What are your unpopular hockey opinions?

[Randall Flagg]

+/- being taken as a small factor while doing extensive research into the team around the player could be useful.

"Marner is a -4 so he sucks" or the same thing with Risto, is a comical attempt at analyzing hockey players, though.

[MattPie]

+/- is like saying saying "I rode my bicycle 5 miles today" (I didn't, don't worry). Useful information in some ways, but if start using it to compare myself to other people without taking other factors into effect it gives a distorted picture. The guy in Kansas on a 60 degree day has it easier (no hills) than the guy riding around Tahoe (altitude and all hills) or the person where it's been pouring rain or snowing all day.

[Thorner]

I love Rob Ray.

 

Brad May is mey.

 

I liked to see NHL games played on the larger international rinks.

 

Goalie pads/equipment size should be reduced to be as small as possible while still having the same protective qualities.

 

Intentionally going down on a knee or laying out on the ice to block a shot should be a penalty.

Ya, I wish they could do something about shot blocking like that. Also, the instances where 2 or 3 defending players are all in the crease playing goaltender on a scramble. Always find that to be aggravating.

[TrueBlueGED]

I don't think raw +/- is useless, just flawed. It's not good at comparing players across the league because of all the variables in line mates, opponents and situations,

 

It doesn't tell you how good a player is, but it can give you some indication of how effective a player has been in the role his coach has given him. Pretty much exactly what Corsi does, except Corsi uses shots by team to measure that effectiveness and +\- uses goals. As far as I can see, Corsi has the same flaws, it just attempts to take the "lucky bounce" factor out of the equation. But it has a similar flaw because it fails to take into account the effectiveness of those shots.

 

I'm sure Blue, or Wildcard, or someone can explain what I'm missing.

It has been explained probably five or six different times on this forum. Somebody else is welcome to swing at it again, but I give up.

[That Aud Smell]

Plus minus just isn't a fair or accurate representation of a player's performance, effectiveness, or ability.

 

But I'm not learned enough to articulate the many reasons why.

 

Not for nothing: Wasn't Ovechkin a -35 the year he scored 50?

 

We can be assured that Ovechkin was really effing good that season.

 

The stat just doesn't tell you much.

[dudacek]

The stat just doesn't tell you much.

It tells you that over the course of the year, the opponents out scored the Caps by 35 goals when Ovi was on the ice at even strength.

That can't be good, considering you have to score more than the other team to win, and winning is why you play.

But how much that had to do with Ovi's play, I have no idea.

 

I do know I'd want him on my team.

Because eye test.

 

EDIT TO ADD:

Substitute Fancystats for +/- and Risto for Ovi and I'd say the same thing.

Edited January 5, 2017 by dudacek

[Randall Flagg]

It also tells you that he sucks, can't play defense, is a bad teammate, is just in it for the paycheck, isn't a good leader, and isn't gritty enough. It tells you that you should never want him on your team.

I wouldn't mind people using +/- if they supplemented some possession stats, pulled out stats showing that his goalies still have a good save percentage while he's on the ice, showed it was much worse than teammates' +/-, some video evidence that indicates poor defensive ability and hockey IQ that may lead to that stat, quality of teammates/competition, etc. But nobody who loves +/- and cites it regularly has ever done anything like this, and so its use gets correctly ridiculed. 

[dudacek]

It also tells you that he sucks, can't play defense, is a bad teammate, is just in it for the paycheck, isn't a good leader, and isn't gritty enough. It tells you that you should never want him on your team.

I wouldn't mind people using +/- if they supplemented some possession stats, pulled out stats showing that his goalies still have a good save percentage while he's on the ice, showed it was much worse than teammates' +/-, some video evidence that indicates poor defensive ability and hockey IQ that may lead to that stat, quality of teammates/competition, etc. But nobody who loves +/- and cites it regularly has ever done anything like this, and so its use gets correctly ridiculed.

 

And many - not on this board - make a similar mistake with fancystats and make sweeping judgements about players they rarely, if ever, see play.

[Randall Flagg]

And many - not on this board - make a similar mistake with fancystats and make sweeping judgements about players they rarely, if ever, see play.

*raises hand*

[inkman]

+/- being taken as a small factor while doing extensive research into the team around the player could be useful.

 

"Marner is a -4 so he sucks" or the same thing with Risto, is a comical attempt at analyzing hockey players, though.

If I need reems of other info to discern whether or not the original info is useful, is the data really useful?

[pi2000]

+/- being taken as a small factor while doing extensive research into the team around the player could be useful.

 

"Marner is a -4 so he sucks" or the same thing with Risto, is a comical attempt at analyzing hockey players, though.

 

If a player is a minus, it doesn't mean he sucks.   It just means he's not good as good at defending as he is at scoring.    It tells you where a player needs to improve.    

 

 

It also tells you that he sucks, can't play defense, is a bad teammate, is just in it for the paycheck, isn't a good leader, and isn't gritty enough. It tells you that you should never want him on your team.

 

I wouldn't mind people using +/- if they supplemented some possession stats, pulled out stats showing that his goalies still have a good save percentage while he's on the ice, showed it was much worse than teammates' +/-, some video evidence that indicates poor defensive ability and hockey IQ that may lead to that stat, quality of teammates/competition, etc. But nobody who loves +/- and cites it regularly has ever done anything like this, and so its use gets correctly ridiculed. 

 

 

I did all this for the Risto +/- analysis and it was overlooked apparently.    Specifically comparing his +/- to the +/- of players on others that similar team goal differentials.   

 

BTW, comparing goalie sv% between skaters is flawed.... bad defensive players will give up better scoring chances so you should expect goalie sv% to be worse when poor defensive (minus players) are on the ice.

 

 

And many - not on this board - make a similar mistake with fancystats and make sweeping judgements about players they rarely, if ever, see play.

 

*raises hand*

 

That said, I enjoy reading Flagg's analysis and respect his opinion (even tho he's wrong most of the time, hahah  :P )

[Ducky]

About the NHL, the Sabres, or the sport in general. Put em in here so we can all yell or laugh at you! 

 

Mine:

- Goalie equipment is fine. This is a recently-developed opinion.

 

- Jacob Slavin is a top 5 defenseman in the Eastern Conference. I was going to say 10, but after  Karlsson, Weber, Letang, and Hedman I was having a lot of trouble coming up with any others.

 

- Rob Ray does a good job. 

 

- Jeff Skinner is awesome.

 

- Jonathan Toews is not a top 50 player in the world, despite being ranked number two by THN a little over a year ago. He's currently something like 150th in scoring, and is paid $10 mil to pace for 45-55 points while being the 4th best player on his team (5th this year, Panarin/Kane/Keith/Hossa all ahead)

 

- If Matthews was 3 days younger he would be a Buffalo Sabre right now. It doesn't bother me one bit that this didn't happen, but I think Tim would have taken him over Jack.

 

- The NHL season should be around 68 games long, and shootouts shouldn't exist.

 

- The Hurricanes have the best goal horn in the NHL (not sure why I'm loving Carolina so much here, I can't stand them haha)

 

- The Sabres will not have another goalie as good as Ryan Miller in my lifetime, even if they get guys that post better stats. Those stats will be a product of the era/system/whatever.

 

Tell me how stupid I am, and add your own! About NHL teams, players, rules, anything hockey.

Shouldn't that be older?

Anyway, if I were you, I would be glad to have Eichel over AM...something tells me that AM isn't a lifer in TO.

 

Growing up watching hockey since the 60s I am really not a fan of OT and SO in the regular season but I see why they are in the game. I think they should change the shootout to 7 players and two have to be D men. If it is tied, it is tied. One point each.

edit ... maybe they could keep stats and give out an award for the best scorer and goalie with a certain amount of attempts or a % of his team's attempts?

 

I also think that every team should play the same amount of b2b games in a season or at least within one.

Edited January 5, 2017 by Ducky

[Stoner]

huh?  and when would they play?  

In the evenings, mainly? That's the point.

[inkman]

If a player is a minus, it doesn't mean he sucks. It just means he's not good as good at defending as he is at scoring. It tells you where a player needs to improve.

 

[pi2000]

In the evenings, mainly? That's the point.

 

so no gameday skate?  I'll allow it... in fact, I'm suprised the PA didn't require gameday skates be optional in the latest CBA... or are they actually "optional"?

[Doohicksie]

I also think that every team should play the same amount of b2b games in a season or at least within one.

 

I think back-to-backs should *always* be a home-and-home between two teams, and I'd actually like to see more of them.  (Talk about grind the down!)

[That Aud Smell]

It also tells you that he sucks, can't play defense, is a bad teammate, is just in it for the paycheck, isn't a good leader, and isn't gritty enough. It tells you that you should never want him on your team.

 

I wouldn't mind people using +/- if they supplemented some possession stats, pulled out stats showing that his goalies still have a good save percentage while he's on the ice, showed it was much worse than teammates' +/-, some video evidence that indicates poor defensive ability and hockey IQ that may lead to that stat, quality of teammates/competition, etc. But nobody who loves +/- and cites it regularly has ever done anything like this, and so its use gets correctly ridiculed. 

 

That first piece was sarcastic?

 

If a player is a minus, it doesn't mean he sucks.   It just means he's not good as good at defending as he is at scoring.    It tells you where a player needs to improve.    

 

But what if Players "A" and "B" are just about the same from most standpoints, save for their on-ice PDO? Player "A" essentially lucked his way into enjoying a much better SH% (from himself and teammates) and a much better SV% than Player "B". 

 

That doesn't mean Player "A" is better at defending than "B".

 

+/- might be an interesting starting point for a conversation, but just pointing at it and saying "Ovechkin sucks at defending" is ... not insightful.

 

And it's a whole 'nother subject of whether you even want Ovechkin to be something he isn't (i.e., a responsible two-way player). 

Edited January 5, 2017 by That Aud Smell

[Randall Flagg]

That first piece was sarcastic?

 

 

Yessir.

[JujuFish]

I also would like every game to be worth the same, and I think a 3-2-1 system is the best way to get that done.  No ties, but also no shootout.  OT goes on until there is a winner, but it is 3-on-3 and perhaps no offside rule, to help ensure games don't get ridiculously long.

[GoPre]

I also would like every game to be worth the same, and I think a 3-2-1 system is the best way to get that done.  No ties, but also no shootout.  OT goes on until there is a winner, but it is 3-on-3 and perhaps no offside rule, to help ensure games don't get ridiculously long.

 

3-2-1 is the way to go. Have long supported the NHL adopting it. Too bad they haven't.... 

Edited January 6, 2017 by GoPre

[Tondas]

3-2-1 is the way to go. Have long supported the NHL adopting it. Too bad they haven't.... 

 

I like 2-1-0.  Makes no difference in the standings but I dont believe in giving a point for losing.  I'm not a millenial, no trophy just for playing (and losing).

Edited January 6, 2017 by Tondas

[MattPie]

I like 2-1-0.  Makes no difference in the standings but I dont believe in giving a point for losing.  I'm not a millenial, no trophy just for playing (and losing).

 

I think you mean Gen X and Boomers; they're the ones that gave out the trophies.

[Tondas]

I think you mean Gen X and Boomers; they're the ones that gave out the trophies.

 

Must be Gen X, cause i'm a Boomer and I never got the "participation trophy". ;)

[MattPie]

Must be Gen X, cause i'm a Boomer and I never got the "participation trophy". ;)

 

I don't think it was many of the boomers giving them out, but I remember hearing about them back in the late 90s. which would have been pretty early for Gen X to be tossing them around. The point is, millennials got the trophies from Gen X and maybe Boomers; they're a product of their upbringing like anyone else. Boomers have their own myopic perceptions, both figurative and literal. :)

[Ducky]

I wonder if that something is the Oilers trading Gretsky, and the Jets trading your boy.

Hawerchuk?? Make no mistake, if Fergie is GM, Ducky retires here...wudda been here for Selanne's 1st year too.

 

No the something is AM himself I think. Just a feeling. I don't think he will be there in 5 or so years. Of course the 99 trade proved to everyone that anyone can be moved but it's not that. I think AM will want the move.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Ducky