i miss exlund

i miss exlund
- Crimsoninja

i miss exlund
- Crimsoninja

And you say I'm insane!

I did read what you wrote. He doesn't bring more of a physical edge then Carle does. Not at all. They are very similar players as far as a physical edge is concerned.
- MJL

Not at all is a bit strong, I think you should rephrase that...anyways my other posts were removed, but this eval coincides with what I think about the physicality comparison between the two:

Carle


ASSETS: Skates very well and is usually in good position. Makes a very good first pass out of his own end. Has solid offensive instincts. Can jump up into the play well.

FLAWS: Isn't as effective in physical contests as he is when the game is more passive. Can occasionally make a critical blunder in the defensive zone when pressured. Lacks consistency.

Suter

ASSETS: Possesses an excellent all-around game. Love to join the attack, and can rack up points on the power play, mainly due to a heavy point shot and pinpoint passing. Loves to hit people, and loves a heavy workload.

FLAWS: Will sometimes chase a big hit, which places himself out of defensive position.

Not at all is a bit strong, I think you should rephrase that...anyways my other posts were removed, but this eval coincides with what I think about the physicality comparison between the two:

Carle


ASSETS: Skates very well and is usually in good position. Makes a very good first pass out of his own end. Has solid offensive instincts. Can jump up into the play well.

FLAWS: Isn't as effective in physical contests as he is when the game is more passive. Can occasionally make a critical blunder in the defensive zone when pressured. Lacks consistency.

Suter

ASSETS: Possesses an excellent all-around game. Love to join the attack, and can rack up points on the power play, mainly due to a heavy point shot and pinpoint passing. Loves to hit people, and loves a heavy workload.

FLAWS: Will sometimes chase a big hit, which places himself out of defensive position.
- flyers20032002

And when were these scouting reports written?

So Suter loves to hit people and chase a big hit?

Suter has played 54 games this year and has registered 30 hits

Carle has played 56 games and has registered 36 hits

As far as physicality goes, they are comparable players.

And when were these scouting reports written?

So Suter loves to hit people and chase a big hit?

Suter has played 54 games this year and has registered 30 hits

Carle has played 56 games and has registered 36 hits
- MJL

Hitting stats are very subjective and I take them with a grain of salt. Not sure when it was written, but both descriptions are accurate if you look at the current players. Suter chasing big hits might be a bit of an exaggeration. There's little doubt in my mind that if you compare Suter's physical game to Carle's, Suter comes out on top.

Hitting stats are very subjective and I take them with a grain of salt. Not sure when it was written, but both descriptions are accurate if you look at the current players. Suter chasing big hits might be a bit of an exaggeration. There's little doubt in my mind that if you compare Suter's physical game to Carle's, Suter comes out on top.
- flyers20032002

Scouting reports aren't subjective and shouldn't be take with a grain of salt? Who was that written by? They may have been accurate when they were written, but not so accurate now. Players evolve and grow and get better. I just compared the two player's physical game. Suter didn't come out on top.

Scouting reports aren't subjective and should be take with a grain of salt? Who was that written by? They may have been accurate when they were written, but not so accurate now. Players evolve and grow and get better. I just compared the two player's physical game. Suter didn't come out on top.
- MJL

So everything else in the scouting report seems spot on, but the physical aspect in regards to both players, the point of contention here, is the only thing inaccurate? Man oh man, w/e lol.

So everything else in the scouting report seems spot on, but the physical aspect in regards to both players, the point of contention here, is the only thing inaccurate? Man oh man, w/e lol.
- flyers20032002

I didn't say what specifically was inacurate. Where are those scouting reports from?

I didn't say what specifically was inacurate. Where are those scouting reports from?
- MJL

Hockey news, a relatively reputable source. Don't take this wrong way, but I'll take a scout's opinion over most people's as they are constantly watching the game and evaluating talent. Have you ever evaluated talent at an elite level? I sure haven't, so while it shouldn't be taken as gospel I think it holds more weight than either of our opinions...just my two cents.

Hockey news, a relatively reputable source. Don't take this wrong way, but I'll take a scout's opinion over most people's as they are constantly watching the game and evaluating talent. Have you ever evaluated talent at an elite level? I sure haven't, so while it shouldn't be taken as gospel I think it holds more weight than either of our opinions...just my two cents.
- flyers20032002

I would also take a scouts opinion. But if were talking about the two players in the 11/12 Season, then it would be best to use a current talent evaluation of the two players and not an outdated scouting report from both players pre NHL days. Just my 2 cents.

I would also take a scouts opinion. But if were talking about the two players in the 11/12 Season, then it would be best to use a current talent evaluation of the two players and not an outdated scouting report from both players pre NHL days. Just my 2 cents.
- MJL

Why do you think it's outdated? You just disagree with the physical eval in regards to Suter, everything else seems spot on based on your previous posts. It appears as though they keep the player bios up to date as well. Go look at a few others. I doubt this was written in 2001 when Suter was drafted, but rather seems to be a work in progress much like the other information on the player's page.

edit: drafted in 2003

Why do you think it's outdated? You just disagree with the physical eval in regards to Suter, everything else seems spot on based on your previous posts. It appears as though they keep the player bios up to date as well. Go look at a few others. I doubt this was written in 2001 when Suter was drafted, but rather seems to be a work in progress much like the other information on the player's page.
- flyers20032002

All of those scouting reports that you read for players are from the beginning of their careers. You see the same scouting report on many websites. It's a pool evaluation. They are outdated

All of those scouting reports that you read for players are from the beginning of their careers. You see the same scouting report on many websites. It's a pool evaluation. They are outdated
- MJL

So you're saying Suter's physical game has magically evaporated? Carle doesn't have a physical game and never will...Based on the verbage in the last 5-6 player evals I have read the information is all spot on. I'd say it isn't outdated and can apply. Look at Pronger's profile, it clearly HAS been updated. Sorry, but I think they are doing a great job keeping the player bio up to date and current:

Pronger


ASSETS: Is an awesome one-on-one defender, has a great reach and can dish out punishing body checks. He's also an excellent power-play point man, due to a big shot. Was born to lead.

FLAWS: Has a tendency to take bad penalties and make questionable hits. Isn't a natural when rushing up the ice with the puck. Is becoming injury-prone.

Lidstrom's as well...you don't call someone a hall of famer in a pool evaluation, sorry...

ASSETS: Uses his superior hockey intelligence and skill to dominate the game. An outstanding passer, he also has an incredibly accurate shot from the point. Plays calm and is very efficient in the defensive zone. Thrives with lots of ice time. Is a great lateral skater.

FLAWS: Is not a physical player by any stretch of the imagination. Has started to wear down because of years of logging tons of ice time.

CAREER POTENTIAL: Future Hall-of-Fame defenseman.

So you're saying Suter's physical game has magically evaporated? Carle doesn't have a physical game and never will...Based on the verbage in the last 5-6 player evals I have read the information is all spot on. I'd say it isn't outdated and can apply. Look at Pronger's profile, it clearly HAS been updated. Sorry, but I think they are doing a great job keeping the player bio up to date and current:

Pronger


ASSETS: Is an awesome one-on-one defender, has a great reach and can dish out punishing body checks. He's also an excellent power-play point man, due to a big shot. Was born to lead.

FLAWS: Has a tendency to take bad penalties and make questionable hits. Isn't a natural when rushing up the ice with the puck. Is becoming injury-prone.
- flyers20032002

It's not current. I'm saying and I'll repeat it and them move on. When it comes to physicality, Suter and Carle are comparable players.

It's not current. I'm saying and I'll repeat it and them move on. When it comes to physicality, Suter and Carle are comparable players.
- MJL

It is current, they are clearly updating it....how can you blindly refute that?

It is current, they are clearly updating it....how can you blindly refute that?
- flyers20032002

How can you blindly say it is current?

How can you blindly say it is current?
- MJL

If it was a pool evaluation of the players outlook early in their career how could they have projected Lidstrom to be a HHOF and Pronger to be injury prone???? Like what the hell?

edit:I am done, you win lol...

If it was a pool evaluation of the players outlook early in their career how could they have projected Lidstrom to be a HHOF and Pronger to be injury prone???? Like what the hell?

edit:I am done, you win lol...
- flyers20032002

How do you explain the inaccuracy of the scouting report you posted for Suter saying he love to hit people? He has 30 hits in 54 games. He loves to hit people but just doesn't do it? His 30 hits rank him 171st among all NHL defenseman in hits. If you want to hang your hat on that, be my guess.

Pronger has had injuries his entire career. Lidstrom's potential has been updated. Do you have to be a pro talent evaluator to know that Lidstrom is going to be a Hall of Fame player? Some may have been updated, But they are very general, and are not written by professional NHL talent evaluators.

How do you explain the inaccuracy of the scouting report you posted for Suter saying he love to hit people? He has 30 hits in 54 games. He loves to hit people but just doesn't do it? His 30 hits rank him 171st among all NHL defenseman in hits. If you want to hang your hat on that, be my guess.

Pronger has had injuries his entire career. Lidstrom's potential has been updated. Do you have to be a pro talent evaluator to know that Lidstrom is going to be a Hall of Fame player? Some may have been updated, But they are very general, and are not written by professional NHL talent evaluators.
- MJL

You're great at twisting people's words to fit your agenda, so w/e...I would like to see Suter's Career hit totals to that of Matt Carle and I bet they're in favor of Suter. You can't just base everything off of one season, it's a bit narrow minded.

You're great at twisting people's words to fit your agenda, so w/e...I would like to see Suter's Career hit totals to that of Matt Carle and I bet they're in favor of Suter. You can't just base everything off of one season, it's a bit narrow minded.
- flyers20032002

They may very well be in favor of Suter. Carle has never been a big hitter. So that's not hard to do. Were not talking about last year, the year before, or the year before that. It's about right now. Because that is the player your getting. The player right now. And right now, they're comparable physically as players. It's not narrow minded, its focused. You brought up pro talent evaluators. If they went to watch each player now, what would they be looking at? The players past, or the player right now?

They may very well be in favor of Suter. Carle has never been a big hitter. So that's not hard to do. Were not talking about last year, the year before, or the year before that. It's about right now. Because that is the player your getting. The player right now. And right now, they're comparable physically as players. It's not narrow minded, its focused. You brought up pro talent evaluators. If they went to watch each player now, what would they be looking at? The players past, or the player right now?
- MJL

Right now, Suter is the more physical of the two...that was the whole point of my original comment. I don't care about the stats through 50+ games of one NHL season. If you take Suter's game and Carle's game and put them side by side Suter has the physical edge. It may not be leaps and bounds, that's not what was in my original comment. It was that he provides more of a physical edge than Carle, he might not be registering it on the stat sheet so far this year. Hartnell is better than Ovechkin, right? His numbers RIGHT now are, so let's go make that deal....

Right now, Suter is the more physical of the two...that was the whole point of my original comment. I don't care about the stats through 50+ games of one NHL season. If you take Suter's game and Carle's game and put them side by side Suter has the physical edge. It may not be leaps and bounds, that's not what was in my original comment. It was that he provides more of a physical edge than Carle, he might not be registering it on the stat sheet so far this year. Hartnell is better than Ovechkin, right? His numbers RIGHT now are, so let's go make that deal....
- flyers20032002

Who's a better player is a different conversation and isn't relevant to this conversation. I disagree. Right now, Suter and Carle are comparable players physically. Unless there is anything else, I'm done here. Neither of us is going to change our minds.

i miss exlund
- Crimsoninja

u were saying?

Who's a better player is a different conversation and isn't relevant to this conversation. I disagree. Right now, Suter and Carle are comparable players physically. Unless there is anything else, I'm done here. Neither of us is going to change our minds.
- MJL

Once again misquoting...I didn't even bring up better player. Yup, we're done here.