Quote:
Originally Posted by heep223
I don't think you realize how much you cherry pick data. Great players can have great +\- but great players can also be minus players.
The issue is that you use +\- as the sole determinant in these elaborate arguments and comparisons, when we know that +\- doesn't determine whether a player is great or not. Partly it's because players are played in different situations. For example Monahan puts up 65 points but is still -5 or whatever, because he's on the PP a lot and also matches up against the top players on the other team 5v5. On the other hand Lance Bouma for example, doesn't play PP so when he's on the ice for a goal it counts as a + every time, and furthermore he doesn't match up against the opposition's best lines 5v5 so has easier competition.
Do you see what I am saying at all? Do you see the flaws in +\-? And that using it as a sole determinant in establishing who is good and who is not is problematic?
|
it is not a sole determinate... It expands on scoring stats.... Monahan is a top centre on the Flames based on his 65 pts..... he will not be a top centre in the league until he is able to go up against the Toews/Kopitars/Thorntons/Crosby/Carters and outplay them. Right now he goes up against them and they are consistently better. When he comes up with a superior effort against a top centre it is newsworthy.... not expected.
Similarly Scheifele and Barkov are the top centres on their teams and while they are in the Monahan pt scoring range they would be considered by neutral observers to be better players at this point in their careers..... because they play against the same level of opposition as Monahan and win more battles as shown by their +/-.
Bouma is an incredibly bad example..... he was a -6 in 44 games. Reflected perfectly his dissapointing 2015-16 season. He also is someone who the Flames want to put out against the other teams top players and hope that he battles them to a scoreless draw at even strength.
Did Bouma have a great season in 2014-15? Not only his 34 pts show this, his +10 was also an indicator of how good he was. He was an extremely important player for the Flames that year..... they had him play at well below 100% physical readiness against the Ducks in the playoffs as he was a better option to play against the superior skilled Ducks than anyone else in the organization.
Backlund is better than his 21 goals and 47 pts (same as scoring range as Colborne).... Backlund was team best +10.