Flyers have a proven track record in some areas of drafting and developing players. In others, they don't. But Subban is just one example. Not to put Subban in that category, but look at other top defenseman drafted in later rounds. Shea Weber was a 2nd rounder. Lidstrom and many more. You would think with all the picks the Flyers used on defenseman in later rounds, one or two would've panned out.
- MJL

Subban is indeed a special case as his developmental curve went crazy after his draft year.

The problem for the flyers must reside in the developmental part. Because the guys that have developed properly have made the jump quite rapidly or were sure-fires. They skipped the AHL for the most part.

Giroux played under 40 games there. Couturier wouldn't have played a game if not for the lockout. Gagné went straight to the NHL.

But can you remember who was the last player that passed a couple of years in the AHL before becoming a contributer to your team? It's nice to have guys that make the NHL fast, but those guys usually aren't the ones you're worried about. Look at a team like Detroit, you might call them lucky to have grabbed Lidstrom so late, or Datsyuk, or Zetterberg, or Filpula etc... But if you make the count you quickly realize there must be something else than lady luck acting for their faith.

I feel a coaching change coming today
- griouxmvp2012

I hope not, but if we get creamed by Pitt and the Isles to start off 2 and 10 on the road.. probably happens.

I hope not, but if we get creamed by Pitt and the Isles to start off 2 and 10 on the road.. probably happens.
- Hextall271

Sounds like there are locker room problems. Not that it has anything to do with the coach Js.....

Subban is indeed a special case as his developmental curve went crazy after his draft year.

The problem for the flyers must reside in the developmental part. Because the guys that have developed properly have made the jump quite rapidly or were sure-fires. They skipped the AHL for the most part.

Giroux played under 40 games there. Couturier wouldn't have played a game if not for the lockout. Gagné went straight to the NHL.

But can you remember who was the last player that passed a couple of years in the AHL before becoming a contributer to your team? It's nice to have guys that make the NHL fast, but those guys usually aren't the ones you're worried about. Look at a team like Detroit, you might call them lucky to have grabbed Lidstrom so late, or Datsyuk, or Zetterberg, or Filpula etc... But if you make the count you quickly realize there must be something else than lady luck acting for their faith.
- QuebecPride

Right now, examples of players that starter in the AHL, and made it to the Flyers are Rinaldo, McGinn, and possibly Gustafsson if he stays. Last year, you can add Bourdon.
Detroit has done a phenomenal job in drafting European players in later rounds. They are the standard in that area. But let's face it. If they know what Datsyuk and Zetterberg were going to be. Would they have waited until the 6th round? They took a chance on those players, and got rewarded.
You want to talk about luck in drafting? The Flyers wanted Sanguinetti the year they drafted Giroux. He got taken before their pick, so they chose Giroux.

You can have any opinion you want on a player. But when you make statements that Carle isn't any better then Grossmann, Coburn, or Schenn are in moving the puck. Then it's obvious that there is a clear bias of the player. Your entire post is hyperbole and isn't accurate of Carle as a player. Quite simply if your analysis of Carle as a player was accurate. Steve Yzerman isn't signing him to that deal. And Boucher isn't stating that Carle along with Salo has transformed the TB defense. And they aren't playing him 20+ mintes a night. Because the player you're describing is a run of the mill 12-15 minute a night 3rd pair player. And if there are other players out there who can move the puck better that are cheaper. Where are they? Who are they?

The facts are clear. The play on the ice and the issues the Flyers have in moving the puck to the forwards is clear evidence of how they greatly miss Carle in that regard. The only way that conclusion can be escaped from is to simply be in denial.

And as far as the Youtube videos. You can find them for every defenseman who ever played. And you just have to go back to last night to find one for Kimmo Timonen.
- MJL

That's like your opinion man! I disagree. There seems to be a perception that somehow if Matt Carle was out there for the Flyers that all the woes would go away. While it would be nice to have the depth with Carle given the injuries, it's just not realistic to think the issues wouldn't be there if only Carle had remained. Even with Carle on the roster there were issues moving the puck out of the zone at times. One can scan the history on these boards and see people calling for another "puck moving D man" at various times over the past few years.

Tell me, what was it Carle was doing out there that was so much better, so much different from what we see now? Did he skate the puck out of the zone alot to start the rush? No, that would be very rare for Carle. Did he always make dependable, low risk passes out of the zone? No.
He most often stayed deep and used a pass to his D partner or maybe a risky stretch pass attempt once in a while. Was he stalwart in his own zone? Not really...he has a good active stick but is vulnerable to rushes by skilled players when he fails to take the body in favor of the stickcheck/playing the puck. He also loses coverage down low sometimes partly due to his lack of physical play.

I'll tell you what, last night I saw Grossman make a play Carle probably wouldn't have been able to...on Briere's first goal, he got back swiftly and decisively curled back with the puck under pressure then made a nice little pass to Schenn to key they rush. Knowing Carle, he probably would have skated that puck back and went behind the net to try and shake the D first and that kind of attack wouldn't have happened. Again, guys like Grossman, Mez, Coburn, Timonen, Schenn and Gusty are fully capable of making plays out/moving the puck out of the zone. Please tell me specifically and in detail, how Carle does it so much better? You can't, because he doesn't.

The fact that Yzerman paid the guy 5.5mil for 6 years doesn't mean he's worth it. Yzerman is an inexperienced GM and will make mistakes. This may have been one of them. Matt Carle is paid 1.5 million more per year than any other Tampa D man, but he's certainly not playing like a #1 D man and probably never will. Maybe it was Holmgren, the more experienced GM who was right in letting him walk. Time will tell. Regarding Boucher, what's he going to say in public? That Yzerman made a bad move and that Carle isn't the answer? Of course not...and Tampa has come back to earth after their hot start, partly due to Carle.

As far as those who move the puck better who are cheaper. A few examples come to mind...Joni Pitkanen at 4.5 million. Remember how everyone's biggest complaint from him was that when he skated the puck out of the D zone and all the way into the O zone himself, he wasn't able to find an open man or shoot on net? The Flyers would really benefit now from someone who could carry the puck like that, delivering it from D zone to O zone on a consistent basis. Matt Carle can't touch Joni's puck carrying ability. Mark Streit is another guy who excels at puck moving, at $4.1 million. Ryan Whitney at 4 mil is a guy who moves the puck deftly but probably needs a change of scenery. He could probably be obtained for cheap and/or be signed to an even cheaper deal when his current one expires this season. PK Subban at 2.875 million is a dynamic puck mover, much moreso than Carle. Yandle makes less than Carle and is a far superior puck mover. Pietrangelo at 3.1 mil, Shattenkirk, Del Zotto at 2.5 mil, Byfuglien at 5.2 mil, Erhoff at 4 mil etc.

So it was Tippet that put those numbers up?

If the Flyers were 10-4-2 right now, Bryz would be the Vezina leader or at least top 3.

Now, before ya'll jump down my throat- I know it's early and the Flyers are terrible. It's hypothetical and an illustration of how fantastic Bryz has been this season.
- Giroux_Is_God

Tippett didn't put those numbers up, but his system boosted them. There's no one doubting Bryzgalov's an NHL goaltender, but what defines a good goaltender from an average one, are the playoffs. Let's say his numbers in the spring dance are far from impressive. Everyone thought the Coyotes were screwed without Bryz, but Smith came in cheap and had no trouble repeating what Bryzgalov had done, and more.

Holmgren went all in on Bryzgalov because after your good run in the playoffs he thought goaltending was the lone weakness of your team, and he may have been right at that time. That won't change the fact that Bryzgalov is not a top-5 goaltender in the NHL. The price the flyers are paying and will pay for him is ridiculous. That's what UFA bids do for you...

Right now, examples of players that starter in the AHL, and made it to the Flyers are Rinaldo, McGinn, and possibly Gustafsson if he stays. Last year, you can add Bourdon.
Detroit has done a phenomenal job in drafting European players in later rounds. They are the standard in that area. But let's face it. If they know what Datsyuk and Zetterberg were going to be. Would they have waited until the 6th round? They took a chance on those players, and got rewarded.
You want to talk about luck in drafting? The Flyers wanted Sanguinetti the year they drafted Giroux. He got taken before their pick, so they chose Giroux.
- MJL

They certainly didn't think they would become superstars. But, let's face it. They liked something from their game. And if you know a player is going to be there in the further rounds, why would you use an earlier pick on him? Detroit back then were one of the few teams scouting Europe live I believe.

You're incorrect. It neither gives the Flyers a pass, nor is it contradictory. My opening statement in the post was that the Flyers have to do a better job at drafting and developing in certain areas. Plain and simple. And what I've also done is looked at all aspects of it. And the luck factor is definitely part of it. Which is the opposite of being selective. Being selective when convenient is only looking at one position when assessing the team's Drafting record.
- MJL

- so your giving them a pass for their lousy record of drafting on D from the org's inception. at some point, luck is bullsh1t and we have to get it done.

- the whole point was analyzing their record at this position. that's a critical analysis that's objective...not meant to just win an argument.

the bottom line is your statement about them needing to draft better here or there is logical, while your dismissal of the skill required to draft at that position lower than the first rnd by by citing luck over a 40+ yr period is not. of course luck is a factor, but with such a dismal record over such a long period of time -as Bill clearly points out- it simply doesn't wash. why don't you attack Bill with the same dismissive tone you did towards me for posting - much more eloquently and comprehensively- what i did?

That's like your opinion man! I disagree. There seems to be a perception that somehow if Matt Carle was out there for the Flyers that all the woes would go away. While it would be nice to have the depth with Carle given the injuries, it's just not realistic to think the issues wouldn't be there if only Carle had remained. Even with Carle on the roster there were issues moving the puck out of the zone at times. One can scan the history on these boards and see people calling for another "puck moving D man" at various times over the past few years.

Tell me, what was it Carle was doing out there that was so much better, so much different from what we see now? Did he skate the puck out of the zone alot to start the rush? No, that would be very rare for Carle. Did he always make dependable, low risk passes out of the zone? No.
He most often stayed deep and used a pass to his D partner or maybe a risky stretch pass attempt once in a while. Was he stalwart in his own zone? Not really...he has a good active stick but is vulnerable to rushes by skilled players when he fails to take the body in favor of the stickcheck/playing the puck. He also loses coverage down low sometimes partly due to his lack of physical play.

I'll tell you what, last night I saw Grossman make a play Carle probably wouldn't have been able to...on Briere's first goal, he got back swiftly and decisively curled back with the puck under pressure then made a nice little pass to Schenn to key they rush. Knowing Carle, he probably would have skated that puck back and went behind the net to try and shake the D first and that kind of attack wouldn't have happened. Again, guys like Grossman, Mez, Coburn, Timonen, Schenn and Gusty are fully capable of making plays out/moving the puck out of the zone. Please tell me specifically and in detail, how Carle does it so much better? You can't, because he doesn't.

The fact that Yzerman paid the guy 5.5mil for 6 years doesn't mean he's worth it. Yzerman is an inexperienced GM and will make mistakes. This may have been one of them. Matt Carle is paid 1.5 million more per year than any other Tampa D man, but he's certainly not playing like a #1 D man and probably never will. Maybe it was Holmgren, the more experienced GM who was right in letting him walk. Time will tell. Regarding Boucher, what's he going to say in public? That Yzerman made a bad move and that Carle isn't the answer? Of course not...and Tampa has come back to earth after their hot start, partly due to Carle.

As far as those who move the puck better who are cheaper. A few examples come to mind...Joni Pitkanen at 4.5 million. Remember how everyone's biggest complaint from him was that when he skated the puck out of the D zone and all the way into the O zone himself, he wasn't able to find an open man or shoot on net? The Flyers would really benefit now from someone who could carry the puck like that, delivering it from D zone to O zone on a consistent basis. Matt Carle can't touch Joni's puck carrying ability. Mark Streit is another guy who excels at puck moving, at $4.1 million. Ryan Whitney at 4 mil is a guy who moves the puck deftly but probably needs a change of scenery. He could probably be obtained for cheap and/or be signed to an even cheaper deal when his current one expires this season. PK Subban at 2.875 million is a dynamic puck mover, much moreso than Carle. Yandle makes less than Carle and is a far superior puck mover. Pietrangelo at 3.1 mil, Shattenkirk, Del Zotto at 2.5 mil, Byfuglien at 5.2 mil, Erhoff at 4 mil etc.
- phantasm

Notice that most of those guys are either on their ELC or were RFAs when they signed (besides Ehroff/Byfuglien). Hardly comparable situations. RFAs can't walk away and threaten you to sign elsewhere, if you qualify them and don't receive offer sheets, you keep their rights.

Carle was a UFA, while Subban, Pietrangelo, Shattenkirk, Del Zotto were RFAs.

That's like your opinion man! I disagree. There seems to be a perception that somehow if Matt Carle was out there for the Flyers that all the woes would go away. While it would be nice to have the depth with Carle given the injuries, it's just not realistic to think the issues wouldn't be there if only Carle had remained. Even with Carle on the roster there were issues moving the puck out of the zone at times. One can scan the history on these boards and see people calling for another "puck moving D man" at various times over the past few years.

Tell me, what was it Carle was doing out there that was so much better, so much different from what we see now? Did he skate the puck out of the zone alot to start the rush? No, that would be very rare for Carle. Did he always make dependable, low risk passes out of the zone? No.
He most often stayed deep and used a pass to his D partner or maybe a risky stretch pass attempt once in a while. Was he stalwart in his own zone? Not really...he has a good active stick but is vulnerable to rushes by skilled players when he fails to take the body in favor of the stickcheck/playing the puck. He also loses coverage down low sometimes partly due to his lack of physical play.

I'll tell you what, last night I saw Grossman make a play Carle probably wouldn't have been able to...on Briere's first goal, he got back swiftly and decisively curled back with the puck under pressure then made a nice little pass to Schenn to key they rush. Knowing Carle, he probably would have skated that puck back and went behind the net to try and shake the D first and that kind of attack wouldn't have happened. Again, guys like Grossman, Mez, Coburn, Timonen, Schenn and Gusty are fully capable of making plays out/moving the puck out of the zone. Please tell me specifically and in detail, how Carle does it so much better? You can't, because he doesn't.

The fact that Yzerman paid the guy 5.5mil for 6 years doesn't mean he's worth it. Yzerman is an inexperienced GM and will make mistakes. This may have been one of them. Matt Carle is paid 1.5 million more per year than any other Tampa D man, but he's certainly not playing like a #1 D man and probably never will. Maybe it was Holmgren, the more experienced GM who was right in letting him walk. Time will tell. Regarding Boucher, what's he going to say in public? That Yzerman made a bad move and that Carle isn't the answer? Of course not...and Tampa has come back to earth after their hot start, partly due to Carle.

As far as those who move the puck better who are cheaper. A few examples come to mind...Joni Pitkanen at 4.5 million. Remember how everyone's biggest complaint from him was that when he skated the puck out of the D zone and all the way into the O zone himself, he wasn't able to find an open man or shoot on net? The Flyers would really benefit now from someone who could carry the puck like that, delivering it from D zone to O zone on a consistent basis. Matt Carle can't touch Joni's puck carrying ability. Mark Streit is another guy who excels at puck moving, at $4.1 million. Ryan Whitney at 4 mil is a guy who moves the puck deftly but probably needs a change of scenery. He could probably be obtained for cheap and/or be signed to an even cheaper deal when his current one expires this season. PK Subban at 2.875 million is a dynamic puck mover, much moreso than Carle. Yandle makes less than Carle and is a far superior puck mover. Pietrangelo at 3.1 mil, Shattenkirk, Del Zotto at 2.5 mil, Byfuglien at 5.2 mil, Erhoff at 4 mil etc.
- phantasm

There isn't anyone, myself included, that believes that Carle would instantly fix the Flyers issues. But it would surely help. You badly misread that.

Secondly, If I have to explain how Carle moves the puck better then Grossmann, Schenn, and Coburn. The you're absolutely right. I can't tell you specifically how he does it better. Because that is obviously impossible. Because of the clear bias and close mindedness on the player. Further illustrated by your statement singling out Carle for TB recent poor play.

In my opinion, you place far too much value on a defenseman skating the puck out of the zone, versus passing it. But that's just simply because you're reaching badly to try and find a way to discredit Carle's obvious puck moving ability. The clear evidence of his puck moving ability is that he is one of the top scoring defensmen at Even Strength. Passing it is far more preferable to skating it out. No defenseman can skate it out faster then it can be passed. That's a fundamental of Hockey. I also vehemently disagree that Carle can't and doesn't do it when it's the right play. Defenseman skating the puck up ice leaves a team vulnerable to turnovers and odd man rushes. It's not what you want your defenseman doing unless it is the only play available. You reference this repeatedly in your posts on Carle. Not only is it inaccurate, but it misses the finer points on puck moving by defenseman.

Yzerman knows the player he is getting and what the market bears. And Boucher was speaking publicly on Carle, so he just made that statement up, because what else is he going to say? Good one! There wasn't anything else he could say, so he just made that up! LOL

And when you were asked what players that could move the puck better and were cheaper then Carle. It was who was available at the time. Not being asked for random players around the League that are entrenched with their current teams.
As an example, if both were available, Carle at 5.5, and Pietrangelo at 3.1. Then no kidding, it's a no brainer. Pietrangelo is a better player. But that's not reality is it?

Carle is gone and with TB. I understand why they did that. But to ignore what the team is missing by losing Carle, is just ignoring the facts.
And now I'm done with this. Far too much current stuff to discuss on the Flyers

- so your giving them a pass for their lousy record of drafting on D from the org's inception. at some point, luck is bullsh1t and we have to get it done.

- the whole point was analyzing their record at this position. that's a critical analysis that's objective...not meant to just win an argument.

the bottom line is your statement about them needing to draft better here or there is logical, while your dismissal of the skill required to draft at that position lower than the first rnd by by citing luck over a 40+ yr period is not. of course luck is a factor, but with such a dismal record over such a long period of time -as Bill clearly points out- it simply doesn't wash. why don't you attack Bill with the same dismissive tone you did towards me for posting - much more eloquently and comprehensively- what i did?
- isaiah520

No, I'm not giving them a pass. You can repeatedly say that I am, doesn't make it so. My first statement that they need to do a better job in that area, is clear and precise language.
I didn't dismiss any skill of drafting in later rounds. That is again, your mis-perception of my post.
I didn't attack you with a dismissive tone. You attacked me and my initial statement, in your first reply to my post. I simply responded and pointed out how you only read what you wanted to read, instead of what was actually written.

Notice that most of those guys are either on their ELC or were RFAs when they signed (besides Ehroff/Byfuglien). Hardly comparable situations. RFAs can't walk away and threaten you to sign elsewhere, if you qualify them and don't receive offer sheets, you keep their rights.

Carle was a UFA, while Subban, Pietrangelo, Shattenkirk, Del Zotto were RFAs.
- QuebecPride

And if you wanted to got the OS route with them, they wouldn't have been cheaper.

Tippett didn't put those numbers up, but his system boosted them. There's no one doubting Bryzgalov's an NHL goaltender, but what defines a good goaltender from an average one, are the playoffs. Let's say his numbers in the spring dance are far from impressive. Everyone thought the Coyotes were screwed without Bryz, but Smith came in cheap and had no trouble repeating what Bryzgalov had done, and more.

Holmgren went all in on Bryzgalov because after your good run in the playoffs he thought goaltending was the lone weakness of your team, and he may have been right at that time. That won't change the fact that Bryzgalov is not a top-5 goaltender in the NHL. The price the flyers are paying and will pay for him is ridiculous. That's what UFA bids do for you...
- QuebecPride

Really when you look at it. 5.6M Cap hit for a Goalie who is playing as he is right now, isn't ridiculous. It's money well spent. The only question is will he remain playing at a high level for the next 7 years.

I feel a coaching change coming today
- griouxmvp2012

Subban is indeed a special case as his developmental curve went crazy after his draft year.

The problem for the flyers must reside in the developmental part. Because the guys that have developed properly have made the jump quite rapidly or were sure-fires. They skipped the AHL for the most part.

Giroux played under 40 games there. Couturier wouldn't have played a game if not for the lockout. Gagné went straight to the NHL.

But can you remember who was the last player that passed a couple of years in the AHL before becoming a contributer to your team? It's nice to have guys that make the NHL fast, but those guys usually aren't the ones you're worried about. Look at a team like Detroit, you might call them lucky to have grabbed Lidstrom so late, or Datsyuk, or Zetterberg, or Filpula etc... But if you make the count you quickly realize there must be something else than lady luck acting for their faith.
- QuebecPride

let's say "chance" rather than luck, combined with strong ability to pick sleeper talent in later rounds

of course every team wants that in their scouting team

No, I'm not giving them a pass. You can repeatedly say that I am, doesn't make it so. My first statement that they need to do a better job in that area, is clear and precise language.
I didn't dismiss any skill of drafting in later rounds. That is again, your mis-perception of my post.
I didn't attack you with a dismissive tone. You attacked me and my initial statement, in your first reply to my post. I simply responded and pointed out how you only read what you wanted to read, instead of what was actually written.
- MJL

i'd say this is dismissive:


the flyers legacy of failure developing dmen extends back 20+ yrs- inexcusable.
- isaiah520


But let's ignore their legacy of developing plenty of players that they drafted.
-MJL

the cost of having to trade for top flight dmen is twofold:
1) the assets required to obtain them

2) the cap space used to pay them at the later stage of their career

i'd say this is dismissive:


the flyers legacy of failure developing dmen extends back 20+ yrs- inexcusable.
- isaiah520


But let's ignore their legacy of developing plenty of players that they drafted.
-MJL

the cost of having to trade for top flight dmen is twofold:
1) the assets required to obtain them

2) the cap space used to pay them at the later stage of their career
- isaiah520

If you use draft picks to draft and develop players at other positions, and have an excess at that position. And use that excess to fortify another position and fill a need. What is the problem with that? Using a 2nd round pick to acquire an Andre Meszaros is the same as drafting them. I don't care how they get them as long as they do.

You need an influx of young players on cheaper EL deals in a Cap environment. But a defenseman of that age is going to be developing. And when and if that player gets to the level of a Timonen, or even Pronger, you're going to have to pay them. It's picking your poison. If you want to have a top team, you're going to have to pay for it.

There isn't anyone, myself included, that believes that Carle would instantly fix the Flyers issues. But it would surely help. You badly misread that.

Secondly, If I have to explain how Carle moves the puck better then Grossmann, Schenn, and Coburn. The you're absolutely right. I can't tell you specifically how he does it better. Because that is obviously impossible. Because of the clear bias and close mindedness on the player. Further illustrated by your statement singling out Carle for TB recent poor play.

In my opinion, you place far too much value on a defenseman skating the puck out of the zone, versus passing it. But that's just simply because you're reaching badly to try and find a way to discredit Carle's obvious puck moving ability. The clear evidence of his puck moving ability is that he is one of the top scoring defensmen at Even Strength. Passing it is far more preferable to skating it out. No defenseman can skate it out faster then it can be passed. That's a fundamental of Hockey. I also vehemently disagree that Carle can't and doesn't do it when it's the right play. Defenseman skating the puck up ice leaves a team vulnerable to turnovers and odd man rushes. It's not what you want your defenseman doing unless it is the only play available. You reference this repeatedly in your posts on Carle. Not only is it inaccurate, but it misses the finer points on puck moving by defenseman.

Yzerman knows the player he is getting and what the market bears. And Boucher was speaking publicly on Carle, so he just made that statement up, because what else is he going to say? Good one! There wasn't anything else he could say, so he just made that up! LOL

And when you were asked what players that could move the puck better and were cheaper then Carle. It was who was available at the time. Not being asked for random players around the League that are entrenched with their current teams.
As an example, if both were available, Carle at 5.5, and Pietrangelo at 3.1. Then no kidding, it's a no brainer. Pietrangelo is a better player. But that's not reality is it?

Carle is gone and with TB. I understand why they did that. But to ignore what the team is missing by losing Carle, is just ignoring the facts.
And now I'm done with this. Far too much current stuff to discuss on the Flyers
- MJL

I understand what you're saying. That is mostly in line with many's views on the player. But few can actually describe why he's such a good puck mover or what he did specifically that the team is struggling to do now. Would Carle really be able to beat the opposing forecheckers in those physical puck battles and get the puck out better than what's here now? Really?

I point out the negatives on Carle, not because of bias, but because I think he is overrated (and, now, overpaid). Look, overall, I think Carle is a good player. If I were to describe him, I'd say he's a good utility defenseman who can play in all situations but not really excel in any one of them. He's solid on his skates but lacks a physical game which limits his effectiveness. Defensively, he has a good active stick and can block shots with it but he is prone to playing the puck instead of the man and can get burnt against skilled players. He can sometimes leave guys too loosely covered in the slot area. Carle can make a good first pass but isn't a puck moving d man in the pure sense as he rarely skates the puck up ice. Offensively, Carle is capable of joining the play and making good, basic decisions. His lack of a quality shot limits his potential, especially as a poweprlay QB. While Carle will rarely lead the rush, he can join it effectively, though he can sometimes get caught pinching and failing to get back in time to defend.

I think the ideal slot for a guy like Carle is in a second pairing, playing with a quality, physical, two-way guy, getting somewhere between 18-22 minutes a game (and making less than 5 mil).

With Timonen in his last years, and no heir apparent to the #1 spot, the Flyers will need to land a top guy in the near future. With the injuries and certain guys struggling to find chemistry the Flyers weren't likely to contend in this partially aborted season anyway, with or without Carle. With what may be tightened cap restrictions, locking up a guy like Carle at his 5.5mm price may have compromised the ability of the Flyers to go after some of the top FA D men (or trade for a signed #1) in a year or two when the young guys come into their own and window opens up wider once again. They're already going to have to be creative to sign the pending RFAs. IMO, Carle just doesn't add a lot of unique value that makes him an indispensible/irreplaceable player. The Flyers' struggles have more to do with other things (injuries/chemistry, possibly coaching issues) than with missing what Matt Carle brought to the table, per se.
So, yeah, I don't miss him. Let Tampa pay him that money and make him their big money free agent acquisition, good luck with that.

If you use draft picks to draft and develop players at other positions, and have an excess at that position. And use that excess to fortify another position and fill a need. What is the problem with that? Using a 2nd round pick to acquire an Andre Meszaros is the same as drafting them. I don't care how they get them as long as they do.

You need an influx of young players on cheaper EL deals in a Cap environment. But a defenseman of that age is going to be developing. And when and if that player gets to the level of a Timonen, or even Pronger, you're going to have to pay them. It's picking your poison. If you want to have a top team, you're going to have to pay for it.
- MJL

look at the wealth of assets and cap space it took to obtain/pay pronger at 35? it's clearly NOT the same. it's one thing to get a #4 guy like mez for a 2nd rnder, but wouldn't it be a joy to draft an OEL or karlsson ? when you do have to pay them, they've been raised in your culture and you know whether your willing to live with their warts and all of the inside stuff that's rarely discussed. thats a solid intangible to be aware of. you know i'm right.

look at the wealth of assets and cap space it took to obtain/pay pronger at 35? it's clearly NOT the same. it's one thing to get a #4 guy like mez for a 2nd rnder, but wouldn't it be a joy to draft an OEL or karlsson ? when you do have to pay them, they've been raised in your culture and you know whether your willing to live with their warts and all of the inside stuff that's rarely discussed. thats a solid intangible to be aware of. you know i'm right.
- isaiah520

I think you're right on some points, but not all. I think you're so ingrained with getting a young defenseman that you overlook a lot of variables and it clouds your judgement. That's just my opinion. It as if they get a young defenseman in using a draft pick or in any trade, or it's a bad move. That's tunnel vision. It would be just as much of a joy to draft on OEL as it would be to draft a Giroux. But Phoenix and Ottawa doesn't have a Giroux. There are many ways to get defenseman and build a defense is my point. And Holmgren has shown he can do that. But it's as if they don't draft one and develop the player themselves, then it's not as good in your view. I don't share that same sentiment. I don't give a dam about what culture they were raised in, as long as they're a good player and they fill a need.

I think you're right on some points, but not all. I think you're so ingrained with getting a young defenseman that you overlook a lot of variables and it clouds your judgement. That's just my opinion. It as if they get a young defenseman in using a draft pick or in any trade, or it's a bad move. That's tunnel vision. It would be just as much of a joy to draft on OEL as it would be to draft a Giroux. But Phoenix and Ottawa doesn't have a Giroux. There are many ways to get defenseman and build a defense is my point. And Holmgren has shown he can do that. But it's as if they don't draft one and develop the player themselves, then it's not as good in your view. I don't share that same sentiment. I don't give a dam about what culture they were raised in, as long as they're a good player and they fill a need.
- MJL

- not even implied. after 40 + yrs of having that as the only surefire way to obtain a premier guy being unacceptable...that's the salient point.

hockey is much like football in that culture makes a big difference. it's part of the reason that elements of the talent that we culled together in '08 are not with us. hence all the talk about "in the room", not in a vacuum.

- not even implied. after 40 + yrs of having that as the only surefire way to obtain a premier guy being unacceptable...that's the salient point.

hockey is much like football in that culture makes a big difference. it's part of the reason that elements of the talent that we culled together in '08 are not with us. hence all the talk about "in the room", not in a vacuum.
- isaiah520

Drafting a player doesn't automatically make that player fit into a culture. That's why teams a lot of times go outside of an Organization to bring in players of quality and leadership qualities.

Zero interest in rehashing the reason why certain elements were traded from 08. Especially in the light of recent events proving the overwhelming majority of that weak speculation to be unfounded. And that's the end of that.