Rangers pass. Would certainly entertain a Kakko for Raymond swap though.

If the other deal doesn't happen I would think about it

He’s the complete opposite of Raymond though lol. Defensive-responsibility, good play on the puck, and slower skater. Raymond dynamic offensively, smoother skater, poor defensively.

Red Wings would take that right now

Plus-minus is meaningless because it depends on far too many variables. These include quality of linemates, team systems, deployment, personal shooting %, team shooting %, team save % and sheer luck. But the fact that you put enough faith in it to create this post this explains a lot.

I wouldn't give up either of those players for Kakko alone and he certainly isn't worth both together.

Lafrenière is way better than Kakko but even he isn't worth Raymond.

at that notion that he has a negative +/- guess you just need to trade the entire team except the 7 guys that have a positive +/-. good luck with just: Maatta, Raz, Holl, fischer, copp, walman, and berggren. why not trade Veleno? Hes a -16 and only has 26 points to Raymonds 53?

> Using +/- to argue a point.
Yeah, you're bait.



You are severely undervaluing Raymond and severely overvaluing Kaako.

You may take that but there is ABSOULTELY NO CHANCE the Wings trade Raymond for Kakko.

I did trade Veleno

It's not a meaningless stat when you're plus minus is the worst on the team for the third year in a row. Only other players close are Veleno and Ghost and we all know Ghost is terrible defensively. Veleno is a fourth line center at best

He's literally the only one who cares right now. Watch the games you might learn something

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TgaCXWsjYM

I think he lost those ten pounds cus he gets knocked off the puck pretty easily and is a soft player. On top of that Kane is soft and so is Sprong. Three out of your four right wingers are soft and bad defensively and the other one in Perron is old and slow. And you wonder why they give up so many goals. It's not just the defense it's the soft forwards.

Rangers pass.

When you out yourself as not having actually watched Raymond play hockey this year...

No it really is pointless to many factors that a single player has no control over which I listed some in my first post.

Read this Behind the Numbers: Why Plus/Minus is the worst statistic in hockey and should be abolished.

Since people barely click links, so I've copied and pasted part of it below. Now this was written by Garret Hohl and posted on The Hockey Graphs website. While I do agree with this is his work and by no means am I trying to take credit for his work.

This is sometimes news to those that use plus/minus as a stat. The number is not exclusive to 5v5, or even strength. The plus/minus statistic includes all even strength goals, all goals with either goaltender pulled (as hockey views goalie pulled as even strength), and short handed goals.

This causes some very odd skewing in plus/minus to particular player types.

Including only shorthanded goals means that the power play can only hurt a skater’s rating (or stay even). It also means that a penalty killer can only improve their rating with tallies in the plus column (or stay even). The longer they spend in those situations, the greater the likely skew, regardless of how effective they are in their respective special teams deployment.

The skew is increased further by empty nets. Pulling the goalie is a desperation tactic, that increases the chance of scoring while also increasing the chance of a goal against even more.

This means that players who typically play with the lead and the opposition’s goaltender pulled are more likely to garner pluses than minuses over the long run. Players who are playing from behind and have their own goalie pulled are the opposite.

There is a tendency for penalty killers to play in the lead situation, and power play unit skaters to go out with the trailing situation, so these two factors in general skew in the same direction for skaters.

A handful of short handed and empty net goals may not seem like much, until you realize that the standard deviation in even strength goal differential is only about nine goals.

There is no science or evidence-backed reasoning to the meaningfulness of using some goals and not others. It is simply because it seemed right to the first person who made the rules for the number, and then tradition has kept it that way.

One example I like to use is Mark Stuart of the Winnipeg Jets for the 2014-2015 season:

Mark Stuart carried the Jets’ team-worst goal differential of the 13 defenders when looking at even strength (-3), power play (+0), and penalty kill (-19). He ended the season with the 6th-best plus/minus, with a +5 rating.

Stuart logged huge minutes on the penalty kill and essentially none on the power play. This, plus empty net goals, skewed his plus/minus up despite being the worst differential player in essentially all the situations.

This post has more words than the OP does brain cells.