Werenski & McAvoy vs Provorov & Chabot

[Tripod]

Werenski wasn't just gifted the minutes, he happens to be an elite PP producer. He'd push Ghost to second unit.

And if you think at evens Werenski only looks better because of Jones, look at his relative corsi. Werenski has the highest relative corsi among rookie D ever recorded.

The things Flyers fans tell themselves about Werenski are usually misinformation.

It's debatable if Ghost would be moved to the #2 unit for Werenski. Ghost just had a "bad" year and still out produced Werenski on the PP. Hell, I would want both on the #1PP and bump Voracek off if Philly had both.

I am not slamming Werenski at all. He is really good. He FOR SURE helps their PP be as good as it was. But only a fool would say it makes no difference having Seth Jones compared to AMac as your D partner. Sure you agree with that.

These guys will always get compared due to the same draft. And Werenski will likely always outpoint Provy. Their usage is different. Provy was needed to be the #1 Dman while having a corpse as his D partner and being needed on the PK. Werenski was not used on the PK but instead given big PP time. And there is nothing wrong with that. It's a great usage of Werenski's strengths.

Philly got what is looking like a #1 Dman for the next decade from that draft. I am not complaining if CBus did too.

 

[Micklebot]

Werenski wasn't just gifted the minutes, he happens to be an elite PP producer. He'd push Ghost to second unit.

And if you think at evens Werenski only looks better because of Jones, look at his relative corsi. Werenski has the highest relative corsi among rookie D ever recorded.

The things Flyers fans tell themselves about Werenski are usually misinformation.

Not debating that Werenski had a great year, but highest ever recorded Rel CF% among D is a relatively small sample in the scheme of things since the metric only started getting tracked in 07-08, and you also ignored Muzzin's rookie year, along with Goligoski, Wiercioch, Brodie, Marincin and a host of others btw (probably due to a games played filter, but those I mentioned all played 40+ games, so a reasonable sample when it comes to Corsi, which typically takes about 20 games to stabilize).

Beyond that, CF% rel for D is strongly impacted by Depth on D and usage issues. players on teams with deep bluelines (like Nashville for example) have a hard time producing gaudy rel stats, while teams with more shallow bluelines may not. Point being, using rel corsi to evaluate performance does not in any way put all rookie D on a level playing field.

 

[major major]

Not debating that Werenski had a great year, but highest ever recorded Rel CF% among D is a relatively small sample in the scheme of things since the metric only started getting tracked in 07-08, and you also ignored Muzzin's rookie year, along with Goligoski, Wiercioch, Brodie, Marincin and a host of others btw (probably due to a games played filter, but those I mentioned all played 40+ games, so a reasonable sample when it comes to Corsi, which typically takes about 20 games to stabilize).

Beyond that, CF% rel for D is strongly impacted by Depth on D and usage issues. players on teams with deep bluelines (like Nashville for example) have a hard time producing gaudy rel stats, while teams with more shallow bluelines may not. Point being, using rel corsi to evaluate performance does not in any way put all rookie D on a level playing field.

I totally agree about the way Corsi-rel is inflated by poor depth (see Calgary D). But I was responding specifically to the argument that Werenski was only so good because of all the great D he got to play with in Columbus. The Corsi-rel suggests he was carrying more than being carried - either Werenski was amazing or Columbus D depth was poor.

I was just pulling that "best ever recorded" stat from Scott Cullen. I don't have a go to spot to check the stats now that stat.hockeyanalysis is down. Where do you go?

 

[Micklebot]

I totally agree about the way Corsi-rel is inflated by poor depth (see Calgary D). But I was responding specifically to the argument that Werenski was only so good because of all the great D he got to play with in Columbus. The Corsi-rel suggests he was carrying more than being carried - either Werenski was amazing or Columbus D depth was poor.

I was just pulling that "best ever recorded" stat from Scott Cullen. I don't have a go to spot to check the stats now that stat.hockeyanalysis is down. Where do you go?

Hockeyreference actually has a decent interface for historical advanced stats searches, and you can get data from Volman's hockey abstract site too. Naturalstatrick is good as well;
https://www.hockey-reference.com/play-index/ppbp_finder.cgi
http://www.hockeyabstract.com/testimonials
http://naturalstattrick.com/playerteams.php?stdoi=std

Wrt Werenski carrying the D, I'm not so sure. The deeper you look at his deployment, the more it shows he was put in a position to succeed, rather than succeeded despite his position.

Looking at the top 4 D in Columbus specifically,

Player|5v5 TOI/G| Rel ZS%| TOI% QOT
Johnson|19.15|-15.0%|28.4%
Savard|19.13|-12.3%|28.4%
Jones|19.60|7.5%|28.0%
Werenski|17.35|9.1%|28.8%

Deployed far more in the OZ than the pairing of Johnson and Savard, and with a sizable bump in QOT TOI%, Basically, he got the starts in the OZ with the top lines more than any other top four dman, even significantly more than his partner (well, more accurately, his partner played extra mins in less favourable deployment that Werenski wasn't subject to).

Now, he still succeeded in the mins he was given, so no faulting him there, but it seems as though the other three guys did the bulk of the dirty work while he gets more of the praise. Give him Johnson's minutes and we might not see the same sparkling results.

 

[Tripod]

^^^^ Just to add....

Werenski being used in the OZ more than the D zone is smart coaching IMO. He being on the point on a faceoff win gives them the best chance to score. I know some people look down upon it, but I see nothing wrong with offensive Dmen getting as many OZ faceoffs as possible.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

Option 2 for me. I'm going to be a bit of a homer here but I think Chabot is going to be the best of these 4 defenseman.

Significantly more than a bit.

More likely he is 4th.

 

[Micklebot]

^^^^ Just to add....

Werenski being used in the OZ more than the D zone is smart coaching IMO. He being on the point on a faceoff win gives them the best chance to score. I know some people look down upon it, but I see nothing wrong with offensive Dmen getting as many OZ faceoffs as possible.

I don't disagree at all; his usage makes sense given his skillset, and the skillset of his teammates. But it still needs to be considered when comparing him to players like Provorov who don't benefit (at least not to the same degree) from the same favourable usage,

Columbus handled Werenski pretty much perfectly imo. Maximize his skillset, give him confidence, and ease him into more difficult deployment as time goes on if needed.

All that to say, even if I'm calling his deployment more favourable, I would caution against calling him sheltered. You can't really 100% shelter a guy playing top 4 mins. Both teams want to get favourable matchups, and only one gets last change.

 

[Tripod]

I don't disagree at all; his usage makes sense given his skillset, and the skillset of his teammates. But it still needs to be considered when comparing him to players like Provorov who don't benefit (at least not to the same degree) from the same favourable usage,

Columbus handled Werenski pretty much perfectly imo. Maximize his skillset, give him confidence, and ease him into more difficult deployment as time goes on if needed.

All that to say, even if I'm calling his deployment more favourable, I would caution against calling him sheltered. You can't really 100% shelter a guy playing top 4 mins. Both teams want to get favourable matchups, and only one gets last change.

Oh for sure I would not say he was sheltered. I see nothing wrong with a coach starting their best offensive D on faceoffs in the OZ. That's good coaching. Just like starting good defensive guys in the D Zone.

I said it before as you have, comparing Werenski and Provy is tough because their usage was different. Philly NEEDED Provy to be a #1 Dman and a PK leader. They had Ghost to be the PP guy on the top unit. And I dare say, when Sanheim and Myers arrive, someone will not be on the PP at all. That could be Provy. And of course their overall point will be affected by it.

I can't say it enough, despite what major major thought, in no way was I trying to put down Werenski. But as you showed, they were used differently by their teams.

 

[La Masse]

Werenski
Provorov

Chabot

Mcavoy

 

[ResignCraigAdams]

6 games...

Don't get me wrong, he played well, but its six games. Temper your expectations a bit.

This. Shouldn't project his whole career based on six playoff games. That being said, he did play well.

 

[garyturner3]

Werenski > Chabot > Provorov > McAvoy

in my opinion

I'm honestly curious, how on earth can you seriously rank Chabot over Provorov at this point? The guy is 20 and a lot of Flyers fans thought he was their best d-man last year.

As far as the poll is concerned, it's not really a fair poll at this point because two of the guys have already proven a lot at the nhl level and two have essentially zero experience. They all look like future potential studs and any one of the four could end up the best of the group.

 

[Jyrki Lumme]

The one with Werenski

Werenski>Provorov>>>Chabot/McAvoy

 

[major major]

@Tripod: I got ya. I love Provorov and we all know he was put in a bad situation this year, leaving aside whatever deployment Werenski had.

I don't disagree at all; his usage makes sense given his skillset, and the skillset of his teammates. But it still needs to be considered when comparing him to players like Provorov who don't benefit (at least not to the same degree) from the same favourable usage,

Columbus handled Werenski pretty much perfectly imo. Maximize his skillset, give him confidence, and ease him into more difficult deployment as time goes on if needed.

All that to say, even if I'm calling his deployment more favourable, I would caution against calling him sheltered. You can't really 100% shelter a guy playing top 4 mins. Both teams want to get favourable matchups, and only one gets last change.

Good point. I'd say there's a lot of different levels to it. Some guys really can get seriously sheltered minutes, and those are limited because there's only so many easy minutes out there. Others get somewhat sheltered deployment - very easy zone starts, like Ekblad's rookie year, perhaps? Then Werenski gets a tier less than that. It's true that he wasn't on the shutdown pair, but his zone starts were a lot closer to even than Ekblad's. Then there's hard minutes D, and then there's unusual shutdown deployments like Savard's or Andy Greene's.

 

[major major]

Looking at the top 4 D in Columbus specifically,

Player|5v5 TOI/G| Rel ZS%| TOI% QOT
Johnson|19.15|-15.0%|28.4%
Savard|19.13|-12.3%|28.4%
Jones|19.60|7.5%|28.0%
Werenski|17.35|9.1%|28.8%

Speaking of distortions in relative stats - JJ-Savard had perhaps the hardest zone starts of any pairing. David Savard in particular should be getting more attention for what he did last year. How can you be +30 with very good P/60 and relative corsi in that kind of situation?

 

[Elias Pettersson]

Werenski is better than the other three prospects combined

 

[MacDonald4MVP]

He is no Morgan Reilly, but Werenski for 4.9 milion is a steal!

 

[nmbr_24]

Chabot was better head to head in the World Juniors and had a much more impressive year in the QMJHL than McAvoy had in the NCAA.

McAvoy was very impressive in the playoffs, but who's to say Chabot wouldn't have been too if his team had gotten knocked out of the playoffs early?

Was he really? I know Chabot was the MVP of the tournament but McAVoy was the player of the game in the Gold medal win over Canada. Head to head it sounds like McAvoy was better.

 

[Tripod]

Werenski is better than the other three prospects combined

Lol...that is just a dumb comment.

He is no Morgan Reilly, but Werenski for 4.9 milion is a steal!

Umm....I believe you have confused Wennberg and Werenski.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

Was he really? I know Chabot was the MVP of the tournament but McAVoy was the player of the game in the Gold medal win over Canada. Head to head it sounds like McAvoy was better.

I know I'd much rather have McAvoy. He will be the better two way player and has a physical edge to his game.

 

[UsernameWasTaken]

Went w/ Werenski/McAvoy just b/c I'm a big Werenski fan. But either response is correct, imo.