What is with all the high end dmen with poor +/- stats?

[volcom92886]

What is with all these high end dmen with terrible +/-:
OEL: -20
Karlsson: -15
Letang:-15
Keith:-11
Burns:-8

I know its not the best stat to assess players on but its pretty telling for the play of a #1 dman, which all of these players are. A few of these players were the early season favorites to win the Norris as well.

OEL plays on a horrible team but the others teams are decent. Why are the +/- numbers of these perennial norris favorites so low?

Click to read more...

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

Most of those teams offense is pretty low down... so the team likely isn't scoring when they are on the ice in 5 on 5.


Montour is a +10 tho

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

#1 d-men go with the flow of the team for better or for worse. Obviously they have a huge impact but OEL is a good example of sometimes you're just along for the ride.

See where they are relative to team though, that part is a little bit more important (even if it still requires more context).

 

[AfroThunder396]

+/- is driven by TOI and quality of team/competition.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

They play on bad 5v5 teams. PM is heavily team influenced and not the best way to evaluate an individual.

 

[RickP]

+/- is not a stat that I like. But if I want to look at it, I prefer to look at 5 on 5 +/-, it at least gets rid of the empty netters or SHG. It most cases it won't make a big difference, but in some cases, it does. But even then, it doesn't tell you if a player has been bad defensively, or if the goalie has just been horrible. It usually just tells you that the team hasn't been good at 5 on 5.

 

[CraigsList]

They have to be on the ice longer than others.

 

[RDTBay4]

Stralman +20

 

[SenzZen]

They're no Jeff Schultz, that's for sure.

 

[Crazy Cizikas]

Oel and Karlsson are on bad teams. Letang and Keith are on teams that are good but when they lose, they lose spectacularly. Not sure what’s wrong with Burns.

 

[KingBran]

The thread should be "offensive D-men known for their offense aren't as good at defense:"

Top-end offensive d-men sure. But those guys have never been dominant on D or among the best in the league in actual defensive statistics. Except maybe Keith for a year or two.

 

[KingTrouty]

Drew Doughty +16.

And it aint "the system" this year, folks. The Kings are still a team in transition in scheme, and he is carrying his pairing. 2nd in TOI. Tied for first in D scoring.

 

[LeafGrief]

They're playing a ton of minutes for teams that have been getting buried on the scoresheet at 5on5. Karlsson, Letang, and Burns are also playing several orders of magnitude worse than they did last year.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Need to also look at team +/- goal differential

 

[Fig]

Why is it that most times I see numbers relating to Brent Burns, an 8 is involved?

 

[kingsholygrail]

Why is it that most times I see numbers relating to Brent Burns, an 8 is involved?

Imagine the top of the 8 as his head and the bottom of the 8 as his beard.

 

[lifelonghockeyfan]

I'll agree with others, that some of these players are on the ice longer and because they are labelled "top" Dmen, they play against the top opposition. But I think we sometimes get mesmerized by what is a top defensemen. We often see the goals/points and if they are high assume the guy must be really good. Not denying that scoring is important, even on the PP. But a good point producer doesn't necessarily make a top defensemen.

 

[lomiller1]

+/- can systematically favor weaker players. In particular it is skewed against:
Anyone who gets power play time
Anyone you want on the ice when you are down by a goal in the last 2 min of a game
Player who get a lot of ice time (weak teams, ort teams with weak goaltending only)

 

[rent free]

cold streaks. oel's on a team that can't stop bleeding out goals, karlsson is on team that lost 9 straight games before a few nights ago, letang hasn't been great this season, keith hasn't been great either, burns has been bad so far

 

[rent free]

Why is it that most times I see numbers relating to Brent Burns, an 8 is involved?

because his contract his 8x8, 8 million cap hit for 8 years, 8 million average salary for 8 years, he went 8 games last season to get his first goal (i think)

 

[Barrie22]

because his contract his 8x8, 8 million cap hit for 8 years, 8 million average salary for 8 years, he went 8 games last season to get his first goal (i think)

1 game to get his 1st goal. 3 games to get his 1st multi goal game.

 

[aufheben]

+/- is not a stat that I like. But if I want to look at it, I prefer to look at 5 on 5 +/-, it at least gets rid of the empty netters or SHG. It most cases it won't make a big difference, but in some cases, it does. But even then, it doesn't tell you if a player has been bad defensively, or if the goalie has just been horrible. It usually just tells you that the team hasn't been good at 5 on 5.

Absolutely, I remember this discussion from the Rangers board when Yandle had a worse +/- than Girardi.

It includes/excludes goals arbitrarily, and factors in goal-tending. Last week the Rangers beat the Hurricanes 5-1. None of the 5 goals were scored 5-on-5, but Sebastian Aho ended the game with a -3, (PPG, EV4-on-4, EN, EN, PPG).