Huberdeau or Strome?

[GM17*]

I think +/- IS borderline useless in rating players in many instances. Especially between teams, but not necessarily if it's +/- 105 then it's quite apparent there's an issue unless they're playing with one of those tarp goalies to tie to the posts.

 

[YNWA14]

The OHL might have more offensive talent just because they get most of the best Euro's at the import draft, but the WHL is better at developing players because they have more NHL like rules and better coaching and systems.

Facts are facts. There are more top level OHL players in the NHL than from any other junior league. You can say the WHL has better development, but if you look at the past 10 drafts there are more top 10, and #1 picks, from the OHL than any other junior league as well.

You can look at the NHL stats yourself, but in the last 10 drafts the OHL has gotten 31 picks in the top 10, and 5 #1 overall picks. The WHL has gotten 27 top 10 picks and 0 #1 overall picks.

The difference seems slight, but it becomes an even bigger difference when you consider draft position and if you were to incorporate the entire first round of the draft. The OHL is the #1 junior league for sure.

 

[arsmaster*]

Facts are facts. There are more top level OHL players in the NHL than from any other junior league. You can say the WHL has better development, but if you look at the past 10 drafts there are more top 10, and #1 picks, from the OHL than any other junior league as well.

You can look at the NHL stats yourself, but in the last 10 drafts the OHL has gotten 31 picks in the top 10, and 5 #1 overall picks. The WHL has gotten 27 top 10 picks and 0 #1 overall picks.

The difference seems slight, but it becomes an even bigger difference when you consider draft position and if you were to incorporate the entire first round of the draft. The OHL is the #1 junior league for sure.

There are more players in the NHL from the WHL.

 

[YNWA14]

There are more players in the NHL from the WHL.

Could you provide where you got this statistic?

I could only find this:

http://www.nhl.com/futures/canada.html#ohl

 

[BluechipBulletin]

Actually, you have.

When? Post a link. I supplement my arguments with statistics, but they never "hang" on statistics unless it's a purely statistical argument.

I made several points about Huberdeau, but the only one you clung to was my reference to his +/-. It was a minor statistical reference. You ignored the rest of my points.

And? Since when does someone have to respond to every point someone else makes? I don't remember what the rest of your points were (assuming you had some), and I either agreed with them, didn't have an opinion, or disagreed with them without disagreeing to the extent that I felt a response was warranted.

Your +/- argument was stupid, so I responded. Simple as that.

As to it being completely useless - if a guy +57 on a team versus a guy +5 on the same team - I'd disagree, and so would most.

Yep, and you'd be wrong, but at least you'd have a lot of company.

It oftens speaks to a line or defensive pairing more than the player, but it can be useful. To suggest it means absolutely "zero" is extreme to the point of being naive.

Nope. In game 5 of the Bruins series the other night, the Bruins were in the middle of a line change when they gained the offensive zone. I forget who scored, but maybe two seconds before the puck went in, Tyler Seguin skated onto the ice and he ended up picking up a + on that play. You're telling me that he must have been solid defensively on that "shift" because he ended up +1.

Let's say we're playing on opposite teams. You're playing D, and I'm playing LW, and I blow past you like you're a pylon, and I get a clear shot at the net but your goalie makes a wicked save. You're still even +/- even though you totally blew your assignment. Later in the game, there's a two-on-one and I'm playing the pass. My positioning is perfect; I take away the pass and the puck carrier ends up colliding with the goalie and the puck trickles past him. You're on the ice, but haven't touched the puck in several shifts and had absolutely nothing to do with with goal and you're now a +1 while I'm a -1. A little later in the game, your team has the puck in my end and I'm covering you like a glove. Your C passes to your RW and he one-times it past my goalie. You're now +2 and I'm -2. Third period, my team is on the PP and my LW dumps the puck into my corner. You get to it and I shove you in the chest, knocking you off the puck and forcing the turnover. I pass it back to my D, he passes it back to me, I drive to the net and stiff-arm you away and roof one past your goalie. That's three major defensive errors and a turnover on your part, and you're still +2 while I've played a perfect defensive game and potted a goal, yet I'm still -2.

+/- is a team stat that you're trying to apply to an individual. It's not even slightly reflective of a player's defensive play. There are six guys potentially responsible for a goal against, and it's usually only one guy who is actually responsible for the goal, yet all of them get the minus.

That more people would agree with your inane argument than mine is sad but true.

 

[R S]

I agree that plus/minus is a vastly overrated statistic for people to claim that they know what they are talking about in regards to how players are defensively.

BUT, I do think it has mild validity over the course of a season. Not game to game per say...but it does show that a player is more often than not putting himself in a good or bad position at both ends of the ice on a regular basis over a long term scale.

 

[arsmaster*]

I agree that plus/minus is a vastly overrated statistic for people to claim that they know what they are talking about in regards to how players are defensively.

BUT, I do think it has mild validity over the course of a season. Not game to game per say...but it does show that a player is more often than not putting himself in a good or bad position at both ends of the ice on a regular basis over a long term scale.

I like to see +/- coupled with either A) Time on Ice or B) Having watched said player multiple times to know who he matches up against in games ie. vs. Checking lines and top d-pair etc.

+/- on its own tells about zero about the player, for example players on the Bruins like Boychuck, McQuaid, Ferrence etc, arent known as great shutdown d-men, but all ranked really high in +/-, while anyone knows the tougher minutes on the team were being eaten up by Chara. A player like Chara, or any other shutdown type defensman who has a high +/-, you know he is earning his +/- as he goes against opposing teams top lines EVERY shift.

Another example is Bieksa/Hamhuis this regular season. They played on the highest scoring team in the league, but they matched up nightly against top lines....both had higher +/-'s than they had points, which to me says they were able to play pretty good in their own end.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

When? Post a link. I supplement....blah, blah, blah... than mine is sad but true.

I gave you the example, and you missed it, despite addressing it in your next blurb. Pretty amusing.

As to your example, I agree. Game to game, it isn't much use. But over a season and can and does show an impact, although obviously needs to be taken in context. I'd argue the same can be said for second assists. Often they are the most meaningless statistical achievement, but they still count, because over a season they do mean "something". How much, is certainly open for debate, just like +/-.

BTW, you sure like the word inane a lot. Is that your word of the day or something?

 

[GM17*]

I gave you the example, and you missed it, despite addressing it in your next blurb. Pretty amusing.

As to your example, I agree. Game to game, it isn't much use. But over a season and can and does show an impact, although obviously needs to be taken in context. I'd argue the same can be said for second assists. Often they are the most meaningless statistical achievement, but they still count, because over a season they do mean "something". How much, is certainly open for debate, just like +/-.

BTW, you sure like the word inane a lot. Is that your word of the day or something?

Those calendars are great.