HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Orr v. Gretzky (Part 2)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-24-2010, 11:22 AM
  #51
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,252
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
None of that post answers anything the pervious poster was asking. THe poster was asking about great hockey minds like Sam Pollock, Al Arbour, Dick Irvin, Scotty Bowman, Don Cherry, Harry Neale and Harry Sinden.

You then posted Bleeneys post that has nothing to do with what was asked.
Huh?
Bleeney's post was a detailed account of how close the voting was in the very thing he was asking about, which was the Hockey News top 100, done in 1998.
Both players received 18 first place votes each.
How in the hell is that not answering his question???


Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Trail of the Stanley Cup Vol. II 1927-1946 by Charles L. Coleman.

Icing p.314, forward pass, offside pages 82-87, red line p. 474.

Kindly share your sources so that they may be corrected or ignored.
Thanks man.
Those sources would be
www.tmlfever.com
(I will post the rest when I get home from work)

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I think Gretzky got worse defensively in the 1990s... a lot worse.
I dunno about that, his defensive deficiencies became more glaring maybe but I believe he tried harder to defensively aware as the 90's went, he had to be really.
Tough call though.


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 08-24-2010 at 11:28 AM.
Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 12:06 PM
  #52
Infinite Vision*
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I think Gretzky got worse defensively in the 1990s... a lot worse.
Yep he most definitely did. In the early 80's Gretzky was more than reliable defensively, just continuously got worse though as his career went on. (Obviously)

Infinite Vision* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 01:08 PM
  #53
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Huh?
Bleeney's post was a detailed account of how close the voting was in the very thing he was asking about, which was the Hockey News top 100, done in 1998.
Both players received 18 first place votes each.
How in the hell is that not answering his question???
I'm not sure but maybe the point was that it has been often argued here that most/nearly all who have seen both Orr and Gretzky play, would pick Orr as the best ever... and yet that panel of experts favoured Gretzky, even if it was by the slightest of margins.

VMBM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 02:33 PM
  #54
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Huh?
Bleeney's post was a detailed account of how close the voting was in the very thing he was asking about, which was the Hockey News top 100, done in 1998.
Both players received 18 first place votes each.
How in the hell is that not answering his question???




Thanks man.
Those sources would be
www.tmlfever.com
(I will post the rest when I get home from work)



I dunno about that, his defensive deficiencies became more glaring maybe but I believe he tried harder to defensively aware as the 90's went, he had to be really.
Tough call though.
The poster was asking specifically about the persons he had bolded who had obviously seen them both play. We know the voting was close. Al Arbour, Scotty Bowman, Don Cherry ect ect ect. Apparently everyone who saw them both play didn't vote for Orr and you still never answered his question.

I have no problem being on the same side as these individuals.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 03:07 PM
  #55
Infinite Vision*
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
The poster was asking specifically about the persons he had bolded who had obviously seen them both play. We know the voting was close. Al Arbour, Scotty Bowman, Don Cherry ect ect ect. Apparently everyone who saw them both play didn't vote for Orr and you still never answered his question.

I have no problem being on the same side as these individuals.
In his defense though his point was the difference in the voting is almost negligible. Basically a coin toss.

Infinite Vision* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 03:21 PM
  #56
bleeney
Registered User
 
bleeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,834
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starchild74 View Post
First of all I used hockey reference for the list and their are many errors. Becasue Westfall did once play defence and was their as I am not sure exactly when he changed to a winger. I wanted to keep him in there so that anyone who might later on say he played defence could not complain about the list. I never said this was an acurate list but as close as I could get because of the mistakes in hockey reference website.

As far as the list I used it was to show that Gretzky was just as dominant agaisnt centers as Bobby Orr was against defenceman if not more

All the defenceman you listed are great great and the best of the best of ever to play hoever one thing though. Horton was not a offensive defenceman. Savard and Robinson were as close to complete defenceman to a degree as Orr, Potvin was young and up and coming, Only Brad Park is talked about in the same breath of Orr during the years Orr was playing because offensively he was the closest for most of the years in Orr's prime, if you could say that. THe other ones you mentioned alot of people who were not born might not know these players and how good they were.

I did not want to get into scoring vs forwards it was a comparison against his own position. To try and show that Orr as great as he was had no one to compete agaisnt in his position really. Where Gretzky was beating the best of the best offensive players ever at his position That is why I also never included wingers against Gretzky because there are some great wingers Gretzky dominated also

Orr did outscore forwards and hall of fame forwards their is no debate about that but let's be honest here except for Orr and a few wingers in the history of the NHL the players who get the most points are Centers. Gretzky did not just beat them and get more points he dominated every one fo them. All HHOF ones. Like I said this is not an argument to prove Gretzky is the best ever. I never once said who was the best of the two. I am just trying in my way of showing that it is alot closer then some on here have said. If Orr is better or if Gretaky is better it is not by much. It is just that alot of posters on here have said Orr Dominated offensively like no other player ever, which is not true. I mean Paul Coffey scored more points then some forwards too. In the playoffs some defenceman have scored more points then forwards.
Do you see the irony in what you just said?

You say that with few exceptions, the players who get the most points are centres. And it also goes without saying that defense is by far the toughest position to rack up points from.

The fact that Bobby Orr, a defenseman, was able to outscore all of those HOF centres (except for Espo, who was the prime beneficiary of Orr's playmaking, and who saw his production suddenly drop by over 60% when he was traded away from Bobby) is every bit as remarkable as Gretzky's statistical dominance over his fellow centres. Hell, Orr even outscored Espo a few times.

Thank you for helping me make this point.

I feel that I should add something here. Orr didn't care about scoring titles, records, individual honors etc. The only thing he cared about was the team. Just look at how he reacts after he scores... head down, slap of his stick on the shin pads of a teammate, and on with the game. In fact, there are only a few times I can really recall him celebrating after a goal, such as his Cup-winning goal in '70, and the little dance he did after scoring the winning goal against Parent in the dying seconds of game one in the '74 Finals. Why? Because they were huge goals for the team in games when the Cup was on the line. Other than that... nothing. Even when he set records and it was announced over the P. A., he just kept his head down, almost as if he were embarrassed by the attention.

The following youtube video has a few examples of what I'm talking about:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGoGEjvvWrQ

Notice in particular:
0:15) Orr's little dance after winning goal in the '74 Finals, very unusual for him
2:00) Subdued reaction after scoring hat-trick for 100th point of year
4:40) Just sets a new all-time record for Dmen with 38th goal of season, yet little celebration

Here's an example of Orr's disregard for points and individual honours:
"There was one time when Orr and Phil Esposito were running neck-and-neck for the scoring championship. Time and again Bobby would find himself in excellent scoring position, but instead of firing the puck he would look around for someone to pass to and often it was Phil. So, finally I asked my defenseman Carol Vadnais what was going on with Bobby and why he was squandering potential points. "Don't you know?" he said. "He's trying not to get too far ahead of Phil for the scoring title." He risked the Art Ross Trophy in order to make the team play better."
-from Don Cherry: Grapes; pg 205

Any comparison of Orr vs. Gretzky based on points should keep in mind not only that he was a defenseman playing in a more defensive era, but that he had an unselfish disregard for individual records and personal stats.

bleeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 03:22 PM
  #57
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,252
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
The poster was asking specifically about the persons he had bolded who had obviously seen them both play. We know the voting was close. Al Arbour, Scotty Bowman, Don Cherry ect ect ect. Apparently everyone who saw them both play didn't vote for Orr and you still never answered his question.

I have no problem being on the same side as these individuals.
Well if the vote was just Orr vs Gretzky then you would have a point but it wasn't.
Only 36 out of 50 voted for Orr and Gretzky, another 14 didn't choose either of them, electing to go with someone else like Howe.
Take the same panel, eliminate all other options, leaving the choice to be a head to head of Orr vs Gretzky and I would be willing to bet a months salary that Orr's wins that vote.

Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 04:00 PM
  #58
Infinite Vision*
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Well if the vote was just Orr vs Gretzky then you would have a point but it wasn't.
Only 36 out of 50 voted for Orr and Gretzky, another 14 didn't choose either of them, electing to go with someone else like Howe.
Take the same panel, eliminate all other options, leaving the choice to be a head to head of Orr vs Gretzky and I would be willing to bet a months salary that Orr's wins that vote.
You know what, I never thought of it that way and I agree entirely. Of course, there again would not be a huge difference though.

Infinite Vision* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 04:15 PM
  #59
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Well if the vote was just Orr vs Gretzky then you would have a point but it wasn't.
Only 36 out of 50 voted for Orr and Gretzky, another 14 didn't choose either of them, electing to go with someone else like Howe.
Take the same panel, eliminate all other options, leaving the choice to be a head to head of Orr vs Gretzky and I would be willing to bet a months salary that Orr's wins that vote.
You're full of bets that can't be proven.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 05:48 PM
  #60
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Well if the vote was just Orr vs Gretzky then you would have a point but it wasn't.
Only 36 out of 50 voted for Orr and Gretzky, another 14 didn't choose either of them, electing to go with someone else like Howe.
Take the same panel, eliminate all other options, leaving the choice to be a head to head of Orr vs Gretzky and I would be willing to bet a months salary that Orr's wins that vote.
I don't see why that is such a certainty.

Besides, where did this 50-man panel come from? The panel THN used was not that large!

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 07:05 PM
  #61
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,252
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I don't see why that is such a certainty.

Besides, where did this 50-man panel come from? The panel THN used was not that large!

I didn't say it was a certainty, I said I would put money on it.

It was indeed a 50 man panel heh.

Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 07:22 PM
  #62
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
It was indeed a 50 man panel heh.
The list of names who put the list together has been posted in this thread already, and it's the same list I recall seeing throughout the past decade - it's about 12 names long. Who are these 50?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 07:34 PM
  #63
reckoning
Registered User
 
reckoning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,370
vCash: 500
It was definitely a 50 man panel. They listed it in the original magazine that came out with it. I have a copy of it somewhere, but I recently moved and have no idea which unlabelled box in my closets it's in.

I remember their points system was somewhat complicated. For example, if a player was voted 50th on a ballot they'd get zero points. But if they weren't on a ballot they'd get minus-two points.

reckoning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 12:08 AM
  #64
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,730
vCash: 500
Looks like you're right, it was indeed 50 guys. I found it in the book that was released for the list that year. Strange how whenever the panel is listed, it gets boiled down to those 12 or so names.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 01:31 AM
  #65
greatgazoo
Registered User
 
greatgazoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cobourg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Compliments of bleeney from part 1 of this thread.
http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=2...&postcount=895
Excellent insight but even so he had Howe ranked ahead of Gretzky and Orr.

What happens when you take that one voter out of the equation?

greatgazoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 01:39 AM
  #66
greatgazoo
Registered User
 
greatgazoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cobourg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,479
vCash: 500
Every Orr supporter brings up his defensive ability, which obviously is great but what about this:

During their prime 6 seasons, for Orr 1969-1975 and Gretzky 1981-87:

Orr avg a +81 meanwhile Gretzky avg a +76.

5 goals difference and take into account that Gretzky played on the 2nd penalty kill and scored an unbelievable 45 shorthanded goals during his prime. Meanwhile Orr scored just 14.

Then let's take shooting percentage into account...
Orr during his prime: 9.7%
Gretzky during his prime: 21.5%

Better shooter: Gretzky
Better playmaker: Gretzky
Better defensive player: Orr

How can a guy who wins 2 out of 3 not be considered the best?

greatgazoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 03:38 AM
  #67
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,252
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by greatgazoo View Post
Every Orr supporter brings up his defensive ability, which obviously is great but what about this:

During their prime 6 seasons, for Orr 1969-1975 and Gretzky 1981-87:

Orr avg a +81 meanwhile Gretzky avg a +76.

5 goals difference and take into account that Gretzky played on the 2nd penalty kill and scored an unbelievable 45 shorthanded goals during his prime. Meanwhile Orr scored just 14.

Then let's take shooting percentage into account...
Orr during his prime: 9.7%
Gretzky during his prime: 21.5%

Better shooter: Gretzky
Better playmaker: Gretzky
Better defensive player: Orr

How can a guy who wins 2 out of 3 not be considered the best?
Lets try breaking this down a little better

Same 6 seasons
Gretzky 473GP 1219points +456
Orr 447GP 734points +484

So lets get this straight now, Gretzky not only played 26 more games but also scored 485 more points yet was still +28 behind Orr.
BTW, shorthanded goals count for +/-.

Either way, +/- on its' own doesn't tell enough of the story, I highly suggest you check out the adjusted +/- thread compliments of Overpass here http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=591548

That's where you find out where Orr was 22 goals for to every 10 goals against to Gretzky's 15.4 goals for to every 10 goals against.
Don't feel bad though, Orr buries everyone with that ratio, not just Gretzky.
Orr's numbers are so vastly superior to everyone else that he even went so far as to take only players first 10 seasons to go up against him and he still has a ridiculous lead.

As far as trying to compare the shooting % of a forward to a Dman...ummm...


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 08-25-2010 at 03:46 AM.
Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 12:01 PM
  #68
Infinite Vision*
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by greatgazoo View Post
Every Orr supporter brings up his defensive ability, which obviously is great but what about this:

During their prime 6 seasons, for Orr 1969-1975 and Gretzky 1981-87:

Orr avg a +81 meanwhile Gretzky avg a +76.

5 goals difference and take into account that Gretzky played on the 2nd penalty kill and scored an unbelievable 45 shorthanded goals during his prime. Meanwhile Orr scored just 14.

Then let's take shooting percentage into account...
Orr during his prime: 9.7%
Gretzky during his prime: 21.5%

Better shooter: Gretzky
Better playmaker: Gretzky
Better defensive player: Orr

How can a guy who wins 2 out of 3 not be considered the best?
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Rk Years Player Seasons $F/G $A/G R-ON R-OFF XEV+/- EV+/- AEV+/- /Season PP% SH%
1 68-76 Bobby Orr 7.4 1.84 0.85 2.18 1.10 51 600 549 75 98% 64%
2 80-89 Wayne Gretzky 9.7 1.67 1.08 1.54 1.10 66 463 397 41 86% 37%
3 92-01 Jaromir Jagr 9.2 1.40 0.96 1.46 0.95 -27 337 365 39 68% 12%
4 83-92 Ray Bourque 9.2 1.20 0.79 1.51 0.94 -30 307 337 37 88% 54%
5 93-02 Eric Lindros 7.2 1.39 0.86 1.62 0.95 -20 312 332 46 74% 15%
6 77-86 Bryan Trottier 9.4 1.13 0.60 1.87 1.21 83 406 323 34 66% 24%
7 71-80 Bobby Clarke 9.8 0.94 0.47 1.98 1.20 68 374 305 31 65% 42%
8 81-90 Mark Howe 8.4 1.16 0.76 1.53 0.94 -29 277 305 36 61% 44%
9 78-87 Mike Bossy 9.4 1.08 0.60 1.80 1.17 67 370 302 32 75% 5%
10 95-04 John Leclair 8.4 1.19 0.72 1.64 1.07 31 320 289 34 68% 1%
11 72-81 Guy Lafleur 9.2 1.25 0.62 2.01 1.50 185 473 289 31 74% 5%
12 76-85 Marcel Dionne 9.7 1.04 0.82 1.28 0.80 -107 179 286 30 81% 14%
13 97-07 Peter Forsberg 6.9 1.17 0.66 1.76 1.00 1 287 285 41 74% 17%
14 74-83 Borje Salming 9.2 1.25 1.00 1.25 0.85 -89 190 280 30 72% 57%
15 74-83 Larry Robinson 9.3 1.51 0.83 1.83 1.54 247 522 275 30 50% 52%
16 74-83 Steve Shutt 9.4 1.06 0.51 2.09 1.51 160 424 264 28 42% 1%
17 88-97 Mario Lemieux 6.5 1.46 1.07 1.37 0.89 -51 210 260 40 98% 40%

Here are the top players by best 10 consecutive seasons of adjusted plus-minus. I went 17 deep this time because I wanted to include Mario.

Lindros drops a couple of spots, but he's still very high.
These are their ten best consecutive seasons. As seen here, Orr played 2.3 seasons worth of games less than Gretzky, yet has a significant gap in adjusted even strength +/-, and is also on the ice for more percentage of his teams power play, and shorthanded goals. I honestly don't see the argument that Gretzky was better than Orr other than his longevity, which I don't value nearly as much as others.

Infinite Vision* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 02:57 PM
  #69
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infinite Vision View Post
These are their ten best consecutive seasons. As seen here, Orr played 2.3 seasons worth of games less than Gretzky, yet has a significant gap in adjusted even strength +/-, and is also on the ice for more percentage of his teams power play, and shorthanded goals. I honestly don't see the argument that Gretzky was better than Orr other than his longevity, which I don't value nearly as much as others.
Well that ends it then?

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 03:05 PM
  #70
Infinite Vision*
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
Well that ends it then?
Yes sir.

I just don't see how people can dismiss that. Of course this isn't exact science...but tell me is it coincidence that the best two-way player ever highly outscores anyone in this metric?. The thing is, Gretzky isn't close here, and he's still above everyone else. This should not be taken with a grain of salt. It really illustrates just how good he really was.

Infinite Vision* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 03:12 PM
  #71
Infinite Vision*
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,861
vCash: 500
People can say what they want about the teams/eras as well, but the fact remains each of their teams scored 11 goals for every 10 allowed when they weren't on the ice. Only when Orr was on the ice, his team scored 22 for every ten allowed compared to 15.4 for Gretzky. On top of that...Orr was on the ice for more percentage of his teams powerplay and shorthanded goals (of course the shorthanded goals should be a given). Keep in mind also that the shorthanded goals they were on for don't count in the AES +/-. So not only was he clearly helping his team win more at even strength, he apparently was on special teams as well.

Infinite Vision* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 03:26 PM
  #72
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infinite Vision View Post
Yes sir.

I just don't see how people can dismiss that. Of course this isn't exact science...but tell me is it coincidence that the best two-way player ever highly outscores anyone in this metric?. The thing is, Gretzky isn't close here, and he's still above everyone else. This should not be taken with a grain of salt. It really illustrates just how good he really was.
Orr does indeed dominate this metric and it is quite impressive.

The problem I have with it is that everyone on HOH is quoting these numbers as something definitive without remembering another important part of overpass' post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
The plus-minus statistic is often reviled by NHL fans as a useless statistic. This is not without reason, as the stat produces numbers that are often inexplicable. Most importantly, a player’s team is a major factor in his plus-minus.

However, the plus-minus stat is not without merit. Most importantly, it aims to measure the most important part of winning – outscoring the other team. The only thing that matters in winning hockey games is outscoring the other team, whether by scoring goals or preventing them. Evaluating players based on scoring stats alone will more directly measure a player’s contribution to scoring, but will fail to capture other aspects of the game, especially defensive play. Plus-minus aims to capture the full impact of a player’s game, but it is a more indirect measure that can be influenced by a number of factors out of the player’s control.

The most important of these is the quality of the team on which the player plays. My adjusted even-strength plus-minus statistic attempts to remove this bias from the numbers and present a number that can compare players from bad teams and good teams on an equal footing. Specifically, the method of adjusting for team is to compare the team’s goals for and against while the player is on the ice to the team’s goals and against while the player is off the ice. Additionally, plus-minus includes shorthanded goals scored by both teams. This introduces a bias against players who play on the power play and in favor of players who play on the penalty kill. My adjusted plus-minus estimates on-ice shorthanded goals based on on-ice power play goals, as on-ice shorthanded goals for individuals are not available for most years, and removes them from the player’s record.

To calculate the adjusted plus-minus, I take the player’s on-ice total goals for and against as given. I calculate an expected plus-minus for the player, based on his team’s off-ice performance. The expected plus-minus is calculated using the off-ice performance regressed partially to even, as a player should be expected to play somewhat better than a set of bad teammates or worse than a set of good teammates. I then calculate an actual plus-minus, which differs from official NHL plus-minus in that it is normalized to a scoring environment of 200 even-strength goal per season and does not include shorthanded goals. I subtract the “expected plus-minus” from the “actual plus-minus” to generate an adjusted plus-minus number.

While this method removes many of the biases from raw plus-minus, it is still an imperfect method of rating players. First, most importantly, it is for even-strength play only. Second, a player’s linemates or defence partner may exert a major influence on a player’s numbers – see Milan Hedjuk for a prime example. Third, the on-ice/off-ice method of adjusting for team implicitly compares a player to the other players on his team who play the same position but on another line or D-pairing. If a player is on the same team as a great player, the off-ice baseline may not be a fair comparison. For example, Ted Green’s 1971 season has one of the lowest adjusted plus-minus ratings ever. When you realize that much of his off-ice baseline was set by Bobby Orr, the reason for the low rating becomes clear. Also, some players play more difficult opposition than others, facing the other team’s best players and taking more defensive zone faceoffs. These differences can also skew the numbers.

For the above reasons, please keep the following in mind when using these numbers to evaluate players
  • Adjusted plus-minus is best used to compare players who played in a similar role. For example, compare #1 defensemen who played the toughest ice-time on the team to other #1 defensemen, not to #6 defensemen who were sheltered by their coaches from the best players. For example, take Tom Preissing’s rating with a huge grain of salt.
  • Adjusted plus-minus is measured against a baseline of average, so it will tend to underrate players with a long decline phase or several poor years at the start of their career (Mark Messier) and give high ratings to players who retired young and didn’t play a lot past their prime(Bobby Orr, Eric Lindros).
  • Adjusted plus-minus is measured against a baseline of average, so it will tend to underrate players with a long decline phase or several poor years at the start of their career (Mark Messier) and give high ratings to players who retired young and didn’t play a lot past their prime(Bobby Orr, Eric Lindros).
  • Check to see who the player’s linemates were. Did he have a great player on his line? Charlie Simmer and Dave Taylor both have very high ratings, and likely owe much of it to Marcel Dionne.
  • Did the player play on a team with another great player who was on another line/D-pairing? If so, his adjusted plus-minus may be too low. Mark Messier in his Edmonton years is an example here, along with Ted Green. I don’t think there are too many cases of this kind, but there are certainly a few.
  • There may be a significant amount of random variation in a single-year result. For that reason, I would look at multiple years when measuring a player’s peak, and would not use this stat as definite proof that one player was better than another in a given year.

There are a lot of disclaimers there, but I still believe there is a lot of good information in adjusted plus-minus when evaluating a player’s career. Even after taking the above possible biases into account, there are still some very interesting results.
So while this is certainly an interesting look at things, it is not definitive and should absolutely be taken with a grain of salt.

BraveCanadian is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 04:06 PM
  #73
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,252
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Orr does indeed dominate this metric and it is quite impressive.

The problem I have with it is that everyone on HOH is quoting these numbers as something definitive without remembering another important part of overpass' post:



So while this is certainly an interesting look at things, it is not definitive and should absolutely be taken with a grain of salt.

When looking at only the final adjusted +/-, yes, for sure you have to weigh it accordingly.
What I really like though is all the other info he provides in getting there, that's the real gold.

Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 07:22 PM
  #74
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by greatgazoo View Post
Every Orr supporter brings up his defensive ability, which obviously is great but what about this:

During their prime 6 seasons, for Orr 1969-1975 and Gretzky 1981-87:

Orr avg a +81 meanwhile Gretzky avg a +76.

5 goals difference and take into account that Gretzky played on the 2nd penalty kill and scored an unbelievable 45 shorthanded goals during his prime. Meanwhile Orr scored just 14.

Then let's take shooting percentage into account...
Orr during his prime: 9.7%
Gretzky during his prime: 21.5%

Better shooter: Gretzky
Better playmaker: Gretzky
Better defensive player: Orr

How can a guy who wins 2 out of 3 not be considered the best?
more games, more points, still a lower +/-.

And don't forget that the 80s were much higher scoring - it was easier to have an obscenely high +/- or low +/- in the 80s. Orr kills Gretzky and everyone else in this category.

For the record, I am on the Gretzky side. I think he clearly did more in 20 years than Orr did in 9. But there should be NO doubt that per-game, Orr was the best player ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Orr does indeed dominate this metric and it is quite impressive.

The problem I have with it is that everyone on HOH is quoting these numbers as something definitive without remembering another important part of overpass' post:



So while this is certainly an interesting look at things, it is not definitive and should absolutely be taken with a grain of salt.

Depends what you mean by "a grain of salt" - this is probably the best statistic anyone on this board has put together. It eliminates team factors, with only linemates being the major factor that can skew it considerably. This makes it infinitely better than unadjusted +/-.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 08:18 PM
  #75
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Depends what you mean by "a grain of salt" - this is probably the best statistic anyone on this board has put together. It eliminates team factors, with only linemates being the major factor that can skew it considerably. This makes it infinitely better than unadjusted +/-.
I'm not discounting the work that he put in.. obviously it took a lot of thought and it is a very interesting result.

But it does not eliminate team factors. It attempts to remove team bias and normalize scoring etc.

As we have seen with all adjusted stats there are many caveats in any such enterprise and overpass lists a good many limitations to his own method. Funny that everyone else throws them out the window.

It very likely is quite a bit better than unadjusted +/- .. but trying to make an individual case using such a team dependent statistic is virtually impossible.

BraveCanadian is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:22 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.