Addition by Subtraction

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, JoeSchmoe said:

Even in their limited roles against limited competition, Lafferty and Gilbert were two of our worst statistical players. Clifton was less sheltered but was still our worst defensemen next to Bryson.

The guys we got to replace them are pretty decent in similar roles.

Who is Gilbert's replacement? Gilbert was a 7/8 D man, but also the guy who stood up after the Tage fiasco. 

I could care less about Lafferty, but my expectation of him was never high to begin with. Arguing about our 4th line guys is of little consequence. We will see how it shakes out this time. It was supposed to be better last year and wasn't. 

[Thorny]

Next up on the tee: Lafferty Daniel…and Gilmore, Happy

[PerreaultForever]

5 hours ago, JP51 said:

Yeah, I think Muel based on his minutes is a major anchor... Gilbert was just an 8th d who was a C minus fighter that was willing... just an Adams failed nod to you need someone to respond.... here lets throw this cannon fodder out there to get beat... cause I know he will jump in when no one else will... 

Cozens I agree.. as unpopular as this may be I think we see Cozens mature over the years and will become a player that people will want... right now he is just too much of a spaz and head case to be an effective player and leader night in and night out...  but in the right situation I think he develops into a guy that will score 25-30 for 50-60 points... and can play two way minutes...  and no, I didnt say now... (especially the 2 way minute part) but if he settles down and develops I believe he can be a taller version of a poor mans Mike Peca or a higher scoring Gaustad 

 

I don't see Cozens going the Peca or Gaustad route but if I was Ottawa (and I said a few years ago this was needed here) I'd have him in the weight room constantly. Beef up and get stronger. He's a big guy but really lanky and thin not strong. (Quinn needs the same treatment).

I have no idea what Cozens will or won't be but we definitely overpaid him early and had too much faith in him.

[Pimlach]

8 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Next up on the tee: Lafferty Daniel…and Gilmore, Happy

[dudacek]

I fully understand the limitations of +\- but I disagree it should be ignored.

The object of the game is to score more than the other guy.

It doesn’t show if a player is good or bad, but it shows how successful a player was in the manner he was deployed.

[LGR4GM]

32 minutes ago, dudacek said:

I fully understand the limitations of +\- but I disagree it should be ignored.

The object of the game is to score more than the other guy.

It doesn’t show if a player is good or bad, but it shows how successful a player was in the manner he was deployed.

I don't agree. +/- only tells us that players even strength goal differential. I think within a team it can tell you some things but I don't think he tells us how successful a player was. If I take Zach Benson and deploy him with Bryson and Samuelsson and he gets UPL being a sieve every night, his +/- is going to be ***** regardless of what he does. 

In the end, I think ppl will use the stats they like and I can't really argue with that. I use xgf% because it helps be contextualize both offense and defense. 

[DarthEbriate]

I love +/- specifically for this thread title because it combines both mathematical symbols in sequence. It's the perfect stat.