Sometimes +/- does tell the tale

[GreenLantern2814]

I was checking the Flames stats page tonight and noticed that 47 games in, TJ Brodie is a plus 23. Playing the high risk style he plays, he's plus 23. That isn't all on Gio covering his backside, that's because Brodie is that goddamn good.

I then noticed that Wideman is sitting at a manageable -2, and that Smid and Engelland are -12 and -13 respectively and unsurprisingly.

Our first minus player is Josh Jooris at -1. Then the next four forwards who aren't McGrattan are all basically rookies: Ferland, Granlund (-2), Reinhart (-3) Baertschi (-4). All players that are learning the NHL game; they'll all make mistakes and learn at different paces.

Now we begin to see the presence of veterans. Byron is the least seasoned of this group at -5, and not surprisingly, the only player in this group who is not on the consensus island of misfit toys.

But Mason Raymond is -6. Brandon Bollig is -7. Setoguchi was too, before he was disappeared into nothingness. Then you round out with the aforementioned Smid and Engelland. Diaz is in this crowd too, but he's the 7th defenseman. He's played 25 games, he's -5, which means in the here and now, he's better than Smid and Engelland as far as I'm concerned.

I know it doesn't tell the whole story, but sometimes it does, you know? Raymond, Bollig, Smid and Engelland. If you upgrade those four positions, this is a playoff team. Credit to those guys, they are playing well enough to keep this team in the hunt. But is anyone going to stand up and tell me we've yet to see the best from Engelland and Smid?

I think these guys are playing their guts out, giving everything they have, and setting great examples for our younger players. But if you go into a playoff series, they're a liability.

To be a playoff team, your third best defensive pairing probably has to be nearly as good as Russell/Wideman. At least they should be comparatively as reliable in their assignments. Our bottom pair doesn't come close to any of our top four.

Raymond and Bollig are filler. They're meat in the room. Bollig might be an okay agitator who hits sometimes when he's on, and he might not be a complete defensive liability based on his role and skillset. But he's certainly not great at his role - you donn't identify him as a 'heart and soul core Darren McCarty' bottom six guy like Bouma, you identify him by his physical characteristics, and what someone of his particular skillset SHOULD do when they're good at their job.

That same thing goes to Mason Raymond. He's NHL calibre, sort of. But he's not great. His awareness sucks. He has no feel for where anyone is on the ice, or where he's supposed to be. His goals are all scored because he was in a position where his physical superiority gives him an advantage. And he's not physically superior enough to be consistent.

If you upgrade those four players, the Calgary Flames a playoff team. If they are all replaced with guys who are best described as 'competent in their roles', the Calgary Flames are a playoff team.

In conclusion, +/- doesn't always tell the whole truth. But sometimes it tells the whole truth so help it God.

[gilligans_off]

....ok

Cool story bro.

[Jacks]

Agree that +/- isn't a great stat and can be misleading but it is somewhat useful in the larger picture. If a player is consistently a + or a - there usually is a reason.

Originally Posted by gilligans_off

....ok

Cool story bro.

Agree or disagree OP took the time to lay out an opinion with some facts to back it up. Glad to see you took 20 seconds to offer your detailed rebuttal.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by gilligans_off

....ok

Cool story bro.

Second cool story: I couldn't figure out how to start this thing, and actually had it begin with 'Cool story time'.

I didn't though. Would've been sweet if I had.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Agree that +/- isn't a great stat and can be misleading but it is somewhat useful in the larger picture. If a player is consistently a + or a - there usually is a reason.


Agree or disagree OP took the time to lay out an opinion with some facts to back it up. Glad to see you took 20 seconds to offer your detailed rebuttal.

It's a thinly veiled bash Engelland/Smid/Bollig/Raymond thread. The fact he concludes his summary by saying sometimes +/- tells the whole story is nothing short of a farce because +/- NEVER tells the whole story.

The one part of the story being ignored is goals scored when these guys (Engelland/Smid) are on the ice. Smid for instance has only been on the ice for 8 goals for all year, Engelland has only been on the ice for 12 all year. Each of the top 4 defensemen have been on the ice for a minimum of 50 goals for.

When this team's offensive game is driven from the backend it shouldn't take much more than a passing thought to realize the 3rd pairing which contains 2 guys that are lacking on offensive ability are going to struggle in +/-.

[Psytic]

We need someone to dig up a goals scored while on the ice per 60 minutes played for our D core. Then we would have to take into account the quality of competition. Just watching these guys you can tell they are the dead weight. If we are going to give an honest analysis we need more than just plus minus though.

[FlamesAddiction]

It's not a useless stat when comparing players within the same team, but it does get fuzzy when you consider the different roles within the team and who is on which line. I also look at it as a relative measurement.

My big beef is when people use it to compare players on different teams.

[Stormchaser]

I really hate the "cool story bro"and wish it would disappear...

I personally think that Raymond is lost in the shuffle here in Calgary. With the emergence of Gaudreau and Bouma stepping up his game, it's a sink or swim and he's sinking fast. I'm pretty sure he must have been penciled in on the 1st or second line before the season started...can't remember who his linemates were at the start of the season...

Is it a confidence problem? Its definitely not for lack of effort as you can see lots of "try" out there...or is that just because he's a faster skater? But he just doesn't seem to get close to the net for a good opportunity and takes low percentage bad angle shots seemly hoping for something good to happen. Raymond was also a -6 last year with the Leafs and was playing 2 mins more per game as well.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by Psytic

We need someone to dig up a goals scored while on the ice per 60 minutes played for our D core. Then we would have to take into account the quality of competition. Just watching these guys you can tell they are the dead weight. If we are going to give an honest analysis we need more than just plus minus though.

Rank	Player_Name     Team  	Pos	GP	GF60	GA60	TMGF60	TMGA60	OppGF60	OppGA60	GF60RelTM	 GA60RelTM	 
1	LADISLAV SMID	Calgary	D	31	1.25	3.38	2.46	2.29	2.27	2.37	-1.21 	         1.09	         
2	DENNIS WIDEMAN	Calgary	D	46	2.43	2.43	2.88	2.28	2.4	2.41	-0.46 	         0.14	         
3	MARK GIORDANO	Calgary	D	47	3.09	2	2.25	2.39	2.44	2.42	0.84   	        -0.39	         
4	KRIS RUSSELL	Calgary	D	45	2.8	2.12	2.35	2.63	2.38	2.42	0.44   	        -0.51	         
5	TJ BRODIE	Calgary	D	47	3.03	1.84	2.38	2.51	2.44	2.41	0.65   	        -0.67            
6	DERYK ENGELLAND	Calgary	D	41	1.44	3.17	2.54	2.25	2.28	2.4    -1.1 	         0.92	        
7	RAPHAEL DIAZ	Calgary	D	25	1.57	3.15	2.32	2.37	2.2	2.47   -0.74 	         0.77

Courtesy Puckalytics. This is only for 5v5 and adjusted for Zone Starts.

Calgary's team GF60 and GA60 for 5v5 and adjusted for Zone Starts are 2.22 and 2.27, respectively.

Not sure how to factor in quality of competition though.

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

When this team's offensive game is driven from the backend it shouldn't take much more than a passing thought to realize the 3rd pairing which contains 2 guys that are lacking on offensive ability are going to struggle in +/-.

Fancystats definitely seems to support this.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

It's a thinly veiled bash Engelland/Smid/Bollig/Raymond thread. The fact he concludes his summary by saying sometimes +/- tells the whole story is nothing short of a farce because +/- NEVER tells the whole story.

The one part of the story being ignored is goals scored when these guys (Engelland/Smid) are on the ice. Smid for instance has only been on the ice for 8 goals for all year, Engelland has only been on the ice for 12 all year. Each of the top 4 defensemen have been on the ice for a minimum of 50 goals for.

When this team's offensive game is driven from the backend it shouldn't take much more than a passing thought to realize the 3rd pairing which contains 2 guys that are lacking on offensive ability are going to struggle in +/-.

So you agree with the OP then that the 3rd pair isn't contributing or fitting in to the style the team plays and an upgrade would be helpful?

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

It's a thinly veiled bash Engelland/Smid/Bollig/Raymond thread. The fact he concludes his summary by saying sometimes +/- tells the whole story is nothing short of a farce because +/- NEVER tells the whole story.

The one part of the story being ignored is goals scored when these guys (Engelland/Smid) are on the ice. Smid for instance has only been on the ice for 8 goals for all year, Engelland has only been on the ice for 12 all year. Each of the top 4 defensemen have been on the ice for a minimum of 50 goals for.

When this team's offensive game is driven from the backend it shouldn't take much more than a passing thought to realize the 3rd pairing which contains 2 guys that are lacking on offensive ability are going to struggle in +/-.

It isn't a thinly veiled anything - Smid and Engelland aren't good enough. I don't need +/- to tell me that, and Neither do you.

+/- confirms the four weakest links on the team. They're exactly who we thought they were.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

So you agree with the OP then that the 3rd pair isn't contributing or fitting in to the style the team plays and an upgrade would be helpful?

Having a poor +/- does not mean they aren't contributing in other ways, there is more to the game than just goals for. Individually I think there is a place on this team for both Engelland and Smid on the Flames, it just cannot be together. I'd like to see Hartley try Smid with Wideman and Russell with Engelland for the ice-time that Engelland and Smid would play (and then Wideman and Russell together for other shifts). I think this would make both Engelland and Smid more effective and possibly even improve them enough where they could lighten the load on the top 4.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

It isn't a thinly veiled anything - Smid and Engelland aren't good enough. I don't need +/- to tell me that, and Neither do you.

+/- confirms the four weakest links on the team. They're exactly who we thought they were.

So its not thinly veiled, its another useless thread to complain.

[CSharp]

If it's Ovechkin where he's got a -36 and he's scoring 35 gaols, that's a -71 goal differential. That means all he's doing is cherry picking while his team is doing all the work trying to stay alive.

Other than that, the +/- stat don't mean much for a single player. You have to look at the other 5 players on the ice at that moment in time. If a line is always a minus, the coach better look at this an shuffle the lines around to resolve that issue since you don't want to be scored on all the time when using the same line on the ice. It also depends on what other lines are matched up against the opposition. So, the +/- really means didly-squat for an individual stat record, except for Ovechkin.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

It isn't a thinly veiled anything - Smid and Engelland aren't good enough. I don't need +/- to tell me that, and Neither do you.

+/- confirms the four weakest links on the team. They're exactly who we thought they were.

Isn't one of the complaints that Eggs and Smid are not good synergy players to each other? I think Wideman wouldn't be as good if paired with someone other than Russell. I also think someone said Wotherspoon and Smid weren't bad last year. It would be interesting to see if Eggs or Smid had a faster puck mover paired with them, whether it could help to improve their +/- (Similar in nature to comments about Stajan helping out the 4th line)

The above argument about who is in front of Smid and Eggs is a good one too.

Consider pairing up this thread with the chemistry thread... does it help?
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=143576

[bomber317]

Originally Posted by CSharp

If it's Ovechkin where he's got a -36 and he's scoring 35 gaols, that's a -71 goal differential. That means all he's doing is cherry picking while his team is doing all the work trying to stay alive.

Other than that, the +/- stat don't mean much for a single player. You have to look at the other 5 players on the ice at that moment in time. If a line is always a minus, the coach better look at this an shuffle the lines around to resolve that issue since you don't want to be scored on all the time when using the same line on the ice. It also depends on what other lines are matched up against the opposition. So, the +/- really means didly-squat for an individual stat record, except for Ovechkin.

You need to account for PP goals. -36 + scoring 35 goals does not equate to a -71 goal differential.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

So its not thinly veiled, its another useless thread to complain.

How do you think Smid and Engelland are going to do when they play Anaheim in a seven game series? Nashville? St Louis? Chicago?

They're going to get worked. I know this because they get worked now. They aren't going to magically get better once game 82 hits - they are what they are.

If you go into a playoff series with Smid and Engelland as your third pair, that is going to cost you the series. They aren't good enough.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

It's a thinly veiled bash Engelland/Smid/Bollig/Raymond thread. The fact he concludes his summary by saying sometimes +/- tells the whole story is nothing short of a farce because +/- NEVER tells the whole story.

The one part of the story being ignored is goals scored when these guys (Engelland/Smid) are on the ice. Smid for instance has only been on the ice for 8 goals for all year, Engelland has only been on the ice for 12 all year. Each of the top 4 defensemen have been on the ice for a minimum of 50 goals for.

When this team's offensive game is driven from the backend it shouldn't take much more than a passing thought to realize the 3rd pairing which contains 2 guys that are lacking on offensive ability are going to struggle in +/-.

So you're saying it is telling the story??? Basically "It doesn't tell the story, they're bad because they can't push the puck up the ice". That's not disagreeing but somehow you're disagreeing?

They've been on the ice for more goals against per 60 minutes of even strength and almost no goals for. That's awful for any pairing

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

How do you think Smid and Engelland are going to do when they play Anaheim in a seven game series? Nashville? St Louis? Chicago?

They're going to get worked. I know this because they get worked now. They aren't going to magically get better once game 82 hits - they are what they are.

If you go into a playoff series with Smid and Engelland as your third pair, that is going to cost you the series. They aren't good enough.

Individually, either could be fine. They aren't good enough as a pair, but that's where +/- is flawed since theirs is identical. Smid-Wotherspoon is a completely different look. Engelland-Culkin might be too.

[gilligans_off]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Agree or disagree OP took the time to lay out an opinion with some facts to back it up. Glad to see you took 20 seconds to offer your detailed rebuttal.

Opinion? Sounded more like a complaint to me. If you look hard enough for a stat to show how bad certain players are you can find it.

Some people just want to bi*ch about the flames regardless of what they do on the ice. If your not happy with the team, stop buying tickets... if you do.