked at one metric in the stat I gave. There are numerous stats/metrics that I've cited that indicate Carle isn't all that you have claimed. Carle is in line for what will likely be an oversized contract because the market in D men is such that players like Wideman get 5.25 mil, not because he's just that great.

Absolutely the numbers support my opinion. Carle played some on the first unit. But the majority of his PP time was on the 2nd unit.

Easily identified by the facts. And those facts are total PP TOI

1st unit for the majority of the Season was
Giroux 301:21
Simmonds 264:01
Hartnell 263:21
Voracek 262:28
Timonen 287:55

Players who for the majority of the Season were on the 2nd PP unit

Jagr 237:40
Briere 225:07
Carle 216:23
Read 199:58

Now the units were mixed and matched some over the course of the Season, as Jagr spent some time on the first unit. But there is an obvious disparity in PP icetime between the players who spent the the most time on the first unit versus the 2nd. So how do explain the discrepancy between Carle and Timonen's total PP icetime? It's easy to explain. Carle spent a lot of time on the 2nd unit. So my point is accurate. And is a factor that you obviously did not consider when looking at the metric you posted. You have to be able to figure out what it's telling you. Not just blindly look at it.
- MJL

Carle had second highest minutes/per game for D men on the Flyers PP, including time spent with Giroux and the first unit earlier in the season (Voracek wasn't always at the point, that came latter half of the season). The fact remains that the Flyers PP (5v4) scored 1.5 more goals per 60 mins of pp time with Carle on the bench versus when he's on the ice. I'm not claiming it's the be all/end all, but there's still some value to this metric imo. If Carle was the pp player you say -- "Carle plays on the PP because of his confidence, quick thinking and movement, swift puck movement, vision and hockey sense." - MJL He wouldn't have been demoted in favor of Voracek and the numbers with him on the ice during pp's would be more favorable than they are.

I thought the words were perfect in describing Carle.
- MJL

Yeah you're just perfection personified! A legend in your own mind!

We'll see on Sunday if the NHL thinks Carle is a "bit above average" defenseman.
- MJL

He's going to be overpaid. Everyone knows this. His contract will be more a commentary on the scarce market for top 4 D men than a ringing endorsement of Carle's abilities. See: Wideman, Dennis and his new 5.25 mil/yr contract.

I don't think Carle is special. Players like Weber and Chara are special.
- MJL

Ok so he's not special and you say one rung under all-star level...so what makes him as good as you think he is? Besides decent passing from the defensive zone, and a good stick defensively (not exactly rare commodities), what does he really do out there that makes him in that next to all star category? What are the things he does offensively that make him especially valuable to the Flyers offense so they should try hard retain him? What are the things he does defensively that makes the Flyers defense better or tougher to play against defensively (or is maybe one of the reason's the D isn't that great is Carle getting top overall minutes)? Do you think the team will struggle to break out of the zone or have trouble scoring or struggle to be tough defensively if they have to go into next season without Carle because they decided not to overpay him?

- FlyerMike18

Cloaking device fail.