It is still referred to during games by actual analysts. In and of itself, it does not say much, but it is not completely irrelevant.
It is only amongst online analysts that it is completely meaningless.
Habs acquire Nate Thompson from Kings
- Thread starter hairnova
- Start date
It is still referred to during games by actual analysts. In and of itself, it does not say much, but it is not completely irrelevant.
It is only amongst online analysts that it is completely meaningless.
Comparing +/- of players on different teams is completely useless.
"Joe Blow (on the best team in the league) has a better +/- than John Doe (on the worst team in the league) so he's better defensively. " Is a ridiculously stupid statement.
Comparing where 2 players rank on their respective teams in +/- minus is a lot more relevant.
In context it can be used to be PART of an argument. You still need to look at zone starts and QoC.
"Joe Blow (on the best team in the league) has a better +/- than John Doe (on the worst team in the league) so he's better defensively. " Is a ridiculously stupid statement.
Comparing where 2 players rank on their respective teams in +/- minus is a lot more relevant.
In context it can be used to be PART of an argument. You still need to look at zone starts and QoC.
You are a stat guy, who/what determines QoC?
GrandWazoo
Well-known member
Completely agree. Do you have a good site to get QoC? Zone starts is about the best I could get. I would also like to see WOWY stats, I used to have a site but I can't find it anymore.
GrandWazoo
Well-known member
Well we also have 5 on Dale Weise and had 6 on Dwight Knight, another 6 on Martinsen, etc.
Le_Slacker
Member
don't tease!
CaptainBolduke
Active member
The reason television analysts use +/- is because it is easy for the masses to understand on its own.
+/- is the "buck a beer" of hockey.
so it's for you?
GrandWazoo
Well-known member
It's also something that is meaningful in the context of a game. The -2 by Chaput, Deslauriers and Peca in less than 8 minutes of play spoke volume last Saturday.
worm
Well-known member
There are better stats to use than plus minus.
But you are right. Quality of Competition, D zone starts, etc all play a role.
He has a bad corsi, shots against, etc but maybe that is because he is playing against other teams top lines or something.
worm
Well-known member
Eye test can tell you that quite easily though. That is the issue with small sample sizes.
15 scoring chances for and 2 against but Price let in two weak ones and the other goalie robbed you = -2
CH1
The Artist Formerly Known as chiggins.
Pfffffft. We had over 20 pages when we traded the amazing Danny Kristo.
This board hasn't been the same since.
GGpX
Well-known member
What if both of those goals were softball goals from Price?
That's the thing with +/-. A player can be in the positive or negative while having absolutely zero impact on any of the play. To me, that in of itself, destroys any real value the stat can have.
The only way +/- can have value is if it's used in a much larger context in a complimentary way, but even then, it holds almost no value to me. Same thing as GAA for goalies. What's the value in GAA when the stat remains the same regardless of the amount of shots you face? Who had a better game, goalie who gave up 2 goals on 20 shots or the goalie who gave up 2 goals on 50 shots? Odds are, the goalie who faced 50 shots. And yet, the GAA remains the same...
Last edited:
GrandWazoo
Well-known member
Every stats have flaws. Just because you're on the ice doesn't mean you have anything to do with a shot for or against either. Hell players can get assists from the bench but won't be credited with the +/- or the shot for, while the guy who just jump in gets the credit. We could also be on the ice for 15 shots from the blue line against 5 shots against but those shots were 3 2-on-1s and a breakaway, and a prime chance from the slot.
-1 or +1 in a game doesn't mean much but +/- 2 is starting to be meaningful, and +/- 3 most definitely means something. Generally there is always parts of the play before a goal where you did or could have done something to influence it. I'm old school and I like +/- because they are based on goals, which is the only thing that matters in hockey, but you need context to make sense of it. Shots have a bigger sample rate and remove some of the bad variations which is great but generally they need to go together. If a guy has great relative Corsi but is in the minus (also relative to team and context), it raises some questions. The opposite is also true.
Corsi and sv% means more to me when quality of shots is represented. I've seen 50 shots games when the goalie didn't have to make a single difficult save and I've also seen 20 saves games where the goalie robbed at least 5 sure goals. Some goalies also generate more shots to themselves by bad rebound control and poor stick work.