Confirmed with Link: Maple Leafs re-sign Nikita Zaitsev for 7 years, $4.5M per

[saltming]

And what would those objective arguments be?

"I likey like Zaitsev, so if his +/- is low, that means the stat is badie bads."

Like the ones being supported by statistical data. Stats are not the be all end all bit they do help to eliminate bias or subjective views.
There is a song possibility that a player can be on the ice and no doing anything wrong while a goal is scored against his team no? So while that player is playing well he gets a minus.
Also a player that always starts in there own end against the other teams best line has a way higher chance of getting a minus vs a player that always starts in the offensive zone against the other teams weakest line. No?

 

[Ropesman]

But aren't even the advanced stats heavily debated for their reliability? Do the advanced stats clash with Zaitsev having a terribly low +/-?

By and large the good playmakers get a lot of assists compared to players with poor playmaking skills.

And by and large the very defensively responsible players have a good +/- compared to their defensively flawed teammates.

Neither stat is the be all end all of all stats. But they are both very very telling.

Zaitsev was lowest +/- on the team. FIFTY goals below the best defenseman. I mean, the team ITSELF only had an 18 goal differential. And Zaitsev was FIFTY below Gardiner.

That should tell you a lot about their defensive play/awareness.

Writing the stat off entirely because it's not telling you what you want to hear seems silly to me.

Almost as silly as building an argument entirely based off of +/-

You are trying to give plus minus an inflated amount of value in order to suit the point you are trying to make. That point being the Zaitsev contract is a bad deal.

What i am curious about is why you are hanging onto plus minus like it's the end all be all. It is widely regarded through the hockey world as an outdated stat. There are many many more ways of evaluating a player using numbers that are more specific and go much further in depth.

 

[zeke]

plus minus is a useless stat.

 

[ConnorTO]

plus minus is a useless stat.

- 2 2

 

[Walshy7]

What I want to know if Zaitsev contract is so bad based on +-, why isn't the poster outraged at Morgan riellys "worse contract" -20 and $5m?

 

[bobermay]

No. Assists depend on what the guy you pass it to does.

If you're setting a lot of people up well, you'll gather the assists, regardless of "luck".

And if you're a defenseman playing exceptional defence all year, your +/- will go up compared to your teammates who are playing lousy defense, regardless of luck.

Your persistence is admirable, but you'll come around eventually.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

Comparing assists to +/- is not logical.

Why not?

I'm simply using your argument.


If +/- is not a reliable stat because players "face different competition" and are "deployed differently by their coaches", wouldn't that also apply to assists?

Players facing "different competition" and being "deployed differently by their coaches" WILL affect their assist numbers. So again, by YOUR logic, assists are also not a reliable stat.

I'm using assists as an example to show that your argument was flawed.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

How long is "in the long run?" Is it a few months? A full season? Multiple seasons?

I ask because if 1 season is long enough, than do you believe that Joel Edmundson is better defensively than Alex Pietrangelo? You should, because Edmundson had a better +/- this season. How many people do you think would agree that Edmundson is the better defensive player?

If 1 season is not long enough, than your conclusion is premature at best, because the sample size is not yet large enough.

I'm not arguing that you're wrong, as "better" stats also point out that Zaitsev wasn't great defensively, but you're literally picking one of the worst stats available to support your argument. Here (TLN) and here (PPP) are a couple of articles which make a much better case than you're currently doing.

I agree that there are better stats than +/- and that there are better arguments that are critical of the Zaitsev contract.

This thread got sort of derailed when people started arguing that +/- is an entirely useless stat. I started arguing against that in principal. FAR too many fans dismiss the stat when a player they like has a low +/-, and fully embrace the stat when a player they like has a high +/-.

This wasn't that Zaitsev was 5 goals lower in +/- than Gardiner. It was FIFTY. You agree that other "better" stats support that Zaitsev was pretty lousy defensively. And I assure you that that will almost always be the case. Because extremes in +/- (like the case with Zaitsev vs Gardiner) speak volumes. Maybe not in one shift. Maybe not even in one game. But over a full season.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

Like the ones being supported by statistical data. Stats are not the be all end all bit they do help to eliminate bias or subjective views.
There is a song possibility that a player can be on the ice and no doing anything wrong while a goal is scored against his team no? So while that player is playing well he gets a minus.
Also a player that always starts in there own end against the other teams best line has a way higher chance of getting a minus vs a player that always starts in the offensive zone against the other teams weakest line. No?

Sure.

But a player that always starts in their own end against the other teams best line has a way higher chance to get less assists than players that play on powerplays and always start in the offensive zone. You need to consider context when assessing both stats.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

Almost as silly as building an argument entirely based off of +/-

You are trying to give plus minus an inflated amount of value in order to suit the point you are trying to make. That point being the Zaitsev contract is a bad deal.

What i am curious about is why you are hanging onto plus minus like it's the end all be all. It is widely regarded through the hockey world as an outdated stat. There are many many more ways of evaluating a player using numbers that are more specific and go much further in depth.

The other ways of evaluating players seem to support that Zaitsev was pretty lousy defensively this season.

I admit, this thread got derailed into a debate over whether +/- is entirely unreliable or not. Every argument made to label +/- as unreliable can also be applied to assists. So I guess assists are a useless stat as well.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

plus minus is a useless stat.

According to direct arguments made by others in this thread, so are total assist numbers. That's not my argument. It's theirs.

 

[zeke]

I think everyone acknowledges that scoring totals can be very misleading, and very dependant on teammates and usage. '

But even then, they're much, much more useful than +/-.

 

[Canada4Gold]

If Zaitsev is bad there will be a bunch of stats that show it, not just 1 of the more useless awful, inconsistent stats out there in +/-. If you have to look around and see that +/- is the only thing that is showing a player is bad then the +/- is likely wrong. If other things agree then use those stats, they're more reliable.

As far as your assist argument. If a player is putting up a ridiculous number of assists eventually the opposition is going to play their best players against that player in an attempt to shut them down. If they continue putting up a crazy number of assists then they're a really good player doing it against shutdown lines and pairings. If a player isn't putting up assists then eventually they'll stop drawing top assignments(if they were drawing top assisgments), if they still fail to put up assists against weaker groups they're not very good.

The same isn't true for the opposite side of the puck, +/- being part of that, on defense if you're putting your top pair out against the stars of the league and they're in the negative, the opposition isn't going to start trying to find a new matchup because the one they have is working. Minuses are expected against the stars of the league, if you don't have them then you're one of the premiere defensive players in the league. Maybe your own coach will eventually switch it up and try to give you easier matchups but some teams don't have that luxury(us).

Would I prefer if Z had a better +/-? Yes. Do I think the drastic gap between him and Gardiner is alarming? Yes, but there are clear competition factors in there. That being said Gardiner is the better defenseman at the moment, and I'm not overly concerned with the +/- because there are much better stats to use that I am marginally concerned about.

+/- is a really unreliable stat, if you see a bad +/- and are concerned then look deeper instead of just using +/- as your entire argument. If there's something there then it'll show up in numerous other places. For example Zaitsev's possession numbers aren't the best. Comparatively to other defensive guys who face top competition all the time they're not awful, but in general they're not the best.

That being said he just had his first season on small ice, and didn't look out of place. Defenseman also peak later. He's 25, so while you wouldn't expect him to get drastically better, a little improvement in the next couple years should be expected.

 

[Ropesman]

The other ways of evaluating players seem to support that Zaitsev was pretty lousy defensively this season.

I admit, this thread got derailed into a debate over whether +/- is entirely unreliable or not. Every argument made to label +/- as unreliable can also be applied to assists. So I guess assists are a useless stat as well.

Just seems quite extreme to go to this length to argue a stat like +/-. I think you even know yourself comparing it to assists is a bit ridiculous. +/- is an outdated stat, which has many alternatives, when combined with all these alternatives +/- can be useful. Looking at +/- and making an assumption solely based on that is unfair to the player. Especially when the player is a rookie in the NHL who had no time to adjust before being thrown to the wolves?

 

[Mess]

Just seems quite extreme to go to this length to argue a stat like +/-. I think you even know yourself comparing it to assists is a bit ridiculous. +/- is an outdated stat, which has many alternatives, when combined with all these alternatives +/- can be useful. Looking at +/- and making an assumption solely based on that is unfair to the player. Especially when the player is a rookie in the NHL who had no time to adjust before being thrown to the wolves?

When Babcock paired Rielly (-20) and Zaitsev (-22) together as his top pairing to test their abilities to go up against the toughest competition on a nightly basis of the opposition the experiment failed based on that +/- factor of Leafs finishing pucks out of their own net as a result. Those 2 Dman considered among Leafs best were the 2 worst +/- Leaf players on the season.

In sharp contrast the top 4 +/- Leaf leaders were;
1) Gardiner +24
2) Polak +10
3) Hunwick +8
4) Carrick +8

So when any on these Dmen are on the ice paired together then more pucks go into the opposition net.

With 3 balanced offensive lines playing in front of the defense core, same coach, same system, playing in front of the same goalie producing completely opposite results is something worth analyzing why the drastic contrast.

What this shows is that Mo Riells and Zaitsev are on the ice there are more defense breakdowns and high goals against and as a shutdown tandem it simply doesn't work.

 

[Ricky Bobby]

Leaf Management said 'we believe in this Anderson guy in net so we'll lock him up for 5 years' -
HF Boards said "What???? crazy!!! Too much money, too much term!!!"

9 months later .....

Leaf Management says 'we believe in this Zaitsev kid, so we'll lock him up'
HF Boards says "What???? crazy!!! Too much term!!!"

Lets see what happens in 12 months

How true.

Fans also can't seem to grasp paying for UFA years vs. RFA years.

Zaitsev's contract is taking up 5 UFA years being accounted for. It also only will take him to 32 years of age so we're buying up all of his prime years.

When washed up greybeards like Beauchemin, Bieksa, Martin, Streit all get multi year deals at over 4M as UFAs I'm not sure what the fuss is all about with the Zaitsev term.

When people see that this year's crop of UFA's Dmen like Alzner, Shattenkirk, etc. all get long terms at a much higher cap that expire when those players are around 35 than hopefully that puts the Zaitsev into perspective for some people. But I doubt it.

 

[Battle Lin]

give me another zaitsev on this contract, i'll even pay more

rielly zaitsev
gardier zaitsev

our D would be set for many years

 

[TeamBester]

When Babcock paired Rielly (-20) and Zaitsev (-22) together as his top pairing to test their abilities to go up against the toughest competition on a nightly basis of the opposition the experiment failed based on that +/- factor of Leafs finishing pucks out of their own net as a result. Those 2 Dman considered among Leafs best were the 2 worst +/- Leaf players on the season.

In sharp contrast the top 4 +/- Leaf leaders were;
1) Gardiner +24
2) Polak +10
3) Hunwick +8
4) Carrick +8

So when any on these Dmen are on the ice paired together then more pucks go into the opposition net.

With 3 balanced offensive lines playing in front of the defense core, same coach, same system, playing in front of the same goalie producing completely opposite results is something worth analyzing why the drastic contrast.

What this shows is that Mo Riells and Zaitsev are on the ice there are more defense breakdowns and high goals against and as a shutdown tandem it simply doesn't work.

That pair played against the best every night, and the Leafs made the playoffs. I call that success, you don't? Wonder where the team placed if Polak and Hunwick were slotted into that role every game?

Great development year. Zats will be better in his second year. Their +- will only improve as this team grows.

 

[Morbo]

Why not?

I'm simply using your argument.


If +/- is not a reliable stat because players "face different competition" and are "deployed differently by their coaches", wouldn't that also apply to assists?

Players facing "different competition" and being "deployed differently by their coaches" WILL affect their assist numbers. So again, by YOUR logic, assists are also not a reliable stat.

I'm using assists as an example to show that your argument was flawed.

look, I can see you think this line of thinking is enormously clever, but it just isn't.

you can't have an assist deducted from your total. nor can you get an assist for simply being on the ice without touching the puck.

so no, they can't be compared. end of.

 

[Trapper]

plus minus is a useless stat.

I don't believe it's useless. I believe it is a tool like any other to guide you.
It doesn't mean a particular individual is bad, it requires the proper context.

 

[hockeywiz542]

 

[Phion Keneuf]

This contract is going to look amazing soon

 

[Mugzy97]

This contract is going to look amazing soon

Thinking the same thing.

 

[Pookie]

No getting around it, the term is the biggest risk here.

But this is the way of the NHL and the cap system. Younger players just don't get to UFA ages and if you think you have something... key word "think"... you've got to gamble on what is usually a limited set of data.

Just the way it is.

Could work. Might not. But if they feel after 1 year that they see something in the player... this is the way business is done nowadays.

No sense criticizing the reality.

 

[Mr Hockey]

No getting around it, the term is the biggest risk here.

But this is the way of the NHL and the cap system. Younger players just don't get to UFA ages and if you think you have something... key word "think"... you've got to gamble on what is usually a limited set of data.

Just the way it is.

Could work. Might not. But if they feel after 1 year that they see something in the player... this is the way business is done nowadays.

No sense criticizing the reality.

Term? he is our best all around dman and he is only 25?