View Single Post
Old
08-19-2012, 10:58 AM
  #33
MAK19
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 14,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sureves View Post
We are comparing a player's +/- relative to his team, and we are comparing +/- relative to his top 10 most common teammates, as such, if we are going to consider zone starts, we need to compare it also relative to his team.

Player A Team A: +0.50 relative to team, +0.50 relative to top 10 teammates, 50% zone start
Player B Team B: +0.50 relative to team, +0.50 relative to top 10 teammates, 50% zone start

Which one is better? Contrary to what you'd think, they aren't equal. It depends on what their relative zone starts are. If team A is on the attack 90% of the time, and Player A has half his zone starts in the offensive zone, clearly he is being used very defensively.

Similarly if Player B's team is on the attack only 10% of the time, but he's having half his zone starts in the offensive zone, obviously he is being used in a very offensive role.

It will be easier for Player B to generate +/- relative to team, +/- relative to top 10 teammates than it will be for Player A: much easier, despite the fact that technically their zone start percentages are the same.

Also for the record, Weber's relative zone starts are 49%, Karlsson's are 52.50% adjusted to assume 50% Team Offensive Zone Starts.
OK I get it but I don't think we should compare zone starts. Difference is negligible. No one is like the Sedins.

MAK19 is offline   Reply With Quote