Who is Brule?

[Crosbyfan]

LOL Crosbyfan....what do stats prove???

If Stats mean everything than why are their hundreds of scouts around the world? Shoudlnt the player with the best +/- be picked #1 overall??

NO

+/- are just facts. They can and should be explained. You can judge a lot by the explanations given. I keep hearing that +/- sucks because player X has a worse +/- than player Y even though X is much better. Often (not always) it is followed
by some reasonably plausible reason why X's +/- is worse than Y's and how if things were more equal X's +/- would be much better than Y's. They don't realize they have just argued that +/- is useful.

Pick any team in the bottom 20% of any league. The worst +/- on the team probably (predictably) belongs to one of their top 2 defenceman. You can't just line them up and pick players by +/-.

 

[LaLaLaprise]

+/- is a reflection of icetime and the quality of your team.

If you play a lot on a bad team your +/- will be bad. If you play a lot on a good team your +/- will be good.

That doesnt say anything about the player.

 

[Crosbyfan]

+/- is a reflection of icetime and the quality of your team.
.

True

If you play a lot on a bad team your +/- will be bad. If you play a lot on a good team your +/- will be good..

Somewhat true

That doesnt say anything about the player.

Wrong


2 out of 3 and yet you claim +/- is useless?

 

[LaLaLaprise]

Explain to me...how it says something about the player if it is a reflection on the team??

Petr Vrana was a +47 in 02/03 and was a -20 in 03/04. Did Vrana magically lose his hockey skills over night??

 

[Crosbyfan]

Explain to me...how it says something about the player if it is a reflection on the team??

Petr Vrana was a +47 in 02/03 and was a -20 in 03/04. Did Vrana magically lose his hockey skills over night??

Didn't Vrana play for the Mooseheads in 02/03 , a huge + team, and again in 03/04, a huge minus team?

 

[LaLaLaprise]

Didn't Vrana play for the Mooseheads in 02/03 , a huge + team, and again in 03/04, a huge minus team?

THAT is MY POINT!!

+/- is a reflection of the TEAM!!!

 

[Crosbyfan]

THAT is MY POINT!!

+/- is a reflection of the TEAM!!!

This is a valid point. Now how did he compare to his team mates and line mates? The comparison is much better if he played for teams that were closer in +/-. The dominant factor here is the huge difference between these two Moosehead teams. This may swamp other factors. Does this mean the whole +/- stat is useless? I don't know a lot about Petr Vrana but I suspect his +/- stats are a good indication of the years he had if compared to his team mates and linemates for those same years.

 

[LaLaLaprise]

This is a valid point. Now how did he compare to his team mates and line mates? The comparison is much better if he played for teams that were closer in +/-. The dominant factor here is the huge difference between these two Moosehead teams. This may swamp other factors. Does this mean the whole +/- stat is useless? I don't know a lot about Petr Vrana but I suspect his +/- stats are a good indication of the years he had if compared to his team mates and linemates for those same years.

Looking at +/- to gauge who is better between players is in fact useless.

There are too many extrenuating circumstances. Like what if one of your linemates is a floater and doesnt help out? What if you get lucky and you get on the ice and a goal is scored right away.

 

[Crosbyfan]

Looking at +/- to gauge who is better between players is in fact useless.

There are too many extrenuating circumstances. Like what if one of your linemates is a floater and doesnt help out? What if you get lucky and you get on the ice and a goal is scored right away.

That's like saying using goals scored as a test of goal scoring ability is useless. What if one of your linemates is a puck hog and doesnt pass the puck? What if you get lucky and one bounces in off your butt? Taken over a season some of these variables "tend to" average out. Others (like good/poor line mates) may not. It would help if + and - were shown separately as well as together and not given out at all for empty net goals but it is still a good stat overall. Better than goals and assists for two way play. For defensive play alone it is less accurate but still far from "useless".

 

[krooky]

And why do you think that? Anything can happen in a year.

Yeah, anything can happen in a year but this isn't going to happen. It's going to be just like this year. Crosby will go #1 and Brule will go #2 just like Ovechkin and Malkin. Anyone who thinks Brule has a chance to go #1 is dreaming but anyone who thinks Bertram or Latendresse or anyone else has a shot at #2 over Brule is also dreaming.

 

[Crosbyfan]

Yeah, anything can happen in a year but this isn't going to happen. It's going to be just like this year. Crosby will go #1 and Brule will go #2 just like Ovechkin and Malkin. Anyone who thinks Brule has a chance to go #1 is dreaming but anyone who thinks Bertram or Latendresse or anyone else has a shot at #2 over Brule is also dreaming.

Count me in for Latendresse at #2. Hope Brule is top 10 in Dub scoring to keep it close!

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

Count me in for Latendresse at #2. Hope Brule is top 10 in Dub scoring to keep it close!

Brule will be top 5 in scoring, might even lead.

 

[Crosbyfan]

Brule will be top 5 in scoring, might even lead.

What will be interesting will be the WJC camp in December. Latendresse and Brule should be invited and one or both could make the team.

 

[Synergy27]

+/- is a reflection of icetime and the quality of your team.

If you play a lot on a bad team your +/- will be bad. If you play a lot on a good team your +/- will be good.

That doesnt say anything about the player.

Does not the quality of the team depend on the quality of the players? If a good player plays alot his team will probably be good. If a bad player plays alot his team will probably be bad, no? I certainly dont think that +/- should be used as a stand alone tool for evaluating players, but it can definitely be useful when considered along with a variety of other factors.

 

[Yayo]

Yeah, anything can happen in a year but this isn't going to happen. It's going to be just like this year. Crosby will go #1 and Brule will go #2 just like Ovechkin and Malkin. Anyone who thinks Brule has a chance to go #1 is dreaming but anyone who thinks Bertram or Latendresse or anyone else has a shot at #2 over Brule is also dreaming.

This year some scouts believed that Malkin possibly could have gone #1.

 

[LaLaLaprise]

That's like saying using goals scored as a test of goal scoring ability is useless. What if one of your linemates is a puck hog and doesnt pass the puck? What if you get lucky and one bounces in off your butt? Taken over a season some of these variables "tend to" average out. Others (like good/poor line mates) may not. It would help if + and - were shown separately as well as together and not given out at all for empty net goals but it is still a good stat overall. Better than goals and assists for two way play. For defensive play alone it is less accurate but still far from "useless".

No its nothing like that at all. Most knowledgable hockey people will tell youy +/- is overrated.

Plus just because you have the most goals doesnt mean you are the best goal scorer. Just like highest +/- doesnt mean you are defensivly aware.

Have you actually watched hockey? Or do you just look at stats?

 

[LaLaLaprise]

Does not the quality of the team depend on the quality of the players? If a good player plays alot his team will probably be good. If a bad player plays alot his team will probably be bad, no? I certainly dont think that +/- should be used as a stand alone tool for evaluating players, but it can definitely be useful when considered along with a variety of other factors.

Did you see my example??

Petr Vrana...+47 playing 2nd line in 02/03 -25 playing 1st line.

It has nothing to do with the players DEFENSIVE ability.

 

[Crosbyfan]

No its nothing like that at all. Most knowledgable hockey people will tell youy +/- is overrated.

Plus just because you have the most goals doesnt mean you are the best goal scorer. Just like highest +/- doesnt mean you are defensivly aware.

Have you actually watched hockey? Or do you just look at stats?

La-La you are taking your own bias as to how you think people use these stats and assuming people that use them all think that way. So most knowledgable hockey people will tell you +/- is overrated? Overrated relative to what? You said they are "useless". Tell me what knowledgable hockey people ignore them completely.

 

[Crosbyfan]

Did you see my example??

Petr Vrana...+47 playing 2nd line in 02/03 -25 playing 1st line.

It has nothing to do with the players DEFENSIVE ability.

Here is an EXAMPLE of your thinking. Synergy27 didn't even mention DEFENSIVE ability in their post and even qualified their use of +/- as useful and not to be used on it's own. Your Vrana example is probably another PREDICTABLE +/- stat. In fact it is so extreme it could be explained by a small child who watches very little hockey. Vrana played those two years under VERY different circumstances. Which do YOU think would be the better circumstances for a better +/-?

Now given similar circumstances explain how +/- has nothing to do with the players DEFENSIVE ability. If you can you get my nomination for the Nobel Prize in Statistics AND Player Evaluation.

 

[LaLaLaprise]

La-La you are taking your own bias as to how you think people use these stats and assuming people that use them all think that way. So most knowledgable hockey people will tell you +/- is overrated? Overrated relative to what? You said they are "useless". Tell me what knowledgable hockey people ignore them completely.

You dont ignore anything completly, but you also dont base anything on it. In the Brule vs. Crosby debate you brought up how Crosby had a better +/- like it was important when they are both 16

 

[LaLaLaprise]

Here is an EXAMPLE of your thinking. Synergy27 didn't even mention DEFENSIVE ability in their post and even qualified their use of +/- as useful and not to be used on it's own. Your Vrana example is probably another PREDICTABLE +/- stat. In fact it is so extreme it could be explained by a small child who watches very little hockey. Vrana played those two years under VERY different circumstances. Which do YOU think would be the better circumstances for a better +/-?

Now given similar circumstances explain how +/- has nothing to do with the players DEFENSIVE ability. If you can you get my nomination for the Nobel Prize in Statistics AND Player Evaluation.

That is my point Crosbyfan. You liked to give Crosby kudos because of his good +/- but you fail to mention that he has that +/- because his line filled the net. That is all it proves.

+/- honestly has nothing to do with a players defensive ability. How does scoring a goal, which gives you a plus, translate into a good defensive player??

You wont be able to convince me otherwise.

 

[Stiffler's Mom]

What Dr Sense says is essentially how I feel.

I do honestly believe that Brule has a decent shot at #1, but he has to crack 100 points in the 'dub'. Make no mistake: General Managers in the NHL will take a WHL guy over a QMJHL guy 9 times out of 10 if they feel it's a close race. If Brule could put up as I said, 100 points and lead the WHL in scoring, Crosby in my mind would have to put up 180 points or more to be considered a better guy I'd think.

I think if you consider the ice time Crosby got last year in comparison to Brule, as well as the leagues, there is not a impossible gap here even for the most ardent Crosby fan. Does anyone recall in 2001 where Jason Spezza a year before the draft was considered the uncontested 1st overall pick in 2001 until Ilya Kovalchuk exploded at a tournament in Finland? Or, as mentioned, Daniel Cleary's big numbers in the OHL? It's easy to say now that Crosby is more talented than Cleary, now that Cleary barely made the NHL at all, but at the time some considered Crosby the best prospect to come down the pike in years, and I imagine many had him going #2 behind Joe Thornton.. some even #1 that year I'm sure.

As usual, the draft year will mean just about everything. Do not discount Brule yet though.. I think he has an excellent chance to lead the dub in points next season, what with him likely going to get about 5 - 7 more minutes of ice per game, better linemates, more PP times, and a year older. Crosby already was on the top line in Rimouski, so it'll be a challenge for him to do anything like 190 points like some may be expecting.

Very astute observation in regards to Brule's ice time. He usually received 10-15 minutes per game last season. If his icetime goes up to say the low 20's, then his point production will drastically improve. Crosby's ice time was sometimes up to 30 minutes a game, especially when the Oceanic were desperately trying to clinch first in their division at the end of the season. I think Brule will definitely break 100 pts in the WHL, assuming he gets a huge increase in icetime per game. He will need about 110 points to win the scoring title. Much tougher to score points in the WHL, obviously.

 

[Hiishawk]

Someone wrote:
Does anyone recall in 2001 where Jason Spezza a year before the draft was considered the uncontested 1st overall pick in 2001 until Ilya Kovalchuk exploded at a tournament in Finland? Or, as mentioned, Daniel Cleary's big numbers in the OHL? It's easy to say now that Crosby is more talented than Cleary, now that Cleary barely made the NHL at all, but at the time some considered Crosby the best prospect to come down the pike in years, and I imagine many had him going #2 behind Joe Thornton.. some even #1 that year I'm sure.

But I answer:
No I don't remember this. Mostly because it never happened. In the draft preview rating in his draft year Cleary was considered a top 5 CANDIDATE. In his PREVIOUS year a few people said he was an early candiadte for #1 a year and a half later. That's all. Go back and check. No one ever made as big a deal about Cleary as is often mentioned here.

I know, I was scouting AND writing then.

As for Spezza- no one said he was an uncontested No.1. He was the slight frontrunner going into his draft year but some publications and many scouts had Kovalchuk right behind him or even with him at the start of the year. Kovalchuk had had a great U17s in Halifax and was considered a a definite #1 contender well before the 4 nations in Finland.

People have short memories of this stuff. The last one to generate Crosby-like #1 with-certainty-itis was Lindros.

 

[Just a Guy]

I think Crosby will be #1 this year if he continues with the same point production, but to say that Brule couldn't unseat him....well...That's not necessarily true. A number of things can happen...Crosby has a serious injury...has a long slump...Brule puts up serious numbers in the WHL, which is considered a defensively tougher league...etc. Anything could happen to dip his status of a number one canidate. Heck if the Caps get the 1st overall pick next year...the chance of GMGM picking Brule first overall goes up tremendously based on the fact of his preference for WHL players.

Now don't get me wrong...I do believe barring the above...Crosby will be picked #1.

I'm going to stay out of the +/- debate.

 

[Crosbyfan]

Very astute observation in regards to Brule's ice time. He usually received 10-15 minutes per game last season. If his icetime goes up to say the low 20's, then his point production will drastically improve. Crosby's ice time was sometimes up to 30 minutes a game, especially when the Oceanic were desperately trying to clinch first in their division at the end of the season. I think Brule will definitely break 100 pts in the WHL, assuming he gets a huge increase in icetime per game. He will need about 110 points to win the scoring title. Much tougher to score points in the WHL, obviously.

If Brule is that good and he played only 10 minutes in a game his coach deserves a severe butt kicking.