TSN's Top 50

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

Il Stugotz

Dude Good (good dude)
Sponsor
Jan 23, 2008
9,203
6,617
Except for when he doesn't, like when he lost to Zetterberg and then proceeded to draw even with Bergeron and Kopitar in 2013.

Zetterberg got away with murder in that series.

Kopitar didn't do jack in that series.

Toews scored 5 points in the last 3 games against Boston to lead Chicago to the Cup.

Throughout that entire playoff run teams couldn't score 5v5 with their best players up against Toews on the ice.
 

WarriorofTime

Registered User
Jul 3, 2010
30,411
19,050
I am completely dumbfounded you consider this a reliable indicator of two-way play.

I know it wasn't you, but it always irritates me how people go "you have no facts!" and then when presented with facts say "I can't believe you're presenting such dumb facts"
 

sharks9

Registered User
Jan 16, 2012
16,444
2,604
Canada
I know it wasn't you, but it always irritates me how people go "you have no facts!" and then when presented with facts say "I can't believe you're presenting such dumb facts"

Because +/- is a dumb stat.

If not, Pacioretty was robbed of the Selke this year
 

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,069
11,841
I know it wasn't you, but it always irritates me how people go "you have no facts!" and then when presented with facts say "I can't believe you're presenting such dumb facts"

Plus minus has never been a reliable indicator of anything other than what it is meant to show, that is how many even strength/shorthanded goals you are on the ice for, and how many even strength/powerplay goals you are on the ice against. Trying to take anything from that data is silly.
 

WarriorofTime

Registered User
Jul 3, 2010
30,411
19,050
Plus minus has never been a reliable indicator of anything other than what it is meant to show, that is how many even strength/shorthanded goals you are on the ice for, and how many even strength/powerplay goals you are on the ice against. Trying to take anything from that data is silly.

And this is a bad thing? :help:
 

Il Stugotz

Dude Good (good dude)
Sponsor
Jan 23, 2008
9,203
6,617
Plus minus has never been a reliable indicator of anything other than what it is meant to show, that is how many even strength/shorthanded goals you are on the ice for, and how many even strength/powerplay goals you are on the ice against. Trying to take anything from that data is silly.

LOL, you don't even understand the stat!
 

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,069
11,841
And this is a bad thing? :help:

I'm saying trying to use it to expand upon a point is silly. It doesn't measure two-way play, or defensive play.

LOL, you don't even understand the stat!

What am I missing, here?

When an even-strength goal or shorthanded goal is scored, the plus–minus statistic is increased by one ("plus") for those players on the ice for the team scoring the goal; the plus–minus statistic is decreased by one ("minus") for those players on the ice for the team allowing the goal.[1] Power play or penalty shot goals are excluded. An empty net does not matter for the calculation of plus–minus.
 

DCHabitant

Registered User
Feb 24, 2013
874
174
And again, people are misusing +/- like it shows defensive ability. It shows team goal differential when a player is on the ice. That's it.

Like any stat, it doesn't tell the whole story. But +/- (when compared to other players on the team) does correlate with defensive capabilities. Everyone is quick to point out what a great season Ovy had last year. But his goals/points stats were nearly identical to those of the previous year. Ovy looked better because he wasn't quite as one-dimensional (read: he backchecked and played more responsibly). As a result, he went from -35 to +10.
 

Il Stugotz

Dude Good (good dude)
Sponsor
Jan 23, 2008
9,203
6,617
ITT posters on a hockey board don't know how plus/minus is calculated.
 

WarriorofTime

Registered User
Jul 3, 2010
30,411
19,050
I'm saying trying to use it to expand upon a point is silly. It doesn't measure two-way play, or defensive play.



What am I missing, here?

I was asked for a stat or fact. I provided one.

Somehow, I doubt Wings fans were too upset when +/- was giving Datsyuk Selkes and Lidstrom Norrises.
 

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,069
11,841
I was asked for a stat or fact. I provided one.

Somehow, I doubt Wings fans were too upset when +/- was giving Datsyuk Selkes and Lidstrom Norrises.

So you think +/- was why Datsyuk and Lidstrom won their trophies?

Seriously?
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
84,365
84,584
Redmond, WA
ITT posters on a hockey board don't know how plus/minus is calculated.

I'm pretty sure you just don't know how to. Because what the other poster said (it's goals for at ES and while you're on the PK minus goals against at ES and when you're on the PP) is completely correct.
 

EbonyRaptor

Registered User
Jul 10, 2009
7,340
3,246
Geezerville
+/- is a VERY relative stat. It is heavily influenced by team play and how each player is used within the team structure. It's a nice stat to get a "feel" for how the player plays but it is no way a stat worth anything without further context for each individual player within their team.
 

jeffl97

Registered User
Dec 5, 2010
1,364
1
I'm saying trying to use it to expand upon a point is silly. It doesn't measure two-way play, or defensive play.



What am I missing, here?

I think he's referring to
"and how many even strength/powerplay goals you are on the ice against"

As you do not receive a minus for getting scored on while shorthanded. I'm pretty sure you just made a typo though, so it's whatever.
 

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,069
11,841
I think he's referring to
"and how many even strength/powerplay goals you are on the ice against"

As you do not receive a minus for getting scored on while shorthanded. I'm pretty sure you just made a typo though, so it's whatever.

I thought it was clear I meant goals against while on the powerplay (as opposed to being scored on while shorthanded).

Perhaps I needed to just say shorthanded for clarity.
 

DCHabitant

Registered User
Feb 24, 2013
874
174
So you think +/- was why Datsyuk and Lidstrom won their trophies?

Seriously?

Again, no stat should be looked at in a vacuum. But it doesn't mean that +/- is an utterly useless stat when evaluating a player. If you had your choice of having a 45 goal scorer or a 55 goal scorer, who would you prefer to have on your team? What if the 45 goaal scorer was +39 and the 55 goal scorer was -39? Would you ignore that stat altogether?
 

ArGarBarGar

What do we want!? Unfair!
Sep 8, 2008
44,069
11,841
Again, no stat should be looked at in a vacuum. But it doesn't mean that +/- is an utterly useless stat when evaluating a player. If you had your choice of having a 45 goal scorer or a 55 goal scorer, who would you prefer to have on your team? What if the 45 goaal scorer was +39 and the 55 goal scorer was -39? Would you ignore that stat altogether?

I would prefer not to look at selective stats devoid of context to make my determination.
 

NyQuil

Big F$&*in Q
Jan 5, 2005
97,906
63,436
Ottawa, ON
Again, no stat should be looked at in a vacuum. But it doesn't mean that +/- is an utterly useless stat when evaluating a player. If you had your choice of having a 45 goal scorer or a 55 goal scorer, who would you prefer to have on your team? What if the 45 goaal scorer was +39 and the 55 goal scorer was -39? Would you ignore that stat altogether?

What do you think Lemieux's plus minus in his first season is an indicator of?

He looks terrible!

Then again, he was the 1st overall pick in that draft year.

Which says something about the team he was on.
 

hatterson

Registered User
Apr 12, 2010
35,971
13,569
North Tonawanda, NY
Again, no stat should be looked at in a vacuum. But it doesn't mean that +/- is an utterly useless stat when evaluating a player. If you had your choice of having a 45 goal scorer or a 55 goal scorer, who would you prefer to have on your team? What if the 45 goaal scorer was +39 and the 55 goal scorer was -39? Would you ignore that stat altogether?

Gretzky went from being an average of a +61 a season in Edmonton to only have 4 more + seasons in his career, only 2 above a +8 and only one above a +15.

Clearly he just forgot how to play defense.
 

bigwillie

Registered User
Jul 14, 2006
7,032
24
Portland, OR
Tom Preissing not only lead his team in +/- once, but the entire league.

+/- is about as useful a statistic, in terms of determine skill at the sport of hockey, as the number of hairs on a player's head, or the number of pairs of underwear they own. It's completely and utterly irrelevant. I put zero stock in +/-.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad