He falls right in line with the other saints that have recently played for this team and done no wrong. Randy Jones, Jody Shelley, Ilya Bryzgalov and my favourite was Nodl.

Familiar day on HB.
- flyer_nutter

Yep, full of hyperbole.

I think its time we settle this once and for all.

W...T...F does soft mean? Because it seems my definition and others definitions are not the same.

It seems to me that if a guy does not run people through the wall, and fight, they get labeled soft. And in my opinion that is just idiotic.

I guess by their definition Nik Lidstrom is soft. Kimmo is soft. Eric Dejardins was soft.

Give me a break.
- MBFlyerfan

Jeff Carter

To compare Matt Carle and "soft" to a player like Lindstrom, Timonen and Desjardins is kind of insulting to the latter 3 imo.

I'll do it this way. With the current Flyer D core, who is soft? Probably Streit and Guss.

It shouldnt even matter what the hell the definition of soft is. It comes down to people needing to prove their penis size and that "their definition is correct".

If someone finds Matt Carle to be an iron man. Thats cool. Dont try to force those views on others, because frankly many people dont believe that, or need to "debate" about it.
- flyer_nutter

Well, then instead of you trying to prove to me you have a big cock, why dont you explain to me what you think a soft d-man is?

There is only person person here driving this whole Carle hard on.

The guy was sent out on his ass because he wanted too much money for what he is. A soft D-man, who is decent in his own end, decent passer but cant shoot the puck to save his life.

Mediocre.

Matt (frank)ing Carle? We are still debating this hard on for him? Really?
- flyer_nutter

We didnt keep him because we made a big pitch to Suter. We would have paid him his money if we hadn't wanted to swing for the fenses. Not complaining only stating. Would rather have him then Striet but NEVER complaining about homer aiming big. Love it. Stanley or bust and that doesnt mean short term planning only in my eyes.

Yep, full of hyperbole.
- MBFlyerfan

In the end. Just an opinion.

I dont feel a need to "prove" my opinion on others.

But that was my original point: You don't need Mark Streit to play those hard minutes, because now the Flyers have Luke Schenn.

Yes, they can, and should, hide Mark Streit at 5v5. That's good coaching. What the Flyers were missing last year was someone with Streit's skillset who could be hidden in the defensive zone yet kill it on the offensive side.
- AllInForFlyers

I agree with that totally. And fans need to realize what they're getting in Streit. There's going to be some occasions where he is caught in the wrong situation. You know going in that other Coaches are going to try and take advantage of that. It's the good with the bad. But if he helps with the transition game, and produces on the PP. Then he's doing his job.

We didnt keep him because we made a big pitch to Suter. We would have paid him his money if we hadn't wanted to swing for the fenses. Not complaining only stating. Would rather have him then Striet but NEVER complaining about homer aiming big. Love it. Stanley or bust and that doesnt mean short term planning only in my eyes.
- coffee junkie

Love that Holmgren went for the big fish. Just didn't work out.

Well, then instead of you trying to prove to me you have a big cock, why dont you explain to me what you think a soft d-man is?
- MBFlyerfan

Haha alrighty I suppose, but I am going to change topics after this if thats cool, the whole Matt Carle "soft" debate gets old.

The best way to describe it is by comparing players. Take guys like Grossman, Meszaros, Timonen, Luke Schenn and Coburn.

Now compare them to say Guss or Streit.

I dont feel like going into each and every subjective opinion I have on the topic, because as we all know, the debate will rage. I'm cool with PM'ing you but for the sake of the board I rather stay away from it.

In the end. Just an opinion.

I dont feel a need to "prove" my opinion on others.
- flyer_nutter

I'm not asking you to prove anything, I really want to know why you think a soft dman is a soft dman other than "because they are."

In my opinion anyone who blocked as many shots as Carle did, is not a soft player in my book.

I would classify a guy as soft if he actively avoids contact, constantly gets outworked because of LACK OF EFFORT, and does not sacrifice himself to block shots.

Your turn.

In the end. Just an opinion.

I dont feel a need to "prove" my opinion on others.
- flyer_nutter

You don't need to prove it, but you do need to complain anytime anybody has a contrary view of Carle? Does not compute.

Well, then instead of you trying to prove to me you have a big cock, why dont you explain to me what you think a soft d-man is?
- MBFlyerfan

A king who has to say he is the king all the time isn't truly a king

We didnt keep him because we made a big pitch to Suter. We would have paid him his money if we hadn't wanted to swing for the fenses. Not complaining only stating. Would rather have him then Striet but NEVER complaining about homer aiming big. Love it. Stanley or bust and that doesnt mean short term planning only in my eyes.
- coffee junkie

I dont really know if the Flyers wanted to keep Carle for that money, but its possible.

At least personally, I'm happy for whatever reason they didnt decide to pay him that kind of cash, for the term.

I'm not asking you to prove anything, I really want to know why you think a soft dman is a soft dman other than "because they are."

In my opinion anyone who blocked as many shots as Carle did, is not a soft player in my book.

I would classify a guy as soft if he actively avoids contact, constantly gets outworked because of LACK OF EFFORT, and does not sacrifice himself to block shots.

Your turn.
- MBFlyerfan

x2

I dont really know if the Flyers wanted to keep Carle for that money, but its possible.

At least personally, I'm happy for whatever reason they didnt decide to pay him that kind of cash, for the term.
- flyer_nutter

Only in the context of what they paid Streit, I would rather have Carle at 5.5.

You don't need to prove it, but you do need to complain anytime anybody has a contrary view of Carle? Does not compute.
- BulliesPhan87

Actually I came in kind of shocked that Carle still stands to be a hot topic.

I made my own post on that. Which was, as always, replied to with a stern defense of Carle.

x2
- Crimsoninja

+1 ?

Haha alrighty I suppose, but I am going to change topics after this if thats cool, the whole Matt Carle "soft" debate gets old.

The best way to describe it is by comparing players. Take guys like Grossman, Meszaros, Timonen, Luke Schenn and Coburn.

Now compare them to say Guss or Streit.

I dont feel like going into each and every subjective opinion I have on the topic, because as we all know, the debate will rage. I'm cool with PM'ing you but for the sake of the board I rather stay away from it.
- flyer_nutter

That's not a good way to describe a soft player. A soft player is a player who is intimidated, and shies away from physical contact. And bails out on plays. Comparing a player like Carle who is at best 6'0 and 200 lbs to players like Coburn, Grossmann, and Schenn, who are 6'3-6'5 and 220-240 lbs doesn't make much sense. Like MB said, I guess Lidstrom is soft also. Because he doesn't play with a mean streak and doesn't throw big checks and push people around either.

You don't need to prove it, but you do need to complain anytime anybody has a contrary view of Carle? Does not compute.
- BulliesPhan87

For me, all I said was that the Flyers didn't miss Matt Carle at 5v5 even strength defensively -- because, well, he just didn't play those brutal minutes particularly well.

I certainly gave him the credit that he was due, for the player that he is. But swapping his Top 4 role defensively will benefit the Flyers now that they have someone who can provide the offense that he did.

It's really a two-for-one -- and that's not saying that Mark Streit is better than Matt Carle, or vice versa. It's that having Schenn allows Streit to be deployed in far more favorable situations.

Actually I came in kind of shocked that Carle still stands to be a hot topic.

I made my own post on that. Which was, as always, replied to with a stern defense of Carle.
- flyer_nutter

Ever think mebbe your opinion is just... wrong? Not saying it is or isn't but usually when an opine is vehemently defended its really either spot on or way off.

+1 ?
- JoeRussomanno

dont start, joe

I'm not asking you to prove anything, I really want to know why you think a soft dman is a soft dman other than "because they are."

In my opinion anyone who blocked as many shots as Carle did, is not a soft player in my book.

I would classify a guy as soft if he actively avoids contact, constantly gets outworked because of LACK OF EFFORT, and does not sacrifice himself to block shots.

Your turn.
- MBFlyerfan

Now that is a solid description of a soft player.

Kevin Shattenkirk.

dont start, joe
- Crimsoninja

but I was agreeing with you

Kevin Shattenkirk.
- acd513

Will stay a member of St Louis.

I'm not asking you to prove anything, I really want to know why you think a soft dman is a soft dman other than "because they are."

In my opinion anyone who blocked as many shots as Carle did, is not a soft player in my book.

I would classify a guy as soft if he actively avoids contact, constantly gets outworked because of LACK OF EFFORT, and does not sacrifice himself to block shots.

Your turn.
- MBFlyerfan

I'll play then a little. Its all subjective in the end anyway, and Im cool if you dont find him soft. I wont try to change your views. Its all subjective in the end really.

To me, Carle was soft because of a lack of initiating physicality. Inability to clear the net. Losing too many battles in the trenches.