What “Common Wisdom” Do You Doubt or Disagree With?

[IceNeophyte]

"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take"

--Yeah sure, but if 97% of those shots aren't scoring chances and 30% would result in turnover of the puck and there's your open teammate over on the opposite hash.....

 

[Predsanddead24]

Common Wisdom: Plus-Minus is a garbage stat, and should never be used.

Me: It does provide some context when comparing players on the same team over a large sample size.

My favorite aspect of this is that the same people who often complain about +/- will quote CF% as a crucial stat when it's essentially just +/- for shot attempts.

 

[JustaFinnishGuy]

One I hate the most is how people think the best possible way to get a change is to dump the puck into the opponent's end, giving them the initiative to attack

 

[ziggyjoe212]

Not really when ice time and opportunity can vary greatly between teams. PP time given to a player is also a team characteristic and not a player characteristic, and players score buckets more on PP.

If you're discussing Art Ross trophies and league leaders in points, then obviously these players will be a staple of any team's PP and ice time.

 

[BrokenFace]

Common Wisdom: Plus-Minus is a garbage stat, and should never be used.

Me: It does provide some context when comparing players on the same team over a large sample size.

Plus/minus is a pointless combination of two useful stats. Knowing how many goals for a player was on the ice for is useful with context and a decent sample size. Same with goals against. Combining these 2 stats into one plus/minus stat is like combining assists and PIMs into a single stat.

 

[wintersej]

That QoC doesn't matter much

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

If you're discussing Art Ross trophies and league leaders in points, then obviously these players will be a staple of any team's PP and ice time.

Of course. But not all teams have the same PP time (by a long shot) and not all teams deploy their PPs the same (e.g., PP1 on for full 2 minutes, or split PP1 / PP2 time evenly)

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

Ok man, you take the guy playing 15 minutes a game who has really impressive primary points per 60 numbers at 5 on 5, I'll take the guy that has the most points in the league. Deal?

Sure. You better hope the coaches got it right.

 

[Leksand]

"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take"

--Yeah sure, but if 97% of those shots aren't scoring chances and 30% would result in turnover of the puck and there's your open teammate over on the opposite hash.....

Good one!

 

[Leksand]

One I hate the most is how people think the best possible way to get a change is to dump the puck into the opponent's end, giving them the initiative to attack

Yes, but this is changing with “cycling back” as the preferred approach if possible.

 

[ziggyjoe212]

Of course. But not all teams have the same PP time (by a long shot) and not all teams deploy their PPs the same (e.g., PP1 on for full 2 minutes, or split PP1 / PP2 time evenly)

An art Ross trophy is a far bigger indicator to a players worth than PP time.

 

[ESH]

I dunno.... If I was trying to explain why Jamie Benn had a better career so far than James Van Riemsdyk, I'd almost certainly mention the Art Ross.

Though, to be honest, I don't know why I should have to explain such a thing.

You wouldn’t have to use the argument that Benn has an Art Ross because that wouldn’t even be an argument anyways.

I think the point is more that Benn won an Art Ross in 2015, but that doesn’t mean he was really a better player than Crosby or Ovechkin or even Tavares that season. He just happened to score a few more points in an arbitrary amount of games.

 

[TheOtherOne]

Couple of mine are:

1. I’m not sure playoff or cup championship experience matters in the NHL. I believe it matters in individual sports like Golf or Tennis, but I don’t think it matters much, if at all, in the NHL. Or, put another way, I think in some cases it may hurt where in other situations it may help. I don’t care how many players I have on my team with cup experience or championships. (I think it matters for coaching a bit maybe but not for players).

Reminds me of a recent Wings game where an NBC announcer said teams should be interested in trading for Trevor Daley because "he knows what it takes to win".

Made me laugh.

 

[Leksand]

Wisdom: Choose the player who is better at scoring goals - scoring goals is hard.

I’ve seen this a lot when prospects are discussed among experts who clearly see themselves as pretty sophisticated. Maybe I’m misunderstanding it, but it does not make any sense to me.

At the upper echelon - I’d take Crosby over Ovechkin easily. A tier or two down I’d take any number of more complete players over Laine.

 

[Hasbro]

Bigger is better

Analytics are revoltutionizing the sport.

 

[Bounces R Way]

That because there are 31 teams then there must be 31 #1 defenseman, 31 #1 centers, and 31 #1 goalies.

 

[Leksand]

You wouldn’t have to use the argument that Benn has an Art Ross because that wouldn’t even be an argument anyways.

I think the point is more that Benn won an Art Ross in 2015, but that doesn’t mean he was really a better player than Crosby or Ovechkin or even Tavares that season. He just happened to score a few more points in an arbitrary amount of games.

This is true, but then what is the conventional wisdom you don’t agree with?

I’d argue the conventional wisdom is:
“if a player has three Harts and another zero over their career then that’s a good indicator that player is better.”
You disagree with this?

 

[teravaineSAROS]

• Face-offs are super-important.

Nobody's said that in atleast a decade. It can be important in some cases but it's not a common saying.

 

[Mobiandi]

More hockey is better. I detest this opinion

82 games is a superhuman task. Tie that in with all the insane travel and the improved tactical coaching across the league and you get a good but not great product.

They need to cut it down to between 45-60. That lockout shortened back in 2013 was superb and my team wasn't even any good.

 

[ESH]

This is true, but then what is the conventional wisdom you don’t agree with?

I’d argue the conventional wisdom is:
“if a player has three Harts and another zero over their career then that’s a good indicator that player is better.”
You disagree with this?

Well I guess it depends on the player. Patrick Roy never won a Hart and Bobby Clarke has 3, but I’d probably rank Roy higher.

 

[member 305909]

You don't take a time-out when your team is leading a game.

 

[Howboutthempanthers]

More hockey is better. I detest this opinion

82 games is a superhuman task. Tie that in with all the insane travel and the improved tactical coaching across the league and you get a good but not great product.

They need to cut it down to between 45-60. That lockout shortened back in 2013 was superb and my team wasn't even any good.

It's an exchange. I'll take the good product over 6 months, over a "great" product over 3 and half months. That little extra stimulation is not important to me. Because that stretch of October to January was not great.

 

[Voight]

“Defense wins championships”

PIT kind of proved that a couple years ago when they won with a rag tag group of d-men

 

[lottster14]

This is more of an unpopular opinion, but 4 on 4 overtime is/was better and more exciting.

 

[Spearmint Rhino]

All Coaches and GMs are better at their jobs than any of us could be cause they are the paid professionals

My boss is a paid professional and couldn't find his ass with both hands