why do you think carolina would do that

That kessel deal is F ing horrible

Carolina doesn't need Schultz, they just need a bottom pairing RHD. Hagelin makes sense as a rental on a contending team with plenty of cap space (and the willingness to spend it), rather than Carolina.

And wow, that Kessel deal is too horrible to discuss. You think a third round pick makes up for the difference between Kessel and Niederreiter?

true dat!

so is the carolina deal. Shultz has turned it around the last 2 years. His game was lights out last year. +23, you got to be kidding me to trade him.
Jarry and Hagelin for Skinner, I might be willing to do that. they can have the pick and Johnson too, he's ahl material

lol +/- mean **** all



And most players are better without him

yeah ok, he finished with the highest +/- of any Pens defender and he's the problem. I mean really, nice little chart you got going on there, but I assure you, looking at stats of a player like Hunwick, and Shultz wasn't the problem there.
That chart means all of nothing. Shultz passes the eye test. When his contract is up, he's going to get a huge payday if he plays as good as he did last year in the next two years.

Plus minus tells you very little about any player. Are they facing top lines? Or are they facing bottom 6 guys. Is their defensive partner any good? Was their goalie good? Was the rest of their team good? were they used in defensive zones face-offs or offensive zone ones?

It's a **** stat.

Duncan Keith was -29. Jef Skinner was -27. Justin Faulk was -26. Erik Karlsson was -25. Jack Eichel was -25. Bad players, right?

Feel free say Schultz was good or cite other factors. But plus/minus is lazy and a shitty stat.

Please don't display these ridiculous thoughts in public bro. No way.

+/- is one of the best stats for a defense man. If you are on the + your team is winning with you on the ice, if you are on the - your team is not. Not rocket science man. We all know where Shultz fits in the lineup last year. He was a 2nd line pairing. We don't really need to try to make excuses for his numbers. He was on the ice, they played better than with any other defenseman on 5 v 5. That's all you need to know.

Schultz played in a heavily sheltered role last year, and the year before. Letang+Dumoulin consistently faced better competition. Do you think that impact's +/-? If you don't, then you are incapable of understanding this explanation.

It's a **** stat. By this metric, Erik Karlsson is complete garbage and a much worse player than Schultz. Is that what you actually believe?

no one is comparing Karlsson.
Fact is second line pairings aren't "sheltered" I'm not sure where you get that idea. They did shelter defensemen last year. The 3rd pairing with Chad R.
What you think you can shelter 2/3 of your defensive pairings. My god, please learn hockey

both of those deals are bad, need to get more back for kessel if you decide to trade him(I prefer not to but if you get a good deal in return im more open to it) and that's way too much to give up for skinner and faulk.

If you are saying the having a good plus/minus means that you are good, you are saying Karlsson is **** and Schultz is good. I brought up that comparison to show you how dumb your reasoning is here.

Being listed as a "second" pairing defenseman doesn't tell you much about how they are used. For example, Schultz was used on offensive zone face-offs (55%) far more than defensive zone ones. In comparison, Jaime Oleksiak was used in more defensive zone face-offs than offensive ones (47%). Being a third pairing defenseman doesn't mean that they are getting favorable deployments. You are far more likely to get scored on if you start from your own zone. Are you genuinely too lazy to look this up?

I'm sorry, but I just seems like I am talking to someone who is too lazy to actually look up any information and just wants to use lazy stats like plus minus. And when it's pointed out to you how dumb that is, you get defensive. My god, please stop being so damn lazy and ignorant.

@pharrow you are really Jultzing this argument

"the chart means nothing"

Yeah, obviously stats such as shot suppression are terrible stats while +/- is the greatest stat in existence. Play driving and having positive effect on teammates (Niederreiter, Perrault) is obviously a lot less important than having your ass carried by players like Crosby and Malkin (Sheary and Schultz).

Dude seriously did you just listen to yourself before you typed the garbage you are yapping on about.
First off I never mentioned Karlsson about ANYTHING. I never said anything about him.
Second off, REALLY!!! Are you gonna tell me they were hiding Shultz when it was clear all season they were hiding their 3rd pairing that had such great players like Hunwick and Chad R. Are you really going to drivel on such nonsense. You can't hide 2/3 of your defensive pairings. you can hide 1 pair at best, and anyone with a brain knows which pair they hid!!!!!!
You're just PO because your wrong! Shultz played very well last year. They didn't shelter him. His minutes weren't even that much on the powerplay until letang faultered and Shultz was able to step in and help out. You and his make believe nonsense. Tell me did they "shelter Matta too? Considering he was the 2nd pairing LD.
But go one tell me the Jamie O and Chad R. pairing had a tougher assignment on the ice.

Is it really that hard to just spell Schultz correctly? It's spelled out everywhere on this page. Man, you really are just plain lazy.

And I've explained to you multiple times now why I brought up Karlsson. It's because you are praising the plus minus stat. But based on just that, Karlsson is a bad player. Or are you still struggling to understand that point?

*gives you the actual numbers

"You are wrong!"

I don't care about what Karlsson did, we aren't talking about karlsson. It simply shows ignorance on your part.
Notice how you hide the obvious facts of the conversation when I throw them right out to you. According to you they were sheltering their 2nd line pairing. That doesn't even make 1 bit of logical sense.
Matta by all accounts had a very solid year last year....who played next to, oh my god, Schultz who had a very solid year last year! WOW amazing.
But you know, according to you Matta too was sheltered and it's just a fluke.
god learn something for once in your useless life.

For the last time, the Karlsson example was to show you how dumb the plus minus stat is when used like this. We can switch to Duncan Keith if you like. Do you think he is ****?

If you weren't so lazy, you could actually look up metrics to show you how Schultz was deployed last year and the quality of competition that he faced.

According to the actual facts (that you refuse to look up out of laziness), Schultz faced favorable matchups and deployments. That's just a fact. I don't care what number his defensive pairing was. Oleksiak played harder minutes.

I know you are a lazy person, but are you intentionally spelling all the names wrong? It's not hard to look up the correct spellings, man. Two A's and two T's.

you are the person who never put on a pair of skates who wants to claim to be a hockey expert. About who had "hard minutes" and who was "sheltered"
Give it up. You're a joke.
You lost. No one hid Schultz period. Chad R. Yup sure did. Schultz nope. There was no room to hide him anywhere.
When you hide Chad R, which they did you'd have to be a total idiot not to realize that. Then there is no more room to hide a R hand Defense man. PERIOD.
FOR THE LAST DAMN TIME. NO ONE MENTIONED ANYTHING ABOUT KARLSSON. I don't know why you keep fixating on him.
They are two totally different players, in two totally different situations.
Being in the negative does say a lot about your play. Don't think so. Go look at the beginning of Letang's season when his numbers were horrible!
The team was playing like crap and so was he!
Shot attempts don't mean anything. You go look at the last cup run in the playoffs. They lost the shot attempt almost every game against the Bluejackets, does that mean the defense men played bad. Hell no it didn't. As a matter of fact, they played really well blocking tons of shots and making sure no goal was scored. At the end of the day there is only one stat that really matters. Was your team winning while you were on the ice. a +23 says yes indeed they were winning with him on the ice. Mean while a turn over machine like Letang finished with worse +/- numbers and it's not hard to figure out why! His turn overs were all over the place and he cost his team goals! It's one of the reasons they had an early exit from the playoffs.
But please, come tell me all about how that number doesn't "mean anything". It tells a whole lot!
That's the reason they keep it!

You seem....stable. But seriously, man stop being so damn lazy and look up this stuff. There are actual metrics for quality of completion.

I also didn't bring up shot attempts. Not sure why you felt the need to go on a rant about it.

For the final time, I brought up Karlsson, not you. And I did it as an example about your incredible bad take on plus minus.

But since that name seems to really set you off.

Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson. Erik Karlsson.

Plus minus is a **** stat that doesn't tell you about how good a player was compared to his teammates when he was on the ice, doesn't acount for how the goalie played, and is heavily reliant on the computations and situations where the player is used.

I honestly can't tell if you generally can't grasp any of this information or you are just trolling. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, troll.