When it comes to plus minus I always see the argument that bad players can have good plus/minus because they indirectly benefit from being on the ice when guys like Datsyuk, Malkin, Stamkos, etc. score. It's always used to denigrate the play of guys that aren't considered stars. But I never see the argument that good players will have bad plus/minus because of screwups by bad players. And considering blown coverages, turnovers, bad line changes, etc. happen far more frequently than goals, you'd expect that the effect of bad play would skew that stat downward for star players far more than it would inflate the number for bad players right?
I think Lidstrom's -2 in 2011 is an example of what you're talking about.
My point about Quincey and the weakness of plus-minus is this. He's a +11 and has 1 goal this season (his only point of the season as well). So all his pluses except that one are dependent on the production of other players on the ice.
Look at one game like against St. Louis where the Wings won 5-1. The Blues one goal came on the PP, so no one gets a minus. The Wings goals however, came from guys like Kindl, Emmerton, Cleary, Brunner, and Flip.
Kronwall plays 21 minutes of Even Strength and ends up with a +1. Quincey plays 14:42 minutes of ES and ends up a +3. Neither one had a point in the game.
So Quincey had a better game and is shutting down 2nd and 3rd lines because he was standing on the ice when three of his teammates scored?
The other Blues game where they won 5-3 is another good example.
Don't get me wrong I think Q has been fairly solid and much better than his first few games of the season. But that's based on watching games. Not on misusing a statistic.