Adjusted Even-Strength Plus-minus 1960-2017

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,254
2,736
See here for updated numbers through 2010 for active players.

The plus-minus statistic is often reviled by NHL fans as a useless statistic. This is understandable, as the stat produces numbers that are often inexplicable. Most importantly, a player’s team is a major factor in his plus-minus.

However, the plus-minus stat is not without merit. Most importantly, it aims to measure the most important part of winning – outscoring the other team. The only thing that matters in winning hockey games is outscoring the other team, whether by scoring goals or preventing them. Evaluating players based on scoring stats alone will more directly measure a player’s contribution to scoring, but will fail to capture other aspects of the game, especially defensive play. Plus-minus aims to capture the full impact of a player’s game, but it is a more indirect measure that can be influenced by a number of factors out of the player’s control.

The most important of these is the quality of the team on which the player plays. My adjusted even-strength plus-minus statistic attempts to remove this bias from the numbers and present a number that can compare players from bad teams and good teams on an equal footing. Specifically, the method of adjusting for team is to compare the team’s goals for and against while the player is on the ice to the team’s goals and against while the player is off the ice. Additionally, plus-minus includes shorthanded goals scored by both teams. This introduces a bias against players who play on the power play and in favor of players who play on the penalty kill. My adjusted plus-minus estimates on-ice shorthanded goals based on on-ice power play goals, as on-ice shorthanded goals for individuals are not available for most years, and removes them from the player’s record.

To calculate the adjusted plus-minus, I take the player’s on-ice total goals for and against as given. I calculate an expected plus-minus for the player, based on his team’s off-ice performance. The expected plus-minus is calculated using the off-ice performance regressed partially to even, as a player should be expected to play somewhat better than a set of bad teammates or worse than a set of good teammates. I then calculate an actual plus-minus, which differs from official NHL plus-minus in that it is normalized to a scoring environment of 200 even-strength goal per season and does not include shorthanded goals. I subtract the “expected plus-minus” from the “actual plus-minus” to generate an adjusted plus-minus number.

While this method removes many of the biases from raw plus-minus, it is still an imperfect method of rating players. First, most importantly, it is for even-strength play only. Second, a player’s linemates or defence partner may exert a major influence on a player’s numbers – see Milan Hedjuk for a prime example. Third, the on-ice/off-ice method of adjusting for team implicitly compares a player to the other players on his team who play the same position but on another line or D-pairing. If a player is on the same team as a great player, the off-ice baseline may not be a fair comparison. For example, Ted Green’s 1971 season has one of the lowest adjusted plus-minus ratings ever. When you realize that much of his off-ice baseline was set by Bobby Orr, the reason for the low rating becomes clear. Also, some players play more difficult opposition than others, facing the other team’s best players and taking more defensive zone faceoffs. These differences can also skew the numbers.

For the above reasons, please keep the following in mind when using these numbers to evaluate players

  • Adjusted plus-minus is best used to compare players who played in a similar role. For example, compare #1 defensemen who played the toughest ice-time on the team to other #1 defensemen, not to #6 defensemen who were sheltered by their coaches from the best players. For example, take Tom Preissing’s rating with a huge grain of salt.
  • Adjusted plus-minus is measured against a baseline of average, so it will tend to underrate players with a long decline phase or several poor years at the start of their career (Mark Messier) and give high ratings to players who retired young and didn’t play a lot past their prime(Bobby Orr, Eric Lindros).
  • Adjusted plus-minus is measured against a baseline of average, so it will tend to underrate players with a long decline phase or several poor years at the start of their career (Mark Messier) and give high ratings to players who retired young and didn’t play a lot past their prime(Bobby Orr, Eric Lindros).
  • Check to see who the player’s linemates were. Did he have a great player on his line? Charlie Simmer and Dave Taylor both have very high ratings, and likely owe much of it to Marcel Dionne.
  • Did the player play on a team with another great player who was on another line/D-pairing? If so, his adjusted plus-minus may be too low. Mark Messier in his Edmonton years is an example here, along with Ted Green. I don’t think there are too many cases of this kind, but there are certainly a few.
  • There may be a significant amount of random variation in a single-year result. For that reason, I would look at multiple years when measuring a player’s peak, and would not use this stat as definite proof that one player was better than another in a given year.

There are a lot of disclaimers there, but I still believe there is a lot of good information in adjusted plus-minus when evaluating a player’s career. Even after taking the above possible biases into account, there are still some very interesting results.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tom_servo

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,254
2,736
Glossary of Terms:

SFrac: Season Fraction. 1.00 is a full season. I prefer it to games played because it gives a 48 game season, a 74 game season, an 80 game season or an 82 game season the same weight.
$ESGF: Even-strength goals for, normalized to a 200 ESG scoring environment and with estimated SH goals removed.
$ESGA: Even-strength goals against, normalized to a 200 ESG scoring environment and with estimated SH goals removed.
R-ON: Even strength GF/GA ratio when the player is on the ice.
R-OFF: Even-strength GF/GA ratio when the player is off the ice.
XEV+/-: Expected even-strength plus-minus, which is an estimate of the plus-minus that an average player would post with the same teammates. The calculation is described above.
EV+/-: Even –strength plus-minus, which is simply plus-minus with estimated shorthanded goals removed and normalized to a 200 ESG environment.
AdjEV+/-: Adjusted even-strength plus-minus, which is even-strength plus-minus minus expected even-strength plus-minus. This is the final number.
The following three stats evaluate special teams play and are not related to adjusted plus-minus. I’m including them in the table for a quick reference to the player’s contributions outside of even-strength play.
PP% : The % of the team’s power play goals for that the player was on the ice for.
SH%: The % of the team’s power play goals against that the player was on the ice for.
$PPP/G: Power play points per game, normalized to a 70 PPG environment and with pre-1988 PP assists estimated.

Results
Here are the top 100 in career adjusted even-strength plus-minus, as well as the players in the HOH Top 100 and several others who were strongly considered for voting.

RankPlayerGP$ESGF$ESGAR-ONR-OFFEV%EV+/-XEV+/-AEV+/-AEV+/-/82
1Jaromir Jagr1711179413321.350.9340%461-6953025
2Ray Bourque1612169112311.370.9542%460-4850826
3Bobby Orr65710445261.991.0349%5181350563
4Wayne Gretzky1487189314921.271.0447%4013936220
5Larry Robinson1384163210221.601.3443%61125036021
6Nicklas Lidstrom1564168211891.411.1741%49314934418
7Joe Thornton144612699551.330.9635%314-2834219
8Teemu Selanne1451123210021.230.8735%230-10133219
9Mark Howe9299396281.500.9639%311-2033029
10Al MacInnis141613979921.411.1138%4048132319
11Stan Mikita139312208251.481.1233%3957332319
12Mario Lemieux91510928831.240.8446%209-11031929
13Bobby Clarke11478944981.801.2030%3978231422
14Eric Lindros7608425651.490.9542%276-2229832
15Borje Salming1148120610561.140.8243%150-14829821
16Dave Taylor11118766711.300.8430%205-8629121
17Peter Forsberg7087414321.711.0738%3092428533
18Gordie Howe9219197241.270.8536%195-8928425
19Pavel Datsyuk9538585531.551.0734%3053027524
20Bryan Trottier127910817241.491.1733%3579026717
21Mike Bossy7527324081.801.1736%3255926629
22Sidney Crosby7828486021.410.9641%246-1826428
23Guy Lafleur112610796461.671.3534%43216826419
24Marcel Dionne1348112610191.100.8035%107-15626316
25Henrik Sedin12489517071.350.9831%244-1225517
26John Leclair9678685861.481.0835%2823624621
27Daniel Sedin12258916601.350.9729%231-1424516
28Larry Murphy1615153412751.201.0239%2581424412
29Denis Potvin106011227531.491.2343%36912724219
30Alex Tanguay10889457131.331.0035%232223017
31Scott Stevens1635165812651.311.1942%39316223012
32Brad Park111512128661.401.2042%34512522116
33Ron Francis1731137412491.100.8934%125-9522010
34Brad McCrimmon122210417261.431.1834%3149422015
35Chris Kunitz8847054711.501.0531%2331721720
36Brian Rafalski8338235831.411.0538%2402421521
37Chris Pronger116710608581.230.9939%201-720815
38Frank Mahovlich104810227221.421.1835%3009420616
39Steve Shutt9307904361.811.4529%35414820618
40Sergei Fedorov124910187661.331.0832%2524720614
41Marian Hossa130910267581.351.1230%2686420513
42Ryan Getzlaf8617405461.350.9836%194-719919
43Patrik Elias12409126911.321.0431%2202319813
44Steve Larmer10067505771.300.9532%173-2419716
45Brian Propp10167675241.461.1231%2434919516
46Zigmund Palffy6846155021.230.8037%114-8019423
47Terry Harper106611088901.241.0443%2182519315
48Craig Ramsay10706944621.501.1225%2314218915
49Keith Tkachuk12019928951.110.8736%98-8818613
50Charlie Simmer7125243951.330.8329%130-5618621
51Gary Roberts12249607231.331.1031%2375318412
52Chris Chelios1651147611521.281.1839%3241431819
53Bobby Hull92310047291.381.1840%2759418116
54Lubomir Visnovsky8837917021.130.8338%88-9218017
55Jonathan Toews7176664561.461.0934%2103118021
56Jere Lehtinen8756164131.491.0728%2032318017
57Pierre Turgeon129410428391.241.0433%2032417811
58Luc Robitaille1431120410281.171.0033%175-217710
59Kenny Wharram6676114051.511.1031%2063217321
60Brendan Shanahan152411819601.231.0732%221491729
61Dmitri Khristich8116084721.290.9030%136-3517117
62Alex Ovechkin9218907021.271.0339%1871617115
63Carl Brewer5336484561.421.0744%1932317026
64Joe Sakic1378127211051.151.0038%167-216910
65Daniel Alfredsson124610108181.231.0433%1922316911
66Milan Hejduk10208406621.271.0233%178916914
67Pierre Pilote6608736521.341.1149%2215216921
68Jarome Iginla1554123811431.080.9136%95-731699
69Petr Svoboda10478126221.311.0532%1902216813
70Michael Nylander9207185851.230.9332%133-3016315
71Jason Arnott12449637921.221.0132%171816311
72Michel Goulet10898126881.180.9232%123-3916312
73Simon Gagne8226004461.340.9829%153-716116
74Henrik Zetterberg10008726721.301.0835%2004016013
75Marek Malik6915824411.320.9534%141-1815919
76Jean Ratelle128010738341.291.1432%2398115810
77Zdeno Chara1350127110621.201.0739%2085015710
78Marian Gaborik9897566241.210.9534%132-2515713
79Joe Reekie9027166041.190.9135%112-4015314
80Jacques Lemaire8528114841.681.5233%32717515215
81Theoren Fleury10849427951.191.0036%147-315011
82Joe Pavelski8065924451.331.0031%147-114915
83Ron Stackhouse8898938531.050.8242%40-11014914
84Alexander Semin6505214021.300.9131%119-3014919
85Bill Hajt8548135841.391.1937%2288114814
86Patrice Bergeron8996845161.321.0530%1682014813
87Mike Foligno10186655571.190.9028%107-4014712
88Ulf Samuelsson10809117751.170.9836%135-1114711
89Cliff Ronning11377095921.200.9326%117-2914611
90Steve Sullivan10117456211.200.9530%124-2114512
91Mats Sundin1346113910241.110.9635%115-281439
92Doug Gilmour147411419971.141.0034%14411438
93Henri Richard9989336631.411.2833%27012914112
94Paul Kariya9898347431.120.9138%91-5114112
95Pavol Demitra8477165541.291.0535%1622214014
96Sergei Gonchar1301111310101.100.9537%104-361409
97Keith Carney10188186881.190.9835%131-813911
98Martin St. Louis11349859391.050.8636%46-9213810
99Jeremy Roenick13639898221.201.0532%167301388
100Sergei Zubov106810428271.261.1442%2157813711
[TBODY] [/TBODY]


PlayerGP$ESGF$ESGAR-ONR-OFFEV%EV+/-XEV+/-AEV+/-AEV+/-/82
Steve Yzerman1514135211481.181.0936%205731317
Paul Coffey1409162513251.231.2043%3011751267
Phil Esposito1282130210151.281.2537%2871661218
Duncan Keith9139788161.201.0843%1624511811
Evgeni Malkin7066775321.271.0838%1452911614
Alex Delvecchio10179328651.080.9236%67-491169
Scott Niedermayer126311699441.241.2339%225139866
Jean Beliveau7486534901.331.3031%16397667
Patrick Kane7406975761.211.1638%12161607
Tim Horton1010119610271.161.1748%169114565
Johnny Bucyk1299109610651.030.9832%30-15453
Brett Hull126910939951.101.1238%9975232
Dave Keon12969188481.081.1029%7054161
Mark Messier1756141813021.091.1333%11610970
Gilbert Perreault11919809041.081.1336%767330
Bob Gainey11606455251.231.5123%120155-35-2
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

And the bottom 10.

PlayerGP$ESGF$ESGAR-ONR-OFFEV%EV+/-XEV+/-AEV+/-AEV+/-/82
Craig Adams9512153490.621.0814%-13414-148-13
Brendan Witt8905486970.791.0032%-1490-149-14
Steve Kasper8214175030.831.2326%-8663-149-15
Mark Janssens7111783350.530.9717%-157-6-152-17
Jack Johnson7115416540.831.1039%-11438-152-18
Eric Brewer10097578900.851.0436%-13321-154-13
Bobby Carpenter11786977730.901.1929%-7684-161-11
Rob Niedermayer11535606900.811.1126%-13043-173-12
Mike Sillinger10495137500.680.8926%-237-49-188-15
Kelly Buchberger11823966320.630.9220%-236-30-206-14
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Note: These numbers have been updated and expanded to go back to 1960 and through 2017.

I would just add that the 1960-1967 numbers are not directly comparable to the postexpansion numbers, as the average team and average player was stronger in the six team NHL than after expansion.

Also, a couple of methodological notes. I have changed the weighting so it weights based on games played and no longer adjusts for season length. I didn't like the increased weight on games in the lockout shortened seasons of 1995 and 2013. Also, the numbers are adjusted to a scoring level of 2.2 ESG/G per team.
 
Last edited:

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,254
2,736
Analysis

  • Ray Bourque tops the list, and rightly so, I believe. Bourque was almost a latter-day Gordie Howe in his ability to consistently play at a very high level for a very long time, and he may have the most career value of any player since 1968.
  • Bobby Orr’s numbers are absolutely incredible. His on-ice impact was like no other player in hockey history. The fact that he played in an expansion and WHA diluted league must be taken into account, but even so I’m convinced that he’s the #1 hockey player on peak value.
  • Gretzky’s career numbers are surprisingly unimpressive. Fourth place isn’t bad, but one would expect more from the Great One. However, a season-by-season examination reveals that almost all of his positive value came in his Edmonton years, and he was barely above average in Los Angeles and New York. For this reason I see him as more of a terrific 8-10 year prime candidate than a 20 year Bourque or Howe type candidate, despite his high scoring throughout his career.
  • Jagr’s excellence can be obscured by his poor teams or the fact that he played in a low-scoring era, but his seven year run from 1995-2001 was incredible.
  • Lemieux is surprisingly low on this, but his per-game results are very good, he played a number of games before and after his prime, and he was possibly the greatest power play player in history.
  • Larry Robinson isn’t #1 as he is in unadjusted plus-minus, but still scores very well.
  • Others who look very good by this metric are Mark Howe, Lindros, Clarke, Salming, MacInnis, and Dionne.
  • Notice Dave Taylor and John LeClair in the top 20 as a couple of players who probably have large linemate effects.
  • Among players who were named to or considered for the HOH Top-100, Bob Gainey, Guy Lapointe, Mark Messier, Gilbert Perreault, and Brett Hull all have very ordinary numbers here.
  • Gainey and Lapointe are very difficult cases. As they spent their prime years on the best team of all time, it’s hard to know how well a teammate comparison works when the teammates are this good. Lapointe also put up terrible numbers after leaving the Canadiens, and a prime-only comparison would make him look better. These numbers may underrate Gainey, but I still feel he’s overrated – compare his numbers to contemporary shutdown left winger Craig Ramsay.
  • Messier suffers from two factors – he played on a team with Gretzky for years on a different line, and he had several terrible years at the end of his career. Remove these final years and adjust for the Gretzky factor, and his numbers are closer to Yzerman.
  • I think Perreault and Hull are just overrated – both weren’t among the scoring leaders as much as you might think and, if the numbers are correct, did very little other than scoring.
  • Finally, I’d like to push Eric Lindros and Mark Howe for the HOH Top-100 based on these numbers. Neither one had a long career, and other players did more on special teams, but very few were impact players at even-strength like these two were.
 
Last edited:

Master_Of_Districts

Registered User
Apr 9, 2007
1,744
4
Black Ruthenia
This is great stuff.

Very informative.

Not surprised to see the likes of Lehtinen, Elias, Ramsay, Modano etc on the list.

In my experience, two way forwards tend to be underrated, which is unfortunate considering that two way play often contributes as much (or more) to winning as scoring a ton of points does.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
- WOW! When you sent me this spreadsheet and I played around with it, I hadn't noticed that it was adjusted for era. I noted that Orr's per-game average was almost double that of the next best, Lindros. Part of that, thought, was due to the higher-scoring era he played in. I had no idea this was already adjusted. Incredible how good Orr was.

- Good point regarding Gainey. It can be misleading to see him so low because he played against top lines all the time, and also because the benchmark for him was a team that was frequently first overall. That said, it did not stop Robinson from placing so high, and, I never realized before that the "good team, bad team" factor was accounted for. One look at this list should cast serious doubt on Gainey's seemingly automatic status of best defensive forward of all-time. Especially when you look way up the list and see contemporary Craig Ramsay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: barbu

foame

Registered User
Jan 26, 2008
265
13
Can you post the numbers for post-lockout (Top 20 from 05-06 to 08-09)

It's really fascinating to see Howe top 10 in AdjEV+/- /Season

Selänne does really well here, I think he got somewhat underrated last year, I can't seem to find stats for the Olympics but he has scored 20 goals in 25 games, so he must be pretty hign on the scoring list there.
 

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,254
2,736
Can you post the numbers for post-lockout (Top 20 from 05-06 to 08-09)

It's really fascinating to see Howe top 10 in AdjEV+/- /Season

Selänne does really well here, I think he got somewhat underrated last year, I can't seem to find stats for the Olympics but he has scored 20 goals in 25 games, so he must be pretty hign on the scoring list there.

Top 20 in Adjusted Even-strength Plus-Minus, 2006-2008

Rk | Player | Years | SFrac | ESGF/G | ESGA/G | R-ON | R-OFF | XEV+/- | EV+/- | AdjEV+/- | /S
1 | Joe Thornton | 2006-2008 | 2.99 | 1.12 | 0.65 | 1.72 | 0.83 | -25 | 114 | 139 | 47
2 | Dany Heatley | 2006-2008 | 2.87 | 1.25 | 0.71 | 1.76 | 1.08 | 10 | 127 | 117 | 41
3 | Pavel Datsyuk | 2006-2008 | 2.88 | 1.13 | 0.54 | 2.09 | 1.18 | 25 | 140 | 115 | 40
4 | Jaromir Jagr | 2006-2008 | 3.00 | 1.09 | 0.67 | 1.63 | 0.94 | -10 | 104 | 113 | 38
5 | Alexander Ovechkin | 2006-2008 | 2.99 | 1.18 | 0.94 | 1.25 | 0.75 | -55 | 59 | 112 | 37
6 | Sidney Crosby | 2006-2008 | 2.60 | 1.09 | 0.83 | 1.32 | 0.78 | -42 | 55 | 98 | 38
7 | Teemu Selanne | 2006-2008 | 2.29 | 0.97 | 0.50 | 1.94 | 0.95 | -6 | 87 | 94 | 41
8 | Nicklas Lidstrom | 2006-2008 | 2.88 | 1.21 | 0.66 | 1.82 | 1.24 | 37 | 129 | 93 | 32
9 | Jason Spezza | 2006-2008 | 2.57 | 1.21 | 0.74 | 1.64 | 1.11 | 12 | 99 | 87 | 34
10 | Tom Preissing | 2006-2008 | 2.82 | 0.94 | 0.65 | 1.46 | 0.91 | -14 | 68 | 83 | 29
11 | Jonathan Cheechoo | 2006-2008 | 2.77 | 0.88 | 0.56 | 1.58 | 0.95 | -8 | 73 | 82 | 30
12 | Simon Gagne | 2006-2008 | 2.11 | 0.98 | 0.75 | 1.32 | 0.69 | -41 | 40 | 82 | 39
13 | Ryan Getzlaf | 2006-2008 | 2.63 | 0.76 | 0.41 | 1.87 | 0.99 | -4 | 75 | 81 | 31
14 | Henrik Zetterberg | 2006-2008 | 2.62 | 1.08 | 0.56 | 1.92 | 1.27 | 31 | 111 | 81 | 31
15 | Daniel Alfredsson | 2006-2008 | 2.73 | 1.14 | 0.71 | 1.61 | 1.15 | 20 | 97 | 78 | 29
16 | Mike Knuble | 2006-2008 | 2.78 | 0.87 | 0.69 | 1.26 | 0.77 | -37 | 41 | 76 | 27
17 | Marek Malik | 2006-2008 | 2.26 | 0.97 | 0.56 | 1.74 | 1.02 | 2 | 77 | 75 | 33
18 | Jason Arnott | 2006-2008 | 2.78 | 0.99 | 0.66 | 1.50 | 1.05 | 3 | 77 | 71 | 26
19 | Nathan Horton | 2006-2008 | 2.87 | 0.93 | 0.69 | 1.35 | 0.92 | -13 | 57 | 70 | 24
20 | Jarome Iginla | 2006-2008 | 2.85 | 0.99 | 0.70 | 1.40 | 0.98 | -4 | 66 | 70 | 25

Here are the numbers for the 3 seasons from 2006-2008. They don't include the current season.

  • There are a number of linemates on this list, so some of these players may be on this list because of their linemates as much as their own play.
  • Peter Forsberg just missed the list despite the fact that he only played half the games in these three seasons, and Gagne and Knuble may be on the list in part because of him (although Gagne had very good numbers before 2006 also.)
  • Malik and Preissing rank very well by this method, as they do by raw plus-minus. While they may be underrated, I believe that both played a lot of minutes with their team's top offensive players, Preissing with the Heatley-Spezza-Alfredsson line in Ottawa and Malik with the Jagr line in New York, and this inflated their numbers.
  • This method ranks Ovechkin and Crosby more favorably than raw plus-minus, as both had relatively weak teammates over the past 3 years.
  • The list is fairly forward-heavy, and few defensemen have done well in these numbers in the past few years. Lidstrom stands out here as the only top defenseman to make the list.

I should also add that exact even-strength and shorthanded on-ice numbers are available for post-lockout season, but I haven't included them, but have instead estimated them as I have for all years 1968-2008. As a result, there are probably more accurate methods of player valuation available in recent years. The advantage of my method is that it is directly comparable over the last 40 years.

Gordie Howe does score very well. When you consider that those were his age 39-42 and age 51 seasons, I have little doubt that if adjusted plus-minus numbers were available for his whole career he would be at or very near the top of the list.
 

Corpuscle2

Registered User
Dec 15, 2006
185
0
Question

Where do you get the "Percentage of Power Play Goals that the player was on the ice for" statistic?

Not doubtng it, but I would love to know the source. Having watched most of Bobby Orr's career, I believe that he was on the ice for 98% of the Bruins PPGs...

Thanks
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
Where do you get the "Percentage of Power Play Goals that the player was on the ice for" statistic?

Not doubtng it, but I would love to know the source. Having watched most of Bobby Orr's career, I believe that he was on the ice for 98% of the Bruins PPGs...

Thanks

It would be found by simply dividing the player's PPGF (PPG that he was on the ice for) by the team's total PPG. Both numbers are readily available at places like www.hockey-reference.com.
 

arrbez

bad chi
Jun 2, 2004
13,352
261
Toronto
Maybe I'm just missing it on one of those many stat columns, but could you list the players who have the biggest percentage movement up or down after adjustment? It would be interesting to see who makes the biggest jump.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
Maybe I'm just missing it on one of those many stat columns, but could you list the players who have the biggest percentage movement up or down after adjustment? It would be interesting to see who makes the biggest jump.

I'm sure he can do that, but that begs the question: If you go from -10 to +30, what percentage did you go up?
 

Triffy

Registered User
Jun 23, 2006
337
3
Helsinki
I'm sure he can do that, but that begs the question: If you go from -10 to +30, what percentage did you go up?

The answer is -400%. That sounds like a wrong answer but there should be an explanation for it. I can't figure it out, though.

It's also problematic if your original +/- rating is 0.
 

Triffy

Registered User
Jun 23, 2006
337
3
Helsinki
If there isn't another solution, that problem could be solved by marking the worst ever +/- rating as a 0 point. (Or actually, it should be 1 to avoid dividing by zero but let's just make it easier and mark it 0). That way there would be no minus ratings. Similar to the Kelvin scale.

So: let's pretend the worst ever +/- rating anyone has ever had was -50. Then if player A's rating right now is 0, his rating translates to 50.

If A's adjusted +/- rating is 30, it translates to 80 in the new scale (30-(-50)=30+50=80).

In the example, the player A had a percentual rise of (80-50)/50=60%.

Make me feel stupid. Tell me what the problem is in the system presented above.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
The answer is -400%. That sounds like a wrong answer but there should be an explanation for it. I can't figure it out, though.

It's also problematic if your original +/- rating is 0.

it's definitely a wrong answer. Because by that logc if you're -5 and go up to +30, you went up 800%. But it's a smaller jump than -10 to +30 is.
 

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,254
2,736
Maybe I'm just missing it on one of those many stat columns, but could you list the players who have the biggest percentage movement up or down after adjustment? It would be interesting to see who makes the biggest jump.

I did a sort by Expected Plus-Minus (XEV+/-), which shows the difference between unadjusted +/- and adjusted +/-. Basically, expected plus-minus tries to answer the question "What would an average player's plus-minus be in this situation?" Here are the top 20 and bottom 20 in XEV+/-.

I also added a column on the right, which is expected plus-minus per season. This should come pretty close to the largest percentage movement. Actually what it should show is who has the worst teammates per season and who has the best teammates per season. Notice Bob Stewart, the subject of a recent thread, appears on here.

Player | SFrac | ESGF/G | ESGA/G | R-ON | R-OFF | XEV+/- | EV+/- | AdjEV+/- | XEV+/-/S
Serge Savard | 13.2 | 1.28 | 0.89 | 1.46 | 1.52 | 366 | 424 | 58 | 28
Guy Lapointe | 11.15 | 1.23 | 0.87 | 1.42 | 1.63 | 360 | 324 | -36 | 32
Larry Robinson | 17.34 | 1.31 | 0.82 | 1.6 | 1.33 | 331 | 697 | 366 | 19
Dallas Smith | 9.93 | 1.39 | 1 | 1.39 | 1.45 | 268 | 314 | 46 | 27
Paul Coffey | 17.79 | 1.28 | 1.04 | 1.23 | 1.2 | 238 | 356 | 117 | 13
Jacques Lemaire | 10.91 | 1.06 | 0.63 | 1.68 | 1.53 | 233 | 381 | 148 | 21
Wayne Cashman | 13.01 | 0.96 | 0.66 | 1.47 | 1.41 | 227 | 321 | 94 | 17
Guy Lafleur | 14.14 | 1.07 | 0.64 | 1.69 | 1.31 | 222 | 496 | 274 | 16
Scott Stevens | 20.53 | 1.13 | 0.86 | 1.31 | 1.19 | 213 | 442 | 229 | 10
Bob Gainey | 14.52 | 0.62 | 0.5 | 1.23 | 1.53 | 202 | 140 | -62 | 14
Nicklas Lidstrom | 15.62 | 1.19 | 0.84 | 1.41 | 1.23 | 199 | 452 | 253 | 13
Don Awrey | 10.78 | 1.12 | 0.99 | 1.13 | 1.3 | 198 | 119 | -79 | 18
Steve Shutt | 11.66 | 0.95 | 0.52 | 1.82 | 1.43 | 195 | 407 | 211 | 17
Yvan Cournoyer | 9.92 | 0.98 | 0.6 | 1.64 | 1.53 | 194 | 310 | 116 | 20
Bill Barber | 11.33 | 0.84 | 0.53 | 1.59 | 1.5 | 187 | 294 | 107 | 17
Phil Esposito | 13.36 | 1.15 | 0.92 | 1.26 | 1.22 | 183 | 260 | 76 | 14
Chris Chelios | 20.25 | 1 | 0.78 | 1.28 | 1.2 | 183 | 364 | 180 | 9
Eric Desjardins | 14.33 | 1.03 | 0.81 | 1.26 | 1.26 | 181 | 257 | 76 | 13
John Bucyk | 10.08 | 0.87 | 0.64 | 1.38 | 1.49 | 181 | 196 | 15 | 18
Yvon Lambert | 8.56 | 0.74 | 0.52 | 1.41 | 1.7 | 175 | 151 | -25 | 20
Keith Tkachuk | 13.24 | 0.9 | 0.79 | 1.15 | 0.86 | -120 | 120 | 240 | -9
Jack Lynch | 4.81 | 0.73 | 1.21 | 0.61 | 0.68 | -121 | -189 | -68 | -25
Wilf Paiement | 11.83 | 0.75 | 0.88 | 0.86 | 0.83 | -123 | -123 | 0 | -10
Mike Christie | 5.15 | 0.88 | 1.12 | 0.79 | 0.67 | -123 | -100 | 23 | -24
Ron Francis | 21.68 | 0.86 | 0.78 | 1.11 | 0.89 | -123 | 166 | 290 | -6
Dennis Hextall | 8.66 | 0.77 | 0.94 | 0.82 | 0.79 | -124 | -122 | 2 | -14
Vincent Lecavalier | 8.66 | 0.9 | 0.99 | 0.91 | 0.77 | -124 | -65 | 59 | -14
Teemu Selanne | 13.36 | 0.95 | 0.76 | 1.24 | 0.87 | -124 | 211 | 335 | -9
Bryan Watson | 9.12 | 0.78 | 0.96 | 0.81 | 0.77 | -128 | -131 | -3 | -14
Brent A Hughes | 5.63 | 0.88 | 1.16 | 0.78 | 0.7 | -129 | -124 | 5 | -23
Mario Lemieux | 11.29 | 1.3 | 1.07 | 1.2 | 0.85 | -130 | 204 | 334 | -12
Bob Stewart | 7.23 | 0.84 | 1.29 | 0.65 | 0.76 | -137 | -271 | -135 | -19
Guy Charron | 9.26 | 0.66 | 0.86 | 0.78 | 0.75 | -144 | -158 | -14 | -16
Reed Larson | 11.3 | 0.99 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 0.82 | -146 | -100 | 45 | -13
Ron Stackhouse | 11.21 | 1.12 | 1.07 | 1.05 | 0.83 | -147 | 47 | 194 | -13
Yvon Labre | 4.65 | 0.73 | 0.98 | 0.74 | 0.58 | -149 | -98 | 51 | -32
Walt Mckechnie | 12.07 | 0.61 | 0.72 | 0.85 | 0.73 | -176 | -107 | 70 | -15
Gary Croteau | 8.65 | 0.56 | 0.87 | 0.65 | 0.61 | -184 | -218 | -34 | -21
Borje Salming | 14.37 | 1.17 | 1.02 | 1.15 | 0.82 | -194 | 172 | 366 | -13
Marcel Dionne | 16.92 | 0.93 | 0.84 | 1.11 | 0.81 | -210 | 127 | 336 | -12
 
Last edited:

Dark Shadows

Registered User
Jun 19, 2007
7,986
15
Canada
www.robotnik.com
Very interesting. Nice to see how Francis places far above Hawerchuk and Oates, who tend to be heralded as his equals around here.

Take it with a grain of salt. John Leclair and Dave Taylor both finished above Francis, Taylor by a large amount, and neither of those players remotely come close to being as good as Oates or Hawerchuk or Gilmour or Francis, etc
 

FissionFire

Registered User
Dec 22, 2006
12,571
1,095
Las Vegas, NV
www.redwingscentral.com
Not sure why Gordie Howe didn't get a * but he should get one.

Am I the only one who finds it astounding that Mr. Hockey is 98th on the list? His ages were 39-42 and 51 during the seasons taken into account, yet he finished with an average adjusted season rating of +29. He wasn't exactly on great teams for those years either, making the playoffs only once in Detroit (in a 12 team league) and once at 51 with Hartford. These pretty much incorporat his worst statistical scoring seasons as well. Am I completely off-base to think that he'd be far atop this list if we had his numbers, especially during his prime? I think his average adjusted season could rival or exceed that of even Orr.
 
Last edited:

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,254
2,736
Take it with a grain of salt. John Leclair and Dave Taylor both finished above Francis, Taylor by a large amount, and neither of those players remotely come close to being as good as Oates or Hawerchuk or Gilmour or Francis, etc

For those specific players, I'd take it with a grain of salt named Eric Lindros or Marcel Dionne.

Yeah, every stat needs to be interpreted, and this one does have some funny results (I'm not sure what to make of Dmitri Khristich or Joe Reekie in the top 50.) But I do think it's far better than unadjusted plus-minus, as the Francis example shows.

Not sure why Gordie Howe didn't get a * but he should get one.

Am I the only one who finds it astounding that Mr. Hockey is 98th on the list? His ages were 39-42 and 51 during the seasons taken into account, yet he finished with an average adjusted season rating of +29. He wasn't exactly on great teams for those years either, making the playoffs only once in Detroit (in a 12 team league) and once at 51 with Hartford. Am I completely off-base to think that he'd be far atop this list if we had his numbers, especially during his prime? I think his average adjusted season could rival or exceed that of even Orr.

I do think it's pretty amazing that Howe is so high on the list. As a general rule, players tend to become less effective at even-strength as they age, even if the power play skills remain. The body just breaks down and they can't win all the puck battles anymore. See Wayne Gretzky for a perfect example. The fact that Howe was an elite player by this measure at age 40 is crazy, I can't think of any other comparable player. I do think he would be at the top of this list if we had his numbers.

That said, he was playing on a stacked line for a couple of years there with Alex Delvecchio and maybe most importantly, a prime Frank Mahovlich. Those were also the years just after expansion, so it may have been easier to dominate, although I'm not sure that's a factor in these numbers.

I really can't see him matching Orr on a per-season basis, however. Orr was just on another level from everyone.

Edit: I'll add a few numbers here. From 1969-1971, Mahovlich had an adjusted +/- of +113 in Detroit. From 1969-1971, Howe was +104 and Delvecchio +88 with the same numbers. I think Mahovlich may deserve as much credit as Howe for these numbers, although maybe only someone who saw them play could say for sure.

I also added Howe's * in the table, good catch, thanks.
 
Last edited:

FissionFire

Registered User
Dec 22, 2006
12,571
1,095
Las Vegas, NV
www.redwingscentral.com
That's possible, although Howe did lead the Wings in scoring by a fair clip in 1968 without Mahovlich, and only Howie Young has a better unadjusted +/- on the team (and that team included Norm Ullman most of the year). In 1971 Howe was also finally breaking down some and retired after the season because of severe arthritis in his wrists that limited him all year. In 1970 Howe had a better +/- than Mahovlich by a decent margin as well. How was also still playing on the PK despite being 41. I'm sure Mahovlich had an impact, but I don't see him as the reason Howe's +/- relative to the team would be inflated.

As far as his prime +/- I think it would be much higher than you assume. Take 1952-53 for example. The team had 222GF and 133GA, a +89 margin. Howe finished that season with 95 points. He was on a stacked line there as well. I don't think it's outside the realm of reason to assume that his +/- that season was extremely high, even in relation to his teammates. Nobody on his team finished withing 24 points of him, leading me to believe he was double or triple shifted quite a bit that season (or he was scoring a ridiculous amount of unassisted goals). Sadly there will likely never be a way to know for sure, but I'd bet his adjusted +/- per season through his prime and even mid 30s was far higher than you might expect.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->