the human eye is naturally bias we see things the way we want to see them. for example y2k Canucks and myself likely don't see the same things when watching the Sedins play, it's conformation bias. the eye test is obviously important but it's dumb to suggest that you think x player is good when all objective information points to the contrary.
there's two extreme stances in this debate, there's the extreme pro advanced stats and the extreme anti advanced stats, both sides are fairly flawed IMO. people that use advanced stats as a be all and end all aren't using them properly, everyone that knows anything about hockey can tell you that Shea weber is better than Patrick Wiercioch, the thing is advanced stats would tell you differently. advanced stats are best used when pilled in with the eye test. people who ignore advanced stats completely are dinosaurs, the information presented towards us gives us a better understanding of our game is totally ridiuclous to dismiss them without properly debunking them. every succssfull organization in the league usses them, and it's no wonder that teams like the Kings and Blackhawks are always near the top in CF%
keeping the puck 200ft away from your net is the best form of defense, it's why id rather use a guy like Sedin or Thornton against other teams best players than a guy like Kesler or Backes. Sure, Kesler and Backes are visually good defensively but who gives a **** Sedin and Thornton are much more effective, and last time I checked the premise of the game was to allow less goals than the opposition, and sedib and Thornton are better at that.
puck possession correlates to goals, look at the beat CF players in the league and look where they rank in the GF% department, obviously there's outliers but for the most part puck possession correlates to goals for.