Jeff Carter

coords · June 5, 2014

My mind is blown

He was a line killer here. I'm pretty sure while he was here, with the way he played, he'd of reduced the point production of anybody on his line. It could have been Carter Crosby and Malkin, Carter, Lindros, Primeau, and he'd kill the line and have us questioning if Primeau was anygood.

Yes he could shoot... but.. that was pretty much one good shot then 4 out of 5 times, high and wide and going the other way.

Yes I know he could skate, yes I knew the way he did it made his style of play have nonchalance this city cannot tolerate...but who is this player on the Kings?

He can pass now?

He plays smart now?

I thought he could get better but right now he's looking like the third best player on a team that should win the Cup...behind Quick and Doughty...I never of guessed that even possible.

Poulin20 · June 5, 2014

Coaching maybe?? Maybe someone got ahold of him and showed what he needed to focus the talent that he had, or maybe a team mate or team mates made him accountable???

Who knows but he is much better now...

fishbulb · June 5, 2014

He's also much older and more mature. Getting traded to columbus was probably a wake up call too. (Yes.. even though he apparently pouted crater haters)

King Knut · June 5, 2014

Don't know how to break it to you, but he had a lot of that when he was here. These aren't new skills.

The difference as I see it is confidence.

He's not tentative. He was always cautious before. Never committing too much. Many saw it as laziness but to me it seemed like caution. Concern for being out of position. If I'm being honest I feel like I remover the same thing with willy and rusty in their time a few years earlier.

Now Carter is just all in. He has confidence that his wingers will be open and ready for a pass, that his d men can back him up and that his goalie will shut the door.

He didn't have many of those with any consistency with much consistency in philly.

To boot, hitch hated playmakers and play making. He was all about system system system.

Stevens wasn't much better to be honest. So in that sense coaching probably was a factor as well.

My mind is blown

He was a line killer here. I'm pretty sure while he was here, with the way he played, he'd of reduced the point production of anybody on his line. It could have been Carter Crosby and Malkin, Carter, Lindros, Primeau, and he'd kill the line and have us questioning if Primeau was anygood.

Yes he could shoot... but.. that was pretty much one good shot then 4 out of 5 times, high and wide and going the other way.

Yes I know he could skate, yes I knew the way he did it made his style of play have nonchalance this city cannot tolerate...but who is this player on the Kings?

He can pass now?

He plays smart now?

I thought he could get better but right now he's looking like the third best player on a team that should win the Cup...behind Quick and Doughty...I never of guessed that even possible.

Vanflyer · June 5, 2014

He was a line killer here.

he was not a line killer. He was just one dimensional.

I thought he could get better but right now he's looking like the third best player on a team that should win the Cup...behind Quick and Doughty...I never of guessed that even possible.

Somebody said maturity and I think that hit the nail on the head. I also think that Stevens / Suter has had allot to do with it. Remember Stevens was the Phantoms calder cup wining coach with both Richards and Carter coming in late after their Junior seasons were done. There is a LONG history there.

Somebody finally got into his head to re-teach him to play like he did in Jrs. He was not one dimensional then. Perhaps confidence / maturity and not banging so many old city chicks every night.

All I ask is nobody say wow, I want that player back. Voracek / Couturier are still greater than Carter is right now and there is a huge ceiling for Couturier (who out-scored Carter at the Jr. level).

Not for nothing, but Carters home is Jersey shore. In the off season, he lives there. Just a bit of trivial info.

Edited June 5, 2014 by Vanflyer

Vanflyer · June 5, 2014

Don't know how to break it to you, but he had a lot of that when he was here. These aren't new skills.
The difference as I see it is confidence.

He's not tentative. He was always cautious before. Never committing too much. Many saw it as laziness but to me it seemed like caution. Concern for being out of position. If I'm being honest I feel like I remover the same thing with willy and rusty in their time a few years earlier.

Now Carter is just all in. He has confidence that his wingers will be open and ready for a pass, that his d men can back him up and that his goalie will shut the door.

He didn't have many of those with any consistency with much consistency in philly.

To boot, hitch hated playmakers and play making. He was all about system system system.
Stevens wasn't much better to be honest. So in that sense coaching probably was a factor as well.

Could not have said it better myself. Winner winner, chicken dinner.

Digityman · June 5, 2014

Let a player develop. Weird concept.

King Knut · June 5, 2014

It's funny because when hitch started his second year, he was saying that the problem with his first year was that he was trying to force players away from their strengths and into his system.

He said that, but then nothing seemed to change. Only Primeau and Gagne seemed to adapt fully.

Rusty and Willy we're quite happily shipped to cup winners elsewhere and the fan bases turned on them both for not turning into scoring machines.

I feel like I see that a lot in Philly. A guy just starts to realize his potential, but then just stops doing whatever he had been doing and stays conservative and safe a lot more.

Seems to happen regardless of the coach too.

Giroux seems to have cracked it. Simmonds has flashes and those flashes got frequent if not consistent this year.

Coots just committed to the other direction first which I'm fine with because he's just so damned good at it.

Even VLC's issues seem to fit in with this a little.

Carter scored more goals more consistently as a flyer, but as a king he's turned into a play maker and now it seems a game changer.

I could go along with the maturity angle some assert, but the team's track record with scoring talent really seems to suggest there is more going on.

Maybe this whole joke about "hitch yelled at me" had more to do with what hitch was yelling than just the volume?

Let a player develop. Weird concept.

murraycraven · June 5, 2014

do we really need to have a new Carter / Richards post after every game?

DaGreatGazoo · June 5, 2014

do we really need to have a new Carter / Richards post after every game?

Yes. It's in the forum guidelines.

DaGreatGazoo · June 5, 2014

Sorry, guys..but I'm not going to revise history. Carter could score when he was in Philly, on and off the ice. And that's all he did...he floated, he didn't back check, he didn't go into the corners, and he sure as hell deserved the reputation he got while a Flyer.

The talent was never a question; the heart always was. Maturation is one the keys, as someone said. Saying that...if he had stayed in Philly I'm not sure he develops into the player he is now--for all the reasons we've already beaten to death.

fanaticV3.0 · June 5, 2014

Sorry, guys..but I'm not going to revise history. Carter could score when he was in Philly, on and off the ice. And that's all he did...he floated, he didn't back check, he didn't go into the corners, and he sure as hell deserved the reputation he got while a Flyer.

The talent was never a question; the heart always was. Maturation is one the keys, as someone said. Saying that...if he had stayed in Philly I'm not sure he develops into the player he is now--for all the reasons we've already beaten to death.

This revisionist history makes me want to barf (not you coords, you are not pretending to have expected this all along). He was absolutely a one dimensional player here. Anyone pretending they knew he had this in him all along is full of the stuff I'm about to go evacuate from my system.

Additionally, he had 50 points in the regular season. He's having a good PO, and this is probably the best stint in his career, but it's still just a stint at this point. Get off his cock.You can recognize how good he's playing right now without anointing him the best player in the league.

murraycraven · June 5, 2014

Sorry, guys..but I'm not going to revise history. Carter could score when he was in Philly, on and off the ice. And that's all he did...he floated, he didn't back check, he didn't go into the corners, and he sure as hell deserved the reputation he got while a Flyer.

The talent was never a question; the heart always was. Maturation is one the keys, as someone said. Saying that...if he had stayed in Philly I'm not sure he develops into the player he is now--for all the reasons we've already beaten to death.

Thank you! Well said...

This revisionist history makes me want to barf (not you coords, you are not pretending to have expected this all along). He was absolutely a one dimensional player here. Anyone pretending they knew he had this in him all along is full of the stuff I'm about to go evacuate from my system.

Additionally, he had 50 points in the regular season. He's having a good PO, and this is probably the best stint in his career, but it's still just a stint at this point. Get off his cock.You can recognize how good he's playing right now without anointing him the best player in the league.

Thank you too and well said...

I think we need to get the mods around the table to change the HF Bilaws that Jeff Carter is a distant memory of the Flyers, and thus, posters must refrain from future JC threads.

I am wating for this post to appear one of these days: "Is Jeff Carter a better leader and player than Giroux?"

Edited June 5, 2014 by murraycraven

fanaticV3.0 · June 5, 2014

Thank you! Well said...

Thank you too and well said...

I think we need to get the mods around the table to change the HF Bilaws that Jeff Carter is a distant memory of the Flyers, and thus, posters must refrain from future JC threads.

I am wating for this post to appear one of these days: "Is Jeff Carter a better leader and player than Giroux?"

I hate revisionist history when it comes to former players. Player X is playing well now, therefore it was a bad trade. What moronic logic that is. It ignores so much all for the sake of right now. JVR had more points than Carter this past regular season for Christ's sake, but Carter is a great player all of a sudden because of this year's PO? Please. If he wasn't on a Cup contending team, we wouldn't even be talking about him.

murraycraven · June 5, 2014

If he wasn't on a Cup contending team, we wouldn't even be talking about him.

^^THIS^^

Carter is playing well and I will not downplay is game of late. The fact of the matter is Carter has a great Team around him too and he is not the #1/#2 cornerstone player in LA as he was expected to be in Philly. I have no problem w/ debating past trades and what not but this topic has been beat to death... and then beat some more.

Edited June 5, 2014 by murraycraven

radoran · June 5, 2014

I hate revisionist history when it comes to former players. Player X is playing well now, therefore it was a bad trade. What moronic logic that is. It ignores so much all for the sake of right now. JVR had more points than Carter this past regular season for Christ's sake, but Carter is a great player all of a sudden because of this year's PO? Please. If he wasn't on a Cup contending team, we wouldn't even be talking about him.

I completely agree that the topic is beaten to death, but I do think that a lot of the revisionist history is the "line killer" line that is usually dredged up and the "wasn't going to develop here" mantra.

Again, for the record, I agreed with the trades then and agree with them now. But the fundamental reason they got a first round pick (Sean Couturier) and a first line player (Voracek) for Crater was that he was - and is - a well developed NHL player. You have said on other threads that we should see if a player has multiple 30/60 seasons before deciding he is a "great" player.

Crater had three in a row for the Flyers including a 46/84. How much more "development" did we need to see?

Two of those seasons he was +23 and +27.with the "down" being a +2 in 2010 when all this floating, leaderless, unmotivated kid that the Flyers had tapped with an Assistant Captain label, groomed to be part of the team long term and would sign to a nine-year contract did was score five goals in 12 games, coming back to play after missing 10 games with a broken foot... He scored the Conference Final winning goal against the Habs and added the empty netter to ice the game.

No, that does mean it was a bad trade. But it also doesn't mean that it "couldn't have happened here."

It almost did.

Let a player develop. Weird concept.

Player had developed. If anything, I'd say the Flyers traded him then because his value would never be higher.

And it likely never will be.

mojo1917 · June 6, 2014

I completely agree that the topic is beaten to death, but I do think that a lot of the revisionist history is the "line killer" line that is usually dredged up and the "wasn't going to develop here" mantra.

Again, for the record, I agreed with the trades then and agree with them now. But the fundamental reason they got a first round pick (Sean Couturier) and a first line player (Voracek) for Crater was that he was - and is - a well developed NHL player. You have said on other threads that we should see if a player has multiple 30/60 seasons before deciding he is a "great" player.

Crater had three in a row for the Flyers including a 46/84. How much more "development" did we need to see?

Two of those seasons he was +23 and +27.with the "down" being a +2 in 2010 when all this floating, leaderless, unmotivated kid that the Flyers had tapped with an Assistant Captain label, groomed to be part of the team long term and would sign to a nine-year contract did was score five goals in 12 games, coming back to play after missing 10 games with a broken foot... He scored the Conference Final winning goal against the Habs and added the empty netter to ice the game.

No, that does mean it was a bad trade. But it also doesn't mean that it "couldn't have happened here."

It almost did.

Player had developed. If anything, I'd say the Flyers traded him then because his value would never be higher.

And it likely never will be.

Great post ruxoran, great post

murraycraven · June 6, 2014

ruxoran

good thing i work at home b/c I just spilled coffee all over my desk laughing at that!

flyercanuck · June 6, 2014

Great post ruxoran, great post

Ditto mojo.

I bow before greatness!

fanaticV3.0 · June 10, 2014

^^THIS^^

Carter is playing well and I will not downplay is game of late. The fact of the matter is Carter has a great Team around him too and he is not the #1/#2 cornerstone player in LA as he was expected to be in Philly. I have no problem w/ debating past trades and what not but this topic has been beat to death... and then beat some more.

Me neither. I have no problem admitting he's playing very well right now. But anyone anointing him anything - other than a guy on a hot streak - is an idiot. Scott Hartnell had more points than Carter did this past season. Hell Carter's regular season numbers since leaving here are worse than his last 3 seasons here. He's regressed. A hot streak is nothing more than a hot streak until that player can play at a higher level longer than the length of a tournament.

fanaticV3.0 · June 10, 2014

I completely agree that the topic is beaten to death, but I do think that a lot of the revisionist history is the "line killer" line that is usually dredged up and the "wasn't going to develop here" mantra.

Again, for the record, I agreed with the trades then and agree with them now. But the fundamental reason they got a first round pick (Sean Couturier) and a first line player (Voracek) for Crater was that he was - and is - a well developed NHL player. You have said on other threads that we should see if a player has multiple 30/60 seasons before deciding he is a "great" player.

Crater had three in a row for the Flyers including a 46/84. How much more "development" did we need to see?

Two of those seasons he was +23 and +27.with the "down" being a +2 in 2010 when all this floating, leaderless, unmotivated kid that the Flyers had tapped with an Assistant Captain label, groomed to be part of the team long term and would sign to a nine-year contract did was score five goals in 12 games, coming back to play after missing 10 games with a broken foot... He scored the Conference Final winning goal against the Habs and added the empty netter to ice the game.

No, that does mean it was a bad trade. But it also doesn't mean that it "couldn't have happened here."

It almost did.

Player had developed. If anything, I'd say the Flyers traded him then because his value would never be higher.

And it likely never will be.

Funny enough, he hasn't had 30/60 in a single season (let alone more than one in a row) since leaving. If he had, we're not having this conversation.

I don't feel the least bit guilty, wrong, or overzealous in saying it wasn't going to happen here with them at the helm. It's not presumptuous, it's astute. If someone can look at their time here and is still all "We don't know what would have happened", I've got a wonderful investment opportunity for you. All you have to do is mail your life savings to my friend in Nigeria. He's a prince, so you can trust him.

mojo1917 · June 10, 2014

If someone can look at their time here and is still all "We don't know what would have happened", I've got a wonderful investment opportunity for you. All you have to do is mail your life savings to my friend in Nigeria. He's a prince, so you can trust him.

this is funny.

He was good when he was here, he's better now. it happens.

let it go Elsa , let it go.

Edited June 11, 2014 by mojo1917

Bakanekimiwa · June 11, 2014

Let a player develop. Weird concept.

Carter had plenty of time to develop in Philly. I don't think the board fully appreciates what a good coach Suter is. it's not coincidence that he's able to turn around most players he coaches. Marian Gaborik says hi.

King Knut · June 11, 2014

Your comments lead me to suspect you're not watching these games.

He's not playing like a guy on a hot streak he's playing like someone seeing the ice better than anyone else out there.

Honestly. He's not passing like this, or skating as smoothly as this, but the way he seems to be seeing the ice and the confidence with which he is slaking reminds me of Forsberg.

He's not a player on a hot streak, he's "seeing the matrix" right now. It's 100% all about confidence IMHO as well.

As far as his production regressing, don't you think that has more to do with him buying into a system than it is about him playing worse? Many if the Kings numbers are down over that same stretch.

Yet they have one cup, a conf finals appearance and a 3 game lead in a 2nd cup finals to show for it.

I mocked Yzerman for taking Carter for the Olympics, but obviously I was wrong. The guy's game has just developed and arrived. Winning isn't about one guy having numbers. It's about your team having more goals than the other team.

If we care about winning, regression is the ansolute last thing Carter has done.

Me neither. I have no problem admitting he's playing very well right now. But anyone anointing him anything - other than a guy on a hot streak - is an idiot. Scott Hartnell had more points than Carter did this past season. Hell Carter's regular season numbers since leaving here are worse than his last 3 seasons here. He's regressed. A hot streak is nothing more than a hot streak until that player can play at a higher level longer than the length of a tournament.

King Knut · June 11, 2014