It started with plus minus rightfully having its shortcomings pointed out, to people getting whipped into a frenzy and then all of the sudden its the most worthless stat ever! Then it bounces around the echo chamber until it's this undeniable fact somehow.+/- : Some goals count. Some don't.
Bad player on good team gets skewed results.
Good player on bad team gets skewed results.
Among many other things. Honestly, +/- has been so analyzed and explained away to death it shouldn't need to be discussed any more. There is something real underlying it but the flaws create so much noise overtop of the real thing measured that it gets completely buried. It becomes just a random number.
I posted a link to one of Garrett's articles on it just a few days ago.
The "some posters say" is simply providing some actual eyes on observation. It isn't absolute proof of anything but it appears to be near unanimous. Take it FWIW.
What strawmen? What emotion? If either of us is posting emotionally, it appears to me to be you. You are ignoring that I agree that Capo has earned a look. But Ville earned more than a look. He earned an opening night spot in the NHL. Probably would have started, though we can't know that for certain. Whether he would have kept that job or not we can't know either. If he had faded against NHL competition he would have been sent down. But injury prevented any of that.
Plus minus still has value, in context. The nhl still uses it, and particular in outlier cases with a good sample size it can help tell the story, as in Capos case.
What's HILARIOUS about it is the fancystats dudes who trumpet how bad it is and point out all the reasons why conveniently leave out that many of their 'advanced stats' have the very same flaws.
Hmmmm, maybe they have something to gain??